Where's Brian

[email hidden] (Tom Kunich) wrote .google.com>...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=2004/witchhunt2

I think that Brian would do well to read the final paragraph in this
rather good article. Perhaps he might find that a law student has a
better grasp of the world than he.

About the author
"Michelle Gallen is researching for a PhD in international law,
examining the legal issues surrounding drugs in sport in a range of
jurisdictions, with an end view to recommending a model law for
anti-doping. She worked for several years as a senior advisor at the
Australian Sports Drug Agency; is a selector for Triathlon Australia;
was an elite swimmer with the Australian Institute of Sport and now
races triathlons.

"This article is a short version of a paper Ms Gallen is preparing for
submission to legal journals."

"K. J. Papai" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de :
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Tom Kunich) wrote .google.com>...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=2004/witchhunt2

I think that Brian would do well to read the final paragraph in this
rather good article. Perhaps he might find that a law student has a
better grasp of the world than he.

About the author
"Michelle Gallen is researching for a PhD in international law,
examining the legal issues surrounding drugs in sport in a range of
jurisdictions, with an end view to recommending a model law for
anti-doping. She worked for several years as a senior advisor at the
Australian Sports Drug Agency; is a selector for Triathlon Australia;
was an elite swimmer with the Australian Institute of Sport and now
races triathlons.

Having worked for some years on-site in legal reform projects (USAID, etc.)
in the ex-Soviet Union, and having co-authored, commented on and redacted
"model laws" in their national implementations, I can assure you that the
American industrial interests have primary, though "informal", rights of
redaction over all content. This has been particularly true in the
petroleum industry, as well as associated environmental laws.

In one drafting exercise, we were warned *not* to resolve the lacunae of
land regulation between two ministries affecting petroleum sludge disposal.
The reasoning was, that under the existing legislation, the law on subsoil
resources did not cover dumping it directly on the ground, just prevented
burying it. That's to moral purpose your tax monies support. Don't expect
any holy text to arise, uless it contains commercial benefits to existing
giants.

So, I imagine that the pharmaceutical industry, the medical field, and
testing laboratories will all be able to make their contributions well ahead
of anyone writing here, in the NY Times, or "in cahoots". Sorry for the
extent of the reply, but those who don't craft laws don't understand the
overreaching purposes.
--
Bonne route,

Sandy
Paris FR

"SMMB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"K. J. Papai" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de :
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Tom Kunich) wrote .google.com>...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=2004/witchhunt2

I think that Brian would do well to read the final paragraph in this
rather good article. Perhaps he might find that a law student has a
better grasp of the world than he.

About the author
"Michelle Gallen is researching for a PhD in international law,
examining the legal issues surrounding drugs in sport in a range of
jurisdictions, with an end view to recommending a model law for
anti-doping. She worked for several years as a senior advisor at the
Australian Sports Drug Agency; is a selector for Triathlon Australia;
was an elite swimmer with the Australian Institute of Sport and now
races triathlons.

Having worked for some years on-site in legal reform projects (USAID, etc.)
in the ex-Soviet Union, and having co-authored, commented on and redacted
"model laws" in their national implementations, I can assure you that the
American industrial interests have primary, though "informal", rights of
redaction over all content. This has been particularly true in the
petroleum industry, as well as associated environmental laws.

In one drafting exercise, we were warned *not* to resolve the lacunae of
land regulation between two ministries affecting petroleum sludge disposal.
The reasoning was, that under the existing legislation, the law on subsoil
resources did not cover dumping it directly on the ground, just prevented
burying it. That's to moral purpose your tax monies support. Don't expect
any holy text to arise, uless it contains commercial benefits to existing
giants.

So, I imagine that the pharmaceutical industry, the medical field, and
testing laboratories will all be able to make their contributions well ahead
of anyone writing here, in the NY Times, or "in cahoots". Sorry for the
extent of the reply, but those who don't craft laws don't understand the
overreaching purposes.

Well written and well said Sandy.
My sister-in-law works for USAID (food & nutrition in 3rd world), but
in any case, what you say has a lot of relevant meaning, especially to
the legal world.

Certain people are all too eager (or happy?) to convict anyone who
"tests positive" (most probably are cheats so no tears from me), but
worse, to convict in a discussion forum, such as RBR, and drag those
atheletes through the mud, of those certain world-class atheletes who
have NEVER tested psotive for doping. ([censored] grammatical sentence I
know 😉

-Ken