This proves it: Landis is innocent

[Ken Prager]

Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
(again)???

<http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>

 

[RonSonic]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:45:13 -0700, Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:

>Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
>(again)???
>
><http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>

Are they TRYING to blow this case? Does LNDD and WADA and USADA want this case
to be thrown out on procedure while still sliming Floyd?

That is the only possible explanation for this egregious behavior.

Ron

 

[Mark Hickey]

Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:

>Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
>(again)???
>
><http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>

AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
independent testing to clear Floyd?

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[[email protected]]

On Apr 23, 9:19 pm, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
> >(again)???
>
> ><http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
> independent testing to clear Floyd?
>
> Mark Hickey
> Habanero Cycleshttp://www.habcycles.com
> Home of the $795 ti frame

they started on monday last week and sunday is the only day his rep
wasn't in attendance- so they waited to do everything on one day
(sunday)?- or, because of the one day his rep was not allowed all the
other results become invalidated ?

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:[email protected],
Ken Prager <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
> (again)???
>
> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>

Within that same story, you will find that they did so as instructed by
USADA, or so CN says. As to leaking, this is not an "again" at all. They
did not previously leak results. I am neither for the lab nor against
Landis ; but please rely on facts, not gossip.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:[email protected],
RonSonic <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:45:13 -0700, Ken Prager <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
>> results (again)???
>>
>> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> Are they TRYING to blow this case? Does LNDD and WADA and USADA want
> this case to be thrown out on procedure while still sliming Floyd?

In the spirit of stamping out the Big Lie of our sport, procedure seems to
have been followed, just not your sense of how you want things to turn out
or how you imagine procedure to work. However, it is clear that the WADA
wants to get results that validate its own existence.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:[email protected],
Mark Hickey <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
>> results (again)???
>>
>> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
> independent testing to clear Floyd?

Use, or use up ??? Are you certain, or are you just making this up ? I
really don't know.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

 

[[email protected]]

On Apr 24, 1:24 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> Mark Hickey <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>
> > Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
> >> results (again)???
>
> >> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> > AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
> > independent testing to clear Floyd?
>
> Use, or use up ??? Are you certain, or are you just making this up ? I
> really don't know.
> --
> Bonne route !
>
> Sandy
> Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

dumbass,

from what i understand the a-sample and b-sample are sealed in front
of the athlete, so if the b-sample is tested i assume it's integrity
for the purposes of subsequent testing is destroyed.

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de
news:[email protected],
[email protected] <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> On Apr 24, 1:24 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dans le message denews:[email protected],
>> Mark Hickey <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>>
>>> Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
>>>> results (again)???
>>
>>>> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>>
>>> AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
>>> independent testing to clear Floyd?
>>
>> Use, or use up ??? Are you certain, or are you just making this up
>> ? I really don't know.
>> --
>> Bonne route !
>>
>> Sandy
>> Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
>
> dumbass,
>
> from what i understand the a-sample and b-sample are sealed in front
> of the athlete, so if the b-sample is tested i assume it's integrity
> for the purposes of subsequent testing is destroyed.

Chemical integrity, legal integrity or volumentric integrity ?
Again, I don't know as to other than legal, and I don't see that it is
compromised.

 

[[email protected]]

On Apr 24, 2:20 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> [email protected] <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>
>
>
> > On Apr 24, 1:24 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> >> Mark Hickey <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré:
>
> >>> Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
> >>>> results (again)???
>
> >>>> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> >>> AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
> >>> independent testing to clear Floyd?
>
> >> Use, or use up ??? Are you certain, or are you just making this up
> >> ? I really don't know.
> >> --
> >> Bonne route !
>
> >> Sandy
> >> Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
>
> > dumbass,
>
> > from what i understand the a-sample and b-sample are sealed in front
> > of the athlete, so if the b-sample is tested i assume it's integrity
> > for the purposes of subsequent testing is destroyed.
>
> Chemical integrity, legal integrity or volumentric integrity ?
> Again, I don't know as to other than legal, and I don't see that it is
> compromised.


legal. the a and b-samples are created when they are taken, but there
isn't a procedure to re-seal the unused portion to be used for later
testing.

 

[Donald Munro]

raamman wrote:
> they started on monday last week and sunday is the only day his rep
> wasn't in attendance

Do the French fit working on a sunday into a 35 hour week ?

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:[email protected],
Donald Munro <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> raamman wrote:
>> they started on monday last week and sunday is the only day his rep
>> wasn't in attendance
>
> Do the French fit working on a sunday into a 35 hour week ?

We're not too hot on the idea of Thrusday or Friday, for that matter, not to
mention Monday!

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de
news:[email protected],
[email protected] <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> On Apr 24, 2:20 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dans le message
>> denews:[email protected],
>> [email protected] <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a
>> déclaré :
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 24, 1:24 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Dans le message denews:[email protected],
>>>> Mark Hickey <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>>
>>>>> Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
>>>>>> results (again)???
>>
>>>>>> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>>
>>>>> AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
>>>>> independent testing to clear Floyd?
>>
>>>> Use, or use up ??? Are you certain, or are you just making this up
>>>> ? I really don't know.
>>>> --
>>>> Bonne route !
>>
>>>> Sandy
>>>> Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
>>
>>> dumbass,
>>
>>> from what i understand the a-sample and b-sample are sealed in front
>>> of the athlete, so if the b-sample is tested i assume it's integrity
>>> for the purposes of subsequent testing is destroyed.
>>
>> Chemical integrity, legal integrity or volumentric integrity ?
>> Again, I don't know as to other than legal, and I don't see that it
>> is compromised.
>
>
> legal. the a and b-samples are created when they are taken, but there
> isn't a procedure to re-seal the unused portion to be used for later
> testing.

Only if one or both sides are being obstreperous, is there a problem in
creating an ad hoc formula.

 

[Bill C]

On Apr 24, 1:20 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> Ken Prager <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>
> > Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
> > (again)???
>
> > <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> Within that same story, you will find that they did so as instructed by
> USADA, or so CN says. As to leaking, this is not an "again" at all. They
> did not previously leak results. I am neither for the lab nor against
> Landis ; but please rely on facts, not gossip.
> --
> Bonne route !
>
> Sandy
> Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Sandy at least AP is reporting it as "another" Leak:

http://tinyurl.com/3by6my

The news of Landis' positive test during the Tour, also conducted at
the Chatenay-Malabry lab outside Paris, also was leaked last year.

I have almost zero faith in the AP to report anything accurately, but
on the surface this seems to be a decent job of reporting what
happened, at least according to Landis. This is my big complaint with
AP's content. They take a position and have been caught, several
times, outright lieing to support it in hard news stories so who
knows.
Bill C

 

[Donald Munro]

Donald Munro wrote:
>> Do the French fit working on a sunday into a 35 hour week ?

Sandy wrote:
> We're not too hot on the idea of Thrusday or Friday, for that matter, not to
> mention Monday!

When I become rbr supreme leader I will issue a decree that henceforth
Monday is a stay at home recovery day following the sunday long ride (or
even the 30Km fatty master training ride "race").

 

[Mark Hickey]

"Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Dans le message de news:[email protected],
>Ken Prager <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
>> (again)???
>>
>> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
>Within that same story, you will find that they did so as instructed by
>USADA, or so CN says. As to leaking, this is not an "again" at all. They
>did not previously leak results.

Then perhaps you could explain how Landis was confronted DURING the
tour by the media about the results of his positive test, rather than
by UCI / WADA.... hmmmmm?

> I am neither for the lab nor against
>Landis ; but please rely on facts, not gossip.

You need to bolster your collection of facts, it appears.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:[email protected],
Mark Hickey <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Dans le message de news:[email protected],
>> Ken Prager <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>>> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
>>> results (again)???
>>>
>>> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>>
>> Within that same story, you will find that they did so as instructed
>> by USADA, or so CN says. As to leaking, this is not an "again" at
>> all. They did not previously leak results.
>
> Then perhaps you could explain how Landis was confronted DURING the
> tour by the media about the results of his positive test, rather than
> by UCI / WADA.... hmmmmm?

I take it this was a smart-alecky "hmmmmm", yes?
Forgetting whether it was Pound or not, I do recall one of the hoity-toities
saying that there was a positive test result, and characterizing it as
something like "... and it couldn't be worse." Paraphrasing - I don't
recall perfectly. That's how I explain it.
>
>> I am neither for the lab nor against
>> Landis ; but please rely on facts, not gossip.
>
> You need to bolster your collection of facts, it appears.

No, I don't, or at least not to a non-paying non-client. For a substatial
fee, of course, I would be happy to do the legwork, but someone in the forum
will likely volunteer. Of course, if _you_ know precisely who it was who
disclosed the first inklings, I am sure you will let us all know.

 

[[email protected]]

On Apr 24, 1:24 am, "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> Mark Hickey <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>
> > Ken Prager <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the
> >> results (again)???
>
> >> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> > AND use up the last of the samples that could have been used for
> > independent testing to clear Floyd?
>
> Use, or use up ??? Are you certain, or are you just making this up ? I
> really don't know.
> --
> Bonne route !
>
> Sandy
> Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Surely you understand that once the seal is broken on the container
that the contents are no longer valid? This is why there is supposed
to be an observer from the rider's camp present.

 

[[email protected]]

On Apr 24, 6:06 am, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> >Ken Prager <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> >> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
> >> (again)???
>
> >> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> >Within that same story, you will find that they did so as instructed by
> >USADA, or so CN says. As to leaking, this is not an "again" at all. They
> >did not previously leak results.
>
> Then perhaps you could explain how Landis was confronted DURING the
> tour by the media about the results of his positive test, rather than
> by UCI / WADA.... hmmmmm?
>
> > I am neither for the lab nor against
> >Landis ; but please rely on facts, not gossip.
>
> You need to bolster your collection of facts, it appears.
>

C'mon man, don't be a candyass. Give us the names of the leakers.

 

[[email protected]]

On Apr 24, 6:06 am, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Sandy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Dans le message denews:[email protected],
> >Ken Prager <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> >> Why else would LNDD keep out his representative *and* leak the results
> >> (again)???
>
> >> <http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/apr07/apr23news3>
>
> >Within that same story, you will find that they did so as instructed by
> >USADA, or so CN says. As to leaking, this is not an "again" at all. They
> >did not previously leak results.
>
> Then perhaps you could explain how Landis was confronted DURING the
> tour by the media about the results of his positive test, rather than
> by UCI / WADA.... hmmmmm?
>
> > I am neither for the lab nor against
> >Landis ; but please rely on facts, not gossip.
>
> You need to bolster your collection of facts, it appears.
>

The "fact" that the "media" "confronted" Landis is neither necessary
nor sufficient to demonstrate that a person employed by the lab
communicated the results to a person who was not authorized to receive
them.
Now if you can name names, don't be a candyass, just give 'em up!