Cycling: UCI to respond to Lance Arms...

Cycling: UCI to respond to Lance Armstrong revelations on Monday

There are 7 comments on the The Independent story from Oct 19, 2012, titled Cycling: UCI to respond to Lance Armstrong revelations on Monday. In it, The Independent reports that:

Note: We do not store your email address but your IP address will be logged to prevent abuse of this feature.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Independent.

john

United States

#1 Oct 19, 2012
If armstrong never tested + in competition? how is he guilty? How many of his accusers tested + during competition? How many people lost their jobs because of accusations & later proved wrong? where do we go from here? mob media rule?
I do not defend someone who fails a test, but no fail???
thanks
GeeMan

Broxburn, UK

#2 Oct 19, 2012
There is never any way you can second guess Pat before he speaks so we shall see.

It shall be anything from we agree, unlikely.

To

Its a new investigation we cannot trust it.

Maybe he shall do the right thing and become Pontius Pilate and wash his hands of it and pass it to CAS.
turtle

Huddersfield, UK

#3 Oct 20, 2012
GeeMan wrote:
There is never any way you can second guess Pat before he speaks so we shall see.
It shall be anything from we agree, unlikely.
To
Its a new investigation we cannot trust it.
Maybe he shall do the right thing and become Pontius Pilate and wash his hands of it and pass it to CAS.
Just as a side issue geeie, do you recall your quotes about how his sponsors had stayed with him and you stated that they would continue to do so? i am sure i recall something along the lines of well informed, astute and better minds than ours continuing to support him. Therefore mine and others posts against la were ill informed and would prove to be wrong !! i know it is not an accurate quote but it is not far from, and i am pretty sure that was the general slant you were taking.
Now i am not one for blowing his own trumpet but as you have continually moved your goal posts and derided me and others for our thoughts maybe a little trumpet jazz is in order ;)
i am only joking my friend, yet i do play the trumpet and am willing to send you a mp3 file of some of my better solo's if you wish :)
Robert C Brooks

Amsterdam, Netherlands

#4 Oct 20, 2012
Armstrong did fail a test and got quack doctor to backdate prescription. Under penalty of perjury and before a grand jury Tyler Hamilton stated that Lance told him he had tested positive for EPO in the 2001 Tour de Suisse. Passing drug tests was/is quite easy as outlined by Hamilton in 'The Secret Race.'
john wrote:
If armstrong never tested + in competition? how is he guilty? How many of his accusers tested + during competition? How many people lost their jobs because of accusations & later proved wrong? where do we go from here? mob media rule?
I do not defend someone who fails a test, but no fail???
thanks
GeeMan

Broxburn, UK

#5 Oct 22, 2012
@Robert that is the reported consensus but there is also statements that it was rubbish and was in place beforehand.

The issue I have with the statement is where it came from and cannot take TH word for a lot.

If we judge people for what we can apply against them like LA then you need to do the same with TH, FL, JV all perjurers and FL fraud.

There is other evidence with far better security than these guys so being objective would you want to see them on the stand for your case when opposing Lawyer would just rip them apart as unreliable and liars.

There is also the 2005 Vrijam report that presented scientific data to show why some positive past tests can look positive now. It was accepted by WADA scientist as correct.

Like I said there are better sources against LA than this one.
turtle

Huddersfield, UK

#6 Oct 22, 2012
GeeMan wrote:
@Robert that is the reported consensus but there is also statements that it was rubbish and was in place beforehand.
The issue I have with the statement is where it came from and cannot take TH word for a lot.
If we judge people for what we can apply against them like LA then you need to do the same with TH, FL, JV all perjurers and FL fraud.
There is other evidence with far better security than these guys so being objective would you want to see them on the stand for your case when opposing Lawyer would just rip them apart as unreliable and liars.
There is also the 2005 Vrijam report that presented scientific data to show why some positive past tests can look positive now. It was accepted by WADA scientist as correct.
Like I said there are better sources against LA than this one.
maybe geeie, but this evidence stands alone with testimony from several people. None more important than Emma O'Reilly, which by your own criteria of what can be considered truthful. Her evidence is the best, the sordid claims and bullying from la can now be accepted for being just that. As la is proven to be a consistent liar throughout the case. Which leads to an apology to her from all those who fell hook line and sinker for la's and his teams lie's about her. Hopefully you can see geeie that an innocent was stamped all over by malicious larceny coming fromla and his camp.
She should now be considered as a reliable and accurate scource.
GeeMan

Broxburn, UK

#7 Oct 22, 2012
turtle who exactly will corroborate that evidence?

If you are seeking validation of evidence I repeat what I said to Robert there is far better available than 1 to 1 comments. I can also confirm that I would not and have not made any comments to support ANYONE in a 1 to 1 situation as being more truthful than the other, including Emma.

In all cases not everyone tells the truth and not everyone tells lies you need to look at how I can prove it is fact or not. If you struggle it is in-between, like Emma's.
I have said she has been consistent in her comments and claims which are a positive but not proof. FL was the same for long enough but changed as did JV. It is dangerous to take comments on face value either from those who love LA or donít.

You choose to believe her and I choose to do neither.

I am also open minded to point to evidence with issues as well as other with more security to them.
You know my issues are always with how it has been handled and not the doping, as they were all at it, and if I see a difficulty in any evidence I will say so which I have done.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cycling Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Alarm Siren Padlock 110dba Instructions Rev... Jul '17 NewYorkView 1
News Buy Nothing Day + Carnivalesque Rebellion | Adb... (Nov '10) Jun '17 BuyPhartsx 3
The Bicycle Air Pump Horn 120DB Super Loud Inst... Jun '17 NewYorkView 1
News Trump turns to 'The Snake' to warn about border... May '17 Wildchild 1
News Sir Dave Brailsford admits treatment by former ... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Sky phart 1
News British Cycling reputation 'in tatters', says M... (Mar '17) Mar '17 British phart 1
News Democratic pressure to oppose Trump roils Capit... (Feb '17) Feb '17 Democrats alienat... 1
More from around the web