USADA-Armstrong Phase II

[aphronesis]

The only problem is that all you do is suggest that the USADA is corrupt. You have no proof. None at all. In fact, your timeline is completely ignorant of the events that brought most of this evidence to light. I wonder why it is that you have not turned your attention to the UCI as much??? Interesting actually.

No Chewie, that is not all I do. In point of fact I have never suggested such a thing. I have, however, suggested that their methods are less than honorable.

Ah, UCI, maybe because only people who were glued to Bicycling and Versus believed that Pat and Hein had cycling's best interests in mind. (To the extent that they know who they are.)

Sorry, I leave the numbing task of repeating the obvious daily to those who embrace it.

Which timeline? Do enlighten me, but do it without twisting my words to fit a default position of antagonist....

 

[MarkvW]

Couldn't agree more. To wit:

"He is a hero, one of the few we have left in a country virtually bereft of them. And he needs to remain one.

"Did he use enhancers? Maybe I am the one who is blind, but I take him at his word and don’t believe it; he still passed hundreds of drug tests, many of them given randomly. But even if he did take enhancers, so what?"

A hero? Didn't use PED's, but even if he did so what? WTF!!!!! How does tripe like this even get published? And in a nationallty prominant magazine no less!

It ist not so difficult zu verstanden. Wann the end the DDR came, many trainers and journalists emigrated zu Amerika. Und you know, we had vays off athlete über performance making. It ist all gut!

 

[MaxVO2]

Couldn't agree more. To wit:

"He is a hero, one of the few we have left in a country virtually bereft of them. And he needs to remain one.

"Did he use enhancers? Maybe I am the one who is blind, but I take him at his word and don’t believe it; he still passed hundreds of drug tests, many of them given randomly. But even if he did take enhancers, so what?"

A hero? Didn't use PED's, but even if he did so what? WTF!!!!! How does tripe like this even get published? And in a nationallty prominant magazine no less!

NBC SportsTalk, a mainstream sports show on the NBC Sports Channel, introduces Buzz Bissinger today as "one of the most famous sports authors of all time." Really? Ok. I respected his talking points regarding the Sandusky case and how passionate he came across on television defending the victims. But now watching him today, I realize he's a hack writer. He said he spoke to Lance the night he decided to stop fighting USADA. Basically, he regurgitated every Lancism:

-USADA is a kangaroo court and he was unable to see the evidence.
-USADA is out to get him.
-Lance passed 500 doping tests.
-Lance has been fighting this for 13 years.
-Arbitration is unfair to him and USADA is an unfair tribunal.
-Everyone else was doing it, so you had to dope to win.
-etc...

All these were Lance's talking points, which were also given to the UCI. Why is he a hack? Because he didn't take the time to properly investigate all the Lancisms as being LIES.

He continues to attack and try to undermine USADA, and then at the end says "cycling is a filthy sport". He never truly defends Lance's claim of NOT doping. He's asked by the host if he thinks Lance Armstrong cheated. Buzz Bissinger answers with a soft and terse voice "I would think 'yes' [he cheated]. I think he cheated."

WHAT!!! After all his slanderous attacks, he admits that Lance cheated!!! Out of 10 minutes of show where the host and Buzz vilify all of Lance's detractors, the last 30 seconds reveal the truth!!!

What a no good, slimy piece of *(#(@!!!

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Hmmm, someone's feeling a bit plucky...

Are you guys still harping on about string instruments?

 

[benzwire]

Don't know if this has been posted, but I saw this on Velonews' forum. It's the Dan Patrick podcast (hour 3, Aug 24) also available on iTunes. Travis Tygart interview:
http://media.ccomrcdn.com/media/station_content/727/120824_DP_Hour_3_1345825216_30307.mp3

Also a great podcast that everyone should be listening to, the Velocast, has a "Lance Armstrong Special Episode". Great pod!
http://velocastcc.squarespace.com/race-radio/2012/8/27/lance-armstrong-special-edition.html

 

[MaxVO2]

Don't know if this has been posted, but I saw this on Velonews' forum. It's the Dan Patrick podcast (hour 3, Aug 24) also available on iTunes. Travis Tygart interview:
http://media.ccomrcdn.com/media/station_content/727/120824_DP_Hour_3_1345825216_30307.mp3

Also a great podcast that everyone should be listening to, the Velocast, has a "Lance Armstrong Special Episode". Great pod!
http://velocastcc.squarespace.com/race-radio/2012/8/27/lance-armstrong-special-edition.html

Thank you Benzwire! Listening to the TT interview right now.

 

[hiero2]

Are you guys still harping on about string instruments?

Has the cat got my tongue? Nyet. I don't harp, sir, I make beautiful music, my words are a symphony, my rebuttals an operatic masterpiece! Ha, I wish, eh? Perhaps pianissimo would be a better mode.
We do seem to be climbing some mountain in the thread - although we don't have the full score yet. We do seem more improvisational than classic, which would lead me to think of jazz, but jazz usually has some brass, or at least some brassy, elements, yes? On the other hand, if we compared Grapelli to Merckx, do you think we would get any followers?

 

[hiero2]

D. . .
Also a great podcast that everyone should be listening to, the Velocast, has a "Lance Armstrong Special Episode". Great pod!
http://velocastcc.squarespace.com/race-radio/2012/8/27/lance-armstrong-special-edition.html

Wow! A dispassionate and rational examination of reality! Good show. Thanks.

 

[Pazuzu]

He continues to attack and try to undermine USADA, and then at the end says "cycling is a filthy sport". He never truly defends Lance's claim of NOT doping. He's asked by the host if he thinks Lance Armstrong cheated. Buzz Bissinger answers with a soft and terse voice "I would think 'yes' [he cheated]. I think he cheated."

WHAT!!! After all his slanderous attacks, he admits that Lance cheated!!! Out of 10 minutes of show where the host and Buzz vilify all of Lance's detractors, the last 30 seconds reveal the truth!!!

If the host was doing his/her job s/he should have posed this question to Bissinger: "Suppose a journalist writes an story. It's an uplifiting piece which inspires millions of people and results in the writer being awarded a Pulitzer prize. However, It later comes to light that the story, which had been presented as factual, is actually fabricated and contains sundry plagiarized passages. Should the journalist be able to keep the Pulitzer prize?"

I wonder what Buzz would say?

 

[aphronesis]

Well, there's no point in commentng on any of other the other complete and utter ****tle you spout off so why not?

You "question" the AAA protocol from a position of complete ignorance, and refuse to acknowledge that a US federal judge, from Armstrong's home town, stated in unimpeachable terms, that the arbitration protocol did not compromise Armtrong's right to due process.

He further stated that IF there were indications that USADA did not follow the AAA protocol (again, not critical of the protocol itself), then he would entertain revisiting his ruling. Double protection.

Is the AAA protocol "flawed and corrupt"? No.
Your ridiculous nonsense? Yes.

I do agree, though, that Armstrong is far from innocent.

Did I question the AAA protocol? Did I say it was flawed and corrupt? Neither. You responded to a post of mine about the USADA not the arbitration process.

Did I anywhere demonstrate that I've been off the grid and lost all linguistic faculties such that I might be unaware of or incapable of comprhending Spark's decision? No.

How about "imperfect," will that soothe your righteousness?

Tygart recently used the phrase "perfect justice,"
you'll excuse me if I'm skeptical of anyone claiming such idealism, let alone how they square all their actions with the realities of the world.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

The reaction to this, more than anything else I have experienced, has proven to me that people shouldn't talk about things they have no idea about.

If that were the case, the unemployment rate among journalists would exceed 90%.

 

[PosterBill]

Wow, the Dan Patrick interview is very revealing...that's the best interview I have heard/read

 

[gree0232]

NBC SportsTalk, a mainstream sports show on the NBC Sports Channel, introduces Buzz Bissinger today as "one of the most famous sports authors of all time." Really? Ok. I respected his talking points regarding the Sandusky case and how passionate he came across on television defending the victims. But now watching him today, I realize he's a hack writer. He said he spoke to Lance the night he decided to stop fighting USADA. Basically, he regurgitated every Lancism:

-USADA is a kangaroo court and he was unable to see the evidence.
-USADA is out to get him.
-Lance passed 500 doping tests.
-Lance has been fighting this for 13 years.
-Arbitration is unfair to him and USADA is an unfair tribunal.
-Everyone else was doing it, so you had to dope to win.
-etc...

All these were Lance's talking points, which were also given to the UCI. Why is he a hack? Because he didn't take the time to properly investigate all the Lancisms as being LIES.

He continues to attack and try to undermine USADA, and then at the end says "cycling is a filthy sport". He never truly defends Lance's claim of NOT doping. He's asked by the host if he thinks Lance Armstrong cheated. Buzz Bissinger answers with a soft and terse voice "I would think 'yes' [he cheated]. I think he cheated."

WHAT!!! After all his slanderous attacks, he admits that Lance cheated!!! Out of 10 minutes of show where the host and Buzz vilify all of Lance's detractors, the last 30 seconds reveal the truth!!!

What a no good, slimy piece of *(#(@!!!

What is most amazing to me is that people will decide, not based on facts or even a desire to respectfully disagree, that someone they previously admired is now ... an expletive.

Yep, when someone disagrees with a heavily biased process, but even if they agree with the Lance Haters in the end ... well, look at the last line.

And there are those who get agitated when the hunt for LA is compared to Moby ****?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

What is most amazing to me is that people will decide, not based on facts or even a desire to respectfully disagree, that someone they previously admired is now ... an expletive.

Yep, when someone disagrees with a heavily biased process, but even if they agree with the Lance Haters in the end ... well, look at the last line.

And there are those who get agitated when the hunt for LA is compared to Moby ****?

LOL @ this crap post. Lance was busted based on OVERWHELMING factual evidence. You just choose to ignore it. Which is your own problem.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I'm pretty sure gree is Polish, without his requisite level of unicorn dust...

 

[ManInFull]

I've read that the USADA might release some evidence this week, but I've also read that USADA can not do anything until ALL of the respondents have either waived arbitration or have been awarded a decision through arbitration.

Which is it?

 

[MarkvW]

I'm pretty sure gree is Polish, without his requisite level of unicorn dust...

I've had that troll on ignore for quite some time.

 

[BroDeal]

What is most amazing to me is that people will decide, not based on facts or even a desire to respectfully disagree, that someone they previously admired is now ... an expletive.

Yep, when someone disagrees with a heavily biased process, but even if they agree with the Lance Haters in the end ... well, look at the last line.

And there are those who get agitated when the hunt for LA is compared to Moby ****?

No one is buying you BS, dude. You spent years denying Armstrong's doping. You came up with excuses for everything. Now that Armstrong has been officially labeled a lying drug cheat and justly stripped of his ill-gotten wins, you try to pretend the process is biased. You have no credibility. Zero. All you have left is a crazed search to find the Great White Whale that will excuse Armstrong's doping. Just like Ahab, you have been entangled and dragged to the depths, leaving your reputation as flotsam on the surface.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

LOL @ this crap post. Lance was busted based on OVERWHELMING factual evidence. You just choose to ignore it. Which is your own problem.

"Its not about the bile".

 

[Oldman]

I've read that the USADA might release some evidence this week, but I've also read that USADA can not do anything until ALL of the respondents have either waived arbitration or have been awarded a decision through arbitration.

Which is it?

I wouldn't think they'd want to release elements relevant to the other actions. Bruyneel's date will be the new stall...

 

[benzwire]

Wow! A dispassionate and rational examination of reality! Good show. Thanks.

Yeah, those guys (Scott and John) are great. Very entertaining and smart discussions.

 

[Oldman]

What is most amazing to me is that people will decide, not based on facts or even a desire to respectfully disagree, that someone they previously admired is now ... an expletive.

Yep, when someone disagrees with a heavily biased process, but even if they agree with the Lance Haters in the end ... well, look at the last line.

And there are those who get agitated when the hunt for LA is compared to Moby ****?

There are more than a few that have been exposed to actual facts. The "bias" of a process is usually judged by each side. Lance would just any process that would end in his disfavor as biased. USADA would consider a process that took their evidence and selectively applied it to an uncontrolled end as possibly biased. You continually wish to ignore that the UCI has an inappropriate interest in this particular case. They ignored similar opportunities to defend many other riders so you should saddle up for the long haul. Maybe you can get a salary from Pub Strat or are you paid by the word?

 

[ScienceIsCool]

I've read that the USADA might release some evidence this week, but I've also read that USADA can not do anything until ALL of the respondents have either waived arbitration or have been awarded a decision through arbitration.

Which is it?

The situation is analogous to this: five people rob a bank. One pleads 'no contest' and accepts a ten year sentence behind bars. Does the DA release all the evidence regarding the first case? No. The DA waits until the other four defendants have been prosecuted.

John Swanson

 

[Deagol]

Don't know if this has been posted, but I saw this on Velonews' forum. It's the Dan Patrick podcast (hour 3, Aug 24) also available on iTunes. Travis Tygart interview:
http://media.ccomrcdn.com/media/station_content/727/120824_DP_Hour_3_1345825216_30307.mp3

Also a great podcast that everyone should be listening to, the Velocast, has a "Lance Armstrong Special Episode". Great pod!
http://velocastcc.squarespace.com/race-radio/2012/8/27/lance-armstrong-special-edition.html

did not know Axel Merckx worked with Ferrari, makes a lot of sense why he & his dad are now defending Lance

 

[iZnoGouD]

Floyd was the subject of some judicial punishment for having gone public accusing athletes and sports leaders?