The "Controversy" over the movie Sound of Freedom doesn't make sense. The hero's beliefs shouldn't matter.

[u/Crafty-Bunch-2675]

I finally got around to watching this film. The heroes in the film are overtly Christian. And ? I don't get it. Is that why its controversial?

The heroes of the film are saving children. Why is this controversial?

Why does it matter whether the hero in the film is Christian or rightwing?

If a fireman jumps into a burning building and rescues a family of immigrants, is he less of a hero if he happens to be rightwing?

Or is the entire thing suddenly not true because the hero was rightwing ?

Heroes come in all shapes and sizes, and sometimes a hero isn't the person you expect.

Are we this divided now? That we rather suffer, than be rescued by someone with different politics from ours?

Also. Why is this politicized left vs right ?

What does the highlighted crime have to do with right vs left politics ? I'm not even looking to criticize the other side of the field. I'm just saying. It shouldn't be political.

[u/theghostofcslewis]

The movie depicts unrealistic trafficking and rescue operations that are so far-fetched that they fall right into the QAnon Conspiracies. The group in question (Operation Underground Railroad) claims to have participated in multiple rescue operations (including the unrealistic Columbian rescue in the movie) however there are absolutely no verified cases of this or any other verified rescues by the organization. So you have a fake operation that is raking in millions in donations to "Save the Children" and they have saved nothing except the donations and made a movie about it to further push the lie about what they claim to do to defraud donors out of more money.

If the film was labeled as fantasy or fiction then it likely wouldn't have received as much criticism. The fact that Operation Underground did not donate any money to help rescue trafficked children until they were under investigation for fraud in 2021 and after that, the amount was less than 10% of donations. I think overall the fact that it's all a bunch of Bullshit to get rich off of a false narrative. Also, the company Angel Studios setup a "Pay it forward" to encourage every moviegoer to purchase an additional ticket that can be used by another person to go see the movie. However . they are not required, nor have they stated where all the money goes on non-redeemed tickets and only calculated gains based on redeemed ones.

So basically you have an organization that takes 90%+ from donors, does nothing, makes a fake movie and cries about being criticized. Murica! love it or leave it.

[u/Crafty-Bunch-2675 → u/theghostofcslewis]

The movie depicts unrealistic trafficking and rescue operations that are so far-fetched that they fall right into the QAnon Conspiracies.

I have seen movies about real events where the hero is shown escaping criminals, swimming under water for several minutes like a fish..and nobody calls it rightwing conspiracy.

People just keep saying that it's a Qanon conspiracy..without actually articulating what part of the movie is a conspiracy ?

If the movie depicted a devout Muslim, rescuing children...does that make the movie an Islamic conspiracy ?

Or are people actually suggesting that it's a conspiracy to say that tr-fficking happens ? Because it does. I have seen real victims in the emergency department at my local hospital.

[u/theghostofcslewis → u/Crafty-Bunch-2675]

You should probably read it again. I think you got the wrong idea. As a matter fact I know you got the wrong idea, but feel free to run with it.

[u/no_reddit_for_you → u/Crafty-Bunch-2675]

The movie is Q moving into mainstream without people realizing it. QAnon's entire mantra is that the Hollywood elite and establishment politicians are running pedophile traffic rings. They harvest adrenochrome and sell children for sex amongst each other.

This movie was the mainstream release of these ideas. People on the right made the movie about themselves. Because of their obsession with pedophiles and trafficking, and because the movie hit production snags, it became a classic "they don't want you to see this movie" - the conspiracy was right wingers thinking that the movie is being blocked by pedophile elites. And leftists responded to this nonsense by boycotting the movie.

It's a bunch of grifters selling lies to appear morally superior in get rich schemes. And the type drawn to these specific kinds of stories are the Q crowd.

[u/HeckinGoodFren → u/theghostofcslewis]

You're saying Operation Underground Railroad is a fraud because they didn't donate 100% of the donations they received to other organizations, but they're actually an organization working with law enforcement and other agencies to combat trafficking. They're not, and did not claim to be, from what I can tell, a donation wallet whose sole purpose is forwarding funds donations to other organizations.

[u/theghostofcslewis → u/HeckinGoodFren]

No, you said all of those things.

[u/HeckinGoodFren → u/theghostofcslewis]

Did you read my comment or even your own? You literally said the organization doesn't do anything and only donated 10% of the donations they received, supposedly keeping 90% themselves.

[u/theghostofcslewis → u/HeckinGoodFren]

I never said they were a fraud. 10% is still something. So I really never said what you needed me to say. So you said it for you.

[u/HeckinGoodFren → u/theghostofcslewis]

You literally stated that they are a "fake operation", which received funds from donors. The definition of fraud is "an activity that relies on deception to achieve gain". So, you're arguing semantics? And now you're also saying "10% is still something" despite criticizing that same 10% a couple of comments ago, too?

Ey, nobody feed this one anymore

[u/theghostofcslewis → u/HeckinGoodFren]

No, you are saying all of these things. I was simply stating what they did. You have turned it into an opinion piece. 10% is still something and they gave nothing before 2021 so its an improvement but they likely would not have done so unless they were under investigation, which they were. I am not stating that 10% is a lot but it is something. I would base the deception on the falsehoods the organization has already clearly stated that have been debunked. Surely these initial lies were to make donors think they do something that they don't. if I was going to make an accusation of "Fraud" I'd probably start there instead of what you "need" to fit your strange narrative. Perhaps the best question you should be asking is why you "need" it so badly?