Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongRe: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongAnd by winning more they badly hurt the image of the US Postal Service?
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
I didn't know that Trek was part of a government agency, I thought they were a private entity that donated bikes to U.S. Postal. Are you saying that those bikes became government property after Trek donated them? If the bikes had not been sold, how would the government's bottom line have been any different?
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
I don't lump Bonds in with Armstrong and Jones for two reasons:
2) Unlike Jones and Armstrong, Bonds' sport had no drug testing/enforcement program at the time he is alleged to have used PED's, and without rules, there can be no cheating.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongToday they are talking about a "former teammate" of Armstrong's who says blah blah blah whatever. I assume the former teammate is, again, Landis.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Not Landis. From New York Times story link several posts up -
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongThis morning while discussing the Lance Armstrong saga, Mike Grolick admitted using steroids when he played in the NFL, but of course he qualified his drug use by adding that he "only did it to recover from an injury". It amazes me at how these sports hypocrites believe they can absolve themselves of rules violations and law breaking if they have good enough excuses. It's like a bank robber telling a judge that he only did it because he had been laid off from his job and he was trying to prevent his house from being foreclosed upon.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
What about a guy that killed both of his parents and now is begging mercy from the court, because he is an orphan
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Isn't that the definitive example of "chutzpah"?
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongSaw this sign today and immediately thought of Lance
![]()
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongHe was in town this weekend but I did not join the throng to see him.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Funny stuff!
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Say what you will about Armstrong - the guy makes a great commercial. From his Livestrong ads for Dick's SG a few years ago lol - "I've got this watch" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hi2sc74ySA "Like a blacksmith to the forge" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVCeUw9kj2I
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongNow the G-Men have traveled to Paris to build their case against Armstrong.
http://www.universalsports.com/news/art ... 01176.html I've come to the conclusion that USADA, WADA and all the other drug enforcement agencies of the various sports governing bodies are totally useless compared to what the FBI and its European counterparts do. Without the American and European government law enforcement agencies, hardly any of the illegal gamblers and dopers in baseball, basketball, football, soccer, track and field or cycling would have never been exposed. Even in college football, if Cam Newton is found out to have been bought and paid for by Auburn, we'll have the FBI to thank for it, since as we speak, they are conducting interviews of the various Mississippi State alumni, boosters and coaches who are involved in the allegations.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
That sure sounds swell. Good to hear they are going after the important stuff. 'In the wake of 9/11, Saudi authorities came under criticism in the U.S. for sluggishness in investigating the attacks, in which 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens. Now it appears that the U.S. bears some responsibility for the slackness with which leads were pursued. According to several former employees of the U.S. embassy in Riyadh, the FBI legal attaché's office housed within the embassy was often in disarray during the months that followed 9/11. When an FBI supervisor arrived to clean up the mess, she found a mountain of paper and, for security reasons, ordered wholesale shredding that resulted in the destruction of unprocessed documents relating to the 9/11 investigations. A letter obtained by Time confirms that the Senate Judiciary Committee is investigating the matter.' http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... 48,00.html And this: 9/11 Congressional Report Faults F.B.I.-C.I.A. Lapses By DAVID JOHNSTON Published: July 24, 2003 WASHINGTON, July 23 — The Sept. 11 attacks were preventable, but the plot went undetected because of communications lapses between the F.B.I. and C.I.A., which failed to share intelligence related to two hijackers, a Congressional report to be released on Thursday says. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/24/us/9- ... apses.html
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
You do understand the FBI and CIA have nothing to do with the Armstrong investigation?
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
From the article linked in my previous post:
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongNot referring to you jc.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
I am just quoting from your thread. Frankly the whole thing bores me. 'I've come to the conclusion that USADA, WADA and all the other drug enforcement agencies of the various sports governing bodies are totally useless compared to what the FBI and its European counterparts do. Without the American and European government law enforcement agencies, hardly any of the illegal gamblers and dopers in baseball, basketball, football, soccer, track and field or cycling would have never been exposed. Even in college football, if Cam Newton is found out to have been bought and paid for by Auburn, we'll have the FBI to thank for it, since as we speak, they are conducting interviews of the various Mississippi State alumni, boosters and coaches who are involved in the allegations."
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
That's not mine. Back to the question, in reference to you dragging 9/11 into the conversation. Do you or do you not know the FBI and CIA are not involved in the Armstrong investigation?
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongFor the record, I'm ambivalent on whether the G-Men should be involved in insuring fair play in professional and big-time college sports. My main point is that the governing bodies of these various sports lack the competency, and in some cases, lack the will, to catch and punish the rule breakers in their sports. The G-Men are much better at it than they are.
For example, Mississippi State reported Cecil Newton's pay-for-play shakedown to the SEC back in January, but now we find out that the SEC just sat on it. Two weeks ago when Cam's dirty laundry started leaking to the media (probably from a miffed Mississippi State booster), and questions started being asked about where the investigation was going, the SEC honchos said that they don't consider it their job to enforce NCAA rules. Of course the media attention forced the NCAA to get involved, but the investigation was still moving at a snail's pace until the FBI started conducting interviews today, and now folks are singing like canaries.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongSince the FDA is handling the PED investigations, I'm fine with it. That's their job.
As for Newton, you couldn't be more right about FBI involvement getting the moss off the stone. I was stunned Auburn played Newton against Georgia after his father admitted to NCAA investigators last week that he did indeed seek financial compensation from Miss State for Cam's services(while saying Cam didn't know a thing LOL!). If that's true it doesn't matter if Cam "knew" or not, and his days are numbered.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Look fool, obviously the CIA is not involved. And who cares about the FBI. It wouldn't surprise me that they were involved. After all going after low hanging fruit is their specialty.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
You lose.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Can't we all get along?
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
So, what's your point? And what would you have the FDA investigate, if not illegal drug use/trafficking?
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
So true! However, I think their real specialty is "shiny", low-hanging fruit. I doubt that the FBI would be involved if Cam Newton was the third-string tight end for Indiana.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
Of course, neither would six-figure pay to play demands.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
That's true, but it's Newton's fame and Auburn's success got the G-Men's attention, not his six-figure price tag. If Newton hadn't panned out at Auburn, but instead was sitting on the bench as a third-string quarterback on a 5-6 Auburn team, instead of an 11-0 team, I don't think the G-Men would be interested, despite the shakedown attempt by his father.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstronghttp://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/m ... ?eref=sihp
Perhaps the most disturbing, and disappointing, revelation - Dr. Don Catlin "lost" five questionable test results, and somehow confirmation on two other positives was "unsuccessful".
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongThe latest Armstrong news is in a story linked in the headline section of the home page. Ex-Olympic champ admits doping and says he saw Armstrong doing it.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-ArmstrongArmstrong posted this to his FB wall yesterday night:
Quite interesting to see the ignorant masses (who are 99.9% his fans, of course) gulping it up. Marion Jones never failed a drug test - and my guess her number was in the four digits. Ditto Zhanna Block, Stephanie Graf and countless others.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
I thought the same thing. LA's statement doesn't address anything that has been levelled against him and is clearly intended to win the public/media (i.e. ignorant of the non-link between passing tests and not doping) battle. Amongst those who know the sports of cycling or athletics this argument holds absolutely no water. We are well used to big dopers passing tests over an extended period of time. To me, the questions of Armstrong's usage and Contador's usage are not even slightly debatable. To make it crystal clear, that's without saying whether or not I believe them to be dopers - just that I personally have no doubt on the matter.
Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong
It is not ignorance, but rather nobody cares. And rightfully so.
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: jhc68 and 6 guests |