Where is Pat McQuaids integrity?

[Basecase]

Pat, you've claimed that 'age old' methods work. You've made the claim - so provide evidence of 'age old' methods working, drawing upon your immense experience of success in influencing the UCI by going through your national fed.

It's very straight forward and when you won't answer and spend your time avoiding the question, the only thing I can conclude is that you are a liar and a sockpuppet.

Just to clarify I ain't PMcQ - sorry to burst your bubble.

I've suggested that if people have issues with McQ, that going through club,regional organisations/National Federations may be more effective than merely moaning on here. But then again maybe most people who are part of national federations feel like me and do not see UCI governance as an issue worth getting worked up about......

No need to namecall just because you don't agree with me.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If you have to resort to name calling that really reinforces your argument

Did I say I complained about issues? I am not obligied to divulge my input at various levels to the likes of you am I?

It's gas - you want me to basically say who I am or else my opinion does not count here!??! What a great contention!! Isn't anonimity allowed here?

Just because my opinion and advised methology in dealing with a complaint to the UCI differs to yours it doesn't mean I have to be "outed" or dismissed, does it?

Oh and while your at it - why don't you tell me how McQ was elected??

But isn't that pretty much what you asked me earlier (in the below post) when I questioned your position?

Why don't you enlighten us as to what would "happen there" instead of making titillating innuendos ..... but I doubt you will

Could you enlighten us on your experience with various feds???

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

You've provided no evidence to support your arguments, so therefore you are lying and your claims and comments worthless. Furthermore you are the person who started with the name calling and personal attacks in the thread. If you don't like it then you should have started it.

'Fraid I can't help you anymore Pat. Try telling the truth for once is the best advice I can give you.

 

[Basecase]

You've provided no evidence to support your arguments, so therefore you are lying and your claims and comments worthless. Furthermore you are the person who started with the name calling and personal attacks in the thread. If you don't like it then you should have started it.

'Fraid I can't help you anymore Pat. Try telling the truth for once is the best advice I can give you.

Tell the truth??? Where did I lie?!

Who did I call names? I may have challenged posts but I don't believe I insulted posters - unlike you!

 

[Basecase]

But isn't that pretty much what you asked me earlier (in the below post) when I questioned your position?

Yes and you cared not to answer - which is your perogative! I didn't call you a liar!!!

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Originally Posted by Basecase View Post
If you have to resort to name calling that really reinforces your argument

Did I say I complained about issues? I am not obligied to divulge my input at various levels to the likes of you am I?

It's gas - you want me to basically say who I am or else my opinion does not count here!??! What a great contention!! Isn't anonimity allowed here?

Just because my opinion and advised methology in dealing with a complaint to the UCI differs to yours it doesn't mean I have to be "outed" or dismissed, does it?

Oh and while your at it - why don't you tell me how McQ was elected??

But isn't that pretty much what you asked me earlier (in the below post) when I questioned your position?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basecase View Post
Why don't you enlighten us as to what would "happen there" instead of making titillating innuendos ..... but I doubt you will

Could you enlighten us on your experience with various feds???

LOL. Pat, you should really give up on new media. Floyd kicks your **** via email and now you get your **** kicked on the forums.

 

[Basecase]

LOL. Pat, you should really give up on new media. Floyd kicks your **** via email and now you get your **** kicked on the forums.

Fantastic retort to my questions -

"Tell the truth??? Where did I lie?!

Who did I call names? I may have challenged posts but I don't believe I insulted posters - unlike you!"

...............

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yes and you cared not to answer - which is your perogative! I didn't call you a liar!!!

Did I call you a liar? No.

Also - I didn't go in to detail, but I did answer your question.

What will happen if someone takes it through to Nat Fed level? Nothing (or at best your regional secretary might get a strange phone call).

Yes, I have been involved in pretty much every level of the sport - from marshallings a corner for kids races up to Pro level.
I also have worked (well, volunteered) with both regional and national level federations.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Pat, you are like Nixon. We know when you are lying because your lips are moving.

Now, your first contribution to this thread was to accuse your critics of *****ing and wasting internet storage space. That immediately set the tone for your contributions, which have at best been disingenuous and trolling and but for the most part have been ********.

You've dismissed comments with asking people what they've done, and when those same questions have been asked of you you've failed to answer them. You can give it out but you just can't take it.

You've offered nothing constructive, which just re-enforces my view that you are trolling, and your failure to support your claims shows that your claims are lies.

Have fun now and wake me up when you start to offer something useful.

 

[Basecase]

Pat, you are like Nixon. We know when you are lying because your lips are moving.

Now, your first contribution to this thread was to accuse your critics of *****ing and wasting internet storage space. That immediately set the tone for your contributions, which have at best been disingenuous and trolling and but for the most part have been ********.

You've dismissed comments with asking people what they've done, and when those same questions have been asked of you you've failed to answer them. You can give it out but you just can't take it.

You've offered nothing constructive, which just re-enforces my view that you are trolling, and your failure to support your claims shows that your claims are lies.

Have fun now and wake me up when you start to offer something useful.

They are more opinions rather than claims - and I am entitled to my opinion.

 

[Race Radio]

Just to clarify I ain't PMcQ - sorry to burst your bubble.

I've suggested that if people have issues with McQ, that going through club,regional organisations/National Federations may be more effective.

Or they can make a wish....both have the same likelihood of success.

Good to hear you are ok with your fees going to legal costs for personal vendettas, harassment, and personal enrichment.

 

[Benotti69]

.....

Who did I call names? I may have challenged posts but I don't believe I insulted posters - unlike you!

you know i would be highly insulted too if someone called me Pat McQuaid.

but then maybe he meant Pat Nixon

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

They are more opinions rather than claims - and I am entitled to my opinion.

Pat - You still haven't provided any evidence to support your opinions. You can attempt to obfuscate by calling them 'opinions' rather than 'claims' but the fact remains your opinions are baseless.

Choice is yours. You can provide the evidence to support your opinions, or we can conclude that you an aversion to telling the truth.

Have fun under the bridge

 

[Dr. Maserati]

With the revelations about a cover up positive from the Tour de Suisse in 2001, I believe that we spotted the difference in numbers cited by McQuaid here first.

A reminder, McQuaid said there were 8 EPO positives in 2001 when there were at least 10. But of those 3 were eventually dismissed - was Pat using positive B samples as THE number??

If so, it means he cannot pass todays news by Hamilton (which backs up Landis) as something that happened before he came to office - sorry Pat, you are as much a part of the deceit as Verbruggen.

 

[skippythepinhead]

Why was Contador's positive not reported immediately? Why did Pat give Alberto time to concoct the fairy tale he eventually settled on? Why did it take the lab threatening to go public before Pat breathed a word publicly?

I contacted every little noodle in the alphabet soup of organizational acronyms and I have not received a single response from any of them to help me understand whether proper protocols were followed and whether any investigation will be undertaken.

But maybe someone posting on this thread could try to locate a memo or something that would shed some light on the issue. I assume it's the memo right over there on top of the filing cabinet where Pat keeps his last shred of integrity in case he can one day figure out how to read the manual that came with what used to be his.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Im not the one biatching about him on a web forum where the most effect that can be achieved is waste of space in a data centre somewhere

British Pro Cycling is great.