Since they all were doped up do is it really matter.
Its kinda like getting upset that Arnold was taking steroids.
Its kinda like getting upset that Arnold was taking steroids.
armstrong stripped of world titles
- Thread starter lost in a sea
- Start date
so lets say someone is using something that currently is not a prohibited substance; he wins, then, many years later, someone decides it should be a banned substance, then what? they test all stored samples and if the newly banned substance is found in the samples, competitors can loose their winnings?
I did not know there was such an industry for this, storing blood samples, new doping tests, tons of $$$$ to be made.
from what I've gathered so far, they have found nothing on Lance's blood, not on the fresh tests, nor on the stored ones, right?
then, what else is there to discuss?
thank you!
peace!
Sundance
member
Here is a link to the history of doping accusations against Lance ... and some of the dopes who made them
Interesting reading
floyd landis, tyler hamilton, and a sick, perverted, sexual freak of a lawyer who is one of 3 members of a panel of the USADA charging Lance - make up the " evidence " of the USADA
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/index-of-lance-armstrong-doping-allegations-over-the-years
In case you missed this
http://abovethelaw.com/2012/03/elde...or-accused-of-unsportsmanlike-penile-conduct/
This weekend - Lance entered in a Mountain Bike Race on Saturday, followed by a Marathon on Sunday
Sundance
Interesting reading
floyd landis, tyler hamilton, and a sick, perverted, sexual freak of a lawyer who is one of 3 members of a panel of the USADA charging Lance - make up the " evidence " of the USADA
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/index-of-lance-armstrong-doping-allegations-over-the-years
In case you missed this
http://abovethelaw.com/2012/03/elde...or-accused-of-unsportsmanlike-penile-conduct/
This weekend - Lance entered in a Mountain Bike Race on Saturday, followed by a Marathon on Sunday
Sundance
and makes you a sexual freak,, have rehabs for that stuff thesedays
Sundance
member
That was not trying - it was forcing ... forcing someone who clearly didn't want any part of it, and was disgusted and traumatized by the experience
I guess ya can get away with that shit in places like Thailand, and the Philippines
Here in America - we have laws against that - as you clearly see in the article
I bring it up - because this guy is one of 3 members on a panel of the USADA trying to destroy Lance ... and because it certainly says a lot about the quality of a man's character - or lack of it
Here is something well worth reading - Lance's full statement why he is not fighting the USADA
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lance-armstrongs-full-statement-on-usada
Statement by Lance Armstrong (lawyer's letter to USADA below)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart's unconstitutional witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today - finished with this nonsense. I had hoped that a federal court would stop USADA's charade. Although the court was sympathetic to my concerns and recognized the many improprieties and deficiencies in USADA's motives, its conduct, and its process, the court ultimately decided that it could not intervene.
If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA's process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and - once and for all - put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?
From the beginning, however, this investigation has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs. I am a retired cyclist, yet USADA has lodged charges over 17 years old despite its own 8-year limitation. As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges. The international bodies governing cycling have ordered USADA to stop, have given notice that no one should participate in USADA's improper proceedings, and have made it clear the pronouncements by USADA that it has banned people for life or stripped them of their accomplishments are made without authority. And as many others, including USADA's own arbitrators, have found, there is nothing even remotely fair about its process. USADA has broken the law, turned its back on its own rules, and stiff-armed those who have tried to persuade USADA to honor its obligations. At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers' expense.
For the last two months, USADA has endlessly repeated the mantra that there should be a single set of rules, applicable to all, but they have arrogantly refused to practice what they preach. On top of all that, USADA has allegedly made deals with other riders that circumvent their own rules as long as they said I cheated. Many of those riders continue to race today. The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced. The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, perverts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It's an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It's just not right.
USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles. I know who won those seven Tours, my teammates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours. We all raced together. For three weeks over the same roads, the same mountains, and against all the weather and elements that we had to confront. There were no shortcuts, there was no special treatment. The same courses, the same rules. The toughest event in the world where the strongest man wins. Nobody can ever change that. Especially not Travis Tygart.
Today I turn the page. I will no longer address this issue, regardless of the circumstances. I will commit myself to the work I began before ever winning a single Tour de France title: serving people and families affected by cancer, especially those in underserved communities. This October, my Foundation will celebrate 15 years of service to cancer survivors and the milestone of raising nearly $500 million. We have a lot of work to do and I'm looking forward to an end to this pointless distraction. I have a responsibility to all those who have stepped forward to devote their time and energy to the cancer cause. I will not stop fighting for that mission. Going forward, I am going to devote myself to raising my five beautiful (and energetic) kids, fighting cancer, and attempting to be the fittest 40-year old on the planet.
To: Mr. William Bock, III, General Counsel United States Anti-Doping Agency
Dear Bill:
The United States Anti-Doping Agency ("USADA") has presented our client, Lance Armstrong, with the following ultimatum: Agree, by midnight on Thursday, August 23rd, to submit to an unauthorized, ultra vires disciplinary proceeding against him by USADA or accept USADA’s proposed sanction. Given the assertion of jurisdiction and authority by the Union Internationale Cycliste ("UCI"), and its mandate that no one associated with UCI or USA Cycling should participate in such an arbitration, which was confirmed by USA Cycling, Mr. Armstrong cannot proceed into the arbitration. For that reason and based on the reservations articulated by Judge Sparks, it would appear that the appropriate next step for USADA would be to: a) follow the governing rules and submit the information and evidence to UCI for an independent review and decision; or b) take the jurisdictional dispute (which puts Mr. Armstrong in the middle) to the appropriate forum to resolve the issue, the Court for Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
From the beginning, we have challenged USADA’s motives, methods, and authority to proceed with a so-called conspiracy charge against Mr. Armstrong and others. While the federal court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to address these issues, its decision leaves no room for doubt that our concerns are well-founded. Indeed, the court’s observations make clear that Mr. Armstrong’s arguments that USADA lacks jurisdiction are compelling, and that USADA’s efforts to sanction Mr. Armstrong for alleged conduct dating back to before 1996, had "the smell of bad fish." The ethical implications for an inquisition based on hearsay from witnesses to whom USADA has promised leniency are questionable at best. As for the inclusion of foreigners who have never set foot on US soil, Judge Sparks detected a "stench". As the Court aptly put it, USADA’s conduct has been "motivated more by politics and a desire for media attention than faithful adherence to [USADA’s] obligations.
USADA has no authority to proceed in this matter for all of the reasons we have set out in our previous pleadings, correspondence and my presentation in Federal Court. After Mr. Armstrong filed his federal court action, UCI, the international federation for cycling, and USA Cycling, the national governing body for cycling in the United States, both confirmed that UCI, not USADA, has the exclusive authority and jurisdiction in this matter.
For reasons of its own, which Judge Sparks correctly characterized as suspicious and selfserving, USADA refuses to abide its own governing rules. Mr. Armstrong is not free to pick and choose the rules he must follow. Rather, as a retired international cyclist responding to charges about international events he competed in pursuant to his UCI international license, Mr. Armstrong must follow the rules and decisions of the UCI. Under all the applicable rules, USADA cannot proceed until it submits its evidence to UCI’s independent panel for review and adjudicates any disputes with that panel about jurisdiction, scope, the reliability of the evidence, and all related issues with UCI in CAS. At an absolute minimum, UCI and USADA should go to CAS to resolve the jurisdiction issue before any proceedings begin, a solution offered by UCI but rejected by USADA.
A USADA proceeding would force Mr. Armstrong to arbitrate about jurisdiction in at least two, and perhaps three, arbitrations – AAA and then CAS – and perhaps later in a Swiss court. Then, when even USADA’s unfair multi-stage process confirms that USADA does not have authority or jurisdiction, USADA would then be free to submit the file to UCI for consideration and referral and start what would be another review by CAS prior to any dispositive proceeding. It is fundamentally unfair to put Mr. Armstrong through that costly and time-consuming process, particularly when it is already clear that USADA does not have authority to bring these charges. Mr. Armstrong will, instead, respect the decision of UCI with every confidence that his position should and will be vindicated through independent review by authorities with lawful jurisdiction over this matter. As you are aware, this has been the exclusive and required procedure invoked for every international cyclist except Mr. Armstrong.
We believe UCI’s independent review panel would conclude, as any fair tribunal would, that the little evidence that exists is tainted testimony procured improperly from witnesses trying to profit at Mr. Armstrong’s expense and secured by improper coercion and promises to witnesses. It is also very likely that USADA’s blatant failure to observe its own 8-year statute of limitations by pursuing allegations over 17 years old would be summarily corrected.
In one of USADA’s many recent press releases, USADA’s CEO, Travis Tygart, stated that "Mr. Armstrong agreed to play by the same rules that apply to every other athlete and we believe he should not be allowed to create a new set of rules that apply only to him." But if USADA were sincere about its repeated admonitions, then USADA should follow the governing rules, under which UCI has exclusive authority for this matter.
Any organization that is serious about fair play, integrity, and respect for rules, would take Judge Sparks’ criticisms to heart, rather than waste taxpayer money in the vindictive pursuit of Mr. Armstrong. Sadly, based upon our experience with USADA over the recent months, we have little confidence that USADA has the institutional character for that task. Indeed, the Court further observed that "USADA’s apparent single-minded determination to force Armstrong to arbitrate’ indicated that USADA was "acting according to less noble motives" than to combat doping. To be clear: Mr. Armstrong is not requesting a AAA arbitration because -- unlike USADA – he respects the rules applicable to him and not because of any belief that USADA’s charges have merit or any fear of what a fair proceeding would establish.
Finally, you are on notice that if USADA makes any public statement claiming, without jurisdiction, to sanction Mr. Armstrong, or to falsely characterize Mr. Armstrong’s reasons for not requesting an arbitration as anything other than a recognition of UCI jurisdiction and authority, USADA and anyone involved in the making of the statement will be liable.
Very truly yours,
Timothy J. Herman
Robert Luskin
Sundance
member
A lot of penis play in the assange and armstrong threads. Is everyone gay here or is it just me?
View Image
Just you
For not being gay you are really into cock and balls. What does anyone's cock have to do with free speech (Assange) or bicycle racing (Armstrong)?
Sorry you have so many problems with genitalia.
I would like to see a "Doped Olympics"!!!
Get all these super-human freaks out there...and see what they can do!!
Get all these super-human freaks out there...and see what they can do!!
Sundance
member
I give up - what ?
What does rape have to do with free speech ? ... the answer is - nothing
Just stating - relevant ... obvious ... gory ... facts
Last edited:
Sundance
member
USADA who ?
Banned rider unafraid of pending USADA report to UCI
Lance Armstrong is unconcerned by what the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) will issue in its report to cycling's governing body, the UCI.
On Thursday, Armstrong announced he would not fight USADA's charges of doping and conspiracy which led to the agency stripping the American of his seven Tour de France titles which were included in the any and all competitive results obtained on and subsequent to August 1, 1998. Armstrong was also banned for life.
The UCI is now waiting for communication from USADA detailing the reasoning behind its decision before moving on to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport against the ruling, or to gain jurisdiction over the case.
After taking part in a run with his fans in Montreal, Canada, Armstrong said "I'm absolutely not afraid," of anything which may be in USADA's report.
He was in the Canadian city to speak at the World Cancer Congress where he opened his speech with:
"My name is Lance Armstrong. I am a cancer survivor. I'm a father of five. And yes, I won the Tour de France seven times."
Banned rider unafraid of pending USADA report to UCI
Lance Armstrong is unconcerned by what the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) will issue in its report to cycling's governing body, the UCI.
On Thursday, Armstrong announced he would not fight USADA's charges of doping and conspiracy which led to the agency stripping the American of his seven Tour de France titles which were included in the any and all competitive results obtained on and subsequent to August 1, 1998. Armstrong was also banned for life.
The UCI is now waiting for communication from USADA detailing the reasoning behind its decision before moving on to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport against the ruling, or to gain jurisdiction over the case.
After taking part in a run with his fans in Montreal, Canada, Armstrong said "I'm absolutely not afraid," of anything which may be in USADA's report.
He was in the Canadian city to speak at the World Cancer Congress where he opened his speech with:
"My name is Lance Armstrong. I am a cancer survivor. I'm a father of five. And yes, I won the Tour de France seven times."
Sundance
member
Sunday, September 23, 2012
UCI president Pat McQuaid faces the media at a press conference during the road Worlds in Valkenburg.
Governing body still waiting for USADA's Armstrong file
UCI president Pat McQuaid has said that the governing body has "nothing to apologise for" in relation to its management of the sport during the Lance Armstrong era. In a press conference in Valkenburg on Saturday, McQuaid also said that the UCI was still waiting to receive the file from USADA's case against Armstrong, but at this point he did not envisage that they would appeal the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
"The UCI assumes that the reasoned decision and the file will justify USADA's position on all of the issues, but we still need to be able to go through those documents before giving our position," McQuaid said. "The UCI is ready to take its responsibility and unless USADA's decision gives us serious reason to do otherwise, we have no reason to go to CAS [to appeal their decision.]"
In August, Armstrong decided not to contest USADA's charges of doping and conspiracy, and faces being stripped of all results from August 1998, but McQuaid refused to speculate on who, if anyone, would be declared the winner of the seven Tours de France that Armstrong won between 1999 and 2005.
"At the moment that's a hypothetical question. We have to wait for the USADA file before deciding," McQuaid said.
During an hour-long press conference in which McQuaid refused to comment in depth on his decision to proceed with a defamation suit against journalist and former rider Paul Kimmage, he defended the UCI's management of cycling during his tenure and that of his predecessor Hein Verbruggen. He refuted the allegation made by both Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton that the UCI covered up a positive test from Armstrong at the 2001 Tour de Suisse.
"The UCI has nothing to be apologetic about. The UCI has always been the international federation that does the most against doping," he said. "In relation to hiding a sample, the UCI has never hidden the sample of any rider, in particular Lance Armstrong."
McQuaid also dismissed as a "fallacy" the allegation that the UCI had informed Armstrong of doping tests in advance, and said that other drug-testing bodies had also failed to snare the American in a positive test during his career.
"Armstrong claims to have done something in the region of up to 500 controls. I know for a fact that the UCI has done 215 of them. The other 280 were done by other agencies which could include USADA, WADA and AFLD. If the UCI was informing him about tests, then who was informing him from the other agencies?
"If the allegations are correct that people were beating the system, it's not the UCI's system, it's the system put in place by WADA. So I repeat, we have nothing to be apologetic about."
David Millar (Garmin-Sharp) was on hand at the press conference due to his work with the BBC during the Worlds, and he challenged McQuaid's assertion that the UCI had no cause for apology, expressing the wish that the governing body would show more humility.
"How can we be apologetic? We do more testing than anyone else. As I said already, we send those samples to laboratories and they do the tests. If we got information at any time on athlete we would act on that, but we've never had that," he told Millar. "You were one who did what you did [Millar confessed to doping in 2004 – ed.] and you didn't inform the UCI you were doing it. Others who have been caught since never informed the UCI what they did. The UCI is not to blame for the culture of doping in this sport."
Instead McQuaid limited himself to admitting that the recent past had been "a black period" for cycling, adding, "but that's not to apportion blame." He was also lukewarm on the idea of retroactively retesting stored urine and blood samples from the past decade.
"This issue naturally was discussed at length by the management committee and congress and the decision was made that the UCI should concentrate on the cycling of the day. That doesn't mean we ignore the past or that we're trying to hide it."
Amnesty
During the London 2012 Olympics, McQuaid had floated the possibility of an amnesty for riders who confessed to doping as part of a sort of truth and reconciliation commission for cycling, but he tracked back on the idea in Valkenburg.
"The UCI management committee discussed the possibility of an operation similar to what South Africa knew at the end of Apartheid with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The conclusion was that it would first be inappropriate to take any action while the USADA-Armstrong affair is underway and, in addition, the WADA code does not provide for any amnesty."
McQuaid expressed his empathy with the Italian federation's decision not to select riders named in doping investigations for the national team, although he wondered if it were legally enforceable. "From a legal point of view, it's difficult to support," he said. "From a philosophical point of view, I do support it."
In the midst of the Armstrong case, it has often been overlooked that his doctor, Michele Ferrari, and manager Johan Bruyneel, have also been charged by USADA, and McQuaid insisted that the UCI was serious about taking action against managers and doctors who encourage doping.
"If the UCI can get information on any doctor, trainer or manager who aids, abets or uses his influence in any way to bring riders into doping programmes, we will do what we can to get rid of him, but we need the information," he said.
McQuaid's term as UCI president comes to an end in 2013, but the Irishman confirmed that he was likely to stand for re-election in Florence next year. "At this point in time I would say yes. The reason I would say yes at this point is that there is still work to be done in the fight against doping and the globalisation of the sport. They are my two objectives."
* Suspense building - this is going to be quite interesting
If they cant get Lance now - will it ever stop ?
Sundance
UCI president Pat McQuaid faces the media at a press conference during the road Worlds in Valkenburg.
Governing body still waiting for USADA's Armstrong file
UCI president Pat McQuaid has said that the governing body has "nothing to apologise for" in relation to its management of the sport during the Lance Armstrong era. In a press conference in Valkenburg on Saturday, McQuaid also said that the UCI was still waiting to receive the file from USADA's case against Armstrong, but at this point he did not envisage that they would appeal the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
"The UCI assumes that the reasoned decision and the file will justify USADA's position on all of the issues, but we still need to be able to go through those documents before giving our position," McQuaid said. "The UCI is ready to take its responsibility and unless USADA's decision gives us serious reason to do otherwise, we have no reason to go to CAS [to appeal their decision.]"
In August, Armstrong decided not to contest USADA's charges of doping and conspiracy, and faces being stripped of all results from August 1998, but McQuaid refused to speculate on who, if anyone, would be declared the winner of the seven Tours de France that Armstrong won between 1999 and 2005.
"At the moment that's a hypothetical question. We have to wait for the USADA file before deciding," McQuaid said.
During an hour-long press conference in which McQuaid refused to comment in depth on his decision to proceed with a defamation suit against journalist and former rider Paul Kimmage, he defended the UCI's management of cycling during his tenure and that of his predecessor Hein Verbruggen. He refuted the allegation made by both Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton that the UCI covered up a positive test from Armstrong at the 2001 Tour de Suisse.
"The UCI has nothing to be apologetic about. The UCI has always been the international federation that does the most against doping," he said. "In relation to hiding a sample, the UCI has never hidden the sample of any rider, in particular Lance Armstrong."
McQuaid also dismissed as a "fallacy" the allegation that the UCI had informed Armstrong of doping tests in advance, and said that other drug-testing bodies had also failed to snare the American in a positive test during his career.
"Armstrong claims to have done something in the region of up to 500 controls. I know for a fact that the UCI has done 215 of them. The other 280 were done by other agencies which could include USADA, WADA and AFLD. If the UCI was informing him about tests, then who was informing him from the other agencies?
"If the allegations are correct that people were beating the system, it's not the UCI's system, it's the system put in place by WADA. So I repeat, we have nothing to be apologetic about."
David Millar (Garmin-Sharp) was on hand at the press conference due to his work with the BBC during the Worlds, and he challenged McQuaid's assertion that the UCI had no cause for apology, expressing the wish that the governing body would show more humility.
"How can we be apologetic? We do more testing than anyone else. As I said already, we send those samples to laboratories and they do the tests. If we got information at any time on athlete we would act on that, but we've never had that," he told Millar. "You were one who did what you did [Millar confessed to doping in 2004 – ed.] and you didn't inform the UCI you were doing it. Others who have been caught since never informed the UCI what they did. The UCI is not to blame for the culture of doping in this sport."
Instead McQuaid limited himself to admitting that the recent past had been "a black period" for cycling, adding, "but that's not to apportion blame." He was also lukewarm on the idea of retroactively retesting stored urine and blood samples from the past decade.
"This issue naturally was discussed at length by the management committee and congress and the decision was made that the UCI should concentrate on the cycling of the day. That doesn't mean we ignore the past or that we're trying to hide it."
Amnesty
During the London 2012 Olympics, McQuaid had floated the possibility of an amnesty for riders who confessed to doping as part of a sort of truth and reconciliation commission for cycling, but he tracked back on the idea in Valkenburg.
"The UCI management committee discussed the possibility of an operation similar to what South Africa knew at the end of Apartheid with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The conclusion was that it would first be inappropriate to take any action while the USADA-Armstrong affair is underway and, in addition, the WADA code does not provide for any amnesty."
McQuaid expressed his empathy with the Italian federation's decision not to select riders named in doping investigations for the national team, although he wondered if it were legally enforceable. "From a legal point of view, it's difficult to support," he said. "From a philosophical point of view, I do support it."
In the midst of the Armstrong case, it has often been overlooked that his doctor, Michele Ferrari, and manager Johan Bruyneel, have also been charged by USADA, and McQuaid insisted that the UCI was serious about taking action against managers and doctors who encourage doping.
"If the UCI can get information on any doctor, trainer or manager who aids, abets or uses his influence in any way to bring riders into doping programmes, we will do what we can to get rid of him, but we need the information," he said.
McQuaid's term as UCI president comes to an end in 2013, but the Irishman confirmed that he was likely to stand for re-election in Florence next year. "At this point in time I would say yes. The reason I would say yes at this point is that there is still work to be done in the fight against doping and the globalisation of the sport. They are my two objectives."
* Suspense building - this is going to be quite interesting
If they cant get Lance now - will it ever stop ?
Sundance
Sundance
member
UCI responds to French sports minister over Armstrong Tour wins
September 25, 23:00
Tour de France titles cannot be stripped until USADA file is reviewed
Following questions from the French Minister for Sport, Valérie Fourneyron, on why it has not yet upheld the USADA decision to strip Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles, the UCI responded to L'Equipe, saying it cannot do so until it has reviewed the dossier.
USADA is expected to disclose the reasoned decision to the UCI by the end of this month. It is anticipated that the evidence collected proving that Armstrong and his associates participated in a conspiracy of doping will be made public after that time. USADA CEO Travis Tygart indicated to L'Equipe earlier this week that the impact will be "terrible, 30 times greater than everything that has come out until now, through books or investigations."
Fourneyron said yesterday that she "would not understand it if the UCI doesn't strip Lance Armstrong from his seven Tour de France titles."
UCI spokesman Enrico Carpani responded today, telling L'Equipe, "Ms. Fourneyron is not supposed to be familiar with the case, since it is still in the hands of those responsible for USADA. And if she is not familiar with it, then such statements appear hasty or inappropriate."
"The UCI has always said that it would assume its responsibilities, that it did not intend to appeal the USADA's decision and that it would apply sanctions if everything has been done according to the rules. But before having our conduct dictated, the UCI wants to at least have the opportunity to review the file. And waiting for all the parties involved that they follow the same rule of conduct.
"We remember the position of Mr. Zapatero, the Spanish prime minister, who had defended Alberto Contador before being contradicted by the facts and by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)," he concluded.
The USADA can and will say anything - 30 times greater ... weather they have the proof or not ... as it is the USADA that is on trial here
Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis are proven cheats and liars .. no one believes anything they say
Hamilton wants to sell his book - and his bikes
Travis Tygart and his US Court convicted penis showing in public member (pun intended) of the USADA - have made this their own personal witch hunt ... and quest for legitimacy
I am quite sure that even before their accusations come out - they are outrageous, reaching, incredibly controversial - and without enough proof to strip Lance of anything ... and much of what will be presented has already been investigated ad nausea and proven bullshit
Not to mention - there will be tons of fighting ... and infighting ... and I am very sure at this point - Lance will have plenty to say too !
Wait ... watch - this will be very, very interesting
" They have sown the wind, they shall reap the whirlwind "
Sundance
September 25, 23:00
Tour de France titles cannot be stripped until USADA file is reviewed
Following questions from the French Minister for Sport, Valérie Fourneyron, on why it has not yet upheld the USADA decision to strip Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles, the UCI responded to L'Equipe, saying it cannot do so until it has reviewed the dossier.
USADA is expected to disclose the reasoned decision to the UCI by the end of this month. It is anticipated that the evidence collected proving that Armstrong and his associates participated in a conspiracy of doping will be made public after that time. USADA CEO Travis Tygart indicated to L'Equipe earlier this week that the impact will be "terrible, 30 times greater than everything that has come out until now, through books or investigations."
Fourneyron said yesterday that she "would not understand it if the UCI doesn't strip Lance Armstrong from his seven Tour de France titles."
UCI spokesman Enrico Carpani responded today, telling L'Equipe, "Ms. Fourneyron is not supposed to be familiar with the case, since it is still in the hands of those responsible for USADA. And if she is not familiar with it, then such statements appear hasty or inappropriate."
"The UCI has always said that it would assume its responsibilities, that it did not intend to appeal the USADA's decision and that it would apply sanctions if everything has been done according to the rules. But before having our conduct dictated, the UCI wants to at least have the opportunity to review the file. And waiting for all the parties involved that they follow the same rule of conduct.
"We remember the position of Mr. Zapatero, the Spanish prime minister, who had defended Alberto Contador before being contradicted by the facts and by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)," he concluded.
The USADA can and will say anything - 30 times greater ... weather they have the proof or not ... as it is the USADA that is on trial here
Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis are proven cheats and liars .. no one believes anything they say
Hamilton wants to sell his book - and his bikes
Travis Tygart and his US Court convicted penis showing in public member (pun intended) of the USADA - have made this their own personal witch hunt ... and quest for legitimacy
I am quite sure that even before their accusations come out - they are outrageous, reaching, incredibly controversial - and without enough proof to strip Lance of anything ... and much of what will be presented has already been investigated ad nausea and proven bullshit
Not to mention - there will be tons of fighting ... and infighting ... and I am very sure at this point - Lance will have plenty to say too !
Wait ... watch - this will be very, very interesting
" They have sown the wind, they shall reap the whirlwind "
Sundance
Sundance
member
UCI questions USADA on Armstrong file delay
September 27, 18:45
UCI president Pat McQuaid answers a question during a press conference held during the UCI road world championships in Valkenburg.
As tensions ahead of the release of the US Anti-Doping Agency's (USADA) file of evidence on the Lance Armstrong and US Postal Service Team doping conspiracy has grown to a peak, the UCI has issued a public statement from president Pat McQuaid questioning why the dossier of information has yet to land on his desk.
The USADA stated earlier this week that the file, which had been expected to be sent to the UCI and the World Anti-Doping Agency by the end of September, would now be provided no later than October 15.
McQuaid made his impatience known today, stating, "It is over a month since USADA sanctioned Lance Armstrong. We thought that USADA were better prepared before initiating these proceedings."
A source close to the case told Cyclingnews Wednesday that "information kept coming in, hence, the delay in getting the dossier to the UCI." USADA would not comment when asked if they were still gathering evidence.
The UCI reiterated this information in the press release, stating, "Reports state that its decision has been delayed because it is continuing to gather evidence and that it has yet to complete its case file."
McQuaid expressed his anxiety over the lack of finality. "The UCI had no reason to assume that a full case file did not exist but USADA's continued failure to produce the decision is now a cause for concern.
"It is at very least unusual that USADA would still be gathering evidence against a person after it has found that person guilty."
The president then suggested, "It seems that it would have been more useful for USADA to have used the time of the Tour de France, the Olympic Games and the Road World Championships to prepare their case in full rather than to make announcements."
Insinuating that the USADA was having "difficulty in putting the evidence together", McQuaid also claimed they only learned of the delay through the media "and not by any official communication from USADA".
However, Cyclingnews understands that USADA and the UCI have been in contact as recently as last week.
"It is not surprising that UCI would send a press release out attempting to undermine and question the substance of our case," USADA CEO Travis Tygart stated. "It is also troubling that they would claim to have had no contact with us which is inaccurate. As they know we will be providing them the 'reasoned decision' no later than October 15 through the process and at that time the questions contained in their publicly released statement today will be answered."
The UCI stated this week that it would uphold the lifetime ban of Armstrong and disqualification of his results back to August 1998 if, when it gets the dossier, it determines that the USADA had followed all applicable rules in coming to the decision.
The UCI is correct in all they say
The actions, and characters of the USADA are laughable
September 27, 18:45
UCI president Pat McQuaid answers a question during a press conference held during the UCI road world championships in Valkenburg.
As tensions ahead of the release of the US Anti-Doping Agency's (USADA) file of evidence on the Lance Armstrong and US Postal Service Team doping conspiracy has grown to a peak, the UCI has issued a public statement from president Pat McQuaid questioning why the dossier of information has yet to land on his desk.
The USADA stated earlier this week that the file, which had been expected to be sent to the UCI and the World Anti-Doping Agency by the end of September, would now be provided no later than October 15.
McQuaid made his impatience known today, stating, "It is over a month since USADA sanctioned Lance Armstrong. We thought that USADA were better prepared before initiating these proceedings."
A source close to the case told Cyclingnews Wednesday that "information kept coming in, hence, the delay in getting the dossier to the UCI." USADA would not comment when asked if they were still gathering evidence.
The UCI reiterated this information in the press release, stating, "Reports state that its decision has been delayed because it is continuing to gather evidence and that it has yet to complete its case file."
McQuaid expressed his anxiety over the lack of finality. "The UCI had no reason to assume that a full case file did not exist but USADA's continued failure to produce the decision is now a cause for concern.
"It is at very least unusual that USADA would still be gathering evidence against a person after it has found that person guilty."
The president then suggested, "It seems that it would have been more useful for USADA to have used the time of the Tour de France, the Olympic Games and the Road World Championships to prepare their case in full rather than to make announcements."
Insinuating that the USADA was having "difficulty in putting the evidence together", McQuaid also claimed they only learned of the delay through the media "and not by any official communication from USADA".
However, Cyclingnews understands that USADA and the UCI have been in contact as recently as last week.
"It is not surprising that UCI would send a press release out attempting to undermine and question the substance of our case," USADA CEO Travis Tygart stated. "It is also troubling that they would claim to have had no contact with us which is inaccurate. As they know we will be providing them the 'reasoned decision' no later than October 15 through the process and at that time the questions contained in their publicly released statement today will be answered."
The UCI stated this week that it would uphold the lifetime ban of Armstrong and disqualification of his results back to August 1998 if, when it gets the dossier, it determines that the USADA had followed all applicable rules in coming to the decision.
The UCI is correct in all they say
The actions, and characters of the USADA are laughable
Sundance
member
Swiss court finds in UCI's favour in Landis defamation case
October 3, 15:43
The Est Vaud District Court has found in favour of the UCI in its defamation proceedings against Floyd Landis. The verdict was handed down on September 26 and the written judgement released by the UCI on Wednesday.
The UCI, its current president Pat McQuaid and former president Hein Verbruggen launched the proceedings against Landis in April 2011, after he alleged that the governing body had colluding in covering up a positive test by Lance Armstrong at the 2001 Tour de Suisse. Landis did not present himself before the court.
“The judgement upholds and protects the integrity of the UCI and its Presidents,” read the UCI statement. “False accusations are unacceptable and unlawful and the UCI will continue to defend itself against all such accusations.”
The UCI, McQuaid and Verbruggen have launched a similar defamation case against the journalist and former rider Paul Kimmage. However, unlike Landis, Kimmage is determined to fight the case, which will be heard in Vevey, Switzerland on December 12.
The Est Vaud District Court’s written judgement, by chair Catherine Piguet, “upholds in large part the petition of 29 April 2011 lodged by the Union Cycliste Internationale, Patrick McQuaid and Henricus Verbruggen against Floyd Landis.”
Landis has been ordered to take out advertisements at his own expense publishing the verdict in the Wall Street Journal, L’Équipe, Le Temps, NYVelocity, Cyclingnews, Velonation, Velonews and De Volksrant. He has also been ordered to pay McQuaid and Verbruggen the sum of 10,000 Swiss Frances each, as well as their legal costs.
Article two of the verdict goes into quite specific detail as to what Landis is not allowed to say about the UCI in the future, noting that it is forbidden for him to say that the UCI, McQuaid and Verbruggen “have concealed cases of doping, received money for doing so, have accepted money from Lance Armstrong to conceal a doping case, have protected certain racing cyclists, concealed cases of doping, have engaged in manipulation, particularly of tests and races, have hesitated and delayed publishing the results of a positive test on Alberto Contador, have accepted bribes, are corrupt, are terrorists, have no regard for the rules, load the dice, are fools, do not have a genuine desire to restore discipline to cycling, are full of shit, are clowns, their words are worthless, are liars, are no different to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, or to make any similar other allegations of that kind.”
Bravo
October 3, 15:43
The Est Vaud District Court has found in favour of the UCI in its defamation proceedings against Floyd Landis. The verdict was handed down on September 26 and the written judgement released by the UCI on Wednesday.
The UCI, its current president Pat McQuaid and former president Hein Verbruggen launched the proceedings against Landis in April 2011, after he alleged that the governing body had colluding in covering up a positive test by Lance Armstrong at the 2001 Tour de Suisse. Landis did not present himself before the court.
“The judgement upholds and protects the integrity of the UCI and its Presidents,” read the UCI statement. “False accusations are unacceptable and unlawful and the UCI will continue to defend itself against all such accusations.”
The UCI, McQuaid and Verbruggen have launched a similar defamation case against the journalist and former rider Paul Kimmage. However, unlike Landis, Kimmage is determined to fight the case, which will be heard in Vevey, Switzerland on December 12.
The Est Vaud District Court’s written judgement, by chair Catherine Piguet, “upholds in large part the petition of 29 April 2011 lodged by the Union Cycliste Internationale, Patrick McQuaid and Henricus Verbruggen against Floyd Landis.”
Landis has been ordered to take out advertisements at his own expense publishing the verdict in the Wall Street Journal, L’Équipe, Le Temps, NYVelocity, Cyclingnews, Velonation, Velonews and De Volksrant. He has also been ordered to pay McQuaid and Verbruggen the sum of 10,000 Swiss Frances each, as well as their legal costs.
Article two of the verdict goes into quite specific detail as to what Landis is not allowed to say about the UCI in the future, noting that it is forbidden for him to say that the UCI, McQuaid and Verbruggen “have concealed cases of doping, received money for doing so, have accepted money from Lance Armstrong to conceal a doping case, have protected certain racing cyclists, concealed cases of doping, have engaged in manipulation, particularly of tests and races, have hesitated and delayed publishing the results of a positive test on Alberto Contador, have accepted bribes, are corrupt, are terrorists, have no regard for the rules, load the dice, are fools, do not have a genuine desire to restore discipline to cycling, are full of shit, are clowns, their words are worthless, are liars, are no different to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, or to make any similar other allegations of that kind.”
Bravo
T
toughmudderdave
The latest...
The USADA is now issuing a report stating that Armstrong is the "ring leader" of one of the largest doping conspiracies in the history of professional sports!! Wow...Anything to justify their accusations not to mention all the money spent singling out one athlete, eh?
Just incredible...
Lance Armstrong, Doping Kingpin
The USADA is now issuing a report stating that Armstrong is the "ring leader" of one of the largest doping conspiracies in the history of professional sports!! Wow...Anything to justify their accusations not to mention all the money spent singling out one athlete, eh?
Just incredible...
Lance Armstrong, Doping Kingpin
