$$$ What's the point of drug testing if we don't believe the results?
$$$ Since when has hearsay been considered reliable evidence?
$$$ Did the two-year federal criminal investigation of Armstrong (which ended in February 2012 with no charges filed) get it wrong?
$$$ Why has USADA taken this 'win at any cost' approach?
$$$ Are Big Tobacco a party to USADA's scalping of Armstrong?
$$$ Haven't Americans got better things to spend their dollars on?
Careful what you sy about the USADA or you may be indicted by a grand jury and extradited to Guantamano Bay to face the music. Being a blogger/journo is not a defence to the charge of being an enemy of USA da! And you can bet that Julia will not come in and bat for you.
ReplyDeleteToo true!
ReplyDeleteNotwithstanding I'm still amazed how USADA is offering to waive sanctions for confessed dopers in exchange for their 'personal confessions' against Lance Armstrong. Furthermore, I'm amazed at these quasi court/tribunal entities and their never-ending quest for power - they move goal posts left right and centre whilst making extraordinary pronouncements that are completely outside their jurisdiction - what do they think they are?
- Congress or something?
Sue
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with you that the processes employed by the USADA is not exactly kosher/halal, the case against Armstrong is compelling, unless you subscribe to the conspiracy theory that the witnesses somehow have got an axe to grind.
Peng, the US District Court Judge Sam Sparks raised concerns that 'USADA has targeted Armstrong for prosecution many years after his alleged doping violations occurred, and intends to consolidate his case with those of several other alleged offenders, including - incredibly - several over whom USA Cycling and USOC apparently have no authority whatsoever. Further, if Armstrong's allegations are true, and USADA is promising lesser sanctions against other allegedly offending riders in exchange for their testimony against Armstrong, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that USADA is motivated more by politics and a desire for media attention than faithful adherence to its obligations to USOC.' (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/judge-issues-stinging-criticism-of-usada-in-armstrong-case)
ReplyDelete...I'm not arguing that he's innocent or not, none of us can know that from the information we've received so far - I'm arguing only that he ought not to be considered guilty as accused by the court of public opinion