Even the UN is getting in on doping

http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"

Looks like you need to spread the bashing around a little more.
Bill C

Dans le message de
ups.com,
Bill C a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"

Looks like you need to spread the bashing around a little more.
Bill C

Just so we don't lose sight of the flaccid nature of this document :

Article 4 - Relationship of the Convention to the Code

1. In order to coordinate the implementation, at the national and
international level, of the fight against doping in sport, the States
Parties commit themselves to the principles of the Code, as the basis for
the measures provided for in Article 5 of this Convention. Nothing in this
Convention prevents the States Parties from adopting additional measures
complementary to the Code.

2. The Code and the most current version of Appendices 2 and 3 are
reproduced for information purposes, and are not an integral part of this
Convention. The Appendices as such do not create any binding obligations
under international law for States Parties.



With special attention to section 4.2 !!



I guess this surpasses the NON-unanimous votes congratulating member state
presidents on their birthdays. Maybe those remain contested in some way.
Or parentage.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Bill C wrote:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"




Jesus Christ.

Don't they have more important stuff to worry about? Like proliferation
of nuclear weapons? Stuff like that.



thanks,

K. Gringioni.

"Kurgan Gringioni" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill C wrote:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"




Jesus Christ.

Don't they have more important stuff to worry about? Like proliferation
of nuclear weapons? Stuff like that.

Bush & Co. are taking care of that. ;-)




thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
Bill C wrote:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"




Jesus Christ.

Don't they have more important stuff to worry about? Like proliferation
of nuclear weapons? Stuff like that.



thanks,

K. Gringioni.
That was exactly my reaction. With all the problems the UN is facing,
and it's inability to do anything meaningful in the way of reform, and
the deepening oil for food scandal maybe they thought that this would
be one positive note they could sound. I just can't believe they had
time to waste on this.
Bill C

Dans le message de
oups.com,
Bill C a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
Bill C wrote:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"

Jesus Christ.

Don't they have more important stuff to worry about? Like
proliferation of nuclear weapons? Stuff like that.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.
That was exactly my reaction. With all the problems the UN is facing,
and it's inability to do anything meaningful in the way of reform, and
the deepening oil for food scandal maybe they thought that this would
be one positive note they could sound. I just can't believe they had
time to waste on this.
Bill C

It's for that warm feeling, like we really CAN coexist on this planet of
wonder !!
Like when the American Congress declares National Pork Week. Nope - that
offends vegetarians. Well, you get my drift ...

Is there some smiley thingy for a YAWN ??
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Bill C wrote:
Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
Bill C wrote:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"




Jesus Christ.

Don't they have more important stuff to worry about? Like proliferation
of nuclear weapons? Stuff like that.



thanks,

K. Gringioni.
That was exactly my reaction. With all the problems the UN is facing,
and it's inability to do anything meaningful in the way of reform, and
the deepening oil for food scandal maybe they thought that this would
be one positive note they could sound. I just can't believe they had
time to waste on this.
Bill C

I don't think they have anything *but* time to waste...

Sandy wrote:
Dans le message de
oups.com,
Bill C a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
Bill C wrote:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/5005598

"U.N. easily passes treaty to fight sports doping"

Jesus Christ.

Don't they have more important stuff to worry about? Like
proliferation of nuclear weapons? Stuff like that.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.
That was exactly my reaction. With all the problems the UN is facing,
and it's inability to do anything meaningful in the way of reform, and
the deepening oil for food scandal maybe they thought that this would
be one positive note they could sound. I just can't believe they had
time to waste on this.
Bill C

It's for that warm feeling, like we really CAN coexist on this planet of
wonder !!
Like when the American Congress declares National Pork Week. Nope - that
offends vegetarians. Well, you get my drift ...

Is there some smiley thingy for a YAWN ??
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
Just a couple of questions. Was the yawn your reaction to the US
Congress getting into the doping game, and what about the French
government getting into it big time?
Personally I think it's a waste of time and resources for governments
to be chasing this stuff beyond their existing drug laws. But I also
think it's BS for political hacks at the NGBs to be the sole selectors
for Worlds and the Olympics. I think there should be open, clear
qualifying events that are open to anyone regardless of whos ass they
kiss.
I would think that a what is supposed to be the base for an expanding
international treaty would be a little more time consuming to craft
than "National Pork Week" and I do think we have one.
It kills me to say it, but someone has to provide stability in a sport
for it to be a reasonable investment for sponsors, so we really do need
the UCI in an oversight position, and I realise that they want to deal
with one NGB from each company, but this whole system just lends itself
the kind of abuses we've seen in the IOC, and the charges of politics
in selections, but once again I've identified what I think is a problem
I have no solution for. Gonna have to be someone smarter than me who
solves it, if it is solved.
Bill C

Sandy wrote:
I guess this surpasses the NON-unanimous votes congratulating member state
presidents on their birthdays. Maybe those remain contested in some way.
Or parentage.

Would you vote in favour of congratulating your least favourite rbr poster
on his birthday or winning a local training ride ?

I'll third that! But it is funny that they take a more serious stance
than the MBL.