Bad news for the Lance bashers

Bill C said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep10newsflash

"Tim Herman, Armstrong's attorney in Austin, Texas explained to
Cyclingnews that Texas State District Judge Margaret Cooper ruled in
favour of [Armstrong and his personal management company Luke David
LLC] with a motion for summary judgement that has dismissed Mike
Andersons' claims of breach of contract and that Armstrong has
defrauded the former Austin bike shop employee who served as
Armstrong's paid dogsbody from 2002-2004."

His 'paid dogsbody'?? WTF is that?

Mike Bruno said:

His 'paid dogsbody'?? WTF is that?

Dumbass:

It's someone who gets paid to be a dogsbody instead of doing it for free.

Robert Chung said:

Mike Bruno said:

His 'paid dogsbody'?? WTF is that?

Dumbass:

It's someone who gets paid to be a dogsbody instead of doing it for free.

Smartass,

I like your style.

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep10newsflash

Armstrong vindicated in Anderson judgement; Le Monde defamation case
dismissed

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8854.0.html

Armstrong also celebrates win in Anderson case
By Agence France Presse
This report filed September 9, 2005
Seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong celebrated a legal
victory and a UCI statement of support Friday, capping a busy week that
included his engagement and hints at a 2006 comeback.

Looks like one of the key people everyone has been using to point at
lance has been dumped. How many of you are going to admit you were
wrong. I expect to hear a [censored] about corrupt Texas justice, rather
than "We were wrong for believing this guy".
Bill C

It's my understanding that the Anderson case involved a decision on a motion
for summary judgment. The court decided that there was no valid contract
between Armstrong and Anderson as a matter of law assuming the validity of
the facts set forth by Anderson as to the existence of an enforceable
contract under Texas law. As discussed here at rbr months ago, this was not
a strong case absent a signed contract and the parole evidence rule. The
decision on the motion probably does not pass judgment on the veracity of
Anderson's allegations as to finding steroids in Armstrong's medicine
cabinet or his drug conversations with Armstrong vis a vis Museeuw.

Perhaps Sandy can comment on the French libel action by Simeoni. I suspect
the French court may have dismissed in view of the existing action for libel
against Armstrong that Simeoni has ongoing in Italy.

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep10newsflash

Armstrong vindicated in Anderson judgement; Le Monde defamation case
dismissed

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8854.0.html

Armstrong also celebrates win in Anderson case
By Agence France Presse
This report filed September 9, 2005
Seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong celebrated a legal
victory and a UCI statement of support Friday, capping a busy week that
included his engagement and hints at a 2006 comeback.

Looks like one of the key people everyone has been using to point at
lance has been dumped. How many of you are going to admit you were
wrong. I expect to hear a [censored] about corrupt Texas justice, rather
than "We were wrong for believing this guy".
Bill C

It's my understanding that the Anderson case involved a decision on a motion
for summary judgment. The court decided that there was no valid contract
between Armstrong and Anderson as a matter of law assuming the validity of
the facts set forth by Anderson as to the existence of an enforceable
contract under Texas law. As discussed here at rbr months ago, this was not
a strong case absent a signed contract and the parole evidence rule. The
decision on the motion probably does not pass judgment on the veracity of
Anderson's allegations as to finding steroids in Armstrong's medicine
cabinet or his drug conversations with Armstrong vis a vis Museeuw.

Perhaps Sandy can comment on the French libel action by Simeoni. I suspect
the French court may have dismissed in view of the existing action for libel
against Armstrong that Simeoni has ongoing in Italy.

Brian we'll have to see what happens but IMO Anderson is a borderline
extortionist, given his unsupported calims of Lance using drugs, which
only came out after Lance denied his demands.
The [censored] with Simeoni is a ridiculous extension of political
correctness to sport. Postal has chased down how many breaks over the
years? How many other teams have chased down riders because they don't
like them? I'd bet a lot. That's a fact of the sport. Making it illegal
to chase daown people you personally dislike is the worst kind of PC
[censored].
Bill C

B. Lafferty said:

The
decision on the motion probably does not pass judgment on the veracity of
Anderson's allegations as to finding steroids in Armstrong's medicine
cabinet

Dumbass -

Anderson couldn't even recall what the name of the "drug" was. What
"veracity" is there in an allegation of that calibre?

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

The
decision on the motion probably does not pass judgment on the veracity

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anderson's allegations as to finding steroids in Armstrong's medicine
cabinet

Dumbass -

Anderson couldn't even recall what the name of the "drug" was. What
"veracity" is there in an allegation of that calibre?

He also didn't tell anybody of what he saw, even his wife, until months
later. Not very convincing, either.

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep10newsflash

Armstrong vindicated in Anderson judgement; Le Monde defamation case
dismissed

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8854.0.html

Armstrong also celebrates win in Anderson case
By Agence France Presse
This report filed September 9, 2005
Seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong celebrated a legal
victory and a UCI statement of support Friday, capping a busy week that
included his engagement and hints at a 2006 comeback.

Looks like one of the key people everyone has been using to point at
lance has been dumped. How many of you are going to admit you were
wrong. I expect to hear a [censored] about corrupt Texas justice, rather
than "We were wrong for believing this guy".
Bill C

It's my understanding that the Anderson case involved a decision on a
motion
for summary judgment. The court decided that there was no valid contract
between Armstrong and Anderson as a matter of law assuming the validity
of
the facts set forth by Anderson as to the existence of an enforceable
contract under Texas law. As discussed here at rbr months ago, this was
not
a strong case absent a signed contract and the parole evidence rule. The
decision on the motion probably does not pass judgment on the veracity of
Anderson's allegations as to finding steroids in Armstrong's medicine
cabinet or his drug conversations with Armstrong vis a vis Museeuw.

Perhaps Sandy can comment on the French libel action by Simeoni. I
suspect
the French court may have dismissed in view of the existing action for
libel
against Armstrong that Simeoni has ongoing in Italy.

Quoted message said:

Brian we'll have to see what happens but IMO Anderson is a borderline
extortionist, given his unsupported calims of Lance using drugs, which
only came out after Lance denied his demands.

Anderson may well not be credible as a witness. However, the court did not
rule on the issue of witness credibility in a decision for summary judgment.
Until he is examined under oath we won't be able to fully assess his
credibility.

Quoted message said:

The [censored] with Simeoni is a ridiculous extension of political
correctness to sport. Postal has chased down how many breaks over the
years? How many other teams have chased down riders because they don't
like them? I'd bet a lot. That's a fact of the sport. Making it illegal
to chase daown people you personally dislike is the worst kind of PC
[censored].

Nobody has made it "illegal" to chase down any opponent. Armstrong was
criticised by a number of his fellow professionals for allowing a personal
dispute to intrude into the affairs of the Tour. How many riders are chased
down by people they are suiing for defamation?

Quoted message said:

Bill C

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

<snipped>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The [censored] with Simeoni is a ridiculous extension of political
correctness to sport. Postal has chased down how many breaks over the
years? How many other teams have chased down riders because they don't
like them? I'd bet a lot. That's a fact of the sport. Making it illegal
to chase daown people you personally dislike is the worst kind of PC
[censored].

Nobody has made it "illegal" to chase down any opponent. Armstrong was
criticised by a number of his fellow professionals for allowing a personal
dispute to intrude into the affairs of the Tour. How many riders are chased
down by people they are suiing for defamation?

If I remember right Simeoni went into court whining about intimidation
after that incident and they took it seriously, that's [censored] IMO. It
really doesn't matter why, an athlete forms a grudge against another
and targets them. That happens for a lot of reasons. Armstrong never
stopped him from competing, attempting to win, never broke the rules to
create a negative impact against Simeoni. All he did was make it clear
that he would compete against Simeoni within the rules of the race. I
don't think that it was a really smart decision on Lance's part because
Simeoni isn't even in the same league for talent, but it's not wrong.
Simeoni had exactly the same oppourtunity as any other riders to
attempt to ride Lance off his wheel and win. Lance did nothing to deny
him the right to fair, and open competition. If Lance told him he'd
never let him win, so what? I didn't know there was a rule or law
saying that certain riders were to be gifted race or stage wins. I
thought they had to be earned.
I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because he
wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
Lance.
Bill C

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

<snipped>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The [censored] with Simeoni is a ridiculous extension of political
correctness to sport. Postal has chased down how many breaks over the
years? How many other teams have chased down riders because they don't
like them? I'd bet a lot. That's a fact of the sport. Making it illegal
to chase daown people you personally dislike is the worst kind of PC
[censored].

Nobody has made it "illegal" to chase down any opponent. Armstrong was
criticised by a number of his fellow professionals for allowing a
personal
dispute to intrude into the affairs of the Tour. How many riders are
chased
down by people they are suiing for defamation?

If I remember right Simeoni went into court whining about intimidation
after that incident and they took it seriously, that's [censored] IMO. It
really doesn't matter why, an athlete forms a grudge against another
and targets them. That happens for a lot of reasons. Armstrong never
stopped him from competing, attempting to win, never broke the rules to
create a negative impact against Simeoni. All he did was make it clear
that he would compete against Simeoni within the rules of the race. I
don't think that it was a really smart decision on Lance's part because
Simeoni isn't even in the same league for talent, but it's not wrong.
Simeoni had exactly the same oppourtunity as any other riders to
attempt to ride Lance off his wheel and win. Lance did nothing to deny
him the right to fair, and open competition. If Lance told him he'd
never let him win, so what? I didn't know there was a rule or law
saying that certain riders were to be gifted race or stage wins. I
thought they had to be earned.
I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because he
wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
Lance.
Bill C

Simeoni testified against Ferrari in Ferrari's trial in Italy. Armstrong
stated in the French press that Simeoni was an outright liar. Simeoni then
sued Armstrong in Italy for defamation. Armstrong then chased down Simeoni
in the Tour. The Italian police then opened a inquiry into whether or no
Armstrong had intimidated a witness (Simeoni) in an Italian judidical
proceeding. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to support such a
charge. What Armstrong did was send a very clear message that if you open
your mouth about drugs, thereby breaking Omerta, you will pay for it with
his wrath, just as Bassons suffered a few years before. For one who is
"against" doping (ROTFL) it seem odd for him to castigate those who speak
openly about their use of drugs and/or seek to speak out in public about the
drug problem.

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

<snipped>

Quoted message said:

> The [censored] with Simeoni is a ridiculous extension of political
> correctness to sport. Postal has chased down how many breaks over the
> years? How many other teams have chased down riders because they don't
> like them? I'd bet a lot. That's a fact of the sport. Making it illegal
> to chase daown people you personally dislike is the worst kind of PC
> [censored].

Nobody has made it "illegal" to chase down any opponent. Armstrong was
criticised by a number of his fellow professionals for allowing a
personal
dispute to intrude into the affairs of the Tour. How many riders are
chased
down by people they are suiing for defamation?

If I remember right Simeoni went into court whining about intimidation
after that incident and they took it seriously, that's [censored] IMO. It
really doesn't matter why, an athlete forms a grudge against another
and targets them. That happens for a lot of reasons. Armstrong never
stopped him from competing, attempting to win, never broke the rules to
create a negative impact against Simeoni. All he did was make it clear
that he would compete against Simeoni within the rules of the race. I
don't think that it was a really smart decision on Lance's part because
Simeoni isn't even in the same league for talent, but it's not wrong.
Simeoni had exactly the same oppourtunity as any other riders to
attempt to ride Lance off his wheel and win. Lance did nothing to deny
him the right to fair, and open competition. If Lance told him he'd
never let him win, so what? I didn't know there was a rule or law
saying that certain riders were to be gifted race or stage wins. I
thought they had to be earned.
I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because he
wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
Lance.
Bill C

Simeoni testified against Ferrari in Ferrari's trial in Italy. Armstrong
stated in the French press that Simeoni was an outright liar. Simeoni then
sued Armstrong in Italy for defamation. Armstrong then chased down Simeoni
in the Tour. The Italian police then opened a inquiry into whether or no
Armstrong had intimidated a witness (Simeoni) in an Italian judidical
proceeding. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to support such a
charge. What Armstrong did was send a very clear message that if you open
your mouth about drugs, thereby breaking Omerta, you will pay for it with
his wrath, just as Bassons suffered a few years before. For one who is
"against" doping (ROTFL) it seem odd for him to castigate those who speak
openly about their use of drugs and/or seek to speak out in public about the
drug problem.

I' aware of all that, but how is it intimidating a witness to compete
against them in a sport in which they are both professional
competitors. If the court had found for Simeoni in this then Jan and
Basso need to get into an argument with Lance real quick and get a
judge to block Lance from dropping them on the climbs, or beating them
in the TTs or even chasing them down. What did either Lance or Simeoni
do outside the rules of bicycle racing? Is there a rule saying Lance
can only chase people who haven't spoken out against him? This incident
is ridiculous, even though Simeoni may have a valid complaint on the
other stuff. Is the court supposed to stop Lanjce from beating Simeoni
in one day races too, because that would intimidate a witness(Simeoni)?
Bill C

B. Lafferty said:

Quoted message said:

I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because he
wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
Lance.
Bill C

Simeoni testified against Ferrari in Ferrari's trial in Italy. Armstrong
stated in the French press that Simeoni was an outright liar. Simeoni then
sued Armstrong in Italy for defamation. Armstrong then chased down Simeoni
in the Tour. The Italian police then opened a inquiry into whether or no
Armstrong had intimidated a witness (Simeoni) in an Italian judidical
proceeding. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to support such a
charge. What Armstrong did was send a very clear message that if you open
your mouth about drugs, thereby breaking Omerta, you will pay for it with
his wrath, just as Bassons suffered a few years before. For one who is
"against" doping (ROTFL) it seem odd for him to castigate those who speak
openly about their use of drugs and/or seek to speak out in public about the
drug problem.

Armstrong has such a strong, uh, viewpoint, shall we say, that if you cross
him, he stops speaking to you for a year.

It could easily be that the motivation for chasing him down was for several
concurrent reasons - daring to sue the "Boss", daring to say things about
the favorite sports doctor, and yeah, speaking negatively about cycling,
and not keeping conflicts within the peloton.

Each of those things is enough to bring LA's wrath down upon you.

If fact I don't think LA realized that a lot of people watching that stage
would instantly think it was about 'omerta' and PEDs - he was just [censored] at being sued and in the moment, Simeoni managed to 'tweak' him that
day.

Only afterwards did LA realize his 'blunder', imo. (Simeoni had -already-
outed the peloton on drugs prior to the testimony at Ferrari's trial.)

Lance may be hot-tempered, but he usually can control it. Only an idiot
would assert omerta on PEDs in front of all the TV cameras.

I'm not just being contrary here, Brian, I really think he blundered and
didn't realize it in the heat of the moment. And I'm not saying you're
wrong - obviously PEDs are going to be wrapped up in the whole mess.

-jet

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty wrote:
> "Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

<snipped>
>
> > The [censored] with Simeoni is a ridiculous extension of political
> > correctness to sport. Postal has chased down how many breaks over
> > the
> > years? How many other teams have chased down riders because they
> > don't
> > like them? I'd bet a lot. That's a fact of the sport. Making it
> > illegal
> > to chase daown people you personally dislike is the worst kind of PC
> > [censored].
>
> Nobody has made it "illegal" to chase down any opponent. Armstrong
> was
> criticised by a number of his fellow professionals for allowing a
> personal
> dispute to intrude into the affairs of the Tour. How many riders are
> chased
> down by people they are suiing for defamation?
>
If I remember right Simeoni went into court whining about intimidation
after that incident and they took it seriously, that's [censored] IMO. It
really doesn't matter why, an athlete forms a grudge against another
and targets them. That happens for a lot of reasons. Armstrong never
stopped him from competing, attempting to win, never broke the rules to
create a negative impact against Simeoni. All he did was make it clear
that he would compete against Simeoni within the rules of the race. I
don't think that it was a really smart decision on Lance's part because
Simeoni isn't even in the same league for talent, but it's not wrong.
Simeoni had exactly the same oppourtunity as any other riders to
attempt to ride Lance off his wheel and win. Lance did nothing to deny
him the right to fair, and open competition. If Lance told him he'd
never let him win, so what? I didn't know there was a rule or law
saying that certain riders were to be gifted race or stage wins. I
thought they had to be earned.
I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because he
wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
Lance.
Bill C

Simeoni testified against Ferrari in Ferrari's trial in Italy. Armstrong
stated in the French press that Simeoni was an outright liar. Simeoni
then
sued Armstrong in Italy for defamation. Armstrong then chased down
Simeoni
in the Tour. The Italian police then opened a inquiry into whether or no
Armstrong had intimidated a witness (Simeoni) in an Italian judidical
proceeding. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to support such a
charge. What Armstrong did was send a very clear message that if you
open
your mouth about drugs, thereby breaking Omerta, you will pay for it with
his wrath, just as Bassons suffered a few years before. For one who is
"against" doping (ROTFL) it seem odd for him to castigate those who speak
openly about their use of drugs and/or seek to speak out in public about
the
drug problem.

I' aware of all that, but how is it intimidating a witness to compete
against them in a sport in which they are both professional
competitors. If the court had found for Simeoni in this then Jan and
Basso need to get into an argument with Lance real quick and get a
judge to block Lance from dropping them on the climbs, or beating them
in the TTs or even chasing them down. What did either Lance or Simeoni
do outside the rules of bicycle racing? Is there a rule saying Lance
can only chase people who haven't spoken out against him? This incident
is ridiculous, even though Simeoni may have a valid complaint on the
other stuff. Is the court supposed to stop Lanjce from beating Simeoni
in one day races too, because that would intimidate a witness(Simeoni)?
Bill C

This was discussed at length here when it happened. Because there were no
witnesses to the conversation between Simeoni and Armstrong on the road, the
Italian authorities could go no further. More than that, I suggest you
Gogle the previous discussion.

Quoted message said:

"Jet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

Quoted message said:

I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because he
wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
Lance.
Bill C

Simeoni testified against Ferrari in Ferrari's trial in Italy. Armstrong
stated in the French press that Simeoni was an outright liar. Simeoni
then
sued Armstrong in Italy for defamation. Armstrong then chased down
Simeoni
in the Tour. The Italian police then opened a inquiry into whether or no
Armstrong had intimidated a witness (Simeoni) in an Italian judidical
proceeding. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to support such a
charge. What Armstrong did was send a very clear message that if you open
your mouth about drugs, thereby breaking Omerta, you will pay for it with
his wrath, just as Bassons suffered a few years before. For one who is
"against" doping (ROTFL) it seem odd for him to castigate those who speak
openly about their use of drugs and/or seek to speak out in public about
the
drug problem.

Armstrong has such a strong, uh, viewpoint, shall we say, that if you
cross
him, he stops speaking to you for a year.

It could easily be that the motivation for chasing him down was for
several
concurrent reasons - daring to sue the "Boss", daring to say things about
the favorite sports doctor, and yeah, speaking negatively about cycling,
and not keeping conflicts within the peloton.

Each of those things is enough to bring LA's wrath down upon you.

If fact I don't think LA realized that a lot of people watching that stage
would instantly think it was about 'omerta' and PEDs - he was just [censored]
off at being sued and in the moment, Simeoni managed to 'tweak' him that
day.

Only afterwards did LA realize his 'blunder', imo. (Simeoni had -already-
outed the peloton on drugs prior to the testimony at Ferrari's trial.)

Lance may be hot-tempered, but he usually can control it. Only an idiot
would assert omerta on PEDs in front of all the TV cameras.

I'm not just being contrary here, Brian, I really think he blundered and
didn't realize it in the heat of the moment. And I'm not saying you're
wrong - obviously PEDs are going to be wrapped up in the whole mess.

-jet

I agree that "in the heat of passion" he reacted in a way that a cooler head
would have prevented. Sort of like the guy who had that moment with Ron and
Nicloe.

B. Lafferty said:

"Jet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

> I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
> happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
> vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because he
> wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
> Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
> Lance.
> Bill C
>

Simeoni testified against Ferrari in Ferrari's trial in Italy. Armstrong
stated in the French press that Simeoni was an outright liar. Simeoni
then
sued Armstrong in Italy for defamation. Armstrong then chased down
Simeoni
in the Tour. The Italian police then opened a inquiry into whether or no
Armstrong had intimidated a witness (Simeoni) in an Italian judidical
proceeding. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to support such a
charge. What Armstrong did was send a very clear message that if you open
your mouth about drugs, thereby breaking Omerta, you will pay for it with
his wrath, just as Bassons suffered a few years before. For one who is
"against" doping (ROTFL) it seem odd for him to castigate those who speak
openly about their use of drugs and/or seek to speak out in public about
the
drug problem.

Armstrong has such a strong, uh, viewpoint, shall we say, that if you
cross
him, he stops speaking to you for a year.

It could easily be that the motivation for chasing him down was for
several
concurrent reasons - daring to sue the "Boss", daring to say things about
the favorite sports doctor, and yeah, speaking negatively about cycling,
and not keeping conflicts within the peloton.

Each of those things is enough to bring LA's wrath down upon you.

If fact I don't think LA realized that a lot of people watching that stage
would instantly think it was about 'omerta' and PEDs - he was just [censored]
off at being sued and in the moment, Simeoni managed to 'tweak' him that
day.

Only afterwards did LA realize his 'blunder', imo. (Simeoni had -already-
outed the peloton on drugs prior to the testimony at Ferrari's trial.)

Lance may be hot-tempered, but he usually can control it. Only an idiot
would assert omerta on PEDs in front of all the TV cameras.

I'm not just being contrary here, Brian, I really think he blundered and
didn't realize it in the heat of the moment. And I'm not saying you're
wrong - obviously PEDs are going to be wrapped up in the whole mess.

-jet

I agree that "in the heat of passion" he reacted in a way that a cooler head
would have prevented.

I guess it's easy to do when the adrenaline is up, lol.

Quoted message said:

Sort of like the guy who had that moment with Ron and Nicloe.

I'm familiar with several of the Kazakh riders. Nicloe sounds italian; is
he with the Deluca, Salvodelli and Ulrich Team? ;-)

-jet

"Jet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Jet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 16:58:03 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <[email hidden]>
wrote:

>> I have no opinion on Simeoni's defamation case, but to bring what
>> happened on the road into court is [censored]. Even if Lance went on a
>> vendetta, and raced every single race that Simeoni did, just because
>> he
>> wanted to stop him from winning, this still wouldn't be wrong because
>> Simeoni has exactly the same chance to win any race, by the rules, as
>> Lance.
>> Bill C
>>
>
>Simeoni testified against Ferrari in Ferrari's trial in Italy.
>Armstrong
>stated in the French press that Simeoni was an outright liar. Simeoni
>then
>sued Armstrong in Italy for defamation. Armstrong then chased down
>Simeoni
>in the Tour. The Italian police then opened a inquiry into whether or
>no
>Armstrong had intimidated a witness (Simeoni) in an Italian judidical
>proceeding. They decided there wasn't enough evidence to support such a
>charge. What Armstrong did was send a very clear message that if you
>open
>your mouth about drugs, thereby breaking Omerta, you will pay for it
>with
>his wrath, just as Bassons suffered a few years before. For one who is
>"against" doping (ROTFL) it seem odd for him to castigate those who
>speak
>openly about their use of drugs and/or seek to speak out in public about
>the
>drug problem.

Armstrong has such a strong, uh, viewpoint, shall we say, that if you
cross
him, he stops speaking to you for a year.

It could easily be that the motivation for chasing him down was for
several
concurrent reasons - daring to sue the "Boss", daring to say things
about
the favorite sports doctor, and yeah, speaking negatively about cycling,
and not keeping conflicts within the peloton.

Each of those things is enough to bring LA's wrath down upon you.

If fact I don't think LA realized that a lot of people watching that
stage
would instantly think it was about 'omerta' and PEDs - he was just
[censored]
off at being sued and in the moment, Simeoni managed to 'tweak' him that
day.

Only afterwards did LA realize his 'blunder', imo. (Simeoni
had -already-
outed the peloton on drugs prior to the testimony at Ferrari's trial.)

Lance may be hot-tempered, but he usually can control it. Only an idiot
would assert omerta on PEDs in front of all the TV cameras.

I'm not just being contrary here, Brian, I really think he blundered and
didn't realize it in the heat of the moment. And I'm not saying you're
wrong - obviously PEDs are going to be wrapped up in the whole mess.

-jet

I agree that "in the heat of passion" he reacted in a way that a cooler
head
would have prevented.

I guess it's easy to do when the adrenaline is up, lol.

Quoted message said:

Sort of like the guy who had that moment with Ron and Nicloe.

I'm familiar with several of the Kazakh riders. Nicloe sounds italian; is
he with the Deluca, Salvodelli and Ulrich Team? ;-)

-jet

I was thinking of Nicole Simpson and he friend Ron.

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Jet <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

I'm familiar with several of the Kazakh riders.

There are NO Kazakh riders in the pro peleton.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

B. Lafferty said:

I was thinking of Nicole Simpson and he friend Ron.

Interesting theory. Do you know if David Walsh has checked
Armstrong's alibi for that evening?

Sandy said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Jet <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

I'm familiar with several of the Kazakh riders.

There are NO Kazakh riders in the pro peleton.

What's a peleton? Is that to do with Brazilian soccer?

-jet