why the hatred? the man won 7 straight tours during an era in which all of his competitors doped. so, either he was better straight than all of the others or in the all drug tdf he was the best. why dislike him for defending himself? the french love richard virenque, the many time k of the mtns, despite his positive test. why hate lance?
You are probably not aware of the existence of The US Postal Investigation Service. They're not as well known as the FBI but they're real law enforcement and not to be taken lightly.
My best guess is that, if charges are brought, prosecutors will go after Bruyneel and just make the cyclists talk.
Nutella1 wrote:
But they have a monopoly on domestic letter shipments, don't they? Or can any company (e.g. UPS) jump in and offer the same service nationwide if they wanted?
They have a monopoly on postal mail. The purpose of that monopoly is to keep the cost of shipment the same nationwide. What you pay for a stamp is the average cost of shipment of 3 ounces of mail, and it's a fee for services not a tax. It's like saying that what you pay for a ticket on Amtrak is a tax.
Johnny Q Law wrote:
In Greg Lemonds lawsuit against Trek (which he won), Armstrongs ex-wife pleaded the fifth in a sworn deposition as to whether or not she has seen Lance inject drugs/blood.
You can bet that Armstrong will plead the fifth many times in this inquiry.
How was his ex wife (or was she is wife at the time) able to take the 5th? She might be able to claim spousal privilege, but that is not the same thing.
Free LA wrote:
The USPS may be independent agency but the stamps you buy to support them are essentially taxes...they are one reason we had the Boston Tea Party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts
You're probably a tea-bagger er -partier yourself. Is there no part of the history of the revolutionary war or intent of the founders that any of you rhubarbs can get right?!?! I was watchng GB the other day when he argued that because most of the founders attended seminary they must have all been men of the cloth, or something close to it. The ignorance of history, or the reliance by the leaders of the tea baggers on the ignorance of their followers is both astounding and depressing.
Oh, and if you're not one of the tea partiers, my apologies....
Wait so is vandalizing mailboxes no longer a federal crime?
Hmm, what does vandalizing mailboxes have to do with this thread.
It's also a federal crime to send someone a threatening email without disclosing who you are.
Johnny Q Law wrote:
In Greg Lemonds lawsuit against Trek (which he won),
Lemond did not win the lawsuit. He did not "lose" it either, (unless of course you consider having trek dump your bike brand as losing, which I sure do). They settled.
And Trek filed it against him, not the other way around
Do you really think that "regular" people, who vote democrat or republican, are scholars of history? Tea baggers are no dumber than the rest of the population...
Link wrote:
You're probably a tea-bagger er -partier yourself. Is there no part of the history of the revolutionary war or intent of the founders that any of you rhubarbs can get right?!?! I was watchng GB the other day when he argued that because most of the founders attended seminary they must have all been men of the cloth, or something close to it. The ignorance of history, or the reliance by the leaders of the tea baggers on the ignorance of their followers is both astounding and depressing.
Oh, and if you're not one of the tea partiers, my apologies....
Wow... this thread really degenerated. How in the world did "tea baggers" become an arguing point? Anyway, I'm sick and tired of hearing people say that it is ok if Lance gets away with cheating, because he was the best of the cheating riders, and would have beaten them all had everyone in the peloton been clean.
If it is found that Lance was also guilty of doping, we still do not know definitively who the best would have been in a TDF void of drugs. Would Lance have caved in workouts or during the race itself without the aid of drugs and infusions where another rider, also riding clean would have not? Did Lance react to the PED's in a more physiologically dramatic and favorable way than other competitors did? Landis has claimed that until he convinced the manager of Phonak to take up systemized doping, that he could not keep up in the tour with riders from teams that were on USPS' type of program... was it the doping regimen and resources behind the man and bike that won those tours, while more naturally gifted, harder working clean riders, or even riders who were also doping without a wizard like Ferrari because they could afford the bikes and staff but not the premium PED resources bought with laundered Trek gear failed to measure up?
We will never know, and THAT is the real tragedy behind PED's and endurance sports. You introduce another nasty element to an equation that should be relatively simple, that should at some level be controlled and have agreed upon boundaries. Instead you have all of these questions floating around: who was doping? who had the best regimen? how would training have gone differently without the drugs? who would have acquired sponsorships w/o dirty performances? who would have made it to the start line without the boost in recovery, the hormones and steroids and EPO that helped subvert injury?
If Lance doped, I for one hope he goes down as one of the greatest con artists in the history of sport. If he's clean, he may be the most impressive athlete of the modern era. Until we figure it out, I'm rooting for this guy:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/nondoping-cyclists-finish-tour-de-france,2268/
jjjjjjj wrote:
why the hatred? the man won 7 straight tours during an era in which all of his competitors doped. so, either he was better straight than all of the others or in the all drug tdf he was the best. why dislike him for defending himself? the french love richard virenque, the many time k of the mtns, despite his positive test. why hate lance?
Wow... this thread really degenerated. How in the world did "tea baggers" become an arguing point? Anyway, I'm sick and tired of hearing people say that it is ok if Lance gets away with cheating, because he was the best of the cheating riders, and would have beaten them all had everyone in the peloton been clean.
If it is found that Lance was also guilty of doping, we still do not know definitively who the best would have been in a TDF void of drugs. Would Lance have caved in workouts or during the race itself without the aid of drugs and infusions where another rider, also riding clean would have not? Did Lance react to the PED's in a more physiologically dramatic and favorable way than other competitors did? Landis has claimed that until he convinced the manager of Phonak to take up systemized doping, that he could not keep up in the tour with riders from teams that were on USPS' type of program... was it the doping regimen and resources behind the man and bike that won those tours, while more naturally gifted, harder working clean riders, or even riders who were also doping without a wizard like Ferrari because they could afford the bikes and staff but not the premium PED resources bought with laundered Trek gear failed to measure up?
We will never know, and THAT is the real tragedy behind PED's and endurance sports. You introduce another nasty element to an equation that should be relatively simple, that should at some level be controlled and have agreed upon boundaries. Instead you have all of these questions floating around: who was doping? who had the best regimen? how would training have gone differently without the drugs? who would have acquired sponsorships w/o dirty performances? who would have made it to the start line without the boost in recovery, the hormones and steroids and EPO that helped subvert injury?
If Lance doped, I for one hope he goes down as one of the greatest con artists in the history of sport. If he's clean, he may be the most impressive athlete of the modern era. Until we figure it out, I'm rooting for this guy:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/nondoping-cyclists-finish-tour-de-france,2268/RRRR wrote:
Why are your tax dollars paying for this? So some high school kid with Breaking Away fantasies doesn't read up on Lance, decide to buy some PED's from across the border and end up killing himself. So that competitively illegal performance enhancement is met with punishment and more athletes in endurance sports (read running) begin to think twice before seeking an unfair edge. So that if Lance is a cheat, and he is shown to be a fraud, that the lie that has built a marketing empire is shown for what it is.
Sometimes integrity is worth the price... if you're really pissed about the allocation of resources, write a congressman.
Not a good reason to spend tax $. How about decent education so the fool kid you are so concerned about does not do what you fear. I would not want my tax $ paying to prosecute how somebody cheats in a game. Lets also prosecute Gaylord perry for throwing a spitter.
That was my point. After reading through some of the articles, it appears they will try to get him for distribution and possibly fraud and conspiracy. I think they are fishing and hoping for a perjury charge. The SCA trial failed to show fraud ( no drug clause in the contract), so I don't know the FEDs will do any better. Distribution will be hard to prove without some kind of paper trail, there dosnt seem to be an abundance of credible witnesses. Can the FEDs show that the team engaged in this illegal program to cheat sponsors out of money? Doesn't seem likely. So ( in my opinion) what it comes down to is trying to get LA to lie under oath, and that is what I consider a waste of millions of tax dollars.
So, a doping accuses another of doping and it becomes more credible?
That same doper that claims innocence and spent millions trying to prove it before deciding to say Lance helped him now?
Why didn't he just simply say Lance was a doper from the beginning?
No, my dad works for USPS, as does my aunt and uncle. It's still a government job, hence why they can buy MACE. When a carrier goes "postal"... why do you think they try to turn on places like City Hall and Superior Courts?
Tax dollars definitely helped pay for this.
Most people are stupid wrote:
Do you really think that "regular" people, who vote democrat or republican, are scholars of history? Tea baggers are no dumber than the rest of the population...
Link wrote:You're probably a tea-bagger er -partier yourself. Is there no part of the history of the revolutionary war or intent of the founders that any of you rhubarbs can get right?!?! I was watchng GB the other day when he argued that because most of the founders attended seminary they must have all been men of the cloth, or something close to it. The ignorance of history, or the reliance by the leaders of the tea baggers on the ignorance of their followers is both astounding and depressing.
Oh, and if you're not one of the tea partiers, my apologies....
The issue is that the tea-baggers take their name, and, indeed, their very identity from the acts of the founders. I live in the South where there's a bunch of these yahoos who show up at practically every public event carrying signs which beg people to ask them about the 10th amendment. When I have asked them, it always turns out that they know very little about it they haven't heard from am radio nut jobs or sons of the confederacy meetings. The issue is not whether they're smarter or dumber than the rest of the voting population, it's that they're both ignorant and wrong about what they themselves say are the reasons for their existence.
Nope, wrong wrote:
No, my dad works for USPS, as does my aunt and uncle. It's still a government job, hence why they can buy MACE. When a carrier goes "postal"... why do you think they try to turn on places like City Hall and Superior Courts?
Tax dollars definitely helped pay for this.
The USPS is a government agency that is not funded by tax dollars - hard to get your heads around, I know.
Nope, wrong wrote:
No, my dad works for USPS, as does my aunt and uncle. It's still a government job, hence why they can buy MACE. When a carrier goes "postal"... why do you think they try to turn on places like City Hall and Superior Courts?
Tax dollars definitely helped pay for this.
At least be factually accurate, when the postal workers "go postal" they are nearly always at a postal facility.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_postal#Edmond.2C_Oklahoma_in_1986The people that are "going postal" at city hall and courts are non-postal workers tagged with a term born at the postal service, much to their chagrin.
Beside the point, who people kill when they go insane really has no bearing on the funding source of an agency.
...my only question: How is it that every Major Cyclist, from Basso, Hamilton, Ulrich, Landis, and the whole lot of them get banned/busted, but one, and only one noticeable name miss the list? How, I ask how?
Can we say, Money, 'Cash Cow' and the cycling federation has no intention of wanting to kill the 'Golden Goose!' Plain and simple, and everyone is cycling knows it and turns a blind eye to it.