ADVERTISEMENT

Deleted and Locked

Status
Not open for further replies.

simons96

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2013
10,119
6,858
1
Plano, TX
looks like someone was hammering the "Report" button pretty hard

funny thing is, I can accept discussion and criticism. but when one side of an argument insists on censorship, it only leads me to believe the other side was hitting some inconvenient truths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjsocrates
Actually, I'm pretty sure the post was reported because it blatantly outed a private victim of child sexual abuse for no particular reason. That should rightfully be considered to be a pretty big no-no. Maybe JZ will fix the article; I suspect he won't and continue to make himself out to be the real victim.
 
looks like someone was hammering the "Report" button pretty hard

funny thing is, I can accept discussion and criticism. but when one side of an argument insists on censorship, it only leads me to believe the other side was hitting some inconvenient truths.

You're going down a bad path. Re-read the Clemente Report. What JZ is doing is wrong. You're better than this.
 
looks like someone was hammering the "Report" button pretty hard

funny thing is, I can accept discussion and criticism. but when one side of an argument insists on censorship, it only leads me to believe the other side was hitting some inconvenient truths.

Roger that!
 
You're going down a bad path. Re-read the Clemente Report. What JZ is doing is wrong. You're better than this.

there's no moral equivocation on curiosity. I'm familiar with Clemente, I have promoted his report every chance I get.

and I am no JZ neophyte. Just find it odd how scared some people are of his interviews.

and as my OP states, when one side insists on censoring the other side, I have to wonder why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
looks like someone was hammering the "Report" button pretty hard

funny thing is, I can accept discussion and criticism. but when one side of an argument insists on censorship, it only leads me to believe the other side was hitting some inconvenient truths.
Don't know the real reason or if truths were exposed, but the squeaky wheels sure got the grease on this one. But, in today's environment PC will always rule the day. I notice some of the whiners' posts referring to others as "sick bastards" are allowed to remain. Go figure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 and simons96
Don't know the real reason or if truths were exposed, but the squeaky wheels sure got the grease on this one. But, in today's environment PC will always rule the day. I notice nothing was done about some of the whiners' posts referring to others as "sick bastards" are allowed to remain. Go figure.

you know, I will also say that when things like this happen, it makes JZ more credible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
there's no moral equivocation on curiosity. I'm familiar with Clemente, I have promoted his report every chance I get.

and I am no JZ neophyte. Just find it odd how scared some people are of his interviews.

and as my OP states, when one side insists on censoring the other side, I have to wonder why.

It's been "censored" because JZ has crossed a line that decent people don't cross.
 
yeah yeah yeah we've heard this song before
If you've heard that song before, it's because JZ has a nasty little habit of doing abhorrent things like publishing the names of child sex abuse victims without their permission to shame them into doing what he wants. To be frank, if we're talking about moral equivocation, I'm fully comfortable being on the side that doesn't support publicly shaming victims of sexual abuse. It seems as though the Free Jerry Brigade sees publicly shaming abuse victims as mere curiosity, which is an unfortunate (but predictable) stance.
 
If you've heard that song before, it's because JZ has a nasty little habit of doing abhorrent things like publishing the names of child sex abuse victims without their permission to shame them into doing what he wants. To be frank, if we're talking about moral equivocation, I'm fully comfortable being on the side that doesn't support publicly shaming victims of sexual abuse. It seems as though the Free Jerry Brigade sees publicly shaming abuse victims as mere curiosity, which is an unfortunate (but predictable) stance.

show me one goddam post where I have said "Free Jerry", frikkin lying scumbag
 
Don't know the real reason or if truths were exposed, but the squeaky wheels sure got the grease on this one. But, in today's environment PC will always rule the day. I notice some of the whiners' posts referring to others as "sick bastards" are allowed to remain. Go figure.

Yep and it is not just "sick bastards", it's a whole bunch of other derogatory names and using that language is against the list of rules posted here. Then there are those who state we should be banned because we believe Sandusky didn't get a fair trial. Hard to figure this out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simons96
Yep and it is not just "sick bastards", it's a whole bunch of other derogatory names and using that language is against the list of rules posted here. Then there are those who state we should be banned because we believe Sandusky didn't get a fair trial. Hard to figure this out.
Fascism anyone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: simons96
Yep and it is not just "sick bastards", it's a whole bunch of other derogatory names and using that language is against the list of rules posted here. Then there are those who state we should be banned because we believe Sandusky didn't get a fair trial. Hard to figure this out.
tumblr_nj7fobmQfH1qh9nffo1_500.gif
 
Yep and it is not just "sick bastards", it's a whole bunch of other derogatory names and using that language is against the list of rules posted here. Then there are those who state we should be banned because we believe Sandusky didn't get a fair trial. Hard to figure this out.

yes they can call us all kinds of names and tell all kinds of lies, all in the name of "protecting the victims"

funny how that same deceptive mentality allowed the BoT to pretty much destroy Paterno and the University as we know it

sometimes I wonder if the so-called "victim's advocates" don't have some more sinister angle to play here
 
Wow. Did someone hit on an inconvenient truth with you.

don't bother answering the question. I have never been part of the "Free Jerry Brigade". I am also no "child rape enabler" when I defend Paterno.

there's your inconvenient truth, bubba.
 
I guess now that Ziegler has proven everything so convincingly we won't need to see another post by him.
 
Last edited:
If you've heard that song before, it's because JZ has a nasty little habit of doing abhorrent things like publishing the names of child sex abuse victims without their permission to shame them into doing what he wants. To be frank, if we're talking about moral equivocation, I'm fully comfortable being on the side that doesn't support publicly shaming victims of sexual abuse. It seems as though the Free Jerry Brigade sees publicly shaming abuse victims as mere curiosity, which is an unfortunate (but predictable) stance.

To my knowledge not a single one of his 'victims' were vetted in court because the judge wouldn't permit it. That to me reeks of collusion and railroading. Someone has got to challenge these 'claims'.

I am not saying Sandusky is innocent, but he was not given a fair, impartial trial.
 
Wow. Did someone hit on an inconvenient truth with you.
To my knowledge not a single one of his 'victims' were vetted in court because the judge wouldn't permit it. That to me reeks of collusion and railroading. Someone has got to challenge these 'claims'.

I am not saying Sandusky is innocent, but he was not given a fair, impartial trial.

I believe that is what most (if not all) of us are stating. Sandusky did not get a fair trial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simons96
To my knowledge not a single one of his 'victims' were vetted in court because the judge wouldn't permit it. That to me reeks of collusion and railroading. Someone has got to challenge these 'claims'.

I am not saying Sandusky is innocent, but he was not given a fair, impartial trial.
How in the world did you come to the conclusion that none of Jerry's victims were "vetted" when each victim who testified in court was cross-examined by Sandusky's own private defense counsel? What precisely constitutes vetting in your mind?
 
Attacking the victims is NOT defending Paterno. It is dishonoring his memory. STOP.

I think you missed my point

reading and critically analyzing JZ's blog doesn't make me part of the Free Jerry Parade, any more than defending Joe Paterno makes me a Child molester enabler
 
I think you missed my point

reading and critically analyzing JZ's blog doesn't make me part of the Free Jerry Parade, any more than defending Joe Paterno makes me a Child molester enabler
This is what some can't or just don't want to separate. Further, they want to quell any dissenting viewpoints. Sound familiar? Some of them are hypocrites as it relates to this affair. Again, I'm not of the mindset that Sandusky is innocent, but what if no one questioned the accepted narrative of Louis Freeh, the news media, and our BOT as it relates to JVP, C,S,S? Or worse, those that did were silenced. Some of these same people, now so sanctimonious when it comes to JZ, would have been raising holy hell.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: simons96
This what some can't or just don't want to separate. Further, they want to quell any dissenting viewpoints. Sound familiar? Some of them are hypocrites as it relates to this affair.

some of them tell lies to get threads deleted
 
the jihad continues. notice how none of you loudmouths has dared popped up on the Sandusky appeal thread.
 
the jihad continues. notice how none of you loudmouths has dared popped up on the Sandusky appeal thread.

Jerry is going to die in jail. How about we just start cutting and pasting the testimony of the victims other than Fisher so you can see exactly what this sick SOB did to young children. I don't care if he gets an appeal or not, he's a serial pedophile. You backwards idiots think this was all one big mistake and this is somehow going to save the day down the line in hopes you get an I told you so in. Nobody except JZ and a few following him even think there is a chance he wasn't doing this. When JZ comes up with more than attacking the credibility of a witness and something actual concrete...let me know. Cry about his lawyer or how these victims as adults are not perfect all you want to. He has yet to provide solid evidence in any way that would convince a halfway intelligent flea that Jerry was "framed".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT