• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Penn State Cult (Joe Knew)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Bucklion;2192697; said:
Yeah, I mean, so OK, if there was a ring, Paterno and almost certainly wasn't in it. I don't see anyone anywhere saying or suggesting he did anything to children. But what it won't have anything to do with is the coverup at PSU about what they knew about Sandusky and when, one way or the other, then. Those are separate issues, though the desperate need to exonerate Paterno at all costs will not allow it to be seen that way.
Click to expand...

What I was saying is that it is very possible Joe was looking the other way for much longer than the Freeh report suggests. This is exactly the opposite of what they want the TRUTH to be.

I do not think Joe was involved with a child sex/porn ring. That is one thing I can agree with the pedsters. As much as I thought Joe was putting up a front with his holier than thou attitude about his coaching and graduating players, I don't think he was a sick fuck like Jerry.
 
Upvote 0
buxfan4life;2192701; said:
What I was saying is that it is very possible Joe was looking the other way for much longer than the Freeh report suggests. This is exactly the opposite of what they want the TRUTH to be.

I do not think Joe was involved with a child sex/porn ring. That is one thing I can agree with the pedsters. As much as I thought Joe was putting up a front with his holier than thou attitude about his coaching and graduating players, I don't think he was a sick fuck like Jerry.
Click to expand...

He was a sick f--k for letting it continue..
 
Upvote 0
Deductive logic works this way:

1. Joe looked the other way while Sandusky raped boys.

2. Joe was unaware of, and therefore did not look the other way, while Sandusky participated in a child sex/pornography ring.

3. Therefore Joe is innocent.
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch;2192703; said:
Deductive logic works this way:

1. Joe looked the other way while Sandusky raped boys.

2. Joe was unaware of, and therefore did not look the other way, while Sandusky participated in a child sex/pornography ring.

3. Therefore Joe is innocent.
Click to expand...

Either that or misery loves company.

This can only get worse for them....
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch;2192703; said:
Deductive logic works this way:

1. Joe looked the other way while Sandusky raped boys.

2. Joe was unaware of, and therefore did not look the other way, while Sandusky participated in a child sex/pornography ring.

3. Therefore Joe is innocent.
Click to expand...

"Deductive" :: Pennsylvanian for "Leap of"
 
Upvote 0
Meanwhile aurabass4psu, the guy running one of those ZOMG JOEPA IS INNOCENT blogs, has really made a strong bid for claiming the title of Dumbest Motherfucker on Earth. Long story short, he suggests that McQueary "only" told Joe et al that he witnessed Jerry engaging in molestation and something possibly sexual (and how the fuck is molestation anything but sexual?) with a kid in the shower. He did not explicitly say he saw penetration. And from that he draws the following conclusions:


IF you say you would buy the idea that Mike was reporting a sex act with this story and hold that above everything you knew about Saint Jerry you are fooling yourself.

I don't care if Mike said he thought it was "a sexual nature". His detailed description of those 45 seconds delivered in 5 or 6 minutes by his own admission would be more than enough for anyone to question his suspicions - particularly delivered against a guy of Sandusky's stature.
...
NO the truth is that those trying to claim Mike McQueary described some kind of sexual assault are pushing way past the limit of any comprehensible explanation.
Click to expand...

And this seems to be his reason for why the Freeh report was wrong to conclude that Spanier, Graham, Curly, and Paterno knew about sexual assualt of a child and did nothing. See you guys, the FACTS are coming out!!!!! Spanier et al only thought McQueary observed Jerry molesting a kid in the shower!!!! There's no reason to take that to the cops!!!! What about DUE PROCESS!?!?!?!??!?!


The thread:
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=157&f=1395&t=9214245
 
Upvote 0
To me, the most damning single statement in the Freeh report never gets talked about. In one of the emails about the 2001 rape, when talking about confronting Sandusky, Spanier says something to the effect of 'if Sandusky doesn't take our warning seriously, we open ourselves up to trouble for not reporting this.' So that would suggest, at bare minimum, Spanier knew that there was an obligation to report this, knew that not reporting it would be a violation of the law, and chose to not report it anyway.
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeInWA;2192723; said:
To me, the most damning single statement in the Freeh report never gets talked about. In one of the emails about the 2001 rape, when talking about confronting Sandusky, Spanier says something to the effect of 'if Sandusky doesn't take our warning seriously, we open ourselves up to trouble for not reporting this.' So that would suggest, at bare minimum, Spanier knew that there was an obligation to report this, knew that not reporting it would be a violation of the law, and chose to not report it anyway.
Click to expand...

[pedster]OMFG. You obviously have not read the report, have you? (I haven't either but that is not the issue) Those emails are clearly doctored with photoshop only to frame Joe. Why can't you see the FACTS?!?!?![/pedster]

If it doesn't click with their conspiracy theory, then it gets totally ignored.

Most of those posters have not, and still refuse to, read the report for themselves. They are letting the batshit crazies spoonfeed them the info they WANT to hear. Remember, they are looking only for the FACTS. Unless those FACTS come from a small list of small minded people, then they are not relevant to the issue.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck;2190334; said:
Bill O'Brien's demeanor and poise during the Big Ten media sessions impressed me greatly. His young men are going to need that kind of self-possessed leadership to get them through the next few years.

I'm planning on supporting the Penn State players and fans when they come to Columbus, since it seems evident to me that there are plenty of morons who will be subjecting them to a barrage of verbal abuse. (Under normal circumstances there's no way I'd go out of my way to make Penn State fans feel welcome, but these are hardly normal circumstances.)
Click to expand...

contrarian (kənˈtrɛərɪən) ? n
a contrary or obstinate person( as modifier ): a contrarian investor ; contrarian instincts
 
Upvote 0
Every time a pedster makes a post about the innocence of various parties, it further proves that what they are denying is, in fact, true.

The whole point of the allegations is that there was a culture of denial. A culture that believed that nothing could, or should, happen that was negative to the program. Therefore, horrendous acts were swept under the rug.

Every time we see another denial, we see further proof of what really happened: That is, everyone turned, and is continuing to turn, a blind eye to the facts.

Facts do not matter to the diehard Penn State fan. Exactly like they didn't matter to Joe, nor the Penn St. leaders that knew what was going on.

When this whole debacle started, and the first allegations were brought up about TSM, I had a gut feeling that it was true. I believe they are. And if they indeed are, I have another gut feeling that the FBI's involvement will be far, FAR less lenient than the NCAA. The NCAA still wants money. The FBI wants justice. If TSM was indeed peddling kids, while staff - any staff - at Penn State turned a blind eye, I believe we'll witness the largest implosion of an organization this side of the Great Depression.
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeInWA;2192723; said:
To me, the most damning single statement in the Freeh report never gets talked about. In one of the emails about the 2001 rape, when talking about confronting Sandusky, Spanier says something to the effect of 'if Sandusky doesn't take our warning seriously, we open ourselves up to trouble for not reporting this.' So that would suggest, at bare minimum, Spanier knew that there was an obligation to report this, knew that not reporting it would be a violation of the law, and chose to not report it anyway.
Click to expand...

I keep waiting for Spanier to be charged but it hasn't happened, yet.
I wonder if Spanier didn't cut a deal? That would not surprise me. But when
the vice pres Shultz and athletic director Curley go to trial for perjury the [Mark May] may really hit the fan.
That's what I'm thinkin'.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top