Ziegler WRSC 8/19
- Thread starter JeannieNeedsAShooter
- Start date
Zig goes FULL RANT during the interview.
Now, I am not a guy to write a person off because they go FULL RANT
, but I know that with a lot of people that will just turn them off......so be it._______________________________
Now....that being the case:
- Whether you want to adopt JZ's conclusions, or not (including stuff like Jerry S's innocence etc) and I don't claim - nor will I try to convince anyone - that his information insures that all of his conclusions are airtight.
- A reasonable person would realize that this "ranter" brings up a whole SLEW of points that SHOULD HAVE BEEN (and should still be) in the front lines of the narrative, but are instead completely ignored.
Several of his points regarding the "victims"....the legal process....the media....etc are very valid - and only the intellectually retarded will "write those issues off" simply because they may not be the "politically acceptable" viewpoints or they are delivered by a guy who's style they don't like..
I won't go into listing some of the most relevant....but if you listen - to the words, without shutting down due to the rant - there is a lot there that people SHOULD be evaluating.
Last edited:
I have watched nearly every video he has made on the Sandusky issue. He is a very annoying speaker but I listen intently to what he brings up. The main problem for me is that he tends to base his theories off erroneous conclusions that he has drawn from information he thinks he knows. When you start wrong you end wrong. He blocked me a long time ago because he didn't like what I had to say but I still try take his opinion into consideration. I'll listen to this one too, but God is he a terrible speakerZig goes FULL RANT during the interview.
Now, I am not a guy to write a person off because they go FULL RANT
_______________________________
Now....that being the case:
- Whether you want to adopt JZ's conclusions, or not (including stuff like Jerry S's innocence etc) and I don't claim - nor will I try to convince anyone - that his information insures that all of his conclusions are airtight.
- A reasonable person would realize that this "ranter" brings up a whole SLEW of points that SHOULD HAVE BEEN (and should still be) in the front lines of the narrative, but are instead completely ignored.
Several of his points regarding the "victims"....the legal process....the media....etc are very valid - and only the intellectually retarded will "right those issues off" simply because they may not be the "politically acceptable" viewpoints or they are delivered by a guy who's style they don't like..
I won't go into listing some of the most relevant....but if you listen - to the words, without shutting down due to the rant - there is a lot there that people SHOULD be evaluating.
You were right about the ranting but nothing knew for him. This was just a continuation of the same things he has been saying.
can't wait to count the Ziegler threads the incessant whiners will get pulled off the board in the coming weeks.
bjf1984, I listened to this because of your history as a reliable, rational poster. But this was an absolute train wreck by Ziegler. He is actually getting worse with his presentation skills over time--I didn't think that was possible.
You think he is ranting? What ?
Not surprised ScottPa buried his dad JoePa when he claimed Sandusky was guilty. And he thinks he is a good lawyer, and he was helping the old man, Penn State or any of us.
N i t t a n y A m e r i c a
Not surprised ScottPa buried his dad JoePa when he claimed Sandusky was guilty. And he thinks he is a good lawyer, and he was helping the old man, Penn State or any of us.
N i t t a n y A m e r i c a
I would rather spend the rest of my life with Zig then the rats on the PENN STATE BoT.
N i t t a n y A m e r i c a
I think John is great and I share his outrage. I wish I could speak as articulately as he does on the myriad of facts of this whole sordid affair. He's dead on with Scott too. The various players in this all have an incentive, none of which is to tell the truth. I'm glad he hasn't gone away.
No doubt NE, he was in full rant. Not that it's really any skin off my nose, but I do wish he'd not go all cray cray with regar. To his issues with Scott P.....seems like a waste of time. I do think some of his stuff about the media. The relationships between the victims and the attorneys etc. is interesting.
I definitely understand you comments about it being same old - same old......because he does always go back to the "conclusions" that he has been over time and again
I do, however, appreciate some of the nuggets - even those that are more opinion than fact - because in this whole FUBAR affair, you don't want to automatically assume anything is true - and any info is at least worth processing.....for me anyway
JZ has done his share of research on the issues. He should be congratulated and commended for his work vs. ongoing expression of dislike for his rant. Ever wonder he may be right! I am willing to go the whole nine yards with his search for Truth.
No one is 100% correct on this mess and conversely, no one is 100% wrong. Only a fool would refuse to consider all possibilities. JZ can make one very uncomfortable with his presentation style and some of his assertions. I do dismiss the SP, JZ feud, since I don't see it as a key to the truth and only they know the source of the acrimony.
Two things that seem to bring a great deal of venom here are questioning the veracity of some of the "victims" and arguing that JS did not receive a fair trial. Personally, I don't have an issue with either one. I do have a difficult time believing Jerry is 100% innocent.
Two things that seem to bring a great deal of venom here are questioning the veracity of some of the "victims" and arguing that JS did not receive a fair trial. Personally, I don't have an issue with either one. I do have a difficult time believing Jerry is 100% innocent.
I think that most people will agree that Jerry engaged in some inappropriate behavior. Based on the trial testimony and what is now known, I am not convinced that he engaged in sexual acts or had any sexual intent with any of the accusers. On the other hand, given the way things have played out; I can certainly understand why some people think otherwise.
I have heard the argument that the victims/accusers have been through enough, shouldn't have to suffer the ordeal of testifying at a new trial, and that it is time for them to heal. I am not buying it. Some of the accusers/survivors have real credibility issues and it doesn't seem like many were thoroughly vetted either at trial or in settlement negotiations with Penn State. I would like to see anyone who has even has a remotely credible claim of being a victim/survivor testify at a new trial and have their accounts cross-examined by a competent lawyer who has been adequately prepared and let the chips fall where they may.
I would particularly like to see what Matt Sandusky and AM have to say as both of their stories seem suspect to me. They both got nice settlements and IMO they should need to show that the settlements are deserved.
Last edited:
I try to listen to Ziegler every time he is on the local radio. I am still waiting for him to actual proof besides "it doesn't make any sense." Or as he puts it: "IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!!"
Just because 'A' doesn't make any sense doesn't prove that 'A' is false, nor does it prove that 'B' is true.
If he can't provide any actual, credible proof when he has my attention on the radio, I'm not going to waste any more of my time to sort through his lunacy of a website.
Just because 'A' doesn't make any sense doesn't prove that 'A' is false, nor does it prove that 'B' is true.
If he can't provide any actual, credible proof when he has my attention on the radio, I'm not going to waste any more of my time to sort through his lunacy of a website.
Manatree, you have captured the essence of my fundamental issue with Ziegler. Him shouting "IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE" over and over as his evidence that Sandusky is not guilty is sheer lunacy. One can look at the Freeh Report's "evidence" against Joe Paterno and realize that Freeh's conclusions are unfounded. Ziegler has even less evidence to support Sandusky's innocence. Ziegler has a BELIEF of Sandusky's innocence, and he shouts about it to emphasize how much he BELIEVES Sandusky is innocent. But I keep waiting for him to come up with a coherent presentation of evidence to back up his belief. JZ is incapable of making that presentation--is it because he is incoherent, or because the evidence isn't really there? Probably both.
Last edited:
The guy is basically a stalker at this point.
He's ranting about people threatening to call the police on him and no trespassing signs on people's property.
He's one step away from following victims with a telephoto lens and collecting stool samples in his quest for the truth.
He's ranting about people threatening to call the police on him and no trespassing signs on people's property.
He's one step away from following victims with a telephoto lens and collecting stool samples in his quest for the truth.
I've heard people complain about Ziegler's delivery as yelling and ranting many times before.
His voice, delivery and passion are not problems with me. I find Ziegler to be the one with the most articulation, knowledge, dedication and honesty about the situation. I've been following him from the beginning and I now have personally started to put the pieces of this convoluted puzzle together for myself. I commend the man for searching for the truth, and for having an open mind about the case. Ziegler, unlike many, is willing to put aside political correctness in his zealous pursuit of the truth. That, my friends, is admirable and unusual trait in this day and age.
His voice, delivery and passion are not problems with me. I find Ziegler to be the one with the most articulation, knowledge, dedication and honesty about the situation. I've been following him from the beginning and I now have personally started to put the pieces of this convoluted puzzle together for myself. I commend the man for searching for the truth, and for having an open mind about the case. Ziegler, unlike many, is willing to put aside political correctness in his zealous pursuit of the truth. That, my friends, is admirable and unusual trait in this day and age.
What proof do you need that Aaron Fisher is a liar?
Mike McQ is a liar?
The Second Mile are liars?
The OAG and Fina are liars?
Scott Paterno is an A hole and a liar?
The BoT are liars?
Corbett / liar?
What?
N i t t a n y A m e r i c a
How about something other than blind accusations and saying that "it doesn't make any sense?" That's all he ever provides when he is on WRSC.
It's what I've heard him delivering that I have my main issue with. His theories are just that. Theories. I have yet to hear him offer any actual proof when I hear him on the radio. If he doesn't bother to do that, why should I waste my time going through his website?
As I said before, his main argument is always saying how it doesn't make any sense. Pedophilia doesn't make any sense to me, but that is hardly proof that it doesn't exist.
He bases all his theories on his own speculation. Since he believes his speculation is fact, his theories must be true. At this point he just another carnival barker
You're missing the point. You have to remember that the entire case is built on what supposedly makes sense since there is literally no evidence beyond accuser's testimony (unlike the Jarod case where there was a mountain of evidence including porn, texts, admissions of guilt, etc. Nothing close to that exists in this case.)
Accusers who would make millions of dollars.
Ziegler is pointing out how ludicrous Mike McQueary and Aaron Fisher's stories have to be to make any logical sense based on what is known. This is done through uncovering layer upon layer of detail between all the players and circumstances, of which there are many. The story about Fisher's mom is many layers deep and central into determining the validity of Fisher's story. It's not a "smoking gun", but it certainly is an indication to what makes more sense. The courts failed us in Pennsylvania. They didn't come close to fully investigating this case and it's obvious.
Cowardice and totally irrational decision making by grossly incompetent people in key positions has lead to the current narrative. It doesn't make sense. And yet there is another narrative that makes a hell of a lot more sense with a hell of a lot more layers of evidence to support it.
I can't think of anyone with less of an agenda in this than Ziegler. Seriously, what does someone gain by shouting to the world that Jerry Sandusky is innocent? Like him or not, like his political views or not, he is not stupid. He has no agenda. He has covered this closer than anyone, and the next person isn't even close imo. He's also right on the money analyzing the media's role in this. A role the media themselves practically always fail to acknowledge. In addition, no one has gone as far as identifying the incentives of each key player as it relates to the Sandusky case and no one has even considered the idea of doing such a thing. This stopped being a national investigative story more than 3 years ago. I understand many Penn Staters want to move on or have already done so. Personally, I haven't had closure with this yet. I for one applaud John for pursuing the truth.
Too bad he can't do a thing but attack the witnesses or victims. Taking pics of their cars. Calling them out on social media. He may have his own mental issues. He wants his version of the truth, not the truth. Let the others get their day in court and see what they have to say. That may not even occur.
Nobody is saying this was handled perfectly, but JZ is nothing more than an a-hole for stalking Jerry's victims. Sorry they didn't grow up great with being abused and having poor parental guidance. JZ loves the attention so you can stop playing his Saint card. I get those upset the BoT jacked things up because they did. I get those mad Joe took a huge hit, but applauding the ambulance chaser is foul. He hasn't proven Jerry's innocence at all. That is why some are over the ranting lunatic. I thought his intentions were good early on, but now he justs want to keep his name out there. Sadly some wants this walked back so bad they stopped thinking about what Jerry actually did to children.
Yeah everybody's a liar. Everybody is a liar except the guys you support. The guy who said nobody is 100% percent right or wrong on the whole affair put it best.
For those looking for the whole truth I wish you luck but I fear if the truth is ever known it will never be accepted due to the JFK assassination like speculation that has already taken hold.
Of course they're theories. There has only been one eye witness in this entire case and that is MM. The victim in the shower that MM has claimed to see denies that anything happened on that day, and the court ruled that JS was cleared from that charge.
So of course the entire case is full of JZ theories. The pillars of the case are weak. That is why there is much doubt about JS being a pedophile.
Wrong, 8 victims testified to what Jerry did. That is 8 eye witnesses and the ones that actually were molested. There is very little doubt JS molested children to anyone not wishing this all was just a bad dream for PSU. His theories can't discount every witness and in fact all he can do is say one of the victims didn't grow up a model citizen which means next to nothing. 8 victims testifying what the man did is not a weak case by and stretch and why he was convicted. I know a few of you would follow JZ off the cliff if it meant this all would be reversed, but it's not going to happen. Focus on taking down the BoT and finding the real truth there as that is where there is some real smoke.
L
The last time I checked, being convicted of felony Indecent Assault could hardly be considered as "cleared".
Way too many unanswered questions with regards to oversight from Dr. Jack Raykovitz and the Second Mile.
Let's put it this way - you're Raykovitz - and the University is on your doorstep complaining about your Founder & charity Figurehead's behavior with a youth on campus. A behavior that, AT THE VERY MINIMUM, could be a charge of Indecent Exposure if it were escalated. Your charity has (let's call it what it is) a parasitic relationship with that University and depends on the good will and volunteer base coming from that institution to survive.
Do you really want your childrens' charity to go down the tubes if it was plastered across the papers that your Founder & Figurehead has a habit of "exposing himself to minors"?
No.
Rather than suggesting Jerry wear "swim trunks" the next time - you haul his ass into that conference room and lay into to him THAT THIS IS THE WAY IT'S GONNA BE FROM NOW ON BUDDY.
No One on One contact with TSM kids. No little jaunts to campus after hours for "work out" sessions with TSM minors unless it's an approved TSM group outing with another counselor. No toodling off to a TSM minor's home in the next county without approval thru TSM offices and proper paperwork on file. No individual "sleepovers" with TSM kids. No gifts or football tickets to TSM kids, unless they are arranged thru TSM offices. No personal contact with a TSM kid on the phone, email or in person unless it's via approved TSM channels and for approved TSM programming. No TSM youths monkeying around on equipment designed for elite, adult, college athletes.
Most importantly - KEEP YOUR CLOTHES ON and KEEP YOUR HANDS & LIPS TO YOURSELF.
This is just a few of the things that could have easily been implemented by Dr. Jack Raykovitz to ensure all adults and kids were protected.
Now I have to ask - if Jerry was conducting himself around teen girls this way - NO ONE would declare him innocent. I fail to see why, since these are males, that it's somehow OK. It's not. They are someone else's kids.
Anyone that has ever been sexually groomed, manipulated, had the mind games played on them, the gifts & the money, the secrets & "contracts", the flattery & special attention, etc - plyed to them from a person of status, power & position can understand the dynamics that Jerry was using. These people are good - they cruise along the edge of plausible deniability when people start asking questions and easily spin it onto the weaker individual. In this case, it's at-risk youth from dysfunctional families, how much weaker can you get?
Dr. Raykovitz should have recognized this (potentially) felonious behavior and addressed it. He & a few others had a duty of care to those clients and to keep Jerry on a short leash. Simply blows my mind that these people have skated.
Let's put it this way - you're Raykovitz - and the University is on your doorstep complaining about your Founder & charity Figurehead's behavior with a youth on campus. A behavior that, AT THE VERY MINIMUM, could be a charge of Indecent Exposure if it were escalated. Your charity has (let's call it what it is) a parasitic relationship with that University and depends on the good will and volunteer base coming from that institution to survive.
Do you really want your childrens' charity to go down the tubes if it was plastered across the papers that your Founder & Figurehead has a habit of "exposing himself to minors"?
No.
Rather than suggesting Jerry wear "swim trunks" the next time - you haul his ass into that conference room and lay into to him THAT THIS IS THE WAY IT'S GONNA BE FROM NOW ON BUDDY.
No One on One contact with TSM kids. No little jaunts to campus after hours for "work out" sessions with TSM minors unless it's an approved TSM group outing with another counselor. No toodling off to a TSM minor's home in the next county without approval thru TSM offices and proper paperwork on file. No individual "sleepovers" with TSM kids. No gifts or football tickets to TSM kids, unless they are arranged thru TSM offices. No personal contact with a TSM kid on the phone, email or in person unless it's via approved TSM channels and for approved TSM programming. No TSM youths monkeying around on equipment designed for elite, adult, college athletes.
Most importantly - KEEP YOUR CLOTHES ON and KEEP YOUR HANDS & LIPS TO YOURSELF.
This is just a few of the things that could have easily been implemented by Dr. Jack Raykovitz to ensure all adults and kids were protected.
Now I have to ask - if Jerry was conducting himself around teen girls this way - NO ONE would declare him innocent. I fail to see why, since these are males, that it's somehow OK. It's not. They are someone else's kids.
Anyone that has ever been sexually groomed, manipulated, had the mind games played on them, the gifts & the money, the secrets & "contracts", the flattery & special attention, etc - plyed to them from a person of status, power & position can understand the dynamics that Jerry was using. These people are good - they cruise along the edge of plausible deniability when people start asking questions and easily spin it onto the weaker individual. In this case, it's at-risk youth from dysfunctional families, how much weaker can you get?
Dr. Raykovitz should have recognized this (potentially) felonious behavior and addressed it. He & a few others had a duty of care to those clients and to keep Jerry on a short leash. Simply blows my mind that these people have skated.
One eyewitness is one more than in the Jared Fogle case and he's going to jail.
And the jury did not rule that JS was cleared of all the charges in the case that MM saw, rather only some of the charges. JS was ruled guilty on some others.
Yeah, all 8 testified after Shubin, their lawyer, coerced them for the big Penn State payday.
They did their duty (sarcasm)..."resign Jerry" in 1999 was about it. Modern CYA at it's best. There is plenty of blame to go around without a doubt. TSM, CYS, Investigators....etc. Tons of blame and the PSU BoT did nothing to protect the school or its own interest IMO. They blamed a sport and a coach for all of this mess which is a joke.
The problem around here is some trying to proclaim Jerry's innocence because a mad man yells it a whole bunch and the loudest with no real proof. Saying the victims got paid does not mean they lied or Jerry is innocent. I could see if they had concrete proof 1 or even 2-3 lied to raise an eyebrow, but it simply doesn't exist. Jerry's actions + 8 victims testifying as adults under oath kind of sink that whole ship. No way in hell should anyone affiliated with PSU should be stalking Jerry's victims. It's disgusting and about as low as any human could be IMO. Attack the BoT, TSM, CYS.....etc...they are fair game. Jerry's victims...not so much.
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Penn State WR target Matthew Outten releases top six
- Latest: Crusher1950
-
