Lance Armstrong Dirty?

Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
15,742
Well, it wasn't so many years ago I despaired of being able to believe anything. Nothing was known in this world of ours. Would drilling in Anwar wipe out the Caribou? Nothing is known. Were there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Nothing is known. Did the French take payoffs from the food for oil program? Nothing is known.

I doubt the French are very fond of Lance Armstrong. Some urine samples he submitted in 1999 to a French lab are now showing 'dirty'; though what in the heck they showed in 1999 might be worth knowing. Armstrong says it's a frameup. And we do live in a world where our own FBI lab results in the 90's had to be thrown out. Nothing is known. It's interesting that the review of old samples was only to be an audit for the French lab and not to be attributed to any individual tested. Geuss that got thrown out once it was found to be Armstrong's samples.

Armstrong won their bike race, arguably the most prestigious on earth, 7 times. No one has done that, if my math is correct, but remember- nothing is known. Most recently they tested him right before a race. No biggie, until he found out he was the only one tested. I doubt the French believe an American is outperforming the world cyclists every year. Some of those first Tours were amazing too; no one in the field could touch him.

I hope Lance is right. I hope he did it all clean. I think he probably did; the French were keen to catch him, and they never did, until now, with samples years old. Lance is hardly perfect. He beat Cancer with the help of his wife, nursing him through the entire experience. When he was well, he dumped her, moving in for a newer model, the blonde folk rock singer. So, he's just a another man, albeit one with some exceptional abilities.

We aren't super, most of us. I try and hold onto this bit of humility as the world's heros are dragged into the mud. Crabs in the bucket; each time one is about to escape, the others clawing their way up drag him down. And in the world of special interests and political power, science and 'fact' are the casualties. We'll probably never know if Supply Side works, along with all the other fond reality shaping theories we endeavor to hold onto in a world of chaos and lies. It used to be some things were solid; like the home run record in the American League, or the time in the 100 yard dash. That's gone.

That was Lance on the bike, wasn't it? I mean, we've got photographic evidence of that, right?

There's a Conspiracy theory program on the Learning channel. They did the, "Did we really land on the Moon?" I thought that was fantastic on it's face but in retrospec, what the hell, bring it on. Everything is up for grabs.

And concerned people want to know why video games are so popular.
Because when nothing is known, opting out is not only logical, but probably keeps Psych Ward admissions down.


munk
 
First man on the moon was (allegedly) Neil ARMSTRONG.

Guy that won all those Tours was (allegedly) Lance ARMSTRONG.

Coincidence? Hmm..
 
munk said:
Well, it wasn't so many years ago I despaired of being able to believe anything. Nothing was known in this world of ours. Would drilling in Anwar wipe out the Caribou? Nothing is known. Were there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Nothing is known. Did the French take payoffs from the food for oil program? Nothing is known.

I doubt the French are very fond of Lance Armstrong. Some urine samples he submitted in 1999 to a French lab are now showing 'dirty'; though what in the heck they showed in 1999 might be worth knowing. Armstrong says it's a frameup. And we do live in a world where our own FBI lab results in the 90's had to be thrown out. Nothing is known. It's interesting that the review of old samples was only to be an audit for the French lab and not to be attributed to any individual tested. Geuss that got thrown out once it was found to be Armstrong's samples.

Armstrong won their bike race, arguably the most prestigious on earth, 7 times. No one has done that, if my math is correct, but remember- nothing is known. Most recently they tested him right before a race. No biggie, until he found out he was the only one tested. I doubt the French believe an American is outperforming the world cyclists every year. Some of those first Tours were amazing too; no one in the field could touch him.

I hope Lance is right. I hope he did it all clean. I think he probably did; the French were keen to catch him, and they never did, until now, with samples years old. Lance is hardly perfect. He beat Cancer with the help of his wife, nursing him through the entire experience. When he was well, he dumped her, moving in for a newer model, the blonde folk rock singer. So, he's just a another man, albeit one with some exceptional abilities.

We aren't super, most of us. I try and hold onto this bit of humility as the world's heros are dragged into the mud. Crabs in the bucket; each time one is about to escape, the others clawing their way up drag him down. And in the world of special interests and political power, science and 'fact' are the casualties. We'll probably never know if Supply Side works, along with all the other fond reality shaping theories we endeavor to hold onto in a world of chaos and lies. It used to be some things were solid; like the home run record in the American League, or the time in the 100 yard dash. That's gone.

That was Lance on the bike, wasn't it? I mean, we've got photographic evidence of that, right?

There's a Conspiracy theory program on the Learning channel. They did the, "Did we really land on the Moon?" I thought that was fantastic on it's face but in retrospec, what the hell, bring it on. Everything is up for grabs.

And concerned people want to know why video games are so popular.
Because when nothing is known, opting out is not only logical, but probably keeps Psych Ward admissions down.


munk
Some people will aggressively dirty their own living areas. Others prefer to pick on people of action. People that take action and do things, that excel at getting the show on the road, winning the day.... those good people must be brought down. WHY? Because some losers want to be winners... and they want it so bad that they will win at anything.... even bringing down good people! My gut feeling is that Lance Armstrong is drug free! He has been attacked ONLY because he is a winner!
Thanks,

iBear
 
FallingKnife said:
First man on the moon was (allegedly) Neil ARMSTRONG.

Guy that won all those Tours was (allegedly) Lance ARMSTRONG.

Coincidence? Hmm..
Your post was very astute! Armstrong is a winner! You are alert! That is good, the world needs more lerts! Armstrong is a good name.

Commendable indeed!

iBear
 
munk said:
I hope Lance is right. I hope he did it all clean. I think he probably did

I think he did it clean, too. Because, what are the implications of the converse, that he did use some kind of undetectable drug?
It would mean:
Such a drug (and an effective drug at that) existed.
The drug was not detectable despite repeated and ever more sophisticated testing over the past 7 years.
As remarkable and effective as this drug is, it was used only to further the athletic career of Lance Armstrong.
No one else has used the drug or at least has remained resolutely silent about it.
All the people who concocted this drug have remained resolutely silent about it.
The drug does not have any apparent long-term side effects.
None of his failed competitors have been able to duplicate or get access to this drug, and if they did, none of them have revealed their knowledge of it out of spite.
 
Do I know what is going on here 100%? No, I don't. The whole thing stinks though. Old sample just "happens" to get tested, by people who may or may not have an agenda, with no way for anyone else to verify their results.

You know what they say...once is coincidence, twice is happenstance, thrice is enemy activity.

For every great man there are countless little men who want to be great men. The good ones work hard to go up; the bad ones work hard to bring others down. Just my take on things.
 
Europeans and Canadians are smarter, wiser, thinner and more cosmopolitan than American trailer trash. Their 21st century global charter is to seek out any pretext to bash and denigrate America's 300 million provincial, vulgar citizens and their evil president. Why should Lance Armstrong be immune?

Lesson learned: Euro-gratitude toward Americans who sacrificed lives fighting their wars, rebuilding their economies and removing the threat of the Warsaw Pact..........had a very short half-life. "America, what have you done for us lately".
 
OK, we've established Something Is Known; Neil Armstrong won the Tour De France after practising on a stationary bike he got at a garage sale at the trailer park where he lived, and Lance Armstrong landed on the Moon after testing dirty for accerlerants in his bloodstream. Also, Yoplait yogurt sucks.



munk
 
It seems odd that they tested him again and again while he raced and then found a dirty sample that was six years old. Then again, who would have thought that Rafiel Palmero was doing steroids. I have this bad tendancy to believe people tell the truth and I'm generally disappointed.

I believe that Armstrong did take EPO or whatever as part of his cancer treatment.

Can athletes take steroids to recover from injuries if prescribed by a doctor like a normal person might?
 
Not that I would accuse the French of being on a witch hunt, but come on, they should rename the race the Tour de Lance....and the French aren't happy about it one bit. Armstrong is the most tested athlete in history. They test him ALL the time and never once has he come back dirty...I'm not much of a conspiracy theory guy, but when they're out to get you it's not paranoia.
 
The use of performance enhancing drugs are so widespread I think they should just say "go for it"

People doing up lines of crank before the bike race, an injured runner firing up some heroin so he can finish the race, maybe we could even have a hallucinogenic mushroom swim match ;) :p
 
Either way it was a great feat. Winning a bike race clean for seven years or using drugs to win for seven years in the midst of other folks using similar stuff is still an accomplishment.

All this makes good business for my internet urine sample company. For a limited time, all HI forumites get 10% off. :) :rolleyes:
 
Just another thing to lay at the door of the French: sore losers. But, I'm surprised that they would be as they have had so much practice at it you'd think they would be used to it by now.
 
One has to wonder what would happen if all the Tour's competitors were subjected to the same level of testing and scrutiny Lance has undergone. Funny thing, no one's ever tried to prove a loser was cheating. I reckon the logic follows that since they lost anyway it doesn't matter. :mad:

Sarge
 
Shann said:
It seems odd that they tested him again and again while he raced and then found a dirty sample that was six years old.

I think that there was some stuff banned 6+ years ago, but they didn't have a test for it at the time. I think they're claiming that, now that they have a test, they're testing old samples, and, shazam, there it is.

Shann said:
Can athletes take steroids to recover from injuries if prescribed by a doctor like a normal person might?

I think that generally, the doctors of pro athletes have to be selective about what drugs they prescribe, to avoid getting into testing trouble.

There are lots of different kinds of steroids. I'm not sure, but I think that the ones used medically (e.g. corticosteroids & cortisone) don't overlap with the banned, performance enhancing ones (anabolic steroids). However, you might not be able to use even the "innocent" drugs because of the weirdness of testing. I suppose an innocent drug could cause a false positive. Meanwhile, things that are in themselves innocent get banned because they help fool the tests for the other stuff.
 
munk said:
OK, we've established Something Is Known; Neil Armstrong won the Tour De France after practising on a stationary bike he got at a garage sale at the trailer park where he lived, and Lance Armstrong landed on the Moon after testing dirty for accerlerants in his bloodstream. Also, Yoplait yogurt sucks.



munk
Hey... not if you don't eat it.... can't hear the tree fall if your not in the forest, can you? Acidophilus is good to eat, by any name!
Thanks,

iBear
 
If a man's wrong in the forest, and there's not a woman there to tell him, is he still wrong? :p

Sarge
 
munk said:
OK, we've established Something Is Known; Neil Armstrong won the Tour De France after practising on a stationary bike he got at a garage sale at the trailer park where he lived, and Lance Armstrong landed on the Moon after testing dirty for accerlerants in his bloodstream. Also, Yoplait yogurt sucks.



munk
OK, we've established Something Is Known; Neil Armstrong won the Tour De France after practicing on a stationary bike he got at a garage sale at the trailer park where he and other nice white people lived, and Lance Armstrong landed on the Moon after taking LSD (He only thought he was on the moon) and testing dirty for accelerants in his bloodstream.
********************************************
IMAGINE? Nothing is known. It's interesting that the review of old samples (1999) was only to be an audit for the French lab and not to be attributed to any individual tested. Hey, I'm thinkin here! Anyway, I say.... Lance is a hero and a winner and that is good enough for me!

iBear
 
Back
Top