Listen up matey as I'm only going to say this once - even though I've said it, as have many others, many times before.
I once had an open mind, and I think I'm speaking for a lot of people who have watched cycling for many years. I started off admiring and respecting Armstrong and loving the way he rode the TdF, his power and strength of will, the look he gave Ullrich and the dominance of USPS. I have stated before, I used to take a day off work on the queen stage just to see LA hopefully destroy the opposition. However, the trickle of evidence of doping from circumstantial to hard eveidence gradually eroded my admiration and belief to the point that I was left with no alternative to the fact that LA and USPS were clearly doped.
This wasn't a position I got to by flipping a coin - it was achieved by starting with an open mind, seeing the evidence and then arriving at a conclusion. That's how evidence based decison making works.
There is no compulsion or requirement for you to agree but I do resent being called closed-minded and fixated, even by you, for whom I have very low regard.
As to being fixated with Armstrong, I conversely believe you to be guilty of that. I have a history on here of posting and deploring any rider who has been charged, convicted or accused of drug-taking; accusing the UCI of systemic failure; ridiculing Verbruggen and McQuaid, and much going back years.
I also post in this section ad nauseam about the actual races such as the Vuelta a Espana which I can inform you is currently going on. I even started a thread on the Eneco Tour, which as many in the know will tell you is a leap of hope over expectation. You, on the other hand, I have only seen posting in Racing on the Armstrong thread. Thank you and goodnight.
And some of us have been on a parallel path to you. I too used to rush home to watch the TdeF and the Ulrich stare was something that stays with me even though he later denied it was what it appeared. I have seen the claims and counter-claims about Armstrong, read daily the Landis hearing reports and transcripts (which showed inter-alia appalling procedural laxity by LNDD that would have had them shut down in an instant if offering medical diagnostics). I'm following the Vuelta although I come to it late each day to catch up but no I don't post on the races.
But where I am different from you and why I am posting on Armstrong is because as I have said before I am strongly against conviction based on rumour and media (which has caused some of the most notable miscarriages of justice and abuse of human rights) and strongly for a proper, fair
and transparent investigation and trial. Sir William Blackstone's much quoted statement
"It is better to let ten guilty men go free than to wrongly incarcerate one innocent man" is worth heeding because ignoring it has cause some tremendous injustices.
I am not alone in having serious doubts about what USADA is doing and how it has gone about it. Judge Sparks expressed serious reservations about their motives and methods in his judgement and warned them of the consequences of not giving Armstrong a fair hearing. Even those greatest non-fans of Armstrong, ASO, are holding fire on their judgement. And in the absence of a hearing I want to see the evidence and follow the Bruyneel hearing before I reach a conclusion. Remember that the FBI and FDA did not find sufficient evidence to launch a prosecution after spending $40m on the investigation and allegedly interviewing under sub-poena and oath the same witnesses that USADA is relying on. So there is clearly some question on the adequacy of the evidence although the conspiracy theorists will of course retort that a retired cyclist controls the US Government, UCI, WADA, ASO, IOC and everybody else and is having it all suppressed.
The trouble with this thread though is anybody that holds a view, for whatever reason, that is not convinced of Armstrong's absolute guilt and questions the strength/validity of the secret evidence on which the USADA ruling is based is derided, ridiculed and abused, called moronic, lying needy trolls in an attempt to ridicule them into going away or conceding the party line.
If you are not prepared to accept that other people have come to views different to yours and debate the reasons in a rational and reasonable way I really don't know why you bother posting.
