• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Church of Lance Armstrong In Action

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't mean to post this as entertainment. But this will go onto show how difficult it is to debate with someone who has a blind allegiance to Armstrong and most importantly, his cancer organization. You can read the entire thread on LA's facebook fanpage http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=11425&post=51484&uid=64263459777#post51484. Person of interest is a relentless "Damian Lawler". Said person condemns me to a life in future of cancer and the idea that I would need to fall on LAF's doorpost begging them for help and LA will be the kind one who will save me. I'm shaking my head. I could only conclude that this is an example of celebrity infatuation beyond any reasonable scale. :rolleyes:

Here's a snippet from his emotionally charged statements to me in that thread

"Ron you should be working for the UCI mate because your powers of investigative journalism are outstanding, you could bring pro cycling down in one foul swoop!

It amazes me how you say LA avoids the truth and answering questions however you are just the same. I asked you research cancer treatment and it is quite clear you have not.

Just for your information my sister passed away Monday morning at 10.40am, she was brave and she believed in a cure for cancer till the very end. Cancer is a disease that takes far too many and it is one that LA was lucky enough to survive, and luck is what it was! he then chose to start up the LAF which now assists millions of people world wide in many ways.

Without people such as LA my sister would have given up a long time ago. He offers hope regardless of whether you like him or not. I am a realist and I work with elite athletes, something which you may not by the sounds of your postings? I can attest not all elite athletes dope, none of mine do! I have to believe in something and someone so I "choose" to believe in LA and the LAF as did my sister. She was 32 by the way mate!

Now tell me what did you offer my sister?

IMO and it is only mine and no one elses, you offer nothing! nothing but cynicism, jealousy, envy and sadness and emptyness. All these things are what make you to be the man you currently are. Fear not though Ron, you have time to change. Statistically you may be a cancer sufferer one day, so remember this my friend as you may need to believe one day too and I bet you don't knock back assistance from the LAF in your time of need, and Ron, LA wont deny you it either as he is currently a better man than you!"
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cozy Beehive said:
I don't mean to post this as entertainment. But this will go onto show how difficult it is to debate with someone who has a blind allegiance to Armstrong and most importantly, his cancer organization. You can read the entire thread on LA's facebook fanpage http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=11425&post=51484&uid=64263459777#post51484. Person of interest is a relentless "Damian Lawler". Said person condemns me to a life in future of cancer and the idea that I would need to fall on LAF's doorpost begging them for help and LA will be the kind one who will save me. I'm shaking my head. I could only conclude that this is an example of celebrity infatuation beyond any reasonable scale. :rolleyes:

Here's a snippet from his emotionally charged statements to me in that thread


Thanks for posting. It's a perfect example of how people such as yourself misrepresent an individual.

YOU SAID: Said person condemns me to a life in future of cancer and the idea that I would need to fall on LAF's doorpost begging them for help and LA will be the kind one who will save me

HE SAID: "Statistically" you have a chance of getting cancer.
HE SAID: if you asked for help from the LAF, they would help.
He DID NOT "condemn" you, and he DID NOT say you were "begging"

YOU COMPLETELY MISREPRESENTED THIS DAMIAN LAWLER.

YOU ALSO SAID: I'm shaking my head. I could only conclude that this is an example of celebrity infatuation beyond any reasonable scale. :rolleyes:

- this is a little bit over dramatic on your part, no? The guy is clearly emotional about this. He opened up about his family troubles and then you make a ridiculous conclusion that he is only saying this becoz of a "celebrity infactuation"... you need to learn to treat people with some respect.

- seriously man, not cool on your part. you've embarrassed yourself by putting this stuff up on a new forum. it makes you look like you can't read, nor can you understand how emotional this guy is after losing his family memmber. you quoted him, and then you completely incorrectly 'paraphrased' what he said to suit your agenda. no respect for you whatsover for that.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
And Mountain Goat didn't read the entire debate on facebook. Who is misinterpreting things now? Define 'condemn' and 'faith'. What the hell does the LAF do? They raise awareness, nothing more and chew through cash like there is no tomorrow. The celebrity infatuation line is credible because the original argument was put forward that in an event the poster falls victim to cancer there only hope lies with with LA and the LAF. Mountain Goat have you been drinking egg nog at the Christmas party?
 
Aug 1, 2009
1,038
0
0
Visit site
This is a serious question, since I know nothing about LAF: The guy writes:

"he then chose to start up the LAF which now assists millions of people world wide in many ways."

How exactly do they assist? What do they do? Is it some sort of hospice or nursing help or economical help or...?
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
HL2037 said:
This is a serious question, since I know nothing about LAF: The guy writes:

"he then chose to start up the LAF which now assists millions of people world wide in many ways."

How exactly do they assist? What do they do? Is it some sort of hospice or nursing help or economical help or...?

They raise awareness of Nike, Oakley, and SRAM.

Never question the myth, the groupies don't like it.
 
Mountain Goat said:
Thanks for posting. It's a perfect example of how people such as yourself misrepresent an individual.

YOU SAID: Said person condemns me to a life in future of cancer and the idea that I would need to fall on LAF's doorpost begging them for help and LA will be the kind one who will save me

HE SAID: "Statistically" you have a chance of getting cancer.
HE SAID: if you asked for help from the LAF, they would help.
He DID NOT "condemn" you, and he DID NOT say you were "begging"

YOU COMPLETELY MISREPRESENTED THIS DAMIAN LAWLER.

YOU ALSO SAID: I'm shaking my head. I could only conclude that this is an example of celebrity infatuation beyond any reasonable scale. :rolleyes:

- this is a little bit over dramatic on your part, no? The guy is clearly emotional about this. He opened up about his family troubles and then you make a ridiculous conclusion that he is only saying this becoz of a "celebrity infactuation"... you need to learn to treat people with some respect.

- seriously man, not cool on your part. you've embarrassed yourself by putting this stuff up on a new forum. it makes you look like you can't read, nor can you understand how emotional this guy is after losing his family memmber. you quoted him, and then you completely incorrectly 'paraphrased' what he said to suit your agenda. no respect for you whatsover for that.

Again, please refer to the thread. The quoted person doesn't really appear as friendly as you think and is quick to dismiss people who submitted some rational arguments on the thread as Lance bashers without himself giving a clear argument of why Lance is clean or why the evidence against him is not true.

And what gives him the liberty to calculate some statistic he has in his mind as favorable that I get cancer and that I may "knock back" assistance from LAF, of all things? That was extremely preposterous. And to say that to someone when he's supposedly mourning for a lost family member.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
Mountain Goat said:
- this is a little bit over dramatic on your part, no? The guy is clearly emotional about this. He opened up about his family troubles and then you make a ridiculous conclusion that he is only saying this becoz of a "celebrity infactuation"... you need to learn to treat people with some respect.

- seriously man, not cool on your part. you've embarrassed yourself by putting this stuff up on a new forum. it makes you look like you can't read, nor can you understand how emotional this guy is after losing his family memmber. you quoted him, and then you completely incorrectly 'paraphrased' what he said to suit your agenda. no respect for you whatsover for that.

This summer my college roommate died. He was 37, Married, had a great 3 year old boy. I am glad I was able to visit him before he passed and attend his memorial. He was like a brother.

This weekend my best friend and our wives took a trip up to the San Juan's to celebrate his beating cancer for the 2nd time.

I have have lost friends, family and teammates to the disease. No way am I going to sit by and let Armstrong use the cancer community as his cover. He escapes questioning by taking out the cancer card whenever it becomes unconformable. This is exploitative and disgusting and should be questioned.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Race Radio said:
This summer my college roommate died. He was 37, Married, had a great 3 year old boy. I am glad I was able to visit him before he passed and attend his memorial. He was like a brother.

This weekend my best friend and our wives took a trip up to the San Juan's to celebrate his beating cancer for the 2nd time.

I have have lost friends, family and teammates to the disease. No way am I going to sit by and let Armstrong use the cancer community as his cover. He escapes questioning by taking out the cancer card whenever it becomes unconformable. This is exploitative and disgusting and should be questioned.

I certainly agree that it should be questioned, but my response to the OP was that he put up a big quote from this guy and then completely paraphrased it incorrectly.

My post had nothing to do with Lance Armstrong's intentions for using cancer as his cover, that was not my issue with the OP, and I encourage you to question his authenticity.

However, I have no issue if people use LA as inspiration, which, sounds like this Damian Lawler's family may have done. Hope is everything with cancer, and if someone uses a sporting figure to inspire them, and inspire them only, then i encourage that. Calling it a celebrity infactuation is a bit over the top in my opinion. There is nothing wrong with being inspired by LA, as that is an individual choice, which is sounds like the Lawlers are. It is not an infactuation, it is a desire to believe in someone and it makes no difference if they are believing fact or some big sham, if the inspiration helps a cancer patient, theres nothing wrong with using it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Galic Ho said:
And Mountain Goat didn't read the entire debate on facebook. Who is misinterpreting things now? Define 'condemn' and 'faith'. What the hell does the LAF do? They raise awareness, nothing more and chew through cash like there is no tomorrow. The celebrity infatuation line is credible because the original argument was put forward that in an event the poster falls victim to cancer there only hope lies with with LA and the LAF. Mountain Goat have you been drinking egg nog at the Christmas party?

" I bet you don't knock back assistance from the LAF in your time of need"

This is hardly telling someone there only hope lies with LA and the LAF does it?

This man is being completely misrepresented. regardless of his views on LA, he should at least be given the respect to be quoted correctly. If he did say the words "there only hope lies with LA and the LAF" in the thread, I apoligise in advance as I did not see that written anywhere... feel free to bring up that quote as the egg nog may have meant I completely missed it
 
Aug 1, 2009
1,038
0
0
Visit site
Race Radio said:
They raise awareness of Nike, Oakley, and SRAM.

Never question the myth, the groupies don't like it.

But they must be doing something other than saying that they are doing something?
 
Mountain Goat said:
" I bet you don't knock back assistance from the LAF in your time of need"

This is hardly telling someone there only hope lies with LA and the LAF does it?

This man is being completely misrepresented. regardless of his views on LA, he should at least be given the respect to be quoted correctly. If he did say the words "there only hope lies with LA and the LAF" in the thread, I apoligise in advance as I did not see that written anywhere... feel free to bring up that quote as the egg nog may have meant I completely missed it

MG : I wasn't trying to disrespect anyone. My statements are an interpretation of what he's trying to tell me - that I may get cancer and when I do, I probably will be knocking on LAF's door to help me and the devil himself, LA will bestow his kind blessings upon me who then will taketh cancer away. The preposterous implication of his message to me is that only LAF and its chairman are the only saviors around when it comes to helping people with cancer. Really? Are they the Walmart of cancer prevention? Do they even "treat" illnesses? Are they an accredited hospital of some sort, without my knowledge? What's this hidden monopoly on cancer prevention that is being implied?

For heaven's sake, hundreds of cancer organizations and aid agencies exist apart from LAF and there are plenty of good hospitals in the world that don't do marketing gimmicks with wristbands and other hoopla, they shut up and treat you if you are diagnosed with cancer. The fight is tough and you may not live if your number is up, but if that's the statistics, statistics doesn't include anything about whether you will live based on a belief in some sports figure (that's the stuff people create in their heads). If one gets cancer, it is far more rational to have faith in medical science and the continued knowledge that they accumulate on cancer prevention and relying on the support from close friends and family you can trust - not in some guy who's an alleged doper and has been proven to be a liar.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cozy Beehive said:
MG : I wasn't trying to disrespect anyone. My statements are an interpretation of what he's trying to tell me - that I may get cancer and when I do, I probably will be knocking on LAF's door to help me and the devil himself, LA will bestow his kind blessings upon me who then will taketh cancer away. The preposterous implication of his message to me is that only LAF and its chairman are the only saviors around when it comes to helping people with cancer. Really? Are they the Walmart of cancer prevention? Do they even "treat" illnesses? Are they an accredited hospital of some sort, without my knowledge? What's this hidden monopoly on cancer prevention that is being implied?

I understand your point about the organisation itself, but i think your implication that this guy is stating that your only saviour is LAF is, IMO a complete misrepresentaion of what he was actually saying.

He said the LAF may help you, if you disagree with that, it's fine, but he was certainly not implying that your only saviour is LAF and its chairman.


For heaven's sake, hundreds of cancer organizations and aid agencies exist apart from LAF and there are plenty of good hospitals in the world that don't do marketing gimmicks with wristbands and other hoopla, they shut up and treat you if you are diagnosed with cancer. The fight is tough and you may not live if your number is up, but if that's the statistics, statistics doesn't include anything about whether you will live based on a belief in some sports figure (that's the stuff people create in their heads). If one gets cancer, it is far more rational to have faith in medical science and the continued knowledge that they accumulate on cancer prevention and relying on the support from close friends and family you can trust - not in some guy who's an alleged doper and has been proven to be a liar.

I agree. There are numerous choices out there and its up to the patient to decide and choose which one best suits their own needs. The rational thing here is that all people are capable of making rational choices. If they choose religion, modern science or a simple charity, that is their personal rational choice. IMO, there is nothing irrational from seeking inspiration from a sporting athlete (regardless of their illedged history) as that is the patients choice and each to their own.

For a cancer patient, I doubt what LA did from 1999-2005 is in anyway relevant. The fact that an athlete nearly died from a disease, and then returned to their respective sport is inspirational enough. If a cancer patient chooses to seek inspiration from someone that lied and cheated to win a bike race there is nothing irrational about that. How he won is most likely irrelevant to them, the fact that he cameback is where I would seek inspiration if I were a patient.
 
Mountain Goat said:
I understand your point about the organisation itself, but i think your implication that this guy is stating that your only saviour is LAF is, IMO a complete misrepresentaion of what he was actually saying.

He said the LAF may help you, if you disagree with that, it's fine, but he was certainly not implying that your only saviour is LAF and its chairman.




I agree. There are numerous choices out there and its up to the patient to decide and choose which one best suits their own needs. The rational thing here is that all people are capable of making rational choices. If they choose religion, modern science or a simple charity, that is their personal rational choice. IMO, there is nothing irrational from seeking inspiration from a sporting athlete (regardless of their illedged history) as that is the patients choice and each to their own.

Well, MG, you won't understand because you didn't even converse with the individual. I have been talking to him for 3 weeks. Earlier in the thread, he claimed our only hope against cancer is Lance and the team at LAF. I stated in that thread clearly what the obvious fallacy was in that statement.

In the end, okay..he can believe what he wants, but as expected, instead of debating about the topic at hand, goes on to make some wild assumptions about my future health condition and takes liberty to state where I should go for help and who would precisely help my condition. He also accused me as someone who couldn't do anything for his deceased sister, whereas Lance supposedly did...and that I'm a hater, I'm jealous, I'm envious and so on and so forth. His tone is emotional. Understandable due to his loss. But if I were him mourning for my dear sister, I wouldn't log onto Facebook a day after she died and deliver back aimless volleys in a public forum. I would like to think this man has no hidden agenda, but unfortunately its hard.... Sorry. Oh well, I had written about this situation, so hardly comes as a surprise to me. :(
 
Must be one of the hardest things to crack: The belief of the cultist.
Such folks are so easily led, like sheep, but once they are "penned", the gate is rarely re-opened.
An inability to adjust mindset, is extremely sad, in human terms. That's why these folks are vulnerable to the dominant personality, telling them what to think and preach.
No one would deny that Lance is a dominant figure.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Who the fuck are we, to say where a cancer patient should turn, where they should go, or what they should do when they are affected with a potentially terminal disease.. if they want to turn to science, so be it, if they want to turn to god, so be it, if they want to turn to LAF, then so be it...

unless youre in the minority on this board thats been there, or been directly involved i dont see what its got to do with any of us...

seriously guys, this isnt about cycling.
 
Apr 3, 2009
138
0
0
Visit site
Race Radio said:
They raise awareness of Nike, Oakley, and SRAM.

Never question the myth, the groupies don't like it.

As someone who recently (within the last year) had their brother-in-law be diagnosed and go through treatment for stage 4 non-hodgkins lymphoma I find your statement to be as ignorant as the original post. My brother-in-law recieved support from the LAF in the form of a large binder that dealt with everthing that he & my sister would need to know, or at the very least provide them information that might create more questions for them to ask his doctors. He (BiL) even went so far as to tell me that the center he was treated at had a lot of Lance images up.

Regardless of how you personally feel about his sporting accomplishments he beat cancer and to those who are suffering from cancer he can be an inspiration. I was recently on the LAF site and did not see anything on the main page that dealt with Nike, SRAM, Oakley or Giro.

THere is no question that Lance is a huge lightning rod on this and other cycling sites. However the LAF does help cancer victims/ survivorrs. Whether you chose to believe this or not is up to you.
 
Dec 11, 2009
161
0
0
Visit site
I agree, why is this thread even posted here?

Plus I agree with Mountain Goat, there's nothing out of the ordinary with the believer's quote - it strikes me as a normal guy. I would expect something way different from a raving fanboy.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Im an atheist, but like all good non believers when my time comes, i will have a quick pray just to be on the safe side..

im sure there's a lot of people who whilst they may mock it now, if they where unfortunate enough to be hit by cancer would take every ounce of help the LAF offered them..

in desperate times we all become hypocrites

but like i say, this has nothing to do with cycling, or doping come to that.. sounds to me more like beehive was getting his **** whupped on facebook and came here for a bit of moral and emotional support
 
Jun 9, 2009
403
1
0
Visit site
Wow. Some people get so upset over complete nonsense.

The facts are that LA makes a lot of money from his foundation and gives some of that money to help with the fight against cancer.

It is O.K. to make a profit.

It is good to give money to organizations focused on improving health care.

LA has raised and donated more money than I ever will. It's hard for me to find fault with that.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
David Suro said:
Wow. Some people get so upset over complete nonsense.

The facts are that LA makes a lot of money from his foundation and gives some of that money to help with the fight against cancer.

It is O.K. to make a profit.

It is good to give money to organizations focused on improving health care.

LA has raised and donated more money than I ever will. It's hard for me to find fault with that.

Is it ok to suspend rational thought in order to believe a myth? Is it ok to attack anyone that questions that myth?
 
Aug 8, 2009
142
0
0
Visit site
Review:

1) Cozybeehive goes to Lance's site to stir up trouble.
2) He succeeds at angering somebody.
3) He brings the evidence to Cycling News to gain favor with the gods of Lance hate.

I find this all really entertaining. Cozy, maybe for your next assignment you could knock over Lance's mailbox and post the pictures here.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cozy Beehive said:
I don't mean to post this as entertainment. But this will go onto show how difficult it is to debate with someone who has a blind allegiance to Armstrong and most importantly, his cancer organization. You can read the entire thread on LA's facebook fanpage http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=11425&post=51484&uid=64263459777#post51484. Person of interest is a relentless "Damian Lawler". Said person condemns me to a life in future of cancer and the idea that I would need to fall on LAF's doorpost begging them for help and LA will be the kind one who will save me. I'm shaking my head. I could only conclude that this is an example of celebrity infatuation beyond any reasonable scale. :rolleyes:

Here's a snippet from his emotionally charged statements to me in that thread

The guy uses his sister's death to win points in an argument about Lance's doping. Typical, happens way too many times. Just because someone uses the death/cancer of someone close to them does not mean you don't care about cancer. That is what they want the world to read, but the reality is that they prostituted out tragedy, not you. Makes me want to heave.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
sashimono said:
Review:

1) Cozybeehive goes to Lance's site to stir up trouble.
2) He succeeds at angering somebody.
3) He brings the evidence to Cycling News to gain favor with the gods of Lance hate.

I find this all really entertaining. Cozy, maybe for your next assignment you could knock over Lance's mailbox and post the pictures here.

So you are saying you should never question the myth?
 
sashimono said:
Review:

1) Cozybeehive goes to Lance's site to stir up trouble.
2) He succeeds at angering somebody.
3) He brings the evidence to Cycling News to gain favor with the gods of Lance hate.

I find this all really entertaining. Cozy, maybe for your next assignment you could knock over Lance's mailbox and post the pictures here.

His mailbox probably contains love letters from you. I wonder if I should even post the "pics". :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.