Armstrong Alleged Doping -- LA Times Article

Here's the link to an LA Times article today about Armstrong's alleged
"doping" ...

http://www.latimes.com/sports/cyclin...home-headlines

Dave

On 9 Jul 2006 07:18:23 -0700, "DC1999" wrote:

Here's the link to an LA Times article today about Armstrong's alleged
"doping" ...

snip

Dave

Todays media when faced with the option of favoring America or other
countries they will typically favor other countries. When faced with
the fact that an American, or America, has done well (or was right in
its actions), the media will spend much time weaving stories about the
technique or intentions are flawed, or illegal.

Fish-Wrappers.

On 9 Jul 2006 07:18:23 -0700, "DC1999" wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/cyclin...home-headlines

"I asked the porter to bring me a newspaper, and the poor fellow, hard
of hearing, brought me a Los Angeles Times."

Pat

Email address works as is.

Patrick Lamb wrote:
On 9 Jul 2006 07:18:23 -0700, "DC1999" wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/cyclin...home-headlines

"I asked the porter to bring me a newspaper, and the poor fellow, hard
of hearing, brought me a Los Angeles Times."

eg Nice! eg

"DC1999" wrote in message
ups.com...
Here's the link to an LA Times article today about Armstrong's alleged
"doping" ...

http://www.latimes.com/sports/cyclin...home-headlines

There is nothing new here. Just a compilation of unsubstantiated or
previously refuted allegations from suspect European sources or former
Armstrong associates with axes to grind and the taste of sour grapes in
their mouths.

RichC

Rich Clark wrote:
There is nothing new here. Just a compilation of unsubstantiated or
previously refuted allegations from suspect European sources or former
Armstrong associates with axes to grind and the taste of sour grapes in
their mouths.

Interesting that they save the most relevant piece of information for
the last paragraph.

Armstrong won the arbitration hearing and was paid $5 million.

On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 15:20:35 -0400, "Rich Clark"
wrote:


"DC1999" wrote in message
oups.com...
Here's the link to an LA Times article today about Armstrong's alleged
"doping" ...

http://www.latimes.com/sports/cyclin...home-headlines

There is nothing new here. Just a compilation of unsubstantiated or
previously refuted allegations from suspect European sources or former
Armstrong associates with axes to grind and the taste of sour grapes in
their mouths.

RichC



This, I think, is instructive:

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/10091.0.html

On 9 Jul 2006 13:11:18 -0700, wrote:

Rich Clark wrote:
There is nothing new here. Just a compilation of unsubstantiated or
previously refuted allegations from suspect European sources or former
Armstrong associates with axes to grind and the taste of sour grapes in
their mouths.

Interesting that they save the most relevant piece of information for
the last paragraph.

Armstrong won the arbitration hearing and was paid $5 million.

--Plus interest and his attorney fees, total: $7.5 million.

wrote in news:1152475878.467165.180490
@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

Rich Clark wrote:
There is nothing new here. Just a compilation of unsubstantiated or
previously refuted allegations from suspect European sources or former
Armstrong associates with axes to grind and the taste of sour grapes in
their mouths.

Interesting that they save the most relevant piece of information for
the last paragraph.

Armstrong won the arbitration hearing and was paid $5 million.


Kinda sad that reporters seem to be all the failed Liberal Arties who
couldn't get into Law School...

My personal opinion is that Armstrong is being grossly unfairly
attacked by people with really bad axes to grind (probably the losing
attorneys/parties in the Texas arbitration) and his/America's enemies
in France and elsewhere. The USA has twice bailed France out of deep
doo-doo in the last century (at considerable cost in American lives),
and many left-wingers from there can't forgive us for it. Then when a
superior athlete comes along and defeats the best the Frogs can put up
-- many times running -- the same people find any excuse to try to
destroy the better man.

While technically Armstrong did not "win" the Texas Arbitration -- it
was a settlement -- in my business (litigation) no one pays that kind
of money if they don't expect to lose big-time.

And, yes, at another time I'd refer to the LA Times as a real
commie-pinko-liberal rag. I'm not sure why I still read it. The
article was nothing but a re-hash of prior reports all dressed up as an
"investigative report." And that's just trash.

Dave C


wvantwiller wrote:
wrote in news:1152475878.467165.180490
@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

Rich Clark wrote:
There is nothing new here. Just a compilation of unsubstantiated or
previously refuted allegations from suspect European sources or former
Armstrong associates with axes to grind and the taste of sour grapes in
their mouths.

Interesting that they save the most relevant piece of information for
the last paragraph.

Armstrong won the arbitration hearing and was paid $5 million.


Kinda sad that reporters seem to be all the failed Liberal Arties who
couldn't get into Law School...