- Aug 13, 2009
- 12,854
- 2
- 0
gree0232 said:--------
You make more claims. So Pound was involved in some kind of smear campaign. Any evidence beyond the voices in your head?
gree0232 said:--------
Race Radio said:You make more claims. So Pound was involved in some kind of smear campaign. Any evidence beyond the voices in your head?
gree0232 said:----
gree0232 said:Well, this is the point that it becomes farsical. Unable to beat the logic, we come up with some minor bit of minutia that would be very easy to clarify if we simply asked a question: Are you saying that **** POund personally leaked the entire 1999 smear campign?
No.
Do I think he was involved in the process? You bet.
Pretty easy to clarify now isn't it?
Now, if we could move back into something that looks like a mature discussion rather than emotional blather and accussation, it would be appreciated by all.
rhubroma said:Sounds like Regan and Iran-Contra. Lance sure would make a perfect GOP presidential candidate now wouldn't he...And even as a cyclist his fan base leans heavily toward that side. Who said it was a bad idea to mix sport with politics? To the contrary here it makes a perfect ideological match.
If such a letter of protest comes out officially, count me in to sign it.
Race Radio said:
patricknd said:i hadn't seen the poll on the political leanings of armstrong fans. got a link to that?
rhubroma said:No, but it has something to do with the inkling I've gotten from reading his supporters on this forum, and comparing their sport thinking with a cerain political thought for which I have a natural aversion. Like having antibodies against a disease.
Then there would be Armstrong's own friendship with Bush and hence his republican affiliation. There has always been a right-wing way about the man: he's a bully, acts with nonchalant prepotency, is extremely ruthless, sees things in black and white, and so forth; which may attract a fan-base that finds these attributes congenial to one's world-view, and hence political bias. I've always thought that we are born right-wing vs. left-wing simply by our personalities and characterial qualities, and don't become right-wing or left-wing. Nature vs. Environment
Mine, though, was simple meant in the spirit of entertainment and irony.
patricknd said:in other words, guessing
cathulu said:Dear Mr. Pat McQuaid
I believe that you are doing a very poor job and need to respond to the open letter posted by the OP and answer all of the points as clearly as possible with back-up documentation that can be viewed and verified. The appearance is one of corruption in the UCI going up to the highest levels - possibly the highest. An outside independent investigation is required in my opinion.
I believe Gree0232 does not represent the majority of cycling opinion - rather a very tiny minority - perhaps a minority of only one. Do not rest easy with Gree0232's endorsement as that would be a mistake.
gree0232 said:Agh, so know we should make leadership a popularity contest, not base it on whether or not the right thing was actually done?
I Watch Cycling In July said:Democracy. You've heard of it? You're so full of specious ****.
I Watch Cycling In July said:In the US, is it cool to satirize war vets around the time of memorial day?
I Watch Cycling In July said:In the US, is it cool to satirize war vets around the time of memorial day?
thehog said:-I want to give you an example, ...
"You mentioned Jose Maria Jiminez, el Chava, who died in 2003 from a heartattack. Was it the drugs that killed him?"
-Of course, like it killed Pantani. The drugs lead you to other addictions. The anti-depressants almost automatically accompany other doping treatments. I took up to 8 pills of prozac a day when I was racing.
"Why"
-Prozac cuts the appetite, keeps you in another world, a world where you're not afraid of what you're doing. You're no longer afraid to inject yourself with all the crap. It takes you to a world where you don't ask any more questions especially you don't ask your doctor questions either or your sporting director. Then there are periods where you must stop doping you feel like superman. Then one day all of the sudden it stops and you become dramatically depressed. Look at Pantani, Vandenbroucke and all the others we don't even talk about. They are numerous other cyclists and former cyclists that are addicted to cocaine, heroin and other medications. It's not just in the world of cycling.
Dr. Maserati said:Dear Pat,
As the cycling community is quite small I have had the opportunity to meet with you over the years. I always admired your enthusiasm for the sport and your extensive knowledge of the sport in general.
Since the revelations made this week by Floyd Landis the sport of cycling and the UCI of which you are President has come under immense scrutiny. The accusations that a positive drug test by Lance Armstrong was ignored in return for a financial settlement is deeply disturbing and a serious charge against the UCI.
In a radio interview on Friday you mentioned that Lance Armstrong had ‘donated’ $100,000 in 2005. You repeated those comments again today at the Giro d'Italia.
It seriously harms the reputation of this great sport that there still remains major discrepancies in your version of events.
At the Play The Game conference in October 2007 you said the $100,000 ‘cash’ came in to our account "in actual fact, about 15 months ago". (Audio here- second clip)
This would be approximately July 2006 - which contradicts todays statements.
More alarmingly - July 2006 is only one month after the publication of the Vrijman report which cleared Mr Armstrong of facing sanction for having EPO in 6 urine samples that were retested in 2005.
With so many discrepancies I believe it is prudent that the UCI subject itself to a full independent financial audit.
I realise that this is a costly and time consuming process but it is one that the UCI must bare if it is to restore its faith in its members and the sporting community.
In a seperate interview today former UCI member Sylvia Schenk said "the UCI was always very proud of its accounts".
This should mean that the UCI should be able to immediately release details of the transaction, UCI booking and machine purchased, before an audit gets underway.
I also believe that you need to consider your position at this point.
In the interest of the sport of cycling, I respectfully suggest you stand down or stand aside while any investigation takes place – as I believe it would effect your ability to carry out the day to day duties of President.
If you feel that you should not stand down or stand aside then it is imperative that you clearly articulate the reasons for not doing so.
It is time to move along and begin the process of rebuilding the trust and credibility of this great sport.
Dr. Maserati said:After todays announcement that Armstrong made 2 donations -not one as McQuaid insisted at the Giro- I think this needs to be reposted.
Either Pat is lying or inept (or both) and that is not the type of President that the UCI needs to look after our sport.
goober said:Both donations were televised with interviews of Lance back when they happened. Pat probably went back and only found the last donation - this is not why he is inept - there are other reasons for that.
goober said:Both donations were televised with interviews of Lance back when they happened. Pat probably went back and only found the last donation - this is not why he is inept - there are other reasons for that.
Race Radio said:Really, then it should be easy for you to come up with a link for the 2002 donation....of did you just make it up?
"To the best of my knowledge, the UCI has not accepted other donations and I'd just like to clarify that there was only one donation from Lance Armstrong not two or three," McQuaid said.
"You have to consider that at the time, in 2002, no accusations against Lance Armstrong had been made. They've all came up since then. We accepted the donation to help develop the sport. We didn't think there's a conflict of interest. It's easy to say in hindsight what could or would have been done. You have to put yourself in the situation at the time."
Ah, no Pat you didn't say that - you made it quite clear in your Giro press conference that it was "one donation"."I said during the Giro d'Italia in May that we were going to investigate and look into the archives to discover exactly what happened. That's what we've done"
...and now you are telling us that the $25,000 (personal check) was paid in May 2002?"It had just opened in April 2002, it was some time after that. They got a guided tour of the centre. They were impressed by what they saw and Armstrong offered $100,000 to help the development of cycling."
Did Hein forget about the $25,000 that Armstrong had just given - and Pat says today that the UCI decided "to use the money for anti-doping tests on juniors, to separate it from Armstrong, because he was racing at the time".....Verbruggen said Armstrong's agent approached the UCI and offered to make a donation for the fight against doping.
"This was discussed by our anti-doping people," Verbruggen said. "They said, 'We can't use this money for doping controls.' Then they said if Lance would agree that we buy a Sysmex for this, then that could be a good idea. I left it there. I have not been busy with it afterwards."