Why 'Sound of Freedom,' Jim Caviezel's controversial child sex trafficking film, is a hit

Not surprised lol

 

Wasn't hard to predict this thread would end with the argument that everyone against the movie is for child sex trafficking. Almost like it's the heart of Q.

 

Fear sells.

 

“Fear sells.”

Sounds like … oh well, I’ve beaten that to death as well.

 

Sounds like content better suited for documentary form, not something I’d go to the theater for.

Popcorn anyone?

I imagine it is being hyped by the Right because anyone who supports the LGBT movement is now considered a groomer or Pedo by a good portion of them.

 

He didn't simply say something critical about the Biden administration and it wasn't an offhand comment about something unrelated to the movie. He accused the American woke left of pushing an agenda that is pro pedophile. There have also been suggestions that those critical of the movie and those concerned about Qanon theories just don't want the public to learn the truth about children being trafficked and raped. Why would anyone want to keep people in the dark about children being raped unless they support child rape?

Also, notably, my post was also in the context of responding to someone on this board accusing Democrats of facilitating and trying to cover up child sex trafficking. That has been a popular refrain online for years. I already said that I will probably see the movie based upon early reviews. But I don't need to see the movie to know that child sex trafficking and abuse are serious problems; it's not a secret. But if this movie is really important for getting the word out to those who don't know, I don't think those who support the movie ought to be alienating many potential viewers.

 

Yes ?

 

Sound of Freedom movie review (2023) | Roger Ebert

Oh, c'mon lol

 

I never realized how widespread pedophilia was until I started expressing concerns about Pit bulls online. That elicited screeching from Pit Bull support group types chiding me with “I’d feel safer with a pittie around my kids than you!” and even accusations I must be a pedophile.

 

I'd say the closer parallel would be Battlefield Earth with John Travolta, given the fact that the actor's participation in the movie itself seems ideologically driven. Tom Cruise didn't spend Top Gun talking about Xenu.

The tie between Qanon and child sex trafficking is mostly a gateway into wider conspiracy communities, which have been broadly linked in recent years. It started with the absorption of Pizzagate-type communities into the broader Qanon community. They then absorbed a real issue, child sex trafficking, as sort of a gateway into the far crazier stuff. Essentially, you start by talking about child sex trafficking (again, a real issue), then it becomes declaring a bunch of people like Tom Hanks or Bill Gates or Hillary Clinton as being perpetrators of sex trafficking, then it becomes about how Bill Gates is trying to chip you, and you are fully off to the races.

 

I’d like to see Caviezel do movies about cleaning up the seamy underbelly of the state. One about taking down Fauci, Birx, et.al., with a sequel taking down Nuland, Kagan, et.al.

 

What do I look for to see these children that are sex trafficked in my hometown? I can see the drunks and the drug addicts but how are these monsters "shopping" these children in small town America? I really have no idea.

 

I saw the interview, and I don't think that is an incredibly fair take of what he said. He noted that he was not saying that the "woke left" and the pedophiles were coordinating or working together, but that the "woke left" is pursuing an agenda that pedophiles happen to like because it furthers their interests.

That's a personal political belief which may or may not be incorrect, but it is not accusing the "woke left" of going out on a limb to defend pedophiles.

There's always suggestions by all sorts of vitriolic and bitter people. I haven't seen any evidence of the people behind the movie claiming that anybody who doesn't like the movie is just a bad person.

I have seen evidence that the people who made the movie believe that some really powerful people don't want the movie shared with the masses because they have evil vested interests. But that's undoubtedly true, just look at Jeffrey Epstein and the connections he had. Making that point is very different from the point that "nobody likes my movie because everyone is stupid or evil."

There's a reason I didn't respond to that portion of your post. I understand that point.

 

Start by supporting a tight enforcment of our souther border.

Wokee neo-prog leftitist mouth piece chicom water carriers always try to spin the border issue as a racist /xenophobic issue, like the only reason ppl want border security is to keep browm Man out.

...but the southern border has proven to be an incredibly easy ingress/egress revolving door for all kinds of maleveolanace, especially sex trafficers and drug trafficers (which has become particularly problematic for fentanyl, which has taken almost 100,000 lives per year for the last 4 years).

TBL: you have a Leftist butt clenching freak out over this film, because any light case on sex trafficing, redounds directly to the southern border, which would then undermine their loser poly postion vis a vis the border, and shed light of truth on why it is not just a legitimate issue, but one of the most compelling on our time.

 

One of the big reasons that the border is ripe for sex or drug trafficking activity is because we spend so much time pushing immigrants into positions where they are sneaking across that it becomes harder to distinguish people trafficking from people immigrating. Start handling the border like Ellis Island, where the immigrants all go to central and large enough processing centers and are allowed to enter unless they fail a security or disease check, rather than engaging in stupid policies designed to prevent immigration as we have since the 1920s and, suddenly, you have a lot more reason to believe that guy and young child trying to cross in the middle might not just be an aspiring low skill labor provider and his child.

Or, alternatively, how many billions more in salary and infrastructure is necessary until you declare it secure in a market with less than 4% unemployment (which is labor shortage territory)?

 

They will tell you to begin at your local pizza parlor

 

No, the director, for example, has not expressly declared that every single person who doesn't like the movie is evil, but his comments have not been relegated to the Jeffery Epsteins of the world either. He says that the mainstream media are scared and "quaking in their boots." He is quoted by Fox News as saying, "The moral depravity is such now that people are willing to live with this. That’s why we did the film."

Seems clear that he's suggesting that a widespread number of people, including the MSM, don't want anything done to stop child sex abuse because they are morally depraved and okay with it. Actually more than just okay; they don't even want the public to know about the problem. The "they don't want you to know the truth" line is a classic influence tool and consistent with Qanon propaganda. According to Fox News, AMC Theaters has been forced to debunk rumors that it's trying to make it more difficult to see the movie. I know I saw tweets accusing theaters of trying to prevent people from seeing the movie by saying the AC was out or something like that. Seems like those rumors are not isolated if AMC felt the need to comment.

As someone else noted, Taken was a very popular movie. As another example, the NBC show To Catch A Predator was very popular. That show was so well known that the Chris Hansen gif became a meme. The notion that Hollywood and the MSM are trying to keep this stuff a secret doesn't make any sense. Also, they're on one hand understandably thrilled about the movie having reached the top of the box office charts and being so widely distributed - somehow that fact doesn't seem to lessen the sense of persecution and that they're fighting some uphill battle here.

‘Sound of Freedom’ actor Jim Caviezel calls out media attacks on hit film: They are ‘quaking in their boots’

 

Again, I don't think that this is a characterization of the broad American audience, but rather, a critique on a particular group of influential elites based on factual beliefs that may or may not be accurate and may or may not be fair.

There's a lot of semantic overload on Tim Ballard's part here. He's kind of talking about predators in the same breath as people enabling the problem and people who have grown numb to the problem. All three are very different groups of people. I think that does him a bit of a disservice here, but in such politically charged times, it's really difficult to navigate the rhetorical waters in a clear and nuanced fashion. That's not to give him a pass for his lack of clarity, but I think that provides a little context to his statements.

I think these are very different times from even ten years ago. I think he's probably exaggerating the extent of Hollywood's evil as far as "supporting" this stuff, which is saying something because Hollywood has a pretty bad history in the exploitation and sex department. But none of this takes away from the film itself. It's Ballard's take on the real-life circumstances, not the depiction presented in the movie.

As far as the "persecution" point, I think that psyche has seeped its way into most people right, left, and center; and sometimes it's justified and sometimes it isn't. But one thing is true, people seem to correctly believe that framing yourself as a martyr for a righteous cause is powerful if a big enough group sees it as authentic. Whether people like Ballard are doing that now (provided that it's false) because they're being manipulative, it's their subconscious engaging in self-preservation, or because they actually believe what they're saying... take your pick. Who knows.

 

Anti-Trafficking Group With Long History of False Claims Gets Its Hollywood Moment