Astana respond to Klodi situation
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id= ... may15news2
If there is evidence, they will do something about it.
Brilliant.
If there is evidence, they will do something about it.
Brilliant.
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
0
Comments
-
C'mon iain - at least JB's consistent.
It's how they also handled Basso - and didn't that turn out wonderful for Discovery
I say: let's hope it drags out, Klodi gets picked for TdF and see how ASO handle it.0 -
iainf72 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/may09/may15news2
If there is evidence, they will do something about it.
Brilliant.
C'mon. Say what you're trying to say but won't. You've already made up you're mind.
Guilty, because you read it on the Internet. :roll: :roll:
What do you want Astana to say?
I say let's beat a confession out of all of them.
Dennis Noward0 -
dennisn wrote:iainf72 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/may09/may15news2
If there is evidence, they will do something about it.
Brilliant.
C'mon. Say what you're trying to say but won't. You've already made up you're mind.
Guilty, because you read it on the Internet. :roll: :roll:
What do you want Astana to say?
I say let's beat a confession out of all of them.
Dennis Noward
I agree. You gotta have due process. Are this commission's findings official or is this just the word of one rider against another?It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
dennisn wrote:iainf72 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/may09/may15news2
If there is evidence, they will do something about it.
Brilliant.
C'mon. Say what you're trying to say but won't. You've already made up you're mind.
Guilty, because you read it on the Internet. :roll: :roll:
What do you want Astana to say?
I say let's beat a confession out of all of them.
Dennis Noward
I guess Dennis you take Kloden's response of not guilty with a pinch of salt since he too used the internet to plead his innocence?0 -
Timoid. wrote:dennisn wrote:iainf72 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/may09/may15news2
If there is evidence, they will do something about it.
Brilliant.
C'mon. Say what you're trying to say but won't. You've already made up you're mind.
Guilty, because you read it on the Internet. :roll: :roll:
What do you want Astana to say?
I say let's beat a confession out of all of them.
Dennis Noward
I agree. You gotta have due process. Are this commission's findings official or is this just the word of one rider against another?
Based on what cyclingnews have reported about the Freiburg report, I think it is fair to assume that the evidence gathered is more than just rider vs. rider statements.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2009/freiburg_report_may09
That said, in defense of Astana they said they would wait until they have seen the report before they act; and so they should. I would just like to see a bit more urgency from them in getting a copy of the report.
I'm just surprised that anyone touched Kloden after he left T-Mobile. He certainly was carrying a lot of excess baggage.0 -
This is a 63 page report written by an independent commission containing three medical experts, plus a secretary. It includes sworn testimony from riders who confirmed Klöden's blood doping.
I don't know what more evidence is needed Dennis?
Most teams would suspend the rider pending their own internal investigation. The conclusions regarding Klöden are hardly shocking, what is worrying is the carefree way that the staff played with rider health. There are too many examples of this. But in the meantime, the only firm action from Bruyneel is a firm finger stuck towards fans and honest riders alike.0 -
He'll go the way of Ullrich. The German's will be like a dog with a bone.
So, it won't matter what LA :roll: decides to do.
Must want him for that Tour domestique spot though, as doing nothing could prove a risky gambit."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Tthey wouldn't want to have to give a Kazakh rider a place on the team for the biggest race in the calendar, would they?0
-
One can just imagine the conversation.SpaceJunk wrote:C'mon iain - at least JB's consistent. It's how they also handled Basso...
JB:" Oh no! They're on to us again! You know what I need to hear Andreas / Ivan / whoever." (Delete as appropriate). "Tell me you didn't do it."
AK/ IB / whoever: "I didn't do it."
JB: "That's good enough for me!"0 -
Kléber wrote:This is a 63 page report written by an independent commission containing three medical experts, plus a secretary. It includes sworn testimony from riders who confirmed Klöden's blood doping.
I don't know what more evidence is needed Dennis?
Most teams would suspend the rider pending their own internal investigation. The conclusions regarding Klöden are hardly shocking, what is worrying is the carefree way that the staff played with rider health. There are too many examples of this. But in the meantime, the only firm action from Bruyneel is a firm finger stuck towards fans and honest riders alike.
Correct me if I'm wrong(and I could be). This "independent commission" was set up to
FIND doping? Not finding it was not an option(if that makes any sense). In order to justify their jobs they had to FIND it. This doesn't sound very impartial to me. And this "sworn testimony"? Was that in court or what? Or just someone saying "I swear that's what happened"? I'm not disputing doping in cycling, or any other sport, but it would seem that
more than a few journalists and experts are making a really good living off of doping scandals and such. It's in their best interest to report "dirt" because it's becoming apparent that no one wants to read about the "good" things in cycling. You seem to demand "firm" action from Bruyneel toward someone who hasn't been found guilty of
anything. Others say Kloden has "excess baggage". You go so far as to say that Bruyneel "flipped you off", yet I see no proof of this. Once again I will repeat my age old argument that you demand way to much from human beings. You ask that these heroes of yours be as pure as the driven snow and not allowed to have any faults. You put them on too high a pedestal. They are human and can't possibly conform to your rules of perfection.
Dennis Noward0 -
Don't forget that Dennis' view of doping regulation and the law in general is at least coloured (and perhaps determined) by the sort of nonsense he has absorbed when reading right-wing 'libertarian' propaganda, such as the following from his favourite book...iainf72 wrote:
Americansdennisn wrote:I say let's beat a confession out of all of them.
Why can't they be like Columbia and pretend he's got an illness?
Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."0 -
Interestingly enough, I have read almost identical 'arguments' from so-called 'libertarian' cranks opposed to holding properly to account those who speed, use mobile phones and so on, and as a result of their selfish, anti-social law-breaking kill or maim other human beings when driving.dennisn wrote:Once again I will repeat my age old argument that you demand way to much from human beings. You ask that these heroes of yours be as pure as the driven snow and not allowed to have any faults. You put them on too high a pedestal0 -
dennisn wrote:Kléber wrote:This is a 63 page report written by an independent commission containing three medical experts, plus a secretary. It includes sworn testimony from riders who confirmed Klöden's blood doping.
I don't know what more evidence is needed Dennis?
Most teams would suspend the rider pending their own internal investigation. The conclusions regarding Klöden are hardly shocking, what is worrying is the carefree way that the staff played with rider health. There are too many examples of this. But in the meantime, the only firm action from Bruyneel is a firm finger stuck towards fans and honest riders alike.
Correct me if I'm wrong(and I could be). This "independent commission" was set up to
FIND doping? Not finding it was not an option(if that makes any sense). In order to justify their jobs they had to FIND it. This doesn't sound very impartial to me. And this "sworn testimony"? Was that in court or what? Or just someone saying "I swear that's what happened"? I'm not disputing doping in cycling, or any other sport, but it would seem that
more than a few journalists and experts are making a really good living off of doping scandals and such. It's in their best interest to report "dirt" because it's becoming apparent that no one wants to read about the "good" things in cycling. You seem to demand "firm" action from Bruyneel toward someone who hasn't been found guilty of
anything. Others say Kloden has "excess baggage". You go so far as to say that Bruyneel "flipped you off", yet I see no proof of this. Once again I will repeat my age old argument that you demand way to much from human beings. You ask that these heroes of yours be as pure as the driven snow and not allowed to have any faults. You put them on too high a pedestal
Dennis - interesting choice of words 'these heroes of YOURS'.
Who says that I see riders as heroes. They are just sports people trying to make money; some by honest means, some by other means. I love the sport of cycling, but that doesn't mean I need to idolise those in the peloton.
And with regards to the commission not being impartial; that is a flawed argument you present there. If there is evidence of doping, there is evidence of doping. It's pretty straightforward - sure the commission's goal was to find evidence. That doesn't mean they fabricated evidence.
If I was being tried in a court of law and I based my defense on "please ignore the evidence of the prosecutors, after all they want to have me found guilty" - well I don't think I'd stand a chance.0 -
Dennis - Your default position seems to be "whatever the rider says". Yet there is a considerable body of evidence that he wasn't being candid.
I suspect if a 4 legged creature, covered in fur was standing in front of you barking, you wouldn't accept it was a dog if Kloden said it wasn't.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
I am afraid that such impeccable logic is probably wasted on those influence by 'libertarian' ideology. In fact, what with the claim of Rand's disciples that they believe in the primacy of reason, whilst at the same time displaying astonishing irrationality, and their claim to believe in 'freedom' whilst at the same time espousing a system that at best advocates mob rule and at worst would lead to corporate totalitarianism, so-called 'libertarianism' is probably the best illustration of Orwellian 'double think' in action ever devised.SpaceJunk wrote:...And with regards the commission not being impartial; that is a flawed argument you present there. If there is evidence of doping, there is evidence of doping. It's pretty straightforward - sure the commission's goal was to find evidence. That doesn't mean they fabricated evidence.
Is I was being tried in a court of law and I based my defense on "please ignore the evidence of the prosecutors, after all they want to have me found guilty" - well I don't think I'd stand a chance.0 -
Dennis - take the tinfoil hat off - you'll get much better reception that waydennisn wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong(and I could be). This "independent commission" was set up to FIND doping? Not finding it was not an option(if that makes any sense). In order to justify their jobs they had to FIND it.0 -
Space Junk, totally agree - you can love the sport without having to love the participants. The sport is what it is, it doesn't cheat or defraud, it demands a physical effort and the way an individual responds to that challenge is their choice. The fact is some choose to break the rules, to cheat, to meet that challenge. I find it difficult to find that admirable, human failing or weakness or not.0
-
Problem is, in the mind of people like Dennis, not only are those involved in law enforcement part of a 'conspiracy' to enslave humanity, the law itself is designed so as to set arbitrary, subjective standards that human beings 'can't possibly conform to', as Dennis himself put it. Therefore, any attempt to regulate anything from dangerous driving to doping is to be resisted, and the only valid laws are those that protect accumulated wealth.Bronzie wrote:
Dennis - take the tinfoil hat off - you'll get much better reception that waydennisn wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong(and I could be). This "independent commission" was set up to FIND doping? Not finding it was not an option(if that makes any sense). In order to justify their jobs they had to FIND it.0 -
Dennis is just playing with people on here.
Back to topic, I note Klodi's denying it now. He's even trying to have a go at Sinkiwitz: "forgets, for example, to mention that this person has given contradictory accounts in various interrogations, and not only before the public prosecutors."
...which is the equivalent of saying "he's more like Pinocchio than me". When all you've got to stand on is the claim that "it can't be true, Sinki said it", you know your time is up.
ASO will be watching this closely.0 -
aurelio wrote:
Don't forget that Dennis' view of doping regulation and the law in general is at least coloured (and perhaps determined) by the sort of nonsense he has absorbed when reading right-wing 'libertarian' propaganda, such as the following from his favourite book...iainf72 wrote:
Americansdennisn wrote:I say let's beat a confession out of all of them.
Why can't they be like Columbia and pretend he's got an illness?
Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
If you want me to pick "sides" in the book, I'm going to have to go with Galt, Taggart, Reardon, and the rest of those "capitalistic pigs" as opposed to Ferris and the rest of the "evil government" people. It's been a while since I've read it and maybe I'll give it another shot one of these days. I must say that I have never thought of any "government"
as being all that worthwhile or useful. Much like Ayn. Opps did I just confess to something?
Dennis Noward0 -
Not really, the ideas you base your world-view on have been obvious for a long time now. Interesting idea, though, abolishing all government. It's an idea that has even been tried from time to time around the world. It's a pity that the usual consequences are mob rule, murder, rape, looting, the breakdown of society, the emergence of tyrannical warlords and a daily fight for survival where only the strong prevail. Still, we must not 'expect too much' of humanity, must we?dennisn wrote:.. I must say that I have never thought of any "government" as being all that worthwhile or useful. Much like Ayn. Opps did I just confess to something?0 -
aurelio wrote:
.. the usual consequences are mob rule, ..., looting, the breakdown in society, the emergence of tyrannical warlords and a daily fight for survival where only the strong prevail.dennisn wrote:.. I must say that I have never thought of any "government" as being all that worthwhile or useful. Much like Ayn. Opps did I just confess to something?
.. and so back to Lance and Pro Cycling!___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
Yes, the parallels are rather obvious, aren't they?calvjones wrote:
.. and so back to Lance and Pro Cycling!aurelio wrote:
.. the usual consequences are mob rule, ..., looting, the breakdown in society, the emergence of tyrannical warlords and a daily fight for survival where only the strong prevail.dennisn wrote:.. I must say that I have never thought of any "government" as being all that worthwhile or useful. Much like Ayn. Opps did I just confess to something? 0 -
Isn't it time Dennis set up his own website?
Or is there a www.trollsRus.com already out in cyberspace?"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
aurelio wrote:dennisn wrote:.. I must say that I have never thought of any "government" as being all that worthwhile or useful. Much like Ayn. Opps did I just confess to something?
Still, we must not 'expect too much' of humanity, must we?
Well, at least we agree on that, although I think I detect a bit of sarcasm in that statement.
Anyway, you had better not expect too much from humanity because I am sure they will disappoint you in whole bunches of ways. Perfection is not our strong point.
Dennis Noward0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:Isn't it time Dennis set up his own website?
Or is there a www.trollsRus.com already out in cyberspace?
What? Can't handle anyone who disagrees with you. Sorry about your luck.
Dennis Noward0 -
I'm just surprised aurelio has dared return to this Ayn Rand topic after being so comprehensively pwned by Dennis (of all people) the last time....Le Blaireau (1)0
-
Perhaps you could point out exactly where that happened? Can't see it myself ...DaveyL wrote:I'm just surprised aurelio has dared return to this Ayn Rand topic after being so comprehensively pwned by Dennis (of all people) the last time....
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... &start=1400 -
dennisn wrote:Blazing Saddles wrote:Isn't it time Dennis set up his own website?
Or is there a www.trollsRus.com already out in cyberspace?
What? Can't handle anyone who disagrees with you. Sorry about your luck.
Dennis Noward
Ah Dennis, I'm quite sure he'd follow you to continue peddling his seemingly endless supply of balloon fuel .. who said that, internet forum people ?0
