Why it DOES matter that Lance goes down.

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
I have read some lately and the mantra appears to be that "it doesn't matter".

This thread is sort of the reverse of Polishes thread - what do people want to happen to Lance and why?

I will start........
One of the worst things he did was to vigorously and ruthlessly try to intimidate and silence people like,
Betsy Andreu - for saying she was motivated by "bitterness, jealousy and hatred".
Greg LeMond - for getting Trek to cut him loose and comments over the years.
David Walsh - for calling him a "f**king troll"...

What other incidents were there?
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
It matters simply b/c the truth matters, and when you are a sanctimonious, vindictive *** who defrauds the worldwide cancer community, that community deserves to know the truth about the bullsh*t they've been fed all these years.

My father is a cancer survivor. For years I've had to use kid-gloves w/ him in regards to "the Lance story". Recently he asked me again, "what do you make of all this talk in the press?" I finally had to have the talk w/ him, told him EVERYTHING -- that ever since Mig, nobody's been clean, EPO changed everything... Mr. 60%, "the look", Floyd's midnite prank call to Lemond, AC Puerto, Lance's famous shower, etc....complete history up to present day.

I wrapped up by saying, "yeah Dad, I think he's dirty as hell. Everybody else was too, but that doesn't make it right." My Dad thought about it for a minute, then gave this priceless response:

"Well, it sounds like they're all pretty flawed individuals. But still, to believe that Lance could have perpetrated a lie this big, and tied it into his cancer work, and to have been living it all these years.....in order to do that, he'd have to be a real SOCIOPATH".

I just smiled. "Well Dad, some people think he is." :)
 
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
I have read some lately and the mantra appears to be that "it doesn't matter".

This thread is sort of the reverse of Polishes thread - what do people want to happen to Lance and why?

I will start........
One of the worst things he did was to vigorously and ruthlessly try to intimidate and silence people like,
Betsy Andreu - for saying she was motivated by "bitterness, jealousy and hatred".
Greg LeMond - for getting Trek to cut him loose and comments over the years.
David Walsh - for calling him a "f**king troll"...

What other incidents were there?
Doc,
You have been on this forum for years trying to 'take down' Lance and demanding in open letters that people come up with the evidence to nail Lance.

And now we are calling people 'Sociopaths' and "Massive Conspiracy" for not buying into the sham?

Why is this more about the truth then about ego? Why is the 'truth' that Lance doped?

Why, after 12 years of this, with one failed accussation after another, should we be treating this 'important' issue as something other than the boy who cried wolf - and a set of stubborn individuals who will not acknowledge any other possibility?

To spend 12 years on a witch hunt and produce nothing sound more sociopathic than standing up to it.

So, why is it important that we continue to accuse and dig?
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
I have read some lately and the mantra appears to be that "it doesn't matter".

This thread is sort of the reverse of Polishes thread - what do people want to happen to Lance and why?

I will start........
One of the worst things he did was to vigorously and ruthlessly try to intimidate and silence people like,
Betsy Andreu - for saying she was motivated by "bitterness, jealousy and hatred".
Greg LeMond - for getting Trek to cut him loose and comments over the years.
David Walsh - for calling him a "f**king troll"...

What other incidents were there?
Simeoni

Bassons
 
Mar 20, 2009
406
0
0
gree0232 said:
Doc,
You have been on this forum for years trying to 'take down' Lance and demanding in open letters that people come up with the evidence to nail Lance.

And now we are calling people 'Sociopaths' and "Massive Conspiracy" for not buying into the sham?

Why is this more about the truth then about ego? Why is the 'truth' that Lance doped?

Why, after 12 years of this, with one failed accussation after another, should we be treating this 'important' issue as something other than the boy who cried wolf - and a set of stubborn individuals who will not acknowledge any other possibility?

To spend 12 years on a witch hunt and produce nothing sound more sociopathic than standing up to it.

So, why is it important that we continue to accuse and dig?
agreed. theres a lot of very bored wannabe's here.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
gree0232 said:
Doc,
You have been on this forum for years trying to 'take down' Lance and demanding in open letters that people come up with the evidence to nail Lance.

And now we are calling people 'Sociopaths' and "Massive Conspiracy" for not buying into the sham?

Why is this more about the truth then about ego? Why is the 'truth' that Lance doped?

Why, after 12 years of this, with one failed accussation after another, should we be treating this 'important' issue as something other than the boy who cried wolf - and a set of stubborn individuals who will not acknowledge any other possibility?

To spend 12 years on a witch hunt and produce nothing sound more sociopathic than standing up to it.

So, why is it important that we continue to accuse and dig?
I have been on "this forum" for 1 and a half years - where have I ever "demanded evidence"? When have I written "sociopaths" or "massive conspiracy'?


BTW - the fact that you attempted to completely lie and not even attempt to address the OP says all I need to know about your opinion on the subject.
 
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
I have been on "this forum" for 1 and a half years - where have I ever "demanded evidence"? When have I written "sociopaths" or "massive conspiracy'?


BTW - the fact that you attempted to completely lie and not even attempt to address the OP says all I need to know about your opinion on the subject.
So you are accussing me of lying, wven though the second post clearly ends with someone calling Lance a sociopath - in a forum filled with a herd of trolls who attacks anyone who dares to defend Lance ....

Please notice the use of the term 'we' not 'you' in the original.

Rather than state why, after a failed federal investigation (based on what SI is writing apparently) we should continue to dig on this one?

Why? Why do YOU and the other Lance magnets NEED to be right? Why does Lance positively HAVE TO HAVE doped?

Why is that the 'truth'? Rather than what evidence can resonably support?

Nah, best to instead call people asking these questions liars.

The simple issue is that since Landis went public, he ha smade a series of allegations, and the Lance magnets predict the show will fall - and we will finally get Lance.

And then the witnesses are investigated, and the only 'witness' that corroberates the story is from 20 years ago, but even he never saw Lance dope.

The rest of the witnesses publically questioned, deny Lance's claims.

And the latest is no different. Witnesses claimed are suddenly publically denying (Caitlin) and the 'drug' appears to be non-plausible - but the shoe will no doubt drop.

When is enough, enough?

When do we start looking at the accussations and the failure to convict and start treating those continuing to dig as sky is falling accussations?
 
Personally, the only way anyone still believes in Lance is if they have a vested financial interest, are completely clueless of the evidence against him, are just really dumb, or just cannot handle the cognitive dissonance associated with accepting reality after so many years of being a fanboy.

I can't see any other way anyone could believe Armstrong is anything other than a fraud. I really can't.
 
Dec 1, 2010
51
0
0
Anyone guilty of committing a crime should "go down", IMHO. I don't think people should go down for being major a-holes, though. So much of what I read here is based on his personality and behavior towards other people.

My admiration for Armstrong has been based solely on his accomplishments on the bike. So while I am disappointed with how things have gone, I am hardly disillusioned.

If Armstrong goes down, it needs to be because he committed a crime. Not because he was the biggest jerk to throw a leg over a bicycle and was mean to Greg Lemond and Betsy Andreu.

Cheers
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
TheComeBackKid said:
I thought I was about to read a great argument for why Armstrong has to be made an example of for the betterment of cycling.

I don't think aggressively defending your reputation is the crime of the century. It happens all the time in sport, business and politics. The actions of all of the people cited could have potentially stopped Armstrong's success. Wouldn't you be upset if someone did that to you? Betsy Andreu even decided to reveal a private conversation he had on his hospital sick bed, betraying his trust, and she is still going around calling him a fraud and campaigning against him. Again, how do you think looks from his point of view? How would you feel?

That's not to say the people don't have a right to be aggrieved with how Armstrong has treated them, but there are two sides to it. They could have changed Armstrong's life in a much more profound way than anything he has done to them. We forget that.
Well BPC at this stage you should know that Betsy was called to testify in the SCA case - and that she and Frankie had tried not to go by claiming that they were not in the jurisdiction - so SCA had them testify in Michigan.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Michael Brown said:
Anyone guilty of committing a crime should "go down", IMHO. I don't think people should go down for being major a-holes, though. So much of what I read here is based on his personality and behavior towards other people.

My admiration for Armstrong has been based solely on his accomplishments on the bike. So while I am disappointed with how things have gone, I am hardly disillusioned.

If Armstrong goes down, it needs to be because he committed a crime. Not because he was the biggest jerk to throw a leg over a bicycle and was mean to Greg Lemond and Betsy Andreu.

Cheers
No argument there.

Even Floyd stated it in a sort of way, "good guys dope, bad guys dope..."

It is getting well past the point of reasonable debate whether Lance doped. I don't care of he is a jackass or not. He is a criminal, by any standard, and he will get what is coming to him soon enough. Bear in mind, there have been plenty of criminals who had the best intentions and are nice guys. I grew up with some blokes like that, they have run afoul of the law back in Ireland and it ruined their lives.

The only problem I have is with the way he sold the fraudulent myth to inspire cancer patients. He will have a huge amount of explaining how he rationalized lying to them, year after, year, and profiting from the false proposition he sold to those who cared for those with cancer.

False hope. False trust.

If I were faced with this sort of betrayal, I would add Lance to the "A-hole" column, and it is easy to see why this drives so many here to ratchet up the degree to which they hope he goes down.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
gree0232 said:
So you are accussing me of lying, wven though the second post clearly ends with someone calling Lance a sociopath - in a forum filled with a herd of trolls who attacks anyone who dares to defend Lance ....

Please notice the use of the term 'we' not 'you' in the original.

Rather than state why, after a failed federal investigation (based on what SI is writing apparently) we should continue to dig on this one?

Why? Why do YOU and the other Lance magnets NEED to be right? Why does Lance positively HAVE TO HAVE doped?

Why is that the 'truth'? Rather than what evidence can resonably support?

Nah, best to instead call people asking these questions liars.

The simple issue is that since Landis went public, he ha smade a series of allegations, and the Lance magnets predict the show will fall - and we will finally get Lance.

And then the witnesses are investigated, and the only 'witness' that corroberates the story is from 20 years ago, but even he never saw Lance dope.

The rest of the witnesses publically questioned, deny Lance's claims.

And the latest is no different. Witnesses claimed are suddenly publically denying (Caitlin) and the 'drug' appears to be non-plausible - but the shoe will no doubt drop.

When is enough, enough?

When do we start looking at the accussations and the failure to convict and start treating those continuing to dig as sky is falling accussations?
Nice long post - so where have I "demanded evidence" as you stated?
If you can't back it up you lied.

If you have nothing to add to the subject of this thread then stop trolling.
 
Jan 27, 2010
921
0
0
gree0232 said:
Doc,

So, why is it important that we continue to accuse and dig?
Maybe its about Moral code or a moral obligation to oneself and society to stop liars. And, especially stop liars that make money off lying, channel money away from factually nobel causes and stop liars from providing completely negative and vile hope to the most desperate of human beings.

If you cannot see this then you don't believe in 'society'. Maybe you are still an adolescent, completely insular. Maybe you think that there is no harm in flushing toxic pulp mill effluent downstream into a kindergarden school ground where kids play and drink contaminated water. An extreme example yes, but hopefully you can tease a thread out of it.

Allowing completely reprehensible members of society to 'ride' freely is the thin edge of the wedge.

NW
 
Jan 27, 2010
921
0
0
Add to the list,

**** Pound, and other high level officials that tried to seek the truth and stand up to LA.

Any cyclist that feels threatened by speaking up

Most of his former teammates

All the clean cyclists that may the same of more innate ability as LA but were cheated out of competing because they didn't want to cheat.

NW
 
Proof Please

TheComeBackKid said:
You have a handful of people he has upset, put against millions of people worldwide that he has either helped through his charity or have enjoyed his success, and he has been a major boost for the sport of cycling.
Who are these millions you speak of? Millions what? Cured? No. to date, a pittance of livestrong funds goes to research. Really, be specific.

When was this 'major boost to cycling?' All my friends in the industry missed it. Some of us were around when Armstrong was a junior, so I know my history very well.

TheComeBackKid said:
If you personally know those handful of people he has upset I suppose they must seem like the most important thing, but to me that's not the right way to look at it.
I'd say it's more than a handful. What about the riders killed by EPO? What about the Tailwind investors? What about doping children? (Carmichael, Wenzel and others around the globe) What about the sick and dying who were lead to 'just believe?'
 
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Nice long post - so where have I "demanded evidence" as you stated?
If you can't back it up you lied.

If you have nothing to add to the subject of this thread then stop trolling.
Yeah, that is what it is about.

The question is: why do we need to keep digging?

BTW - If I am not mistaken, you posted an open letter to one JV right here on this very forum. One to Pat McQuaid as well, right? If that is not demanding evidence, what the hell is?
 
Neworld said:
Add to the list,

**** Pound, and other high level officials that tried to seek the truth and stand up to LA.

Any cyclist that feels threatened by speaking up

Most of his former teammates

All the clean cyclists that may the same of more innate ability as LA but were cheated out of competing because they didn't want to cheat.

NW
More to the list:

What about obeying the rules? It is just cycling, but the same principal applies. Where do you stop ignoring the rules? Misdemeanor? Felony? We (that includes you) are back to living in caves without rules.

Some rules are more important. Like obtaining, using, and selling controlled substances that kill. Let's ignore that one because 7 TdF wins was worth it.
 
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Neworld said:
Maybe its about Moral code or a moral obligation to oneself and society to stop liars. And, especially stop liars that make money off lying, channel money away from factually nobel causes and stop liars from providing completely negative and vile hope to the most desperate of human beings.

If you cannot see this then you don't believe in 'society'. Maybe you are still an adolescent, completely insular. Maybe you think that there is no harm in flushing toxic pulp mill effluent downstream into a kindergarden school ground where kids play and drink contaminated water. An extreme example yes, but hopefully you can tease a thread out of it.

Allowing completely reprehensible members of society to 'ride' freely is the thin edge of the wedge.

NW
So, if we THINK someone lies, we should follow them around for 12 years denoucing them as a liar and worse, conduct a federal investigation that is apparently not finding supporting evidence for the 'lie' ...

And after this, keep digging to expose the 'lie' because it is a moral obligation?

And people who tell their children that Santa is real? Lie? They are reprehensible members of society?

And people who win the TdF seven times are riding freely are they?

Again, why is this such a moral crusade?
 
May 25, 2009
332
0
0
Michael Brown said:
Anyone guilty of committing a crime should "go down", IMHO. I don't think people should go down for being major a-holes, though. So much of what I read here is based on his personality and behavior towards other people.

My admiration for Armstrong has been based solely on his accomplishments on the bike. So while I am disappointed with how things have gone, I am hardly disillusioned.

If Armstrong goes down, it needs to be because he committed a crime. Not because he was the biggest jerk to throw a leg over a bicycle and was mean to Greg Lemond and Betsy Andreu.

Cheers
How about the crime of distributing an FDA regulated and unapproved drug? whether it was effective or not - that is a crime in this country as well it should be otherwise drug companies would sell all their wares to a desperate public looking for cures to what ails them?

What about buying influence with the UCI to be tipped off about when drug tests will be performed? I'm not a lawyer but if it's not a sporting crime it should be.
 
Moose McKnuckles said:
Personally, the only way anyone still believes in Lance is if they have a vested financial interest, are completely clueless of the evidence against him, are just really dumb, or just cannot handle the cognitive dissonance associated with accepting reality after so many years of being a fanboy.

I can't see any other way anyone could believe Armstrong is anything other than a fraud. I really can't.
Moose, when I think of the Lance fans I know in my area, mostly aging yuppies who cannot grasp the concept of growing old gracefully or who use any and every situation, whether it's at their jobs or on the weekend rocket ride to show the world they still "have it", cycling offers them very few heroes.

Armstrong has conquered the world of cycling, dominating the most prestigious event in the world a record 7 times. He has conquered the corporate world selling nothing more substantial than the hot air emanating from his rear end.

Lance has the same beady-eyed, thinned-lipped determination to "be the best" these type-A personalities do. And like Armstrong, many resort to all manner of cheating, whether it's trading on insider information or getting scripts for testosterone and HgH. And all the while these are the guys that will look a fellow rider who struggles to keep up in the eye and condescendingly tell them they need to work harder.

It's a combination of the Puritan work ethic, a monumental sense of entitlement and the corroded morality that pervades our society that only values winners that is the reason Armstrong is defended so vociferously by his fanboys. They all see themselves in him, only younger.

Armstrong is the apotheosis of the rotten underbelly that is the culmination of the American Dream, the Caucasian Superman who grew up and overcame his dysfunctional, white trash background like a black or latino kid coming out of the projects to become an athletic and corporate boardroom star.

He is the white male version of "Jenny From The Block".
 
gree0232 said:
The question is: why do we need to keep digging?
Answer: because an untold number of rules were broken. We are supposed to be a Republic guided by the Rule of Law. Violate the rules and pay the consequences. Now, digging is required to discover the extent of the laws broken.

Ideally, the list of felonies will be long and include charges against Tailwind principals. But I'm not biased or anything.
 
hear, hear

Berzin said:
It's a combination of the all-American Puritan work ethic, a monumental sense of entitlement and the corroded morality that pervades our society that only values winners that is the reason Armstrong is defended so vociferously by his fanboys. They all see themselves in him, only younger.

Armstrong is the apotheosis of the rotten underbelly that is the culmination of the American Dream. .
Speak on it!
 
Jan 27, 2010
921
0
0
Dude(Gree),

We're not talking about some guy who won a cycling pro stage race and made 100K off it right! And there are facts out there, just read...well almost any post talking about the 1999 retested samples, the sworn testimonies, his teammates...

Hey, you seem to be self-righteous and confident why don't you stop the 12 yrs of allegations and initiate a legal suit against Mr. Armstrong forcing him to testify and explain all these allegations? That would help to solve these dilemmas.

But then LA would sue you A$$ off and you'd realize why so many others have been hesitant and just looked the other way.

Or, you could wait as many other have, for 12 yrs, for something just something of significance to occur, adding up, maybe 6 or 7 items. Most recently Landis, and then the FEDs go "I like that, that will be juicy" and alas the search for the truth and an obligation to maintain a certain kind of morality is born. Not to mention to reclaim some of Uncle Sam's Green backs.

Rather than be critical why don't you spend some energy in finding the truth? You don't really think he is or was clean do you? You don't really think his philanthropic oncological behaviour is acceptable do you?

NW
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Originally Posted by gree0232

So, why is it important that we continue to accuse and dig?


Let's use a cancer analogy.

If you were diagnosed with a malignant tumor, would you even entertain the idea of only partially removing it?

If you are going to remove the cancer, you get ALL of it, maybe even some surrounding tissue, just to be safe. You also might go above the normal routine of chemo to also include some radiation, just to be sure its gone. I liken that to the criminal investigation and the whistleblower case.... Might be overkill but if you want the cancer gone you would take seriously strong steps.

Please tell me you understand.

Your continued obtuseness can be overcome but you've got to make some effort here to "get it".
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY