|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
USADA report "proves" Armstrong used drugs
I started reading the report and given how detailed the accounts were
I am starting to believe that Lance was probably guilty. It would seem hard to fabricate such a big lie. It's possible however that the witnesses were asked about specific instances and then coerced to lie. It's hard to tell since the transcript were not available. I haven't seen any interview transcripts, but the affidavits are posted at: http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/ under the tab "Appendices and Supporting Materials". |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
USADA report "proves" Armstrong used drugs
"Red Cloud" wrote in message
... On Oct 10, 1:23 pm, "Free Willy" wrote: "atriage" wrote in message eb.com... The wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/usada-report-p...d-drugs-153323... NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lance Armstrong and his team ran the most sophisticated doping program in sport according to the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USDA) which released its report on the case against the US Postal cycling team on Wednesday. USADA said it was sending the report, which was more than 1,000 pages long and contained the sworn testimony of 26 people, including 15 riders, to the International Cycling Union (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC), before making it available on its website. "The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen," USADA said in a statement from chief executive Travis Tygart. "The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence Let's see fatty McQuaid wriggle out of this one. So far, all I see are opinions couched as facts. The UCI will laugh at the USADA and well they should. The UCI oversees the controls in the TDF and since Lance never failed to pass each and every control. The USADA has no standing. -- Willy Free Why the hell Armstrong's former teammates admitted it? Why hell they do that unless they knew Armstrong did dope and made a tons of the money out of it as well as got fame and fortune. Landis admitted out of the jealous? But 5 or 6 other armstrong teammates also confessed using banned chemical. This can't be untrue. ON top of that, I suspect that these guys did not care about the moral or ethical using banned chemical since they cared more about fame & fortune. Not going to jail for it anyway, so why not use dope! Hey I would do the same! Good Job Lance Armstrong!!!! He got caught but he won't go to jail for it))) ============888888888============8888888888888==== =========== Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit and not guilty of DUI. By the same token, if WADA says the Hematocrit limit is 49% and Lance tests at 48% then he is under the limit and not guilty of doping. Only when over the limit is any cyclist guilty of doping. The controls have limits for a purpose. For some drugs the presence of any of it at all is a violation. For others, since the body naturally produces them (testosterone, for example) there is a limit. Hematocrit levels can be elevated by using EPO. But if EPO is not found in the controls then a high Hematocrit cannot be said to be due to doping. Some people have higher Hematocrit than others. Lance never failed a WADA doping control - this means he was always under the limit set by WADA. For USADA to run an investigation where people claimed Lance doped and then say to the UCI -"Take away Lance's Tour wins because some people say he's a doper," is ludicrous. The USADA has no standing when it comes to WADA controls and UCI rules. -- Willy Free |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
USADA report "proves" Armstrong used drugs
On 10/10/2012 5:47 PM, The Observer wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/usada-report-p...3625--spt.html NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lance Armstrong and his team ran the most sophisticated doping program in sport according to the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USDA) which released its report on the case against the US Postal cycling team on Wednesday. USADA said it was sending the report, which was more than 1,000 pages long and contained the sworn testimony of 26 people, including 15 riders, to the International Cycling Union (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC), before making it available on its website. "The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen," USADA said in a statement from chief executive Travis Tygart. "The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence including financial payments, emails, scientific data and laboratory test results that further prove the use, possession and distribution of performance enhancing drugs by Lance Armstrong and confirm the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars in funding." Armstrong has denied cheating and never failed a doping test but the seven-times Tour de France winner was banned for life by USADA in August after announcing he would not fight the charges. Armstrong's lawyers have repeatedly attacked the credibility of USADA's case, describing the proceedings as a "kangaroo court" and a "witch hunt" on the eve of Wednesday's release. "USADA has continued its efforts to coerce and manufacture evidence from other riders through threats and sweetheart deals and generated self-serving media coverage through leaks and piecemeal release of tired, disproven allegations," Armstrong's attorney, Timothy J. Herman, wrote in a letter to USADA. "This reasoned decision will be a farce... while USADA can put lipstick on a pig, it still remains a pig." USADA said the case against Armstrong and his team included eyewitness, documentary, first-hand, scientific, direct and circumstantial evidence and testimony from 11 former team mates. Several former team mates have already spoken out publicly against Armstrong but USADA named all 11 for the first time on Wednesday. "The evidence demonstrates that the ‘Code of Silence' of performance enhancing drug use in the sport of cycling has been shattered, but there is more to do," USADA said. "From day one, we always hoped this investigation would bring to a close this troubling chapter in cycling's history and we hope the sport will use this tragedy to prevent it from ever happening again," it added. USADA identified the 11 team mates as: Frankie Andreu, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson, Tyler Hamilton, George Hincapie, Floyd Landis, Levi Leipheimer, Stephen Swart, Christian Vande Velde, Jonathan Vaughters and David Zabriskie. "It took tremendous courage for the riders on the USPS Team and others to come forward and speak truthfully. It is not easy to admit your mistakes and accept your punishment," USADA said. "But that is what these riders have done for the good of the sport, and for the young riders who hope to one day reach their dreams without using dangerous drugs or methods." The UCI had been heavily critical of the American anti-doping body for not releasing its findings sooner. The UCI can appeal the decision to ban Armstrong for life, even though the American decided not to fight the case, but the sport's world governing body had not yet responded shortly after the USADA report was released. (Additional reporting by Gene Cherry; Editing by Ken Ferris) What I find extraordinary is the wording - from the outset it's not like a legal enquiry, more an emotional appeal. An example : "the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars in funding." Now it may be that in the USA that's acceptable in court. Here in the UK it would be thrown out as mere opinion. Additionally in the appendices there are absolutely NO transcripts, so it's impossible to gauge whether leading questions were asked of any "witness". Is the US justice system so very different to the UK's? Taking, as ever, no sides, just sayin'. -- Chris 'Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.' (Oscar Wilde.) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
USADA report "proves" Armstrong used drugs
On Friday, October 12, 2012 12:54:24 PM UTC-5, Free Willy wrote:
"Red Cloud" wrote in message ... On Oct 10, 1:23 pm, "Free Willy" wrote: "atriage" wrote in message eb.com... The wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/usada-report-p...d-drugs-153323.... NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lance Armstrong and his team ran the most sophisticated doping program in sport according to the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USDA) which released its report on the case against the US Postal cycling team on Wednesday. USADA said it was sending the report, which was more than 1,000 pages long and contained the sworn testimony of 26 people, including 15 riders, to the International Cycling Union (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC), before making it available on its website. "The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen," USADA said in a statement from chief executive Travis Tygart. "The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence Let's see fatty McQuaid wriggle out of this one. So far, all I see are opinions couched as facts. The UCI will laugh at the USADA and well they should. The UCI oversees the controls in the TDF and since Lance never failed to pass each and every control. The USADA has no standing. -- Willy Free Why the hell Armstrong's former teammates admitted it? Why hell they do that unless they knew Armstrong did dope and made a tons of the money out of it as well as got fame and fortune. Landis admitted out of the jealous? But 5 or 6 other armstrong teammates also confessed using banned chemical. This can't be untrue. ON top of that, I suspect that these guys did not care about the moral or ethical using banned chemical since they cared more about fame & fortune. Not going to jail for it anyway, so why not use dope! Hey I would do the same! Good Job Lance Armstrong!!!! He got caught but he won't go to jail for it))) ============888888888============8888888888888==== =========== Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit and not guilty of DUI. By the same token, if WADA says the Hematocrit limit is 49% and Lance tests at 48% then he is under the limit and not guilty of doping. Only when over the limit is any cyclist guilty of doping. The controls have limits for a purpose. For some drugs the presence of any of it at all is a violation. For others, since the body naturally produces them (testosterone, for example) there is a limit. Hematocrit levels can be elevated by using EPO. But if EPO is not found in the controls then a high Hematocrit cannot be said to be due to doping.. Some people have higher Hematocrit than others. Lance never failed a WADA doping control - this means he was always under the limit set by WADA. For USADA to run an investigation where people claimed Lance doped and then say to the UCI -"Take away Lance's Tour wins because some people say he's a doper," is ludicrous. The USADA has no standing when it comes to WADA controls and UCI rules. -- Willy Free Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit and not guilty of DUI. Does that mean your NOT drunk? Lance may have almost never failed a test, but that does not mean he never doped. He was under strict control of the team doctor, and team manager for his doping program so he would pass. And from what I have read, LA did fail a test or two, but was able to "buy" a negative result. Just sayin' Coz |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
USADA report "proves" Armstrong used drugs
"TheCoz" wrote ...
Free Willy wrote: [trim] Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit and not guilty of DUI. Does that mean your NOT drunk? Yes, it means precisely that as the definition of "drunk" driving is over the limit of .08% . Under the limit means you're not considered drunk. Lance may have almost never failed a test, but that does not mean he never doped. Yes it does. What defines doping is failing to pass the controls. The controls are set up precisely to define doping. Any old Rube can come along and claim Lance was doping. But, by whose definition? It has to be doping according to the definition (controls) set up by the sanctioning body which is the UCI for the Tour and which is WADA running the controls. As long as Lance didn't run afoul of the WADA controls then, by definition, he's not doping as doping is defined by the limits (controls) set forth by WADA over which limits it is then called doping and punishable. He was under strict control of the team doctor, and team manager for his doping program so he would pass. Duh! You continue to use your own definition of doping which seems to be saying, "Throw the controls out as they mean nothing. Instead you call doping using ANY amount of any substance covered in the controls. You are incorrect. IOW, one must be proven guilty by failing the controls - not assumed guilty by word of mouth. FYI, some substances are prohibited at any detectable level and some substances are prohibited above established levels. http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/ge...QxNzI&LangId=1 Having an agency, other than the one that oversees the controls and the testing, trying to tell the controlling agency to take away wins on the basis of after-the-fact investigations based primarily upon hearsay is simply ludicrous. It would be great if the UCI and WADA told the USADA to mind their own business. -- Willy Free |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
USADA report "proves" Armstrong used drugs
In article ,
Mower Man wrote: Is the US justice system so very different to the UK's? It is different in many ways. What you are looking at is not the USA justice system; nor is it a reasonable facsimile. Take for example the right to cross-examine one's accuser's. Not present in the USADA dog and pony show. -- Old Fritz |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Oil for drugs"- succinct explanation? | Mike Jacoubowsky | Racing | 13 | November 16th 08 11:16 PM |
Lindsay Lohan and Michael Rasmussen Plan "Just Say Yes to Drugs" World Tour | Breaking News | Racing | 0 | July 26th 07 06:48 AM |
"Armstrong blasts cycling Epo report" | Robert Chung | Racing | 0 | September 13th 06 05:13 AM |
letter to the editor of The Age re "Drugs, dial, drive, bloody idiot?" | Carl Brewer | Australia | 14 | July 18th 05 08:04 AM |