rec.bicycles.racing
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=enrec.bicycles.racing@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Novitzky gets the Ball rolling - 19 messages, 7 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/96a152be0c7d300f?hl=en
* AFLD banned on TdF- Ricco back on big team... - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/676e6f1f793a2a1d?hl=en
* TdF Podium predictions - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/8f023468176a0a7d?hl=en
* Cleaning and scrubbing Lafferty - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/e13fa72713b23b14?hl=en
* French woman stops Longo's Domination by 4 minutes - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/c628b855499c1777?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Novitzky gets the Ball rolling
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/96a152be0c7d300f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 12:09 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 6/26/2010 2:17 PM, Fred Gringioni wrote:
>
> "rickhopkins"<rick_3hopkins@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:5228fa52-0607-4be7-b099-f16ef2a07fd7@k1g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Ummm, who raced for Rock Racing, yeah Tyler Hamilton who was caught
>> and busted (at least twice) maybe even some others on the team have a
>> shady past, i don't remember. Did Tyler race with Lance - yeah, will
>> in implicate Lance, he could but I doubt it.
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Statute of Limitations.
>
> thanks,
>
> Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
>
Actions taken to lull others in furtherance of the fraud and concealment
of same, effectively toll the statute of limitations.
But, I'm certain you knew that already.
== 2 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 12:12 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 6/26/2010 3:06 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:Bs2dncZjhNs70bvRnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 6/26/2010 2:40 PM, Amit Ghosh wrote:
>>> On Jun 26, 2:06 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"<Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What does Tyler, or anyone else for that matter, have to gain from
>>>> saying
>>>> anything whatsoever? The "crime" being avoided here is nebulous and
>>>> outdated
>>>> at best, and what exactly would the penalty be for saying "I don't
>>>> recall"?
>>>
>>> dumbass,
>>>
>>> lafferty cannot get over his dream to see armstrong and weisel do the
>>> perp walk, but it will not happen (has anyone even mentioned weisel
>>> here in the last 5 yrs besides lafferty ?).
>>>
>>> papp was convicted of distributing drugs, and ball (if you look at his
>>> various shady activities) is a good candidate to be involved in
>>> illegal activity.
>>>
>>> the riders involved will be sloppy dirty domestic pros like papp and
>>> clinger, maybe some disgraced ex-europros, but not guys with deep
>>> resources like armstrong.
>>
>> Sounds like you're channeling Lance and Thom. Keep hoping boys.
>
> But what is the downside to Tyler or whomever simply not recollecting in
> front of the Grand Jury? You know something about this stuff. What are
> the pros and cons?
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
Mike, having no recollection looks good at Congressional hearings. It
looks much less good in front of Grand Juries, especially where there is
other evidence showing knowing/intentional prior involvement in the
matter being investigated.
== 3 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 12:40 pm
From: "K. Fred Gauss"
B. Lafferty wrote:
> On 6/26/2010 12:59 PM, K. Fred Gauss wrote:
>> Anton Berlin wrote:
>>> On Jun 25, 8:17 pm, DA74 <davidasto...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 25, 4:50 pm, "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/25/2010 7:15 PM, Scott wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 25, 3:27 pm, "B. Lafferty"<b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/25/2010 5:06 PM, Brad Anders wrote:> On Jun 25, 1:46 pm,
>>>>>>> "i,Fred"<n0...@anywhere.0rg> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> And now it begins. Ball gets served with a warrant regarding
>>>>>>>>> doping on Rock
>>>>>>>>> Racing:
>>>>>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/06/24/2010-06-24_f...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's it? They're going after a defunct pro team with an out-of-
>>>>>>>> business bankroller? This is going to lead to the downfall of the
>>>>>>>> EMPIRE OF LANCE? Guess I was expecting a bit more fireworks.
>>>>>>>> Side note: Landis needs to write a new book after all this is over,
>>>>>>>> "Don't Burn Your Bridges, Nuke 'em!"
>>>>>>>> Brad Anders
>>>>>>> I seriously doubt that this is "it." If anything "it" is just the
>>>>>>> beginning.
>>>>>> I agree. It's only beginning.
>>>>>> On another note, did anyone really believe that all those "ex" dopers
>>>>>> on Rock Racing had really cleaned up?
>>>>> And the criminal search warrant is under seal so that no one will know
>>>>> who has talked and provided evidence leading to the issuance of the
>>>>> warrant. It's just the beginning of a long process. Sit back and enjoy
>>>>> the show, folks.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> I have the distinct feeling that this opening salvo is meant to start
>>>> applying pressure to those who may have information that will assist
>>>> the prosecutors in targeting the big fish. These motherfuckers are
>>>> going to start singing like a Spring Nightengale when they get
>>>> confronted with the consequences of lying to the Feds and the reality
>>>> of prison life for skinny white guys with the build of Kate Moss at
>>>> the end of a coke binge at NY Fashion Week.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>>
>>> I am going to open some Champagne - great news.
>>
>> From this story, Brad has deduced that the investigation is going
>> nowhere and you've concluded that all hell is breaking loose.
>>
>> You're both dumbasses. They got a search warrant to look for PEDs at
>> Rock Racing. That's all we know. Learn to recognize your own
>> assumptions, you'll be a better person for it.
> What is quite clear here is that most of the child dumbasses inhabiting
> this forum haven't a clue as to how Federal criminal investigations
> progress. But, that's OK. Carry on. :-)
You've been telling us for years that that Armstrong's getting busted
any day now. You might be right this year, but you've been wrong for so
long that skepticism is justified.
== 4 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 12:41 pm
From: "K. Fred Gauss"
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "Amit Ghosh" <amit.ghosh@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:7784e9e1-6c78-4159-aa86-efb05b4611a0@r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 26, 2:06 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
> wrote:
>
>> What does Tyler, or anyone else for that matter, have to gain from saying
>> anything whatsoever? The "crime" being avoided here is nebulous and
>> outdated
>> at best, and what exactly would the penalty be for saying "I don't
>> recall"?
> =========
> dumbass,
>
> lafferty cannot get over his dream to see armstrong and weisel do the
> perp walk, but it will not happen (has anyone even mentioned weisel
> here in the last 5 yrs besides lafferty ?).
>
> papp was convicted of distributing drugs, and ball (if you look at his
> various shady activities) is a good candidate to be involved in
> illegal activity.
>
> the riders involved will be sloppy dirty domestic pros like papp and
> clinger, maybe some disgraced ex-europros, but not guys with deep
> resources like armstrong.
> ==========
>
> Anyone else wondering if Ball is actually the center of (the fed's)
> attention? His wouldn't be the first empire that ran into trouble and
> started to do some shady stuff behind the scenes, stuff that has very
> little to do with bike racing. An expanded import business, shall we say.
John DeLorean
== 5 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 12:54 pm
From: Amit Ghosh
On Jun 26, 3:06 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
> But what is the downside to Tyler or whomever simply not recollecting in
> front of the Grand Jury? You know something about this stuff. What are the
> pros and cons?
dumbass,
that's not how it works. almost no one has an interest to cooperate
with an investigation.
the system is based on making deals and the laws are what facilitate
the deal breaking. if novitzky can find someone who committed a crime
he will use that to pressure them to testify against bigger fish.
the chance that a guy like clinger is involved is very high, the
chance that a rider currently on a euro team will emerge is very low.
if they are doping they are not getting it in the US.
== 6 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 1:03 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 6/26/2010 3:40 PM, K. Fred Gauss wrote:
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> On 6/26/2010 12:59 PM, K. Fred Gauss wrote:
>>> Anton Berlin wrote:
>>>> On Jun 25, 8:17 pm, DA74 <davidasto...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 25, 4:50 pm, "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/25/2010 7:15 PM, Scott wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jun 25, 3:27 pm, "B. Lafferty"<b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/25/2010 5:06 PM, Brad Anders wrote:> On Jun 25, 1:46 pm,
>>>>>>>> "i,Fred"<n0...@anywhere.0rg> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> And now it begins. Ball gets served with a warrant regarding
>>>>>>>>>> doping on Rock
>>>>>>>>>> Racing:
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/06/24/2010-06-24_f...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's it? They're going after a defunct pro team with an out-of-
>>>>>>>>> business bankroller? This is going to lead to the downfall of the
>>>>>>>>> EMPIRE OF LANCE? Guess I was expecting a bit more fireworks.
>>>>>>>>> Side note: Landis needs to write a new book after all this is
>>>>>>>>> over,
>>>>>>>>> "Don't Burn Your Bridges, Nuke 'em!"
>>>>>>>>> Brad Anders
>>>>>>>> I seriously doubt that this is "it." If anything "it" is just the
>>>>>>>> beginning.
>>>>>>> I agree. It's only beginning.
>>>>>>> On another note, did anyone really believe that all those "ex"
>>>>>>> dopers
>>>>>>> on Rock Racing had really cleaned up?
>>>>>> And the criminal search warrant is under seal so that no one will
>>>>>> know
>>>>>> who has talked and provided evidence leading to the issuance of the
>>>>>> warrant. It's just the beginning of a long process. Sit back and
>>>>>> enjoy
>>>>>> the show, folks.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>> I have the distinct feeling that this opening salvo is meant to start
>>>>> applying pressure to those who may have information that will assist
>>>>> the prosecutors in targeting the big fish. These motherfuckers are
>>>>> going to start singing like a Spring Nightengale when they get
>>>>> confronted with the consequences of lying to the Feds and the reality
>>>>> of prison life for skinny white guys with the build of Kate Moss at
>>>>> the end of a coke binge at NY Fashion Week.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am going to open some Champagne - great news.
>>>
>>> From this story, Brad has deduced that the investigation is going
>>> nowhere and you've concluded that all hell is breaking loose.
>>>
>>> You're both dumbasses. They got a search warrant to look for PEDs at
>>> Rock Racing. That's all we know. Learn to recognize your own
>>> assumptions, you'll be a better person for it.
>> What is quite clear here is that most of the child dumbasses
>> inhabiting this forum haven't a clue as to how Federal criminal
>> investigations progress. But, that's OK. Carry on. :-)
>
> You've been telling us for years that that Armstrong's getting busted
> any day now. You might be right this year, but you've been wrong for so
> long that skepticism is justified.
No. I haven't been telling you for years that Armstrong is "getting
busted any day now." I've been saying that Armstrong is more than
likely a doper who could not do what he's done in multiple Tours without
preparation. And, IMO, I'm right on that one despite the bleating of the
rbr children to the contrary. You'll just have to learn to live with
Lance's preparation reality.
Carry on. :-)
== 7 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 1:35 pm
From: --D-y
On Jun 26, 2:03 pm, "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> When this is all over, with or without criminal indictments, Mr. Lance's
> reputation as an honest sportsman will be severely tarnished, if not
> destroyed. In ...
>
> read more »
The reason it says "read more" is because you didn't trim like you're
supposed to, Brian.
No worries.
--D-y
== 8 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 1:37 pm
From: DA74
On Jun 26, 11:06 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
> "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:V_-dnXSd1p3IYbjRnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 6/26/2010 1:03 AM, rickhopkins wrote:
> >> On Jun 25, 9:45 pm, DA74<davidasto...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Jun 25, 9:11 pm, rickhopkins<rick_3hopk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On Jun 25, 8:49 pm, "i,Fred"<no...@nywhere.0rg> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> rickhopkins<rick_3hopk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jun 25, 6:38=A0pm, Anton Berlin<truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> I am going to open some Champagne - great news.
> >>>>>> More likely only Landis will go to jail for continuing to lie - if
> >>>>>> I
> >>>>>> am not mistaken he still claims not to have taken synthetic
> >>>>>> testosterone at the TDF so either he is lying or he was correct and
> >>>>>> the test was wrong. Want to bet he is still lying. When the feds
> >>>>>> have no hard evidence on anyone else, they will slip away. Keep in
> >>>>>> mind they just lost an important appeal in the Barry Bonds case last
> >>>>>> week, that case is evaporating unless they can win the next appeal
> >>>>>> (what another yr to 1.5 yrs and several experts have noted every day
> >>>>>> that goes by without a trial the harder a conviction will be). If
> >>>>>> you
> >>>>>> can't convict Bonds, don't hold to much hope for this mini adventure
> >>>>>> will shake much loose. You may want to keep the cork in it for now.
>
> >>>>> Rick,
> >>>>> First off, this case has nothing to do with BALCO
> >>>>> so any comparison on the merits of one based on the
> >>>>> other is meaningless. Different circumstances,
> >>>>> different sports, different players - only the genre
> >>>>> is the same.
>
> >>>>> Secondly, the feds are not interested in prosecuting
> >>>>> athletes for doping. That is a well established fact,
> >>>>> so don't get your hopes up for Floyd taking the perp
> >>>>> walk anytime soon. As has already been discussed here,
> >>>>> the investigation is looking into the misappropriation
> >>>>> of funds as they relate to organized doping practices.
>
> >>>>> i,Fred
>
> >>>> I, Fred,
>
> >>>> You are naive to believe this is not about drugs. No evidence of
> >>>> doping, no case. If Floyd has taken them down a wild goose chase (and
> >>>> as I already noted he is probably still lying as he claims not to have
> >>>> taken synthetic testosterone) and wasted fed $, believe me after the
> >>>> Balco case if they have nothing to show for their effort (which is
> >>>> what I suspect will happen regardless of guilt), Floyd my become
> >>>> someones bitch. In some respects, the feds have no alternative but to
> >>>> investigate, that is not the same thing as there is evidence to
> >>>> indite. As I said don't pop the corks just yet.
>
> >>>> Rick- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >>> Rickster,
> >>> You've got to stop posting while drinking, and if you're going to do
> >>> it anyway then let's swap the Smirnoff for some Stoli. You deserve it
> >>> bro. And don't even think about going down whisky road - you see where
> >>> that got our friend Floyd (but if you're in the market for some
> >>> southern hospitality then pick up some Jeremiah Weed).
>
> >>> Anyway, I digress. Now as far as the matter at hand, of course the
> >>> case is about drugs. Novitsky works for the FDA for fucksake and we
> >>> sure as shit know this ain't about food unless we're looking in the
> >>> pantry to see if Jan is still stuffing his face full of Svenhards
> >>> butter horns.
>
> >>> With all that established you can bet your Assos lederhosen that
> >>> nobody but nobody on the home team is going to spend any of your hard
> >>> earned tax dollars without having a pretty good fucking clue that
> >>> there's something rotten in Denmark if you insist on using BALCO as a
> >>> benchmark. Now that might be news to you but it ain't news to anyone
> >>> who's spent any trigger time as a carbon cowboy.
>
> >>> At this point it's just a matter of scaring the shit out of everyone
> >>> with subpoenas, quizzical looks and endless simple questions over a
> >>> dimly lit table in a room with no windows to see who sings first. I'll
> >>> tell you right now, it's not going to be hard to get these guys to
> >>> roll over and corroborate Floyd's story. There's just too much at risk
> >>> on the downside and too many of them at this point - the tide has
> >>> turned. I'm very interested in what the boys in the Vaughters camp
> >>> will come out with, given that they have carte-blance immunity from
> >>> turtleneck Doug as far as job security goes.
> >>> -DA74
>
> >> Its Sierra Nevada Pale Ale
>
> >> I believe, Novitsky cut his teeth on BALCO, and if you think what has
> >> or will happen with Bonds has no affect on how serious this
> >> investigation becomes, than you live on another planet. My suspicion
> >> is that when things start working there way through, Floyds dates and
> >> recollections about who was where and so on will be all messed up. In
> >> the end, unless the feds can get someone to turn, with evidence, don't
> >> expect much. I bring up Bonds, because it is pretty obvious he is
> >> guilty (he admits to taking the clear and cream just thought they were
> >> flaxseed oil) and the feds case is getting weaker by the day. No
> >> evidence, no case, wasted $ and some supervisor will cut this pretty
> >> quick if it goes nowhere.
>
> >> You have way to much time on your hands. Don't wet your self
> >> expecting this to go anywhere. If no one turns, it dies and Floyd may
> >> be the feds scapegoat. I have no dog to hunt in this one, just not
> >> too worked up over an investigation starting that the feds have no
> >> alternative but to do.
>
> >> Given your random ramblings I suggest you should take up drinking if
> >> you haven't already.
>
> >> Rick
> > My friend, it already has gone somewhere. What some of the tifosi fail to
> > understand is that to obtain a criminal search warrant the US Attorney has
> > to make a sworn application to a US Federal judge or magistrate. While
> > grand juries may indict ham sandwiches, federal judges do not issue
> > criminal search warrants absent a probable cause showing. They do take the
> > privacy rights of suspects rather seriously when considering warrant
> > applications.
>
> > That said, there was enough of a showing of FACTS here on which to issue a
> > warrant. That is significant. That the warrant is under seal means that
> > the entire doping community will be wondering who has talked and what the
> > feds know. The pressure on them is being ramped up exponentially.
>
> > What I'm interested to know is what communication, if any, there has been
> > between the feds and their counterparts in France. Stay tuned.
>
> What does Tyler, or anyone else for that matter, have to gain from saying
> anything whatsoever? The "crime" being avoided here is nebulous and outdated
> at best, and what exactly would the penalty be for saying "I don't recall"?
>
> And you talk about a showing of "FACTS" but what is new? What has been said
> that is in any way more relevant to the Feds than whatever accusations there
> have been surrounding the supposed 1999 blood sample?
>
> The best shot Novitzky would have had would have been before, not after,
> Landis went off with his rambling accusations. Landis is simply not
> credible; all he adds is a bit of faux star-power (Landis?) that draws media
> attention to it. Perhaps a rallying point. But choosing Landis as the
> centerpiece for an investigation makes about as much sense as seeing Sarah
> Palin as the hope of the republican party.
>
> Oh. I see your point. :-(
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Big Jabowsky,
You've got to get off this Floyd credibility trip you keep repeating.
If what he was saying wasn't credible or they couldn't corroborate his
story on the simplest of facts the
== 9 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 1:39 pm
From: --D-y
On Jun 26, 3:03 pm, "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On 6/26/2010 3:40 PM, K. Fred Gauss wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >> On 6/26/2010 12:59 PM, K. Fred Gauss wrote:
> >>> Anton Berlin wrote:
> >>>> On Jun 25, 8:17 pm, DA74 <davidasto...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Jun 25, 4:50 pm, "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 6/25/2010 7:15 PM, Scott wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jun 25, 3:27 pm, "B. Lafferty"<b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 6/25/2010 5:06 PM, Brad Anders wrote:> On Jun 25, 1:46 pm,
> >>>>>>>> "i,Fred"<n0...@anywhere.0rg> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> And now it begins. Ball gets served with a warrant regarding
> >>>>>>>>>> doping on Rock
> >>>>>>>>>> Racing:
> >>>>>>>>>>http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/06/24/2010-06-24_f...
>
> >>>>>>>>> That's it? They're going after a defunct pro team with an out-of-
> >>>>>>>>> business bankroller? This is going to lead to the downfall of the
> >>>>>>>>> EMPIRE OF LANCE? Guess I was expecting a bit more fireworks.
> >>>>>>>>> Side note: Landis needs to write a new book after all this is
> >>>>>>>>> over,
> >>>>>>>>> "Don't Burn Your Bridges, Nuke 'em!"
> >>>>>>>>> Brad Anders
> >>>>>>>> I seriously doubt that this is "it." If anything "it" is just the
> >>>>>>>> beginning.
> >>>>>>> I agree. It's only beginning.
> >>>>>>> On another note, did anyone really believe that all those "ex"
> >>>>>>> dopers
> >>>>>>> on Rock Racing had really cleaned up?
> >>>>>> And the criminal search warrant is under seal so that no one will
> >>>>>> know
> >>>>>> who has talked and provided evidence leading to the issuance of the
> >>>>>> warrant. It's just the beginning of a long process. Sit back and
> >>>>>> enjoy
> >>>>>> the show, folks.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>> I have the distinct feeling that this opening salvo is meant to start
> >>>>> applying pressure to those who may have information that will assist
> >>>>> the prosecutors in targeting the big fish. These motherfuckers are
> >>>>> going to start singing like a Spring Nightengale when they get
> >>>>> confronted with the consequences of lying to the Feds and the reality
> >>>>> of prison life for skinny white guys with the build of Kate Moss at
> >>>>> the end of a coke binge at NY Fashion Week.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >>>> I am going to open some Champagne - great news.
>
> >>> From this story, Brad has deduced that the investigation is going
> >>> nowhere and you've concluded that all hell is breaking loose.
>
> >>> You're both dumbasses. They got a search warrant to look for PEDs at
> >>> Rock Racing. That's all we know. Learn to recognize your own
> >>> assumptions, you'll be a better person for it.
> >> What is quite clear here is that most of the child dumbasses
> >> inhabiting this forum haven't a clue as to how Federal criminal
> >> investigations progress. But, that's OK. Carry on. :-)
>
> > You've been telling us for years that that Armstrong's getting busted
> > any day now. You might be right this year, but you've been wrong for so
> > long that skepticism is justified.
>
> No. I haven't been telling you for years that Armstrong is "getting
> busted any day now."
Salivating while typing "he's gonna get it".
> I've been saying that Armstrong is more than
> likely a doper who could not do what he's done in multiple Tours without
> preparation. And, IMO, I'm right on that one despite the bleating of the
> rbr children to the contrary. You'll just have to learn to live with
> Lance's preparation reality.
(Relatively) long ago "learned". Thanks for your help and advice <g>.
Again, I think the best thing that could come out of this mess is
indeed a revelation of protocols. 100%, all the way. Ain't gonna
happen but again, there's a lot of good research and development being
kept under wraps here, due to bad rules and bad enforcement.
--D-y
== 10 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 1:46 pm
From: Amit Ghosh
On Jun 26, 3:03 pm, "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> When this is all over, with or without criminal indictments, Mr. Lance's
> reputation as an honest sportsman will be severely tarnished, if not
> destroyed. In fact, it's already showing the wear. The cover of the
> upcoming Outside Magazine is just the beginning. Sports Illustrated
> writers have, in the past year or so, pointing out the smoke all around
> the "clean" Lance asking out loud if there isn't fire there as well. The
> questioning is only going to get d more detailed.
>
> All the children here who love Lance's ass will enjoy one more Tour with
> their false God. Savor it while you still can. :-)
dumbass,
there's enough public information for people to make up their minds:
the '99 LNDD stuff, the bestsey andreu stuff, the mcilvain tape, the
admitted involvement with ferrari
the owner or a bankrupt jeans comapny in california is not going to
yield critical new information about lance armstrong.
== 11 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:00 pm
From: curtis@the-md-russells.org
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:45:54 -0700 (PDT), DA74
<davidastor74@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Anyway, I digress. Now as far as the matter at hand, of course the
>case is about drugs. Novitsky works for the FDA for fucksake and we
>sure as shit know this ain't about food unless we're looking in the
>pantry to see if Jan is still stuffing his face full of Svenhards
>butter horns.
As long as it is coming from the FDA, it is probably focused on
methods used to circumvent controls on purchasing controlled drugs.
The use of drugs (once it parts ways from purchasing and/or obtaining
the drugs) and criminal conspiracy to illegally use federal funds are
not part of the mandate of the FDA in any way, so some of the broad
stroke conspiracy theories given here aren't likely in the offing
until either the FBI or the Secret Service get involved, depending on
how they are chasing the conspiracy. Even the criminal conspiracy
convictions of the FDA tend to be technical and result in fines, not
jail sentences.
As long as it remains an FDA matter (if it has), I don't see how it
can be a deep indictment of a single rider or team. The FDA is
concerned with processes and methodologies that circumvent their
regulations and this will look to the provider, not the user. LA is
not a circumventor or provider at the level the FDA is looking for.
Their convictions look to labs, distributors, criminal providers.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
== 12 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:04 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"
K. Fred Gauss" <Not@This.Planet> wrote in message
news:4c2657f8$1@news.x-privat.org...> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> "Amit Ghosh" <amit.ghosh@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7784e9e1-6c78-4159-aa86-efb05b4611a0@r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jun 26, 2:06 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What does Tyler, or anyone else for that matter, have to gain from
>>> saying
>>> anything whatsoever? The "crime" being avoided here is nebulous and
>>> outdated
>>> at best, and what exactly would the penalty be for saying "I don't
>>> recall"?
>> =========
>> dumbass,
>>
>> lafferty cannot get over his dream to see armstrong and weisel do the
>> perp walk, but it will not happen (has anyone even mentioned weisel
>> here in the last 5 yrs besides lafferty ?).
>>
>> papp was convicted of distributing drugs, and ball (if you look at his
>> various shady activities) is a good candidate to be involved in
>> illegal activity.
>>
>> the riders involved will be sloppy dirty domestic pros like papp and
>> clinger, maybe some disgraced ex-europros, but not guys with deep
>> resources like armstrong.
>> ==========
>>
>> Anyone else wondering if Ball is actually the center of (the fed's)
>> attention? His wouldn't be the first empire that ran into trouble and
>> started to do some shady stuff behind the scenes, stuff that has very
>> little to do with bike racing. An expanded import business, shall we say.
>
> John DeLorean
+1
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
== 13 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:21 pm
From: Amit Ghosh
On Jun 26, 3:03 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
> Anyone else wondering if Ball is actually the center of (the fed's)
> attention? His wouldn't be the first empire that ran into trouble and
> started to do some shady stuff behind the scenes, stuff that has very little
> to do with bike racing. An expanded import business, shall we say.
dumbass,
i don't think he's the center of attantion, but mr. lambos and models
runs a bankrupt jeans company and a cycling team who's riders have to
sell their kit on ebay to pay themselves.
== 14 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:24 pm
From: curtis@the-md-russells.org
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:06:06 -0700, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
<MikeJ@ChainReaction.com> wrote:
>What does Tyler, or anyone else for that matter, have to gain from saying
>anything whatsoever? The "crime" being avoided here is nebulous and outdated
>at best, and what exactly would the penalty be for saying "I don't recall"?
>
>And you talk about a showing of "FACTS" but what is new? What has been said
>that is in any way more relevant to the Feds than whatever accusations there
>have been surrounding the supposed 1999 blood sample?
The FDA is not about drug use, but obtaining controlled drugs while
circumventing the controls. BALCO was a USADA investigation that led
to a Federal grand jury and the raid was primarily by FBI agents,
mostly due to the most trivial part of the case, the money laundering
from the business account to the personal account (probably how
Special Agent of the IRS Novitsky got pulled into it). With all that,
a pitiful level of results.
The FDA investigations are all about moving up the chain, not down. In
local cases, they have handed off investigations to Medicare/Medicaid
guys (prescription fraud), the FBI and local prosecutors. They don't
do users in general and probably not at all.
I'm guessing personally that good legal advice would be to stick
closely to answering the relevant questions accurately and dumb down
on the rest. If it remains an FDA case, they won't care if LA had a
refrigerator in his motel room or what was in it, if they have already
established where the supply lines lay and where to go next. If
Hamilton remember who delivered the drugs, he better get it right. A
memory lapse on whether or not he saw LA do drugs, not so much if at
all.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
== 15 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:25 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"
"B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:xpSdnfGaFbTKzLvRnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 6/26/2010 3:06 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> "B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:Bs2dncZjhNs70bvRnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> On 6/26/2010 2:40 PM, Amit Ghosh wrote:
>>>> On Jun 26, 2:06 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"<Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What does Tyler, or anyone else for that matter, have to gain from
>>>>> saying
>>>>> anything whatsoever? The "crime" being avoided here is nebulous and
>>>>> outdated
>>>>> at best, and what exactly would the penalty be for saying "I don't
>>>>> recall"?
>>>>
>>>> dumbass,
>>>>
>>>> lafferty cannot get over his dream to see armstrong and weisel do the
>>>> perp walk, but it will not happen (has anyone even mentioned weisel
>>>> here in the last 5 yrs besides lafferty ?).
>>>>
>>>> papp was convicted of distributing drugs, and ball (if you look at his
>>>> various shady activities) is a good candidate to be involved in
>>>> illegal activity.
>>>>
>>>> the riders involved will be sloppy dirty domestic pros like papp and
>>>> clinger, maybe some disgraced ex-europros, but not guys with deep
>>>> resources like armstrong.
>>>
>>> Sounds like you're channeling Lance and Thom. Keep hoping boys.
>>
>> But what is the downside to Tyler or whomever simply not recollecting in
>> front of the Grand Jury? You know something about this stuff. What are
>> the pros and cons?
>>
>> --Mike Jacoubowsky
>> Chain Reaction Bicycles
>> www.ChainReaction.com
>> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
> Mike, having no recollection looks good at Congressional hearings. It
> looks much less good in front of Grand Juries, especially where there is
> other evidence showing knowing/intentional prior involvement in the matter
> being investigated.
Can you give examples where a Grand Jury focused on something that had
happened such a long time ago?
Also, from the last paragraph of this page-
http://www.abanet.org/media/faqjury.html - it's obvious that, unless
something dark & nasty was staring you right in the face, you're better off
not testifying. Is there an assumption that cyclists are so stupid & poor
that they're not going to "lawyer up" and stay silent? And yes, I know you
can't have a lawyer with you, but at the same time, you are allowed to
interrupt the testimony and leave the room to consult with one.
========
What protection does a target have against witnesses lying to the grand
jury, or against the use of unconstitutionally obtained evidence?
None. The target's only redress is to challenge the evidence at trial. One
of the reasons a witness may assert the Fifth Amendment is that he or she
does not know if the prosecutor has presented witnesses who have lied. The
witness cannot risk testifying contrary to those witnesses, for fear of
being charged with perjury if the prosecutor does not believe his or her
testimony.
========
I don't see how this plays out in a way that threatens anyone "big" anytime
soon.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
== 16 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:27 pm
From: curtis@the-md-russells.org
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 12:03:35 -0700, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
<MikeJ@ChainReaction.com> wrote:
>Anyone else wondering if Ball is actually the center of (the fed's)
>attention? His wouldn't be the first empire that ran into trouble and
>started to do some shady stuff behind the scenes, stuff that has very little
>to do with bike racing. An expanded import business, shall we say.
He's probably in a good position to launder funds from his suppliers,
including drugs. Not uncommon. A logical progression for that would be
for the preliminary investigation to develop enough info to call a
grand jury and then the FBI pulled in to use the money laundering to
pry other stones loose. And it will have little to do with the bike
teams or members at that point.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
== 17 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 3:05 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 6/26/2010 5:25 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:xpSdnfGaFbTKzLvRnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 6/26/2010 3:06 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> "B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Bs2dncZjhNs70bvRnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> On 6/26/2010 2:40 PM, Amit Ghosh wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 26, 2:06 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"<Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What does Tyler, or anyone else for that matter, have to gain from
>>>>>> saying
>>>>>> anything whatsoever? The "crime" being avoided here is nebulous and
>>>>>> outdated
>>>>>> at best, and what exactly would the penalty be for saying "I don't
>>>>>> recall"?
>>>>>
>>>>> dumbass,
>>>>>
>>>>> lafferty cannot get over his dream to see armstrong and weisel do the
>>>>> perp walk, but it will not happen (has anyone even mentioned weisel
>>>>> here in the last 5 yrs besides lafferty ?).
>>>>>
>>>>> papp was convicted of distributing drugs, and ball (if you look at his
>>>>> various shady activities) is a good candidate to be involved in
>>>>> illegal activity.
>>>>>
>>>>> the riders involved will be sloppy dirty domestic pros like papp and
>>>>> clinger, maybe some disgraced ex-europros, but not guys with deep
>>>>> resources like armstrong.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like you're channeling Lance and Thom. Keep hoping boys.
>>>
>>> But what is the downside to Tyler or whomever simply not recollecting in
>>> front of the Grand Jury? You know something about this stuff. What are
>>> the pros and cons?
>>>
>>> --Mike Jacoubowsky
>>> Chain Reaction Bicycles
>>> www.ChainReaction.com
>>> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>>
>> Mike, having no recollection looks good at Congressional hearings. It
>> looks much less good in front of Grand Juries, especially where there
>> is other evidence showing knowing/intentional prior involvement in the
>> matter being investigated.
>
> Can you give examples where a Grand Jury focused on something that had
> happened such a long time ago?
Off the top of my head I know of two examples. Because I was
peripherally involved in them as an attorney, I can't give you any details.
Tailwind ceased being funded by USPS at the end of the 2004 season,
IIRC. The continued denials, and legal actions commenced against those
who questioned the team and Armstrong's doping would amount to lulling
that would keep the statute of limitations running. Events from 6-8
years ago are not really that long ago in the sense of criminal
conspiracies that occur over many years.
>
> Also, from the last paragraph of this page-
> http://www.abanet.org/media/faqjury.html - it's obvious that, unless
> something dark & nasty was staring you right in the face, you're better
> off not testifying. Is there an assumption that cyclists are so stupid &
> poor that they're not going to "lawyer up" and stay silent? And yes, I
> know you can't have a lawyer with you, but at the same time, you are
> allowed to interrupt the testimony and leave the room to consult with one.
Not testifying is not an option when subpoenaed to appear before a Grand
Jury. You can't stay silent when questioned unless you are asserting a
privilege against testifying--e.g. 5th Amendment self-incrimination. If
you are granted some form of immunity, use or transactional, you have to
answer the questions or face a contempt hearing and possible jailing.
>
> ========
> What protection does a target have against witnesses lying to the grand
> jury, or against the use of unconstitutionally obtained evidence?
Lying, probable none other than being able to prove the witness is
lying. Evidence improperly obtained can be subject to a pre-trial
suppression motion.
>
> None. The target's only redress is to challenge the evidence at trial.
> One of the reasons a witness may assert the Fifth Amendment is that he
> or she does not know if the prosecutor has presented witnesses who have
> lied.
I think not. Asserting the privilege is not related to the testimony of
others. It is a privilege as to the witness' testimony that from
his/her lips will incriminate the witness.
> The witness cannot risk testifying contrary to those witnesses,
> for fear of being charged with perjury if the prosecutor does not
> believe his or her testimony.
The witness is required to tell the truth even if others are lying. It
isn't enough for a prosecutor to believe that someone has committed
perjury. The prosecutor must be able to prove it beyond a reasonable
doubt. That's one reason why there aren't many perjury prosecutions.
> ========
>
> I don't see how this plays out in a way that threatens anyone "big"
> anytime soon.
Time will tell, but unless you're on the inside of the investigation,
it's difficult to know how much the feds know.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
== 18 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 3:13 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 6/26/2010 4:46 PM, Amit Ghosh wrote:
> On Jun 26, 3:03 pm, "B. Lafferty"<b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> When this is all over, with or without criminal indictments, Mr. Lance's
>> reputation as an honest sportsman will be severely tarnished, if not
>> destroyed. In fact, it's already showing the wear. The cover of the
>> upcoming Outside Magazine is just the beginning. Sports Illustrated
>> writers have, in the past year or so, pointing out the smoke all around
>> the "clean" Lance asking out loud if there isn't fire there as well. The
>> questioning is only going to get d more detailed.
>>
>> All the children here who love Lance's ass will enjoy one more Tour with
>> their false God. Savor it while you still can. :-)
>
> dumbass,
>
> there's enough public information for people to make up their minds:
>
> the '99 LNDD stuff, the bestsey andreu stuff, the mcilvain tape, the
> admitted involvement with ferrari
>
> the owner or a bankrupt jeans comapny in california is not going to
> yield critical new information about lance armstrong.
>
Maybe yes; maybe no. Maybe they'll turn up something that will lead
them to others closer to Armstrong. It's all about developing leads and
following them wherever they go. There are enough former associates of
Armstrong's connected to Ball that there might be something of interest
there. Without seeing the affidavits in support of obtaining the search
warrant, you can't really say anything about the substance of the
investigation.
I was surprised to read about Ball being the subject of the search.
We'll all just have to be patient. This investigation could go on for a
year or more.
== 19 of 19 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 3:28 pm
From: "K. Fred Gauss"
B. Lafferty wrote:
>
> No. I haven't been telling you for years that Armstrong is "getting
> busted any day now."
Your denials are kind of like Lance's denials except that
groups.google.com isn't full of material evidence against Lance.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: AFLD banned on TdF- Ricco back on big team...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/676e6f1f793a2a1d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:01 pm
From: DA74
On Jun 26, 10:47 am, "K. Fred Gauss" <N...@This.Planet> wrote:
> DA74 wrote:
> > And Lafferty's point all along,
>
> He's had a lot of points. Some right, some wrong. He's argued that:
>
> Armstrong's going to jail in 2002
> Landis was clean in 2006
> Armstrong's going to jail in 2003
> Ulrich was clean all those times he was robbed of wins by LA
> Armstrong's going to jail in 2004
> Landis is going to jail for hacking AFLD
> Armstrong's going to jail in 2005
>
> etc., etc.
>
> Believing that Armstrong's a doper is not the same as believing he'll go
> to jail or be disgraced before the American public as Landis has been.
> Believing that Armstrong's a doper doesn't mean that anyone else was
> clean. These are the distinctions that have blown Brian's credibility,
> if not his amusement value.
I'm not talking about anything else here but the fact that Lafferty
was one of the only non-racers on this forum to question LA's
cleanliness. What's been interesting to watch is the progression of
responses from the rbr jagoffs. At first all the rbr jagoff doubters
insisted that this was simply not true. Now and over the last several
years where information has come into the public domain that seems to
overwhelmingly indicate LA was a dirty doper the response has changed
from the complete denial into a litany of other excuses as to why
Lafferty was actually wrong. It's amusing.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 3:28 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 6/26/2010 5:01 PM, DA74 wrote:
> On Jun 26, 10:47 am, "K. Fred Gauss"<N...@This.Planet> wrote:
>> DA74 wrote:
>>> And Lafferty's point all along,
>>
>> He's had a lot of points. Some right, some wrong. He's argued that:
>>
>> Armstrong's going to jail in 2002
>> Landis was clean in 2006
>> Armstrong's going to jail in 2003
>> Ulrich was clean all those times he was robbed of wins by LA
>> Armstrong's going to jail in 2004
>> Landis is going to jail for hacking AFLD
>> Armstrong's going to jail in 2005
>>
>> etc., etc.
>>
>> Believing that Armstrong's a doper is not the same as believing he'll go
>> to jail or be disgraced before the American public as Landis has been.
>> Believing that Armstrong's a doper doesn't mean that anyone else was
>> clean. These are the distinctions that have blown Brian's credibility,
>> if not his amusement value.
>
> I'm not talking about anything else here but the fact that Lafferty
> was one of the only non-racers on this forum to question LA's
> cleanliness. What's been interesting to watch is the progression of
> responses from the rbr jagoffs. At first all the rbr jagoff doubters
> insisted that this was simply not true. Now and over the last several
> years where information has come into the public domain that seems to
> overwhelmingly indicate LA was a dirty doper the response has changed
> from the complete denial into a litany of other excuses as to why
> Lafferty was actually wrong. It's amusing.
It is amusing. A friend of mine picked up a water bottle thrown away by
Ulrich in the Pyrenees. Every time he uses it, he claims it gives him an
added boost. ;-)
Just a note--I don't race now but I did, primarily from 1978 -1984 on
the road. I've even sucked Lemond's wheel in a NYC race. Last race I
did was a time trial at Colebrook in CT back around 2004.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: TdF Podium predictions
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/8f023468176a0a7d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:05 pm
From: Amit Ghosh
On Jun 25, 5:30 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
> Jani B is an extreme dark horse, and
> would require a scenario where he was put in charge of checking Contador on
> the final parts of the climb... and as the only person on RS who might be
> able to hold his wheel, could end up putting him in a position to be
> supported for the GC.
dumbass,
brajkovic is a good rider, but will not be GC material.
he probably has one or two good climbs n him but he will not be a
regular at the front group in the mtns. leipheimer and kloden will
more likely to be high on GC.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:31 pm
From: curtis@the-md-russells.org
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:47:50 -0700 (PDT), DirtRoadie
<DirtRoadie@aol.com> wrote:
>I'm pretty sure there's a rule against the same rider getting all
>three podium spots. Sorta' like a rider can only wear one of the
>"jerseys" at a time.
>So I think LA gets the "lifetime achievement award" jersey, but no
>podium.
Screw the rules. After last year, LA isn't sharing the podium with
anyone.
And Hinault can damn well stand in line and pay for autographs like
everyone else. No more puffing up a has been.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:36 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"
"Steve Freides" <steve@kbnj.com> wrote in message
news:88mm7sF59pU1@mid.individual.net...
> NoDannyNo wrote:
>
>> Poor Contador will DNF after crashing on the cobbles. The
>> Unimpeachable One will pounce on that like a fat man who finds a jelly
>> donut. By the 2nd week, you kiddies will think yer stuck in 2005.
>
> It will be even better. On an important climb, with Lance looking
> haggard, a mysterious spectator, later identified as related to Lance
> Armstrong and his team by exactly six degrees of separation, will let the
> handle of a large shopping bag reach out onto the road at exactly the time
> Contador rides by,. catching his handlebars - and then accidentally step
> on the rider's super-light frame, breaking it. Contador will then be
> beaten by an angry crowd of pro-Lance fans.
>
> -S-
Is that why Tour magazine, for the TdF issue, came with the faux feedbags?
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cleaning and scrubbing Lafferty
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/e13fa72713b23b14?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 2:06 pm
From: Fred Flintstein
Focksticks,
He's like the guy talking to himself
on the street, living his own reality.
How many of you retards would attempt
rational discourse with the guy on
the street?
If you want him to stfu you've got to
stop replying to him.
Fred Flintstein
==============================================================================
TOPIC: French woman stops Longo's Domination by 4 minutes
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/c628b855499c1777?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 26 2010 3:21 pm
From: "GoneBeforeMyTime"
M�lodie Lesueur wins solo in the French national road race
http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/french-road-championships-ne/elite-womens-road-race/results
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.bicycles.racing"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.bicycles.racing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
Posts
