Posted on 10/13/2012 4:43:34 PM PDT by Vision
Ms. O’Reilly said Mr. Armstrong demonized her as a prostitute with a drinking problem, and had her hauled into court in England. Ultimately, a legal settlement was reached, and Ms. O’Reilly tried to pick up her life, sometimes talking about Mr. Armstrong and drugs, but to little notice.
Ms. O’Reilly said she was once in a room giving Mr. Armstrong a massage when he and officials on the team fabricated a story to conceal a positive drug test result. Ms. O’Reilly said Mr. Armstrong told her, “You know enough to bring me down.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Sticking to the subject of Mikey Anderson, yes, he's a disgruntled nut case............
As for the others, what does the USADA have on them and why haven't they been as thoroughly investigated as Armstrong?
And for that matter, where are the findings of the USADA on all the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th place teams that were edged out by USPS?
Have the USADA show us the results of their investigations on these other cyclists and maybe, just maybe, I might give them some credibility. Until they do so, they're just another government sponsored thug posse........
UNITED STATES ANTI-DOPING AGENCY.
Protect the Rights of U.S. Athletes — We protect the right of U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes to compete healthy and clean — to achieve their own personal victories as a result of unwavering commitment and hard work — to be celebrated as true heroes.
The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) is the national anti-doping organization for the Olympic movement in the United States. The U.S. Congress recognized USADA as “the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American and Paralympic sport in the United States.”
Since its inception in 2000, USADA has worked to preserve the integrity of competition, inspire true sport and protect the rights of athletes in the Olympic & Paralympic movement in the United States. With the vision to be the guardian of the values and life lessons learned through true sport, our organization’s anti-doping programs are comprehensive, including in-competition and out-of-competition testing, results management and adjudication processes, drug reference resources and therapeutic use exemption process, scientific research initiatives, and athlete and outreach education. We continue to work to improve our system and anti-doping endeavors to further protect clean athletes and the health of future athletes.
As a non-profit, non-governmental agency, our programs:
Provide deterrence and preservation of sport for athletes, coaches, students, teachers, parents, scientists and more through education and resources;
Include numerous protections for athletes to ensure that only athletes who are guilty of a doping violation are sanctioned;
Strive to systematically identify and sanction those individuals who are engaged in the effort to gain an advantage over athletes who are competing clean; and
Fund pioneering research for the detection of doping substances and techniques, and the pursuit of scientific excellence in doping control.
It was a REPUBLICAN congress that gave us this organization, but it was only for olympics. Not to go after private citizens retired from sport for things that happened years ago.
Yes, they are not government; they seem to have coercive powers and the ability to act as an agency of the government, and it’s time they were reigned in and kept within the bounds of their original charter.
And from “the history”:
USADA is the independent anti-doping agency for Olympic related sport in the United States. It was created as the result of recommendations made by the United States Olympic Committee’s Select Task Force on Externalization to uphold the Olympic ideal of fair play, and to represent the interests of Olympic, Pan American Games, and Paralympic athletes.
The USOC was aware that its program lacked credibility internationally for a number of reasons, and the task force was charged with recommending both the governing structure (as represented by the Board of Directors) and responsibilities, which should be assumed by the new agency.
USADA began operations Oct. 1, 2000. Its board consisted of nine members, five of whom came from outside the Olympic family and four of whom (two each) were elected by the Athlete Advisory Council (AAC) and National Governing Body (NGB) Council.
USADA was given full authority to execute a comprehensive national anti-doping program encompassing testing, adjudication, education, and research, and to develop programs, policies, and procedures in each of those areas.
In 2003 the Board further extended its independence by choosing to consider recommendations from the AAC and NGBs, but ultimately electing its own members. USADA is still an evolving organization, and its history is still being written.
Note the ominous phrase “Given full authority to execute...”
And again, note that their charter is for olympics. Last I looked, the Tour De France had nothing to do with Olympics.
Was Lance Armstrong competing in the 2012 Olympics and I didn’t notice?
As do most prisoners of war. And witches, right before they are burned at the stake. Just confess to your crime, and then things will be better for you, and then we will kill you. I think that was in a book you might want to read.... :-)
You have a very narrow vision. You should change your screen name.
Seriously, you don’t see the flaw in your supposed “logic”? You claim that if someone is accused, they are better people if they confess than if they assert innocence.
Interestingly, in the political world, it is often that people will confess when they have no choice left, and somehow they are credited with goodwill for “confessing”.
So in your narrow field of view, a guy who tests positive for drugs, and when confronted with the positive evidence, rats other people out, should get a pat on the back because he “came clean”, while a guy who tests negative for drugs should be looked upon with disdain because he doesn’t confess?
Whether the 2nd person is guilty or not, I hope that you see the illogic there.
The people who you could say should get better treatment are those who test negative, but who then confess and return their money and awards, for NO PURPOSE other than they want to have a clear conscience.
But doing so under duress isn’t nobel, and identifying the next witch isn’t gracious.
as to the book reference, in the book 1984, and I don’t want to ruin the plot for you, but lets just say that in the end, the people graciously confess to their crimes, but it doesn’t turn out so well for them.
It doesn’t matter how narrow the USADA charter was originally. USA Cycling is the governing body for cyclists from the United States and that is the organization American cyclists go through to get a racing license. USA Cycling uses the USADA as their anti-doping organization. The USADA has made a decision to sanction a number of cyclists and USA Cycling has made the decision to enforce the sanctions. The Union Cycliste Internationale has not yet announced that they will enforce the sanctions. That is the body that will ultimately decide if Armstrong is stripped of his Tour de France titles. That’s where the situation gets sticky. There is suspicion(and allegations) that the UCI helped sweep drug use under the rug and would probably prefer not to strip the titles. The problem with that is that if the UCI doesn’t strip the titles, there is fear that the World Anti-Doping Agency will recommend that cycling be dropped from the Olympics.
“I had heard of them before, but thought they were simply making sure to harrass our olympic athletes, which you could stretch an argument to say, since they compete for our government, that the government has a compelling reason to keep them clean (also, the olympics may require that a government have a testing authority in place).”
But our Olympic athletes don’t compete for our government. All these agreements and arrangements such as racing licenses are more akin to contracts between individuals and associations of individuals. USA Cycling is not part of the U.S government. Even the United States Olympic Committee isn’t part of the U.S. government.
Here’s a link to an interview of Emma O’Reilly:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-15/interview-with-emma-oreilly/4310066
Part of the interview was used in the Australian Broadcasting Corporation television program “The World According to Lance”. Here’s a link to a webpage with that program. There are a few other videos on that page related to the television program as well.
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/10/11/3608613.htm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.