A moral hypothetical on Floyd...

My Opinion_El Paso_Texas wrote:

That is some list dude. You win the first prize. A brooks saddle!!!!! How are you buddy?
Slobbering Kiss Ass and Slobbering Liar!

My Opinion_El Paso_Texas wrote:

Hey Chris, can't you even keep it straight as to what I'm an expert at anymore. Thank you for calling me an expert.
In reality in the medical world it is realy hard in being an expert as everything changes day to day. Some are just more knowledgeable than others as they take the extra time in researching and sutdying related information.
But, that also comes from living and working in a free society where we often find that we can learn and experience anything and everything that we want to, if we take the time in doing so.
So, you've been visiting the ladies in Manchester again I see. And all along you led us to believe that you were married. That's okay Chris. We won't tell on you. Manchester must have that special appeal in drawing out the little man in you.

My Opinion_El Paso_Texas wrote:

You still look as you're 6 foot Chris.

athos wrote:

<quoted text>Only in my mind and my dreams!

My Opinion_El Paso_Texas wrote:

<quoted text>
Well you can always try hanging upside down and see if you can get back an inch.

Raymond wrote:

There is no "moral Hyperthetical" Zen. He was caught, tried and rightly convicted by the full proccess. Including CAS! Your quote! "OK let us go to a "real court" CAS for a true verdict". Well we got that!!!!!
Give it up M8 let us just live and learn and move on. As most of the time. Kindest regards Raymond

ZENmud wrote:

did you read (ever?) the first post on the first page of this TPX?
did it ever dawn on myself (or you) that a panel at CAS could be 'corrupted'?
did you ever read the excerpts from Floyd's case in the USA, using the Federal Arbitration Act as properly promulgated, to assert a charge of 'bias' and 'conflict of interest', which case was withdrawn (for reasons unpublished) but which allowed Floyd to resume racing without paying the unprecedented 'FINE' imposed by CAS in the case you seem to relish thinking about, without thinking through?
All above questions asked with a BIG ZEN smile...
zJD
<quoted text>

Raymond wrote:

<quoted text>
So my friend, I do not have to "think it through". Many Courts have come to an injust opinion. However in this case, because of the evidence presented and the lengthy proccess it is my opinion that justice was done.
Review the evidence and Floyds own comments. I have no doubt. Since, as you are aware, many have followed him.
Tell me? What is your problem with CLEAN sport. For myself, I see non. In any event there is only one winner, just let the winner be clean. Thats all! If winning at ANY COST is the norm! Then I give up. This is not SPORT but more akin to warmongering politics. Regards

ZENmud wrote:

Mon ami, mon vieux,
It really saddens me, after two years of interaction, that you have sooooo obviously misunderstood me:
I am in NO WAY against 'clean sport', but I am 100pc FOR 'clean LAW'.
If we don't sustain 'clean law', then anything Bush wants is 'a-okay' because well shucks-damnit he's our President and he must be right, right?
Similarly, anything Dick Pound wants, is 'a-okay' because I mean really, all them there countries voted him in as WADA's voice and spokesman, so shucks-damnit he must be right, and have also the right to state this whenever he wants (whether in conformity with the WADA Code or not...)!
But throughout that 'lengthy process' that rolls-your-eyes and yet you claim its legitimacy (perhaps here for the first time?), you still haven't read one word of the transcripts, haven't read one word of the evidence, haven't followed one thought that didn't emanate from 'l'EQUIPE'...
Et quand même! Tu parles comme un jeune naïf!!! The TdF has NEVER BEEN clean, and yet you wax eternally as if it were 'Lance's fault' and no one else... How many times do you have to read, cheri, that the FIRST TdF had riders on Strychnine, in 1903, before you admit the truth?
I am only trying to get you to admit that the 'Tour' is, as we both continue to adore it, unique in the annals of sport, in the infamy of Eternal Doping, and none of your 'French chauvinism' will create the mythic clean world that you want...
Eg.: how much money per year is Thomas Voelker earning in sponsorships?(personally I'd hope at least 20K Euros/yr) I like him, I KNOW he's clean (like you KNOW Floyd doped), and I'd like to see his talent grow into one of the tops in the peleton.
Will that happen? Must he dope to do so? That's where we digress: you'd say 'Of course he'd have to dope to get into the top 20'; I'd say 'Of course not, but he'd have to change his nonchalant training efforts...'
heh heh
ZENtruth
<quoted text>

My Opinion_El Paso_Texas wrote:

Well one thing is certain here for now and that is that Floyd Landis is back racing!
But, what has this case provided the Sport of Cycling so far?
1. We've seen the ASO and the UCI get into a serious pissing contest with one another.
Grade = D -
2. We've seen doping continue in cycling.
Grade = D +
3. Have we really seen any cycling team(s) come out with a really great internal drug testing program? I don't believe so!
Grade = C -
4. Have we seen UCI, WADA, and the federations coming together as 'One Team?' Hell NO
Grade = D -
5. Has the sport of cycling or anyone or any organization developed a plan on combating doping?
Hell NO
Grade = D -
6. Has anyone or any organization developed any progressive program in helping the riders overcome the pressure of cheating and doping besides the current system of just busting them and throwing them away? NO
Grade = D -
So, talk all you want about the Sport of Cycling and about how good you are or were on the bike. Because you all only continue continue being part of the 'Problem' as you all have never become part of the 'Solution!'
Nothing and I mean nothing has really been done during the last three years!!!