Sound of Freedom - What are they up to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can handle a lot of things, but the thought of crimes against children immediately makes me tear up. The fact that someone is making money off a movie about such a serious subject makes me so angry. People in the theater munching away on popcorn then saying “wow so powerful” and never actually doing anything. Just ridiculous.

You don't know what other people are thinking and might do after watching. Getting the message out to the public is a good thing.. Get off your high horse.

[Anonymous]

Who is keeping people from watching that movie? This sounds like a way to get free publicity. It's playing at my local theater along with Indiana Jones and Mission Impossible.

[Anonymous]

Even if we take the criticism against the film as true... what is the bad outcome if people see it? Worst case, they develop more concern and empathy for trafficking victims. And then they will be less likely to patronize sex workers, less likely to view porn, and less likely to patronize businesses that use slave labor. Am I missing something? These all seem like net positives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t seen it, but there is a trailer for it, so it can’t be that secretive. It was made Angel Studios who I would assume do mostly Christian based programming & probably don’t have very big budgets.

It’s based on a true story of Tim Ballard who I have read about. He worked for Homeland Security and then founded Operation Underground Railroad to rescue kids from human trafficking.

There are extremists on most issues, but that doesn’t mean that it invalidates the issue itself. I don’t think this has anything to do with qanon beliefs even if qanon people are getting behind it.

I would hope that we can all agree that human trafficking is real & horrendous & needs to be addressed. I can’t imagine not supporting anyone doing what they can to help with that issue even if I didn’t agree with all of their beliefs.

+1. People really need to stop reflexively being against anything that the "other side" is for. Otherwise you're going to argue insane things like "only weirdos are against child sex trafficking."

This. Being against this just because there as some Q-Whackos who are against it as well is silly. Don’t fall into the trap of assuming it isn’t real. This is real and it’s a compelling story and should end with you being informed and engages, not headed to Comet Pizza to break into their basement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so laughable that with their manipulative “pay it forward” scheme, they claim to have been “more popular than Indiana Jones.” And dim bulbs just lap it up.

Sound of Freedom beat Indiana Jones during the Fourth of July weekend ticket sales.

https://wsau.com/2023/07/10/sound-of-freedom-becomes-top-grossing-u-s-movie-beats-indiana-jones/

Sorry that reality is so difficult for you.

.

A fool and his money are soon parted.

Except for the protagonist on this film. He is laughing all the way to the bank.

A before anyone accuses me of not caring, I worked in LE for 12 years and did a few of these cases. You all a sheeps. If not, tell me what you have actually done for this issue other than “raising awareness” by trolling Internet forums.

Agreed. This was a money making scheme. No one quits HSI mid-career because they feel so impassioned about a cause. When’s the last time an DEA agent quit anfter 10 years to become a drug addictikn counselor? Also, I know most of the retired HSI guys that now work for him. They’re “B list” investigators who have similar personas.

Ballard is so impassioned about the cause because the grandson of a man was kidnapped from the church daycare and trafficked. Ballard promised the man that he would find the boy. When he did track him down with a group of other trafficked kids he told his superiors they needed to plan the rescue. He was turned down due to expense, which was about $200K per rescue. Ballard realized that the problem with cost was government overhead. He raised some money (Glenn Beck’s charitable arm was a huge donator) and they were able to launch a rescue for only 15K. They used retired military paratroopers to aid. Ballard and a couple other men would pose as men who wanted to buy the children and when the money exchanged hands, the paratroopers would rain down with long guns and rescue the kids. He’s still not found that little boy, sadly, and never really forgave the government for not allowing him to go in when he had - that was why he was so impassioned to start O.U.R. And before the lot of you naysayers start on religion and race, the little boy he’s still looking for is black.

I have made monthly donations to this organization from its inception.

What does the kid being Black have to do with it?

[Anonymous]

This whole manufactured outrage about this movie is beyond! These right wing nut jobs are acting like this is the very first time human trafficking has been communicated to the public, and it's some left wing conspiracy to not acknowledge it. I have been aware of human trafficking via mandatory training, I have to take in my hospitality, job, different lifetime movies, Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis's visit to Congress (was it two years ago?) And so on and so forth. Who the heck cares who is goes to what movie! Why is this even a thing? Where I choose to spend my money if I go to a movie in a movie theater is my business. And no one else's. The fact that this has made the news tells me it's become some sort of weird right wing talking point. I don't watch Mission impossible movies, despite the popularity of this movie series because I personally do not like Tom Cruise and his connection to Scientology. It's a personal choice. This is just another example of manufactured outrage.

This manufactured outrage is what happened to Comet pizza, the January 6 insurrection, and so on. The propaganda right wing news media gets their people all riled up behind a cause and this is the latest. Lemmings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This whole manufactured outrage about this movie is beyond! These right wing nut jobs are acting like this is the very first time human trafficking has been communicated to the public, and it's some left wing conspiracy to not acknowledge it. I have been aware of human trafficking via mandatory training, I have to take in my hospitality, job, different lifetime movies, Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis's visit to Congress (was it two years ago?) And so on and so forth. Who the heck cares who is goes to what movie! Why is this even a thing? Where I choose to spend my money if I go to a movie in a movie theater is my business. And no one else's. The fact that this has made the news tells me it's become some sort of weird right wing talking point. I don't watch Mission impossible movies, despite the popularity of this movie series because I personally do not like Tom Cruise and his connection to Scientology. It's a personal choice. This is just another example of manufactured outrage.

This manufactured outrage is what happened to Comet pizza, the January 6 insurrection, and so on. The propaganda right wing news media gets their people all riled up behind a cause and this is the latest. Lemmings.

No, they're not; and your description here gives affirmation to their claims. If they're wrong, then why all the negative posts here? I don't think the producers are saying that it's the first time human trafficking has been communicated to the public, but there are many more people who need to learn about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even if we take the criticism against the film as true... what is the bad outcome if people see it? Worst case, they develop more concern and empathy for trafficking victims. And then they will be less likely to patronize sex workers, less likely to view porn, and less likely to patronize businesses that use slave labor. Am I missing something? These all seem like net positives.

Where does this money made from this go? Is it going to line people's private pockets, or does it get donated to a non-profit with transparency in tracking funds?

If any movie or project should be clear about that, surely it's this one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole manufactured outrage about this movie is beyond! These right wing nut jobs are acting like this is the very first time human trafficking has been communicated to the public, and it's some left wing conspiracy to not acknowledge it. I have been aware of human trafficking via mandatory training, I have to take in my hospitality, job, different lifetime movies, Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis's visit to Congress (was it two years ago?) And so on and so forth. Who the heck cares who is goes to what movie! Why is this even a thing? Where I choose to spend my money if I go to a movie in a movie theater is my business. And no one else's. The fact that this has made the news tells me it's become some sort of weird right wing talking point. I don't watch Mission impossible movies, despite the popularity of this movie series because I personally do not like Tom Cruise and his connection to Scientology. It's a personal choice. This is just another example of manufactured outrage.

This manufactured outrage is what happened to Comet pizza, the January 6 insurrection, and so on. The propaganda right wing news media gets their people all riled up behind a cause and this is the latest. Lemmings.

No, they're not; and your description here gives affirmation to their claims. If they're wrong, then why all the negative posts here? I don't think the producers are saying that it's the first time human trafficking has been communicated to the public, but there are many more people who need to learn about it.

No, but they are pushing extremely hard on watching this movie and then if people say no, I don't want to line the pockets of in Qanon adjacent person or movie company. We are labeled pedophiles and are trying to hide the fact that human trafficking happens. Again who the heck cares whether or not I'll watch a movie?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The politics are these: border policies contribute to the problem. The Internet and Dark Web contribute to the problem. According to the movie producers, the US is the biggest consumer. The producers of the movie have stated they are against the idea of children of a certain age consenting to gender affirming treatments and surgeries because it is a slippery slope to lower the age of consent a child gives to an adult to have sex.

The movie producers hold strong views, religious and political, about other controversial subjects, not just human trafficking.

Please explain the dichotomy of the red states being all in on allowing children to marry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole manufactured outrage about this movie is beyond! These right wing nut jobs are acting like this is the very first time human trafficking has been communicated to the public, and it's some left wing conspiracy to not acknowledge it. I have been aware of human trafficking via mandatory training, I have to take in my hospitality, job, different lifetime movies, Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis's visit to Congress (was it two years ago?) And so on and so forth. Who the heck cares who is goes to what movie! Why is this even a thing? Where I choose to spend my money if I go to a movie in a movie theater is my business. And no one else's. The fact that this has made the news tells me it's become some sort of weird right wing talking point. I don't watch Mission impossible movies, despite the popularity of this movie series because I personally do not like Tom Cruise and his connection to Scientology. It's a personal choice. This is just another example of manufactured outrage.

This manufactured outrage is what happened to Comet pizza, the January 6 insurrection, and so on. The propaganda right wing news media gets their people all riled up behind a cause and this is the latest. Lemmings.

No, they're not; and your description here gives affirmation to their claims. If they're wrong, then why all the negative posts here? I don't think the producers are saying that it's the first time human trafficking has been communicated to the public, but there are many more people who need to learn about it.

No, but they are pushing extremely hard on watching this movie and then if people say no, I don't want to line the pockets of in Qanon adjacent person or movie company. We are labeled pedophiles and are trying to hide the fact that human trafficking happens. Again who the heck cares whether or not I'll watch a movie?

Umm no one cares if you watch this movie or not. If you don't want to see the movie then don't go. Who is pushing extremely hard for you to see it? You're foaming at the mouth calling people nut jobs and conspiracy theorists when you sound like one yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who have cynically cried wolf before have no credibility.

When you are considering whether to believe any allegation, you have to consider the source. If it is a source that has lied before and insists that everyone in authority or established is hiding the truth, you may well be dealing with a whack job trying to sell you something for nefarious purposes. If that group is a well-known whack job collective like QAnon, well...

What are you talking about? This movie is based on a true story and the script was written in 2015 before QAnon was even a thing. I really wonder what is wrong with people who are trying to discredit this movie when it is opening people's eyes up to the reality of human trafficking. Young children are literally being sold and raped and we have people on here talking about QAnon.

The qanon crap started well before 2015. These crazy conspiracy theories were around in the 90s. The crazy crap my fil believed and was into back then…

[Anonymous]

The movie was created and is supported by people who do not care about facts and truth. It’s impossible to support this movie given the agenda of these people. It really isn’t about child trafficking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The movie was created and is supported by people who do not care about facts and truth. It’s impossible to support this movie given the agenda of these people. It really isn’t about child trafficking.

Exactly what evidence do you have to support what you are saying? What agenda do you think they have? I find it ironic people keep ranting about QAnon and conspiracy theorists when you literally sound like one yourself making stuff up.

[Anonymous]

Sex trafficking is bad. Don’t need to watch 2 hours and 11 minutes worth of tragedy porn to convince me of that.