Lol

Fairy*

“TrUSt tHE eXPeRtS”, sir this is a message board so I guess I can’t listen to your message board alone-in-a-car-mask-wearing flavored rhetoric.

Go ahead and look up some statistics rather than personal bias, the movie is (loosely) based on a true story and sadly child trafficking does happen in the form being shown in the movie, now you can cover your eyes and ears and pretend like there is no evil in the world but sadly remaining ignorant of the devil will only hurt you in the end. You have revealed yourself to be young in age and mind, so I’m replying to point this out to others. There is a supreme evil in the world, and all our days are numbered, we are all quickly approaching our deaths and what we do on the planet matters and has consequences.

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.

What’s your opinion on the woman king?

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?

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.

Oh wow look at that, using rollingstone as a source and running with blinders on. Hey look at how many people liked your comment, you must be right.

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?

Thats a complete failure to interpret or mischaracterization of my entire point about the smear campaign against the movie. In your fire analogy a better characterization would be:

A building is on fire. Standing outside of it is a person yelling loudly “This building is on fire!”. Nobody is asking him what started the fire or why he is worried about the fire since buildings catch on fire multiple times a year. But he just keeps standing there yelling at anyone that will listen. Then he is approached by members of the crowd that has gathered who all berate him for being so loud and abnoxious and explain to him that house fires happen all the time and to let the authorities handle it, that it’s not really an issue to be concerned with. Then another member of the crowd says, “Hey! I know someone that donated to this building fund when it was being built, and he was accessory to arson! So shut up about this building being on fire, it was only built by people that approve of arson!”

You don’t believe this is odd behavior?

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

Wait you think Budweiser didn’t suffer financially from sponsoring DM? What metric are you using to determine financial loss?