Question about anti-armstrong fanboys

[Anonymous]

There is only one rule in life......it's the golden rule.

He who has the GOLD makes the rules...

And then he dies like everyone else...and you aren't one of those guys anyway.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't get it ..... so ....what are you saying...?

Well I near as I can figure what he is saying is this.
"While there exists [some interesting - but not yet proven in a court - ] very compelling evidence that Armstrong [may have] and does doped I still choose to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he does not dope. However since I do admit that some of that evidence exists that makes me an [I am] open minded fan of cycling and not an empty headed fanboy. All of those who choose the conclusion that Armstrong did dope [are perfectly rational and I respect their opinion] however are haters of excellence."
I may be paraphrasing here.

Since your paraphrasing is a little misguided, i've underlined a reasonable answer to what I was saying. This is the last time I will reply to your obvious baiting/trolling behaviour.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Since your paraphrasing is a little misguided, i've underlined a reasonable answer to what I was saying. This is the last time I will reply to your obvious baiting/trolling behaviour.

Sorry, but since nothing that you say has been proven in a court of law, I don't believe any of it. Frankly I am glad I will not have to read another lame response.

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry, but since nothing that you say has been proven in a court of law, I don't believe any of it. Frankly I am glad I will not have to read another lame response.

You just wrote one!!

I just thought you need to be aware of that, despite how obvious it is.

I just couldnt resist breaking my promise of the last post to say that

 

[auscyclefan94]

Since your paraphrasing is a little misguided, i've underlined a reasonable answer to what I was saying. This is the last time I will reply to your obvious baiting/trolling behaviour.

Goatie, i usually agree with you but saying LA is a doper is not trolling. It's stating fact. Saying LA is a naracisist and up him self is not LA bashing. It's stating fact. for other cyclists or people in general that is bashing but we are talking about a germ by the name of Lance Armstrong.

 

[Hugh Januss]

You just wrote one!!

I just thought you need to be aware of that, despite how obvious it is.

I just couldnt resist breaking my promise of the last post to say that

Yes, it is true, OJ is innocent. I know it's true, it was proven in a court of law.

 

[rhubroma]

Actually I loathe him because he has:

- cynically and deliberately invested his own public integrity in the struggles of those fighting a deadly disease, and using their misguided loyalty to protect himself from accusations that he knows are truth and fact (and laughing all the way to the bank off the back of this)

- using his corporate clout to silence and eradicate those who disagree with him, often in an offensive and entirely juvenile manner.

- motivating himself with aggression and hatred for his competitors and critics, which he makes little effort to disguise, and seems to think are admirable human qualities

- Threatening to sue those who reveal his shady past, and never doing so. (put your money where your mouth is)

- promising "transparency" and then dropping supervision programs, delaying tests, editing and then removing publically posted blood values.

- being a liar, a cheat, a bully, a sociopath, narcissistic egomaniac and a total fraud in virtually all areas of his life.

- The fact that millions of people worldwide fail to see through this despicable man is a constant reminder to me of corporate cash ins and carefully marketed imaging overriding morality and truth at all times and the general stupidity and ignorance of most of the population, who merely believe the filth that is peddled to them by the corporations that strive constantly to turn us all into consumers first, citizens second. Keep believing, keep buying.

I'd sign to this one million times over. No more, no less is necessary.

 

[Ferminal]

Well I near as I can figure what he is saying is this.
"While there exists [some interesting - but not yet proven in a court - ] very compelling evidence that Armstrong [may have] and does doped I still choose to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he does not dope. However since I do admit that some of that evidence exists that makes me an [I am] open minded fan of cycling and not an empty headed fanboy. All of those who choose the conclusion that Armstrong did dope [are perfectly rational and I respect their opinion] however are haters of excellence."
I may be paraphrasing here.

There isn't evidence that Armstrong may have doped, it is either evidence that he did, or no evidence that he did. The may have is simply a condition one would apply to justify their stance. The evidence holds true, the evidence is incorrect (e.g. Tampering), or the evidence doesn't exist (ignorance), they are the only three possibilities.

We can look at the evidence for every "link" Lance has to Doping, a person could categorically accept or deny each individual case and then draw their own conclusion, the only "may have" is a person's opinion, not the evidence

You could form a "may have doped" by say, accepting the Ferrari link and medical admission, but believe that it's not enough for you. On the other hand, if you accept the 7 positives, it's a lot harder to form a "may have".

 

[gregod]

... but saying LA is a doper is not trolling. It's stating fact. Saying LA is a narcissist and up him self is not LA bashing. It's stating fact. ...

I do not like LA and am also of the opinion that he has doped and probably continues to dope, but stating that he is a doper is not fact. It is speculation. You have not seen the evidence with your own eyes, but are relying on the reports of others (as I am) to draw your conclusion. However, if he were to be suspended for doping, then you could say phArmstrong being a doper is fact. You also state that LA is a narcissist. This is a fact; i.e. something observable with your own eyes.

See the difference?

Furthermore, something can be a fact and be trolling. Something can be fact and be bashing. They are not mutually exclusive. In this case, since the thread addresses the anti-armstrong crowd, one is entitled to give their opinion of him. Bash away, I say. However, if this were a "why do you love LA?" thread, even if he had received a lifetime doping ban, stating you hated him because of his factual doping, this would be invidious and therefore trolling. Stating a mentally-challenged person is stupid is a fact. It is also not very nice; i.e. bashing.

 

[BroDeal]

I do not like LA and am also of the opinion that he has doped and probably continues to dope, but stating that he is a doper is not fact. It is speculation. You have not seen the evidence with your own eyes, but are relying on the reports of others (as I am) to draw your conclusion.

It is way beyond speculation. He tested positive for EPO six times. I don't need to go up in the space shuttle to personally observe the earth with my own eyes to know that it is a sphere.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I don't need to go up in the space shuttle to personally observe the earth with my own eyes to know that it is a sphere.

That's because you hate flatness.

 

[ggusta]

I do not like LA and am also of the opinion that he has doped and probably continues to dope, but stating that he is a doper is not fact. It is speculation.

No, sorry, but it IS a fact beyond any shadow of a doubt. And that isn't even why I no longer like him.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

 

[HoustonHammer]

That's because you hate flatness.

I can't prove it, but I have a suspicion he also hates unicorns.

 

[BroDeal]

I can't prove it, but I have a suspicion he also hates unicorns.

 

[Anonymous]

it really was only a matter if time before this thread ended up in the clinic wasnt it..

 

[flicker]

I think men hate Lance because he threatens their masculinity.
Also he is a better bike rider and gets the girls.

 

[rata de sentina]

it really was only a matter if time before this thread ended up in the clinic wasnt it..

Should the clinic be the dumping ground for other forums trash? Maybe the admins should be more active in tending the garden and apply the padlock more liberally.

People who should know better get sucked into posting in this kind of rehashing thread to the detriment of far more productive and interesting discussions. The OP should have been met with a deluge of links and let them work it out for themselves.

 

[Anonymous]

Goatie, i usually agree with you but saying LA is a doper is not trolling. .

I wasn't calling him a troll for that, it was something else, he knows what I mean. It's in the 'essays' i got sucked into writing earlier hahaha.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

People who should know better get sucked into posting in this kind of rehashing thread to the detriment of far more productive and interesting discussions. The OP should have been met with a deluge of links and let them work it out for themselves.

Post enough, like I have, and you do indeed find yourself repeating the same arguments, stressing the same points over and over and over and over.

Whether one is a fan or not, it is peculiar that almost any thread on Lance may inevitably end up in the Clinic it seems, for all the reasons discussed here.

I think Greg and some of the others are doing a good job already, but one goal of mine is to try to help lock threads that really do long outlive their usefulness.

 

[HoustonHammer]

I think men hate Lance because he threatens their masculinity.
Also he is a better bike rider and gets the girls.

You know, My Friend Flicka might have a point here. With just one shriveled up little roid ball, this guy is jetting around the world knocking up the girlies like he was Tom Brady. It does make me feel a little inadequate. I mean, you wanna talk about excellence...

 

[Animal]

The LA haters, generally, hate:

the fact that he is arrogant,
the fact that he has huge marketability,
the fact he has the ability to snag hollywood actresses,
the fact the media love him,
the fact that he is the greatest stage racer since indurain,
the fact that he's never served a doping suspension,
the fact that other people like him,
the fact that he was unbeatable for seven years straight,
the fact that he came out of retirement,
the fact that he will top 10 in the ironman,
the fact that he challenged the european approach to training for the TDF,
the fact that he was a superstar athlete from childhood,
the fact that every cyclist at one stage loved him,
the fact that he embraced twitter,
the fact that he inspires sick people to achieve,
and the fact that he got on the podium despite the fact that they all predicted he would not even be close!!

All of those FACTs, are FACTs that the the LA haters are scared of, and feel the need to hate the guy. I like him, there are a few here like me, and we try to defend him, but it falls on disgruntled ears..

In 5 years time, when Contador has won 7 tours, they will turn on him too.

Personally, I like all riders, especially the one's that show other people how to really ride a bike (Contador, Armstrong, Cancellara) and don't care what the plebs on cycling forums write about them

Whiney, victim, passive-aggressive twat. "FACT".

I couldn't give a shit about personalities.

He's just "YAD". Yet Another Doper. So many of them that the sport has become boring after trying to be a blinkered fan for 15 years. After standing on the roadsides in France in July yelling "GO LANCE", and and "GO MARCO" and "GO TYLER" and "GO FLOYD" and "GO JAN", and on and on..

And eventually you feel like you've been made to look like a total chump, and they've been taking the piss out of you the whole time.

So spare me your blanket labelling of people who don't share your rosy tinted spectacles.

 

[gillan1969]

only he's not just YAD....ask anyone in the street who Simeoni is, ask them who ferrari is and they'll say "eh....Enzo?"

He's 'played' cycling, and indeed brought more to the table (for everyone), probably intensified post-cancer, for all its worth. Whilst that might engender 'I wish it was like the old days' thoughts in some, it engenders admiration in others. What we can say is that he divides opinion. Most 'great' people do.

Whatever you think of him I think its fair to say he is 'great'. His achievments (even if they are being undetected for his whole career whilst winning the tour 7 times, and having the french authorities, press and assorted others after him) are unparalleled.

The rather vitriolic posts on here do not reflect well on the posters. Their ire would be better directed at McQuaid and his cronies who have spectacularly failed in creating a system which does not engender doping (although to be fair they generally do acknowledge this)

 

[Angliru]

Their ire would be better directed at McQuaid and his cronies who have spectacularly failed in creating a system which does not engender doping (although to be fair they generally do acknowledge this)

A system that Armstrong made a 1/2 a million dollar contribution to.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Whatever you think of him I think its fair to say he is 'great'. His achievments (even if they are being undetected for his whole career whilst winning the tour 7 times, and having the french authorities, press and assorted others after him) are unparalleled.

The rather vitriolic posts on here do not reflect well on the posters. Their ire would be better directed at McQuaid and his cronies who have spectacularly failed in creating a system which does not engender doping (although to be fair they generally do acknowledge this)

He has never had the French Authorities "after him". this was all propoganda to appeal to the xenophobic sentiment of some of his base support. Cynically cranked up a notch when US and France disagreed over the validity and usefulness of invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Lots of bullies like to play victim too.

 

[CentralCaliBike]

Lots of bullies like to play victim too.

I immediately was thinking of a gas attack by a bully I saw back in 1988.

The Halabja poison gas attack (Kurdish: Kîmyabarana Helebce) occurred in the period March 16–17 1988, during the Iran-Iraq War. Chemical weapons (CW) were used by the Iraqi government forces in the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja.

The attack instantly killed thousands of people (3,200-5,000 dead instantly) and injured 7,000-10,000, most of them civilians.[1] Thousands more died of horrific complications, diseases, and birth defects in the years after the attack.[2] The incident, which some define as an act of genocide, was as of 2009 the largest-scale chemical weapons attack directed against a civilian-populated area in history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack