Emma Addresses Strickland

On Apr 29, 4:31*pm, BL wrote:
Interesting how Armstrong went after her with his legal team but
couldn't crack her.http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselect...-o%E2%80%99rei...

BL anyone with a 3rd grade reading ability would read this section of
the article and come up with the conclusion you wrote.

"why did Lance’s legal team feel the need to go to the High Court the
morning of my testimony for the above case so they could sit in on it?
They would have known that I was without my lawyer, another bullying
tactic that I had become accustomed too. Unfortunately, it’s hard to
effectively bully someone who is telling the truth."


Yes - Lance's legal team went after her and couldn't crack her and
the rest of these RBR jokers are being stupid ****s. It must be
some kind of silly grade school game they play.

On Apr 30, 11:44*am, BL wrote:
On 4/30/2011 12:11 PM, Phil H wrote:



On Apr 30, 6:26 am, *wrote:
On 4/29/2011 10:15 PM, Substance McGravitas wrote:

On 4/29/2011 6:33 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Apr 29, 5:57 pm, "Mike
wrote:

Great read, thanks for the link!

Funny that the part you take away from this article is about Lance
and his
legal team. The article had little to say about that; rather, it was, as
your subject line states, Emma addressing Strickland, and the weight the
media places on her testimony vs others.

The part I found most interesting was this-

"Years ago I gave an interview to David Walsh, in which I told him
the truth
of what I had seen and experienced in my years in cycling.
Incidentally, I
got paid a small sum of money for all the time I put into helping
David."

I found this interesting:
"But now I am sick to death of journalists and people in the media
using my facts to help whatever point they want to get across. They
chase me like dogs in heat when they are trying to get their story,
then drop me if they’ve got their facts or I won’t elaborate or
embellish their story.
{snip}
For the record, I might not have achieved anything like Lance has—who
has? But I live a nice, quiet life running a small business, with my
two dogs and my boyfriend."

Chase me like a dog in heat? What woman would say that? It's
implying she's a female dog - a bitch. Very odd. Then I read the
last part - and that explained it all. She's in business with the two
dogs (notice the first billing) and her boyfriend. I wonder who's top
dog? =:O

R

Shes's sick of people who wont listen and take her staements out of
context - like you and Brian. It ****es her off. That's all she said in
the bits you twisted.

Show me where I've taken any of her statements out of context.

Out of context isn't a precise account of what she said. Folks with
their own agenda, selling newspapers, books, gossip mongers, the
"bring down Lance" brigade etc. Her desire was to rid cycling of drugs
and the impression that Lance the bully went after her.......well, you
can make accusations, but you'd better be able to back them up with
facts otherwise you're wide open to attack.....simple as that. She's
right...she was very naive.
Phil H

Re-read what RICO wrote. He said I took what she said out of context.
Show me where I have ever taken what she has said out of context.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I agree, you haven't taken what she said out of context but that's a
moot point. She is critical of people (Rico includes you) because of
their "other" agendas.
As for her word versus Lance's, Strychnine was right. Lance wins
because more is needed than just somebody's word to establish the
accused deed as a fact........don't you think? The fact that she
doesn't see this means what......a very narrow and naive perspective
maybe?

Phil H

Lance wins
because more is needed than just somebody's word to establish the
accused deed as a fact........don't you think? The fact that she
doesn't see this means what......a very narrow and naive perspective
maybe?

Phil H

Wait a sec - she was asked to tell the truth. Put under oath and
appears to have done so. Because of that she's paid a price -
suffered consequences. We all know this can happen.

Would you trust Lance Armstrong to tell the truth when there would be
consequences for him ?

I doubt anyone in this forum can honestly say they would.

“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't
believe you”

Not about differences in opinion, or Rashomon style perspectives.
Lance is, has been and will be an outright liar.

On Apr 30, 6:36*pm, Phil H wrote:
On Apr 30, 11:44*am, BL wrote:









On 4/30/2011 12:11 PM, Phil H wrote:

On Apr 30, 6:26 am, *wrote:
On 4/29/2011 10:15 PM, Substance McGravitas wrote:

On 4/29/2011 6:33 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Apr 29, 5:57 pm, "Mike
wrote:

Great read, thanks for the link!

Funny that the part you take away from this article is about Lance
and his
legal team. The article had little to say about that; rather, it was, as
your subject line states, Emma addressing Strickland, and the weight the
media places on her testimony vs others.

The part I found most interesting was this-

"Years ago I gave an interview to David Walsh, in which I told him
the truth
of what I had seen and experienced in my years in cycling.
Incidentally, I
got paid a small sum of money for all the time I put into helping
David."

I found this interesting:
"But now I am sick to death of journalists and people in the media
using my facts to help whatever point they want to get across. They
chase me like dogs in heat when they are trying to get their story,
then drop me if they’ve got their facts or I won’t elaborate or
embellish their story.
{snip}
For the record, I might not have achieved anything like Lance has—who
has? But I live a nice, quiet life running a small business, with my
two dogs and my boyfriend."

Chase me like a dog in heat? What woman would say that? It's
implying she's a female dog - a bitch. Very odd. Then I read the
last part - and that explained it all. She's in business with the two
dogs (notice the first billing) and her boyfriend. I wonder who's top
dog? =:O

R

Shes's sick of people who wont listen and take her staements out of
context - like you and Brian. It ****es her off. That's all she said in
the bits you twisted.

Show me where I've taken any of her statements out of context.

Out of context isn't a precise account of what she said. Folks with
their own agenda, selling newspapers, books, gossip mongers, the
"bring down Lance" brigade etc. Her desire was to rid cycling of drugs
and the impression that Lance the bully went after her.......well, you
can make accusations, but you'd better be able to back them up with
facts otherwise you're wide open to attack.....simple as that. She's
right...she was very naive.
Phil H

Re-read what RICO wrote. He said I took what she said out of context.
Show me where I have ever taken what she has said out of context.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I agree, you haven't taken what she said out of context but that's a
moot point. She is critical of people (Rico includes you) because of
their "other" agendas.

I included no one.

As for her word versus Lance's, Strychnine was right. Lance wins
because more is needed than just somebody's word to establish the
accused deed as a fact........don't you think? The fact that she
doesn't see this means what......a very narrow and naive perspective
maybe?

She's been kicked around and she's sensitive to anything on the issue
where her name crops up. Nothing surprising there.

R

On Apr 30, 9:27*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:

Wait a sec - she was asked to tell the truth. *Put under oath and
appears to have done so. * *Because of that she's paid a price -
suffered consequences. *We all know this can happen.

True. We also know that people commit perjury, juggle kittens and
steal library books. So let me take the opportunity to say I hate
Vino. He's a dick and I hope he Rasmussen's himself in his next time
trial.

Would you trust Lance Armstrong to tell the truth when there would be
consequences for him ?

I doubt anyone in this forum can honestly say they would.

No offense, pizza boy, but I can honestly say I wouldn't trust you to
tell the truth if there were consequences for you.
I am not 100% sure, but I believe this is what they call "life." This
is why we watch sports - to get away from life, no?

R

On Apr 30, 11:55*pm, RicodJour wrote:
On Apr 30, 9:27*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:



Wait a sec - she was asked to tell the truth. *Put under oath and
appears to have done so. * *Because of that she's paid a price -
suffered consequences. *We all know this can happen.

True. *We also know that people commit perjury, juggle kittens and
steal library books. *So let me take the opportunity to say I hate
Vino. *He's a dick and I hope he Rasmussen's himself in his next time
trial.

Would you trust Lance Armstrong to tell the truth when there would be
consequences for him ?

I doubt anyone in this forum can honestly say they would.

No offense, pizza boy, but I can honestly say I wouldn't trust you to
tell the truth if there were consequences for you.
I am not 100% sure, but I believe this is what they call "life." *This
is why we watch sports - to get away from life, no?

R

I wouldn't count on me to give the same opinion as 1 in a million
people - but you can rely on me telling the truth. There's a huge
difference.

On 4/30/2011 2:54 PM, Substance McGravitas wrote:
On 4/30/2011 11:44 AM, BL wrote:
On 4/30/2011 12:11 PM, Phil H wrote:
On Apr 30, 6:26 am, wrote:
On 4/29/2011 10:15 PM, Substance McGravitas wrote:



On 4/29/2011 6:33 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Apr 29, 5:57 pm, "Mike
wrote:

Great read, thanks for the link!

Funny that the part you take away from this article is about Lance
and his
legal team. The article had little to say about that; rather, it
was, as
your subject line states, Emma addressing Strickland, and the
weight the
media places on her testimony vs others.

The part I found most interesting was this-

"Years ago I gave an interview to David Walsh, in which I told him
the truth
of what I had seen and experienced in my years in cycling.
Incidentally, I
got paid a small sum of money for all the time I put into helping
David."

I found this interesting:
"But now I am sick to death of journalists and people in the media
using my facts to help whatever point they want to get across. They
chase me like dogs in heat when they are trying to get their story,
then drop me if they’ve got their facts or I won’t elaborate or
embellish their story.
{snip}
For the record, I might not have achieved anything like Lance has—who
has? But I live a nice, quiet life running a small business, with my
two dogs and my boyfriend."

Chase me like a dog in heat? What woman would say that? It's
implying she's a female dog - a bitch. Very odd. Then I read the
last part - and that explained it all. She's in business with the two
dogs (notice the first billing) and her boyfriend. I wonder who's top
dog? =:O

R

Shes's sick of people who wont listen and take her staements out of
context - like you and Brian. It ****es her off. That's all she
said in
the bits you twisted.

Show me where I've taken any of her statements out of context.

Out of context isn't a precise account of what she said. Folks with
their own agenda, selling newspapers, books, gossip mongers, the
"bring down Lance" brigade etc. Her desire was to rid cycling of drugs
and the impression that Lance the bully went after her.......well, you
can make accusations, but you'd better be able to back them up with
facts otherwise you're wide open to attack.....simple as that. She's
right...she was very naive.
Phil H
Re-read what RICO wrote. He said I took what she said out of context.
Show me where I have ever taken what she has said out of context.

You're not capable of seeing your own misrepresentations. You are not
constrained by reality. "Each reader will take from her statement what
they will" justifies claiming that she was talking about anything.

You claim the article was about Lance's legal team, no reasonable person
would read it that way.
The short answer is "No, I haven't taken anything she has said out of
context."

Further, I made no claims at all, ****Tard. I pointed out one aspect of
her statement that I found interesting. Other readers will be
interestred in other aspects of her statement. That does not mean that
anyone is taking any part of her statement out of context. I suggest
you go back to your room and finish whacking off to your Lance poster
collection. And shut the door so you don't disturb Mommy.

On 5/1/2011 9:50 AM, BL wrote:
On 4/30/2011 2:54 PM, Substance McGravitas wrote:
On 4/30/2011 11:44 AM, BL wrote:
On 4/30/2011 12:11 PM, Phil H wrote:
On Apr 30, 6:26 am, wrote:
On 4/29/2011 10:15 PM, Substance McGravitas wrote:



On 4/29/2011 6:33 PM, RicodJour wrote:
On Apr 29, 5:57 pm, "Mike
wrote:

Great read, thanks for the link!

Funny that the part you take away from this article is about Lance
and his
legal team. The article had little to say about that; rather, it
was, as
your subject line states, Emma addressing Strickland, and the
weight the
media places on her testimony vs others.

The part I found most interesting was this-

"Years ago I gave an interview to David Walsh, in which I told him
the truth
of what I had seen and experienced in my years in cycling.
Incidentally, I
got paid a small sum of money for all the time I put into helping
David."

I found this interesting:
"But now I am sick to death of journalists and people in the media
using my facts to help whatever point they want to get across. They
chase me like dogs in heat when they are trying to get their story,
then drop me if they’ve got their facts or I won’t elaborate or
embellish their story.
{snip}
For the record, I might not have achieved anything like Lance
has—who
has? But I live a nice, quiet life running a small business, with my
two dogs and my boyfriend."

Chase me like a dog in heat? What woman would say that? It's
implying she's a female dog - a bitch. Very odd. Then I read the
last part - and that explained it all. She's in business with the
two
dogs (notice the first billing) and her boyfriend. I wonder who's
top
dog? =:O

R

Shes's sick of people who wont listen and take her staements out of
context - like you and Brian. It ****es her off. That's all she
said in
the bits you twisted.

Show me where I've taken any of her statements out of context.

Out of context isn't a precise account of what she said. Folks with
their own agenda, selling newspapers, books, gossip mongers, the
"bring down Lance" brigade etc. Her desire was to rid cycling of drugs
and the impression that Lance the bully went after her.......well, you
can make accusations, but you'd better be able to back them up with
facts otherwise you're wide open to attack.....simple as that. She's
right...she was very naive.
Phil H
Re-read what RICO wrote. He said I took what she said out of context.
Show me where I have ever taken what she has said out of context.

You're not capable of seeing your own misrepresentations. You are not
constrained by reality. "Each reader will take from her statement what
they will" justifies claiming that she was talking about anything.

You claim the article was about Lance's legal team, no reasonable person
would read it that way.
The short answer is "No, I haven't taken anything she has said out of
context."

Further, I made no claims at all, ****Tard. I pointed out one aspect of
her statement that I found interesting. Other readers will be
interestred in other aspects of her statement. That does not mean that
anyone is taking any part of her statement out of context. I suggest you
go back to your room and finish whacking off to your Lance poster
collection. And shut the door so you don't disturb Mommy.

I said that no reasonable person would read this article as being about
Lance's legal team, and you defend your reasonableness with an obscenity
laced tirade.

You are not required to confirm everything I type, just so you know.

On 5/1/2011 9:48 AM, Anton Berlin wrote:
On Apr 30, 11:55 pm, wrote:
On Apr 30, 9:27 pm, Anton wrote:



Wait a sec - she was asked to tell the truth. Put under oath and
appears to have done so. Because of that she's paid a price -
suffered consequences. We all know this can happen.

True. We also know that people commit perjury, juggle kittens and
steal library books. So let me take the opportunity to say I hate
Vino. He's a dick and I hope he Rasmussen's himself in his next time
trial.

Would you trust Lance Armstrong to tell the truth when there would be
consequences for him ?

I doubt anyone in this forum can honestly say they would.

No offense, pizza boy, but I can honestly say I wouldn't trust you to
tell the truth if there were consequences for you.
I am not 100% sure, but I believe this is what they call "life." This
is why we watch sports - to get away from life, no?

R

I wouldn't count on me to give the same opinion as 1 in a million
people - but you can rely on me telling the truth. There's a huge
difference.

Really? You don't tell lies when it's in your interest to do so? Never?

There's Jim Carey movie based on a guy like that.

On 5/1/2011 11:48 AM, Anton Berlin wrote:
On Apr 30, 11:55 pm, wrote:
On Apr 30, 9:27 pm, Anton wrote:



Wait a sec - she was asked to tell the truth. Put under oath and
appears to have done so. Because of that she's paid a price -
suffered consequences. We all know this can happen.

True. We also know that people commit perjury, juggle kittens and
steal library books. So let me take the opportunity to say I hate
Vino. He's a dick and I hope he Rasmussen's himself in his next time
trial.

Would you trust Lance Armstrong to tell the truth when there would be
consequences for him ?

I doubt anyone in this forum can honestly say they would.

No offense, pizza boy, but I can honestly say I wouldn't trust you to
tell the truth if there were consequences for you.
I am not 100% sure, but I believe this is what they call "life." This
is why we watch sports - to get away from life, no?

R

I wouldn't count on me to give the same opinion as 1 in a million
people - but you can rely on me telling the truth. There's a huge
difference.

I would 100% count on you to tell the truth as you wish
to see it.

Fred Flintstein