Lance Armstrong, Latest Victim of the 2000-Pound Sponge
24th August 2012
1. Note that he is to be ‘stripped of his titles’. As if that will make people forget that he actually won those races. No, it’s all about the ‘permanent record’, which is in the hands of the bureaucrats.
2. Note that he is to be ‘banned for life’. From what? From participating in the sort of competitions run by these slug. What a hardship.
Armstrong claims the USADA investigation “has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs”.
That seems like a true statement. (If you haven’t seem the movie, RollerBall, do so. It deals with a similar sports situation in a dystopian future that we seem to be rapidly approaching.)
Armstrong, in a passionate defence of his career record, said USADA had no right to take away his Tour titles.
“USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles,” he said.
“I know who won those seven Tours, my team-mates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours.
So who is this USADA?
The United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) is a non-profit organization funded by the US Government, sports organizations, and the national anti-doping organization (NADO) for the United States.
So it’s an organization set up by people who think that ‘doping’ is bad, supported by the government but with no legal authority. Welcome to the New World Order.
USADA is not a government entity, however the agency is mostly funded ($9 million) by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), with its remaining budget generated from contracts for anti-doping services with sport organizations, most notably the United States Olympic Committee.[4] The United States has also ratified the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport, the first global international treaty against doping in sport.
Putting aside the question of why the fuck the U.S. government is entering into a TREATY against ‘doping in sport’ — surely it has better things to do? — the more serious question is why the government is funding and giving apparent legitimacy to this group of international busybodies.
U.S. District Court Judge Sam Sparks noted, though, that the USADA’s “conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives.”
No shit.
August 24th, 2012 at 14:22
“So it’s an organization set up by people who think that ‘doping’ is bad” But you don’t think so? ‘May the best drug win’ is okay with you?
Plain and simple, the evidence against him would have been made available in a public forum and he would have had the chance to refute it. So if he’s so innocent, why didn’t he do that? He’s been clamoring for his ‘day in court’, and now that it’s here, he bails. Not defending yourself is not proof of guilt, but it sure is suspicious.
“whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives.”” So what are the ‘less noble motives’ referenced? Vague insinuation is not an argument. If he has reason to believe that the USADA has an ulterior agenda, he should produce it.