Dr. Verner Moeller, meet Dr. Eddy Coyle

http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/1...sports_doping/

BLafferty wrote:

http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/1...sports_doping/

Just from reading the BACKGROUND, this is going to be a very sympathetic
lecture to Lance, which isn't surprising considering the locale in
Lance's backyard. I would imagine the Austin American Statesman rag
will then follow up with a puff-piece of how great this lecture was in
dispelling all the myths surrounding the "unproven" doping allegations
against Lance.

Any idiot can look at the media and realize that the media has been
Lance's cocksucker since 1991. That's because 98% of the media is
stupid, gullible, and wants to promote fairy tales, since it sells
newspaper and magazines.

The only way you can believe Lance is innocent is if you also believe OJ
is innocent.

Magilla

On Sep 12, 8:56*pm, Magilla Gorilla wrote:
BLafferty wrote:
http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/1...sports_doping/

Just from reading the BACKGROUND, this is going to be a very sympathetic
lecture to Lance, which isn't surprising considering the locale in
Lance's backyard. *I would imagine the Austin American Statesman rag
will then follow up with a puff-piece of how great this lecture was in
dispelling all the myths surrounding the "unproven" doping allegations
against Lance.

Any idiot can look at the media and realize that the media has been
Lance's cocksucker since 1991. *That's because 98% of the media is
stupid, gullible, and wants to promote fairy tales, since it sells
newspaper and magazines.

The only way you can believe Lance is innocent is if you also believe OJ
is innocent.

Quoting from the above link:
Moeller, a professor in the Department of Sport Science at Aarhus
University, has written or co-authored several books on drugs and
sports, including "Elite Sport, Doping and Public Policy," "The Doping
Devil" and "The Essence of Sport." He has lectured at academic
gatherings throughout Europe and is regularly engaged by the media as
Denmark's leading public intellectual on doping in the sports world.

"The Doping Devil" doesn't sound like a "sympathetic" title.

You could be right, of course, but I see "the media" being a whole lot
less kind, so to speak, to Lance Armstrong, since No-novitsky hit the
scene. And you know how the American people, instead of idolizing
Jerry Lewis and RIchard Virenque like the French, love to build heroes
up and then tear them down.

I might be able to attend the lecture, and will report.
Lessee, where did I put that last Livestrong bracelet...
--D-y

--D-y wrote:

On Sep 12, 8:56*pm, Magilla Gorilla wrote:
BLafferty wrote:
http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/1...sports_doping/

Just from reading the BACKGROUND, this is going to be a very sympathetic
lecture to Lance, which isn't surprising considering the locale in
Lance's backyard. *I would imagine the Austin American Statesman rag
will then follow up with a puff-piece of how great this lecture was in
dispelling all the myths surrounding the "unproven" doping allegations
against Lance.

Any idiot can look at the media and realize that the media has been
Lance's cocksucker since 1991. *That's because 98% of the media is
stupid, gullible, and wants to promote fairy tales, since it sells
newspaper and magazines.

The only way you can believe Lance is innocent is if you also believe OJ
is innocent.

Quoting from the above link:
Moeller, a professor in the Department of Sport Science at Aarhus
University, has written or co-authored several books on drugs and
sports, including "Elite Sport, Doping and Public Policy," "The Doping
Devil" and "The Essence of Sport." He has lectured at academic
gatherings throughout Europe and is regularly engaged by the media as
Denmark's leading public intellectual on doping in the sports world.

"The Doping Devil" doesn't sound like a "sympathetic" title.

You could be right, of course, but I see "the media" being a whole lot
less kind, so to speak, to Lance Armstrong, since No-novitsky hit the
scene. And you know how the American people, instead of idolizing
Jerry Lewis and RIchard Virenque like the French, love to build heroes
up and then tear them down.

I might be able to attend the lecture, and will report.
Lessee, where did I put that last Livestrong bracelet...
--D-y

Trust me, Texas University wouldn't have him there unless he was a Livestrong
semen guzzler. Lance's PR team (Fabio et al) is likely behind this. This is
right up there with the ludicrous Vrijman report that attempted to whitewash
Lance's EPO positives by claiming the lab did all sorts of "unethical"
things.

In fact, the lab did nothing unethical.

Magilla

On Sep 13, 7:27*pm, Magilla Gorilla wrote:
Frederick the Great wrote:
In article ,
*Magilla Gorilla wrote:

BLafferty wrote:

http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/1...sports_doping/

Just from reading the BACKGROUND, this is going to be a very sympathetic
lecture to Lance, which isn't surprising considering the locale in
Lance's backyard. *I would imagine the Austin American Statesman rag
will then follow up with a puff-piece of how great this lecture was in
dispelling all the myths surrounding the "unproven" doping allegations
against Lance.

Any idiot can look at the media and realize that the media has been
Lance's cocksucker since 1991. *That's because 98% of the media is
stupid, gullible, and wants to promote fairy tales, since it sells
newspaper and magazines.

The only way you can believe Lance is innocent is if you also believe OJ
is innocent.

Is anyone innocent? Orinthal James Simpson was
acquitted of the murder charges brought against him.
Lance Armstrong has not even been charged.

--
Old Fritz

OJ did commit the murders.* *Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him
guilty doesn't mean Jack to me. *OJ was found liable in civil court. *His DNA
was at the murder scene...tons of other evidence. *Juries are stupid.

For some strange reason you think I am obligated to wait until formal charges
have been leveled. *Wrong. *I can make the determination *that Lance is
guilty on my own. *What, you think if a jury acquits Lance that I am
obligated to go along with that?

Please.

Don't be such a god-damned candyass.

It's one thing to think that LANCE doped. Lots of us think
that, some think it's beyond a reasonable doubt, some not.

It's another thing to think that LANCE is going to be found
guilty by USADA and stripped of a TdF title.

And it's yet another thing to think that LANCE is going to be
found guilty by a court of some unspecified crime - fraud,
perjury, tampering with a witness, conspiracy to distribute
a controlled substance.

You've been beating your chest about how LANCE is going
up the river, so don't candyass out and say that if he gets
off of the legal charges and is merely guilty-by-presumption
of doping, that all your monkey farts were still justified. Take a
position and stick to it.

Fredmaster Ben

On 9/14/2010 12:27 AM, LawBoy01 wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:27 pm, Magilla wrote:
Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him
guilty doesn't mean Jack to me.

And some "anonymous" ****wit's hate filled diatribe doesn't mean
anything to Lance.


Absolutely



Bill

--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

LawBoy01 wrote:

On Sep 13, 9:27*pm, Magilla Gorilla wrote:
Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him
guilty doesn't mean Jack to me. *

And some "anonymous" ****wit's hate filled diatribe doesn't mean
anything to Lance.

Lance hates people who expose him for doping. He calls their employer
and tries to get them fired. Is that the hate you're talking about?

Magilla

"William R. Mattil" wrote:

On 9/14/2010 12:27 AM, LawBoy01 wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:27 pm, Magilla wrote:
Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him
guilty doesn't mean Jack to me.

And some "anonymous" ****wit's hate filled diatribe doesn't mean
anything to Lance.

Absolutely

Bill

--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

It will mean something to Lance whe he goes on trial, jackass.

Magilla

Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:

On Sep 13, 7:27*pm, Magilla Gorilla wrote:
Frederick the Great wrote:
In article ,
*Magilla Gorilla wrote:

BLafferty wrote:

http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/1...sports_doping/

Just from reading the BACKGROUND, this is going to be a very sympathetic
lecture to Lance, which isn't surprising considering the locale in
Lance's backyard. *I would imagine the Austin American Statesman rag
will then follow up with a puff-piece of how great this lecture was in
dispelling all the myths surrounding the "unproven" doping allegations
against Lance.

Any idiot can look at the media and realize that the media has been
Lance's cocksucker since 1991. *That's because 98% of the media is
stupid, gullible, and wants to promote fairy tales, since it sells
newspaper and magazines.

The only way you can believe Lance is innocent is if you also believe OJ
is innocent.

Is anyone innocent? Orinthal James Simpson was
acquitted of the murder charges brought against him.
Lance Armstrong has not even been charged.

--
Old Fritz

OJ did commit the murders.* *Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him
guilty doesn't mean Jack to me. *OJ was found liable in civil court. *His DNA
was at the murder scene...tons of other evidence. *Juries are stupid.

For some strange reason you think I am obligated to wait until formal charges
have been leveled. *Wrong. *I can make the determination *that Lance is
guilty on my own. *What, you think if a jury acquits Lance that I am
obligated to go along with that?

Please.

Don't be such a god-damned candyass.

It's one thing to think that LANCE doped. Lots of us think
that, some think it's beyond a reasonable doubt, some not.

It's another thing to think that LANCE is going to be found
guilty by USADA and stripped of a TdF title.

Yeah, so what the **** are you implying when you say it's "another thing." What
the hell is that suppose to me - that it won't happen?



And it's yet another thing to think that LANCE is going to be
found guilty by a court of some unspecified crime - fraud,
perjury, tampering with a witness, conspiracy to distribute
a controlled substance.

Yeah, so?



You've been beating your chest about how LANCE is going
up the river, so don't candyass out and say that if he gets
off of the legal charges and is merely guilty-by-presumption
of doping, that all your monkey farts were still justified. Take a
position and stick to it.

Fredmaster Be

Hey ****hole...I can't predict what jurors will do - especially since most jurors
are so enamored with celebrity. My position is clear - Lance doped his entire
career. Whether or not a jury comes to that conclusion has nothing to do with me.

My position has never vacillated.

Bitch,

Magilla

On Sep 14, 11:31*am, Magilla Gorilla
wrote:
LawBoy01 wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:27*pm, Magilla Gorilla wrote:
Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him
guilty doesn't mean Jack to me. *

And some "anonymous" ****wit's hate filled diatribe doesn't mean
anything to Lance.

Lance hates people who expose him for doping. *He calls their employer
and tries to get them fired. * Is that the hate you're talking about?

Magilla

Prove it or STFU. Names? Dates? Times? Sources? But we're wasting
time, so STFU.