collapse


L'arri

  • Is on Dr Search's Green and Grey Diet
  • Grand Tour Winner
  • *
  • Country: be
  • Posts: 9585
  • Liked: 6786
  • Dopeology.org @DopeologyDotOrg @L_arriviste
    • Dopeology.org
  • Awards: Post of the year 2015Best Opening Post 2012
Re: The official Lance Armstrong thread
« Reply #720 on: August 27, 2012, 08:37 »
I've been reading all the news item comments and keep reading the same talking points, most tested, 500 tests, hearsay, etc. I am looking for some short counter points to copy and paste in reply. My little puppy is very ill :'( And my brain is not focusing well. So a little help is needed.
Just off the top my head I used these this morning

You have much to learn, Grasshopper

Eyewitness testimony is not hearsey.

Allegedly was tested more than 500 times. Maximum documented 236.

OK, here are a few more examples:

Quote
If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA's process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and - once and for all - put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance.

Judge Sparks does not agree.

Quote
As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges.

Judge Sparks does not agree.

Quote
The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine.

When you get tipped off 20 minutes before testing? When you race throughout a period before the bio-passport forces you to manage your blood numbers "around the clock"? When you "gift" money to the sport's governing body?

Quote
I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced

UCI: evidence points to complicity
WADA: only established in 1999; rules only adopted from 2004
USADA: if so, why the charges?

Quote
At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers' expense.

Swap out "USADA" for "Lance Armstrong" and you get the picture. What about those people (including a contributor to this thread) who received a similar sort of attention from Armstrong? And as for "U.S. taxpayers' expense", the USADA is federally funded to "Preserve the Integrity of Competition, Inspire True Sport, Protect the Rights of U.S. Athletes" so investigating a US-based doping conspiracy is absolutely relevant.
  • ReplyReply
  • Cycling is a Europe thing only and I only watch from Omloop on cause I am cool and sh*t
    RIP Craig1985 / Craig Walsh
    RIP KeithJamesMc / Keith McMahon / Larry Sarni

     

    * Dark Side Chatbox

    Sorry, this shoutbox does not exist.


    Top
    Back to top