The Fun Is About To Begin



"Bob Schwartz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> B. Lafferty <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I take it that you still haven't read the book. BTW, do you understand
>> what
>> a prima facie case is?

>
> There you go with that French **** again.
>
> I'll summarize the evidence. Emma goes to Spain to pick up some pills. You
> ought to be able to positively ID them by the shape, color, and markings.
> But she doesn't note any of that, she just hands them to Lance and has no
> clue what they are. It's up to your imagination.
>
> Horseshit.
>
> From: http://www.iht.com/articles/524790.html
>
> "In July 1999, before the perfunctory medical examination that precedes
> each Tour de France, Armstrong asked her for makeup to cover bruises on
> his arm caused by injections. The authors say that the many legal
> injections of vitamins, iron and recuperative agents that riders receive
> are always administered in the buttocks; the upper arms, they contend,
> are better suited for such illegal substances as EPO, human growth
> hormone and steroids."
>
> Horseshit.
>
> There's other stuff too, It all may be true. But none of it is verified
> in any way other than Emma's word.


There's a lot more than just Emma and the other tidbits that have been
reported in the press. Remember, the book is 388 pages long. Read it and
then decide where you stand.
 
"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message


> >>> Exonerated of what? The book had no proof.
> >>
> >> You've read the book then?
> >>

> > I don't have to. I read your posts.

>
> Sorry, Kyle. Until you read the book, you're just talking out of your ass.


You mean there's some gem of proof in the book that you've deliberately
refrained from posting? Seems hard to believe.

Congratulations, Lafferty - you've managed something unusual in RBR,
you've alienated, or just bored, even the LANCE-detractors and the
people tired of LANCE worship.
 
"Benjamin Weiner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > B. Lafferty wrote:
>> >> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>
>> >>> Exonerated of what? The book had no proof.
>> >>
>> >> You've read the book then?
>> >>
>> > I don't have to. I read your posts.

>>
>> Sorry, Kyle. Until you read the book, you're just talking out of your
>> ass.

>
> You mean there's some gem of proof in the book that you've deliberately
> refrained from posting? Seems hard to believe.


Not any one thing, but taken as a whole, a picture does emerge. Read it and
decide for yourself.
 
>From: "B. Lafferty"

>I told you that I'd loan you my copy.


And I openly admired your trust, IMS. Of course, you have it memorized anyhow.

Post the killer parts you haven't already. Must be better than possibly
disgruntled ex-employees and the like, eh?

388 pages??? No editor on the project? --TP
 
"Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >From: "B. Lafferty"

>
>>I told you that I'd loan you my copy.

>
> And I openly admired your trust, IMS. Of course, you have it memorized
> anyhow.
>
> Post the killer parts you haven't already. Must be better than possibly
> disgruntled ex-employees and the like, eh?


No. It would be far more informative for you to read the entire book.
>
> 388 pages??? No editor on the project? --TP


Read it and then comment on editorial.
 
>From: "B. Lafferty"

>Read it


Pass. I'm just going to wait for the trial, like you <g>.
 
>From: "B. Lafferty"

>Read it


Pass. I'm just going to wait for the trial, like you <g>.
 
"Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >From: "B. Lafferty"

>
>>Read it

>
> Pass. I'm just going to wait for the trial, like you <g>.


Good. You might have something informative to relate by 2006.
 
B. Lafferty said:
"Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >From: "B. Lafferty"

>
>>I told you that I'd loan you my copy.

>
> And I openly admired your trust, IMS. Of course, you have it memorized
> anyhow.
>
> Post the killer parts you haven't already. Must be better than possibly
> disgruntled ex-employees and the like, eh?


No. It would be far more informative for you to read the entire book.
>
> 388 pages??? No editor on the project? --TP


Read it and then comment on editorial.

The extracts i have read that were published in the newspapers in Britain and from interviews on various websites were nothing more than rumour and conjecture.And this are the parts that are meant to be damning and make you want to buy the book.

This whole project had 2 aims :
1) to attack Lance Armstrong in somesort of personal vendetta that Walsh had against him and
2) make buckets of cash off the book (making money from trashy , unsubstantiated investigitive journalism off of someone elses hard work - pondlife)

All in all i hope Lance rolls this ******** in court and every penny Walsh makes from it he loses.A nice fat check to Lances charity and the ceasure of circulation of the book would be a just result.
Anyone can say they have 'researched' a subject and then write a few hundred pages slandering someones character.Its cheap journalism and contains ZERO facts regarding Lance taking illegal drugs.
pathetic.
 
>From: "B. Lafferty"

(BL):
>>>Read it [LA Con., Walsh]


(Me):
>> Pass. I'm just going to wait for the trial, like you <g>.


(BL):
>Good. You might have something >informative to relate by 2006.


You gonna stop posting the "Lance farted" stuff in between?

Get your Livestrong band yet?

http://www.laf.org/

Ride for the Roses is coming up:

http://www.laf.org/news_events/Events/Ride_Weekend/default.cfm

Raised $4.5 million last year.

What's Walsh doing with the book money?

>
 
"Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >From: "B. Lafferty"

>
> (BL):
>>>>Read it [LA Con., Walsh]

>
> (Me):
>>> Pass. I'm just going to wait for the trial, like you <g>.

>
> (BL):
>>Good. You might have something >informative to relate by 2006.

>
> You gonna stop posting the "Lance farted" stuff in between?


Lance farted? No kidding. Wow!
>
> Get your Livestrong band yet?
>
> http://www.laf.org/


No thanks.
>
> Ride for the Roses is coming up:
>
> http://www.laf.org/news_events/Events/Ride_Weekend/default.cfm
>
> Raised $4.5 million last year.


No thanks.
>
> What's Walsh doing with the book money?


Ask Walsh. I couldn't care less.

Have a nice evening.
 
B. Lafferty <[email protected]> wrote:

> There's a lot more than just Emma and the other tidbits that have been
> reported in the press. Remember, the book is 388 pages long. Read it and
> then decide where you stand.


How high do you have to pile horseshit before it smells like
something other than horshit? Just curious.

Hey, if this book is so damning, what does the English language
edition have to do with anything? Are French speaking people
so in love with LANCE that they cut him so much slack? That
must be it.

Actually there is one item that I'd believe, the part about
cutting other teams in on the million bucks in order to
guarantee the payout. Because he'd be pretty damn stupid if
he *didn't* do that!

Bob Schwartz
[email protected]
 
If Lance were a doper then why would he risk it by suing ? The book did not
seem to have a big impact from what I gather. A guilty one would just
ignore it because more attention would just bring out others from the
woodwork.

Therefore, he must have a point. He is obviously willing to put up a big
fight to prove his point. What does he stand to lose if the authors and
O'Rielly are indded correct, his reputation.

Dave
"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> From CyclingNews:
>
> Armstrong suing for ?2 million
> Two and a half months after the the publication of the book L.A.
> Confidentiel by British journalist David Walsh and Pierre Ballester -

which
> he had tried to prevent without success - Lance Armstrong has now set out

to
> sue the publisher Martinière, the authors, his ex-soigneur Emma O'Reilly

as
> well as French magazine L'Express for printing excerpts.
>
> According to a statement issued by Michel Zaoui, the magazine's attorney,
> the defamation of character case involves ?2 million and a preliminary

court
> date has been set for December 1, 2004. A second charge of complicity is
> also being made against Emma O'Reilly and with a hearing scheduled for
> December 9. M. Zaoui declared he would be asking for the two cases to be
> treated at the same hearing, while not expecting a final ruling before

2006.
>
> Armstrong's lawyers told AFP, "The pre-publication of excerpts in

L'Express,
> together with the book's publication on the next day, were merely a
> commercial event destined to make enormous profits to the detriment of

Lance
> Armstrong."
>
> In France the book was indeed much talked about and a best-seller,

although
> it did not offer any conclusive proof that Armstrong had ever used
> performance-enhancing drugs.
>
>
> --
> Peloton Pigs--Flying Since 1991
>
>
 
>From: "B. Lafferty"

>> You gonna stop posting the "Lance farted" stuff in between?

>
>Lance farted? No kidding. Wow!


I knew you'd like to follow up on that.

[LAF, Ride for Roses raising millions for cancer research and care for those
with cancer]

(In reference to the above, I asked):

>> What's Walsh doing with the book >>money?


(BL responded):
>Ask Walsh.


Good idea.

>I couldn't care less.


I think it's relevant considering the timing of the LAC publication. Put
plainly, I think it's ironic that Lance is pilloried for "not racing enough"
while he spends a lot of off-the-bike time with "cancer activities", while
Walsh, who could have produced his "expose" in his regular newspaper column,
chose to go for the extra payday with a book. Not to mention producing "news"
when it was news, not over three years later, in an obvious attempt to prevent
win # 6 by someone he has a deep personal dislike for. "Ethics". --Tom
Paterson