LA/Feds

On 8/25/11 3:13 PM, BL wrote:
On 8/25/2011 2:47 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:
On 8/25/2011 1:30 PM, BL wrote:


As complex federal investigations go, this one seems to be proceeding
nicely. You won't have to wait much longer to read the indictment.



You don't have a clue about how the "indictment" is proceeding. Not hard
to imagine this mind you. How would you know ? or is this simply more of
your endless flag waving on your Anti-Lance diatribe ?

Give us details on your sources for this ..... Or better yet, shut the
**** up.

Like pretty much everyone else here I've grown tired of your rhetoric.


Bill


Try re-reading what I wrote. I didn't say the indictment was proceeding.
I said the investigation seems to be going well.

Candyass.

On 8/25/11 3:09 PM, BL wrote:
On 8/25/2011 2:38 PM, Fred Flintstein wrote:
Trolling Laff isn't that hard. Mr OCD responds to everything.
He can't help himself.

F
ROTFL!! Like you don't?

Yeah.

You're never going to understand how ironic it is that you responded to
that.

On 8/26/2011 8:36 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
On 8/25/11 3:09 PM, BL wrote:
On 8/25/2011 2:38 PM, Fred Flintstein wrote:
Trolling Laff isn't that hard. Mr OCD responds to everything.
He can't help himself.

F
ROTFL!! Like you don't?

Yeah.

You're never going to understand how ironic it is that you responded to
that.

You children are so moronically predictable. I don't even have to start
the thread before you all have hard-ons. Once I make any substantive
comment you kiddies pollute 80% the tread with personal invective.
It's so amusing to see you guys have your own little, inane dialogue. :-)

On 8/27/2011 9:02 AM, BL wrote:
On 8/26/2011 8:36 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
On 8/25/11 3:09 PM, BL wrote:
On 8/25/2011 2:38 PM, Fred Flintstein wrote:
Trolling Laff isn't that hard. Mr OCD responds to everything.
He can't help himself.

F
ROTFL!! Like you don't?

Yeah.

You're never going to understand how ironic it is that you responded to
that.

You children are so moronically predictable. I don't even have to start
the thread before you all have hard-ons. Once I make any substantive
comment you kiddies pollute 80% the tread with personal invective. It's
so amusing to see you guys have your own little, inane dialogue. :-)

Bob said "Mr OCD responds to everything", and you're knocking yourself
out proving him correct. No one's making you do this, so quit blaming
everyone else for your inability to STFU.

On 8/27/2011 11:02 AM, BL wrote:

Once I make any substantive comment


You have never actually done this. None of your comments have any
substance to them. And that dear boy is the problem.


Bill



--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

On 8/27/2011 12:19 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
On 8/27/2011 9:02 AM, BL wrote:
On 8/26/2011 8:36 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
On 8/25/11 3:09 PM, BL wrote:
On 8/25/2011 2:38 PM, Fred Flintstein wrote:
Trolling Laff isn't that hard. Mr OCD responds to everything.
He can't help himself.

F
ROTFL!! Like you don't?

Yeah.

You're never going to understand how ironic it is that you responded to
that.

You children are so moronically predictable. I don't even have to start
the thread before you all have hard-ons. Once I make any substantive
comment you kiddies pollute 80% the tread with personal invective. It's
so amusing to see you guys have your own little, inane dialogue. :-)

Bob said "Mr OCD responds to everything", and you're knocking yourself
out proving him correct. No one's making you do this, so quit blaming
everyone else for your inability to STFU.
ROTFL!! And no one is making you children post your personal nonsense. I
do have to admit that it's fun to troll you after the your first
non-substantive response.

On 8/27/2011 12:30 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:
On 8/27/2011 11:02 AM, BL wrote:

Once I make any substantive comment


You have never actually done this. None of your comments have any
substance to them. And that dear boy is the problem.


Bill



Come now, you know that isn't true. Earlier in this thread I began with
a substantive reply to Anders and followed it up with a link to a news
article and a substantive comment regarding it. You children then
started running amok in the playground as you usually do with your
playground personal comments.

On 8/27/2011 9:46 AM, BL wrote:
On 8/27/2011 12:30 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:
On 8/27/2011 11:02 AM, BL wrote:

Once I make any substantive comment


You have never actually done this. None of your comments have any
substance to them. And that dear boy is the problem.


Bill



Come now, you know that isn't true. Earlier in this thread I began with
a substantive reply to Anders and followed it up with a link to a news
article and a substantive comment regarding it.

Your delusions don't count as substance. You've been mindlessly
repeating yourself for a decade, pretending to know the inner workings
and processes that will lead to LA's imminent demise. And you've been
repeatedly wrong. That's not substance, it's just crazy.

When I tell you've been repeatedly wrong and you're acting crazy, it's
not a personal attack. It's just the simple truth.

On 8/27/2011 7:03 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
On 8/27/2011 9:46 AM, BL wrote:
On 8/27/2011 12:30 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:
On 8/27/2011 11:02 AM, BL wrote:

Once I make any substantive comment


You have never actually done this. None of your comments have any
substance to them. And that dear boy is the problem.


Bill



Come now, you know that isn't true. Earlier in this thread I began with
a substantive reply to Anders and followed it up with a link to a news
article and a substantive comment regarding it.

Your delusions don't count as substance. You've been mindlessly
repeating yourself for a decade, pretending to know the inner workings
and processes that will lead to LA's imminent demise. And you've been
repeatedly wrong. That's not substance, it's just crazy.

When I tell you've been repeatedly wrong and you're acting crazy, it's
not a personal attack. It's just the simple truth.
ROTFLMAO!!! Right, Jimmie Moron. Just love your incorrect assertions.
I've been saying for years that Armstrong is a doper and guess what--He
is! Amazing, eh. Deal with it and the fact that I've been correct all
along. Enjoy your day Jimmie.

On Aug 28, 7:39*am, BL wrote:
On 8/27/2011 7:03 PM, Jimmy July wrote:







On 8/27/2011 9:46 AM, BL wrote:
On 8/27/2011 12:30 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:
On 8/27/2011 11:02 AM, BL wrote:

Once I make any substantive comment

You have never actually done this. None of your comments have any
substance to them. And that dear boy is the problem.

Bill

Come now, you know that isn't true. Earlier in this thread I began with
a substantive reply to Anders and followed it up with a link to a news
article and a substantive comment regarding it.

Your delusions don't count as substance. You've been mindlessly
repeating yourself for a decade, pretending to know the inner workings
and processes that will lead to LA's imminent demise. And you've been
repeatedly wrong. That's not substance, it's just crazy.

When I tell you've been repeatedly wrong and you're acting crazy, it's
not a personal attack. It's just the simple truth.

ROTFLMAO!!! *Right, Jimmie Moron. *Just love your incorrect assertions.
I've been saying for years that Armstrong is a doper and guess what--He
is! Amazing, eh. Deal with it and the fact that I've been correct all
along. Enjoy your day Jimmie.

Brian, virtually everyone on this n.g. has known that LA was a doper
for years. The only reason people rag on you is because of your
obsession with his prosecution, and your belief that it would somehow
change the sport for the better. Anyone who has finished in the top 10
on GC of a major tour the past two (three? more?) decades has likely
doped either for the event or at some point in their career. Wasting
millions of dollars of US taxpayer money going after a guy who doped
in a sport full of dopers a decade ago seems ridiculous and pointless
to most of us. If you weren't obsessed with LA, maybe you'd see it
that way, too.