Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby Pego » Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:05 pm

uakari wrote:i never understood why the obamaphobes are so obsessed with the "hussein" part of his name, when "barack" is a perfectly good arab name as well...


Saddam Hussein is your answer.
Pego
 
Posts: 10196
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby trevorp » Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:01 am

dukehjsteve wrote:Where are the Men In The White Suits when you need them ?!

I think what they wear is less important that what they've loaded the hypodermics with.
trevorp
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:12 am
Location: Birmingham, UK

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby MattMarriott » Thu Aug 02, 2012 7:03 pm

the fact that nobody but LAST PROPHET exposed the doping conspiracy proves that beasts are marked by the BEAST.

The two most important pages of the short story of the web ...
#1 result of this interesting google search of four words
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=basic+facts+about+God
MattMarriott
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby Marlow » Thu Aug 02, 2012 7:45 pm

Fascinating. Delusional paranoid mumbo-jumbo, but fascinating.
I sincerely wonder how Matt carries on in the real world, and, after the Colorado tragedy, why people aren't genuinely worried about him. I know I am. :(
Bot . . . intentional troll . . . fraternity hazing carried on way too far?
Marlow
 
Posts: 21076
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby Daisy » Thu Aug 23, 2012 6:31 pm

After more than a decade of outrunning accusations that he had doped during his celebrated cycling career, Lance Armstrong, one of the best-known and accomplished athletes in recent history, surrendered on Thursday, etching a dark mark on his legacy by ending his fight against charges that he used performance-enhancing drugs.

....

His decision means he will almost certainly be stripped of his seven Tour titles, the bronze medal he won at the 2000 Olympics and all other titles, awards and money he won from August 1998 on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/sport ... itles.html
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:23 pm

Too bad USADA doesn't have jurisdiction over the NFL, the NBA and MLB.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby CookyMonzta » Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:14 pm

Bet your horse money that his LiveStrong Foundation will go bust before the next Tour de France. The existence of that foundation is completely predicated upon the fame he gained from his exploits at the Tour de France. Without his victories, there would not have been a LiveStrong Foundation.

Now, once we are done with what could very well be the single biggest redistribution of awards (and money) ever to take place in the history of sport, all that remains of his legacy and career record will be even far worse than what remains of Marion Jones'. Her career record and awards, up to the summer of 2000 (including her 1997 and '99 World Championships and her PRs of 10.65A, 21.62, 49.59 and 20.8 relay leg), still remain intact. Everything Lance has, right up to the beginning of 1999, is not even a footnote compared to what remains of hers. Hardly anyone spoke of him before the 1999 Tour.

Who finished 2nd in each of the 4 AP polls that Lance won for Male Athlete of the Year? Venus Williams was 2nd to Marion in the 2000 Female Athlete of the Year poll. How will they deal with Lance?
CookyMonzta
 
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby Tuariki » Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:14 am

It will be interesting to see id the UCI tells USADA to go take a flying jump.

I am totally opposed to drugs and if Armstrong is guilty then I hope he gets his just desserts. However, Armstrong has probably been tested more times than any athlete alive and has always tested clean. US federal authorities decided they didn't have any evidence to charge him.

USADA has not put up a skerrick of indisputable evidence. Landis is not evidence. I am totally unsurprised that Armstrong has said to USADA "Go and F%$* your arbitration". Why should Armstrong spend millions trying to keep on defending himself?

So, if he is guilty then he deserves to go down. But USADA needs to front up with the evidence. Unfortunately, USADA is a typical example of how the USA justice system often works. Iraq had weapons of mass destruction because the US said so. And because the US has the military might and power it can do what it did. But not a skerrick of evidence. The USADA also has the might and power it seems to push a case, even if the real USADA motive is politics or publicity as Judge Sparks hinted at.

"USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives,'' such as politics or publicity, U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks wrote.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1288
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby Gabriella » Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:38 am

At last, we are near to some justice. This arrogant cheat looks to finally get his just desserts.

The only reason he has made the decision not to fight is to avoid any formal prosecution and conviction of doping; he wants to avoid the humiliation.

A great quote from a UK journalist:

"The most important lesson of the Lance Armstrong story, though, is the hardest to prepare for and guard against: our own gullibility and willing complicity. What is astounding and disturbing is that one man – a dominant personality as well as a dominant athlete – was able to enforce his will, isolate, bully and silence his doubters and critics, and win the world's top cycling event year after year and make people believe in him, despite there being, apparently, dozens of witnesses to its utter phoniness. Too many people had too much invested in the Lance Armstrong story, and the power of persuasion followed the money.

The moral of the story is that if a cyclist looks too good to be true, then he probably is. But if a cyclist looks too good to be true and has an entourage of lawyers, press flaks, doctors and bodyguards, then he definitely is."
Gabriella
 
Posts: 1677
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:59 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby pakillo » Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:30 am

quote "USADA chief executive Travis Tygart said Armstrong would be hit with a lifetime ban on Friday and planned to strip him of the seven Tour de France titles he won from 1999-2005."

The only one who should be banned for life are those who were silent when they were supposed to bust all the cheats, all anti-doping officials from that time, period.
pakillo
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby guru » Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:20 am

Tuariki wrote: US federal authorities decided they didn't have any evidence to charge him.



That's simply not true, and had nothing to do with the decision of U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte to suddenly close the case last winter.
guru
 
Posts: 10265
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby catson52 » Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:31 am

A great write up, bambam; though I am no expert on cycling, it brought back memories of the sport 40-50 years ago. Any views on Charly Gaul, the great Luxembourger from the 50s?
catson52
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:22 am

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby MattMarriott » Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:39 am

04-06-2009, 04:40 PM
http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-e ... ollow.html

Six acts
Lance Armstrong accused 29 June 2012 - stripped of his Tour de France titles ?
Usain Bolt accused ? - stripped of his Olympics and World titles ?
"Hussein Obama II" accused ? - stripped of his 44th presidential title ?

August 24, 2012 - second act out of six - Lance Armstrong stripped of his Tour de France Titles
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-0 ... d-for-life
MattMarriott
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby j-a-m » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:22 am

Congratulations to Beloki, Kloeden, Basso, Zuelle for winning their first Tour? And to Ullrich for winning three additional Tours? And correct me if I'm wrong, the only two of those five who never tested positive are Beloki and Kloeden?
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:47 am

j-a-m wrote:Congratulations to Beloki, Kloeden, Basso, Zuelle for winning their first Tour? And to Ullrich for winning three additional Tours? And correct me if I'm wrong, the only two of those five who never tested positive are Beloki and Kloeden?

Yeah but, Beloki's career ended prematurely in that horrific crash on the way to Gap in the 2003 Tour and there's too much smoke surrounding Kloden for there not to be some fire too.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:55 am

Tuariki wrote:It will be interesting to see id the UCI tells USADA to go take a flying jump.

I am totally opposed to drugs and if Armstrong is guilty then I hope he gets his just desserts. However, Armstrong has probably been tested more times than any athlete alive and has always tested clean. US federal authorities decided they didn't have any evidence to charge him.

There's no doubt in my mind that Armstrong doped along with the rest of his teammates and the entire peleton, but I think these matters are better left to the UCI. Was USADA granted the authority to get involved in such matters or did they arrogate themselves this power in the same manner that the NCAA arrogated itself the power to get involved with criminal justice matters involving Penn State?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby MattMarriott » Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:35 am

Lance Armstrong, Usain Bolt,"Hussein Obama II" accused and stripped: first of 6 acts June 29 2012, next 5 to follow in 2012

Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" accused and stripped - first of six acts June 29 2012

Last Prophet predicted 2004 that the greatest cycling champion ever, Lance Armstrong, would be executed the same way as Marion Jones:
- first: falsely accused of doping, as many others before, part of the agenda behind the illuminati doping conspiracy; (1)
- second: all major TITLES erased from the official medals table, which is also part of the "Rewrite History" agenda pushed to the utter limits.

In 2007 Last Prophet explained that Usain Bolt would be executed the same way as Lance Armstrong.
In 2008 after Usain Bolt set his world records at the Beijing Olympics, Last Prophet explained that Usain Bolt became the fastest man ever AND FOREVER.

Last Prophet explained immediately after the illuminati were forced to use plan B for the 2008 "election" and have "Obama" play counterfeit president and have him detonate as fake suicide bomber (like Nixon) later, that illuminati actor "Obama" would be executed the same way (2) as the two greatest sports champions ever, Armstrong and Bolt:
- accused of all sort of crimes (forging birth certificate; murdering "granny", etc);
- stripped of his title, with Hillary Clinton declared 44th president and successor of GW Bush.

All this part also of the supervised ethnic civil war script, to be launched together with the collapse of banks and anihilation of savings and pension funds of the human cattle.

The first of these six acts (accusation, titles stripping of Armstrong, Bolt and "Obama") timely took place (3) on June 29, 2012, hours before the start of the Tour de France.
The next five acts won't take as long as the first did. Actually they are all scheduled for 2012.

Notes
(1) http://doping-conspiracy.blogspot.pt/20 ... ll-be.html
(2) http://rewrite-history.blogspot.pt/2009 ... nia-v.html
(3) Lance Armstrong to face charges from U.S. Anti-Doping Agency
June 29, 2012
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/o ... igs30.html

In
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=47306
MattMarriott
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby guru » Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:36 am

jazzcyclist wrote: Was USADA granted the authority to get involved in such matters...?



Yes, because as the infamous 1984 pre-Olympic USOC "warnings" showed(linked to my profile here), sport governing bodies have a vested interest to not pursue - if not flat cover up - doping issues.
guru
 
Posts: 10265
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:40 am

guru wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote: Was USADA granted the authority to get involved in such matters...?



Yes, because as the infamous 1984 pre-Olympic USOC "warnings" showed(linked to my profile here), sport governing bodies have a vested interest to not pursue - if not flat cover up - doping issues.

I understand the conflict of interest of governing bodies, but does that mean that USADA has the authority to strip Peyton Manning of his MVP's if it found cause? Who gave USADA this power?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby guru » Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:45 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
guru wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote: Was USADA granted the authority to get involved in such matters...?



Yes, because as the infamous 1984 pre-Olympic USOC "warnings" showed(linked to my profile here), sport governing bodies have a vested interest to not pursue - if not flat cover up - doping issues.

I understand the conflict of interest of governing bodies, but does that mean that USADA has the authority to strip Peyton Manning of his MVP's if it found cause? Who gave USADA this power?



No, because the NFL does not fall under USADA's purview as ""the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American and Paralympic sport in the United States." It was created in 2000 because the USOC was under increasing pressure due to conflict of interest credibility issues
guru
 
Posts: 10265
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby j-a-m » Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:50 am

jazzcyclist wrote: but I think these matters are better left to the UCI. Was USADA granted the authority to get involved in such matters or did they arrogate themselves this power

What USADA is doing here is a publicity stunt at best. Looking forward to UCI making its own decision or getting this to the CAS.
j-a-m
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby Cooter Brown » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:17 am

He owns a bar downtown called "Six" which opened after his 6th title. I wonder if he'll rename it Zero.
Cooter Brown
 
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Austin

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:23 am

guru wrote:No, because the NFL does not fall under USADA's purview as ""the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American and Paralympic sport in the United States." It was created in 2000 because the USOC was under increasing pressure due to conflict of interest credibility issues

So if what you're saying is true and USADA can involve itself in any Olympic sport, I would presume that USADA also has the power to strip Lebron James of MVP awards and Serena Williams of Wimbledon titles, and since golf is returning to the Olympics in 2016, I guess it can also take away Tiger Woods' 14 major golf titles if it sees fit.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby Marlow » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:44 am

I just realized that MM (AFAIK) has NEVER engaged anyone here; he just posts and disappears again.

Matt! I'm calling you out, bro! How is it that you are not willing to DISCUSS this? You just want to 'lecture' us. That ain't hackin' it! Stand up for what you believe! :shock:

[not that I believe for a moment that the thread wouldn't go south IMMEDIATELY and disappear, with a life-time ban on our favorite anti-hero]
Marlow
 
Posts: 21076
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby HopStepJump » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:45 am

j-a-m wrote:Congratulations to Beloki, Kloeden, Basso, Zuelle for winning their first Tour? And to Ullrich for winning three additional Tours? And correct me if I'm wrong, the only two of those five who never tested positive are Beloki and Kloeden?


I really wonder how far down the GC list you would have to go to find a clean rider. 10th place? 20th place? Who really knows? I presume it's far enough down that they couldn't find a rightful winner because the tactics focus on the perceived threats and the small potatoes guys are allowed to ride off in breakaways.
HopStepJump
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 1:19 pm
Location: Maryland

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby odelltrclan » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:51 am

The titles should simply be vacated. No winners. At least in the cases of other athletes being elevated who have had their own issues, such as Ullrich and Basso. How embarrassing is it to say to admitted or convicted dopers, here is your title! In my opinion, Lance deserves what he is getting but, as others have pointed out, much of the peleton was doping and no winner would be the best answer.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby CookyMonzta » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:54 am

My bad. I thought Lance created his LiveStrong Foundation well after winning his first Tour de France. I knew he was raising money for cancer research, but I didn't hear about this foundation until after his first retirement in 2005. I didn't know he created this foundation in 1997, while he was out of cycling and getting treatment for cancer.

Which leads me to this question: Did he cheat to keep his foundation going, knowing that, if he were just an also-ran in those 7 Tours (maybe 1 or 2 wins between '99 and '05), the charity money would not flow even remotely as fast as it did during the last 13 years of that foundation's existence? That is to say, did he think the survival of his foundation was completely dependent on his success at the Tour? And did he return to cycling in 2008 because the money started to slow down dramatically after his 2005 retirement?

And how does one beat a test when being tested up the wazoo as Lance was? The accusations started immediately after he won his first Tour, and I'm sure that, because of the accusations, they tested him every single chance they had.
CookyMonzta
 
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:59 am

odelltrclan wrote:The titles should simply be vacated. No winners. At least in the cases of other athletes being elevated who have had their own issues, such as Ullrich and Basso. How embarrassing is it to say to admitted or convicted dopers, here is your title! In my opinion, Lance deserves what he is getting but, as others have pointed out, much of the peleton was doping and no winner would be the best answer.

Has Riis' 1996 title been vacated? After all, he's an admitted doper.
Last edited by jazzcyclist on Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby Cooter Brown » Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:59 am

HopStepJump wrote:I really wonder how far down the GC list you would have to go to find a clean rider. 10th place? 20th place? Who really knows?


I heard earlier that 23 out of the top 25 riders in the 2005 Tour de France have either been suspended or implicated in doping scandals.
Cooter Brown
 
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Austin

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:03 am

CookyMonzta wrote:Which leads me to this question: Did he cheat to keep his foundation going, knowing that, if he were just an also-ran in those 7 Tours (maybe 1 or 2 wins between '99 and '05), the charity money would not flow even remotely as fast as it did during the last 13 years of that foundation's existence? That is to say, did he think the survival of his foundation was completely dependent on his success at the Tour? And did he return to cycling in 2008 because the money started to slow down dramatically after his 2005 retirement?

And how does one beat a test when being tested up the wazoo as Lance was? The accusations started immediately after he won his first Tour, and I'm sure that, because of the accusations, they tested him every single chance they had.

According to Tyler Hamilton, U.S. Postal already had a full-blown doping program before Armstrong joined the team after his bout with cancer.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby odelltrclan » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:11 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
odelltrclan wrote:The titles should simply be vacated. No winners. At least in the cases of other athletes being elevated who have had their own issues, such as Ullrich and Basso. How embarrassing is it to say to admitted or convicted dopers, here is your title! In my opinion, Lance deserves what he is getting but, as others have pointed out, much of the peleton was doping and no winner would be the best answer.

has Riis' 1996 title been vacated? After all, he's an admitted doper.


Yes, I think it was vacated.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:19 am

odelltrclan wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:
odelltrclan wrote:The titles should simply be vacated. No winners. At least in the cases of other athletes being elevated who have had their own issues, such as Ullrich and Basso. How embarrassing is it to say to admitted or convicted dopers, here is your title! In my opinion, Lance deserves what he is getting but, as others have pointed out, much of the peleton was doping and no winner would be the best answer.

has Riis' 1996 title been vacated? After all, he's an admitted doper.


Yes, I think it was vacated.

Not according to the Tour's official website. According to it, Landis is the only one who has ever been stripped.

http://www.letour.fr/2012/TDF/HISTO/us/palmares.html
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby Conor Dary » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:19 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
I understand the conflict of interest of governing bodies, but does that mean that USADA has the authority to strip Peyton Manning of his MVP's if it found cause? Who gave USADA this power?


Right. Americans play soccer in the EPL. Are they going after those guys?

I wonder what the Tour de France people think of all of this? After all it is their event.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby Conor Dary » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:20 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
Not according to the Tour's official website. According to it, Landis is the only one who has ever been stripped.

http://www.letour.fr/2012/TDF/HISTO/us/palmares.html


Which makes sense since the guy flunked a Tour test....
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: Columnist looks at "trolls" who are anti-Armstrong

Postby odelltrclan » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:33 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
odelltrclan wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:
odelltrclan wrote:The titles should simply be vacated. No winners. At least in the cases of other athletes being elevated who have had their own issues, such as Ullrich and Basso. How embarrassing is it to say to admitted or convicted dopers, here is your title! In my opinion, Lance deserves what he is getting but, as others have pointed out, much of the peleton was doping and no winner would be the best answer.

has Riis' 1996 title been vacated? After all, he's an admitted doper.


Yes, I think it was vacated.

Not according to the Tour's official website. According to it, Landis is the only one who has ever been stripped.

http://www.letour.fr/2012/TDF/HISTO/us/palmares.html


It at one point had been removed but then was added back several years later. Perhaps the same thing will happen with Lance. I personally don't care if he retains the titles or not. Yes, they were all doping and he was the best of the bunch. But the culture of the sport needs to be cleaned up so the future is better for current athletes. Lance could go a long way in furthering that effort along if he would admit the truth.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby MattMarriott » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:45 am

They do not even let the audience hear what Armstrong has to say.
The same like with every other champion falsely accused, until some of them got a Guantanamo type of confession.
What else is there to discuss?
MattMarriott
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby odelltrclan » Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:59 am

MattMarriott wrote:the fact that nobody but LAST PROPHET exposed the doping conspiracy proves that beasts are marked by the BEAST.

The two most important pages of the short story of the web ...
#1 result of this interesting google search of four words
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=basic+facts+about+God


Where have you been? There are so many people who have discussed this "conspiracy" ad naseum over the last few years you would have to have been living in a closet not to have been exposed to it.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby MattMarriott » Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:25 am

I don't know about "discussed". I am talking about exposed.
So who else exposed it?
MattMarriott
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby odelltrclan » Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:49 am

MattMarriott wrote:I don't know about "discussed". I am talking about exposed.
So who else exposed it?


If something has been discussed at length (for YEARS mind you) then it is safe to say it has been exposed, because to expose something is to bring to light something previously hidden. If it has been discussed for how ever many years it was not hidden. Actually, what happened yesterday was expected by many. Go to cycling world and read up on the discussions there. The posts go into the thousands discussing these issues.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong. Usain Bolt, "Hussein Obama II" stripped

Postby MattMarriott » Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:56 am

You obviously did not read the link of article:
http://doping-conspiracy.blogspot.pt/20 ... ll-be.html
MattMarriott
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests