Re: you people are idiots

Quoted message said:

MagillaGorilla said:

Okay, so you admit that people go with just an A-test result for their
own medical care. Why should athletes be afforded more protections if,
according to you, it's standard medical treatment to go with only the A
test result? Everything else you said is off-point and moot.

Didn't say that. Said, "people trust their docs". Plus don't want to
[censored] them off.

First of all, why would your doc get "[censored]" at you for asking for
a confirmation test? Second, do you think someone is worthy of your
trust if they get [censored] simply because you merely want
confirmation? And third, you imply the doctoor will do something bad to
you or in some way sabotage your health (i.e. "don't want to [censored] them
off"😉 simply because you ask for a second test...but then you state that
"people trust their docs."

It sounds like you trust a psychopath who is easily angered and is
willing to harm you. What bizarre logic you have.

Quoted message said:

"Get a second (third, etc.) opinion" is standard. As are the stories of
"finally finding a doctor who cured me".

Athletes should be afforded protections from gas-bag crusaders and bad
rules/enforcement because there are gas-bag crusaders and bad
rules/enforcement out there.

Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.

Quoted message said:

We were better off with omerta, once they got the 'crit level thing
going.

What does not talking about doping have to do with stopping its use?
You imply that the problem in doping is people finding out about it.

Quoted message said:

The EPO deaths happened because EPO use was driven underground by bad
rules/enforcement.

I agree. I think WADA should be prosecuted criminally for causing
cyclists' death because dope testers "drove EPO use underground."
Goddamnit you are stupid.

So are you saying that EPO deaths no longer occur? WADA has stepped up
its enforcement of EPO, driving EPO use further underground. You think
WADA is to blame for this (as opposed to the athletes or their
pharmalogical suppliers).

Maybe not exactly orange juice, but you know, EPO is

Quoted message said:

given to some pretty sick people who are under add'l stress from chemo
and radiation, and it helps them.

No kidding. What's your point?

Quoted message said:

Kathleen Nelson (St. Louis Post-Dispatch) offered another "kick them
all out" IRT the Dirty 100 in baseball. Whoops, names on a list,
steroid positives apparently (2003!), and "this would avoid the
appearance of racial profiling" IRT Barry Bonds. Followed by "I was
thrilled that the teams entered in the Tour de France followed their
ethics code and refuse to allow favorites Ivan Basso and Jan Ullrich to
start because of allegations of their involvement in a doping scandal."
Further on: "The solution is simple." Yup, the athletes who dope are
supposed to admit what they do. Give up their DNA, "serve your time if
found guilty".

IOW, "stand aside for those who know how to dope without getting
caught". Not gonna happen on this planet, if that's news to anyone
besides Ms Nelson.

Point is, it's an unsolveable problem. How much punishment will fix it?
--D-y

That's like saying since decades of prosecutions of people who committed
robberies, rapes, and murders has failed to completely eradicate those
crimes, we should stop prosecuting those crimes altogether.

Wow, you're really smart. Thanks for demonstrating your frivolous logic.

Magilla

MagillaGorilla said:

First of all, why would your doc get "[censored]" at you for asking for
a confirmation test? Second, do you think someone is worthy of your
trust if they get [censored] simply because you merely want
confirmation? And third, you imply the doctoor will do something bad to
you or in some way sabotage your health (i.e. "don't want to [censored] them
off"😉 simply because you ask for a second test...but then you state that
"people trust their docs."

I'm happy for you that your medical experience apparently has been so
completely positive.

Mine hasn't. Sabotage health due to being [censored]? Uh, yeah. Like
when my son was born. I'll spare you the details in the ng. Like when
my mom passed, likewise. Plus minor affairs, not "sabotaging health"
but being put down for asking a simple question-- "control issues".
Very, very common esp. with surgeons, for instance. [censored] and proud
of it.

Quoted message said:

Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.

The riders, including Ullrich and Basso, kept out of the TdF. Not a
"conviction" per se but how about some due process? (And if they can't
be tagged without giving up their DNA, more power to them for refusing
to give a DNA sample.)

Quoted message said:

What does not talking about doping have to do with stopping its use?
You imply that the problem in doping is people finding out about it.

Doping isn't going to be stopped. To some extent, yes, the problem is
"finding out about it", or rather, scapegoating athletes. Which is
what's going on in the present system. Bad rules, bad enforcement; when
the guy next to you can dope with little fear of detection, what's your
choice?

Quoted message said:

I agree. I think WADA should be prosecuted criminally for causing
cyclists' death because dope testers "drove EPO use underground."
Goddamnit you are stupid.

I didn't say that. Didn't say I think you're stupid, either <g>. During
some period of time, riders were allegedly able to use EPO without
being caught (by timing and limiting amounts of EPO used, per the
"stories"😉. One way of looking at that is the dopers worked out a
protocol that stopped killing them. Could have been done a whole lot
faster in the plain light of day, and saved some lives in the process.

Quoted message said:

So are you saying that EPO deaths no longer occur? WADA has stepped up
its enforcement of EPO, driving EPO use further underground. You think
WADA is to blame for this (as opposed to the athletes or their
pharmalogical suppliers).

I haven't read of EPO deaths in a good while. Enlighten me.

(me):

Quoted message said:

Maybe not exactly orange juice, but you know, EPO is

Quoted message said:

given to some pretty sick people who are under add'l stress from chemo
and radiation, and it helps them.

(him):

Quoted message said:

No kidding. What's your point?

"Protecting the health of riders".

Quoted message said:

That's like saying since decades of prosecutions of people who committed
robberies, rapes, and murders has failed to completely eradicate those
crimes, we should stop prosecuting those crimes altogether.

Wow, you're really smart. Thanks for demonstrating your frivolous logic.

Nope. I'm saying that WADA's selling of the idea that they're "going to
clean up sports" is phony, and they know it, too. A sell-out to
sponsors (Pound at work), riders scapegoated, bad rules and bad
enforcement. I'm repeating. --D-y

Quoted message said:

MagillaGorilla said:

First of all, why would your doc get "[censored]" at you for asking for
a confirmation test? Second, do you think someone is worthy of your
trust if they get [censored] simply because you merely want
confirmation? And third, you imply the doctoor will do something bad to
you or in some way sabotage your health (i.e. "don't want to [censored] them
off"😉 simply because you ask for a second test...but then you state that
"people trust their docs."

I'm happy for you that your medical experience apparently has been so
completely positive.

Mine hasn't. Sabotage health due to being [censored]? Uh, yeah. Like
when my son was born. I'll spare you the details in the ng. Like when
my mom passed, likewise. Plus minor affairs, not "sabotaging health"
but being put down for asking a simple question-- "control issues".
Very, very common esp. with surgeons, for instance. [censored] and proud
of it.

Damn, where were you when I needed you to help me beat down all these
punks who were trying to tell me Armstrong's doctors would have written
down everything he said in the records (during the McIllvain thread).

Magilla

Quoted message said:

MagillaGorilla said:

First of all, why would your doc get "[censored]" at you for asking for
a confirmation test? Second, do you think someone is worthy of your
trust if they get [censored] simply because you merely want
confirmation? And third, you imply the doctoor will do something bad to
you or in some way sabotage your health (i.e. "don't want to [censored] them
off"😉 simply because you ask for a second test...but then you state that
"people trust their docs."

I'm happy for you that your medical experience apparently has been so
completely positive.

Mine hasn't. Sabotage health due to being [censored]? Uh, yeah. Like
when my son was born. I'll spare you the details in the ng. Like when
my mom passed, likewise. Plus minor affairs, not "sabotaging health"
but being put down for asking a simple question-- "control issues".
Very, very common esp. with surgeons, for instance. [censored] and proud
of it.

Quoted message said:

Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.

The riders, including Ullrich and Basso, kept out of the TdF. Not a
"conviction" per se but how about some due process? (And if they can't
be tagged without giving up their DNA, more power to them for refusing
to give a DNA sample.)

Quoted message said:

What does not talking about doping have to do with stopping its use?
You imply that the problem in doping is people finding out about it.

Doping isn't going to be stopped. To some extent, yes, the problem is
"finding out about it", or rather, scapegoating athletes. Which is
what's going on in the present system. Bad rules, bad enforcement; when
the guy next to you can dope with little fear of detection, what's your
choice?

You sound like Landis and Hamilton about 2 weeks before they were caught
doping. Landis positive test is going to ruin his life and his family's
life.

Landis ain't riding his bike again if he's found guilty. He's done.
And then his wife will divorce him.

Magilla

MagillaGorilla said:

Damn, where were you when I needed you to help me beat down all these
punks who were trying to tell me Armstrong's doctors would have written
down everything he said in the records (during the McIllvain thread).

I've responded in at least three of those threads, to the effect that
asking that question with others around is so completely unprofessional
that I doubt it happened. --D-y

MagillaGorilla wrote:

(me):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Doping isn't going to be stopped. To some extent, yes, the problem is
"finding out about it", or rather, scapegoating athletes. Which is
what's going on in the present system. Bad rules, bad enforcement; when
the guy next to you can dope with little fear of detection, what's your
choice?

('rilla):

Quoted message said:

You sound like Landis and Hamilton about 2 weeks before they were caught
doping. Landis positive test is going to ruin his life and his family's
life.

So, are you agreeing with me, or what?

Quoted message said:

Landis ain't riding his bike again if he's found guilty. He's done.
And then his wife will divorce him.

Let's hope for some true justice here. --D-y

Quoted message said:

MagillaGorilla wrote:

(me):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Doping isn't going to be stopped. To some extent, yes, the problem is
"finding out about it", or rather, scapegoating athletes. Which is
what's going on in the present system. Bad rules, bad enforcement; when
the guy next to you can dope with little fear of detection, what's your
choice?

('rilla):

Quoted message said:

You sound like Landis and Hamilton about 2 weeks before they were caught
doping. Landis positive test is going to ruin his life and his family's
life.

So, are you agreeing with me, or what?

Quoted message said:

Landis ain't riding his bike again if he's found guilty. He's done.
And then his wife will divorce him.

Let's hope for some true justice here. --D-y

Why waste your time. I'm amazed at the level of support for Kangaroo
Courts and guilt by State propaganda that's been shown here.
I suppose I shouldn't be but I'm bipolar on humanity. I know they
suck, but continue to work for, and hope for the best. Seems you do the
same.
Bill C

Bill C said:

I suppose I shouldn't be but I'm bipolar on humanity. I know they
suck, (snip)

The only thing wrong with human nature is human nature. --Mark Twain

We have met the enemy, and he is us. --Walt Kelly

--D-y

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.

Already have. Ullrich, Basso, and Landis.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.

Already have. Ullrich, Basso, and Landis.

You are aware of the fact that none of those riders have been suspended
by the UCI/WADA/CAS. Rather, it was THEIR TEAMS who forced them not to
race, which they were entitled to do as per their contract.

You are aware of that MAJOR FACT, correct? So how is enforcing a
contractual term a "crucifixion?" The riders agreed to those terms,
dumbass.

Thanks,

Magilla

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.

Already have. Ullrich, Basso, and Landis.

You are aware of the fact that none of those riders have been suspended
by the UCI/WADA/CAS. Rather, it was THEIR TEAMS who forced them not to
race, which they were entitled to do as per their contract.

You are aware of that MAJOR FACT, correct? So how is enforcing a
contractual term a "crucifixion?" The riders agreed to those terms,
dumbass.

You asked about "wrongly convicted." You have my
answer. Waiving their rights makes them stupid, not
guilty.

What is with the quotes around `crucifixion'?

And why is team management [censored] Pound's hatchet man?

--
Michael Press

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
MagillaGorilla <[email hidden]> wrote:

>Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
>these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
>course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
>wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.

Already have. Ullrich, Basso, and Landis.

You are aware of the fact that none of those riders have been suspended
by the UCI/WADA/CAS. Rather, it was THEIR TEAMS who forced them not to
race, which they were entitled to do as per their contract.

You are aware of that MAJOR FACT, correct? So how is enforcing a
contractual term a "crucifixion?" The riders agreed to those terms,
dumbass.

You asked about "wrongly convicted." You have my
answer. Waiving their rights makes them stupid, not
guilty.

Under their contractual terms with their teams, riders were properly
suspended. Your argument that waiving their rights doesn't make them
guilty, but only stupid, is irrelevant. The teams didn't suspend them
because they were guilty - they suspended them because under the terms
the riders agreed to abide by in their contracts, the teams can suspend
a rider who is merely implicated in a drug offense. This rule was
necessary for the preservation of sponsorshp dollars and the integrity
of the sport.

Quoted message said:

And why is team management [censored] Pound's hatchet man?

Are you saying [censored] Pound doesn't have the right to voice his opinion?

Thanks,

Magilla

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Michael Press said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Michael Press wrote:

>In article <[email hidden]>,
> MagillaGorilla <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Can you give me any examples of athletes who were wrongly crucified by
>>these so-called crusaders who dyou don't bother to mention by name, of
>>course? I keep asking for people to give me examples of athletes
>>wrongly convicted, and I have yet to see a single example.
>
>Already have. Ullrich, Basso, and Landis.

You are aware of the fact that none of those riders have been suspended
by the UCI/WADA/CAS. Rather, it was THEIR TEAMS who forced them not to
race, which they were entitled to do as per their contract.

You are aware of that MAJOR FACT, correct? So how is enforcing a
contractual term a "crucifixion?" The riders agreed to those terms,
dumbass.

You asked about "wrongly convicted." You have my
answer. Waiving their rights makes them stupid, not
guilty.

Under their contractual terms with their teams, riders were properly
suspended. Your argument that waiving their rights doesn't make them
guilty, but only stupid, is irrelevant. The teams didn't suspend them
because they were guilty - they suspended them because under the terms
the riders agreed to abide by in their contracts, the teams can suspend
a rider who is merely implicated in a drug offense. This rule was
necessary for the preservation of sponsorshp dollars and the integrity
of the sport.

Quoted message said:

And why is team management [censored] Pound's hatchet man?

Are you saying [censored] Pound doesn't have the right to voice his opinion?

What does it look like?

--
Michael Press