Pro Pedophile group bashes Sound Of Freedom

[reason10]

I don't think that I have said much if anything about that topic.

I'm pretty sure your real name is not Roger Ebert, so it's unlikely that you have critiqued the film. If you're just saying the film is ridiculous without actually seeing it, because you are on the side  of the MAP crowd (Minor Attracted People) then you have some explaining to do. But somehow I just can't  picture a  pompous windbag like you actually paying to see ANY Jim Caviezel movie.

"Hmmmm... MICHAEL doesn't post much about condemning illegal immigration... and since that's a source of trafficking, that must mean he SUPPORTS it"

Illegal aliens ARE child traffickers. If you support illegal immigration, you support child traffickers. If you are like most of America and don't want those animals jumping the line in front of LEGITIMATE IMMIGRANTS waiting to enter this country, that's different.

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, reason10 said:

1. If you're just saying the film is ridiculous without actually seeing it, because you are on the side  of the MAP crowd (Minor Attracted People) then you have some explaining to do.

2. you support child traffickers. 

1. Yes great logic.  You have proven my point: according to you, because I didn't go to see your stupid movie I am pro child molestation.

2. Your logic is bad and your behaviour disgusting.  

Please DM me with the date by which you promise to leave the forum.

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Nobody's fighting it.  Some are a little jaded by the selling of this thing, understandably so.

Like I say, there's a boatload of hidden agendas there... 

What "hidden agendas" are there? It's clear that leftists/democrats are far more likely to support, if not be directly involved with, human trafficking than anyone else, so there's nothing "hidden" about this. 

Democrats who actually disagree with human trafficking should at least be verbalizing their opposition to this evil practice. Actively speaking out against the film or just standing on the sidelines and not saying anything isn't enough. 

 

Edited July 20, 2023 by Deluge

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Deluge said:

1. What "hidden agendas" are there? 

2. Democrats should at least be verbalizing their opposition to this evil practice. 

1. Take your pick.  When I go to the save the children group on facebook, it's posting about vaccines, Trudeau the Democrats world conspiracy, Pride and LGBTQ, and such. They never mentioned Republican associated pedophiles, of which there are more than a few.

2. Versus Republicans who nominated Roy Moore and stood by him?  Or the guy who spoke with Giuliani at Four Seasons Landscaping?

If it's about the kids why are Republicans never mentioned?

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

If conservatives cared about children, they would work in a bi-partisan fashion to implement policies to improve the lives of children.

 

But conservatives don’t care about children. They grab issues like pedophilia and attach it to homosexuality and transsexuality, when we know there is no such relationship and we know that persecuting minorities is not the solution to this problem. 

The best thing for children is having a mother and a father in a loving and secure family setting. If democrats really cared about children they would be helping build these family units, not paying the government to replace the fathers. 

Conservatives DO care about children. It's the lefties that want to either shit can unborn children or create government supported fatherless houses. The government is YOUR answer to every f*cking thing. 

Edited July 20, 2023 by Deluge

[reason10]

1. Yes great logic.  You have proven my point: according to you, because I didn't go to see your stupid movie I am pro child molestation.

That's a lie.  I said that if you called the movie ridiculous without actually seeing it,that makes you a pompous windbag. Like Limbaugh tried to tell you lefties,WORDS MEAN THINGS.

2. Your logic is bad and your behaviour disgusting.  

Please DM me with the date by which you promise to leave the forum.

The reason I haven't ever requested that you do the same, (DM with a  promise to leave the forum) is because you are not that important. You're just another member of the unthinking, uneducated Hitler Youth here and you really don't have that much impact on anything important. Oh, and I'm certainly able to tolerate ignorance and stupidity and disgusting behavior FROM YOU AND ALL THE OTHER LEFT WING GOOSE STEPPERS HERE, so I'm not going to throw a tantrum here and ask someone to leave the and box.

I might be gone from this forum for longer periods of time, when school starts here in Florida. Unlike the welfare cheating left wing bums here, I put in very long hours on both jobs. Somehow I prefer the company of Florida third graders because they are better educated than you and all the other liberal goose steppers here.

You ARE occasionally fun to watch, when you put on that imperious, sanctimonius cloak of elitism.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2023 by reason10

[Deluge]

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Take your pick.  When I go to the save the children group on facebook, it's posting about vaccines, Trudeau the Democrats world conspiracy, Pride and LGBTQ, and such. They never mentioned Republican associated pedophiles, of which there are more than a few.

2. Versus Republicans who nominated Roy Moore and stood by him?  Or the guy who spoke with Giuliani at Four Seasons Landscaping?

If it's about the kids why are Republicans never mentioned?

1. I would. All those f*ckers are probably RINO's and are just as guilty. 

They need to be mentioned. I would throw those a$$holes onto my search list too. 

The heading to my list would look something like this: The DNC and RINO's. 

Edited July 20, 2023 by Deluge

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, Deluge said:

1. I would. All those f*ckers are probably RINO's and are just as guilty. 

They need to be mentioned. I would throw those a$$holes onto my search list too. 

The heading to my list would look something like this: The DNC and RINO's. 

Why not Republicans in general?  Would you excuse Roy Moore if he were guilty?  Or Giuliani?

[reason10]

32 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Also notice that he blames illegal immigrants for human trafficking without providing any evidence. 

https://www.cbp.gov/frontline/border-crisis-cbp-fights-child-exploitation

https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/biden-shovels-millions-nonprofits-aid-his-open-border-schemes-congress-must

For more than two years now, the Biden administration has been encouraging and mass-releasing millions of illegal aliens into the country. To accomplish its goal of unlimited illegal immigration, the administration relies heavily on NGOs to receive, process, transport, lodge, and counsel the illegal aliens.

The administration pays the NGOs billions of taxpayer dollars through numerous federal departments—including Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, State, and Justice—for this migration weaponization used against America’s interests.

These NGOs and the Left hide behind faith-based organizations to keep their federal grants flowing and to distract from the horrific results in terms of human devastation, death, sex trafficking, forced child labor, national security and public safety threats, and more. Unfortunately, the faith-based organizations are more than willing to lead the pressure campaigns to safeguard their revenue streams.

https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2018/06/27/the-intersection-of-human-trafficking-and-immigration/

Woman account for about 80 percent of individuals involved in sex-trafficking, with some estimates stating that a quarter of these cases involve minor children. The average age for females at the time of entry into sex-trafficking is thought to be between 17–19 years old.

https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/tip-and-som/module-12/key-issues/children-on-the-move--smuggling-and-trafficking.html

Like flows of all irregular migrants, flows of child migrants are mixed. Some are asylum seekers and refugees while others are seeking economic and social opportunities. Some are victims of trafficking and other crimes, while others are smuggled migrants. Some are unaccompanied or separated from their families, while others travel with them. Not all these categories are exclusive; in many cases they may overlap. One child may be a smuggled migrant and a victim of trafficking (see Module 11 for the overlap between smuggling and trafficking), and that same child may also be seeking asylum.

https://nypost.com/2021/03/22/us-mexico-border-traffickers-earned-as-much-as-14m-a-day-last-month/

Criminal cartels that are trafficking families, women, children and single adults over the southern border earned as much as $14 million a day in February, according to a report on Monday. 

“Trafficking is a multibillion-dollar industry,” former Tucson Border Patrol Chief Roy Villareal, who retired in December after 30 years with the agency told Fox News. 

“A lot of these vulnerable populations use their life savings. Some are essentially indentured servants and they’re working off this debt for a long period of time. In other cases, some of these migrants are asked to transport narcotics or some form of crime to work off a different part of their debt,” he said. 

https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/federal-judge-the-obama-administration-aids-and-abets-human-trafficking

federal judge in Texas has issued a searing indictment of the Obama administration’s immigration policy. He accuses the government of “completing the criminal mission” of human traffickers “who are violating the border security of the United States” and assisting a “criminal conspiracy in achieving its illegal goals.” The judge calls the administration’s behavior “dangerous and unconscionable” and says that “DHS should cease telling the citizens of the United States that it is enforcing our border security laws because it is clearly not. Even worse, it is helping those who violate these laws.”

On December 13, federal district court Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Brownsville, Texas, issued his order in U.S. v. Nava-Martinez. It described in shocking detail the malfeasance of the government. Mirtha Veronica Nava-Martinez, an admitted human trafficker and resident alien, pleaded guilty to attempting to smuggle a ten-year-old El Salvadoran girl into the U.S. This was Nava-Martinez’s second felony offense; she was convicted of food-stamp fraud in 2011. She was caught at the Brownsville & Matamoros Bridge checkpoint in Texas, after being hired by “persons unknown” to smuggle the girl into the U.S. The girl’s mother, Patricia Elizabeth Salmeron Santos, is an illegal alien living in Virginia. She had solicited the unknown smugglers to get her daughter from El Salvador to the U.S. for the agreed-upon price of $8,500.

As Judge Hanen pointed out, the human-trafficking conspiracy instigated by Salmeron Santos was interrupted when Nava-Martinez was arrested, but the “goal of the conspiracy was successfully completed thanks to the actions of the United States.” Hanen expressed grave concern over the “apparent policy of [DHS] of completing the criminal mission of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States.”

After the child was taken into custody, DHS agents learned that the mother had “instigated this illegal conduct.” Yet DHS delivered the child to the mother and took no enforcement action: “It did not arrest her. It did not prosecute her. It did not even initiate deportation proceedings for her.” As the judge said, “instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, the Government took direct steps to help the individuals who violated it,” conduct for which any “private citizen would, and should, be prosecute.”

What especially angered the judge was that this was the fourth case of this nature that he “had in as many weeks.” All involved “human traffickers who smuggled minor children [and] were apprehended short of delivering the children to their ultimate destination.” In each case, the parents were in this country illegally and had initiated and funded the illegal activity. And in each instance, DHS completed the crime by delivering the child to the parents and refusing to take any action against them.

As the judge pointed out, this means that DHS is encouraging “parents to put their minor children in perilous situations subject to the whims of evil individuals.” According to the judge, “this concern for the safety of these [children] in not fanciful or theoretical; it is a real and immediate concern.” While the Santos child had been transported in a car, “others are made to swim the Rio Grande River or other bodies of water in remote areas.” As Judge Hanen was waiting for the judgment in this case to be prepared, “two illegal aliens drowned, two more are missing, and a three-year-old El Salvadoran toddler was found abandoned by smugglers” just outside of Brownsville.

This DHS policy troubles Judge Hanen for three reasons. First and most important, human trafficking is controlled by and helps fund the drug cartels. He didn’t need to list the dangers facing minors and adults as they are smuggled into the U.S. In the last year alone, the judge had “seen instances where aliens being smuggled were assaulted, raped, kidnapped and/or killed.” Judge Hanen cited a long report on drug cartels that describes their “exploitation and trafficking of children” and the “violence, extortion, forced labor, sexual assault, or prostitution” to which they subject children and adults.

 “Time and again,” the judge related, “this Court has been told by representatives of the Government . . . that cartels control the entire smuggling process. These entities are not known for their concern for human life. They do not hire bonded childcare providers to smuggle children. By fostering an atmosphere whereby illegal aliens are encouraged to pay human smugglers for further services, the Government is not only allowing them to fund the illegal and evil activities of these cartels, but is also inspiring them to do so.” By virtue of this DHS policy, American citizens are “helping fund these evil ventures with their tax dollars.”

Second, Judge Hanen said that the DHS policy “undermines the deterrent effect the laws may have and inspires others to commit further violations.” Since it is DHS policy to deliver the smuggled children to their parents and not initiate deportation proceedings against them or prosecute them for human trafficking, they “perceive that they have nothing to lose but some time and effort. If the human traffickers are successful, so much the better — mission accomplished. Even if their co-conspirators are unsuccessful, the Government will finish the job of the human traffickers — mission still accomplished.” Even worse, this DHS policy is “encouraging individuals to turn their children over to complete strangers — strangers about whom only one thing is truly known: they are criminals involved in criminal conspiracy.”

That the DHS policy is encouraging human trafficking cannot be doubted. Judge Hanen cites statistics showing that the number of UAC (unaccompanied alien children) apprehensions along the U.S.-Mexican border “increased 81 percent from FY2010 to FY2012.” As the judge says, “an 81 percent increase in two years should tell the DHS” what its policy is doing: “it encourages this kind of Russian roulette.”

Finally, Judge Hanen said that this DHS policy “lowers the morale of those law enforcement agents on the front line.” They “do their best to enforce our laws” with “no small risk to their own safety.” It is “shameful that some policymaker in their agency institutes a course of inaction that negates their efforts.”

Judge Hanen made clear that it is not his “goal to divide or separate family members.” But there is no reason why DHS cannot “reunite the parent and child by apprehending the parent who has committed not one, but at least two different crimes.” Instead, American taxpayers are not only paying the cost of transporting smuggled children across the country for delivery to the illegal alien parents, but are also paying room and board for the children and the salary and travel expense of a guardian to accompany them. The judge calls that “an absurd and illogical result.”

Judge Hansen said he would not address two issues that some might raise: whether it is in the best interests of this ten-year-old girl “to be reunited with a parent who had previously abandoned that child in a different country . . . [and] whether a responsible parent would place her child not only in the care of total strangers, but also in the care of total strangers which she knows are criminals.” He did note, however, that “most courts in the United States would not find that to be good parenting.”

As Judge Hanen concludes, the decision of Salmeron Santos to smuggle her child across the border “even if motivated by the best of motives, is not an excuse for the United States Government to further a criminal conspiracy, and by doing so, encourage others to break the law and endanger additional children.” The DHS policy is “as logical as taking illegal drugs or weapons that it has seized from smugglers and delivering them to the criminals who initially solicited their illegal importation/exportation. Legally, this situation is not different.”

While the court “is not blind to the needs of a minor child,” a concern for common decency does not compel the government “to not only aid, but also reward an individual for initiating a scheme to break the laws governing the border security of this country.” And it does not compel “the Government to aid the drug cartels who control this human trafficking.”

Finally, Judge Hanen tossed out the excuse the Obama administration often gives for its highly questionable behavior: prosecutorial discretion. The judge said that while prosecutors have the ability to defer prosecution or arrest in particular cases, “it is not aware of any accepted legal principle, including prosecutorial discretion, that not only allows the government to decline prosecutions, but further allows it to actually complete the intended criminal mission.”

The court ends with a stern admonition to the Obama administration: “The DHS should enforce the laws of the United States — not break them.”

 

 

[Deluge]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why not Republicans in general?  Would you excuse Roy Moore if he were guilty?  Or Giuliani?

Because Republicans aren't about excusing deviant behavior. That's ALL democrat ALL the time. 

Nobody gets a pass on human trafficking.  

[reason10]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why not Republicans in general?  Would you excuse Roy Moore if he were guilty?  Or Giuliani?

You excused KKKlinton, and PEDOPHILE JOE.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Because Republicans aren't about excusing deviant behavior. 

Ok well what about my examples then? 

if you are reluctant to admit Republicans aren't guilty at least some of the time then you're missing something.

I DO believe you have principles here, so I am going to go to the logical end...

[Deluge]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ok well what about my examples then? 

if you are reluctant to admit Republicans aren't guilty at least some of the time then you're missing something.

I DO believe you have principles here, so I am going to go to the logical end...

I just told you that NO ONE gets a pass. I told you that in the last post. 

[WestCanMan]

On 7/19/2023 at 10:44 AM, Michael Hardner said:

The 1diots who support this ridiculous film accused AMC of poisoning them through the candy concession stand.

No, I am NOT kidding.

How to ensure that your next crackp0t conspiracy film doesn't get distribution...

I don't even know what you're talking about re: AMC poisoning, but you gotta admit that no one has fallen for as many retarded narratives as you and all the other lefties here. 

You've fallen victim to every crackpot conspiracy of the last 8 years. 

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I don't even know what you're talking about re: AMC poisoning, but you gotta admit that no one has fallen for as many retarded narratives as you and all the other lefties here. 

You've fallen victim to every crackpot conspiracy of the last 8 years. 

I don't agree.

If you don't think that the AMC poisoning is real, do your own research....

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Rebound said:

But conservatives don’t care about children. They grab issues like pedophilia and attach it to homosexuality and transsexuality, when we know there is no such relationship and we know that persecuting minorities is not the solution to this problem. 

The fact right wingers so conspicuously and guilelessly attach these issues to the left suggests there's a great deal of projection intended to create an ideological relationship.

It's the most enduring disgusting feature of conservatism bar none

[reason10]

52 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't agree.

If you don't think that the AMC poisoning is real, do your own research....

That is incredibly LAZY of you. An intelligent (and there are so few of us intelligent/read CONSERVATIVES here) poster would scour the web with facts from reliable sources.

But you just want to wave people off and pretend you're important.

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't agree.

If you don't think that the AMC poisoning is real, do your own research....

You're the one who referenced it, if you want it to stand as a point of fact then provide a cite or stfu. 

[Rebound]

49 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The fact right wingers so conspicuously and guilelessly attach these issues to the left suggests there's a great deal of projection intended to create an ideological relationship.

It's the most enduring disgusting feature of conservatism bar none

If they truly cared about children’s welfare, they’d try to advance workable proposals instead of making everything about ideology. 

[Michael Hardner]

57 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You're the one who referenced it, if you want it to stand as a point of fact then provide a cite or stfu. 

Hahahaha !  You fell into my TRAP !!!

Congrats - you now are immersed in the rule "positive claimant must provide a cite" ...
 

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/sound-of-freedom-amc-conspiracy-theories-1234787961/

[West]

On 7/19/2023 at 2:15 PM, Army Guy said:

I thought it was based on a true story, The film is about a federal agent who saves a sister and brother from child trafficking and is based on a true story. Are you suggesting we should disragard it becuase of the candy acusation, or the story itself..       

These pedophile sympathizers.. sad

[WestCanMan]

17 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hahahaha !  You fell into my TRAP !!!

Congrats - you now are immersed in the rule "positive claimant must provide a cite" ...

It's not just a forum rule, it's a main component of polite conduct in general and I've always been an adherent.

Where leftards get left behind here is they want cites for things which have become common knowledge within the topic that they're discussing. For example, if someone whats to chime in on the topic of the origins of covid at this point, it's no longer obligatory for a poster to prove that there is a BSL4 lab in Wuhan. 

We did that for slack-jawed leftists back in 2020, but anyone who's unaware of that BSL4 lab now has just been left behind, and they need to get up to speed themselves if they wanna participate in the discussion. It's considered sealioning for them to ask for it now.

I asked about a cite for your reference because I never heard of it before. In essence what you posted is just a red herring. It's "nice to know" but a tweet by one random dude is not germane to the topic at hand. 

[West]

8 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

It's not just a forum rule, it's a main component of polite conduct in general and I've always been an adherent.

Where leftards get left behind here is they want cites for things which have become common knowledge within the topic that they're discussing. For example, if someone whats to chime in on the topic of the origins of covid at this point, it's no longer obligatory for a poster to prove that there is a BSL4 lab in Wuhan. 

We did that for slack-jawed leftists back in 2020, but anyone who's unaware of that BSL4 lab now has just been left behind, and they need to get up to speed themselves if they wanna participate in the discussion. It's considered sealioning for them to ask for it now.

I asked about a cite for your reference because I never heard of it before. In essence what you posted is just a red herring. It's "nice to know" but a tweet by one random dude is not germane to the topic at hand. 

When Dems talk about sanctuary cities they actually want a sanctuary for PEDOPHILES to do their thing. Sick puppies

[robosmith]

On 7/20/2023 at 11:16 AM, Michael Hardner said:

I don't think that I have said much if anything about that topic.

If that's the basis for you thinking I'm ok with child abduction, let's see how that works logically...

"Hmmmm... MICHAEL doesn't post much about condemning illegal immigration... and since that's a source of trafficking, that must mean he SUPPORTS it"

Ok, well no it doesn't work logically.

R10 is just FULL of LOGICAL FALLACIES.

 

Republicans lob a bomb of cynicism at our soldiers

Quote

Why would Republicans want the military to prepare for real wars when fighting culture wars is so much more fun?

Perhaps the best way to summarize GOP priorities these days is merely promotion of cultural grievances and fearmongering. Certainly there have been many policies — so-called bathroom bills, anti-immigrant measures, book bans, anti-drag legislation — playing up the culture wars, particularly at the state level.

But at the federal level, the GOP seems to have another broad objective, too: throwing sand in the gears of government, and sowing government dysfunction wherever possible.

After all, the House bill’s culture-war measures are probably dead on arrival in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Maybe this means that at the other end of this process, legislators will have worked out a more normal, bipartisan, cultural-grievance-free bill. Perhaps more likely, unresolvable conflict over the defense bill will help precipitate a government shutdown, which some Republican lawmakers have openly signaled they want.

Culture wars and chaos: the brand conservatives can get behind. 

 

[WestCanMan]

On 7/19/2023 at 3:21 PM, Michael Hardner said:

If I answer no, will you believe me?

Of course not, and not just because of your history of truth-bending.

I have at least one very good reason to believe that you support human trafficking: your eagerness to attempt to validate and then disseminate half-assed criticisms of one of the few movies that draws attention this vile crime while it's going largely unreported. 

Why would you even do that? Shouldn't we be celebrating every attempt to bring this crime to the forefront?

How is it even possible that human trafficking is so common in the modern world and we are doing almost nothing to combat it? 

If you had a missing child would you be so quick to condemn a feature film that drew attention to this problem? I doubt it, f'ing hypocrite. 

And what reason do I have to believe that you don't support human trafficking? I'd honestly just be making an assumption.