Buying weed Sestriere

__________________________

📍 Verified store!

📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!

__________________________

▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼

▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲

Buying weed Sestriere

I rang up Mr. Walsh to talk about his and Mr. Andy Shen: Tell me about the new book. DW: Yes, a big change has happened in the ASO where they went from being the organization that was leading, right at the forefront of the anti-doping movement in professional cycling to, in our opinion, an organization that has accepted that doping is an integral part of the sport, and by highlighting the problem, you only damage the commercial viability of the sport. Changes were made, and people who were leading that charge were ousted. DW: Yes. DW: Well, in certain respects it wants to be seen as being right at the front of it, with the whole biological passport stuff. AS: I saw a blog posting on cyclingfans. DW: Because it matters. Why should I let it go? Why should I? Nothing about his past has been discussed, that has not been entered into dialogue about, all the allegations remain, as far as Lance is concern, are buried in the past. Because we have to know if the guy who won the Tour de France seven times is a genuine champion or not. And other people will say, 'Oh well, most of the other guys who rode those Tours were doping, so therefore he was the best. So money has always been a complete irrelevance for me here. And this book, it will have cost us as much to do it as we will earn from it. So what. How absurd is that? Is it hypocritical for you guys to follow rugby yet tear down cycling? Dope testing could be better in rugby, but it is very existent. So proportionally you have a high chance of being dope tested after a rugby match. In Britain, for example, the UK sports council that supervises the dope testing in the UK where I work, they send their dope testers to all the rugby clubs for out of competition testing, and the rugby clubs have totally subscribed to that. AS: I just thought this posting was a good crystallization of a lot of what I see on forums when people complain about you guys. DW: Sure. People genuinely believe this. He was the guy who would write the most engaging piece. He loved the sport. Do it. So they had a problem. And you listen to their complaints. But it was true. The ASO have reacted in the same way. It will protect the interests of cycling. DW: I can speak maybe more clearly about the stuff I was involved in. I looked at the LAF foundation, and how Lance has used cancer as a shield, in a sense, to protect him. It has. The funding of survivorship programs has been very impressive. That I would put stuff like that in my body? And to the lay person, it sounded like an incredibly convincing argument. They were the very drugs that helped him recover from his chemotherapy. But that was the argument from day one. And after that, it was more subliminal. Somebody who was such an icon to the cancer community would surely never cheat. I think it has worked very well as a shield. It means that the American media, for example, had a fantastic story about Lance Armstrong, because in his own country he was seen as a tremendous beacon of hope, a guy who came back from life threatening cancer. A guy who then decided that he would acknowledge the responsiblity of the cure, and do all this work for cancer. This also served a very useful purpose in relation to the image of Lance Armstrong. And there are some interesting points that have come up in that. And then you get the creation of livestrong. My feeling is that if somebody goes to their computer and types in www. And livestrong. And Lance is an equity holder in that company. AS: You started covering Lance Armstrong, and you quite liked him, when he was young and brash, in his first tour, correct? DW: Yes I did, The interview is kind of tattooed onto my consciousness. On each stage I would sit down with somebody and they would tell me their story of the Tour. And I interviewed him, and the interview lasted three hours. It was what you would call a positive piece. I do believe that he had an insatiable desire to win, that comes across very much in the piece. And I think always will be. So yes I did like him that day I met him, I did a subsequent interview with him, we met twice in that Tour, he gave me loads of time. I remember on a rest day in Geneva we spent about three, three and half hours talking, and I had a very positive attitude towards him. AS: Is the piece available anywhere? DW: Yes it is. The book is called 'Inside the Tour de France'. There was nothing that said to the public, you know, these guys are all juiced! But once Festina happened, everything changed. Because if we were to write, as some people tried to, that this was just one team, this was the bad guys getting caught by the cops, you were telling a lie. DW: I would hope so, but I would presume not. Because Lance has a reputation out there for being very litigious. And my earlier point about corporations, their only line is the bottom line, and publishers are part of the corporate world. DW: None. I did maybe forty interviews in small radio stations, for which I was really glad to do. PBS, Tom Goldman did a really good interview. But the mainstream just did not want to know. Did not want to know. I think I would say From Lance to Landis. And it is the truth. DW: Yes he did. That was an interview I did in Lance had said, 'I know nothing of the history of the sport. And I thought that was the weirdest answer. Because as everybody knows, Tommy Simpson was found with amphetamines when his autopsy was done, there were amphetamines in his system, amphetamines were found in his back pocket, and the medical view was that they had contributed to his death. Obviously amphetamines were banned at this time. Which was true. But what does that tell us? To me, that answer…Bernard Hinault used to be asked about doping, and Bernard Hinault would always say, 'I passed every test. As opposed to saying, 'I would never ever ever use a performance enhancing drug. Because I totally disagree with using them. Generally the ones who won the big races. DW: Yes, that was just so cynical, and I was such a bloody idiot when I look back. How naive was I. Fulvio, really nice man. And in a relatively short period of time, the guy was visiting Ferrari for three or four days at a time, and maybe once every three or four months. Because at this time Ferrari was being investigated for doping, shortly after he would be charged, sent to trial. So it was quite a big story. But I wanted to give Lance the opportunity to respond to this. So I sent off an email, 'These are the names of the hotels, these are the dates that Lance was there. It was all about a unique collaboration to make an attack on the world hour record. They laughed at the idea that he was going to do the world hour record. They thought this was the greatest joke. This guy, riding up this mountain, at this speed? With this apparent effortlessness, in The Tour of Renewal? In the Tour post Festina, when they were all riding clean? All the journalists laughed, because they saw how ridiculous it was. We knew what EPO had done to the sport, guys riding up mountains at flat-road speed without hardly taking a breath. So pretty much all of the journalists believed Lance was using EPO at that moment. This was the cancer icon coming back to give everybody hope. And the response that the journalists got when they spoke to their editors was utterly and totally connected to Lance as cancer icon and how this was a story of true heroism. And pretty much everybody went with the heroics. He fought the good fight for about a year, believed it was utterly futile, and left the coverage of cycling to do other things. Pierre Ballester was one of the guys who stayed and tried to fight it from the inside. AS: That was one of my questions. DW: Oh no, it was totally widespread. That moment in Sestriere, I mean, the guys all knew it. The laughter in the press room, it was…it was bizarre. Indurain was perceived to be this monster reeling in the breakaways, was reeling them in one by one, and he came up to Chiapucci, and everybody then expected that Indurain would just blow him away. This was quite close to the top, maybe 5k from the top. But Chiapucci suddenly got this new energy, and kept going, and as far as I remember, won the stage. There were lots of guys in tears, journalists in tears, watching this heroic duel between Chiapucci and Indurain. Now, we subsequently learn that Chiapucci and his Carrera team were up to their eyes in doping, and the Banesto team of Indurain, loads of evidence to suggest there was systematic doping there as well. Now, fast forward seven or eight years to Lance, and Lance is producing this extraordinary power up Sestriere, and people were just laughing. This is cycling at two speeds, was their quote, deux vitesse, was their headline. It was absolutely clear in its coverage that Sestriere confirmed to them that he was definitely doping. And Pierre, their top guy, was asked to do their interview with Lance. And Pierre to his great credit, in typical Pierre style, he asked all the right questions. Do you do EPO? Lance said no. Have you ever done EPO, even as part of your post cancer recuperation? And Lance said no. And he did deny it. All the difficult questions were posed, Lance answered them. Some answers were convincing, some were not. He felt that the heir apparent of the Tour, Lance Armstrong, was being interrogated instead of being asked legitimate questions. Jean-Marie was saying to Rouet, 'This has to stop. The bad guys were winning. There are other dopers. This proves that you have a personal grudge against Armstrong. For example, Ullrich has more or less confessed to doping, but to me he seems like a stooge, he was being controlled. DW: Yes he is. Completely different. Why do you go after Lance Armstrong? Ok, folks, who would you prefer? Cycling in the old days had a policy on this. The heads of the Tour de France and the heads of the UCI and all those guys, they did go after people. But they went after the small guys. And if they found a small guy, they generally presented him as the one bad apple in the box. And it was their way of saying, 'Remember folks, only the small guys dope. Our great champions, they would never do that. And a string of great champions down through the years were given passes by the cycling authorities. Why do you go after Lance? Pretty much everybody else, to their discredit, have been caught. Go after Tyler Hamilton? I think that case is well and truly closed. Go after Jan Ullrich? We know about Ullrich. We know about Basso. Bjarne Riis? We know about Bjarne Riis. But I think the Lance case, because remember, Lance was a guy who vigorously protests his innocence. Would have you believe that he never took a doping product in his life. Bernard Hinault was never like that. And Lance has never been like that. He talked about it under oath in the SCA case. He was asked about all the pills that Frankie Andreu saw him display in front of him. And Lance said they were all caffeine pills. Convenient, caffeine is now legal. Up to a certain point. In any case, my writing about doping has never been about Lance. In I was writing long pieces about Ben Johnson. Whoever was the big cheat at the time, in my view needed to be investigated. It just happens that Lance has been around for a long time. Seven Tours is a lot. Did Stephanie McIlvain confirm the hospital incident to you? McIlvain has testified that Armstrong said no such thing, contradicting the testimony of Frankie and Betsy Andreu. DW: She did. Absolutely plenty of times. And confirmed lots else besides. We spoke a lot. I found her, at the time I was speaking to her, I found her a very charming and engaging woman. We spoke on the phone, we never met in person, but she told me lots of stuff about Lance that was very damaging. There was lots of stuff that Stephanie told me. She told me about a discussion she had with her boss, her Oakley boss, that was also quite incriminating. So there was lots of stuff Stephanie told me. And this was the thing, Andy. People would say, 'What makes you so sure? When it came to Stephanie McIlvain, I heard lots of very interesting stuff from Stephanie that was off the record. This has been very tough on Stephanie, she went into that SCA case, she knew she had to give evidence, she said she never heard Lance reply to doctors that he used performance enhancing drugs in the famous hospital incident of October She said under oath, 'I never heard it. And then the famous taped telephone conversation with Greg Lemond is played a few days later in that hearing, and you hear Stephanie say, 'I was there, I heard it. And I think that was very tough on Stephanie no question. I understand that. Anybody would understand that. And she was put in a pretty impossible position. Occasionally at golf tournaments I see Rick Reilly, and I get an urge, when I see Rick now, to just reach for the nearest sickbag. I think Rick Reilly was entitled to do it, give the guy an opportunity to protest his innocence. Now, Rick Reilly has written lots about Lance Armstrong. Well, Lance is his mate. I despair because this was the country that had Watergate, that had Woodward and Bernstein, that really showed us what really great journalism can do. I must say I find that very discouraging. It tells me something about the American media. I know Rick Reilly is no longer with Sports Illustrated, but they allowed him to do that, they allowed him to be serious about Sammy Sosa and to be a fan cheerleading about Lance Armstrong. To me that was just unforgiveable. Can he withstand the dirt digging and oppo research in politics? DW: Yes, and I really hope he goes into politics. From way back, when Lance sent his lawyer Timothy Herman to London to settle with the Sunday Times, to effectively make sure the case was never heard in open court, the guy who worked for the Sunday Times and was negotiating for the Sunday Times was the managing editor Richard Caseby. Richard and Timothy Herman sat down and thrashed out an agreement. When the agreement was completed, Herman said to Richard, 'This was never going to court. And Richard said something to the effect of why not? And Herman said, 'Lance has long term political ambitions, and this would not have been helpful, going to court and having all this stuff out there. So that was the first inkling. The Tour de France is just down the road. My memory of that is always…Lance seeing himself as Our Lord on the cross and the two crooks on either side, and the stuff he said then, with a bit of hindsight for everybody, was absolutely absurd. These great men, Ullrich and Basso, heroes, according to Lance. Is somebody trying to tell us that Lance had no idea these guys were doping? I think the political thing is very much a possbility at the very least, maybe more than that. Maybe a probability. Can you talk about that a little? It was appalling what happened, because it was plain for anyone with eyes to see that the East Germans were systematically doping. When she told the truth about what was happening, she was laughed at by journalists in the US. She just did not want to be interviewed. She did not want to revisit this, like somebody who had been in a war, and the war had been vicious, and awful, and dirty, and just did not want to relive it. She did little bits of interviews here and there, she did a Sports Illustrated piece at one time, and she said that when people ask her now if she once swam, she says no. Just says no. I believe that the reasons we love sport get undermined when people start doing it for money. And a lot of that stuff has been absolutely destroyed by professional sport. And I went to interview a guy yesterday, he and his brother are South Africa internationals. Two young guys. And they come from a small farming background in very rural eastern Free State, which is one of the provinces of South Africa. So these two brothers are professional sportsmen, they get very good contracts to play for their province, which is the Kwa Zulu Natal Sharks. And they play for South Africa, so financially, they do extremely well out of rugby. And the other guy is a broker in a major insurance firm in Durban. They both have genuine and important jobs that run parallel with their rugby careers. But the province insisted that he would have to give up his medical degree. He rang his mom and said what should I do? Andy —this is all getting a little tiresome. You who promulgate the aforementioned so as to not be held accountable. Go ask Lance some follow up questions. Yeah, right. In sport, the viewpoint should remain fairness and honesty. Please continue to present individuals with this in mind. This site is better than SI or almost any other sports coverage that somehow manages to miss the huge fucking elephant in the room. So has the NYT. Walsh would have much more credibility if he knew how to edit himself. The fact remains that he won again and again on a level playing field with his undeniable natural talent and uber determination still the defining factors. Do you think the sport is better off for having had all of this muck raked up? Exactly who has it benefited? Nobody knows your name, you came in second and third so many times in top races. All people remeber is guys who won like Pulla, Joe Papp, and others like them, the guys who were convicted of doping and served suspensions. Any comments? A: Me? No such thing, you must be confusing me with someone else. No comment. Now you laugh at yourself how naive you were, no matter how much time and energy wasted on training and races, all this for nothing, just to find out that cheaters have gotten the better of you. The results have not been amended, convicted cheaters never returned prizes, and those same cheaters continue to show up at races. Why would anyone ever want to keep memory of this??? Stop reading and ask for your money back. Now that would add credibility. What room? What would change if Walsh managed to get his man? Only if you want it to — either in the name of justice or hatred. Me, I can sort of see the justice argument — as a general principle bad guys should get their deserts. Some people obviously are convinced and have joined the crusade. Imagine on! Wow, I guess you guys really miss the point. After Festina pro cycling had it chance to clean up the sport. It failed. So the doping culture continued. But not every rider doped. So is it their fault that they decided to not cheat? The written rules said no doping. They followed those rules, not the unwritten ones. If Lance is proven to be dirty, it will do a lot to stop the doping culture. It ruined his career and everyone in the game stopped using PEDs. Wow, I better stop doping! Athletes dope because they can — they doped before Lance, and will dope after Lance proven dirty or not as long as they can get away with it. The effects might not be what was hoped for, but there would surely be huge ripples. And you and your co-workers would certainly be talking about it for days. My friends, one day the truth will come out. The lies will become truth. When will all you guys use your brains and put 2 and 2 together. Look at ALL the circumstantial evidence, use your intelligence and work it out for yourselves. As much as the truth hurts just face it. Believe in the scientists who publish the data, the analysis — they are experts in their field. Study and you will see the evidence all laid out before you. People in the USA are given the death penalty on circumstantial evidence in court, there is more than enough circumstantial evidence surrounding LA to put him away. He has money and power though, but he will forever be tainted with the fact that he is a drug user, till the day he dies. We all know Lance and you know that we all know, we see it in your face when you discuss doping. When will all the fans get behind Kimmage, Walsh, Lemond — these are guys with sincere integrity. Good people who want to do good. Look at the evidence. Take a look at yourselves and please understand that these guys ride their bikes and lie for a living. Pretty simple to see that blood doping is still very prevalent in the pro peloton. How is that possible? Autologous blood doping is still currently undetectable by test. Nothing will really be solved until there is a way to detect autologous doping, however. David Walsh seems like some sort of elitist to me. I would look at him more favorably if he went after someone like cobey bryant or phil mickelson. If Walsh could read, he would be able to know the difference between Livestrong. The point is, the Livestrong name was created as a non-profit organization and grew through those means. That there is a for-profit arm, that makes money, off the name if Livestrong is questionable. Lemond doped also. Or do you believe he was super human, where as Lance can not be. Neither of them were clean, there is just less evidence against Lemond. His rightous attitude is equally as appalling. Is he not THE most tested and never found a damn thing? Seven freakin tours won…what, did they not test him in all those tours? Am I supposed to believe that the ASO swept this all under the rug? Get a clue folks. If done right note, see Vino for how not to do it you cannot detect it. Passport is used for refinement of the process to catch, and catch up to, the cheaters. That gives me an idea for a reality show…. Kohl was misquoted, ya think he would start taping his own interviews to avoid that? What a cheesehead…. My Triglycerides are high. What does that mean? We used that as a reference to follow. Some seem to be complaining about the length of the interview. But my concentration span is able to deal with it. That is a fucked up allegation. If you have ever known anyone who has suffered with pancreatic cancer, you might be more sympathetic. Causes, and prevention remain little understood. Great interview! Walsh has figured it out. On the other hand, Motorola was getting its ass kicked and so the Americans simply decided with a big push from Armstrong to play the European game. And Mr. Are you kidding me? Armstrong is one of the biggest dopers who ever lived, sure, but so is every other Tour winner. No way. So, the podium of every Tour was doped going back to the time of the beginning of drug testing thank you Mr. Simpson, and may you RIP , and so tell me:. However, he did essentially say that he was doped. You can use all the gear you need! In fact Dirk and I encourage it as we hate to waste time on the set. Lance and his lawyers know how to work the legal system. Just like Johnny Cochran. What for? To carry the substantial spare tire around his waste a little faster down the fairway. Coby Bryant, yeah he has to run and jump so I could understand why he would consider doping not saying he has but Phil Mickelson? Losing a civil suit is different than losing a criminal suit. You may be broke, but you are still free. California does carry the death penalty, BTW. So OJ was free and alive after his criminal suit. Lance has spent millions in the courts, suing just about everyone who tries to accuse him of doping. The evidence of burden is on the accuser, a very tough burden in this case. Armstrong had a relationship with Ferrari. Ferrari is known to have supplied doping products. Therefore, Armstrong is a doper. Yes yes, how dare Walsh suspect Armstrong for doping when all he was doing was secretly working with a known doping doctor, and then obfuscating once discovered. Men are animals. Women are animals. The truth will come out eventually. Maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow, but someday it will all be revealed. The issue of doping in sport is really reflection of our society. People cheat, they do bad things. I believe the most glaring example to be Mark Cavendish, he is too good, and no one is that good, especially that young. The UCI will not prosecute these stars until it is on the brink of extinction; and I dont want that to happen to cycling. Wonder what else you are biased about, hmmm? Walsh says repeatedly without equivocation that he believes Armstrong is a doper, and you choose a hotlink that I put in Walsh just talked on the phone as evidence of his bias? All this talk of bias is just ridiculous. Lance, is that you? I have read everything on this subject and just got the latest Walsh one and have another one due next week —. My conclusions? However, almost all sport has doping, but it depends on what you mean by dope. For ex in junior rugby and other sports at the junior level, body building chemicals are openly used, just look at the adverts in the mags. Maybe, but if they are both playing for a Super 14 side they are using boosters of some sort….. However, he does admit that he was biased and cynical by the time Armstrong started winning. Will persecuting Armstrong help the future of the sport? I say no. You have to focus on the younger Cat. There has to be a structural change, and it starts with the parents of these bike racers. We are the products of our environments. External forces contribute small bits to the final individual decision to put that needle in your arm. But dude, red herring. Deductive proof is not a necessary condition for legal proof. Or in other words, working with a known dope doctor would be relevant circumstancial evidence in a court of law. Life has many complicated shades of grey. Corners are occasionally cut—by ALL of us. Who is telling it, who is interpreting it are all part of the game. As what was acceptable if hidden in the past doping transitions to unnaceptable even as it is still hidden there is going to be some friction. Doping does not allow cyclist to cut corners. They still have to do a vast amount of hard training on a year round basis. Doping, like high octane fuel in a dragster, allows maximum performance. A pinto full of rocket fuel will still not be able to compete with a top fule dragster. I am not supporting doping, I am just pointing this out because most people have no idea the amount of training is involved for even cyclists competing on a local level. Tour de France has an entire history of doping sportsmen, an aggressive movement against doping would make the difference, sending the right message is essential in such an initiative. Do sportsmen need fundamental education to understand that? The book is translated in Dutch, but most of the newspapers here in Holland trashed it in their reviews. FBF fighting anyone? I had a fairly good grasp of it the first time I read it. Walsh does good to describe the science at work without being difficult to understand, he spins a good yarn, reviewed it at amazon. Be clean in sport and expect to never make it, no-one will ever know who you are. You will always wonder how good you really could have been. Your life will be one big regret. Or, dope it, and win, and live a life of misery and lies, forever hating and despising yourself. Lie to your wife, your fans, the media, the courts, and me your God. Why did nobody, who responded to this article and supported Armstrong, said sorry? Especially after all the accusations made to David Walsh, a smart guy who should get a statue for terrific journalism. The interview is as long as the book. Many thanks Andy and David for this excellent interview! Neil, frameforum. Thanks so much for this. Keep up the good work NY Velocity. Or something like that. Baseball is a joke when it comes to busting doping. Lance has nice ripples. Shensational journalism. Who transcribed that interview. I hate you all. That gives me an idea for a reality show… Kohl was misquoted, ya think he would start taping his own interviews to avoid that? Armstrong any worse than anybody else? LeMond took a lot of vitamin B back in the day. So did everyone else. Lotsa yellow wee wee…. David Walsh speaks the truth! Lemond was and is a savant. Both he and Pharmstrong know who the better rider is. This is equivalent to: Men are animals. Dogs are animals. Therefore, men are dogs. Dopestrong presented by Madoff Soap Company. He stopped banging Hate Hudson, after he finished up with Cheryl Crowsfeet. Unfortunately, professional sport is so money driven boosting is inevitable. Bye, Barry. Walsh comes off like less of a jerk in this one. Good job, Andy. Would you call Tiger Woods correcting his vision to be far-sighted surgical doping? Love the interview, but we must balance facts with speculation. The choice is yours. Life is a choice, just hope there is no hell. Correction: why did nobody say? Greg Olsen, Colin Prensky, and that Life is better, somehow.