Inspired by Arc, I figured we would continue here. Arc believes Lance is unfairly being targeted so having A LOT of cycling fans, I went and asked them. Not one agreed with Arc but I will repost what my friend said -- simple because he is a Lance fan.
Here is a link to my post that is in another thread but the info pertains to this thread. http://www.globalaffairs.org/forum/threads/clemens-not-guilty.69078/#post-619123 Not criticizing the person who titled the thread but my point has nothing to do with the title of the thread---did Armstrong dope? That's not the issue. Whether he did or didn't is irrelevant to what I am pointing out. What is being done to Armstrong is that "functionally" for a dozen years he has been "tried" over and over. He has has been found functionally not guilty. He hasn't been subjected to double jeopardy he has gone way beyond that, he has been persecuted and is being persecuted to the point where he is going to be eventually found guilty of doping essentially on the basis that: We can't prove it but we are sure you did it so we are finding you guilty. And before they reach that all most inevitable and arbitrarily finding of "guilty" Armstrong is all ready being punished and suspended from competing even before the latest or newest different "trial" starts. Look at all of the guys that have suspended for doping in cycling, including most of the top guys of the past five to ten years. What did they ALL have in common? They failed a scientific drug test. Armstrong has passed over 500 of them. Armstrong is being overtly arbitrarily uniquely and unfairly being treated different than his peers and that's the point. He also is being held to a different standard. The rule of law doesn't mean "we" can prosecute you as much as we want for as long we want in as many jurisdictions for the same charge and no matter how many times we have failed to "convict" you we will keep on trying you until we find you guilty. Even if the eventual guilty finding flies in the face of previous outcomes of "trials or investigations," So what! Copzilla has accurately said in other threads regarding trial or investigation type proceedings words to the effect of it's not what you think or claim but what you can prove when it comes to allegations of wrong doing of any kind. In this country supposedly you get due process. Due process mean you can prosecute but you can't persecute, especially to infinity or until you reach the result you want regardless of your motives, evidences, or the prior results of investigations and trial type actions.
Lance Armstrong obviously has enemies in the cycling world who are extremely jealous of what he has accomplished in his career. If he did dope he had to have been very very good with his doping technique as he avoided detection through more than 500 tests. Given the scrutiny he endured related to doping and the lack of evidence that he did dope, a logical person would have to conclude that he didn't dope. The alternate position would conclude that he won too much, too often in an era with a lot of top cyclists found to be doping. It is impossible for a person to be that good at the sport, therefore he must be doping. the problem with this position is that it assumes 'facts' that are not in evidence and draws a 'conclusion' based on nothing but "he can't be that good" without doping.
When competing in major events in Europe and other places where drug testing was all ways mandatory or a likely possibility Armstrong was the only rider that I'm aware of that had security for his hotel room when neither he nor any other trusted person was in it. The reason? To ensure that no outsider would plant any "evidence" in the room of PED or doping. There was plenty of basis in reality for the necessary action specific to Armstrong. Do you realize how many enemies that he made not only because of his success but because he succeeded as an American? To the French the worse possible person to lose the Tour to or worse have dominate and win multiple ones was an American. Another fact is that before he got cancer Armstrong was a World Champion of Cycling. After he wasted away to nothing in his battle against cancer with the most aggressive possible poisonous chemotherapy treatments the cancer was gone. Then his body rebuilt itself. Oddly but truly as no on disputes when the muscles that came back were distinctly different than what he had before the disease. They were longer, and stronger and concurrently his weight dropped. He came back with a body that before he even began racing again was strong, more efficient and lighter than when he was a healthy world champion.
Thanks for clarifying and I agree, it's a separate issue whether he did or did not but whether he has been hunted like a witch in Salem.
I gotta say, after all the inquests, tests, inquiries, allegations that have yet to be proven, etc., etc.... I don't think Lance doped, and he's being persecuted in a manner that is most unfair. And if he did dope, it's BLINDINGLY obvious that he'll never be caught--which is pretty much the same as not doping. Penalizing the guy without actionable evidence is completely unworthy. Any organization involved with that process should be ashamed.
To me, the whole sports thing (to different degrees pertaining to the sports) is forked now. Now, in the pro level, it's not up to your talent and training, it's also how well is your doctor's ability to hide the doping. Needless to say, there is no doubt in my mind he doped. There's also no doubt that he was the one euroweenies went after most.
In this case, regardless of whether Armstrong really doped or not, to hammer him based on hearsay with no real evidence or due process is the greater travesty. Someone has a real hard on for Armstrong.
Of course, that's what happens when you are a winner. Look at every highly successful person and entity... and corporations like: Goldman Sachs Apple Google Facebook
I'd have to agree that Armstrong most likely doped, but also have to agree that he is being persecuted more than any other athlete. There again, maybe he brought it upon himself by winning so damn much! Interesting article on doping in general http://youkantbeserious.com/2012/06...ot-he-doped-armstrong-should-lose-his-titles/
Without reading in depth about all this stuff, which to me is kind of similar to the hypochondriac crowd (think of Ethics and his bird-flu panic), it seems like there's a wolf pack mentality among entities that want to use, make, and sell performance enhancing chemicals. Every single reference connecting a successful athlete with a performance enhancement commodity helps to sell and legalize that commodity. Even the athletes that were also-rans and now confess to doping are suspects in my mind, not for doping but for now saying they were doping in a back-handed product endorsement that also expl;oits the media's taste for scandal. I wonder what kind of jobs, scholarships, whatever, could the drug companies be doling out to their relatives or 'close friends' and maybe even the athletes themselves. I bet a publishing company could take a heck of a loss on a book advance without raising an eyebrow anywhere. And not one media appearance requires an announcer in the background reciting nasty side effects from using the products. They are super trolls operating at a level way beyond any swedish bimbette tweeting about jews.
This guy passed over 500 piss tests. If he did dope, then we have a flaw in the system. I hope he didn't. I'm a big pro-cycling fan and watch the Tdf, GdI, and others.
Armstrong dropping fight against doping charges! http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/s...arges-losing-his-7-tour-de-france-titles.html
The NYT article isn't exactly complete nor does it have additional context necessary to completely and adequately explain the situation. This article is much better and complete. (Thanks though for the post to start the info about the developing events.) http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/story/2012-08-23/Armstrong-doping-charges/57258616/1 Tomorrow and in the days to come more information will likely become available and a fuller and complete picture of the situation presented. ADDENDUM: All of this scientific or physical doping evidence they claim to have, where in the hell have they been hiding it for the past 10 plus years--why now is it materializing?
It is weird. All of those tests that he passed and now Armstrong says that "enough is enough" and he will not fight the charges (while still maintaining his innocence). Is he just weary of fighting this bullshit year after year, or do they have something on him? I guess time will tell.
Very interesting article - highly recommended. http://www.opposingviews.com/i/spor...rosecutor-jury-and-judge-lance-armstrong-case
Outstanding article! Great find! The author points out the essence of what I made in my first post in this thread. However, he does so much more eloquently and details the process while specifically identifying and classifying the players, or villains. I do not know how the various agencies interact with regard to each other. In Armstrong's case there is his persecutors, the USADA, and then there is an another US biking agency that says they have no beef with Armstrong plus there is an international biking regulatory agency that also does not have a complaint. As mentioned the DOJ investigated Armstrong and found nothing to cause them to continue on. They dropped the matter. Finally, one can only speculate how the rules come to be that allows the USADA to strip Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles. I mean the Tour is an event held in France. It has it's own organization. Plus there is an International cycling federation that overseas such events. So how does the USADA, in the case of Armstrong, can singularly and arbitrarily strip him of those titles? Fairness should dictate that at best the rules should be that the USADA can only submit their charges along with evidence to those other bodies and only they or some other international tribunal of appropriate authority be able to take away those Tour wins regardless of any evidence that Armstrong doped. Finally, he won seven Tours. I would expect fairness dictate that it be proven that he dope in each of those Tours to have them all stripped. For instance if compelling and credible evidence was produced showing he doped in two of the Tours then worse case scenario he should only be stripped of those two titles, not all seven.
