There is an interesting statement now online from the UCI about the allegations against Lance Armstrong. It can be found at www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep09news3
It is harshly critical of L'Equipe and of the president of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). It says the UCI has not yet been given any information officially by anyone involved, even though it has asked and WADA agrees that the UCI has jurisdiction over the case. One paragraph of the statement suggests that the UCI believes the author of the article lied about the investigation on which he claimed the article was based, committed some kind of fraud to get the documents that link the suspect test to Armstrong, and was looking for evidence only against Armstrong, not about doping generally:
"As for the article itself, the author claims to have been working on the story for four months, when in fact it seems that his 'investigation' was limited to receiving confidential information related to testing conducted by the laboratory and confidential doping control documents, including confidential documents which he was able to consult at the UCI after receiving, under false pretext, the authorization of Lance Armstrong. His subsequent public statements tend to confirm that he was targeting a particular athlete and that the newspaper was only given doping control forms relating to this athlete."
There is an interesting statement now online from the UCI about the allegations against Lance Armstrong. It can be found at www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep09news3
It is harshly critical of L'Equipe and of the president of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). It says the UCI has not yet been given any information officially by anyone involved, even though it has asked and WADA agrees that the UCI has jurisdiction over the case. One paragraph of the statement suggests that the UCI believes the author of the article lied about the investigation on which he claimed the article was based, committed some kind of fraud to get the documents that link the suspect test to Armstrong, and was looking for evidence only against Armstrong, not about doping generally:
"As for the article itself, the author claims to have been working on the story for four months, when in fact it seems that his 'investigation' was limited to receiving confidential information related to testing conducted by the laboratory and confidential doping control documents, including confidential documents which he was able to consult at the UCI after receiving, under false pretext, the authorization of Lance Armstrong. His subsequent public statements tend to confirm that he was targeting a particular athlete and that the newspaper was only given doping control forms relating to this athlete."
--
Paul Turner
Just face it, the French are [censored] poor losers, just because it is their race. Bill Baka
[censored] poor loosers of is this a publicity stunt to get back the man who has made the Tour a true International event not just a European Event. Anglo dollars are worth more than Frog dollers
"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Paul Turner said:
There is an interesting statement now online from the UCI about the allegations against Lance Armstrong. It can be found at www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep09news3
It is harshly critical of L'Equipe and of the president of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). It says the UCI has not yet been given any information officially by anyone involved, even though it has asked and WADA agrees that the UCI has jurisdiction over the case. One paragraph of the statement suggests that the UCI believes the author of the article lied about the investigation on which he claimed the article was based, committed some kind of fraud to get the documents that link the suspect test to Armstrong, and was looking for evidence only against Armstrong, not about doping generally:
"As for the article itself, the author claims to have been working on the story for four months, when in fact it seems that his 'investigation' was limited to receiving confidential information related to testing conducted by the laboratory and confidential doping control documents, including confidential documents which he was able to consult at the UCI after receiving, under false pretext, the authorization of Lance Armstrong. His subsequent public statements tend to confirm that he was targeting a particular athlete and that the newspaper was only given doping control forms relating to this athlete."
--
Paul Turner
Just face it, the French are [censored] poor losers, just because it is their race. Bill Baka
Man my spelling is poor I should stop drinking this Aussie Charonnay "me" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
[censored] poor loosers of is this a publicity stunt to get back the man who has made the Tour a true International event not just a European Event. Anglo dollars are worth more than Frog dollers
"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Paul Turner said:
There is an interesting statement now online from the UCI about the allegations against Lance Armstrong. It can be found at www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/sep05/sep09news3
It is harshly critical of L'Equipe and of the president of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). It says the UCI has not yet been given any information officially by anyone involved, even though it has asked and WADA agrees that the UCI has jurisdiction over the case. One paragraph of the statement suggests that the UCI believes the author of the article lied about the investigation on which he claimed the article was based, committed some kind of fraud to get the documents that link the suspect test to Armstrong, and was looking for evidence only against Armstrong, not about doping generally:
"As for the article itself, the author claims to have been working on the story for four months, when in fact it seems that his 'investigation' was limited to receiving confidential information related to testing conducted by the laboratory and confidential doping control documents, including confidential documents which he was able to consult at the UCI after receiving, under false pretext, the authorization of Lance Armstrong. His subsequent public statements tend to confirm that he was targeting a particular athlete and that the newspaper was only given doping control forms relating to this athlete."
--
Paul Turner
Just face it, the French are [censored] poor losers, just because it is their race. Bill Baka
