Anyone seen Sound of Freedom?

125,470 Views | 1511 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by General Jack D. Ripper
Tibbers
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TCTTS said:

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

TCTTS said:

And so it begins. Again.


What begins? Please tell the class how "Q" directly incited January 6th…apparently the most horrific day in the history of the world.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/qanon-emerges-recurring-theme-criminal-cases-tied-us/story?id=75347445

https://www.insider.com/capitol-riots-qanon-protest-conspiracy-theory-washington-dc-protests-2021-1

https://www.businessinsider.com/qanon-trump-capitol-attack-belief-precursor-the-storm-2021-1

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/qanon-capitol-congress-riot-trump-b1784460.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/us/capitol-rioters.html

https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_capitol-riot-exposed-qanons-violent-potential/6203967.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/13/qanon-capitol-siege-trump/

https://theweek.com/politics/1000962/the-qanon-contradiction

https://theconversation.com/qanon-and-the-storm-of-the-u-s-capitol-the-offline-effect-of-online-conspiracy-theories-152815

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents_involving_QAnon

Also, see the HBO documentary thread linked to above, which outlines it all great detail.


I knew it. You watched the doc and think you know what Q is about. Read the posts and see for yourself but you won't. You don't have the wherewithal or intellectual honesty to do so it seems. You are chasing your tail sir.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DiCaprio is a hypocrite. Plain and simple. One who gives a terrible name to his own cause.

Really? This is all you've got? The most basic, cliched attempt at a "gotcha"? This is like the grandfather of all Hollywood "gotchas."
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TCTTS said:

DargelSkout said:

TCTTS, I have a question.

First off, I'm a conservative that never got into the whole Qanon stuff. I really don't even understand what it is. I do remember seeing it on F16, but thought it was some big troll job.

Do you think that most people hear about movies through the promotional interviews that you posted?

I don't think that they do. I think most people are like me and see trailers while watching other movies/shows or learn about upcoming movies through word of mouth. I found out about this movie while watching The Chosen. When I saw the trailer, I never got a hint of Qanon stuff or anything political.

Nor did I even know the political leanings of the actor and creators of the film. It wasn't until you injected that into this thread that I learned they're into Qanon stuff.

Admittedly, I don't keep up with hollywood gossip or actors beliefs. I know a few of their political thoughts, like Penn and Baldwin, but still enjoy their movies.

My argument isn't that "most people" - especially those on the left - are watching Jim Caviezel interviews with Steve Bannon.

Because they're not.

Obviously.

The issue is that the mainstream media/social media get wind of those interviews, and more importantly the crazy stuff Caviezel says in them, and *that's* what leads to nearly every headline of every mainstream review of this movie saying things like "Sound of Freedom, the QAnon adjacent film…"

In other words, if in promoting the movie, Caviezel didn't use QAnon talking points while speaking to controversial figures like Steve freaking Bannon, the mainstream media/social media would have nothing to latch onto in that regard, and then many here wouldn't be up in arms at them associating the movie with QAnon.

Which, again, is no one's fault but Jim Caviezel's. So blame him.

And I know a number of people here like to downplay QAnon, or talk about how they know nothing about it, but A) that isn't the flex you think it is, and B) a ton of Americans are still super skittish about January 6th, which was directly incited by QAnon, so now there's an overzealousness to label anything with a whiff of QAnon *as* QAnon, and stomp out anything associated with it.

Anyway, I've explained this multiple times in this thread now, and there will no doubt be all kinds of goal post moving and dumb excuse making in response, as per usual, but whatever.


When has Caviezel used the term Qanon when talking about this film. Ballard addressed this question by saying that he has nothing to do with Qanon.

I think Caviezel is reporting facts about an issue that media like CNN don't like and never report on. CNN has a ridiculous video claiming Caviezel is parroting a debunked Qanon theory. CNN is a joke and there are several things in their video that are wrong or misleading, which is typical CNN journalism.

If you are continuing to say that Caviezel talking about adrenochrome is Qanon, you are wrong. Adrenochrome is not an exclusively Qanon idea. It's been around a long time, well before Qanon.
Jsimonds58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tibbers said:

TCTTS said:

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

TCTTS said:

And so it begins. Again.


What begins? Please tell the class how "Q" directly incited January 6th…apparently the most horrific day in the history of the world.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/qanon-emerges-recurring-theme-criminal-cases-tied-us/story?id=75347445

https://www.insider.com/capitol-riots-qanon-protest-conspiracy-theory-washington-dc-protests-2021-1

https://www.businessinsider.com/qanon-trump-capitol-attack-belief-precursor-the-storm-2021-1

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/qanon-capitol-congress-riot-trump-b1784460.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/us/capitol-rioters.html

https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_capitol-riot-exposed-qanons-violent-potential/6203967.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/13/qanon-capitol-siege-trump/

https://theweek.com/politics/1000962/the-qanon-contradiction

https://theconversation.com/qanon-and-the-storm-of-the-u-s-capitol-the-offline-effect-of-online-conspiracy-theories-152815

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents_involving_QAnon

Also, see the HBO documentary thread linked to above, which outlines it all great detail.


I knew it. You watched the doc and think you know what Q is about. Read the posts and see for yourself but you won't. You don't have the wherewithal or intellectual honesty to do so it seems. You are chasing your tail sir.

You're an admitted Q believer/supporter, which makes you one of the most gullible people on this entire board. You realize I'm not going to listen to or take seriously a single thing you have to say, right? I might as well be talking to a first grader.

TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?

This is what they've been reduced to. The goal posts have been moved so many times, and their pretzel logic has become so twisted, that I don't even know what to say anymore.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

And saying "raids don't solve the problem" is like saying that arresting murderers doesn't solve the murder problem. Of course not. It's not supposed to "solve" the problem, just make them happen a lot less often.


Except the victims in a murder are dead and murderers are rarely part of a larger group. The victims in trafficking are alive and often victimized again because they are left without support or resources and the networks that allow trafficking are intact.
And none of that refutes anything I said.

Rape victims aren't dead, theft victims aren't dead, assault victims aren't dead. Yet it is still worthwhile going after all of those criminals because we want less of that stuff happening.

That doesn't mean that we wouldn't ALSO go after the networks and support victims.


I didn't say to not arrest traffickers. I said that raids are not the solution to trafficking. Not even close. They can cause bigger problems than they solve when done wrong.
Nobody said raids are the "solution'. But they do help.

And what do you consider "doing it wrong"? Shooting everybody in the room? I think these guys are pretty squared away on not doing it "wrong". It's not like they are Dateline NBC.


Conducting a raid, saying you liberated kids, and then doing almost nothing to help get those kids care and support so that they don't wind up victims again is doing it wrong. Sort of like what Ballard and other groups like IJM have done.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/22/the-new-abolitionists-mexico-dominican-republic-human-trafficking-mormon-our/
Tibbers
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Attacking me doesn't make me any less right about you. You watched a doc and labeled yourself a PHd. You've never actually read the posts. Am I wrong or are you just going to throw rocks?
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.
Jack Ruby
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This has been a fun thread, especially from someone who has probably half of the posts of over 20 pages. Also from a guy who said he doesn't care what people think. Anyway I'm done here, it's been fun.


Tibbers
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We hardly knew ye.
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TCTTS said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?

This is what they've been reduced to. The goal posts have been moved so many times, and their pretzel logic has become so twisted, that I don't even know what to say anymore.


So where did Caviezel or Ballard introduce Qanon into their marketing?
Tibbers
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They didn't directly, but many of their messaging suggest they are quite familiar Q and their movement. What I don't understand is how that is a bad thing. But hey, maybe the guy that watched a doc and got spooked can fill us in.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
snowdog90 said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.


The idea that it's a secret fountain of youth that's harvested from tortured kids is absolutely synonymous with QAnon. It's only prior history is from the hard right "Pizzagate" types who fed into QAnon.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
snowdog90 said:

TCTTS said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?

This is what they've been reduced to. The goal posts have been moved so many times, and their pretzel logic has become so twisted, that I don't even know what to say anymore.


So where did Caviezel or Ballard introduce Qanon into their marketing?

And with that, I think we've officially reached the end of our time here.

This question has been asked and answered what feels like a hundred times now, to the point of absurdity, where I just can't believe that someone is seriously, genuinely asking it again now.

We have to be getting played at this point.

You guys have fun!

Fenrir
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.


The idea that it's a secret fountain of youth that's harvested from tortured kids is absolutely synonymous with QAnon. It's only prior history is from the hard right "Pizzagate" types who fed into QAnon.
No, it's history is longer than that. You can thank Hunter S Thompson in the 70s for creating the idea of adrenochrome being harvested from living people.
tk for tu juan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TCTTS said:

snowdog90 said:

TCTTS said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?

This is what they've been reduced to. The goal posts have been moved so many times, and their pretzel logic has become so twisted, that I don't even know what to say anymore.


So where did Caviezel or Ballard introduce Qanon into their marketing?

And with that, I think we've officially reached the end of our time here.

This question has been asked and answered what feels like a hundred times now, to the point of absurdity, where I just can't believe that someone is seriously, genuinely asking it again now.

We have to be getting played at this point.

You guys have fun!




Wow, what a coward.

They are not associating with Qanon at all. But the media has used the term "adrenochrome", which Caviezel uses because it's a real thing, to try to associate them with Qanon.

It's disingenuous and misleading, and you have parroted it throughout the whole thread.

1. Caviezel gives interviews about the horrors of human trafficking, which includes things like harvesting organs and adrenochrome and whatever.

2. CNN claims Caviezel is parroting a Qanon debunked theory, which he is not. Adrenochrome is not a Qanon term, it's been documented well before Qanon.

3. You parrot CNN's bull**** talking points, and blame Caviezel for using Qanon marketing.

What a joke. Go away.
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.


The idea that it's a secret fountain of youth that's harvested from tortured kids is absolutely synonymous with QAnon. It's only prior history is from the hard right "Pizzagate" types who fed into QAnon.


This movie clip is from 12 years ago and is a semi-biographical look at Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most depraved scumbags of the last 50 years. The clip is supposed to be from the 70s or 80s, I believe.

Well before Qanon.

Tibbers
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Since others won't look it up, I'll do it for you.

Another Doug
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
snowdog90 said:

Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.


The idea that it's a secret fountain of youth that's harvested from tortured kids is absolutely synonymous with QAnon. It's only prior history is from the hard right "Pizzagate" types who fed into QAnon.


This movie clip is from 12 years ago and is a semi-biographical look at Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most depraved scumbags of the last 50 years. The clip is supposed to be from the 70s or 80s, I believe.

Well before Qanon.


Well if you are just going to equate fact and fiction it actually goes back much further.

Anakin Skywalker was part of a cult that systematically collected younglings and systematically killed them all to appease his cult leader. So the harvesting children idea actually goes back to a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fig96 said:

aTmAg said:

fig96 said:

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

fig96 said:

EclipseAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

BCG Disciple said:

I think the issue is that Q is some how relevant to any discussion. It quite literally had no part in this conversation. Ballard's story has been well documented and has been receiving positive media coverage for the decade plus since the incident in the film occurred. Now it's some how Q related?? Absolute garbage position and like I mentioned it's similar to invalidating a position by calling someone a racist.

https://www.newsweek.com/sound-freedom-movie-creator-tim-ballard-responds-qanon-allegations-sick-1812204

We've already discussed this. Caviezel has promoted QAnon claims. The film was extensively promoted before release on far right outlets, including promoters of QAnon claims, and the basic premise of the film fits into the claims of that worldview. No one has said Ballard is involved with QAnon, though he's clearly on the political right.
And again, why do you think Caviezel went on "far right outlets" to promote the movie?

Did he really turn down interview requests from the NY Times, CBS/NBC/ABC, Washington Post, Newsweek, Rolling Stone, etc., to do a podcast with Steve Bannon? Which high-profile entertainment websites were clamoring to give him attention?

Look at how the media has portrayed him -- and the movie -- once the film gained a little traction. Do you really think these mainstream outlets would have given him the time of day beforehand?

He likely promoted the film with the only outlets that would allow him to. And then the media turns around and calls it a "far right movie."

THAT is the real issue here.
Probably a bit of a chicken and egg scenario. You have a Christian production studio making this film that knows where it's bread is buttered, that audience is often going to see their films whether they're good or not and they targeted their marketing at that demo. Like someone mentioned earlier, they only knew of the film because they saw The Chosen.

Incorrect.
A studio making Christian targeted content then. Point still stands.
So being anti-child-trafficking is Christian targeted now? Does that mean non-Christians are a-okay with child trafficking?

If I remember correctly, a main stream studio filmed it, but then refused to release it. The Chosen guys bought the rights to the movie and released it.
Yes, that's exactly what it means. We all love child trafficking (I'm Christian btw).

It's impossible to have an adult conversation with some of you.
So what is "Christian targeted" about the content then?
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

And saying "raids don't solve the problem" is like saying that arresting murderers doesn't solve the murder problem. Of course not. It's not supposed to "solve" the problem, just make them happen a lot less often.


Except the victims in a murder are dead and murderers are rarely part of a larger group. The victims in trafficking are alive and often victimized again because they are left without support or resources and the networks that allow trafficking are intact.
And none of that refutes anything I said.

Rape victims aren't dead, theft victims aren't dead, assault victims aren't dead. Yet it is still worthwhile going after all of those criminals because we want less of that stuff happening.

That doesn't mean that we wouldn't ALSO go after the networks and support victims.


I didn't say to not arrest traffickers. I said that raids are not the solution to trafficking. Not even close. They can cause bigger problems than they solve when done wrong.
Nobody said raids are the "solution'. But they do help.

And what do you consider "doing it wrong"? Shooting everybody in the room? I think these guys are pretty squared away on not doing it "wrong". It's not like they are Dateline NBC.


Conducting a raid, saying you liberated kids, and then doing almost nothing to help get those kids care and support so that they don't wind up victims again is doing it wrong. Sort of like what Ballard and other groups like IJM have done.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/22/the-new-abolitionists-mexico-dominican-republic-human-trafficking-mormon-our/
Good God that is your claim?

Why should it be on him to provide or pay for the kids care and support afterwards? That's what therapists are for. Should a cop, who rescues a battered woman from her abusive husband, be on the hook to make sure she gets care and support and doesn't go back to her husband? Hell no. That's somebody else's job.

I don't blame therapists for not breaking into houses to rescue abused kids. That's not their job either. People should do what they are good at. I don't get pissed at my auto mechanic for failing to install a new motherboard on my PC. Maybe because I'm not desperately trying to find something senseless to blame him for.

LOL
Fenrir
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't think this from the book by Hunter S Thompson
Quote:

There's only one source for this stuff, the adrenaline glands from a living human body. It's no good if you get it out of a corpse.


is a particularly good analogy in your attempt at making an absurd comparison.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

TCTTS said:

And so it begins. Again.


What begins? Please tell the class how "Q" directly incited January 6th…apparently the most horrific day in the history of the world.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/qanon-emerges-recurring-theme-criminal-cases-tied-us/story?id=75347445

https://www.insider.com/capitol-riots-qanon-protest-conspiracy-theory-washington-dc-protests-2021-1

https://www.businessinsider.com/qanon-trump-capitol-attack-belief-precursor-the-storm-2021-1

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/qanon-capitol-congress-riot-trump-b1784460.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/us/capitol-rioters.html

https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_capitol-riot-exposed-qanons-violent-potential/6203967.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/13/qanon-capitol-siege-trump/

https://theweek.com/politics/1000962/the-qanon-contradiction

https://theconversation.com/qanon-and-the-storm-of-the-u-s-capitol-the-offline-effect-of-online-conspiracy-theories-152815

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents_involving_QAnon

Also, see the HBO documentary thread linked to above, which outlines it all great detail.


So you have the ability to google and copy/paste MSM articles. Good. Let's forget circular reporting for now.

You claim, repeatedly, that Q incited January 6th. You seem super knowledgeable about it…heck, you've got the articles you just googled to prove it.

So no curiosity on your part about:

  • The chief of the capital police saying the crowd that day was swimming with feds?

  • Nancy Pelosi refusing the national guard and extra security knowing what was potentially to unfold?

  • Nancy Pelosi's daughter (and film crew) just happened to be there that day filming?

  • Throwing anyone and everyone, including grandmas, in prison for taking selfies with no due process yet Ray Epps is free to walk around no questions asked?

  • Who is Ray Epps?

  • What happened to the "pipe bombs"? They were able to geolocate random nobodies and throw them in prison but not a peep about the "pipe bombs" that almost killed AOC even though she wasn't there?

  • FBI official offering a "no comment" to every question Ted Cruz asked regarding the numbers of feds in the crowd that day?

  • If it was an insurrection, how come nobody had weapons?


That's just randomly off the top of my head but yes, let's blame an internet psyop most people had never heard of…certainly at that time.


agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tibbers said:

They didn't directly, but many of their messaging suggest they are quite familiar Q and their movement. What I don't understand is how that is a bad thing. But hey, maybe the guy that watched a doc and got spooked can fill us in.
Based on the limited information I've heard or read about QAnaon, just about anything in the world can be linked to QAnon. Which is to say, the MSM simply found an angle and decided to use that angle to bash a movie about child trafficking which for some reason bringing to light is a controversial topic in hollywood.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Squadron7 said:

TCTTS said:

Please explain to be what I said that was wrong. I would love to hear.

In retrospect, I may be in error here. When I read the following...

Quote:

B) a ton of Americans are still super skittish about January 6th, which was directly incited by QAnon, so now there's an overzealousness to label anything with a whiff of QAnon *as* QAnon, and stomp out anything associated with it.

I surmised that you, too, were part of this group.

If you are not, I apologize.




He is.
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fenrir said:

I don't think this from the book by Hunter S Thompson
Quote:

There's only one source for this stuff, the adrenaline glands from a living human body. It's no good if you get it out of a corpse.


is a particularly good analogy in your attempt at making an absurd comparison.


Thanks for this quote, I didn't know it existed. Hollywood LOVED this guy. "He was such a character!" they say. Yes, a very dark, demented scumbag of a character.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

And saying "raids don't solve the problem" is like saying that arresting murderers doesn't solve the murder problem. Of course not. It's not supposed to "solve" the problem, just make them happen a lot less often.


Except the victims in a murder are dead and murderers are rarely part of a larger group. The victims in trafficking are alive and often victimized again because they are left without support or resources and the networks that allow trafficking are intact.
And none of that refutes anything I said.

Rape victims aren't dead, theft victims aren't dead, assault victims aren't dead. Yet it is still worthwhile going after all of those criminals because we want less of that stuff happening.

That doesn't mean that we wouldn't ALSO go after the networks and support victims.


I didn't say to not arrest traffickers. I said that raids are not the solution to trafficking. Not even close. They can cause bigger problems than they solve when done wrong.
Nobody said raids are the "solution'. But they do help.

And what do you consider "doing it wrong"? Shooting everybody in the room? I think these guys are pretty squared away on not doing it "wrong". It's not like they are Dateline NBC.


Conducting a raid, saying you liberated kids, and then doing almost nothing to help get those kids care and support so that they don't wind up victims again is doing it wrong. Sort of like what Ballard and other groups like IJM have done.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/22/the-new-abolitionists-mexico-dominican-republic-human-trafficking-mormon-our/
Good God that is your claim?

Why should it be on him to provide or pay for the kids care and support afterwards? That's what therapists are for. Should a cop, who rescues a battered woman from her abusive husband, be on the hook to make sure she gets care and support and doesn't go back to her husband? Hell no. That's somebody else's job.

I don't blame therapists for not breaking into houses to rescue abused kids. That's not their job either. People should do what they are good at. I don't get pissed at my auto mechanic for failing to install a new motherboard on my PC. Maybe because I'm not desperately trying to find something senseless to blame him for.

LOL


Oh, my bad. I thought you were interested in stopping human trafficking. Clearly not, since just doing raids doesn't actually stop trafficking. At all.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
snowdog90 said:

Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.


The idea that it's a secret fountain of youth that's harvested from tortured kids is absolutely synonymous with QAnon. It's only prior history is from the hard right "Pizzagate" types who fed into QAnon.


This movie clip is from 12 years ago and is a semi-biographical look at Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most depraved scumbags of the last 50 years. The clip is supposed to be from the 70s or 80s, I believe.

Well before Qanon.




Now show the clip where he claims a global cabal of elites is harvesting the chemical from children they torture.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

Sapper Redux said:

aTmAg said:

And saying "raids don't solve the problem" is like saying that arresting murderers doesn't solve the murder problem. Of course not. It's not supposed to "solve" the problem, just make them happen a lot less often.


Except the victims in a murder are dead and murderers are rarely part of a larger group. The victims in trafficking are alive and often victimized again because they are left without support or resources and the networks that allow trafficking are intact.
And none of that refutes anything I said.

Rape victims aren't dead, theft victims aren't dead, assault victims aren't dead. Yet it is still worthwhile going after all of those criminals because we want less of that stuff happening.

That doesn't mean that we wouldn't ALSO go after the networks and support victims.


I didn't say to not arrest traffickers. I said that raids are not the solution to trafficking. Not even close. They can cause bigger problems than they solve when done wrong.
Nobody said raids are the "solution'. But they do help.

And what do you consider "doing it wrong"? Shooting everybody in the room? I think these guys are pretty squared away on not doing it "wrong". It's not like they are Dateline NBC.


Conducting a raid, saying you liberated kids, and then doing almost nothing to help get those kids care and support so that they don't wind up victims again is doing it wrong. Sort of like what Ballard and other groups like IJM have done.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/22/the-new-abolitionists-mexico-dominican-republic-human-trafficking-mormon-our/
Good God that is your claim?

Why should it be on him to provide or pay for the kids care and support afterwards? That's what therapists are for. Should a cop, who rescues a battered woman from her abusive husband, be on the hook to make sure she gets care and support and doesn't go back to her husband? Hell no. That's somebody else's job.

I don't blame therapists for not breaking into houses to rescue abused kids. That's not their job either. People should do what they are good at. I don't get pissed at my auto mechanic for failing to install a new motherboard on my PC. Maybe because I'm not desperately trying to find something senseless to blame him for.

LOL


Oh, my bad. I thought you were interested in stopping human trafficking. Clearly not, since just doing raids doesn't actually stop trafficking. At all.
Back to this? Where did I say "just doing raids"? Oh that's right, I didn't. In fact, I said (and you quoted right here in this post) the opposite:
Quote:

That doesn't mean that we wouldn't ALSO go after the networks and support victims.
And the notion that THIS ONE GUY is responsible for EVERY aspect of the war on child trafficking is idiotic. Your criticism of him is as senseless as blaming Oskar Schindler for not defeating the entire German war machine by himself.


No wonder you fled F16. I forgot how bad you are at this.
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.


The idea that it's a secret fountain of youth that's harvested from tortured kids is absolutely synonymous with QAnon. It's only prior history is from the hard right "Pizzagate" types who fed into QAnon.


This movie clip is from 12 years ago and is a semi-biographical look at Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most depraved scumbags of the last 50 years. The clip is supposed to be from the 70s or 80s, I believe.

Well before Qanon.




Now show the clip where he claims a global cabal of elites is harvesting the chemical from children they torture.


You could ask Hunter Thompson for a clip if he was still alive. He seemed to know a lot on the subject.


from the book by Hunter S Thompson

Quote:
There's only one source for this stuff, the adrenaline glands from a living human body. It's no good if you get it out of a corpse.
Squadron7
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The movie about child trafficking that the Libs want to see is one made by Roman Polanski.
redsquirrelAG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Great work Snowdog. You know why these idiots dont believe it? Because they don't believe in God, thus they don't think this evil exists.

It's documented throughout history blood sacrifice, child sacrifice, etc. Read the Bible you twits!!!
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
snowdog90 said:

Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Sapper Redux said:

snowdog90 said:

Jsimonds58 said:

Are we really playing gotcha here by trying to say that because he didn't say Qanon by NAME, that his peddling of all the horse**** conspiracies is somehow better and different?

I mean is that what this argument has devolved to at this point?


Wow, this is some horse ***** He didn't bring Qanon into this, the media did. They did it to try to discredit him. They are lying, and you are a useless idiot going right along with them. Facts don't matter to you or them.

Adrenochrome is NOT synonymous to Qanon.


The idea that it's a secret fountain of youth that's harvested from tortured kids is absolutely synonymous with QAnon. It's only prior history is from the hard right "Pizzagate" types who fed into QAnon.


This movie clip is from 12 years ago and is a semi-biographical look at Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most depraved scumbags of the last 50 years. The clip is supposed to be from the 70s or 80s, I believe.

Well before Qanon.




Now show the clip where he claims a global cabal of elites is harvesting the chemical from children they torture.


You could ask Hunter Thompson for a clip if he was still alive. He seemed to know a lot on the subject.


from the book by Hunter S Thompson

Quote:
There's only one source for this stuff, the adrenaline glands from a living human body. It's no good if you get it out of a corpse.



Lol. Not familiar with Thompson, I take it. The conspiracy theory in question is maybe 10 years old and is directly tied to the conspiracy theorists who migrated to QAnon.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.