Comment on the post concerning the movie, Sound of Freedom

Posted on by

This comment from Hugh the Grant

Comment:
It’s hard to make sense of the mess around this movie. But I have a theory. Nowadays when I don’t get something in the political arena I always try and model it as a psyop.

This whole story just doesn’t add up if you take things that are taking place around it at face value, like “there is a movie that mirrors a hidden reality but powerful people do not want us to see that and therefore they try and sabotage it” …  OK, but creating a Streisand effect that’s the only thing they somehow didn’t see coming? And if the “power elites” wanted to ACTUALLY sabotage it — so that the movie doesn’t even come out — it’s hard to imagine that they couldn’t have been able to do it…

What if the WHOLE thing is a psyop, including the movie AND the “reaction” to the movie, on all sides? Is it it so implausible after the corona psyop that the “theater” is actually the world we think is reality? What if it’s all a kabuki theater?

I MEAN WHAT IF THE WHOLE CIRCUS (INCLUDING THE SABOTAGES IN THE CINEMAS AND THE MEDIA REACTION) IS “THE MOVIE” AND NOT THE MOVIE ITSELF?

So my theory is that the whole hype could be a LIMITED HANGOUT OPERATION of some sort, that functions as a PRESSURE VALVE: after a huge fake controversy in the public arena about child trafficking, the overpressure has been let out of the system — WITH A MOVIE (that’s legally not real). So when it comes to REAL crimes the elites are committing, I mean stories about actual crimes in real life, the public will only yawn. And thus the “elites” get away with it all — with what crimes exactly is hard to know because that’s the point of this operation: to conceal whatever is in the background (if my theory is right).

 

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

15 Replies to “Comment on the post concerning the movie, Sound of Freedom”

  1. “Ballard has built quite an empire for himself and his family on the issue of human trafficking. A white board purportedly drawn up by him in a meeting visualizes a complex combination of for-profit and nonprofit organizations with the ultimate goal of “lead[ing] them to the covenant.” It’s unclear who “them” refers to — it could be the public, financial supporters or trafficking victims or survivors — but “the covenant” presumably refers to the Mormon “covenant,” as defined by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints using scripture from the Book of Mormon and the church’s Doctrine of Covenants.

    “In other words, Ballard is using his platforms — implicitly or explicitly — to convert people to Mormonism.”

    https://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/other-voices/article277437698.html

  2. VETERANS ON PATROL HAS RESCUED THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN SEXUALLY TRAFFICKED IN THE US – APPEALS FOR MORE VOLUNTEERS – 58:51
    In this article I am publishing today, about a group who has actually done something about child sex trafficking in the US… The name of this group is Veterans on Patrol (VOP), led by Lewis Arthur, and I first learned about Lewis Arthur and his work in Arizona back in 2018, and published a few articles about VOP back then. Please be aware that if you have never heard of VOP and Lewis Arthur before, and decide to do an Internet search on him, all you will find will be negative hit pieces against him. But ask yourself, if he is doing what he claims he is doing and actually rescuing women and children from child sex traffickers, without the help of law enforcement who are either working with the child sex traffickers or are powerless to stop it, then what would you expect others to say about him? Brian Shilhavy
    https://healthimpactnews.com/2023/veterans-on-patrol-has-rescued-thousands-of-children-sexually-trafficked-in-the-u-s-appeals-for-more-volunteers/

  4. M sent in the following email cocnerning YouTube’s current effort to censor/create Streisand effect for the movie. PLEASE BE WARNED the video which M points out seems not to have any strikes on it, and is not in any danger of being censored IS EXACTLY WHAT IT CLAIMS TO BE

    “YouTube Is Pulling ‘Sound Of Freedom’ Interviews, Reviews

    YouTube appears to be removing content featuring or even merely reviewing the movie ‘Sound Of Freedom’ for ‘violating community guidelines’ as censorship of the anti-child trafficking movie continues.

    https://summit.news/2023/07/19/youtube-is-pulling-sound-of-freedom-interviews-reviews/

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/youtube-pulling-sound-freedom-interviews-reviews

    ===============================

    but this one is OK

    Removing BUTT HAIRS Using NAIR Cream – A Visual Guide!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4QO5jyEw2E ”

  5. Watch this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cscYYBD2kY

    Frankly, all one needs to do is look at a local police blotter. It is not uncommon to see yet another person arrested/charged with some sort of “child pornography”. (And I live a rural area.)
    Also,I have personally seen some troubling stuff, e.g., when traveling in a former communist block country- we saw a young, scantily-dressed girl being picked up by a older man driving a car with German tags. …. Doesn’t take a genius to understand what was happening.

  6. So it is that I take refuge in my fortress.

    As I wrote >12months ago — in a comment elsewhere — and I paraphrase: living in this age of fluidity, deconstructionism, nihilism, subterfuge, and relentless psy-ops and the inversion of moral absolutes (all of a piece), where can we go to find TRUTH?

    We must chart our course for the Rock of Ages, seek our refuge in the immutable, all powerful, omniscient, omnipresent, and ONLY true LOVER of our souls.

    All other ground is sinking sand.

  7. Is it a “limited hangout” or just testing the waters/dipping your toe in the water?
    Lionel (The Lionel Nation) and especially his wife Lynn (Lynn’s Warriors) have been covering child sex trafficking for many years.
    A couple of years ago Lionel said that it was “The Ick Factor,” that keeps people from accepting this so they run away from it.
    It’s just like the “Safe and Effective,” vaccine injury deniers.

    Lionel Nation Live Streams
    https://www.youtube.com/@LionelNation/streams

    Lynn’s Warriors
    https://www.youtube.com/@LynnsWarriors

  9. So in order to figure out who is telling the truth, you have to put it to CS Lewis test in the “Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe”:
    When the children can’t believe their sister Lucy that she has been in the land of Narnia, when their brother Edmund says they were only pretending, they take their dilemma to the professor.
    He says: “If you will excuse me for asking the question – does your experience lead you to regard your brother or your sister as the more reliable? I mean, which is the more truthful?”
    “There are only three possibilities. Either your sister is telling lies, or she is mad, or she is telling the truth. You know she doesn’t tell lies and it is obvious that she is not mad. For the moment then unless any further evidence turns up, we must assume that she is telling the truth.”
    There are too many reliable people talking about human trafficking. And we know that there are some people who see human beings as objects to be used for money or experimentation or sexual reasons.
    I believe this film is genuine.

    • The issue is most definitely real. As this is a reenactment of events and not video of the events themselves, it can’t be exact but let’s say it more or less represents the issue properly in the ways that matter.

      My issue is, how is the emotional inertia of the film being used? At this point whenever something is viral, it deserves a close look as YouTube etc. have mechanisms to stop truthful information from becoming common wisdom. Not just YouTube etc. but the entirety of the socialist state has a series of devices it uses to make damn sure there is a narrative at play at all times and people will behave in ways in accordance with what is desired. And that means even if the information is true.

      As Hugh the Grant points out, the Streisand effect is too powerful a tool for a state as sophisticated in information warfare as North America’s is, to not put it to use for their own purposes.

      • @ Eeyore

        “My issue is, how is the emotional inertia of the film being used”

        — Yes and moreover, how and for what purpose that inertia has been CREATED in the first place. Moviemakers apply a ton of psychological expertise to induce mass emotions. Therefore said inertia hasn’t just randomly occured — it’s deliberate. (The issue of whether the content of the movie is genuine / truthful is not my point — but it probably is.)

        This is going to be a Political Rotten Tomato comment:

        Digging into the subject and watching more public / media reactions I have come to the conclusion that mass emotion has been funnelled into the de facto SANCTIFICATION of the main characters of the movie. And that sanctification has been built up by emphasizing the allegedly utterly selfless nature of these two gentlemen, even them claiming that “I would die for others” and “my family doesn’t matter more than the family of others” and or something to that effect. Absolutely altruistic.

        These are self-testimonies of religious achievements that, if true, should be sent to the Vatican so that the official sanctification procedure of the two (!) noble gentleman in question can commence ASAP.

        I can’t help but notice that there has been a dishonest parallel drawn, subliminally, between Jesus and the child-savior in the movie. Which is an abuse of the faith of Christians watching the movie, and Christianity itself. And the showbiz psychology behind it is outright disgusting: they grab the mass of Christian psychological energy that has been built up for ages in the society, twist it and channel it into a movie that is a commercial (or even political) product.

        Which, I dare say, I regard as psychological mass-robbery. And the industrial-scale mockery of Christianity, at that. Adding insult to injury is the showbiz utilization / usurping of protective parental instincts — and that’s the second psychological mass-robbery that has been committed.

        One could argue that emulating Christ — like the marketing machinery of the movie wants to make us believe the protagonist from a three-letters (!) does in real life — is a noble thing to do. Well, in certain circumstances it might be, but within the belly of a showbiz cashcow it looks more like blasphemy. But never mind, because the notion that the protagonist is a near saint is now a new axiome in the public eye — and now I’m the blasphemer if I point that out.

        For those outraged: we’re still talking about a MOVIE — and not real-life efforts to save children.

        Now, about the two protagonists in one. The public personas of the two guys (the actor and its model) have been merged for the sake of the movie. The ads of the movie even emphasize how close friends they have become (since they have saved the world together). It’s easy to see that the goal of that is to portray the movie as a documentary on one hand, and a disclaimer on the other hand. Which is deceitful, snake-like, and a double-edged sword. It’s clear that the producers want the public to view the movie as something as real as possible — and it’s like telling children that Santa Clause is real.

        Meaning that the audience of this movie is being handled like children, by the moviemakers. At the same time they let the criminals off the hook because “it’s just a movie”.

        Notice that I’m not saying that the events behind the story line are not real (because how dare I), but that the producers want the audience to VIEW it as very real and make them invest psyichological energies accordingly.

        That is, again, a con game. But hey, it’s about saving children…NOT.

        It’s important to note that I am not really focusing on the movie itself in this essay — despite seemingly analyzing its content. What I’m interested in for the moment is its social / political effects and possible weaponization.

        Why I am apologizing??? While writing this essay I realized the urge to avoid hurting anyone’s feelings. Of course self-observation is a subjective process that may lead to circular reasoning. But I think this attitude of mine has been induced by the many reactions that are fiercely protecting this movie. So the mentioned sanctity has apparently been turned into a unified mass-behavior … which is almost like a MASS-LINE effort…

        A marxist guide to mass-line:

        “The whole point of the first two steps of the mass line—gathering the ideas of the masses, and then processing or concentrating them—is to come up with a political line which may then be returned to the masses to lead them in their struggle. As Stalin said, “A correct political line is not needed as a declaration, but as something to be carried into effect.””

        https://www.massline.info/mlms/mlch21.htm

        Now, modern Amero-commie mass-line seems to be created from inside-out, starting from the psychological effect, that is by using modern marketing tools. First, marketing tools to sell the movie, and secondly, by using the movie itself as a marketing tool … of politics. Which is much more clandestine than the good old commie methods in the last century. But the core “values” and goals are the same: essentially to lead the masses centrally in order to rule over them.

        I think I have analyzed the clockwork of how I believe the movie has been made to be potentially weaponized.

        How in reality the movie will affect child trafficking and child protection in general, remains to be seen. But I cannot exclude some negative repercussions…or even deliberately negative outcomes. Because it is a strategical political game and in case the movie has a strong effect, that effect must be calculated in order to be positive. Has such a strategical planning taken place? No? So much for the sanctity!

        Yes, publicity may have done some good … but has it really, in this case? Is it the kind of publicity the issue of CHILD PROTECTION (that hasn’t been addressed) would demand and require? I doubt that.

        Instead, the topic seems to have been weaponized.

        However, it’s still not completely clear to me what exactly the Powers have been planning to use this missile for, I only have educated guesses. I hope it will turn out some day. (Elections may be among the reasons, but elections are within the Big Con Game.)

        What’s already obvious though, as a bottom line, is that it seems to be an effort to keep control over the so-called right-wing, so that real reactionary grasroots movements cannot gather and endanger the central power. Also because the globalist left may have realized that they have a bit overdone all that critical-theory stuff of BLM, Antifa and gay armies that target children, and now they have to do something with the enormous energies they have awakened in the society that they have attacked.

        And now, abracadabra, mission accomplished: the “republican voters” (and the right-wing all over the world) are satisfied: the children have been saved, Christ has taken the lead again, after getting reborn to Earth once again in the body of Mr. Caviezel and his brother-in-biz Mr. Ballard. So the painful issues have been finally handled, someone has advocated for the oppressed — and therefore the good old civilized whitey will not start rioting.

        Non of the “elites” criminal conspiracies have been taken to court but be assured that that will come as well… some time in the future…by someone — like Caviezel … I mean Ballard.

        All is good now! What about a pizza, after the movie, folks? (Forget [the reality of] all those wicked assults in the schools agianst our kids for a while and let’s celebrate our victory tonight! I mean Caviezel’s victory … no, I mean Ballard’s … never mind.)

        So. It’s all about managing and mastering the reactions to the (world-wide communist) revolution and keeping control over it. Preventing the people to organize themslAves and grab pitchforks and guns to take down the child-sniffer top dogs and their owners… But I need more data points in order to draw conclusions I am really sure of.

        Now, before you all start stoning me, please ask Jesus about the idea first. Not Ballard or Caviezel, if I may ask.

  11. In that interview with Jordan Peterson, he also interviews Tim Ballard who actually worked for the U.S. Government and then on his own, rescuing children. The movie is based on a real story. But listening to him it sounds as if the reality is far worse than what’s shown in the movie.

  12. After reading your text, probably the best thing to do is to wait for the next movie. Is it?
    Shall I ask Jesus to pay my bills, also?

  13. Claide Lanzmann’s Shoah vs Schindler’s List:
    Documentary vs story-based-on-fact

    Which one includes enough evidence for convictions?