Lance Armstrong gets nod of support f...

Lance Armstrong gets nod of support from Aspen Art Museum

There are 18 comments on the The Washington Post story from Oct 23, 2012, titled Lance Armstrong gets nod of support from Aspen Art Museum. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

Disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong has lost his Tour de France titles and the backing of major sponsors.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

“It's Time to Defeat Terrorism ”

Since: May 11

NYC

#1 Oct 23, 2012
The great American icon Cycling Lance Armstrong 'guilt' as user of doping must be proven in court of law. The fact that USDA used witnesses which is suspected means to claim Armstrong’s doping even if he was tested 500 times during the years 1998-2005 prove that USDA has no evidence against Armstrong. Will Lance Armstrong go to court to prove his innocence similar to baseball superstars that were acquitted?
Path

Albuquerque, NM

#2 Oct 23, 2012
I agree.
GeeMan

Broxburn, UK

#3 Oct 23, 2012
There are many issues with USADA File however I don’t see him doing it whilst there are 2 other cases to go to Arbitration.

I would suspect LA will allow these to be progressed and he will then take a view and act or not.

Both cases shall be found guilty as we all know however it shall allow the Lawyers to get a slice of the evidence in action and have a take on how it could be dealt with in a Legal format.
Path

Albuquerque, NM

#4 Oct 23, 2012
I appreciate your informative posts without all the emotional froth surrounding this issue.
Ahmadinejad

Fairport, NY

#5 Oct 24, 2012
If he had two balls he might be able to stand up for himself.
harvey

Columbus, OH

#6 Oct 24, 2012
Jeffy FarRightone wrote:
The great American icon Cycling Lance Armstrong 'guilt' as user of doping must be proven in court of law. The fact that USDA used witnesses which is suspected means to claim Armstrong’s doping even if he was tested 500 times during the years 1998-2005 prove that USDA has no evidence against Armstrong. Will Lance Armstrong go to court to prove his innocence similar to baseball superstars that were acquitted?
Will Jeffy the Bot ever stop posting worthless spam from the far Right? Apparently Righties support doping, which is at least good to know. Must be one of the few scientific things they support...

LOL
harvey

Columbus, OH

#7 Oct 24, 2012
Path wrote:
I appreciate your informative posts without all the emotional froth surrounding this issue.
Do you support doping in cycling? Yes or no?
GeeMan

Glenrothes, UK

#8 Oct 24, 2012
harvey

What measures do you believe are required to STOP doping/cheating in Sport?
BiggSexxy

United States

#9 Oct 24, 2012
First of all I never believed that when they do the blood test was to see who was guilty or dirty, but I do believd it was to see who was clean.........nobody was!
Conky

Vancouver, Canada

#10 Oct 25, 2012
Jeff Brightone wrote:
The great American icon Cycling Lance Armstrong 'guilt' as user of doping must be proven in court of law. The fact that USDA used witnesses which is suspected means to claim Armstrong’s doping even if he was tested 500 times during the years 1998-2005 prove that USDA has no evidence against Armstrong. Will Lance Armstrong go to court to prove his innocence similar to baseball superstars that were acquitted?
No court needed to reveal that you are an idiot
Chris

Myrtle Beach, SC

#11 Oct 25, 2012
1. He chose not to go to a court of law.
2. The exaggerated number of 500 is actually just that; EXAGGERATED. It was approximately half that amount, likely as much as any cyclist.
3. Again, no, he won't step foot in a courtroom. It's kinda like the 'whore in church' syndrome.
4. Most importantly, say I'm a cyclist that never received a doping suspension, never failed a test and was perhaps the man's best friend and most important domestique` for 7 tours and more years than anyone. What is my motivation to testify that I participated in this same doping ring, did the same drugs under the guidance of my team management, our team management, if I did not? Do you speed? How many speeding tickets do you have? How many does it take to call someone a speeder?
I'm sorry you feel that you need to "put your fingers in the holes thru his hands" but it is what it is. I have a signed Lance Armstrong photo for outstanding support of the then LAF, raising thousands of dollars from those of us inspired by him. But there is no sand deep enough for me to keep my head in to think that this man is no more than a manipulative bully that made a choice, and did whatever it took to protect his secret to that end. His contract with the devil has come due, and deserves whatever comes to him.
Jeff Brightone wrote:
The great American icon Cycling Lance Armstrong 'guilt' as user of doping must be proven in court of law. The fact that USDA used witnesses which is suspected means to claim Armstrong’s doping even if he was tested 500 times during the years 1998-2005 prove that USDA has no evidence against Armstrong. Will Lance Armstrong go to court to prove his innocence similar to baseball superstars that were acquitted?
GeeMan

Glenrothes, UK

#12 Oct 26, 2012
@chris
There was never a court of law

500 tests from media coverage not LA

Would he step into a court...YES for the same reason FDA dropped the case it would be thrown out quickly as in law it has no foundation

GH/LL et al were threatened with jail for the testimony and if you look at their affidavits they are all dated except 1 AFTER LA declined to go to a hearing!

Did he dope YES did every other rider do exactly the same YES.

If YOU want to believe the hype and not look at the BIG issue here that fine but it is nothing like what you believe it is.

My beef is the due process NOT allowed to LA by USADA/WADA who broke many of their own rules to get to him and ignored all other riders and athletes in the process.

If you doubt what I say START with Wiki and type in doping at tour de France and start to catch up.
bumfluff

Claremont, Australia

#13 Oct 27, 2012
GeeMan:
"Did he dope YES did every other rider do exactly the same YES"
LOL, every other rider doped - you sure you are not Lance Armstrong?
Big

Bangkok, Thailand

#14 Oct 27, 2012
250 something not 500, get your number right and read the whole report before you put any comments on the issue....yawn
turtle

Huddersfield, UK

#15 Oct 27, 2012
GeeMan wrote:
@chris
There was never a court of law
500 tests from media coverage not LA
Would he step into a court...YES for the same reason FDA dropped the case it would be thrown out quickly as in law it has no foundation
GH/LL et al were threatened with jail for the testimony and if you look at their affidavits they are all dated except 1 AFTER LA declined to go to a hearing!
Did he dope YES did every other rider do exactly the same YES.
If YOU want to believe the hype and not look at the BIG issue here that fine but it is nothing like what you believe it is.
My beef is the due process NOT allowed to LA by USADA/WADA who broke many of their own rules to get to him and ignored all other riders and athletes in the process.
If you doubt what I say START with Wiki and type in doping at tour de France and start to catch up.
Geeie, still at it i see!
I will not start our whole thing again, so sorry now for the lack of new information or commentary relating to your ever questioning of due process and the many rules you see broken but others do not. Maybe just one statement. As time has gone on and events have changed, i think it's fair to say that some of your earlier questioning on this subject was proved to be wrong. Also there have been many others take issue with you on some of your insistent claims about the process. The eight year rule, your assertion of usada getting its case from the fed's, the uci accepting usada's findings, how the sponsors you were naming, continued their support of la (showing that they could see the lack of due process you saw) actually days later all bailed, You're even more insistent claim (than usada getting its file from fed's) Of la being the best on a level playing field argument which me and many others have explained in detail to you why that is not the case; Not just because we guess it's so, but by reading and listening to people with expertise and knowledge in the area, your every single cyclist did it argument - which is not true - there were riders who did not cheat; and many who did not climb the ranks and continue from a promising start to a career in cycling because they chose not to cheat like la.
To name but a few !!
Finally i will look forward to you pointing out and us all seeing a massive rule and law breaking fallout, in the governance of doping in sport. Which you predict will manifest itself, from the precedent of all this nasty, cheating, law and rule breaking hunt of la.
Can not remember if it was you or someone else banging on about cyclists or even athletes not having a chance when they go to cas. Even quoting percentage figures of how low the chance is of winning. Well (if it was you, sorry if it was not) seen as you know and have always known that "ALL" cyclists cheated with ped's during the time this data was collected. Is it not, not a surprise ! that almost none win their case? That they only take it to cas because they see how everyone else is cheating so why should they be the one who takes all the flack. Yet the omerta keeps them quiet on this. But they think they might get away on a technicality like la has done in his past troubles. Yet they were cheating and taking ped's so cas having a very high percentage against cyclists is of no surprise.
I apologise geeie for my rant, have been away from my puter for a week and have been sick. So unable to get out on the bike or run or play squash to get rid of any tension, and get those natural chemicals buzzing in my brain and shooting down my spinal column.
All of which helps keep me calm, relaxed + positive afterwards.
GeeMan

Glenrothes, UK

#16 Oct 28, 2012
@bumfluff Not sure where you think I was coming from but you are only saying the same as I have for weeks M8.
GeeMan

Glenrothes, UK

#17 Oct 28, 2012
@tutrtle about sponsors bailing. Can you name those who are with him at Livestrong? What about with him on the Tri events being scheduled?

Under WADC Rules it is a requirement of WADA to appeal the 8+8years to CAS! Wrong? But then again why let your own rules get in the way of getting LA. Maybe I had the blind faith WADA would actually do something correct but they don’t have a good record at that also.

Can you align +8 years and the matter?
As soon as you believe the ends justifies the means you are as corrupt as those you chase/jail/sanction.

Do you believe WADA/USADA are correct to break their own rules? If they are why not allow athletes to as well?

I have said since day 1 the due process is wrong if it is breached and what happened? It was breached so the rules are there are no rules!

I’m glad you are feeling better and that I am able to contribute to your recuperating in some way :-)
Gus

Vancouver, Canada

#18 Oct 28, 2012
No matter what,LIVESTRONG LANCE,you only come this way once,if you are Religious,it may haunt you,if you are a Free Thinker...What the Hell,look after yourself and your Family...enjoy LIFE!

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
News Cycling: Lance Armstrong 'still lying' says USA... (Jan '13) Jun '16 Greg McManom 29
Wheel'n Wood Apr '16 Billy Smith 1
News Mattis is a no, so who else is there? Apr '16 charlie foxtrot 1
How To Connect A Bicycle Chain Feb '16 NewYorkView 1
How To Remove A Bicycle Chain Feb '16 NewYorkView 1
Spruzza Feb '16 Billy Wright 1
News Lance Armstrong's doping drugs (Jan '13) Jan '16 Fart news 189
More from around the web