Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession)

[Irondan]

All the little jabs getting thrown around add nothing to the discussion and will be deleted/edited as soon as I see them.

Please keep things civil gents.

 

[mrhender]

Re:

All the little jabs getting thrown around add nothing to the discussion and will be deleted/edited as soon as I see them.

Please keep things civil gents.

I agree.

Now it really is time to give it a rest and move on.

Thank you.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

I must say I did like it.

Too bad I never saw the original hagiography.

With all due respect, the majority of cycling fans see a film about cycling, go "Yay! Bikes!" and park their critical faculties.

The first half of The Armstrong Lie gives a good idea of where Gibney seemed to want to take the original film. The second - questioning - part added nothing that wasn't already known. Gibney offered no new spin on the narrative, no fresh way of looking at the story and reframing it. As a documentary, it failed to deliver anything that hadn't already been on the news and in a million think pieces.

What I thought interesting about the Armstrong Lie was Gibney filmed another film crew following him. Greg LeMond had actually commissioned a film crew to follow a film crew!

Most bizarre. Another than that the Armstrong Lie was fairly routine, the Bruyneel scene on Contador's attack in 2009 was about the most interesting aspect.

Link for this claim? Never heard that one before. When I say link, I mean something that confirms this "other film crew" was hired by LeMond and in fact filming the Gibney crew. Thanks.

 

[thehog]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

I must say I did like it.

Too bad I never saw the original hagiography.

With all due respect, the majority of cycling fans see a film about cycling, go "Yay! Bikes!" and park their critical faculties.

The first half of The Armstrong Lie gives a good idea of where Gibney seemed to want to take the original film. The second - questioning - part added nothing that wasn't already known. Gibney offered no new spin on the narrative, no fresh way of looking at the story and reframing it. As a documentary, it failed to deliver anything that hadn't already been on the news and in a million think pieces.

What I thought interesting about the Armstrong Lie was Gibney filmed another film crew following him. Greg LeMond had actually commissioned a film crew to follow a film crew!

Most bizarre. Another than that the Armstrong Lie was fairly routine, the Bruyneel scene on Contador's attack in 2009 was about the most interesting aspect.

Link for this claim? Never heard that one before. When I say link, I mean something that confirms this "other film crew" was hired by LeMond and in fact filming the Gibney crew. Thanks.

You sound like you don't believe me?

Ok, then... here's the link...

One of those, Greg Lemond a former Tour champion, was so incensed by what he saw as Gibney’s collusion, he commissioned another film-maker to record what he called “the anti-Gibney” account of Armstrong on the same Tour. Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie, a neat visual reminder of the division the rider caused.

Truly bizarre that LeMond would do this, agreed?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/10599723/Alex-Gibney-interview-for-The-Armstrong-Lie-Ive-never-met-a-better-liar-than-Lance.html

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

I must say I did like it.

Too bad I never saw the original hagiography.

With all due respect, the majority of cycling fans see a film about cycling, go "Yay! Bikes!" and park their critical faculties.

The first half of The Armstrong Lie gives a good idea of where Gibney seemed to want to take the original film. The second - questioning - part added nothing that wasn't already known. Gibney offered no new spin on the narrative, no fresh way of looking at the story and reframing it. As a documentary, it failed to deliver anything that hadn't already been on the news and in a million think pieces.

What I thought interesting about the Armstrong Lie was Gibney filmed another film crew following him. Greg LeMond had actually commissioned a film crew to follow a film crew!

Most bizarre. Another than that the Armstrong Lie was fairly routine, the Bruyneel scene on Contador's attack in 2009 was about the most interesting aspect.

Link for this claim? Never heard that one before. When I say link, I mean something that confirms this "other film crew" was hired by LeMond and in fact filming the Gibney crew. Thanks.

You sound like you don't believe me?

Ok, then... here's the link...

One of those, Greg Lemond a former Tour champion, was so incensed by what he saw as Gibney’s collusion, he commissioned another film-maker to record what he called “the anti-Gibney” account of Armstrong on the same Tour. Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie, a neat visual reminder of the division the rider caused.

Truly bizarre that LeMond would do this, agreed?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/10599723/Alex-Gibney-interview-for-The-Armstrong-Lie-Ive-never-met-a-better-liar-than-Lance.html

An "anti-Gibney account of Armstrong on the same Tour" is not the same thing as "in fact filming the Gibney crew".

No, I didn't believe you without confirmation because you've consistently posted things regarding LeMond which are misconstrued (as the above appears to be) or outright falsehoods. I asked because I don't know the truth and wanted to see your source as you do occasionally post things which are in fact true.

Seems pretty straightforward.

It certainly does seem odd from what little information you've posted, but then what little information you've posted is already misleading. So I'll wait to make up my mind when I see a more complete account. But yeah, LeMond does some odd things.

 

[thehog]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

It's not a link? But it is an actual link, it also appears in the movie, The Armstrong Lie. If you'd seen rhe movie you would know this to be true as they show the LeMomd film crew.

Perhaps you'll have to watch it if you don't believe the link I provided. Can't help you there, sorry.

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Yes, agreed, LeMond does do some oddball stuff at times. Never know what he is up to or what his motivations are.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

It's not a link? But it is an actual link, it also appears in the movie, The Armstrong Lie. If you'd seen rhe movie you would know this to be true as they show the LeMomd film crew.

Perhaps you'll have to watch it if you don't believe the link I provided. Can't help you there, sorry.

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Yes, agreed, LeMond does do some oddball stuff at times. Never know what he is up to or what his motivations are.

I've long since ceased giving a *** about Armstrong enough to watch the Gibney movie. Don't know how y'all can keep up the interest.

I notice you didn't address your mischaracterization of the quote from the article.

 

[Digger]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

It's not a link? But it is an actual link, it also appears in the movie, The Armstrong Lie. If you'd seen rhe movie you would know this to be true as they show the LeMomd film crew.

Perhaps you'll have to watch it if you don't believe the link I provided. Can't help you there, sorry.

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Yes, agreed, LeMond does do some oddball stuff at times. Never know what he is up to or what his motivations are.

I've long since ceased giving a **** about Armstrong enough to watch the Gibney movie. Don't know how y'all can keep up the interest.

I notice you didn't address your mischaracterization of the quote from the article.

you asked for a link to back up his statement- he supplied it - that's now not sufficient because you can't stand that hog got one over on you.

 

[StryderHells]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

It's not a link? But it is an actual link, it also appears in the movie, The Armstrong Lie. If you'd seen rhe movie you would know this to be true as they show the LeMomd film crew.

Perhaps you'll have to watch it if you don't believe the link I provided. Can't help you there, sorry.

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Yes, agreed, LeMond does do some oddball stuff at times. Never know what he is up to or what his motivations are.

I've long since ceased giving a **** about Armstrong enough to watch the Gibney movie. Don't know how y'all can keep up the interest.

I notice you didn't address your mischaracterization of the quote from the article.

LeMond did hire a film crew to follow the 2009 Tour and they did film the Gibney crew which was shown in The Armstrong Lie, don't know if that was the only reason they were there but they certainly did film Alex Gibney and his camera crew

 

[thehog]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

It's not a link? But it is an actual link, it also appears in the movie, The Armstrong Lie. If you'd seen rhe movie you would know this to be true as they show the LeMomd film crew.

Perhaps you'll have to watch it if you don't believe the link I provided. Can't help you there, sorry.

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Yes, agreed, LeMond does do some oddball stuff at times. Never know what he is up to or what his motivations are.

I've long since ceased giving a **** about Armstrong enough to watch the Gibney movie. Don't know how y'all can keep up the interest.

I notice you didn't address your mischaracterization of the quote from the article.

you asked for a link to back up his statement- he supplied it - that's now not sufficient because you can't stand that hog got one over on you.

People tend to go a little gaga over LeMond when you demonstrate flaws in his character. It is very odd that he'd spent all the money on a film crew just to film another film crew filming Armstrong. Well it's more strange than odd. But that's Greg LeMond for you!

The link provided states it clearly. Not much more to add that red_flanders was shown up when trying act all tough

 

[Benotti69]

That people were prepared to stand up to Armstorng and not lie down while he sucked in all the $$$$$s is to be admired.

Armstrong at one stage was trying to buy ASO and own pro cycling! I am happy it never happened. I am happy that people stood up to Armstrong for a long long time.

Armstrong was not just another doper as some seem to want to recast him as. He was the biggest fraud in the history of the sport. He cheated his way to 7 straight TdFs. The guy wanted 10 FFS.

He was a d*uche of the highest order. That has not changed. Lots of people used his fall as an excsue to now say the sport is clean. They too are d*uches. But that dont change the fact that Armstrong still is one.

 

[MacRoadie]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

It's not a link? But it is an actual link, it also appears in the movie, The Armstrong Lie. If you'd seen rhe movie you would know this to be true as they show the LeMomd film crew.

Perhaps you'll have to watch it if you don't believe the link I provided. Can't help you there, sorry.

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Yes, agreed, LeMond does do some oddball stuff at times. Never know what he is up to or what his motivations are.

I've long since ceased giving a **** about Armstrong enough to watch the Gibney movie. Don't know how y'all can keep up the interest.

I notice you didn't address your mischaracterization of the quote from the article.

you asked for a link to back up his statement- he supplied it - that's now not sufficient because you can't stand that hog got one over on you.

People tend to go a little gaga over LeMond when you demonstrate flaws in his character. It is very odd that he'd spent all the money on a film crew just to film another film crew filming Armstrong. Well it's more strange than odd. But that's Greg LeMond for you!

The link provided states it clearly. Not much more to add that red_flanders was shown up when trying act all tough

How does the hiring of a film crew amount to "flaws in his character"?

This is 2009, three years before the Reasoned Decision, and smack-dab in the middle of the LeMond v. Trek debacle. Greg is having his credibility and reputation pummeled by the Trem/Armstring PR machine (remember the Trek PowerPoint from mid-2008 that was disseminated throughout the company, basically firing Greg for not buying into the Armstrong mythos),

http://www.scribd.com/doc/110369047/Trek-Ppt-Final

and now Armstrong has hired a documentarian to do a film on his glorious comeback. Make no mistake, the documentary was meant to be a glorification of Armstrong from day one, filmed proof that Lance was and always had been a clean rider, never on the gear, and out to show the world he could (and had) won the Tour 7 times clean.

This is also at the exact same time that Lance is trying to sell everyone on the super-comprehensive Don Caitlin testing plan that was supposed to also track his glorious clean comeback:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/12/sports/othersports/12cycling.html?_r=0

Further, Gibney himself was unabashed about his excitement at filming Armstrong and his motivations to do so:

Back in 2009, he had been invited by Armstrong to film the inside story of his comeback to the Tour de France. After the most fleeting of retirements, the seven-time winner was remounting his bike, back pounding up Alps, threading through the fields of sunflowers, rattling over the cobbles. And he wanted a record for posterity, to mark his place in the pantheon. So he sought out America’s most renowned, fiercely forensic, independent documentary maker to shoot him in action.

“I went along for the ride,” says Gibney now of that summer. “I thought I was filming a tale of wholesome redemption.”

So, it's really no surprise that:

At the time, there was many a sceptic who could have put him right on that, insisting that the Texan’s incredible achievements were chemically propelled, that this was nothing more than a mobile pharmacy pedalling through Provence. One of those, Greg Lemond a former Tour champion, was so incensed by what he saw as Gibney’s collusion, he commissioned another film-maker to record what he called “the anti-Gibney” account of Armstrong on the same Tour. Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie, a neat visual reminder of the division the rider caused.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/10599723/Alex-Gibney-interview-for-The-Armstrong-Lie-Ive-never-met-a-better-liar-than-Lance.html

Some character flaw....

 

[Semper Fidelis]

The fact that Armstrong had a camera crew to follow him around to record the comeback is pretty shallow in terms of what you think of yourself.

Also what is the character motives of someone who hires a camera crew to follow a camera crew? Something is weird about that to me. That person seems to suffer from type of all about me flaw no doubt.

 

[Digger]

Re:

That people were prepared to stand up to Armstorng and not lie down while he sucked in all the $$$$$s is to be admired.

Armstrong at one stage was trying to buy ASO and own pro cycling! I am happy it never happened. I am happy that people stood up to Armstrong for a long long time.

Armstrong was not just another doper as some seem to want to recast him as. He was the biggest fraud in the history of the sport. He cheated his way to 7 straight TdFs. The guy wanted 10 FFS.

He was a d*uche of the highest order. That has not changed. Lots of people used his fall as an excsue to now say the sport is clean. They too are d*uches. But that dont change the fact that Armstrong still is one.

let those be anti lance all they want - but don't dare claim to be anti doping because if they were they would be speaking out on others.

 

[thehog]

Re:

The fact that Armstrong had a camera crew to follow him around to record the comeback is pretty shallow in terms of what you think of yourself.

Also what is the character motives of someone who hires a camera crew to follow a camera crew? Something is weird about that to me. That person seems to suffer from type of all about me flaw no doubt.

LA is a grade A douche not to mention a total dirtbag. Its well established, we all talked it about it to its conclusion which was well deserved.

LeMond and his recording devices is another ballgame. Just plain weird. Not much more to say about it. Have no idea why some defend that part of LeMond as normal. Its not. Its just bizarre.

 

[Digger]

Re: Re:

The fact that Armstrong had a camera crew to follow him around to record the comeback is pretty shallow in terms of what you think of yourself.

Also what is the character motives of someone who hires a camera crew to follow a camera crew? Something is weird about that to me. That person seems to suffer from type of all about me flaw no doubt.

LA is a grade A douche not to mention a total dirtbag. Its well established, we all talked it about it to its conclusion which was well deserved.

LeMond and his recording devices is another ballgame. Just plain weird. Not much more to say about it. Have no idea why some defend that part of LeMond as normal. Its not. Its just bizarre.

interesting that some people defend greg to the hilt on here and elsewhere whilst in private say very negative things...

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

That people were prepared to stand up to Armstorng and not lie down while he sucked in all the $$$$$s is to be admired.

Armstrong at one stage was trying to buy ASO and own pro cycling! I am happy it never happened. I am happy that people stood up to Armstrong for a long long time.

Armstrong was not just another doper as some seem to want to recast him as. He was the biggest fraud in the history of the sport. He cheated his way to 7 straight TdFs. The guy wanted 10 FFS.

He was a d*uche of the highest order. That has not changed. Lots of people used his fall as an excsue to now say the sport is clean. They too are d*uches. But that dont change the fact that Armstrong still is one.

let those be anti lance all they want - but don't dare claim to be anti doping because if they were they would be speaking out on others.

I dont have problem with your post. I have voiced my 'displeasure' with LeMond's hypocrisy re other dopers. My stance on JV is for all to see.

But I aint gonna let Armstrong off any hook. Not for anything. Cant be said enough, the guy was not just stepping on people who got in his way, but trying to destroy them and their lives.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

...

LA is a grade A douche not to mention a total dirtbag. Its well established, we all talked it about it to its conclusion which was well deserved.

LeMond and his recording devices is another ballgame. Just plain weird. Not much more to say about it. Have no idea why some defend that part of LeMond as normal. Its not. Its just bizarre.

This sub-thread has no place here.

1. It is really OLD news... your rehashing of it from the movie doesn't make it any more current. It is almost impossible to see your recent posts as anything but an obvious troll.

2. It has more to do with LeMond than Armstrong, at least by your reasoning. Thus, it doesn't belong on this thread at all.

3. As part of the troll, you are consistently taking things out of context. LeMond did, in fact, have good reason to be wary of what Lance was up to in 2009. Perhaps you have already forgotten the Trek versus LeMond lawsuit. It wasn't settled until February of 2010. There was plenty of legal action between LeMond and Armstrong's allies in 2009. And, from Greg's POV it was pretty serious stuff - damaging his brand as it were. Documenting Armstrong's activities does not seem unreasonable in that context combined with what is now fully public knowledge about his recidivist doping behavior.

Now, I am happy to acknowledge that I am confident that thehog knows all of what I just wrote. Thehog has been following this story for a long time, and it would be unreasonable and disrespectful to believe that he/she forgot all of it. Moreover, where I may disagree with what thehog posts from time-to-time, i do not question thehog's intelligence. It seems more plausible that these posts regarding GL's film crew were posted with a full knowledge of the history and mitigating circumstances at that time.

To summarize: Please stop wasting bandwidth. You are better than that.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

The fact that Armstrong had a camera crew to follow him around to record the comeback is pretty shallow in terms of what you think of yourself.

Also what is the character motives of someone who hires a camera crew to follow a camera crew? Something is weird about that to me. That person seems to suffer from type of all about me flaw no doubt.

LA is a grade A douche not to mention a total dirtbag. Its well established, we all talked it about it to its conclusion which was well deserved.

LeMond and his recording devices is another ballgame. Just plain weird. Not much more to say about it. Have no idea why some defend that part of LeMond as normal. Its not. Its just bizarre.

interesting that some people defend greg to the hilt on here and elsewhere whilst in private say very negative things...

I guess people worry they'll be recorded. What a mess.

 

[Night Rider]

Re: Re:

...

LA is a grade A douche not to mention a total dirtbag. Its well established, we all talked it about it to its conclusion which was well deserved.

LeMond and his recording devices is another ballgame. Just plain weird. Not much more to say about it. Have no idea why some defend that part of LeMond as normal. Its not. Its just bizarre.

This sub-thread has no place here.

1. It is really OLD news... your rehashing of it from the movie doesn't make it any more current. It is almost impossible to see your recent posts as anything but an obvious troll.

2. It has more to do with LeMond than Armstrong, at least by your reasoning. Thus, it doesn't belong on this thread at all.

3. As part of the troll, you are consistently taking things out of context. LeMond did, in fact, have good reason to be wary of what Lance was up to in 2009. Perhaps you have already forgotten the Trek versus LeMond lawsuit. It wasn't settled until February of 2010. There was plenty of legal action between LeMond and Armstrong's allies in 2009. And, from Greg's POV it was pretty serious stuff - damaging his brand as it were. Documenting Armstrong's activities does not seem unreasonable in that context combined with what is now fully public knowledge about his recidivist doping behavior.

Now, I am happy to acknowledge that I am confident that thehog knows all of what I just wrote. Thehog has been following this story for a long time, and it would be unreasonable and disrespectful to believe that he/she forgot all of it. Moreover, where I may disagree with what thehog posts from time-to-time, i do not question thehog's intelligence. It seems more plausible that these posts regarding GL's film crew were posted with a full knowledge of the history and mitigating circumstances at that time.

To summarize: Please stop wasting bandwidth. You are better than that.

Dave.

Lemond was recording conversations at least as early as 2004, probably earlier. Given that some of those recordings are likely to be mentioned in the current Qui Tam against Armstrong then I think mentioning how weird it is for someone to privately record conversations is relevant.

I'm a Lemond fan but have to accept that is a bit creepy?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

...

LA is a grade A douche not to mention a total dirtbag. Its well established, we all talked it about it to its conclusion which was well deserved.

LeMond and his recording devices is another ballgame. Just plain weird. Not much more to say about it. Have no idea why some defend that part of LeMond as normal. Its not. Its just bizarre.

This sub-thread has no place here.

1. It is really OLD news... your rehashing of it from the movie doesn't make it any more current. It is almost impossible to see your recent posts as anything but an obvious troll.

2. It has more to do with LeMond than Armstrong, at least by your reasoning. Thus, it doesn't belong on this thread at all.

3. As part of the troll, you are consistently taking things out of context. LeMond did, in fact, have good reason to be wary of what Lance was up to in 2009. Perhaps you have already forgotten the Trek versus LeMond lawsuit. It wasn't settled until February of 2010. There was plenty of legal action between LeMond and Armstrong's allies in 2009. And, from Greg's POV it was pretty serious stuff - damaging his brand as it were. Documenting Armstrong's activities does not seem unreasonable in that context combined with what is now fully public knowledge about his recidivist doping behavior.

Now, I am happy to acknowledge that I am confident that thehog knows all of what I just wrote. Thehog has been following this story for a long time, and it would be unreasonable and disrespectful to believe that he/she forgot all of it. Moreover, where I may disagree with what thehog posts from time-to-time, i do not question thehog's intelligence. It seems more plausible that these posts regarding GL's film crew were posted with a full knowledge of the history and mitigating circumstances at that time.

To summarize: Please stop wasting bandwidth. You are better than that.

Dave.

BUT to be honest no one can talk about Lemond because the first rule in this * is not to say Lemonds name.

I like you man as a person but this is crystal clear. I'm not buying it and a few of the dirty dozen don't buy neither.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

...
BUT to be honest no one can talk about Lemond because the first rule in this biach is not to say Lemonds name.

I like you man as a person but this shat is crystal clear. I'm not buying it and a few of the dirty dozen don't buy neither.

Glenn, I am not challenging your opinion.

We have always been able to use LeMond's name. That isn't the case for HWMNBN, now is it?

(I am simply correcting you and I don't mean that comment in any sort of cynical way, especially not towards you)

Can we agree that mentioning LeMond in the Armstrong thread is unlikely to be consistent with objective dialog? Or, that even if it starts out on an objective manner, it is highly likely to quickly deteriorate? It is a classic ploy, employed by Lance of course, to distract attention away from the subject matter through the use of innuendo as redirection. Apparently in Forum newspeak, this can sometime be described as trolling.

That doesn't mean that your opinion is invalid. As your post obviously isn't trolling.

I would be more than happy to discuss filming of cyclists, recording of conversations, etc., whether any of it was justified, or whether any could even be rationalized, but there is another place to discuss that.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

...

LA is a grade A douche not to mention a total dirtbag. Its well established, we all talked it about it to its conclusion which was well deserved.

LeMond and his recording devices is another ballgame. Just plain weird. Not much more to say about it. Have no idea why some defend that part of LeMond as normal. Its not. Its just bizarre.

This sub-thread has no place here.

1. It is really OLD news... your rehashing of it from the movie doesn't make it any more current. It is almost impossible to see your recent posts as anything but an obvious troll.

2. It has more to do with LeMond than Armstrong, at least by your reasoning. Thus, it doesn't belong on this thread at all.

3. As part of the troll, you are consistently taking things out of context. LeMond did, in fact, have good reason to be wary of what Lance was up to in 2009. Perhaps you have already forgotten the Trek versus LeMond lawsuit. It wasn't settled until February of 2010. There was plenty of legal action between LeMond and Armstrong's allies in 2009. And, from Greg's POV it was pretty serious stuff - damaging his brand as it were. Documenting Armstrong's activities does not seem unreasonable in that context combined with what is now fully public knowledge about his recidivist doping behavior.

Now, I am happy to acknowledge that I am confident that thehog knows all of what I just wrote. Thehog has been following this story for a long time, and it would be unreasonable and disrespectful to believe that he/she forgot all of it. Moreover, where I may disagree with what thehog posts from time-to-time, i do not question thehog's intelligence. It seems more plausible that these posts regarding GL's film crew were posted with a full knowledge of the history and mitigating circumstances at that time.

To summarize: Please stop wasting bandwidth. You are better than that.

Dave.

Lemond was recording conversations at least as early as 2004, probably earlier. Given that some of those recordings are likely to be mentioned in the current Qui Tam against Armstrong then I think mentioning how weird it is for someone to privately record conversations is relevant.

I'm a Lemond fan but have to accept that is a bit creepy?

Go figure. Apparently it's not to be talked about...

But, yes, weird. Businesses destroyed by Armstrong but enough cash to film people, record phone conversations and release them on to the Internet.

This was discussed on the LeMond thread. Filming Armstong, taking about it on the Armstrong thread seems relevant especially when the movie the Armstrong Lie was brought up.

Straight forward.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

It's not a link? But it is an actual link, it also appears in the movie, The Armstrong Lie. If you'd seen rhe movie you would know this to be true as they show the LeMomd film crew.

Perhaps you'll have to watch it if you don't believe the link I provided. Can't help you there, sorry.

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Yes, agreed, LeMond does do some oddball stuff at times. Never know what he is up to or what his motivations are.

I've long since ceased giving a **** about Armstrong enough to watch the Gibney movie. Don't know how y'all can keep up the interest.

I notice you didn't address your mischaracterization of the quote from the article.

you asked for a link to back up his statement- he supplied it - that's now not sufficient because you can't stand that hog got one over on you.

People tend to go a little gaga over LeMond when you demonstrate flaws in his character. It is very odd that he'd spent all the money on a film crew just to film another film crew filming Armstrong. Well it's more strange than odd. But that's Greg LeMond for you!

The link provided states it clearly. Not much more to add that red_flanders was shown up when trying act all tough

Sure, it's because of LeMond. Couldn't possibly be because you regularly post things which are fairly unbelievable. Which turned out to be the case, as the LeMond film crew was apparently not filming the other film crew as you stated. If you'd simply have stated what was in the article, it's rather doubtful I'd have challenged you, as yes, LeMond does do some over the top stuff. But filming the film crew sounded like BS. And it apparently was.

 

[thehog]

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

Lemond’s rival camera crew is forever appearing in Gibney’s frame in his movie

Sure, it's because of LeMond. Couldn't possibly be because you regularly post things which are fairly unbelievable. Which turned out to be the case, as the LeMond film crew was apparently not filming the other film crew as you stated. If you'd simply have stated what was in the article, it's rather doubtful I'd have challenged you, as yes, LeMond does do some over the top stuff. But filming the film crew sounded like BS. And it apparently was.

I've long since ceased giving a **** about Armstrong enough to watch the Gibney movie. Don't know how y'all can keep up the interest.

Considering you haven't seen the movie, 'The Armstrong Lie', I'm not sure you're in position to provide an opinion.

Perhaps go see the film and we'll pick this up with my accurate quote and link. Thanks again.