Child sex trafficking

[dolomite]

for most of you it would be best if administration just hard deleted this thread.

Sexual slavery here is so prevalent.

It is?
[/https://www.aclu.org/documents/human-tr ... ted-states

[dolomite]

for most of you it would be best if administration just hard deleted this thread.

Sexual slavery here is so prevalent.

It is?
https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/hu ... -by-state/

[Overlander]

Sexual slavery here is so prevalent.

It is?
https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/hu ... -by-state/

Didn’t need a synopsis of what human trafficking is, I am former law enforcement.

I do appreciate you providing “documentation” that it definitely is more prevalent in GOP controlled populace though.

I guess prayer and guns have not had much of an impact?

[dolomite]

I seriously doubt if the GOP has a monopoly on sexual slavery.
Everyone should realize there isn’t a treatment (even prayer) that cures pedophilia.

[jfish26]

I seriously doubt if the GOP has a monopoly on sexual slavery.
Everyone should realize there isn’t a treatment (even prayer) that cures pedophilia.

I agree 100%. So isn't the Sound of Freedom-related talking point - that any criticism of how the movie is being used sounds in PRO CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING - just a distraction?

[jfish26]

This go here?

https://twitter.com/jimstewartson/statu ... q_-8Yt1KMA

[KUTradition]

lol

(except it’s sad, not funny)

[Shirley]

Sorry, haters:

Anheuser Busch InBev ABI +2.90% on Thursday reported second-quarter earnings that beat expectations, despite taking a significant hit to its U.S. sales as some drinkers boycotted its Bud Light beer brand.

AB InBev (ticker: BUD) reported underlying earnings of 72 cents a share for the quarter to the end of June, on revenue of $15.12 billion.

Analysts had expected AB InBev to earn 68 cents a share on revenue of $15.38 billion.

Revenue was up 7.2%...

[jfish26]

lol

(except it’s sad, not funny)

What’s the rube explanation for this going to be?

Bad apple?

Politicized law enforcement?

Free speech?

Fake news?

[randylahey]

Fish thinks this is some big own but it really takes nothing away from the movie

[randylahey]

Just brings up a lot of weird questions. How closely was this guy connected to the movie? One of a group of people funding is the closest I could connect him. Not like he was closely tied to it. But why was he helping fund this movie while being a weirdo at the same time?

Was it just an investment?
Guilty conscious?
Was he trying to throw people off his trail?
Make it make sense lol

[twocoach]

Just brings up a lot of weird questions. How closely was this guy connected to the movie? One of a group of people funding is the closest I could connect him. Not like he was closely tied to it. But why was he helping fund this movie while being a weirdo at the same time?

Was it just an investment?
Guilty conscious?
Was he trying to throw people off his trail?
Make it make sense lol

Nothing related to pedos makes sense.

[jfish26]

Just brings up a lot of weird questions. How closely was this guy connected to the movie? One of a group of people funding is the closest I could connect him. Not like he was closely tied to it. But why was he helping fund this movie while being a weirdo at the same time?

Was it just an investment?
Guilty conscious?
Was he trying to throw people off his trail?
Make it make sense lol

You have tried to tell us that anyone who says anything negative about this movie is pro child sex trafficking. I and others here have pointed out that there are serious issues with the movie - who is behind it and why, and what people on the right are using it for, and what can and does happen in real life because of fear porn like this.

This piece of data suggests those concerns we have raised - which you have repeatedly minimized and deflected - are quite warranted. I would be surprised if this is the only wart on the movie’s ass.

[randylahey]

Just brings up a lot of weird questions. How closely was this guy connected to the movie? One of a group of people funding is the closest I could connect him. Not like he was closely tied to it. But why was he helping fund this movie while being a weirdo at the same time?

Was it just an investment?
Guilty conscious?
Was he trying to throw people off his trail?
Make it make sense lol

You have tried to tell us that anyone who says anything negative about this movie is pro child sex trafficking. I and others here have pointed out that there are serious issues with the movie - who is behind it and why, and what people on the right are using it for, and what can and does happen in real life because of fear porn like this.

This piece of data suggests those concerns we have raised - which you have repeatedly minimized and deflected - are quite warranted. I would be surprised if this is the only wart on the movie’s ass.

No it doesn't. You're just searching for validation.

The movie isn't even the point. The point is the left pretends to care about so many issues, yet child sex trafficking is never one. They almost take the opposite approach of trying to hide the issue and normalize grooming children

[KUTradition]

you sure it isn’t the deep state?

[jfish26]

Just brings up a lot of weird questions. How closely was this guy connected to the movie? One of a group of people funding is the closest I could connect him. Not like he was closely tied to it. But why was he helping fund this movie while being a weirdo at the same time?

Was it just an investment?
Guilty conscious?
Was he trying to throw people off his trail?
Make it make sense lol

You have tried to tell us that anyone who says anything negative about this movie is pro child sex trafficking. I and others here have pointed out that there are serious issues with the movie - who is behind it and why, and what people on the right are using it for, and what can and does happen in real life because of fear porn like this.

This piece of data suggests those concerns we have raised - which you have repeatedly minimized and deflected - are quite warranted. I would be surprised if this is the only wart on the movie’s ass.

No it doesn't. You're just searching for validation.

The movie isn't even the point. The point is the left pretends to care about so many issues, yet child sex trafficking is never one. They almost take the opposite approach of trying to hide the issue and normalize grooming children

I don’t need validation. But following the money is often a good place to unpack motivations. And yes, it does matter if people financing and promoting this fear porn project are themselves abusers.

[randylahey]

You clearly need validation jfish. You commented in a separate thread begging me to check this thread and look at your post. Lol

[randylahey]

And you realize that movie got funding from a lot of sources right? Not like this one guy played a huge role in it. Hollywood refused to make forward with the movie if that tells you enough. Hollywood is rumored to be a huge pedo ring. Ask any former child actor

[Shirley]

https://twitter.com/extrasmiths/status/ ... wsrc%5Etfw

https://youtu.be/Znkxts94ZPY

[jfish26]

And you realize that movie got funding from a lot of sources right? Not like this one guy played a huge role in it. Hollywood refused to make forward with the movie if that tells you enough. Hollywood is rumored to be a huge pedo ring. Ask any former child actor

I would encourage you to actually read the primary source material.

This guy - who is an established, comfortably-public promoter of "Sugar Daddy/Sugar Baby" parties - involved himself quite intentionally. In the MOST charitable read of things, the producers failed to do even basic due diligence as to where this money was coming from.

Is it possible that this guy was a one-off, and that no one else involved had intentions and motivations anything less than pure?

Sure, it's possible.

But life experience - and basic reasoning, given the other folks involved - tells me that's highly unlikely.