I had no idea that Steyn's health and finances were in such a parlous state. The man's been on the sharp end of the culture war for too long, and it's clearly taken its toll.
I am so saddened by what Mark Steyn has gone through. I recommend using GiveSendGo for a fund raiser rather than GoFundMe. GFM is not reputable, especially for people who are not on the left. Please post info ASAP on where to send donations. I want to make one. This is David vs Goliath, and the damage Mann has done is incalculable. He deserves the worst that frauds, cheaters and liars have coming to them. Mark Steyn deserves a medal of honor and our help.
Tragic. Reading the update, it's good to see that Mark Steyn has held on to his great sense of humor.
In a YouTube video, Fr. Chad Ripperger assures us that no one gets away with anything he's done in life. Eternal justice, unlike the farcical system in current-day USA, is uncorruptible.
My wife and I spend quite a bit of time discussing eternal justice for Fraudci, Bourla, et al. While I have no doubt of it, it’s difficult to watch them seemingly thrive and prosper in this life, while inflicting such suffering on others.
Thank you for writing this. Mann’s legal fees most likely are being paid by someone... who needs the climate hoax to proceed because the hoax will pay them richly down the road.
Thank you for alerting us to Mr. Steyn's predicaments. It doesn't seem possible. I considered subscribing to his interweb site; but as much as I love the guy, I wouldn't pay $40.00 a month to listen to me talk. God bless him and for all the joy he has given us. It's not unreasonable to compare his situation with that of the world's bravest journalist: Julian Assange.
Imagine a world where the government boot is constantly pressing down on your mouth and you can actually see the drying horse shit on the cleats as they come down.
The corruption of Penn State is not that Sandusky was a serial pedophile, but that he wasn't. I got this wrong at the time myself. It was such a convenient narrative: University allows dirty old man to abuse kids while it stays silent.
The certain truth is the University president and athletic director and coach Paterno did nothing wrong. Yet they were railroaded by a corrupt legal system and mob opinion. The plausible truth is Sandusky is innocent of sexual abuse. He most certainly is a victim of bad legal representation and of a biased judicial system that deliberately manipulated testimony to produce the desired narrative.
John Ziegler researched the Penn State Sandusky story and provides ample evidence of the subterfuge. There was a coverup but it was to scapegoat innocent men because the university was too lazy to defend them against hyper-political prosecutors. Read Ziegler's story here: http://www.framingpaterno.com/interviews
The Sandusky parallel to Mann's Hockey Stick is people manipulated evidence, and covered up facts, to produce a desired outcome, and Penn State University was at the center of both corruptions.
Even without the "recovered memory" from the counselors' interviews with the kids, the evidence seems overwhelming.
Some of the undisputed facts seem to be: Third parties--a janitor and another coach saw Sandusky in the shower, alone, with a kid. Sandusky took kids on road-trips, putting them in rooms adjoining his, or sharing rooms. He had the kids over, in groups and individually, to his house for sleepovers and longer stays. He "wrestled" with them. He tickled them. He took showers with them. He took them swimming. He showered favored ones with gifts. He sent "love letters" to at least one. Paterno, and others, knew that Sandusky spent inordinate time with young boys. And more.
The rebuttals to these facts are that stories have changed over time (the coach who saw Sandusky in the shower with a kid), there were innocent explanations for all these facts.
But, when viewed in totality, it seems the weight of those facts is an overwhelming circumstantial case that Sandusky DID groom boys for his own pedophilia use. Like many such cases, he hid in plain sight. The doctor for the girls' Olympic gymnast team seems quite similar. For years, he had his way with the girls, with everyone sort of aware, but no one said anything.
It looks like the "recovered memory" counselors piled on, probably with the aim of strengthening their clients' cases for civil suits--which they seem to have all won.
Penn State surely was not victimized here. Just as with their "investigation" of Michael Mann, it appears that truth and facts did not matter. Their focus appears to have been protecting the goose that laid the golden eggs--their football program, and St Paterno, and then later St Michael Mann and his grant-machine.
The two internal "investigations" appear to be from the same cloth.
Was every accusation dredged up by the "recovered memory" counselors accurate? Probably not. But the case for Sandusky being a serial groomer of young boys, using the football aura as candy to lure them in, seems undeniable. Just like the case for Mann being a fraud.
Overwhelming concern about Sandusky and his opportunity to commit sexual crimes does not mean he did commit crimes. What is factual is prosecutors and investigators failed to clinch their case against Sandusky until they resorted to very questionable tactics. The state will say they had to lie and deceive and misdirect in order to convict a serial pedophile! That is not how justice is supposed to work.
I find it interesting that you write about the concern of Sandusky"grooming" his victims. Fair enough. But we also know that those intent on convicting Sandusky exhausted considerable effort to "groom" witnesses against Sandusky. If "grooming" is known to make a person receptacle to agree to certain beliefs, why do we allow the state to "groom" witnesses? How is that fair justice?
We do not know if Sandusky never committed sexual abuse. What we do know is most of the allegations against him are fantastical. There are only a couple of reports that involve credible witnesses. In the instance of the shower encounters we have very credible evidence they both were innocent, non threatening, non sexual events.
That all said, the entirety of pinning blame on Penn State and saving the case against Sandusky rests on lies associated with McQueary's "locker room shower" testimony. Observe that many of these lies were created by the prosecution and not by McQueary. These lies include the narrative of when the incident occurred, what was observed and the urgency of action based on what was seen. Based on these deliberate and intentional lies, good, honest people were impugned and had their reputations smeared.
This ought to bother anyone who values integrity and fairness. If you feel differently about Penn State's culpability, please show what they knew, when they knew it and what they morally should have done about it. Bear in mind that if what Paterno was told in 2001 was weeks after the incident (not the next day) and involved questions of "horse play" (not actual sex) what is the proper the course of action?
Given: the "recovered memory" counselors introduce a twist into the evidence against Sandusky.
That does not erase all the other circumstantial and eyewitness evidence against Sandusky. Even if the victims' stories are not exact, there's plenty of evidence that Sandusky ran a grooming operation that fed him with a constant supply of young boys.
The claims that "the shower encounters...were innocent, non threatening, non sexual events" are just hilarious.
A 40-50 year old professional man does NOT lure 12 year old boys to his prestigious place of work to get naked and "rough-house", "slap box" or snap towels alone in the shower at night with no one else around. All the justifications of Sandusky growing up acting like that are nonsense and irrelevant. He was a grown man, a professional, NOT a 12 year old.
All the other justifications for Sandusky initiating physical contact are likewise hilarious and ignorant--"back-cracking," "massages," and all the other euphemisms the Sandusky supporters use for his ruses to get his hands on pre-pubescent boys. No, none of those are normal, or innocent.
In fact, the Sandusky-is-innocent crowd ignores or over-looks hugely relevant facts. Another such fact is that Sandusky's role in the troubled-boy-charity was officially as a fund-raiser. He had NO authorization, nor need for one-on-one contact with the boys who were beneficiaries of the charity. It seems the head of the charity simply ignored Sandusky's grooming/abuse operation. Again, the abuser enabled by the power of celebrity.
Sandusky's actions were nearly identical to numerous other perverts--using his position and fame, access to money, trips, football games, the locker-room, players, Paterno, the whole celebrity mystique. They target needy or star-struck juveniles, using their power like candy--to attract and then control the kids. It's very clear what they're up to. Once the victims are in, the pervert continues to control them--by providing the "candy," whether it's trip to bowl games, bit parts in movies, access to other celebrities, money, or any other "candy." All the same.
Nearly exact MO by other perverts: Michael Jackson, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Bryan Singer, and many, many others. Not all of them are convicted or even face trial. But the MO is obvious and common.
I had no idea that Steyn's health and finances were in such a parlous state. The man's been on the sharp end of the culture war for too long, and it's clearly taken its toll.
I am so saddened by what Mark Steyn has gone through. I recommend using GiveSendGo for a fund raiser rather than GoFundMe. GFM is not reputable, especially for people who are not on the left. Please post info ASAP on where to send donations. I want to make one. This is David vs Goliath, and the damage Mann has done is incalculable. He deserves the worst that frauds, cheaters and liars have coming to them. Mark Steyn deserves a medal of honor and our help.
+++
I second this motion. I'll donate to something reputable that provides him with money directly.
Tragic. Reading the update, it's good to see that Mark Steyn has held on to his great sense of humor.
In a YouTube video, Fr. Chad Ripperger assures us that no one gets away with anything he's done in life. Eternal justice, unlike the farcical system in current-day USA, is uncorruptible.
My wife and I spend quite a bit of time discussing eternal justice for Fraudci, Bourla, et al. While I have no doubt of it, it’s difficult to watch them seemingly thrive and prosper in this life, while inflicting such suffering on others.
Thank you for writing this. Mann’s legal fees most likely are being paid by someone... who needs the climate hoax to proceed because the hoax will pay them richly down the road.
Huh? It already does.... Mann is already living that gravy train
Thank you for alerting us to Mr. Steyn's predicaments. It doesn't seem possible. I considered subscribing to his interweb site; but as much as I love the guy, I wouldn't pay $40.00 a month to listen to me talk. God bless him and for all the joy he has given us. It's not unreasonable to compare his situation with that of the world's bravest journalist: Julian Assange.
Imagine a world where the government boot is constantly pressing down on your mouth and you can actually see the drying horse shit on the cleats as they come down.
For those who might not have the link to his site:
https://www.steynonline.com
Gofundme? Givesendgo please
You did that sober?
That’s inspirational
If you outspokenly mistrust The Science™ it will come and mess you up legally. I second this motion to help in any way possible with legal fees.
The corruption of Penn State is not that Sandusky was a serial pedophile, but that he wasn't. I got this wrong at the time myself. It was such a convenient narrative: University allows dirty old man to abuse kids while it stays silent.
The certain truth is the University president and athletic director and coach Paterno did nothing wrong. Yet they were railroaded by a corrupt legal system and mob opinion. The plausible truth is Sandusky is innocent of sexual abuse. He most certainly is a victim of bad legal representation and of a biased judicial system that deliberately manipulated testimony to produce the desired narrative.
John Ziegler researched the Penn State Sandusky story and provides ample evidence of the subterfuge. There was a coverup but it was to scapegoat innocent men because the university was too lazy to defend them against hyper-political prosecutors. Read Ziegler's story here: http://www.framingpaterno.com/interviews
The Sandusky parallel to Mann's Hockey Stick is people manipulated evidence, and covered up facts, to produce a desired outcome, and Penn State University was at the center of both corruptions.
Even without the "recovered memory" from the counselors' interviews with the kids, the evidence seems overwhelming.
Some of the undisputed facts seem to be: Third parties--a janitor and another coach saw Sandusky in the shower, alone, with a kid. Sandusky took kids on road-trips, putting them in rooms adjoining his, or sharing rooms. He had the kids over, in groups and individually, to his house for sleepovers and longer stays. He "wrestled" with them. He tickled them. He took showers with them. He took them swimming. He showered favored ones with gifts. He sent "love letters" to at least one. Paterno, and others, knew that Sandusky spent inordinate time with young boys. And more.
The rebuttals to these facts are that stories have changed over time (the coach who saw Sandusky in the shower with a kid), there were innocent explanations for all these facts.
But, when viewed in totality, it seems the weight of those facts is an overwhelming circumstantial case that Sandusky DID groom boys for his own pedophilia use. Like many such cases, he hid in plain sight. The doctor for the girls' Olympic gymnast team seems quite similar. For years, he had his way with the girls, with everyone sort of aware, but no one said anything.
It looks like the "recovered memory" counselors piled on, probably with the aim of strengthening their clients' cases for civil suits--which they seem to have all won.
Penn State surely was not victimized here. Just as with their "investigation" of Michael Mann, it appears that truth and facts did not matter. Their focus appears to have been protecting the goose that laid the golden eggs--their football program, and St Paterno, and then later St Michael Mann and his grant-machine.
The two internal "investigations" appear to be from the same cloth.
Was every accusation dredged up by the "recovered memory" counselors accurate? Probably not. But the case for Sandusky being a serial groomer of young boys, using the football aura as candy to lure them in, seems undeniable. Just like the case for Mann being a fraud.
Kent,
Overwhelming concern about Sandusky and his opportunity to commit sexual crimes does not mean he did commit crimes. What is factual is prosecutors and investigators failed to clinch their case against Sandusky until they resorted to very questionable tactics. The state will say they had to lie and deceive and misdirect in order to convict a serial pedophile! That is not how justice is supposed to work.
I find it interesting that you write about the concern of Sandusky"grooming" his victims. Fair enough. But we also know that those intent on convicting Sandusky exhausted considerable effort to "groom" witnesses against Sandusky. If "grooming" is known to make a person receptacle to agree to certain beliefs, why do we allow the state to "groom" witnesses? How is that fair justice?
We do not know if Sandusky never committed sexual abuse. What we do know is most of the allegations against him are fantastical. There are only a couple of reports that involve credible witnesses. In the instance of the shower encounters we have very credible evidence they both were innocent, non threatening, non sexual events.
That all said, the entirety of pinning blame on Penn State and saving the case against Sandusky rests on lies associated with McQueary's "locker room shower" testimony. Observe that many of these lies were created by the prosecution and not by McQueary. These lies include the narrative of when the incident occurred, what was observed and the urgency of action based on what was seen. Based on these deliberate and intentional lies, good, honest people were impugned and had their reputations smeared.
This ought to bother anyone who values integrity and fairness. If you feel differently about Penn State's culpability, please show what they knew, when they knew it and what they morally should have done about it. Bear in mind that if what Paterno was told in 2001 was weeks after the incident (not the next day) and involved questions of "horse play" (not actual sex) what is the proper the course of action?
Given: the "recovered memory" counselors introduce a twist into the evidence against Sandusky.
That does not erase all the other circumstantial and eyewitness evidence against Sandusky. Even if the victims' stories are not exact, there's plenty of evidence that Sandusky ran a grooming operation that fed him with a constant supply of young boys.
The claims that "the shower encounters...were innocent, non threatening, non sexual events" are just hilarious.
A 40-50 year old professional man does NOT lure 12 year old boys to his prestigious place of work to get naked and "rough-house", "slap box" or snap towels alone in the shower at night with no one else around. All the justifications of Sandusky growing up acting like that are nonsense and irrelevant. He was a grown man, a professional, NOT a 12 year old.
All the other justifications for Sandusky initiating physical contact are likewise hilarious and ignorant--"back-cracking," "massages," and all the other euphemisms the Sandusky supporters use for his ruses to get his hands on pre-pubescent boys. No, none of those are normal, or innocent.
In fact, the Sandusky-is-innocent crowd ignores or over-looks hugely relevant facts. Another such fact is that Sandusky's role in the troubled-boy-charity was officially as a fund-raiser. He had NO authorization, nor need for one-on-one contact with the boys who were beneficiaries of the charity. It seems the head of the charity simply ignored Sandusky's grooming/abuse operation. Again, the abuser enabled by the power of celebrity.
Sandusky's actions were nearly identical to numerous other perverts--using his position and fame, access to money, trips, football games, the locker-room, players, Paterno, the whole celebrity mystique. They target needy or star-struck juveniles, using their power like candy--to attract and then control the kids. It's very clear what they're up to. Once the victims are in, the pervert continues to control them--by providing the "candy," whether it's trip to bowl games, bit parts in movies, access to other celebrities, money, or any other "candy." All the same.
Nearly exact MO by other perverts: Michael Jackson, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Bryan Singer, and many, many others. Not all of them are convicted or even face trial. But the MO is obvious and common.