Rasmussen accusations to 2002: "Biopure"



Status
Not open for further replies.
helmutRoole2 said:
Wrong. In the USA, working journalists are bound by an ethical charter. If they fabricate **** -- like you do -- they are fired. If they pay a source for information they have to state that in the article.

It's guys like you who keep guys like Rush Limbaugh in business.
I think you better tell the New York Times. And by the way, Limbaugh has more credibility than any journalist around.
 
redLantern said:
not at all extraordinary, but evidence IS needed...
And has been provided.
redLantern said:
... remember one of the things this counrty stands for "innocent until proven guilty".
The world is flat. This has never been disproved is a court of law.
redLantern said:
...now i understand why you defended velonews so strongly...
Had you read my public profile you would have known this much earlier in the thread.
redLantern said:
(i do like them) but i sincerely think they made a mistake publishing this story.
Do you realize that one anonymous source brought down the entire Nixon administration? Do you think the reporters and editors at the Washington Post should backed away from that story?
 
For those who may be asking why now and not 2002:

"Instead, it was Rasmussen's recent "trust me" comments during the Tour's rest day on Monday that prompted Richards to speak out."

This alone would make me do it too. That, and his other explanations sounds reasonable to me, shooting the messenger is just plain stupid.
 
azdroptop said:
I think you better tell the New York Times. And by the way, Limbaugh has more credibility than any journalist around.
Limbaugh is a drug addict. Let's not forget the racist comments he made on Monday Night Football while under in the influence of illegal prescription narcotics he bought from his cleaning lady.

Limbaugh... the guiding light for many feeble-minded Americans.
 
So anyway. How is Prudhomme going to react to this? He found it necessary to hold a press conferance about Ras' missed tests. This is far, far worse.

Does Ras finish the Tour?
 
I sincerly hope cow blood is as effective as everyone claims it is. I may have found a way to support my early retirement.

My daughter informed me yesterday she is now training again. She is also currently going thru the application process for her Danish citizenship as she lives in Copenhagen.
And here I am in the center of the USA , right in the middle of cow country. I pass by 100's of cows everyday on my ride. I'll just pluck one, bring it home, and house it in the back yard. I'll send cared packages of blood to my daughter for re-sale among her Danish riding mates.
That's better then getting e-mails from her asking for a set of wheels...
 
Bro Deal said:
So anyway. How is Prudhomme going to react to this? He found it necessary to hold a press conferance about Ras' missed tests. This is far, far worse.

Does Ras finish the Tour?
I think he does. Actually, yes. If he's thorough, he'll first talk to the editors at VeloNews. Then to Richards and Smith. If they sound anything like credible, then he's got to go based on the standards set by the Tour last year.

But, now that I think about it, maybe not. He's not under investigation. I think that was the standard... however, he won't remain not under investigation for long.

Actually, I think it's a real possibility that RB will pull him.
 
wolfix said:
I sincerly hope cow blood is as effective as everyone claims it is. I may have found a way to support my early retirement.

My daughter informed me yesterday she is now training again. She is also currently going thru the application process for her Danish citizenship as she lives in Copenhagen.
And here I am in the center of the USA , right in the middle of cow country. I pass by 100's of cows everyday on my ride. I'll just pluck one, bring it home, and house it in the back yard. I'll send cared packages of blood to my daughter for re-sale among her Danish riding mates.
That's better then getting e-mails from her asking for a set of wheels...
Lance & USPO preferred the calf blood products from Norway over the steroid-based BBQ bovines in Texas.
 
redLantern said:
1.evidence has not been provided(i dont care how many phds you have)
Let me see. Two sources that corroborate each other. Sounds like evidence to me.

redLantern said:
4.the reporters had evidence against nixon.
Yeah. Nixon resigned because he wanted to pursue other opportunities or because he wanted to spend more time with his family. ;)
 
helmutRoole2 said:
And has been provided.
The world is flat. This has never been disproved is a court of law.Had you read my public profile you would have known this much earlier in the thread. Do you realize that one anonymous source brought down the entire Nixon administration? Do you think the reporters and editors at the Washington Post should backed away from that story?
1.evidence has not been provided(i dont care how many phds you have)
2.it doesnt need to be proved,we have satellite images(evidence)
3.im sorry, i dont look at profiles (i could care less where u live or work) i only care about what you have to say.
4.the reporters had evidence against nixon.

ps.i hate rush limbaugh (im a libertarian)
 
1.evidence has not been provided(i dont care how many phds you have)
2.it doesnt need to be proved,we have satellite images(evidence)
3.im sorry, i dont at peoples profiles (i could care less where u live or work) i only care about what you have to say.
4.the reporters had evidence against nixon.

Okay, last question. What is your personal threshold pertaining to newsworthiness? Is it three eyewitnesses? One hundred? One thousand? What if 1,000 people came forward and said, Rasmussen tried to headfake me into being his drug mule. If 1,000 people came forward with that same story, would you think it newsworthy enough to publish?

Another option. What if, on live television, Rasmussen stepped on a well lit stage and injected EPO? Do you think that would be newsworthy enough to publish?

At what point would you, redLantern, editor and chief, go forward with doping allegations against the current leader of the Tour de France?
 
helmutRoole2 said:
I think he does. Actually, yes. If he's thorough, he'll first talk to the editors at VeloNews. Then to Richards and Smith. If they sound anything like credible, then he's got to go based on the standards set by the Tour last year.

But, now that I think about it, maybe not. He's not under investigation. I think that was the standard... however, he won't remain not under investigation for long.

Actually, I think it's a real possibility that RB will pull him.
It seems that this in combination with the missed tests put the ASO in a bad position. Even though Rasmussen has claimed that he has not trained for ITTs, there are rumors that he is bluffing and he has actually improved a lot. What if Ras puts in a respectable ITT on Saturaday? It would be an ASO nightmare to have two have two winners in a row go down for doping.

Maybe if it looks like Ras doesn't have it in the time trials so there is no possibility of him winning, the ASO lets the issue slide. Tossing him out would be a huge scandal and black eye for a battered sport. Another option would be for the ASO to pressure Rabobank to suspend him and claim it was the team's decision and the ProTour code of ethics that removed him.
 
Bro Deal said:
Let me see. Two sources that corroborate each other. Sounds like evidence to me.
wow im impressed, so all i have to do is claim that i know rasmussen,say that he gave me a shoebox with cow blood iv's in it and then tell my buddy(who happens to have a phd) to go along with the story , then call up a news outlet and VOILA!! we have evidence.
 
Well, all I will add is that I think the cycling world is caught in this viscious cycle of self sabotage. The sport gets more publicity with controversy, (doping stories), than the actual races. If the direction of the cycling media would concentrate on the drama of the peloton than the drama outside the race it would be better for the sport. Look, the media has a lot of power and can spin a story any which way they like. The current spin is that cycling is a dirty, dirty sport, all are doped, and gloom and doom will the sport survive.

Doping will always exist. I am not an apologist, and I do think stricker standards and more tests are a step in the right direction, but things like the anti-doping charter are too much. The riders should not be the only ones punished. they are just the little guys. And I think singling out cycling is unfortunate when there are bigger sports with bigger doping problems. Cycling is just an easy whipping boy b/c the leadership within the cycling community seems to thrive on this negative publicity. It is twisted.

As far as the chicken. He is disgusting to look at. clearly he has issues. I don't doubt it is in his character to use cow blood. Just look at how emaciated he keeps himself. But I do agree that the timing of this story is convenient. right now doping stories are en vogue. Regardless of the sources credibility, you have to ask, why now? and why did the danes wait until after chicken got the yellow jersey? it is all in the timing for maximum impact. which goes to my original gripe. the cycling world is destroying itself and thriving on negative publicity, chasing sponsers away b/c of stupid infighting. both sides are using the doping issue to jockey for power when in reality doping was never really the issue. the cycling world needs strong leadership to get the media on its good side so that the ruse of sport and the focus of the sport can be back where it belongs, on the road.

p.s. I was wondering where helmut had gone. welcome back, but seriously are helmut and the doctor the same poster?
 
Bro Deal said:
It seems that this in combination with the missed tests put the ASO in a bad position. Even though Rasmussen has claimed that he has not trained for ITTs, there are rumors that he is bluffing and he has actually improved a lot. What if Ras puts in a respectable ITT on Saturaday? It would be an ASO nightmare to have two have two winners in a row go down for doping.

Maybe if it looks like Ras doesn't have it in the time trials so there is no possibility of him winning, the ASO lets the issue slide. Tossing him out would be a huge scandal and black eye for a battered sport. Another option would be for the ASO to pressure Rabobank to suspend him and claim it was the team's decision and the ProTour code of ethics that removed him.
Best case scenario is for RB to suspend him. If that doesn't happen, then ASO, I think, will act and before tomorrows ITT. If Rasmussen does rip one in the ITT and ASO then decides to act, it'll look like they are only cover their asses. But if they do it now, or if RB does it now, Rasmussen is really the only guy hurt. The Tour appears tough on drugs (and I think they're serious about nicking the top riders when they can), the UCI/WADA stays uninvolved. Either way, I think it'll happen before the ITT tomorrow. If no action is taken before tomorrow and no new reports surface, then ASO isn't going to act.
 
helmutRoole2 said:
Okay, last question. What is your personal threshold pertaining to newsworthiness? Is it three eyewitnesses? One hundred? One thousand? What if 1,000 people came forward and said, Rasmussen tried to headfake me into being his drug mule. If 1,000 people came forward with that same story, would you think it newsworthy enough to publish?

Another option. What if, on live television, Rasmussen stepped on a well lit stage and injected EPO? Do you think that would be newsworthy enough to publish?

At what point would you, redLantern, editor and chief, go forward with doping allegations against the current leader of the Tour de France?
eyewitnesses mean nothing, heck there are probably millions of eyewitnesses to UFO sightings..does that prove that ufos exist??? no......and i would not need rasmussen to inject himself on live television..what i would need is what they have on ullrich..DNA EVIDENCE, with documents and phone numbers connecting ullrich to fuentes.....THAT is sufficient evidence.
 
redLantern said:
4.the reporters had evidence against nixon.
No, initially they had only individuals telling their stories. The evidence connecting to Nixon didn't come until much, much later.
 
redLantern said:
wow im impressed, so all i have to do is claim that i know rasmussen,say that he gave me a shoebox with cow blood iv's in it and then tell my buddy(who happens to have a phd) to go along with the story , then call up a news outlet and VOILA!! we have evidence.
You left out the part where the reporters check your background, run the idea past their editors who run the idea past their publishers who run the idea past their lawyers who investigate you further and discover you work at a 7-Eleven and your buddy with the PhD got it through the internet and works as your manager at the 7-Eleven and then the say hey, have you guys ever been sued for for slander before because, even though you don't have much, when it's all gone you'll want it back.
 
Bro Deal said:
So anyway. How is Prudhomme going to react to this? He found it necessary to hold a press conferance about Ras' missed tests. This is far, far worse.

Does Ras finish the Tour?
Thanks for the re-focus. :)

I agree with Helmut who said he has to go to Velo and the witnesses. I think he gets pulled. Well, actually, I am not sure what to think. But this is a disaster for the sport, coming after last year, a total mess.
 
redLantern said:
eyewitnesses mean nothing, heck there are probably millions of eyewitnesses to UFO sightings..does that prove that ufos exist??? no......and i would not need rasmussen to inject himself on live television..what i would need is what they have on ullrich..DNA EVIDENCE, with documents and phone numbers connecting ullrich to fuentes.....THAT is sufficient evidence.
So you're saying that if 1,000 people said that Rasmussen tried to make them his drug mule, you'd be dubious?

Okay.

This is hopeless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.