Emma Addresses Strickland

Interesting how Armstrong went after her with his legal team but
couldn't crack her.
http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselect...game%E2%80%9D/

"BL" wrote in message
...
Interesting how Armstrong went after her with his legal team but couldn't
crack her.
http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselect...game%E2%80%9D/

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."

There is no reason for me to suspect that Emma was motivated by money to
spin a fictitious tale to Mr. Walsh, but the very act of paying people for a
story has to cast those stories in a questionable light. It doesn't take a
rocket scientist to understand that an embellished story is going to be
worth more. Mr. Walsh is closer to the National Enquirer than the New York
Times (and yes, sometimes even the National Enquirer does get it right, but
I feel safer believing what I read in the New York Times).

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

On 4/29/2011 2:31 PM, BL wrote:
Interesting how Armstrong went after her with his legal team but
couldn't crack her.
http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselect...game%E2%80%9D/


She comes across as pretty well balanced. You could learn a lot from
rereading the article and trying to notice the parts you naturally block
out. It'd be a big effort, but it'd pay dividends.

She's believable and has a decent perspective.

"BL" wrote in message
...
Interesting how Armstrong went after her with his legal team but couldn't
crack her.
http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselect...game%E2%80%9D/



Dumbass -

She lost me right away with this:

"When I spoke to David, Marco Pantani and Jose Maria Jimenez had
just died. This is what the problem is: People are dying because of drugs in
the sport."

That conclusion is just wrong. They were both depressives, Pantani died from
a cocaine addiction/overdose and I couldn't find what drugs killed Jimenez
but they weren't PEDs. He was retired at the time of his death.

The point is: it wasn't PEDs in sport that killed those guys. They were
depressives and it was drugs from society in general that killed them.
Unlike the recreational drugs, EPO doesn't affect the brain. There's a very
significant minority of Western culture whom could be diagnosed as
depressive and therefore susceptible to the temptation to self-medicate out
of the depression by using recreationals. Sport will have some of these
people in its ranks and they will bring those predispositions with them.
It's a problem which is much bigger than PEDs in sport, if PEDs in sport did
not exist, the depressives would still have those issues.

thanks,

Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.

On Apr 29, 5:57*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
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

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.

In article ,
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

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.

People who talk to reporters deserve everything that happens to them,
and it always happens. Peddle your injured innocence elsewhere, Mary.

--
Old Fritz

In article ,
Substance McGravitas wrote:

On 4/29/2011 2:31 PM, BL wrote:
Interesting how Armstrong went after her with his legal team but
couldn't crack her.
http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselect...game%E2%80%9D/


She comes across as pretty well balanced. You could learn a lot from
rereading the article and trying to notice the parts you naturally block
out. It'd be a big effort, but it'd pay dividends.

She's believable and has a decent perspective.

You her mouthpiece?

--
Old Fritz

She's a delusional bitch with no sense of reality. It was this
sentence their killed her credibility with me.

"I would like you to know that what Lance has done for cancer
sufferers has been phenomenal."

However if she had said....

"I would like you to know that what Lance has done for cancer
sufferers has been another criminally minded money making fraud
scheme."

She would have been 100% correct.

On Apr 29, 7:44*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:
She's a delusional bitch with no sense of reality. *It was this
sentence their killed her credibility with me.

"I would like you to know that what Lance has done for cancer
sufferers has been phenomenal."

However if she had said....

"I would like you to know that what Lance has done for cancer
sufferers has been another criminally minded money making fraud
scheme."

She would have been 100% correct.

You bring to mind the Venn diagram of overlapping delusional
perspectives.
Phil H