Raiderjay said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tibbers said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I don't even know why I'm engaging with you anymore - clearly you're inventing things now, to a deranged degree, frankly - but I never once said that Tim Ballard didn't save children from human trafficking. I linked to an article that pointed out a few apparent inconsistencies in his stories, that's all. But never once did I even remotely suggest that he didn't save children, nor did I ever criticize his efforts in that regard. For the 400th time, my gripe was with the PROMOTION of the movie, not the movie itself.

---

so you agree that you were wrong and that Tim Ballard did those things and said those things? Just curious how far you'd like to backtrack. So he's not a lunatic? Because before you called him a lunatic. Just trying to understand.

---

Remember, the poster you are talking to likes Jimmy Kimmel, and doesn't consider him a lunatic. Even though he has openly wished death and suffering on unvaxxed hospital patients to thunderous Hollywood applause and has used the n-word and cried on air over a lion dying lol. Meryl Streep, also not a lunatic.

but Tim Ballard, former Spec-Ops who has devoted his life to rescuing children from the sex slave trade...lunatic.

The Hollywood bubble is VERY real.

---

Dude, you need to get off this Jimmy Kimmel thing. It's super weird. You keep harping about it on F16 and on here. You listed like eight celebrities and said that if I expressed any disdain whatsoever for any of them, you might have "some" respect me. Not that I at all cared about your respect, but I thought, "Ok, I actually don't like most of these people, so here's a chance to build a bridge." I then listed the reasons why I didn't like all but one of them, and thought surely that might count for something, and that we could share a connection there. But no, instead, you immediately popped over to F16 and giddily started telling people that I loved Jimmy Kimmel, conveniently leaving out the fact that I *agreed* with you on everyone else, just like you're doing now.

Like, how do you not see how disingenuous that is?

---

No, it's not disingenuous...you refuse to call Meryl Streep and Jimmy Kimmel (two very unstable narcissistic and hate filled people) lunatics, while calling Tim Ballard a lunatic. It's hilarious.

Anyone not completely consumed in the Hollywood bubble can see how absurd that is.

---

Out of all the celebrities named, I didn't "refuse" to call Meryl Streep a lunatic, I must have forgotten to address her. Regardless, these are some of the most insane nitpicks/complaints/standards I've ever seen. Never mind the fact that I don't owe anyone here anything.

Also, if Tim Ballard believes in QAnon conspiracies, I'm sorry, but that does, in fact, make him a lunatic. I can simultaneously applaud his efforts, and find him to be a noble, courageous person, but if he indeed believes the same things Caviezel does - about Adrenochroming, an evil cabal of devil-worshipping cannibals, etc - that makes him gullible at best, or someone with nefarious political motivations at worst.

---

OK...And IMO if anyone thinks (like the vast majority of the left does) that chemically castrating minors or removing their breasts is humane "gender affirming care", or believed the "OMG RUSSAIA COLLUSION" confirmed hoax, or that the FBI did not collude with big tech to influence the 2020 election, or a number of other things the devout left has taken the bait on time and time again, they are lunatics. So congrats, almost all of Hollywood are lunatics.

All that said, I am not sure I really want to know what goes on in the shadows among certain perverted segments of the elite. We KNOW crazy warped sh** goes on in the hood, trailer parks, and sometimes the burbs. Why not among the rich and powerful who have exhausted every pleasure known to man? Yeah, the satanic ritual stuff loses me (I'm surprised to hear Caviezel buys into that TBH), but we do KNOW that there was an entire ISLAND devoted to sex parties and that the two ring leaders were busted and one "killed himself" under surveillance when the cameras weren't working, but not a single client of theirs was ever named. And we do KNOW that in numerous third world countries, children are captured and sold into the sex trade and some children and babies are even killed for their organs and body parts, and that in FL a major child porn ring was just busted with over like 100k videos and images that included babies and toddlers. So honestly...it would not surprise me if there were groups of rich evil perverts engaging in bizarre sexual rituals involving children. I can at least see how some normal decent God-fearing people would see such a level of evil and then be susceptible to some of the theories.

That being said, what we know is bad enough...no need to push theories of adrenochrome and satanic sex cults...and if you do, you better have the receipts to back it up.

---

These are all great points, and we're basically on the same page. Like you, I have absolutely no doubt that crazy, evil sh*t goes on among certain elites, in Hollywood and elsewhere. And yes, the entire Epstein saga is basically proof of this.

It's not that I have a problem with people believing in that sort of thing in general, or hell, even believing in conspiracy theories (I'm currently participating in a UAP/alien thread, so who am I to talk). It's when someone peddles conspiracy theories that so clearly come directly from QAnon, when QAnon is so clearly A) bullsh*t, and B) politically driven.

In a vacuum, if Caviezel wants to pontificate that there might be a group of rich evil perverts out there doing this, fine, whatever. The tell, however, is that he believes in the QAnon-peddled, QAnon brand of rich evil perverts, and all the insanity that goes along with that. A group whose sole purpose, again, is politically motivated, to paint one side as the devil and rile up the other side to demonize and vilify them, sometimes to the point of violence. Which tells me that *Caviezel* is politically motivated to paint one side as the devil and rile up the other side to demonize and vilify them, sometimes to the point of violence.

In other words, he's USING this issue - and thus these victims - to advance his own political agenda, which I simply find to be abhorrent. I have absolutely no doubt that he cares about these kids and this issue deeply, but to then use those kids and this issue in attempt to paint one side as evil and responsible, I'm sorry, but that's beyond f/cked up, and something I have a huge problem with.

---

Dude, at least watch the movie first, then give us your diatribe......

There is nothing in it about one political side or the other, it's about saving kids, period.....

---

Raiderjay said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tibbers said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I don't even know why I'm engaging with you anymore - clearly you're inventing things now, to a deranged degree, frankly - but I never once said that Tim Ballard didn't save children from human trafficking. I linked to an article that pointed out a few apparent inconsistencies in his stories, that's all. But never once did I even remotely suggest that he didn't save children, nor did I ever criticize his efforts in that regard. For the 400th time, my gripe was with the PROMOTION of the movie, not the movie itself.

---

so you agree that you were wrong and that Tim Ballard did those things and said those things? Just curious how far you'd like to backtrack. So he's not a lunatic? Because before you called him a lunatic. Just trying to understand.

---

Remember, the poster you are talking to likes Jimmy Kimmel, and doesn't consider him a lunatic. Even though he has openly wished death and suffering on unvaxxed hospital patients to thunderous Hollywood applause and has used the n-word and cried on air over a lion dying lol. Meryl Streep, also not a lunatic.

but Tim Ballard, former Spec-Ops who has devoted his life to rescuing children from the sex slave trade...lunatic.

The Hollywood bubble is VERY real.

---

Dude, you need to get off this Jimmy Kimmel thing. It's super weird. You keep harping about it on F16 and on here. You listed like eight celebrities and said that if I expressed any disdain whatsoever for any of them, you might have "some" respect me. Not that I at all cared about your respect, but I thought, "Ok, I actually don't like most of these people, so here's a chance to build a bridge." I then listed the reasons why I didn't like all but one of them, and thought surely that might count for something, and that we could share a connection there. But no, instead, you immediately popped over to F16 and giddily started telling people that I loved Jimmy Kimmel, conveniently leaving out the fact that I *agreed* with you on everyone else, just like you're doing now.

Like, how do you not see how disingenuous that is?

---

No, it's not disingenuous...you refuse to call Meryl Streep and Jimmy Kimmel (two very unstable narcissistic and hate filled people) lunatics, while calling Tim Ballard a lunatic. It's hilarious.

Anyone not completely consumed in the Hollywood bubble can see how absurd that is.

---

Out of all the celebrities named, I didn't "refuse" to call Meryl Streep a lunatic, I must have forgotten to address her. Regardless, these are some of the most insane nitpicks/complaints/standards I've ever seen. Never mind the fact that I don't owe anyone here anything.

Also, if Tim Ballard believes in QAnon conspiracies, I'm sorry, but that does, in fact, make him a lunatic. I can simultaneously applaud his efforts, and find him to be a noble, courageous person, but if he indeed believes the same things Caviezel does - about Adrenochroming, an evil cabal of devil-worshipping cannibals, etc - that makes him gullible at best, or someone with nefarious political motivations at worst.

---

OK...And IMO if anyone thinks (like the vast majority of the left does) that chemically castrating minors or removing their breasts is humane "gender affirming care", or believed the "OMG RUSSAIA COLLUSION" confirmed hoax, or that the FBI did not collude with big tech to influence the 2020 election, or a number of other things the devout left has taken the bait on time and time again, they are lunatics. So congrats, almost all of Hollywood are lunatics.

All that said, I am not sure I really want to know what goes on in the shadows among certain perverted segments of the elite. We KNOW crazy warped sh** goes on in the hood, trailer parks, and sometimes the burbs. Why not among the rich and powerful who have exhausted every pleasure known to man? Yeah, the satanic ritual stuff loses me (I'm surprised to hear Caviezel buys into that TBH), but we do KNOW that there was an entire ISLAND devoted to sex parties and that the two ring leaders were busted and one "killed himself" under surveillance when the cameras weren't working, but not a single client of theirs was ever named. And we do KNOW that in numerous third world countries, children are captured and sold into the sex trade and some children and babies are even killed for their organs and body parts, and that in FL a major child porn ring was just busted with over like 100k videos and images that included babies and toddlers. So honestly...it would not surprise me if there were groups of rich evil perverts engaging in bizarre sexual rituals involving children. I can at least see how some normal decent God-fearing people would see such a level of evil and then be susceptible to some of the theories.

That being said, what we know is bad enough...no need to push theories of adrenochrome and satanic sex cults...and if you do, you better have the receipts to back it up.

---

These are all great points, and we're basically on the same page. Like you, I have absolutely no doubt that crazy, evil sh*t goes on among certain elites, in Hollywood and elsewhere. And yes, the entire Epstein saga is basically proof of this.

It's not that I have a problem with people believing in that sort of thing in general, or hell, even believing in conspiracy theories (I'm currently participating in a UAP/alien thread, so who am I to talk). It's when someone peddles conspiracy theories that so clearly come directly from QAnon, when QAnon is so clearly A) bullsh*t, and B) politically driven.

In a vacuum, if Caviezel wants to pontificate that there might be a group of rich evil perverts out there doing this, fine, whatever. The tell, however, is that he believes in the QAnon-peddled, QAnon brand of rich evil perverts, and all the insanity that goes along with that. A group whose sole purpose, again, is politically motivated, to paint one side as the devil and rile up the other side to demonize and vilify them, sometimes to the point of violence. Which tells me that *Caviezel* is politically motivated to paint one side as the devil and rile up the other side to demonize and vilify them, sometimes to the point of violence.

In other words, he's USING this issue - and thus these victims - to advance his own political agenda, which I simply find to be abhorrent. I have absolutely no doubt that he cares about these kids and this issue deeply, but to then use those kids and this issue in attempt to paint one side as evil and responsible, I'm sorry, but that's beyond f/cked up, and something I have a huge problem with.

---

Dude, at least watch the movie first, then give us your diatribe......

There is nothing in it about one political side or the other, it's about saving kids, period.....

---

Quote:

---

Yeah, so this whole thing sounds like a complete sh*t show. I assume those of you who shamed everyone who didn't immediately fall in line with this movie and its subjects' agenda will now be apologizing.

---

TCTTS said:

---

Raiderjay said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tibbers said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I don't even know why I'm engaging with you anymore - clearly you're inventing things now, to a deranged degree, frankly - but I never once said that Tim Ballard didn't save children from human trafficking. I linked to an article that pointed out a few apparent inconsistencies in his stories, that's all. But never once did I even remotely suggest that he didn't save children, nor did I ever criticize his efforts in that regard. For the 400th time, my gripe was with the PROMOTION of the movie, not the movie itself.

---

so you agree that you were wrong and that Tim Ballard did those things and said those things? Just curious how far you'd like to backtrack. So he's not a lunatic? Because before you called him a lunatic. Just trying to understand.

---

Remember, the poster you are talking to likes Jimmy Kimmel, and doesn't consider him a lunatic. Even though he has openly wished death and suffering on unvaxxed hospital patients to thunderous Hollywood applause and has used the n-word and cried on air over a lion dying lol. Meryl Streep, also not a lunatic.

but Tim Ballard, former Spec-Ops who has devoted his life to rescuing children from the sex slave trade...lunatic.

The Hollywood bubble is VERY real.

---

Dude, you need to get off this Jimmy Kimmel thing. It's super weird. You keep harping about it on F16 and on here. You listed like eight celebrities and said that if I expressed any disdain whatsoever for any of them, you might have "some" respect me. Not that I at all cared about your respect, but I thought, "Ok, I actually don't like most of these people, so here's a chance to build a bridge." I then listed the reasons why I didn't like all but one of them, and thought surely that might count for something, and that we could share a connection there. But no, instead, you immediately popped over to F16 and giddily started telling people that I loved Jimmy Kimmel, conveniently leaving out the fact that I *agreed* with you on everyone else, just like you're doing now.

Like, how do you not see how disingenuous that is?

---

No, it's not disingenuous...you refuse to call Meryl Streep and Jimmy Kimmel (two very unstable narcissistic and hate filled people) lunatics, while calling Tim Ballard a lunatic. It's hilarious.

Anyone not completely consumed in the Hollywood bubble can see how absurd that is.

---

Out of all the celebrities named, I didn't "refuse" to call Meryl Streep a lunatic, I must have forgotten to address her. Regardless, these are some of the most insane nitpicks/complaints/standards I've ever seen. Never mind the fact that I don't owe anyone here anything.

Also, if Tim Ballard believes in QAnon conspiracies, I'm sorry, but that does, in fact, make him a lunatic. I can simultaneously applaud his efforts, and find him to be a noble, courageous person, but if he indeed believes the same things Caviezel does - about Adrenochroming, an evil cabal of devil-worshipping cannibals, etc - that makes him gullible at best, or someone with nefarious political motivations at worst.

---

OK...And IMO if anyone thinks (like the vast majority of the left does) that chemically castrating minors or removing their breasts is humane "gender affirming care", or believed the "OMG RUSSAIA COLLUSION" confirmed hoax, or that the FBI did not collude with big tech to influence the 2020 election, or a number of other things the devout left has taken the bait on time and time again, they are lunatics. So congrats, almost all of Hollywood are lunatics.

All that said, I am not sure I really want to know what goes on in the shadows among certain perverted segments of the elite. We KNOW crazy warped sh** goes on in the hood, trailer parks, and sometimes the burbs. Why not among the rich and powerful who have exhausted every pleasure known to man? Yeah, the satanic ritual stuff loses me (I'm surprised to hear Caviezel buys into that TBH), but we do KNOW that there was an entire ISLAND devoted to sex parties and that the two ring leaders were busted and one "killed himself" under surveillance when the cameras weren't working, but not a single client of theirs was ever named. And we do KNOW that in numerous third world countries, children are captured and sold into the sex trade and some children and babies are even killed for their organs and body parts, and that in FL a major child porn ring was just busted with over like 100k videos and images that included babies and toddlers. So honestly...it would not surprise me if there were groups of rich evil perverts engaging in bizarre sexual rituals involving children. I can at least see how some normal decent God-fearing people would see such a level of evil and then be susceptible to some of the theories.

That being said, what we know is bad enough...no need to push theories of adrenochrome and satanic sex cults...and if you do, you better have the receipts to back it up.

---

These are all great points, and we're basically on the same page. Like you, I have absolutely no doubt that crazy, evil sh*t goes on among certain elites, in Hollywood and elsewhere. And yes, the entire Epstein saga is basically proof of this.

It's not that I have a problem with people believing in that sort of thing in general, or hell, even believing in conspiracy theories (I'm currently participating in a UAP/alien thread, so who am I to talk). It's when someone peddles conspiracy theories that so clearly come directly from QAnon, when QAnon is so clearly A) bullsh*t, and B) politically driven.

In a vacuum, if Caviezel wants to pontificate that there might be a group of rich evil perverts out there doing this, fine, whatever. The tell, however, is that he believes in the QAnon-peddled, QAnon brand of rich evil perverts, and all the insanity that goes along with that. A group whose sole purpose, again, is politically motivated, to paint one side as the devil and rile up the other side to demonize and vilify them, sometimes to the point of violence. Which tells me that *Caviezel* is politically motivated to paint one side as the devil and rile up the other side to demonize and vilify them, sometimes to the point of violence.

In other words, he's USING this issue - and thus these victims - to advance his own political agenda, which I simply find to be abhorrent. I have absolutely no doubt that he cares about these kids and this issue deeply, but to then use those kids and this issue in attempt to paint one side as evil and responsible, I'm sorry, but that's beyond f/cked up, and something I have a huge problem with.

---

Dude, at least watch the movie first, then give us your diatribe......

There is nothing in it about one political side or the other, it's about saving kids, period.....

---

I am now convinced that I'm dealing with a group of illiterate people who someone know how to write but not read.

Truly, this is a wild phenomenon.

Because I've said - a thousand times now - that I have no problem with the movie itself, and that I know none of the QAnon nonsense is in it.

For the thousandth and first time…

I get that.

I understand that.

Instead, a number of us are having a conversation about Jim Caviezel's PROMOTION of the movie, not the movie itself. There's another thread on this very board for those who want to discuss the latter. Or hell, discuss it here. Makes no difference to me. Just *please* stop acting like I'm talking about the movie and not its promotion, when you guys clearly know the difference.

---

TCTTS said:

---

And I get the argument that Hollywood is "forcing" these things into the entertainment we're consuming, so, in turn, that same handful of posters are going to "force" their grievances into the discussion here. I understand the urge. It's just that A) no one is forcing anyone to watch this stuff, and B) there are no rules saying that those conversations have to be had here, on this board, to the degree and frequency that they are.

---

TCTTS said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

"Listen, just completely ignore half the stuff I've said and my rush to judgment based on nothing but unsubstantiated Twitter claims I really wanted to believe. In fact, pretend, like I am, that page two of this thread doesn't even exist…"

Quote:

---

Yeah, so this whole thing sounds like a complete sh*t show. I assume those of you who shamed everyone who didn't immediately fall in line with this movie and its subjects' agenda will now be apologizing.

---

What's even crazier here than the attempt to ret-con all these previous comments as something different than what they are, is that if you ever imply that there is an agenda in anything mainstream Hollywood produces, you are sure to draw a multi-paragraphed rant about how "there is no agenda!". But the same cat jumped to the conclusion about the agendas in this movie based on nothing but his own obvious prejudices and a few tweets.

He's consistently the least self-aware and most hypocritical poster on this site. You can quote it, outline it, diagram it, and spell it out, but there is still just a complete block when it comes to recognition. It seems to be pathological.

---

Jim Caviezel's QAnon agenda in his promotion of the movie + all the other controversial personalities going out of their to promote the movie as well (Gibson, Bannon, Flynn, etc) + inconsistencies in Tim Ballard's stories = "sh*t show." What in the world is so wild and wrong about that conclusion? I know that any news sources you guys happen to disagree with are always "fake news," but theirs IS controversy *surrounding* this movie, and it *is* a "sh*t show." Just take a glance for yourself at the broader internet outside of strictly conservative bubbles.

Either way, none of it discounts the subject matter of the movie itself. None of it discounts that it's an important message that needs to be heard. And people should absolutely go see the movie, as I said I will eventually.

Again, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here. You guys are like a bunch of rabid dogs trying to absolutely annihilate anyone who dare raises a concern about anything having to do with even the promotion of the movie. It's not only weird, but disturbing as hell to see.

Aren't you the same people who get so mad at the left for doing the exact same thing? For cancelling anyone who dares step out of line?

Good lord.

---

Raiderjay said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tibbers said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I don't even know why I'm engaging with you anymore - clearly you're inventing things now, to a deranged degree, frankly - but I never once said that Tim Ballard didn't save children from human trafficking. I linked to an article that pointed out a few apparent inconsistencies in his stories, that's all. But never once did I even remotely suggest that he didn't save children, nor did I ever criticize his efforts in that regard. For the 400th time, my gripe was with the PROMOTION of the movie, not the movie itself.

---

so you agree that you were wrong and that Tim Ballard did those things and said those things? Just curious how far you'd like to backtrack. So he's not a lunatic? Because before you called him a lunatic. Just trying to understand.

---

Remember, the poster you are talking to likes Jimmy Kimmel, and doesn't consider him a lunatic. Even though he has openly wished death and suffering on unvaxxed hospital patients to thunderous Hollywood applause and has used the n-word and cried on air over a lion dying lol. Meryl Streep, also not a lunatic.

but Tim Ballard, former Spec-Ops who has devoted his life to rescuing children from the sex slave trade...lunatic.

The Hollywood bubble is VERY real.

---

Dude, you need to get off this Jimmy Kimmel thing. It's super weird. You keep harping about it on F16 and on here. You listed like eight celebrities and said that if I expressed any disdain whatsoever for any of them, you might have "some" respect me. Not that I at all cared about your respect, but I thought, "Ok, I actually don't like most of these people, so here's a chance to build a bridge." I then listed the reasons why I didn't like all but one of them, and thought surely that might count for something, and that we could share a connection there. But no, instead, you immediately popped over to F16 and giddily started telling people that I loved Jimmy Kimmel, conveniently leaving out the fact that I *agreed* with you on everyone else, just like you're doing now.

Like, how do you not see how disingenuous that is?

---

No, it's not disingenuous...you refuse to call Meryl Streep and Jimmy Kimmel (two very unstable narcissistic and hate filled people) lunatics, while calling Tim Ballard a lunatic. It's hilarious.

Anyone not completely consumed in the Hollywood bubble can see how absurd that is.

---

Out of all the celebrities named, I didn't "refuse" to call Meryl Streep a lunatic, I must have forgotten to address her. Regardless, these are some of the most insane nitpicks/complaints/standards I've ever seen. Never mind the fact that I don't owe anyone here anything.

Also, if Tim Ballard believes in QAnon conspiracies, I'm sorry, but that does, in fact, make him a lunatic. I can simultaneously applaud his efforts, and find him to be a noble, courageous person, but if he indeed believes the same things Caviezel does - about Adrenochroming, an evil cabal of devil-worshipping cannibals, etc - that makes him gullible at best, or someone with nefarious political motivations at worst.

---

Tom Cruise believes he is an alien spirit from another planet shot out of a volcano.......

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Raiderjay said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Tibbers said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I don't even know why I'm engaging with you anymore - clearly you're inventing things now, to a deranged degree, frankly - but I never once said that Tim Ballard didn't save children from human trafficking. I linked to an article that pointed out a few apparent inconsistencies in his stories, that's all. But never once did I even remotely suggest that he didn't save children, nor did I ever criticize his efforts in that regard. For the 400th time, my gripe was with the PROMOTION of the movie, not the movie itself.

---

so you agree that you were wrong and that Tim Ballard did those things and said those things? Just curious how far you'd like to backtrack. So he's not a lunatic? Because before you called him a lunatic. Just trying to understand.

---

Remember, the poster you are talking to likes Jimmy Kimmel, and doesn't consider him a lunatic. Even though he has openly wished death and suffering on unvaxxed hospital patients to thunderous Hollywood applause and has used the n-word and cried on air over a lion dying lol. Meryl Streep, also not a lunatic.

but Tim Ballard, former Spec-Ops who has devoted his life to rescuing children from the sex slave trade...lunatic.

The Hollywood bubble is VERY real.

---

Dude, you need to get off this Jimmy Kimmel thing. It's super weird. You keep harping about it on F16 and on here. You listed like eight celebrities and said that if I expressed any disdain whatsoever for any of them, you might have "some" respect me. Not that I at all cared about your respect, but I thought, "Ok, I actually don't like most of these people, so here's a chance to build a bridge." I then listed the reasons why I didn't like all but one of them, and thought surely that might count for something, and that we could share a connection there. But no, instead, you immediately popped over to F16 and giddily started telling people that I loved Jimmy Kimmel, conveniently leaving out the fact that I *agreed* with you on everyone else, just like you're doing now.

Like, how do you not see how disingenuous that is?

---

No, it's not disingenuous...you refuse to call Meryl Streep and Jimmy Kimmel (two very unstable narcissistic and hate filled people) lunatics, while calling Tim Ballard a lunatic. It's hilarious.

Anyone not completely consumed in the Hollywood bubble can see how absurd that is.

---

Out of all the celebrities named, I didn't "refuse" to call Meryl Streep a lunatic, I must have forgotten to address her. Regardless, these are some of the most insane nitpicks/complaints/standards I've ever seen. Never mind the fact that I don't owe anyone here anything.

Also, if Tim Ballard believes in QAnon conspiracies, I'm sorry, but that does, in fact, make him a lunatic. I can simultaneously applaud his efforts, and find him to be a noble, courageous person, but if he indeed believes the same things Caviezel does - about Adrenochroming, an evil cabal of devil-worshipping cannibals, etc - that makes him gullible at best, or someone with nefarious political motivations at worst.

---

Tom Cruise believes he is an alien spirit from another planet shot out of a volcano.......

---

I mean we (assuming you're Christian) believe a man came back from the dead, walked on water, and eat his flesh and drink his blood every Sunday.

---

Tibbers said:

---

I think he might be a light weight. Dude has never had to doing any life at all most likely, again, I have no idea. Let's see how he responds. Money on the line?

---

TCTTS said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

"Listen, just completely ignore half the stuff I've said and my rush to judgment based on nothing but unsubstantiated Twitter claims I really wanted to believe. In fact, pretend, like I am, that page two of this thread doesn't even exist…"

Quote:

---

Yeah, so this whole thing sounds like a complete sh*t show. I assume those of you who shamed everyone who didn't immediately fall in line with this movie and its subjects' agenda will now be apologizing.

---

What's even crazier here than the attempt to ret-con all these previous comments as something different than what they are, is that if you ever imply that there is an agenda in anything mainstream Hollywood produces, you are sure to draw a multi-paragraphed rant about how "there is no agenda!". But the same cat jumped to the conclusion about the agendas in this movie based on nothing but his own obvious prejudices and a few tweets.

He's consistently the least self-aware and most hypocritical poster on this site. You can quote it, outline it, diagram it, and spell it out, but there is still just a complete block when it comes to recognition. It seems to be pathological.

---

Jim Caviezel's QAnon agenda in his promotion of the movie + all the other controversial personalities going out of their to promote the movie as well (Gibson, Bannon, Flynn, etc) + inconsistencies in Tim Ballard's stories = "sh*t show." What in the world is so wild and wrong about that conclusion? I know that any news sources you guys happen to disagree with are always "fake news," but theirs IS controversy *surrounding* this movie, and it *is* a "sh*t show." Just take a glance for yourself at the broader internet outside of strictly conservative bubbles.

Either way, none of it discounts the subject matter of the movie itself. None of it discounts that it's an important message that needs to be heard. And people should absolutely go see the movie, as I said I will eventually.

Again, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here. You guys are like a bunch of rabid dogs trying to absolutely annihilate anyone who dare raises a concern about anything having to do with even the promotion of the movie. It's not only weird, but disturbing as hell to see.

Aren't you the same people who get so mad at the left for doing the exact same thing? For cancelling anyone who dares step out of line?

Good lord.

---

DTP02 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

"Listen, just completely ignore half the stuff I've said and my rush to judgment based on nothing but unsubstantiated Twitter claims I really wanted to believe. In fact, pretend, like I am, that page two of this thread doesn't even exist…"

Quote:

---

Yeah, so this whole thing sounds like a complete sh*t show. I assume those of you who shamed everyone who didn't immediately fall in line with this movie and its subjects' agenda will now be apologizing.

---

What's even crazier here than the attempt to ret-con all these previous comments as something different than what they are, is that if you ever imply that there is an agenda in anything mainstream Hollywood produces, you are sure to draw a multi-paragraphed rant about how "there is no agenda!". But the same cat jumped to the conclusion about the agendas in this movie based on nothing but his own obvious prejudices and a few tweets.

He's consistently the least self-aware and most hypocritical poster on this site. You can quote it, outline it, diagram it, and spell it out, but there is still just a complete block when it comes to recognition. It seems to be pathological.

---

Jim Caviezel's QAnon agenda in his promotion of the movie + all the other controversial personalities going out of their to promote the movie as well (Gibson, Bannon, Flynn, etc) + inconsistencies in Tim Ballard's stories = "sh*t show." What in the world is so wild and wrong about that conclusion? I know that any news sources you guys happen to disagree with are always "fake news," but theirs IS controversy *surrounding* this movie, and it *is* a "sh*t show." Just take a glance for yourself at the broader internet outside of strictly conservative bubbles.

Either way, none of it discounts the subject matter of the movie itself. None of it discounts that it's an important message that needs to be heard. And people should absolutely go see the movie, as I said I will eventually.

Again, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here. You guys are like a bunch of rabid dogs trying to absolutely annihilate anyone who dare raises a concern about anything having to do with even the promotion of the movie. It's not only weird, but disturbing as hell to see.

Aren't you the same people who get so mad at the left for doing the exact same thing? For cancelling anyone who dares step out of line?

Good lord.

---

Your words speak for themselves. You went off half-cocked because you're predisposed to believe the unsubstantiated criticisms and are trying to ret-con those earlier comments into only ever being about the marketing of the movie and the beliefs of some of those involved.

I don't expect you to ever admit it, so I'll just leave it at that.

---

javajaws said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

And I get the argument that Hollywood is "forcing" these things into the entertainment we're consuming, so, in turn, that same handful of posters are going to "force" their grievances into the discussion here. I understand the urge. It's just that A) no one is forcing anyone to watch this stuff, and B) there are no rules saying that those conversations have to be had here, on this board, to the degree and frequency that they are.

---

Just wanted to respond to your point B above:

There are no rules saying those conversations CAN'T be had here. Just because the topic is uncomfortable to you doesn't mean it is not entertainment related.

Do you expect us to only talk about movies that deal with outdoor activities on the outdoor board? Of course not. The reality is that when entertainment heavily crosses over into other board subjects it gets talked about in multiple forums. And when Hollywood incessantly (and oftentimes unnecessarily) interjects topics of a political nature into nearly everything we want to watch...we'll it's inevitable it's gonna get talked about here.

So to you and everyone else of all viewpoints just remember that we are each different and each of our viewpoints has equal weight and authority to be presented. Just be understanding and respectful to others like good Aggies should.

---

Quote:

---

In the spirit of camaraderie, I hear you, and agree that, from time to time, I and others can be somewhat militant in that regard. If it's any consolation, I assure you, it's not because opposing viewpoints are being presented. I'm not trying to squash out anything that doesn't align with my worldview, or anything of the sort. Hell, I read F16 on a near daily basis, just to have my own views and biases challenged (and, admittedly, to roll my eyes at some of the more extreme "discussions").

---

Quote:

---

That's the thing is that I don't at all mind the actual discussion. I enjoy the discussion, even (and sometimes particularly) when political. But only when it's *actual* discussion, and not some dude simply getting on his soapbox to air his grievances, virtue signal, and name-call. All in the most selfish/derailing manner possible.

---

The Green Dragon said:

---

Brittmoore Car Club said:

---

Did a Hollywood bubble dweller just call Tim Ballard a "lunatic"? Lol, the lack of self awareness among the Hollywood crowd (and yes, it is pretty freaking monolithic, and in a fervently left sort of way) throwing that word around is rich.

How is Tim Ballard any more of a lunatic than the average preachy Hollywood elitist?

Has TCTTS ever called Meryl Streep a lunatic? Alyssa Milano? Cher? Leo DiCaprio? DeNiro? Alec Baldwin?Prob not. He'd probably be Uber stoked to see them in a vegan fro-yo spot in Hollywood and then run straight to Texags to tell us about it. But an ex spec-ops guy who has actually devoted his life to rescuing child slaves? Lunatic. Lol

---

Gonna get a lot of stars in this one.

---

TCTTS said:

---

javajaws said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

And I get the argument that Hollywood is "forcing" these things into the entertainment we're consuming, so, in turn, that same handful of posters are going to "force" their grievances into the discussion here. I understand the urge. It's just that A) no one is forcing anyone to watch this stuff, and B) there are no rules saying that those conversations have to be had here, on this board, to the degree and frequency that they are.

---

Just wanted to respond to your point B above:

There are no rules saying those conversations CAN'T be had here. Just because the topic is uncomfortable to you doesn't mean it is not entertainment related.

Do you expect us to only talk about movies that deal with outdoor activities on the outdoor board? Of course not. The reality is that when entertainment heavily crosses over into other board subjects it gets talked about in multiple forums. And when Hollywood incessantly (and oftentimes unnecessarily) interjects topics of a political nature into nearly everything we want to watch...we'll it's inevitable it's gonna get talked about here.

So to you and everyone else of all viewpoints just remember that we are each different and each of our viewpoints has equal weight and authority to be presented. Just be understanding and respectful to others like good Aggies should.

---

You just so happened to conveniently leave out the parts where I *literally* said that I don't mind opposing viewpoints, and sometimes, in fact, even enjoy the political discussion...

Quote:

---

In the spirit of camaraderie, I hear you, and agree that, from time to time, I and others can be somewhat militant in that regard. If it's any consolation, I assure you, it's not because opposing viewpoints are being presented. I'm not trying to squash out anything that doesn't align with my worldview, or anything of the sort. Hell, I read F16 on a near daily basis, just to have my own views and biases challenged (and, admittedly, to roll my eyes at some of the more extreme "discussions").

---

Quote:

---

That's the thing is that I don't at all mind the actual discussion. I enjoy the discussion, even (and sometimes particularly) when political. But only when it's *actual* discussion, and not some dude simply getting on his soapbox to air his grievances, virtue signal, and name-call. All in the most selfish/derailing manner possible.

---

Like, I explained this in detail - how it's the incessant, derailing soapboxing, and the mean-spirited, f/ck you attitudes of a handful of posters that I can't stand - and yet you took one paragraph out of all of that, to make it sound like I was completely against people sharing their different viewpoints on this board.

Seriously... why do you guys do this?

Why the endless gaslighting?

And if it's not gaslighting, how do you guys so consistently hear only what you want to hear, while ignoring everything else?

---

amercer said:

---

Trafficking has become to the right what trans issues have become to the left. Serious, but overall small problems blown up to outrage the home team.

---

amercer said:

---

Being hidden in the basement of every pizza parlor right?

---