Sunday, September 25

Philadelphia Inquirer: "(you) Lazy Incompetents Can Go to Hell" Walter Uhler

by Barry Bozeman 

Walter Uhler had been one of the most prolific and dedicated defenders of his Alma Mater until his website was hacked about a year ago. His early series on the Penn State situation began in Nov. 2011 and many of his contributions to the FACTS in opposition to media slander are still available archived on OP-ED News and The Smirking Chimp

The Philadelphia Inquirer editorial following the Temple football game activities remembering Joe Paterno is the latest target for Walter Uhler's insightful contempt. The Inquirer claims that PSU "just doesn't get it" when we here at SMSS KNOW TO A CERTAINTY that the Inquirer, along with most of the media nationwide, are the one's who NEVER GOT it then and STILL DON'T GET IT. 

Here is Walter Uhler's letter to the Philadelphia Inquirer sent: Fri, Sep 23, 2016 10:52 am
Subject: Joe Pa Party Insensitive
To the Editor:The first grand jury presentment in the Sandusky scandal was leaked on 5 November 2011. As an intentionally inflammatory summary of the grand jury's findings, rather than actual testimony, the presentment falsely asserted that Mike McQueary "saw a naked boy... being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky" In fact, McQueary told the grand jury no such thing. Neither did he tell the grand jury that he told Joe Paterno and, subsequently, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz that he witnessed anal intercourse. In fact, the author of the presentment lied in order to inflame public outrage. 
One merely needs to look at McQueary's actual testimony to detect these lies. Nevertheless, the Inquirer fell for the bait when, on 4 December 2011, it castigated Penn State officials for "their dismissal of the reported rape." 
The Inquirer was similarly (and mistakenly) outraged when Louis Freeh issued his report and outrageously concluded that Joe Paterno was part of a cover-up. Outrageously? Yes! On  4 September 2013, former Sandusky prosecutor Frank Fina asserted:  “I do not” believe Coach Paterno was a part of the conspiracy to conceal -- to cover-up the crimes at Penn State by Jerry Sandusky. “And, I’m viewing this strictly on the evidence, not any kind of fealty to anybody. I did not find that evidence.” 

Finally, without any investigation of the allegation, in July of this year the Inquirer reported: "A man who claimed that he told Joe Paterno in 1976 that Jerry Sandusky abused him in a Pennsylvania State University locker room shower testified under oath that the iconic head coach brushed off the complaint, saying he had a football season to worry about". Had the people at the Inquirer given that allegation a moment's thought, they would have found it strange that Sandusky -- who was known to first groom his victims and then assault them when they were alone --supposedly assaulted the boy in a shower occupied by other kids. Had the people at the Inquirer given the matter a serious look, they would have found, as did Jay Paterno, that summer campers did not shower with coaches in 1976, but in their private dormitories.   
These false assertions have unjustly cast a cloud over an honorable man -- the only man who acted on McQueary's allegations. Knowing that these false assertions have been swallowed by an ignorant public and complicit press, I proudly participated in the honoring  of Joe Paterno last Saturday at Beaver Stadium. My celebration of Paterno was, in part, a demonstration of the unforgiving contempt I feel for both that uninformed public and lazy, complicit press -- freshly exemplified  today in your editorial today, titled "Joe Pa party insensitive," 
You lazy incompetents at the Inquirer can go to Hell! 
Walter C. Uhler* see bio below

In order to deny the Philadelphia any clicks and visits here is the editorial in full: 

Penn State celebration of Joe Paternoshows the university still doesn't get it

Despite everything that has happened in the five years since Penn State University was rocked by the Jerry Sandusky child molestation scandal, the university's leadership still does not get it.
Penn State used last weekend's football game against Temple to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Joe Paterno's first game as head coach. Celebrating a coach accused of turning a blind eye to accusations that one of his top assistants sexually abused boys on campus is wrong on many levels.
The underlying message is that football remains king at Penn State. More to the point, making money off of football apparently trumps teaching students about character, honesty, responsibility, and standing up for what is right.
No doubt Penn State would like to erase the sordid Sandusky scandal from its history. But choosing now to celebrate is no way for the university to try to move forward. The fact that the university downplayed its announcement of plans to honor Paterno shows officials knew the ceremony was a bad idea.
There is no denying that Paterno was a great football coach who had a lasting impact on many of his players. Indeed, he gave back to the university and helped put Penn State on the map. But evidence indicates Paterno also failed to stand up for boys who were sexually abused by Sandusky.
What Paterno knew and when he knew it is still being debated in courts and in the court of public opinion. According to recently unsealed court documents, a man testified in 2014 that Paterno ignored his complaints of being assaulted by Sandusky in 1976, when the man was a 14-year-old boy.
The same court documents include allegations by other victims who said Penn State football coaches and officials were made aware of Sandusky's deviant behavior around boys in the 1980s and 1990s.
The first time law enforcement was officially notified of Sandusky's abuse occurred in 1998, when a mother reported to Penn State police that her 11-year-old son had showered with the coach.
Paterno testified in 2011 that he first became aware of Sandusky's abuse in 2001, when former assistant coach Mike McQueary told him he had witnessed Sandusky assaulting a boy in a shower. Paterno said he reported McQueary's allegation to Penn State's athletic director.
But another decade passed before Sandusky was arrested. He was convicted in June 2012 of sexually abusing 10 boys and sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison. Paterno died six months earlier.
Eventually, Penn State paid nearly $93 million in settlements to more than 30 of Sandusky's accusers. Most of the sanctions subsequently ordered by the NCAA have been rolled back. More than 200 former football players have petitioned the university to return a bronze statue of Paterno that was removed from outside the stadium in 2012.
It all seems part of an effort to whitewash the scandal and get back to the business of football and myth making.
How much Paterno knew about Sandusky's abuse of boys isn't clear. But shortly before he died, the coach himself admitted: "In hindsight, I wish I had done more." That's a feeble response not worth celebrating.
Anyone who has followed the work of the FREEHdom Fighters and SMSS should be angered and appalled by the complete journalistic incompetence displayed here. Ray Blehar and the SMSS contributors have handed the media complete detailed FACTUAL information that demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt the TRUTH. The Philly Inquirer and almost all of the Pennsylvania media are guilty of gross incompetence and neglect. They have allowed the truly guilty parties, PA state agencies for child protection, The Second Mile Charity directors and board members, Gov. Tom Corbett, and AG Linda Kelly aided and abetted by The PSU Board of Trustee's and particularly acting chairman John Surma, to get away with blaming the wrong parties and allowing the guilty to escape unnoticed. 

When we discovered the evidence of how the Surma brothers, Vic and John, came to blame Joe Paterno for the situation concerning Vic Surma's son Victor B. Surma in The Surma Vendetta and The Surma Vendetta Part II, we knew why John Surma and Corbett orchestrated the removal of Joe and PSU President Graham Spanier. Those two men were PSU's best hope for exposing the LIES in AG Linda Kelly's Presentment. But Joe was fired by phone after an "emergency" meeting that was no emergency without debate or discussion. That move by the BOT signaled to the media that Joe and the administrators must be the guilty parties. The two people best positioned to defend Penn State were sidelined and it all went downhill from that point. 

At one time I was hopeful the TRUTH would surface and alter the narrative in a sweeping vindication of Penn State, Joe Paterno, Graham Spanier, Tim Curley, and Gary Schultz. It seemed quite possible with all the evidence we amassed here on SMSS, that Louis Freeh would be exposed as the fraud he is, and the guilty parties at The Second Mile and in the PA agencies for child protection would be revealed. The events earlier this year have dampened that hope but I am still not completely convinced that this will never turn around. 

Now more than ever we need people like Walter Uhler to continue the fight for Truth. Since it seems clear that the new PA Attorney General is not inclined to dismiss the absurd charges against Dr. Spanier, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, we may yet see a courtroom situation that could expose the TRUTH to a wider audience. My fervent hope is that Louis Freeh and the people who paid him to help destroy Penn State's reputation by manufacturing his bogus 'case', will be exposed and made to pay dearly for his calculated attack based on personal prejudice and greed. 

Until then Keep the Faith - this Penn State outsider remains convinced of Penn State's innocence and Freeh & Corbett's guilt. 

My warmest regards to all of you.   

Walter Uhler served as a senior executive in the Department of Defense. He also is an independent scholar who, for three years, served as President of the Russian-American International Studies Association, which holds an annual conference of Russia scholars in St. Petersburg, Russia.  He has written about defense issues and Russian history for numerous periodicals, including 
The Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Moscow Times, and the Philadelphia Inquirer .  His biography still is included in the 2012 edition of Who's Who in America.  Walter earned 2 BA and 1 MA from Penn State. 


  1. Freeh's report was actually not about Penn State but about himself as FBI Director. The FBI, during the 1990s (Freeh was Director from 1993 to 2001) wrote off physical evidence of forcible sodomy of a child to an "auto accident" and failed to interview the victim even though he might have known about other victims.

    FBI agent Jane Turner brought her concerns about this to Mr. Freeh personally only to suffer career-ending retaliation, of which the FBI was later found guilty by a court, and ordered to pay her compensation.

    1. William,
      Yes, the world and this country have suffered untold damage at the hands of psychopath Louis Freeh. I find it to be truly astonishing that a man that is obviously severely mentally ill is given "freeh" rein by our government to continue hurting this country with his terrorism.

      I think that the Jane Turner angle may turn out to be a very powerful tool to finally expose the crimes and deception of Louis Freeh. At least, as it pertains to his damage inflicted on Paterno and PSU. Rodney Erickson was warned directly with Jane Turner's whistleblower letter about Freeh's known pattern of protecting the guilty in cases of institutional child abuse. I don't think Freeh had been hired yet as the "independent" investigator of Sandusky's child abuse. And Ms. Turner was trying to warn a college president (Erickson) whom she wrongly assumed cared about protecting children and the university. With Freeh's documented cover-ups of child sex abuse, there should have been no doubt that hiring Freeh would hurt children and the university. So Erickson is personally liable for the enormous damage that Freeh has done to the Paternos, the University, the PSU three, and to Sandusky's child victims.

      Maybe Ms. Turner can be persuaded to go on a show like Costas Tonight with Ray Blehar and talk about this.

  2. I think there is still hope that the truth will be exposed. There will be a new Attorney General in January, the fifth since Curley and Schultz were charged. He may have a different view of the criminal charges against CSS.

    The Oct. trial of Mike McQueary could end the CSS criminal case if McQueary is caught in a lie(s). All it would take would be one photo of him at a Second Mile event after the 2001 shower incident. Penn State requested 35 subpoenas so it seems they will mount a vigorous defense.

    The Paterno estate v. NCAA lawsuit could also be a game changer. Neither the NCAA, Big Ten or Penn State want their big wigs giving embarrassing testimony and explaining all their damning emails. I think a likely outcome is for the NCAA to settle and blame Louis Freeh for misleading them. Freeh recently admitted in court that the Freeh Report was just his opinions, not facts based on evidence as he originally claimed. That makes the Freeh Report little more than one of the hatchet job commentaries by the Philadelphia Inquirer.

  3. I find it interesting that those who are closest to the case, whether they respected Paterno (Schultz), disliked Paterno (Sandusky), worked for Paterno (McQueary), employed Paterno (Curley, Spanier) or investigated Paterno (Fina) are united in their agreement that Paterno did not conspire to look the other way.

  4. I don't know if I would call these journalists 'lazy incompetents'. They appear to actively disseminate information in this case with no regard for the truth. They go out of their way to inflame folks to look upon PSU in a negative light and they take sordid pleasure in doing so. And their 'followers' go along with their methods sometimes as a result of the underlying coercion but more often as willing participants in the intended degradation. Apparently it's fun to do this.

    Reactions such as Walter's are exactly what they're looking for. That is actually a reward to these 'bashers'. Then they get to say that Penn Staters 'just don't get it' and they'll use Walter's letter as evidence of just that. And the cycle repeats over and over. It is the new America. Internet driven character assassination. Hate your neighbor in total anonymity with no fear of retribution (for most anyways). It is more 'cowardly indifference' and 'blatant malice' than 'lazy incompetence'. For shame.

    1. Philip,
      Well-said. I agree that these "journalists" are not just lazy incompetents. It's a deliberate form of cyber-bullying whether it be anonymous or otherwise. The desired result is to further hurt and harass those that have been falsely accused by corrupt MSM.

      Leaders are afraid to lead anymore. There will be no end to this strife until a true leader steps up and tells the truth about Paterno, Penn State, Jerry Sandusky and his organization, The Second Mile.

      Obama is supposed to be our leader, but his apathy for all of this media-incited division of our country is telling. Any other president in our history, except Georgy Jr., would have stepped up and said, "enough!". It certainly isn't that hard to propose or initiate laws that would punish the MSM for publishing falsehoods about good people, or even representing staged events as reality.

      I can't believe that Obama is just naturally this apathetic about all of this strife and division the MSM is creating amongst us. I find it more probable that he is playing the part of the clandestine "quasi-Muslim" that we're all supposed to hate and blame for America's ever-increasing state of agitation and division. And two lunatics, Hillary and Trump are supposed to be our choices for the fix? They're all on the same team--George Jr., O-mama, Hitlery, and Donald Dump--they're all out of their minds and are part of the criminal cabal that is destroying this country. Does anyone else find it strange that Trump was all over the mainstream media during 9/11 and now he's running for president? Didn't Trump say he was good friends with Larry Silverstein? Silverstein was the owner of the World Trade Center buildings that took out a multi-billion dollar terrorism insurance policy on the buildings just before the "attacks". MSM portrays Silverstein as "Lucky Larry" because he happened to skip work at his buildings on the day the planes hit. And MSM gave Trump tons of ground zero coverage like he's an honest American businessman that was deeply concerned for his investments at ground zero---sheesh! And now, fittingly, MSM gives Trump air time for his farcical campaign to become our new "leader". The election is a farce, there is only the illusion of choice. Trump and Hillary are part of the crime of the millennium against America!

    2. TS: It's not so much that leaders fail to lead as it is that honest folks are being driven out of leadership positions. Your indictment of our current presidential choices is an example of this. Running for office is fraught with risk of degradation at the hands of your political enemies. This attracts the worst choices for political office as honest folks don't have the temperament for this. Every election has new lows. In this election we find candidates not only degrading each other, but now they insult any voter who would vote for the 'other guy'. Name calling and slandering large classes of Americans are no longer out-of-bounds.

      Obama's handling of the recent riots in Charlotte is yet another harbinger of where we are headed as a nation. As an African-American in a position of leadership such as he has, you would think he would find it conducive to American interests to call upon the Charlotte citizenry to stop the violence and looting and call for a peaceful resolution. A television appearance by a leader of his swagger would go a long way to end the turmoil. Instead he remained silent and had his AG, Loretta Lynch, essentially validate the BLM movement over an incident that was obviously not even racially motivated. It turns out that many of the black communities in Charlotte were not as incensed over the shooting as we were led to believe as evidenced by their showing appreciation to the police after the NFL game there this past Sunday. It turns out that most of the 'protesters' causing trouble were bussed in from other cities. The Charlotte residents know the police are there to protect them and don't want to lose those services. So what is going on there? One can only imagine. Everything may not be what it seems.

    3. Philip,
      You make a lot of good points here. Especially your point about honest folks being driven off by their refusal to participate in the lying, the slander, and outright hatred expressed by Trump towards various ethnic groups.

      It's very clear that Trump and Hillary are actors, they are not behaving in a genuine manner. We have only to look at our daily interactions with family, friends, and co-workers to know Trump, Hillary and Obama are not expressing genuine reactions or emotions. That's why I believe their task is to create division and chaos among the people. The amount of fake protests, fake shootings, fake bombings, and fake riots are getting ridiculous. They are all clearly racially tinged and/or anti-cop and anti-Muslim. We are all being manipulated by criminal MSM working with Hillary, Trump and Obama. Make no mistake, the objective is to agitate the public to the degree that riots will begin to break out with ever-increasing numbers of people and ever-increasing violence. This will then give our criminal "Big Brother" the excuse to begin getting violent with all of us, which may possibly lead to martial law. And also make no mistake, this will be to control and intimidate us. The enormous crimes committed against us by our own government and MSM will be protected by these criminals using our societal unrest as an excuse to hold us at gunpoint.

      The FBI, FEMA, DHS, MSM and the CIA are provoking our anger and misdirecting it with every available resource at their disposal. It's imperative that we all realize what is happening and to not get sucked into it. As you say Philip, people are being bused in as instigators to try and create large-scale violence. If we all begin to turn on each other, these corrupt government agencies will then have full control of us with militarized deadly force.

      Be aware, be smart, be calm, and above all, walk away from violence. We need each other more than ever in this country--black and white, Hispanic and Muslim, cop and citizen, gay and straight---together we are a peaceful army against the outrageous tyranny of 9/11, fake media events, and the lies of Trump, Obama and Hillary and their sham election.

    4. There is much truth in your indictment of the MSM - but we know the MSM is now in the hands of 5 or 6 conglomerates all bent on profit and less concerned with journalism. Don't know what any President can do with that and it's different now than say 16 years back - maybe shorter.
      Used to be News was pretty much an independent arm of the broadcasters on networks - see Good Night & Good Luck or TRUTH or even Broadcast News for some perspectives. Now with the 24 7 commercialization we get far more time with far less coverage.
      Sure there remains some more independent - mainly magazine - news that is more than decent investigative journalism and at times 60 minutes has some in depth journalism.
      Blogs like this have a niche one subject audience and even without any budget we can do things that commercial media cannot. I'm pretty proud of what Ray has done and what I did to get this ball rolling.
      As the OUTSIDER with no PSU ties it's more difficult for the INQUIRER to say "YOU PENN STATERS JUST DON'T GET IT" to me. But then again I'm nobody - just a guy paying attention who has the time, knows what a presentment is and is NOT - and is willing to write what I believe and say go F#ck Yourself to FBI FREEH and his people.
      That's the attitude that turned up The Surma Vendetta and showed why Surma screwed PSU, Joe, Graham, Tim & Gary. Even when it's hard to believe that spiteful little jerk and his brother would cost their Alma Mater 100 million plus over a nephew/son who failed to live up to their expectations. It had to be Joe's fault right?

      Don't tell me Surma didn't know what he and the board were doing. Joe and Graham were the only guys with the gravitas and standing to put Linda Kelley and her Presentment on trial in the court of Public Opinion. With the BOT behind them I think they weather this storm and through the whole thing where it belonged on TSM and Corbett's State agencies.

      But the media was bound to stay on Joe and PSU once Surma and the Board as much as stood up on ll/9/11 firing Joe and SHOUTING TO THE WORLD - JOE IS GUILTY PSU IS GUILTY. What media person wouldn't run with that on top of a presentment? The only guys who could raise enough doubt to balance that tsunami were Joe and Graham and Surma put them out. What should have happened? The BOT should have gotten their best PR guys with Graham and Joe and held a presser saying the Presentment was CRAP. Sandusky had been gone since 99 and why didn't McQueary or his father call in the cops that night?

      Yes the MSM screwed PSU JOE and GRAHAM but SURMA and the BOT handed it to them

    5. Barry,
      Sorry I didn't respond sooner, only just now saw this post.

      Yes, no doubt this coup against PSU involved the premeditated removal of the two men that could have stood up to it and prevented it. I believe John Surma thinks he's close to being a God on this earth. And his corporate model of putting profit and control over integrity is what his coup against PSU was all about. Removal of the ones with integrity was paramount for the success of John Surma's takeover of PSU. And I totally agree that the Surmas saw this as avenging Victor B's failure to make the grade on the team, and of course ultimately his tragic and untimely death in New York.

      Unfortunately, wealthy, powerful men such as John Surma too often look for scapegoats to be destroyed for any perceived failures of the child members of their immediate or extended family. But most of the time the child failures or tragic endings in these wealthy families are due to a severe shortcoming in parental love, guidance, nurturing, integrity and leadership by example. And often times esteemed role-models like Joe are expected to take the place of a mostly absentee parental figure within the wealthy but dysfunctional family.

      And so I'm sure the Surmas had an unreasonable and even delusional expectation of Joe as a replacement father-figure. To them, in a thought process of denial, not working a miracle with Victor meant Joe didn't like him or his family. When in reality, Joe was a coach that cared about everyone and made coaching decisions with integrity.

      If Victor could see the enormous damage that his family has done to PSU, the Paternos, and the entire community, I believe he would want it to be healed with an apology. But this would take the kind of courage, honesty and genuine love that Victor, perhaps, had been searching for.

      Oh, and yes, you and Ray should both be very proud of this blog. It's given us a chance to talk about, and thus expose, all of this dishonesty and deception about Paterno and PSU.

      I firmly believe these unethical people that have done this damage will be accurately recorded in history for what they are---without conscience.

  5. Larry Silverstein was not the owner of the WTC. He was one of a consortium of investors who held a 99 year lease. disputes much of the myth about Larry Silverstein and WTC insurance coverage.

    Maybe Ray should submit "Joe Paterno conspired to coverup for child abuser Jerry Sandusky" to Snopes. They look at the evidence unlike the MSM.

    1. Tim,
      Thanks for the correction of terminology I used in calling Larry Silverstein the owner of the WTC buildings. The sight where I got my information( says:

      "The WTC complex came under the control of a private owner for the first time only in mid-2001, having been built and managed as a public resource. The complex was leased to a partnership of Silverstein Properties and Westfield America. The new controllers acquired a handsome insurance policy for the complex including a clause that would prove extremely valuable: In the event of a terrorist attack, the partnership could collect the insured value of the property and be released from their obligations under the 99-year lease".

      So regardless of the terminology used to describe Larry Silverstein's relationship to the WTC buildings, (owner, controller, 99-year lease holder), he profited enormously from the so-called fortuitous attacks. In fact, the attacks occurred only six weeks after the special terrorist clause was written into his policy for the asbestos-laden buildings. Hmmmm, grand scale insurance fraud with an assist from the industrial/military complex to stoke their war industry? Sounds like a win/win for everybody but those murdered in the controlled demolition and those killed in wars fighting the wrong terrorists overseas. Come on Tim, We are nothing but cannon fodder for these "businessmen".

      The light of truth will shine on the controlled demolition of the WTC. Just as it will shine on the controlled demolition of PSU and the reputations of the men that made it great.

  6. According to Scopes, pre-9-11 almost all insurance policies covered terrorist attacks because they were so rare. It was the exception for a policy to have a terrorist attack exclusion.

    Insurance paid about $500 million for the 1993 WTC terrorism attack. Since WTC had been attacked by terrorists before anyone with a brain would have wanted insurance coverage that protected from terrorism attacks.

    Silverstein just signed the lease a couple of months before 9-11 so of course he would have arranged for insurance at the same time.

    If you want to argue that Freeh concocted a wacky conspiracy theory that Paterno and Penn State administrators covered up for someone they believed was a serial child abuser, then you can't be taken seriously if you promote other wacky conspiracy theories that have been debunked.

    1. Tim,
      Everything about Louis Freeh is a conspiracy---it's his middle name. Interesting how Louis Freeh became the FBI director just 5 months after the 1993 WTC bombing. And interesting how this first bombing would set the expectation for building owners to have "terrorism" insurance.

      Tim, seriously, nothing about the controlled demolition of the WTC buildings has been debunked at all. Just go to the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and begin learning. This is a non-profit group of hundreds, if not thousands, of the best minds in this country on this topic. They are American experts that have proven that our government's 9/11 commission report cannot be true at all.

      Also, why do you say that "of course" Larry Silverstein arranged for terrorism insurance when he signed the lease? I think you are attempting to dismiss the fact that only six weeks later the greatest terrorist destruction of large buildings on American soil just happened to occur at Larry's asbestos-laden towers. And thanks to that 1993 terrorism attack, Larry was inclined to purchase "terrorism" insurance. He got some easy money and got rid of an asbestos problem that would have cost more to remove than the buildings were worth.

      And good-ole Louis Freeh had become the gatekeeper of that 1993 attack so we'd all see it just the way we were supposed to. Yeah, that's the ticket, terrorism insurance. It's a win/win, FBI provides terrorism and rich guys collect insurance, and the war industry thrives!

      It is my hope that even though what I've expressed is quite frightening to some people, they may eventually begin to find courage and leave denial behind. A conspiracy doesn't have to have the word theory attached to it at all. Conspiracies are a reality and can actually exist without being just a theory. You certainly must be aware of that much, right?

      And yes, you know where I stand on the PSU debacle. Freeh was involved and the world still doesn't know the truth because of it. And Freeh is involved in other much bigger conspiracies, wouldn't you say? So what is so 'wacky' about the idea that Freeh could have helped conceal the truth about 9/11? The FBI crime labs were found to have used flawed forensics to convict innocent people under Freeh's leadership. So with expert-testimony coming to light about the flawed scientific explanations of our government's report on the building collapse, where is the wackiness? The wackiness is in the lies Tim, not the truth.

  7. Silverstein was required by his lease to have insurance. If he conspired to destroy the WTC, then why didn't he get more insurance? Scopes says he got the minimum required by his lenders, $3.55 billion. The cost of rebuilding was estimated at $9 billion.

    A WTC conspiracy by Silverstein just seems wacky. We know the WTC plot was years in the planning yet Silverstein just got the WTC lease two months before the attack.

    Freeh wasn't FBI Director on 9-11 so didn't have responsibility for investigating it. The FBI didn't investigate the collapse either. It was done by a team of engineers from the American Society of Civil Engineers and FEMA.

  8. I thought this blog and thread were about Penn State and the Second Mile scandal, not current, non-Penn State politics, other conspiracy theories and other such things.

    1. Jeff,
      Louis Freeh and Jim Clemente, both retired FBI, are both heavily involved in this PSU debacle. So while Ray is away and the blog would invariably become slow, I thought I would deviate a bit and explore these two men's activities outside of their expert "opinions" that have helped shape the PSU narrative. IMO there is a connection and similarity to what Freeh has done to Paterno and what he has done to other innocent people throughout his career. There's a definite pattern that shows his criminality. So I'm trying to show that Freeh, being very dirty in his publicly announced "conclusions", could also be very dirty in his unannounced conclusions. He is the quintessential evidence manipulator. So it's fair to speculate anything that concerns our national security and Louis Freeh is not truthful.

      As for Clemente, I'm only beginning to suspect the motives for his announced conclusions as an expert. His Burke Ramsey media witch-hunt reminds me of Freeh's Paterno witch-hunt. Two retired FBI using MSM, instead of a court to "sentence" someone. The sentence is a ruined life for the wrongly accused without going to court. So I think it's fair to discuss this pattern here because these two men and their backgrounds are very similar.

      Yes, I'll admit that when the "who did 9/11" discussions begin to take off, they go into territory unrelated to the damage done to PSU.

      Out of respect for Ray and the intention of his blog, I will refrain from trying to show the similarity of PSU's destruction and media aftermath to that of the WTC destruction and media aftermath.

    2. Jeff: My intent here was to demonstrate how our perceptions of persecution may be somewhat exaggerated. In my experience, most folks don't have much to say about the PSU situation. Those that do often have a more favorable opinion than we might imagine. Only a vocal minority appear to overwhelm the media with negative perceptions of the university and its community. They appear to take a sordid delight in 'piling on' over this matter and are rather persistent in their methods. Many others are average folks who get caught up in the fervor and are often coerced through various forms of intimidation into joining in the ensuing melee.

      The Charlotte riot incident I mentioned was just another example of such a 'stampede mentality'. They are experiencing a similar misrepresentation of the truth. The media is not showing us the 'other reality' in that situation as well. I was hoping that folks would begin to see that PSU is not the only community with a dog in this fight.

    3. I agree. There has been a lot of "piling on" in the Sandusky Scandal. You'd think CSS and Paterno committed murder as much as they have been vilified by the MSM.

      USA Today reported in Dec. 2011 that there were "Few penalties for keeping child abuse secret" nationwide. They found just 3 cases in PA of failure to report child abuse prior to the CSS charges. The most severe penalty in those 3 cases was a $375 fine.

      The MSM pretty much ignores anything that contradicts their false narrative. There have been only a few local reports about the judge's recent ruling in the Spanier v. Freeh lawsuit that several of Freeh's statements were factual and a jury could determine if they were true (not defamatory) or false (defamatory).

    4. Tim,
      You probably meant to say, "..several of Freeh's statements (MAY BE) factual.." instead of "several of Freeh's statements (WERE) factual". I guess this means the judge is telling us he easily saw that the majority of Freeh's statements against Spanier were pure B.S.

      I think we have all learned that anytime Louis Freeh makes a public statement, it's for money paid to him to defame someone.

      And yes, very typical of the Pennsylvania Mafia-Media and the national Mafia-Media to downplay the judge's ruling on Freeh's statements. Just a little blurb here and there with no in-depth analysis of what this could mean for Louie the Liar. America's MSM media is a disgrace and has basically helped our last 3 lying presidents undermine every good thing this country used to stand for.

    5. I meant what I said. Here's the ruling:

      The judge ruled that several of Freeh's statements "are factual in nature" rather than statements of opinion. Opinions are not defamatory but factual statements can be defamatory if they are false. Whether the factual statements are true or false is a question for the jury.

      One statement that the judge ruled as a factual statement

      "Penn State's most powerful men failed to take any steps for 14 years to protect the children Sandusky victimized."

      I think Spanier will argue that it is false because some steps were taken. In 2001, Sandusky was banned from bringing boys onto campus, and the PhD child psychologist CEO of Sandusky's charity was notified of Sandusky's inappropriate behavior with a boy in the showers.

      Also, during Freeh's 14 year span (1998-2012) all 4 men testified before the Sandusky grand jury.

      I think Freeh greatly exaggerated the time span. It should have been 2001 to 2008 or 7 years. Sandusky was cleared in 1998 by the police, DA and child protection agencies. A victim reported him to police in 2008.

    6. Yes I see what you mean, the judge does seem to be calling some statements factual. But "factual in nature"? "Penn State's most powerful men failed to take any steps for 14 years to protect the children Sandusky victimized" This is Freeh's opinion, he said so already. And this so-called "factual" statement strongly implies that the PSU 3 themselves witnessed victimization and did nothing, which is the whole point of Spanier's lawsuit. So the judge is wrong in calling this statement "factual in nature".

      I suppose a very twisted interpretation of Freeh's "factual in nature" statement can be seen as fact but only because they didn't know of victimization. But because this particular statement by Freeh is within the overall negative context of accusing these men of wrong-doing, it strongly supports the negative conclusion rather than a positive one.

      So Freeh's "factual in nature" statement is an opinion presented by an "expert". And that is were the public is being misled. Because Freeh is an "expert" his opinions are supposed to be factual in nature. It would be akin to saying you Tim are responsible for an SMSS blog reader's injuries because you took no steps to protect them, and you are very powerful. Failed to protect them? According to Freeh, you would have to be omniscient and Spanier, Paterno, Curley and Shultz were all omniscient too.

      Well, in PA a judge's interpretation and ruling seems to be very susceptible to the forces of corruption. The case should be thrown out completely by the judge and denounced as bogus. But this judge must want to give tabloids pennlive and Patriot News some good business for six months.

    7. You seem to be way overthinking it. It's very simple and straightforward.

      Some statements are factual, meaning they can be proven true or false.

      Other statements are opinions and cannot be proven true or false.

      In the example I gave, the judge ruled it was a factual statement so it can be proven true or false. Either CSS "failed to take any steps for 14 years to protect the children Sandusky victimized" or they didn't.

      There is evidence, even in the Freeh Report, that they did take steps so that would make the statement false.
      The judge ruled that the following was opinion:

      "Dr. Spanier fail[ed]... to adequately report and respond to the actions of a serial child predator."

      I think the word "adequately" makes it an opinion because it is a subjective term. Without that one word it would be a factual statement.

    8. Tim,
      Well, wouldn't you agree anything that concerns Louis Freeh's story telling at this point should be looked at with a critical thought process? But some people, for whatever reason, like quick, easy, simple answers to serious questions. "Overthinking" is usually their word for critical thinking. I'm one however that won't accept the advice to not overthink the issue. And especially since 5 years have gone by since the PSU three's lives have been put on hold while we're told to just accept the simple answer: Freeh didn't lie because some of his statements are "factual in nature".

      I thought that "true" was a synonym for fact. And I thought that "false" was a synonym for untruth. Sadly, this is what our unethical legal minds in this country have attempted to do to the truth---make it confusing. They've made the truth out to be subjective and indistinguishable from opinion. But the truth is not confusing at all because it stands unchanging on its own with great authority.

      As Ray has repeatedly shown us, there is a network of corruption in PA (PACORN). This network includes judges that are working to dissuade the public from pursuing the truth. They don't want us to overthink Freeh's conclusions, and they don't want us to overthink their rulings.

      It's been 5 long years for 3 living, breathing innocent men to be assumed guilty without a trial. How can this be here in America?

  9. The judge in Spanier's lawsuit ruled largely in favor of Spanier. Freeh wanted the entire lawsuit tossed but he didn't get that. By identifying several statements that are factual statements and potentially defamatory, the judge moved the case forward and narrowed the focus.

    Some of the statements the judge ruled to be factual statements appear provably false based on evidence in the Freeh Report itself.

    To win the lawsuit as a public figure, Spanier also has to prove actual malice, which in PA law means Freeh knew the statements were false or recklessly disregarded that they were false.

    I think Spanier has good evidence of actual malice because the proof for the falsity of some of the statements is found in the Freeh Report, which cost $8 million and took 8 months to produce.

    As expected, the MSM didn't report any of this because it undermines the false narrative of the Freeh Report.