Astana respond to Klodi situation
Comments
-
Come on Dennis, even Klöden's Mutti wouldn't believe him.dennisn wrote:What? Can't handle anyone who disagrees with you. Sorry about your luck.
As for heroes, these riders aren't heroes and I'm not surprised that many were doping in the past years. Only a naive idiot would think these guys were riding clean.
...but you can learn a bit about the character of these men when they are faces with near-irrefutable evidence. Do they apologise, maybe try to make amends? Or do they resort to blanket denial or even cook up some of the most audacious excuses known to man?0 -
aurelio wrote:
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=140
I'm not so sure I see it either. But thanks.
I think aurelio has somehow gotten the idea that because I thought it was a really good book that I fully support Ayn Rand, and her ideas, as the savior of the world. If only it were as simple as that. Or even as simple as aurelio's other side of the argument.
Dennis Noward0 -
The only hot air around here is coming from the 'air brained.
I see Lance's PR wannabe has arrived.
Iain ought to rename this thread:
'Dennis responds to the Klodi situation'.
Even when there is evidence in such overwhelming quantity, the same people arrive to defend, but only those who have some sort of connection, however tenuous, to one man."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:The only hot air around here is coming from the 'air brained.
I see Lance's PR wannabe has arrived.
Iain ought to rename this thread:
'Dennis responds to the Klodi situation'.
Even when there is evidence in such overwhelming quantity, the same people arrive to defend, but only those who have some sort of connection, however tenuous, to one man.
Ha ... the brothers Montgolfier are never too far away ...
.. who said that, internet forum people ?0 -
dennisn wrote:aurelio wrote:
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=140
I'm not so sure I see it either. But thanks.
I think aurelio has somehow gotten the idea that because I thought it was a really good book that I fully support Ayn Rand, and her ideas, as the savior of the world. If only it were as simple as that. Or even as simple as aurelio's other side of the argument.
Dennis Noward
Will you two just get a room!0 -
Kléber wrote:dennisn wrote:What? Can't handle anyone who disagrees with you. Sorry about your luck.
...but you can learn a bit about the character of these men when they are faces with near-irrefutable evidence. Do they apologise, maybe try to make amends? Or do they resort to blanket denial or even cook up some of the most audacious excuses known to man?
If you want to talk denial just look at all the people in prisons around the world. Most of them are "innocent" or so they say. It's human nature to deny guilt. Everyone has done it.
From Presidents, Prime Ministers, Dictators, all the way down to the lowliest of taxpayers.
That's why I keep saying that these are humans, not gods. They are not subject to a higher level of expectations because they are bike riders or someone looks up to them.
They are you and I, except that they have different job. They put their pants on one leg at a time. You owe them nothing and they owe you the same(so to speak).
I must admit that I am fascinated by people who have some need for apologies from these people. That I do not follow.
Dennis Noward0 -
And plenty of people, including doped cyclists, have admitted their guilt, even without being forced to do so, and have not tried to spin the sort of nonsense resorted to by the likes of Kloden, Landis, Hamilton and so on.dennisn wrote:
If you want to talk denial just look at all the people in prisons around the world. Most of them are "innocent" or so they say. It's human nature to deny guilt. Everyone has done it. From Presidents, Prime Ministers, Dictators, all the way down to the lowliest of taxpayers. That's why I keep saying that these are humans, not gods.Kléber wrote:dennisn wrote:What? Can't handle anyone who disagrees with you. Sorry about your luck.
...but you can learn a bit about the character of these men when they are faces with near-irrefutable evidence. Do they apologise, maybe try to make amends? Or do they resort to blanket denial or even cook up some of the most audacious excuses known to man?
It strikes me that your 'arguments' do nothing but justify and excuse the sort of immoral behaviour that undermines the 'sport' of cycling and society in general. In turn it also devalues the stand taken by those who are willing to break the 'omerta' and admit to doping in the hope this will help to bring about changes in the sport.
Beyond that do you not think that some people, by the very nature of their jobs, should be expected to adhere to the highest possible standards? For example, police officers, who after all are entrusted with enforcing the law. How about politicians? (Or perhaps you would excuse political corruption on the basis it is no more than anyone else would do). Then there professional sportsmen who are paid huge sums, largely on the basis that they have the ability to inspire others by demonstrating just what the human body and spirit is capable of. Failing to meet those standards by resorting to doping is little more than to commit a fraud and to betray the trust placed in them.
You say 'everybody' denies their guilt, presumably including you. Perhaps you are just extrapolating your own attitude of 'justification, denial and excuses' to everyone else in society...0 -
missingmillar wrote:dennisn wrote:aurelio wrote:
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=140
I'm not so sure I see it either. But thanks.
I think aurelio has somehow gotten the idea that because I thought it was a really good book that I fully support Ayn Rand, and her ideas, as the savior of the world. If only it were as simple as that. Or even as simple as aurelio's other side of the argument.
Dennis Noward
Will you two just get a room!
C'mon, we're just having fun. Or at least I'm trying to.
Dennis Noward0 -
-
aurelio wrote:
And plenty of people, including doped cyclists, have admitted their guilt, even without being forced to do so, and have not tried to spin the sort of nonsense resorted to by the likes of Kloden, Landis, Hamilton and so on.dennisn wrote:
If you want to talk denial just look at all the people in prisons around the world. Most of them are "innocent" or so they say. It's human nature to deny guilt. Everyone has done it. From Presidents, Prime Ministers, Dictators, all the way down to the lowliest of taxpayers. That's why I keep saying that these are humans, not gods.Kléber wrote:dennisn wrote:What? Can't handle anyone who disagrees with you. Sorry about your luck.
...but you can learn a bit about the character of these men when they are faces with near-irrefutable evidence. Do they apologise, maybe try to make amends? Or do they resort to blanket denial or even cook up some of the most audacious excuses known to man?
It strikes me that your 'arguments' do nothing but justify and excuse the sort of immoral behaviour that undermines the 'sport' of cycling and society in general. In turn it also devalues the stand taken by those who are willing to break the 'omerta' and admit to doping in the hope this will help to bring about changes in the sport.
Beyond that do you not think that some people, by the very nature of their jobs, should be expected to adhere to the highest possible standards? For example, police officers, who after all are entrusted with enforcing the law. How about politicians? (Or perhaps you would excuse political corruption on the basis it is no more than anyone else would do). Then there professional sportsmen who are paid huge sums, largely on the basis that they have the ability to inspire others by demonstrating just what the human body and spirit is capable of. Failing to meet those standards by resorting to doping is little more than to commit a fraud and to betray the trust placed in them.
You say 'everybody' denies their guilt, presumably including you. Perhaps you are just extrapolating your own attitude of 'justification, denial and excuses' to everyone else in society...
All I can say is that it sounds like you're demanding that humans be perfect or in particular
"pro bike racer humans". Not sure when this will happen but I have my doubts that it will be anytime soon. No faults allowed. Or is it that the only faults that are allowed are what YOU say they are.
Anyway I'd really like to know why so many, on the subject of doping, appear to need some sort of apology from the riders. Call me stupid, but I really don't get it. What will
this apology do for you?
Dennis Noward0 -
0
-
did I miss the post where CdE dropped Valverde (and QS Boonen)?
Oh, of course not, it's the anti LA/JB crowd here.
Even Riis and his Puerto boys are saints, LA/JB are devils, got it.
The Freiburg report was not pretty, everyone hailing Columbia as the new, clean, great team?
Just ask what Holm, Zabel, and Aldag were up to... Old habbits die hard.
easy with the stones here. 0 -
I dont expect these guys to be perfect, but i do expect that they play by the rules and if they dont and get caught well they deserve to face the consequences of there actions. That will include people giving him crap among other things. Good to see that there is a will out there to catch these guys just wish it wouldnt take years to do it :roll:Take care of the luxuries and the necessites will take care of themselves.0
-
Aye, right, everyone's so anti-JB! Just check the post 2008 Giro postings, that'll back your point.....Arkibal wrote:did I miss the post where CdE dropped Valverde (and QS Boonen)?
Oh, of course not, it's the anti LA/JB crowd here.
Even Riis and his Puerto boys are saints, LA/JB are devils, got it.
The Freiburg report was not pretty, everyone hailing Columbia as the new, clean, great team?
Just ask what Holm, Zabel, and Aldag were up to... Old habbits die hard.
easy with the stones here.
Who exactly is claiming Columbia is clean? Not seen too many posts claiming they are & a good few claiming otherwise... Iain can give you a detailed overview if you haven't read the past 2 years.......
Oh & reading this board post TdF last year sure makes a sound point about Riis (especially so given the huge vote of confidence that both Schleck brothers got despite only one being implicated)
I get as irritated as anyone by daft accusations, but your post simply denigrates your positon by using interpretation before facts.... Which is exactly what you claim to be annoyed at others for doing.0 -
It's really homely and rather comforting over here - I pop in very occasionally and .....it's like I've never been gone!!!
AND I still don't understand just WHY any of it matters to anyone.d.j.
"Cancel my subscription to the resurrection."0
