mjolnir2k said:
Limerickbozo...you purport to know people, YET you can't name them. Must be quite a friendship. I believe that you know ZERO people and even fewer in the media. You might have a subscription to Velonews, L'equipe or Cyclesport, but that's about it. Consider me unimpressed. You have just lost any tiny morsel of credibility you had.
I don't believe that I am required to impress you or to name who I have been speaking to within the sport of cycling.
I have explained this to you before.
You are free to question my good faith in all this, of course.
All I will say is that the people I talk to are solid people, with no agenda.
mjolnir2k said:
Wolfix gives a clear and rational explanation about why he believes what he believes, cites that he actually has met Greg LeMond and his wife and has a FAR greater knowledge of him personnally than you ever will, yet you drag out a FICTIONAL book to contradict his statements. You are a JOKE.
Please explain to me how YOU know what Greg LeMond did or did NOT say on his cell phone. How do you come by this knowledge? Am I to understand that along with your many secret friends in the peleton and the media you also have contacts with the CIA who have bugged Greg's phone? Do you even read what you are posting, or does this garbage just spring from your twisted mind without interruption? Perhaps before you cut and paste your next set of lies you will actually read their content.
You are correct, Wolfix did claim that he met LeMond and that he knew his wife.
Wolfix also claimed to follow, closely, LeMonds dealings with the press.
The telephone conversation and the content of the the call are in the book
LA Confidentiel - Les Secretes de Lance Armstrong.
The writers of the book, before publishing, interviewed Greg and Kathy LeMond and they volunteered the contents of the telephone conversation to the authors.
Before publishing the book, the authors received assurances from all of the participants that they would be prepared to defend any libel actions resulting from the books publication.
Greg LeMond, Kathy LeMond, Emma O'reilly, Andrea Perons wife, Stephan Swart, are all prepared to testify in France as to the veracity of the comments pertaining to them about Lance Armstrong, in this book.
The authors await LA's appearance in court in France to contest the veracity
of the contents of the book.
If the participants in the book are lying - as you contend - then the court will adjudicate accordingly.
I think that if these people are lying, they're either stupid or corrupt to have told lies to the books authors.
They have not profitted financially from contributing to the book.
They have nothing to gain in material terms, by telling lies.
Finally, I don't agree with your view that this book is a book of fiction.
On the readership lists, the book is listed as Non-Fiction.
mjolnir2k said:
As soon as LA brought suit against the author he became a plaintiff. In doing so he opens himself up to cross examination by the defendants lawyers and they are free to ask him any questions which he MUST answer. Being the person who brought the suit LA CANNOT take the 5th (refusing to answer on the grounds that the answer may be self incriminating). So that means the defendants lawyers are free to ask him any questions with regard to his past and any possible drug use.
If LA lies under oath then he is subject to PERJURY (pronounced Per-Jer-E) and that carries a pretty stiff penalty. So why would a guilty man take such a risk? You will note that NONE of the Baseball players named as steroid users in Jose Conseco's book have sued..why, because they expose themselves to the above scenario, hence NONE have sued.
I am well aware that in instituting proceedings for libel, LA will be forced to enter a witness box in a French court.
Your country's 5th amendment - evaporates at Ellis Island.
But let me tell you - people initiate legal actions for all sorts of reasons.
Actions are launched in the hope that the other side will back down.
Sometimes actions are launched because the plaintiff wants it's day in court.
I hope LA has the courage of his convictions and will face his accusers in a neutral court in France.
I hope that he is not launching his legal challenge in the expectation that the accusations will be withdrawn before the court hearing.
I won't hold my breath - but let's hope he will get in to court and fight this.
mjolnir2k said:
You will note that NONE of the Baseball players named as steroid users in Jose Conseco's book have sued..why, because they expose themselves to the above scenario, hence NONE have sued.
Once again you have proven yourself to be obtuse and baseless in your claims. To trot out LA Confidential as a source of your "Facts" only proves that point.
I posted LA's race results from 1991-1998 that includes more than 20 TWENTY stage races with MULTIPLE WINS, yet you continue to say he never raced stage races or had no success at stage races.
You are a clown with an agenda that is incapable of seeing anything less than what your twisted mind has concocted.
I cannot comment about the case in other sports you refer to.
I have no knowledge of those cases.
As regards your listing the LA palmares - the majority of the wins listed were for one day races.
One days races.
Not stage races.
I didn't see many stage race wins in the palmares list.
Tour of the Basque Country, Criterium International, Tour of Switzerland,
Tour of Catalunya, weren't listed for between 1992-1996.
Needless to say, no grand tours or classement categories in grand tous were
listed for between 1992-1996
The issue - and I have to keep reminding you of this - is how did a one day rider become such a great stage race rider.
That's the issue.
I think it is best to say that we disagree - and leave it at that.
