USADA Banned Armstrong new Doping Allegations

Mr.Gib · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:15 pm

prendrefeu wrote:

Am I the only person who thinks that the folks who never bothered to read, or willfully chose to ignore, all of the prior posted links to well written articles, interviews, conversations, analysis and evidence and continued to rant on about 'witch hunt' or 'innocence until the evidence is posted' will still choose to willfully ignore, not bother to read or disavow the evidence that was just posted?

Watch all the "witch hunt" ranters engage in revisionist history regarding their opinions. They will talk about how they always knew that Lance doped, despised him, etc. but were always taking a bigger picture view, interested in due process, fairness, etc. They will created diversions regarding idiosyncrasies or contradictions in the USADA evidence, and the list goes on. They will also go back through this thread and delete their comments that make them look foolish.

Someone should go back through this thread and create a collection of appropriate quotes just so we all know where we stand.

I won't begrudge any of you witch hunt ranters for having any opinion you choose, just don't deny me my opportunity to humiliate you.

Weenie · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:15 pm

Mr.Gib · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:20 pm

Mr.Gib wrote:

A few points:

As to this being a waste of money I am not so sure. Certainly much more money has been spent on far more questionable pursuits. If the evidence is good it must be prosecuted. It has nothing to do with finding out if Armstrong doped - that he did is simply common knowledge. It has to do with seeing justice done and not leaving our sport with the impression that you can get away with cheating. "Convicting" Armstrong is essential if cycling is ever to be perceived as clean.

As to the lack of fairness - Armstrong being singled out, sometimes resources (not just money, but manpower and time) dictate that you just go after the most important and most symbolic target.

As for those with concerns about Hamilton and Landis, how will you feel when big George tells the exact same story?

Here's my quote from page two.

swinter · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:24 pm

Once again, Mr.Gib got it right. :smartass:

Mr.Gib · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:30 pm

Rick wrote:

Quote:

The stupid thing about this whole saga is that even if he is given a fair and completely transparent trial, if he is found completely innocent, people are still going to accuse him for years to come. That alone for me means that this whole process is pointless and should not be pursued. Cycling as a sport would be better off just moving on and ignoring him.

That summarizes it.

All the speculation and blather....he said ....she saw....blah, blah, blah....
IT'S ALL OVER. (or at least it should be)
Lance took all the tests. Nothing came up positive. No evidence ==> witch hunt.
At this point, some people will never be convinced that he is either guilty or innocent. Further "investigations" are a waste of time and money and are serving ONLY the personal and political agendas of some of the investigators involved.

But there is never any shortage of inbred hillbillies with torches and pitchforks.

Here's a real gem above.

prendrefeu · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:37 pm

Now now, let's just leave it as it is.
If you continue, people will call this thread a witch hunt too.
And we'll get nowhere fast.

Some sound advice I often give to my peers when I'm presiding over whatever drama comes up at my nonprofit:
"Arguing with an idiot makes two idiots."

majklnajt · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:44 pm

prendrefeu wrote:

"Arguing with an idiot makes two idiots."

I totally agree! Great quote!!

Its like: "He is so mean to his wife. And he is cheating on her."

Well, she can leave him.

Were Hamilton, Landis, Hincapie, etc. forced, TIED AND FORCEFULLY injected with EPO?
No. They werent 5 years old at that time...

majklnajt · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:48 pm

Where is the data from the "Fuentes story"?

dereksmalls · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:07 pm

This report is gonne take me out for the majority of the day. All printed off, doubt abny work will get done by me today :popcorn:

airwise · **Joined:** Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:31 pm **Posts:** 945

If I were American I would be asking one more question.

Why, if they had all of this evidence, did the Federal Investigators close their investigation almost overnight with no charges being made?

shadster · **Joined:** Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:02 am **Posts:** 33

artray wrote:

Armstrong continues to laugh while Landis calls Pat and the UCI a lot of insulting names near one of Switzerlands many boarders quite legally.

is he still laughing??

maquisard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:41 pm

airwise wrote:

Why, if they had all of this evidence, did the Federal Investigators close their investigation almost overnight with no charges being made?

- The burden of proof required in a Federal case is much tighter. Cases can be thrown out on technicalities. This evidence didn't meet those requirements.

artray · **Joined:** Fri Oct 07, 2011 2:08 pm **Posts:** 1365

shadster wrote:

artray wrote:

Armstrong continues to laugh while Landis calls Pat and the UCI a lot of insulting names near one of Switzerlands many boarders quite legally.

is he still laughing??

Armstrong has done a geat job with damage limitation . Nothing has changed from his perspective.
He knew what the USADA had thats why he did not defend himself . He could not win against the USADA but he can still answer all the charges out of court and there is no one there to say he is gulity. People will still believe he did not dope .
Armstrong is still laughing.

bartali · **Joined:** Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:01 pm **Posts:** 181

Who will believe he didn't dope? There may still be fans out there, but surely no one still believes he rode clean.

maquisard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:14 pm

People believe in religion despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Weenie · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:14 pm

dereksmalls · **Posted:** Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:17 pm

Who is Paul Scott and how did he know so much?

USADA Banned Armstrong new Doping Allegations

Who is online