• BigToe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    84
    ·
    1 year ago

    “These people” sounds a little bias eh? I’m so confused at the smear campaign for a movie that vilifies child trafficking.

    • TrousersMcPants@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You want people to be nonbiased when it comes to child traffickers? This film does not vilify child trafficking, it’s an attempt to deflect attention from real child traffickers

    • hauntology@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      QAnon is bullshit. This movie is also bullshit. Jim Caviezel is batshit insane and believes that evil democrats are harvesting the blood of children so they can be wannabee vampires (blood libel anyone?) Fuck this movie and anyone involved in it.

    • socsa@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Picture this. A building is on fire. Standing outside of it is a person yelling loudly “I didn’t start this fire!”. Nobody is asking him if he started the fire. But he just keeps standing there, yelling at nobody in particular. He doesn’t seek cover or anything. He just tells any person he sees that the fire isn’t his fault.

      And you don’t believe this is odd behavior?

    • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because the people who made it are literal child traffickers. Should we not be “a little bias” against them?

      • BigToe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Enlighten me, which person “made” the film that is a “litteral child trafficker”? If you are talking about the person listed in this gobbledygook title, go look into the case a little further before knee-jerk reacting and looking foolish like these other goobers.

    • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you mean the movie that’s founder was just caught kidnapping a child? Is that the movie you’re concerned about people smearing?

      • BigToe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah 'he was a FoUNdeR" lol do a little research the guy donated $501 to get his name in the credits along with nearly 7000 other people and he’s not convicted of child trafficking he’s convicted of accessory to child kidnapping which if you care to read the details about the case is such a non issue when compared to child trafficking. He broke the law, lock him up let him serve his time, the fact that anyone is using some fucking nobody that donated $500 and calling him a founder to discredit the real issue of child trafficking is astonishing and disgusting.

        Think about what the “journalist/reporter” went through to obtain this information, they cross checked legal cases with all nearly 7k donation of $500 and up (so they could run the headline that he/she was a founder of the movie) and found a case with child kidnapping and ran with it and you bozos are eating it up. How about team red or team blue we fucking agree child trafficking is bad and that we should castrate and kill the people trafficking them and the pedophiles buying them?

        • pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The issue isn’t with political partisanship. I think both sides all agree child trafficking is abhorrent, and you’d be hard pressed to find anybody on either side claiming otherwise.

          The problem is QAnon believers reject evidence that doesn’t support their world view and are politically biased. They aren’t making an educational public awareness movie, they’re making propaganda based on misinformed beliefs.

          • BigToe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not really concerned with Qanon tbh and I’ve not kept up with their craziness for some time, I guess that’s what confuses me about the sensationalist title calling this a Qanon adjacent film, just screams smear campaign. What’s your thoughts on California failing to pass SB-14?

        • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have a simpler theory. He got arrested and journalists checked his socials when trying to write a story. He talked about this very subject online. Hey, look! No sinister motives needed1

          Your version has journalists cross checking a list, trying their very best to discredit people involved in exposing the truth. That’s a sign that you’re not coming at this with clear thinking.

          • BigToe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are right, mainstream media definitely isn’t stretching the title and article my mistake they are completely unbiased and there is no issue with child trafficking.

            • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Child trafficking happens predominantly via someone the child already knows (family or family-adjacent). It’s very rarely in the form that this film projects with random people snatching children off the street. The film depicts an almost fictional version of the issue. This is regardless of whatever good intent the backers may have had. But you have revealed yourself to be deeply enmeshed in your perception of the issue and I’m replying to point this out to others rather than to you.

    • HellAwaits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because idiots that make anti-pedophilia part of their personality tend to call their political enemies pedophiles rather than go after the actual pedophiles. Not rocket science.