MacRoadie said:
Then next time just say that, and don't try adding some weight to your otherwise pointless argument by blowing some "it's in the Constitution" bull**** up our collective asses.
No, I see your misunderstanding. Instead of saying "makes explicit" it would have been better to use the word "protects", but does not change the point, The constitution is the basis for the law under which we live and that document is made from a list of defined assumptions.
13..... said:
Thanks 13, I really appreciated the papers. I didn't find the 2nd link too useful but the PDFs were good stuff. I think the problem here is that the majority of people are making a gross assumption and it is the one you refer to in your "cliff notes" (above):
Lets rewind:
1) Floyd Landis is a Mennonite or (to be more accurate) grew up in a Mennonite community.
It is fair to a say that Mennoites are conservative
2) Cycling is also conservative. If you don't believe me then you only have to read the way I have been treated here. It is a typical reaction of a conservative community.
3) This being the case then there is a known human behavorial trait in conservative cliques of "silence is acceptance". In other words if you pose a rhetorical question in your conservative clique and no one refutes your statement, then there is a high probability you will take that as an affirmation.
4) Fast forward to today and Mr. Landis is claiming that Dr. Lim "helped him"
Given this and the fact that Mr.Landis has lied convincingly before (that is to say; he is good at it and has reason to benefit from it) then there is a high probability (over 60%) that the facts have been twisted.
In other words it is simple thought experiment to imagine where Mr. Landis has taken silence by Dr. Lim and turned it into "helped".
Given that we are products of our environments this suposition has more probability of being correct then a simple "he's a liar or he is incompetent statement.", (Even though it is attractive to everyone to have such a simple answer).
Things are more complicated then Mr. Landis would have us believe and no, given Dr. Lim's recent history in advancing anti doping, you cannot crucify him based on the assumptions you are being fed by Floyd Landis.
This is what we do know about Dr. Lim
1) He is not incompetent
2) He has been lied to just as well as the rest of us
Me? I want to hear what a jury says.
cheers
w