I've noticed that you reference George Webb quite often in your posts, and I'm just curious as to why you trust his information? I've said it before, but I don't trust 'George Webb' one bit. I'm sorry I can't remember in detail all the 'exposures' and 'revelations' he has made, that later has proven not to be even remotely true, but that's my informed impression'I have of him that has cumulated during many years.
For instance, some years ago I was reading and following heavily the pedophile/SRA stuff, with characters like Isaac Kappy and Fiona Barnett, and I remember 'George Webb' from those times as he labeled many of the child sex investigators or whistleblowers as controlled opposition without much/any evidence.
I haven't seen Sound of Freedom yet (but intend to) but at least at this point I have to agree that some posts here appear to go too far with nitpicking and 'seeing something that isn't necessarily there', the conspiracy of this film being a plot to microchip our children being one of them. One thing I learned from doing a deep dive into the pedophile/SRA stuff is that the countermeasures, distractions and attacks these groups engage in are more sophisticated and clever than in, let's say, politics. So, I wouldn't be suprised if most of these 'revelations' and 'debunkings' aimed at various critical thinkers in the alternative media sphere originate from the evildoers themselves.
Hi aragorn.
If you read my posts on this thread, I personally never said this film was a "plot to microchip our children." However, you can look at the information put out by the "anti" child sex trafficking organizations and initiatives themselves, which I talk about in my posts. It's not a conspiracy theory to note, as Greg Reese did in the video I linked to, that the enormous rise in profits in the child sex trafficking industry came with the creation of these organizations, which include the digital cataloging of children. So, chipping is just an extension of what is already going on. That Amber Alert is linked to these nefarious players as well starts to round out that picture since it encourages parents to digitize vital information concerning their children allegedly in the interest of protecting them. Actually, as per a video posted on this thread, it seems the woman who had made the news given she was caught moving a number of Haitian children (this tied to the Clinton's Haiti operation), later wound up with the job of CEO for an organization linked to Amber Alert. So, there's that small world again.
Anyway, aragorn, if you have the time, read the posts I wrote. I don't think you'll find them conspiratorial.
As for "nitpicking" (and I'm not sure which posts you are including in that general category), but those of us discussing the nefarious players connected with Sound of Freedom are highlighting the
importance of context relative to assessing the film. This film is not simply a movie we are discussing in the movie section of this forum. The context is of vital importance. In the largest sense, the context is the continued war -- or information war, as some have dubbed it -- that we are in the midst of. If Ballard isn't even close to being an actual hero, as numerous sources are indicating (including Webb), and the film is largely funded by Carlos Slim who's deeply tied to the Clintons (FYI, if you haven't seen what Trump had to say about Slim, then check the video in my first post), then for these reasons we have entered serious second-Matrix disinfo territory. But unlike more confounding scenarios, the objective here seems abundantly clear: that of controlling the narrative (which includes creating a hero) and funneling money that both directly and indirectly (as per its being used for fundraising for the upcoming election cycle) serves the child sex trafficking industry.
The counter argument on this thread is always: it's only about the message. The message of the film is "good." We don't care about the rest.
So, on the "message" of the film: I've not seen the film yet so what I can say about the film itself is limited. I did see a promotional scene from the film which I thought was lacking both in terms of the writing and acting, so I don't have great expectations on that end of things. But, again, if the film's largely fictional narrative is making a hero out of this con artist, Tim Ballard, then I would say that that too is part of the film's "message," whether people realize that or not. And funneling donations into this operator's fund is really just the icing on the already rotten cake.
Anyway, as I said before, we'll just have to wait and see as to whether the exposure of the issue of child sex trafficking through this film is going to have a deleterious effect on the industry -- by which I guess I mean, the profits should markedly decline, and key players should be exposed and tried. Putin has seemingly been involved in doing just that relative to Ukraine... but of course Putin has been largely demonized, and such information isn't readily available in the West.
Of course, with the financial system imploding, and with the no doubt faulty attempts we'll see at inserting CBDC's, etc., we may not be able to see very readily what is effecting what related to this cabal's illicit operations. They are short on cash, and all their illicit activities are therefore likely to take a hit, film or no film. (Due to the war in Ukraine, there is a dearth of laundered funds, which used to prop up these shady banks, some of which have recently failed -- such as Silicone Valley Bank. So, this manner of financial implosion is already happening.)
In other words, there are so many balls in the air right now, it's hard to predict what might happen, or even how we are going to assess what has happened once it does (!).
As far as investigative journalist George Webb goes, aragorn, I wonder how many of his critics have actually spent some time reading and listening to his material for a concentrated period of time. I have, especially this last year or so, much of the research related to the issue of bio weapons, and how they are engineered, the molecular aspects, receptors, pathways, etc. How anthrax, for example, is a good, long-studied durable "carrier" for other diseases that couldn't otherwise make their cellular target without some protective coating, as it were. Actually, Webb has made some very insightful connections between the quickly buried anthrax dimension of 9/11 (anthrax being the gun held to the head of legislators which forced them to accept the Patriot Act), and what is happening now concerning coronavirus. As Webb notes, with very few exceptions, the very same players are involved in both scenarios. There's a lot more to be said on that, but this isn't the right context for it.
Webb has an incredible mind for making connections and storing and reciting detailed information and names. (I'm terrible with names myself, and so I really appreciate those that have a catalog of names at their fingertips.) He is also a creative thinker and something of a wordsmith. He makes interesting analogies and connections, even rhymes, which can serve to provide a handy short-hand for remembering his store of specialized information. Because his research entails such specialized knowledge, one does have to work at it to keep up. One has to really concentrate and expand one's own knowledge base. This kind of work is not for everyone. However, when I do take the time to do that, I find it pays off in deepening my understanding of issues that would never have come to my attention otherwise.
George Webb does miss sometimes with his speculations, and I have heard him readily point to some of his own failings (which already puts him above sources who refuse to acknowledge mistakes). As for SRA related material, aragorn, I know he tries to avoid the subject of child sex trafficking, and issues tied to that, given, as I've said a number of times already, he claims his prior research partner was killed due to her investigative research related to child sex trafficking (not sure about the SRA aspect). He also claims to know of others who were working to expose/stop traffickers who have likewise paid with their lives (I'd have to look for more details on that).
Actually, now that I think about it, someone mentioned Kirby Sommers to him on Twitter, Sommers being a woman who calls herself an ex-sex slave, and who has written numerous books on Epstein and his associates, etc., which are seemingly well researched, although I haven't read any of them myself. But Webb wasn't going to give Sommers any credit, perhaps considering her too compromised. I remember thinking he was being too dismissive in that instance. So, he does have certain stubborn blind spots, maybe especially in that area.
I certainly don't agree with all of Webb's viewpoints. He has little understanding of a more holistic approach to health, for example. And he makes comments sometimes that leave me scratching my head. He is abundantly human, in other words. But as sources go, he does contribute a great deal to the public conversation given that he is often forging new ground for other journalists and researchers -- oh, and he generously includes and refers to the work of other researchers he is in direct contact with, a few of them being scientists doing lab work that contributes to the scope of the work they are all involved in. (Actually, I'd also say that in a personal sense, George Webb seems big hearted and generous.) He is also renewing his past efforts of having (on a string-budget) a countrified looking citizen journalism school, since true citizen journalism is really the mode he feels to be a part of and wants to promote. Actually, on the subject of citizen journalism, Webb also shows how being on the move, and visiting the sites he is investigating is crucial to the type of on the ground journalism he's engaged in. He often has contacts in these various locations, but also takes the time to talk to new people. He photographs himself in these various locations, in front of specific office buildings, hospitals, labs, museums, etc., as a way of bringing the story he's working on to those following him, but also as a way of documenting just where he's been, and why.
Even though Webb doesn't have a massive amount of followers, I still think his work is having a powerful reverberating effect out in the world. His covering the career of Dr. Robert Malone, for example, is especially useful, since, like this Tim Ballard person, Malone is being set up as this "darling" of the "resistance," as it were, which is utter hypocrisy the more you learn about his history, especially as documented by Webb, fact by fact, through the meta-data. Malone and his associates' DOMANE software system, for example (developed I believe at DARPA), used an algorithm to exclude Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine in the search for repurposed drugs that would be effective against Covid during the crucial early period (March 2020). Excluding such effective drugs cleared the way to move forward with the mRNA "vaccines," as well as to instate the deadly hospital protocol utilizing Remdesivir and ventilation.
Actually, the "Nuremberg II" lawyer Reiner Fuellmich has interviewed Webb recently (on Rumble, I believe), which perhaps indicates Webb's widening sphere of influence -- although I tend to think of Webb's work as unleashing some very potent raw data that slowly makes its way to more mainstream sources over time. Similar to what I was saying about Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Webb's work also serves to refine the conversation, given how specialized and fact driven it is. If he gets it wrong sometimes, I tend to give him some slack, as he does seem to be on the cutting edge of this type of investigative journalism.
) is talking about the movie.
