First Islamist Riots, Then Soccer, Now Biking
Have the French figured out how much they suck yet? The rest of the world has.
Congrats to Floyd Landis for keeping the Tour de France throne in American hands.
And a big fat “ptoooey” to those uppity, rude enablers of Islamism in Europe. At least the French do seem to do their best at one thing throughout history……
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
109 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
LOL…..I sometimes wonder if Charles Martel was publicly censured and called “racist” on his return from the Battle of Tours.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 23, 2006 @ 4:33 pm - July 23, 2006
Apart from the fact that the french were right about the Bushco misadventure in Iraq, you may wish to rethink your praise of Landis who had the following exchange with a reporter
(http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/009143.php):
[Landis' cell phone begins ringing:]
–Reporter: Is that Bush?
–Landis (laughing): I doubt it. I’ll hang up.
Comment by Ian — July 23, 2006 @ 5:29 pm - July 23, 2006
Hahah… that’s a good one, Ian.
The French were simply patsies for Saddam because they needed his oil.
Comment by Frank IBC — July 23, 2006 @ 5:54 pm - July 23, 2006
First a guy with one nut, then a guy with one hip. Bwhaha
Comment by ck — July 23, 2006 @ 6:01 pm - July 23, 2006
Ah, well. French croissants just aren’t as good at performance enhancers as American steroids.
Comment by raj — July 23, 2006 @ 6:29 pm - July 23, 2006
Are you suggesting that Landis used steroids, Ian?
Comment by Frank IBC — July 23, 2006 @ 6:42 pm - July 23, 2006
I’ve noticed Raj is the master of the Liberal Tactic — suggest wrongdoing with absolutely no facts to support it.
Kind of like the press asking someone “So when did you stop beating your wife?”
Comment by GayPatriot — July 23, 2006 @ 7:09 pm - July 23, 2006
#7 — Nah, he’s just a typical America-hating lib who feels compelled to piss on anything that might make one feel proud to be an American.
Comment by V the K — July 23, 2006 @ 7:38 pm - July 23, 2006
I don’t believe that the victory of at the event has been turned into a politically polarizing affair. I think we need to learn to pick our battles maybe..
Congrats to him on his win though, didn’t know he had a fake hip
Comment by DarkEyedResolve — July 23, 2006 @ 8:00 pm - July 23, 2006
No fake hip yet, a completely destroyed on. He’ll get a fake one in a couple of weeks.Tough guy.
Comment by ck — July 23, 2006 @ 8:03 pm - July 23, 2006
Has the raj/ian stopped killing and eating puppies yet? Such an unpleasant practice.
Comment by Bobo — July 23, 2006 @ 8:29 pm - July 23, 2006
The Left posters have been getting really honest about their feelings towards anything American lately.
Comment by VinceTN — July 23, 2006 @ 8:55 pm - July 23, 2006
Speaking of people who hate America and all it stands for, ACLU Allies Itself With Fred ‘God Hates Fags’ Phelps
Comment by V the K — July 23, 2006 @ 10:30 pm - July 23, 2006
The French haven’t dominated the Tour in decades. They’ve not been at the forefront of the technology for at least a century – the Italians and Japanese dominate that with perhaps a few exceptions like my fine Le Mond Zurich that is at least assembled in the USA and the great French-made Look pedals that I bought not just for function but also to spite the Francophobes who were renaming French Fries at the time. But the Tour is one of the greatest athletic events in the world so kudos to the French for continuing their fine tradition. And hearty congrats to Landis, one of the many millions of Americans who appears to share my disdain for all things Bush!
Frankly, unless you have actually done a century ride, you haven’t an inkling of what’s required just to finish the Tour let alone win it. BTW, another American, Tyler Hamilton, competed and actually won a stage a couple of years ago after breaking his collarbone in two places near the start of the race. This is not a sport for the typical WATB Republican.
Comment by Ian — July 23, 2006 @ 11:08 pm - July 23, 2006
Why are Americans even in this race? I thought your mouthpieces like O’Reilly and Coulter have called for a complete boycott of France.
Comment by Well? — July 23, 2006 @ 11:14 pm - July 23, 2006
Oh my, aren’t we filled with stereotypes, Raj? Republicans don’t get any exercise, is that what you’re saying?
Comment by Frank IBC — July 23, 2006 @ 11:38 pm - July 23, 2006
Landis, one of the many millions of Americans who appears to share my disdain for all things Bush!
Are you sure you haven’t confused Floyd with Joshua Landis, Raj?
Comment by Frank IBC — July 23, 2006 @ 11:50 pm - July 23, 2006
Anybody here seen “Latter Days”? Here’s a scene from that movie that best sums up this whole blog:
“So God hates fags, huh?”
“And the French…”
“The French?”
“Everyone hates the French.”
So true…
Comment by Jeffrey Williams — July 24, 2006 @ 12:04 am - July 24, 2006
I don’t get why there is such a level of hate towards the French, not like there aren’t dozen of other countries who don’t like us…
Comment by DarkEyedResolve — July 24, 2006 @ 12:23 am - July 24, 2006
#20
Well, when you save someone’s ass and then they fuck you over for oil and money…..
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 24, 2006 @ 12:47 am - July 24, 2006
#19: “So true…”
No, only ignorant WATBs think that. The French and most of the rest of the world were right about Iraq. Bushco was wrong. Here’s what the Speaker of the Iraqi Parliament has to say now:
“The U.S. occupation is butcher’s work under the slogan of democracy and human rights and justice.”
http://tinyurl.com/lduh4
Feel the love.
Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 12:52 am - July 24, 2006
Bruce, Chirac is an embarassment, Villepin worse, but the French also gave us Albert Camus, Marcel Proust and many great writers — plus a few great filmmakers. And n’ouble pas, I was a French major at Williams.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — July 24, 2006 @ 2:10 am - July 24, 2006
#6 Frank IBC — July 23, 2006 @ 6:42 pm – July 23, 2006
Are you suggesting that Landis used steroids, Ian?
Aside from the rather silly fact that your comment–apparently to me–was misdirected to Ian, I pretty much work from the presumption that virtually all high-class and professional athletes take steroids to enhance their performance. So I’m not surprised or disappointed when it’s reported that they do.
Better living through chemistry.
Is Landis using them? I have no idea. Nor do I particularly care, for that matter. However, given the widespread use of steroids in sports, as far as I’m concerned, the burden would be on him to show that he is not.
Comment by raj — July 24, 2006 @ 4:42 am - July 24, 2006
So you, a supposed lawyer, believe that he is guilty until proven innocent?
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 5:32 am - July 24, 2006
#24 Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 5:32 am – July 24, 2006
So you, a supposed lawyer, believe that he is guilty until proven innocent?
Apparently, you are unable to read. No surprise. What I said was, (a)s far as I’m concerned, the burden is on him to show that he is not (using performance-enhancing drugs). (Emphasis added.) Whether or not he carries his burden sufficient to satisfy me in regards my opinion is of no matter in regards either the government or the sport regulatory agencies or you, for that matter.
You are certainly free to believe whatever you want. And support the “athletes’” sponsors, too.
Comment by raj — July 24, 2006 @ 6:20 am - July 24, 2006
#21
“Brought to you by al-NYT! The same reputable paper who brought you award winning Walter Duranty, Jayson Blair and numerous national security secrets.”
“When you need to know national security information and details to help your Jihad, you can count on al-New York Times. We piss in the hole at Church St. & Vesey St. for fun! Our plan is to erect a giant communal Porta-John at the sight. You’ll never find a stronger supporter of international terrorism or a bigger advocate of the Terrorism Bill Of Rights!”
SUBSCRIBE TODAY!!!
***This message brought to you by the DNC, DailyKos, MorOn.org and Friends Clamped Onto George Soros’ cock.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 24, 2006 @ 7:40 am - July 24, 2006
#23
Better living through chemistry.
Nevermind that he’s a Menonite (which opens him up for more ridicule from the compassionate liberals).
It’s an American success story so of course Raj and his fellow team killing fucktards would have a problem with their Neo socialist buddies having their asses handed to them. No. Americans aren’t supposed to succede. That goes against their action line.
There must have been some other reason. Same with elections. They can’t figure out why their sorry asses keep losing, so instead of examining themselves, it must be somebody else’s fault.
Look for liberals to blame Christians, Southerners, the military, voting machines etc. etc. etc. for the failure of their jerk-off buddies (the French). After all, they’re NEVER
responsible for their failures.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 24, 2006 @ 7:47 am - July 24, 2006
Not only can I read, but I am fed up with your sniveling attitude and insults. Exactly where do you get off accusing a man of drug use and then put the burden of proof on him to disprove your own baseless accusation/paranoid fantasy?
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 7:47 am - July 24, 2006
#28 Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 7:47 am – July 24, 2006
Feel free to believe in whatever fantasy land that you wish to believe in. I choose to believe in reality. Apparently you have never heard of induction. As far as I’m concerned, if, indeed, the fellow has never ever used performance-enhancing drugs or techniques, it’s up to him to provide the evidence that he had not. How should he do it? How should I know? Given the lengths that “athletes” have reportedly gone to hide their use of performance-enhancing drugs or techniques.
Better living through chemistry.
Now run along and revel in your fantasies.
Comment by raj — July 24, 2006 @ 8:52 am - July 24, 2006
Have YOU ever heard of libel?
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 8:55 am - July 24, 2006
#27 ThatGayConservative — July 24, 2006 @ 7:47 am – July 24, 2006
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it would not have mattered if had been an American or someone from Kimbuktu. The East Germans (when there was an East Germany) were renowned for using performance enhancing drugs and techniques for their performers in the Olympiads. It was via those reports that I basically determined: prove that you aren’t using them. It was also via reports regarding Jamaican/Canadian Ben Johnson, and (gasp!) American Carl Lewis.
Comment by raj — July 24, 2006 @ 9:03 am - July 24, 2006
#30 Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 8:55 am – July 24, 2006
Have YOU ever heard of libel?
Yes, but apparently you haven’t.
Comment by raj — July 24, 2006 @ 9:05 am - July 24, 2006
Isn’t it funny how Ian accuses Landis of steroid use, then claims Landis is on his side WRT the war in Iraq, then backpedals somewhat on the steroid accusation?
Comment by Frank IBC — July 24, 2006 @ 9:09 am - July 24, 2006
So two athletes (Ben Johnson was disqualified from the 1988 Summer Olympiad) using steroids mean that all athletes use it? Since you’re working from a presumption that, like every other presumption you have ever made, you pulled out of your ass, why should I believe you?
You are a truly sick individual. Why Bruce allows you to comment here is beyond me; he must have the patience of a saint.
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 9:11 am - July 24, 2006
I know enough about what libel is to know that you are guilty of it. You have posted a comment implying that Floyd Landis takes anabolic steroids, and the sources you use to back it up refer to the athletic world in general, accusations against Lance Armstrong and Barry Bonds, and no mention whatsoever of Mr. Landis. Until you come up with something directly implicating Floyd Landis, you have no case.
I sincerely hope that the system of justice in this country does not reach the point where one can be convicted of a crime that has not even been committed.
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 9:26 am - July 24, 2006
#34 Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 9:11 am – July 24, 2006
Poor baby. You have your opinions, and I have mine. Mine are based on inferences based on evidence, yours are apparently based on ideology.
It is no skin off my nose if you want to believe your ideology. I’ll stick with inferences based on evidence.
BTW, what happened to your “libel” bloviation?
Why Bruce allows you to comment here is beyond me; he must have the patience of a saint.
Why don’t you email him and ask him? I have been banned from more than a few right-wing web sites for not kow-towing to the party line. Including the ridiculously-named “FreeRepublic.com” (Rush Lamebrain’s favorite web site), LittleGreenGoofballs, and Jeff Goldstein’s “ProteinWisdom.” I’m quite aware that right wing web sites try to ban people who do not kow-tow to their party line–it’s bad for their advertising revenues, and that’s the bottom line, isn’t it? Why don’t you email GP and ask him why he hasn’t banned me from here. If that is what you really want.
Poor bois. Unable to defend their positions.
Comment by raj — July 24, 2006 @ 9:27 am - July 24, 2006
So what’s your point to hanging out on conservative websites, Ian, other than being an attention-whore?
Comment by Frank IBC — July 24, 2006 @ 9:29 am - July 24, 2006
Poor woods? Are you now trying to mix in French into your smug, condescending prose? And while you were busy making accusations against me that would fit you to a “T” if I were to make them, I did indeed comment on the libel issue. I do not see what defamation of character has to do with ideology.
I’ve been to these websites, and they don’t ban people for disagreeing with them. People get banned for being abusive. “Erik” was banned for threatening to gouge another poster’s eyes out, and “Stephen” similarly went off the deep end and look what happened to him.
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 9:31 am - July 24, 2006
“I’ll stick with inferences based on evidence.”
It’s a funny thing about evidence. Unless it actually exists, it’s kind of useless.
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 9:35 am - July 24, 2006
Ian/raj is a sockpuppet who savors the death of every Ameican soldier and yearns for America’s defeat in any arena. If it disagrees, the burden is on it to prove otherwise.
Comment by Bobo — July 24, 2006 @ 10:02 am - July 24, 2006
#39 Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 9:35 am – July 24, 2006
Lest it escaped your notice, quite frankly your opinion doesn’t mean a whole lot to me.
Yes, as far as I’m concerned, all so-called athletes who make their livings via their “sports” are tainted, and it is up to them to provide evidence that they are not. Why? Because of the money that is in play. Sorry, but them’s the facts. You don’t like it? You want to believe otherwise? I really, really don’t care.
BTW, nice pig-latin Matt.
Comment by raj — July 24, 2006 @ 10:04 am - July 24, 2006
#38 – Actually, I don’t know for sure (Bruce can correct me if wrong) that either “Erik” or “Stephen” were ever banned.
Yes, Bruce does have the patience of a saint.
The only ones I know of that had to be banned would be: GayCowboyBob, Ridor, Reader / QueerPatriot / PussyPatriot. And I can attest to how truly psychotic their abuses were. (The latter was particularly fond of his/her/its sockpuppets… even more than raj/Ian.)
And now folks, what I really came to say… A happier thought…
Is it just some biking thingy, or is Floyd sporting, um, quite a package there?
Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 10:50 am - July 24, 2006
This is interesting…
Yes, as far as I’m concerned, all so-called athletes who make their livings via their “sports” are tainted, and it is up to them to provide evidence that they are not.
Better living through fascism, I suppose.
Eric in Hollywood
Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — July 24, 2006 @ 10:59 am - July 24, 2006
#42- Right on, Calarato!! It IS nice to have another American win this thing, so I’m not really interseted in all the political ramifications. But, WOW, take a gander at the guy’s package! WOO!! HOO!! Mmmm, mmm,mmm.
Comment by Jimbo — July 24, 2006 @ 11:22 am - July 24, 2006
Yes, as far as I’m concerned, all so-called
athletesgays whomake their livingsflaunt their lifestyle via their“sports”“pride parades” aretaintedsleazy, diseased, perverted, pederasts, and it is up to them to provide evidence that they are not.Got bigotry?
Comment by V the K — July 24, 2006 @ 11:32 am - July 24, 2006
In Texas we see a number of bumper stickers with “I believe it, he Bible says it and that settles it” That enlightened view seems to be shared by IanRaj except insert Kos, DU or Al Jazerra for Bible.
Comment by Bobo — July 24, 2006 @ 11:39 am - July 24, 2006
“Speaking of people who hate America and all it stands for, ACLU Allies Itself With Fred ‘God Hates Fags’ Phelps”
Of course they are. Phelps is being anti-military and Bush has criticized him, so naturally, Phelps must be one of the good guys.
Comment by Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 24, 2006 @ 11:43 am - July 24, 2006
Good ol’ ACLU. Want to burn a cross? They’ll come to your defense. Want to display a cross? Fat chance.
Comment by Attmay — July 24, 2006 @ 11:47 am - July 24, 2006
raj (with a small ‘r’), you first implied that he had an edge over the French with steroids because they only used croissants. But then you said the reason you assumed he used steroids was because all athletes do. But by your own words, what you REALLY meant was all AMERICAN athletes use steroids; not the French. So you believe the French are honest and noble sportsmen by default and Americans are cheaters by default, which is why the burden is on Americans to prove otherwise.
Comment by Dalebert (aka Dale in L.A.) — July 24, 2006 @ 11:55 am - July 24, 2006
#42: “Is it just some biking thingy, or is Floyd sporting, um, quite a package there?”
It’s probably an effect of the padded “chamois” in his biking shorts. No doubt such shorts would do wonders for your “package” too. Of course some should never wear Lycra under any circumstances. And no, cyclists don’t wear underwear under those shorts and long distance racers learn to pee while riding.
Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 11:58 am - July 24, 2006
He’s a cheater who uses steroids like all american athletes do, but at the same time a noble soul because of his (alleged) “disdain for all things Bush”.
Go figure…
Comment by Frank IBC — July 24, 2006 @ 12:00 pm - July 24, 2006
long distance racers learn to pee while riding.
Ah, so that’s why you smell funny, Raj. Next time use a condom-catheter.
Comment by Frank IBC — July 24, 2006 @ 12:03 pm - July 24, 2006
Did I miss something with this whole ian/raj thing? I get the distinct impression that the consensus is that ian and raj are the same person.
Just wondering…
Eric in Hollywood
Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — July 24, 2006 @ 12:20 pm - July 24, 2006
#53 – Eric, yes – check out this thread.
Your mileage may vary – but I consider it, if not absolutely “proven”, then at least more likely than the alternative, on present evidence.
Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 12:34 pm - July 24, 2006
#53: “the consensus is that ian and raj are the same person.”
Of course, that same “consensus” seems to feel Bush with his profligate spending, disastrous foreign adventurism, advocacy of legalized low cost immigrant labor, and implementation of Big Brother style government spying on American citizens is somehow still a “conservative.”
Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 12:40 pm - July 24, 2006
#54 cont. -
Or Eric, to put it another way:
It is well proven indeed, if you go by typical Leftist standards of proof. Most Leftist conspiracy ravings being with far less reason or evidence, than what NDT uncovered in the referenced thread.
Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 12:48 pm - July 24, 2006
It’s funny hearing liberals like Raj babble about what supposedly is or is not a true “conservative”.
Comment by Frank IBC — July 24, 2006 @ 12:50 pm - July 24, 2006
Since the consensus is that IanRaj are one and the same, I suggest that one or the other sockpuppets/imaginary persons be banned. Of course, if he/she/it can provide absolutely convincing evidence that RajIan is not one person pretending to be several the the ban could be lifted.
Comment by Bobo — July 24, 2006 @ 12:51 pm - July 24, 2006
#54: Whatever. It keeps you reading our comments in spite of all your protestations to the contrary. LOL!
The fact that neither Bruce nor Dan – with all the information they have at their disposal as the main bloggers here – have weighed in on the subject speaks volumes. If there was real evidence that raj and I were the same person, I doubt they’d continue to let us post our comments. Of course, with all the conservative lemmings having glommed onto the Ian/raj-as-sockpuppets meme, it would be truly embarrassing for these lemmings were the truth to come out. So Dan and Bruce remain silent to protect their conservative friends from being made to look foolish and gullible.
Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 12:56 pm - July 24, 2006
#59 RajIan, it’s not their job to comment either way so their silence means nothing. By your own standard, it’s your job to prove that you are not one person pretending to be several. Your failure to provide any sort proof strongly implies that you have none. Of course, if you submit convincing evidence to back your apparently false identity(s), the matter can be dropped.
The ball is in your court.
Comment by Bobo — July 24, 2006 @ 1:19 pm - July 24, 2006
#60: Frankly, Booboo, I don’t much care what a pathetic little lemming like you cares to believe. I’ll keep posting and no doubt, you’ll keep reading if for no other reason than to look for clues. LOL!
Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 1:50 pm - July 24, 2006
Wow! A three for one from RajIan. Personal attack plus complete refusal to address the issue at hand and a deliberate name misspelling. Now that’s what I call solid evidence regarding the fake identity(s) question. Great response IanRaj but unfortunately the ball is still in your court. You just whiffed.
Comment by Bobo — July 24, 2006 @ 2:13 pm - July 24, 2006
#60 – Indeed.
Bruce and Dan both have MUCH better things to do than worry about the likes of rajIan.
THAT is what speaks volumes.
rajIan, I know you want to be important to them – and us – but, you just aren’t. Sorry.
And if you left (or were banned or whatever), you would not be missed. I know you can’t afford to believe that, but there it is. Sorry again.
Comment by Calarato — July 24, 2006 @ 2:31 pm - July 24, 2006
WOW!
ian/raj/whatever’s little rant remind anyone else of that footage of Andy Dick going drunken apeshit after being caught outside that club in L.A.?
I haven’t seen such a liberal meltdown since Variety reported The Passion grossing over a billion worldwide!
Eric in Hollywood
Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — July 24, 2006 @ 2:31 pm - July 24, 2006
Calarato wrote…
And if you left (or were banned or whatever), you would not be missed.
No! Let him stick around – he’s the 3 year-old we all like to laugh at at family functions.
Eric in Stitches
Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — July 24, 2006 @ 2:33 pm - July 24, 2006
#63: “you would not be missed”
The lady doth protest too much! C’mon clamato, I know you just can’t stop reading my wonderfully insightful comments.
Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 3:31 pm - July 24, 2006
Posted what name?
Comment by Bobo — July 24, 2006 @ 3:58 pm - July 24, 2006
#67: Gawd, Booboo, a three word post and it’s still incomprehensible.
Comment by Ian — July 24, 2006 @ 11:17 pm - July 24, 2006
It’s really amusing the amount of brainpower and bandwidth that is being wasted here in contemplation of whether Ian and I are the same person.
Mir wurst.
Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 8:02 am - July 25, 2006
Oh, and one more thing. Given the silliness of the speculation among some of the nutters here that Ian and I are the same poster, I’ll just chalk it up to their heard mentality: I heard it from another nutter, so I’ll repeat it here.
Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 8:05 am - July 25, 2006
I thought the burden of proof was on the accused, not the accuser, Rajian.
Comment by Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 9:02 am - July 25, 2006
The RajIan denial scheme continues as expected. You haven’t achieved the Greenwald gold standard yet but keep working and you’ll make it with along all of your imaginary friends.
Brat wurst
Comment by BoBo — July 25, 2006 @ 9:38 am - July 25, 2006
#71 Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 9:02 am – July 25, 2006
I thought the burden of proof was on the accused, not the accuser, Raj (truncated)
I suppose that it is taught in third year law school that there is a difference in a trial between burden of proof and burden of moving forward with the evidence. I’m sure that you don’t understand the difference, but, well, there really is one.
BTW, I suppose that it is beyond your ability to recognize that we are not here engaged in a trial. You have your opinion, and I have mine. Isn’t that what BushLeague’s freedom&democracy is all about? I guess not, according to the wingnuts.
Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 10:03 am - July 25, 2006
#72 BoBo — July 25, 2006 @ 9:38 am – July 25, 2006
Good name selection. Say hello to Yogi Bear next time you see him.
BTW, don’t try to mangle any more German. It’s “Bratwurst,” one word. As I’m sure that your buddy fatMatt can tell you, next time he comes to Boston to meet with his buddy Arthur Finkelstein.
Comment by raj — July 25, 2006 @ 10:04 am - July 25, 2006
#74 Sorry IanRaj, I thought that you were bright enough to recognize mocking. I’ll try to dumb things down for you in the future.
BTW (that is short for by the way) apparently you have forgotten that we are only applying the standard that you used earlier regarding athletes and drugs. To paraphrase what you stated in #23, given the widespread reports of RajIan being a noted sockpuppet combo, as far as many of us on this blog are concerned, the burden is on IanRaj to show that it is not a fake and liar.
It must be really unconfortable to be held your own standards. I feel your pain.
Comment by BoBo — July 25, 2006 @ 11:51 am - July 25, 2006
#70: “I’ll just chalk it up to their heard mentality: I heard it from another nutter, so I’ll repeat it here.”
It really does demonstrate in a microcosm how the whole wingnut noise machine operates and how it can shamelessly promote complete fiction. Dan or Bruce could certainly clear things up and one would think they would want to maintain the integrity of their blog by not permitting the fraud that you and I have been accused of committing. Since they have studiously avoided commenting and certainly have not banned either of us, I think that’s pretty strong evidence that they’re certain we are not the same person.
Frankly, if I were going to play identity games here, I would create some gross stereotype of a homosexual wingnut but alas, I’d find it hard to differentiate it from the many such stereoypes who already comment here.
Comment by Ian — July 25, 2006 @ 11:53 am - July 25, 2006
It proves nothing Rajian. I suppose they don’t want to get involved while you hang yourself with your own forked tongue. You have been proven as a hypocrite, and must resort (as usual) to ad hominem attacks.
Comment by Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 12:11 pm - July 25, 2006
#76:
Way to quote yourself, and your own misspelled “heard mentality.” It’s “herd mentality,” since you are so fond of pointing out misspellings of others.
Comment by Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 12:12 pm - July 25, 2006
Dan or Bruce could certainly clear things up and one would think they would want to maintain the integrity of their blog by not permitting the fraud that you and I have been accused of committing.
Why? Because the evidence that you are merely sock-puppet identities isn’t damning enough?
What you’re attempting to do is to lie and spin your way out by appealing to authorities that you don’t respect. You have already made it clear that you don’t accept any of Bruce or Dan’s words as truthful; therefore, your basing your evidence based on their action or inaction is in and of itself fatally flawed.
In short, you said they do nothing but lie; thus, you’ve invalidated their testimony.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 25, 2006 @ 12:24 pm - July 25, 2006
Thanks, NDT, for the link, and for saving me the trouble of having to wade through the deep puddles of bile spewed by Raj/Ian/Sybil/whatever.
Comment by Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 12:32 pm - July 25, 2006
#78: “Way to quote yourself, and your own misspelled “heard mentality.” It’s “herd mentality,” since you are so fond of pointing out misspellings of others.”
You’re kidding right? Did you not read raj’s original post? Everyone see what I meant in #76? I simply could not create an over-the-top stereotype that could hold a candle to this Attmay character. LOL!
Comment by Ian — July 25, 2006 @ 12:37 pm - July 25, 2006
So why don’t you thank Raj for his brilliant post while you’re at it, Raj?
Comment by Frank IBC — July 25, 2006 @ 12:52 pm - July 25, 2006
#79: “You have already made it clear that you don’t accept any of Bruce or Dan’s words as truthful”
Really? Where exactly have I made that clear? The truth is you’re lying again. But what else is new?
You also insult Dan and Bruce by suggesting they would stand idly by and knowingly let their blog be used to perpetrate a fraud. Now I take issue with much of what they have to say but I know they have and continue to put a lot of effort into this blog and I can’t imagine they would permit its basic integrity to be compromised by such a fraud. It’s a simple matter for them to check IP addresses and learn not only that mine is different from raj’s but also that our geographical location is different – I’m in Arizona while I think he’s on the east coast.
At this point, I’m actually enjoying the reaction of the lemmings who post here. I suspect even some of the old-timers are a bit uneasy about how gullible their fellow wingnuts can be. I know my friends are enjoying this amusing but instructive example of wingnut foolishness.
Comment by Ian — July 25, 2006 @ 1:07 pm - July 25, 2006
You also insult Dan and Bruce by suggesting they would stand idly by and knowingly let their blog be used to perpetrate a fraud.
In order for you to successfully perpetrate a fraud, Ian, we would have to be unaware that you and Raj are the same person.
The fact is that we’re not.
GP and GPW are a bit like the bartenders who see the same guy come in every night and try to hit up different people with different stories…..only to get nailed when they slip up.
You are doing the equivalent of saying, “No, I didn’t lie to you…..those bartenders would never stand idly by and let fraud be perpetrated, so I must not be lying….” as the angry crowd advances on you.
And as for the rest of your statements, I’m sure your other friends in the drawer are amused indeed; however, the opinion of a legion of sock puppets, all animated by the same hand, are really of very little concern to us.
Oh, and don’t try to steal the identity of former commentor “Ian S” by claiming to be in Arizona; the differentiation was made very clearly long ago that he and you were two different people.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 25, 2006 @ 2:05 pm - July 25, 2006
If you are in Arizona, then why did “raj” claim one of your quotations as his own?
Comment by Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 2:06 pm - July 25, 2006
#85: He didn’t actually, as he has already fully explained. But since you didn’t get his “heard” pun, I doubt you’d follow the explanation.
Comment by Ian — July 25, 2006 @ 2:27 pm - July 25, 2006
I did not realize “raj” was attempting to make a pun, as I had no evidence that “raj” had a sense of humor.
Comment by Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 5:29 pm - July 25, 2006
And I documented clearly that Raj did claim one of your quotations as his own.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 25, 2006 @ 5:57 pm - July 25, 2006
Most Americans strive to be great. Most hate the idea of being dependant. Being the leader of the free world is hard. Being the best makes you a target for those that are jealous. When exactly would you consider France to be a third world country?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 25, 2006 @ 11:16 pm - July 25, 2006
#85: NDT made an error in punctuation. Raj assumed NDT meant what he wrote and responded accordingly since based on an exact reading of what NDT wrote, the reference was to something raj not I wrote. Raj’s only failing was in assuming NDT was a careful writer. For myself, I find it all wonderfully amusing and instructive in how false right wing memes can become embedded amongst the true believers.
Comment by Ian — July 26, 2006 @ 12:14 am - July 26, 2006
Actually, no, Ian; as I cited in the proof post, the references are specific to comment numbers. Raj himself admits in #42 that he said the quote in question — which came directly, as I pointed out, from a comment labeled yours.
Nice try; however, your sock puppetry is too blatantly obvious. And I see you’ve also given up the fiction that you live in Arizona once I made it clear that your attempting to claim Ian S.’s identity as your own wasn’t going to fly.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 26, 2006 @ 3:26 am - July 26, 2006
#85 Attmay — July 25, 2006 @ 2:06 pm – July 25, 2006
If you are in Arizona, then why did “raj” claim one of your quotations as his own?
Poor jackass. I didn’t claim one of Ian’s quotations as my own. I claimed one of my quotations as my own. The quotation that I claimed as my own was the one that was above NDXXX’s question in the post in issue, not the one below NDXXX’s question. Why did I do that? Because I wrote it
If NDXXX wants to continue asserting that I claimed the quotation after his question as my own, that’s his business. But it isn’t my fault that NDXXX is completely unable to write clearly. Maybe he would like to take some writing lessons.
I’m done on this topic. NDXXX is a well known bloviator and dissembler.
BTW, given the heard mentality around here, one might seriously wonder whether you, Mich_Matt, V the Kow, Calarato, RightWingProf, GP and GPW–among others–are all sockpuppets of one another.
Comment by raj — July 26, 2006 @ 10:10 am - July 26, 2006
#91: “I see you’ve also given up the fiction that you live in Arizona”
I see you are still a consummate liar and reading-challenged dolt.
Comment by Ian — July 26, 2006 @ 10:39 am - July 26, 2006
#74 BoBo — July 25, 2006 @ 11:51 am – July 25, 2006
drugs. To paraphrase what you stated in #23, given the widespread reports of RajIan being a noted sockpuppet combo, as far as many of us on this blog are concerned, the burden is on IanRaj to show that it is not a fake and liar.
This is a joke, right? The issue of whether Landis was or even had been using performance-enhancing is largely within his purview. He could pee into a cup at the end of the race, but the sad fact is that there are performance enhancing regimins that escape detection, and, if one stops using some of them early enough, residuals will have washed out of their bodies. Undetectable.
On the other hand, I don’t know what my IP address is–it’s assigned by my ISP–and I certainly don’t know what Ian’s IP address is–it’s assigned by his ISP. But the webmaster here certainly knows what our IP addresses are, at any point in time that we log on and post comments.
In other words, the information is not within our purview to prove, and, even if we were to provide you with the evidence, you wouldn’t believe it. Apparently you are too ignorant to understand the difference. Ask the webmaster–he can tell you. Why don’t you email the webmaster and demand that he compare our IP addresses while we’ve been posting? Probably because you don’t really care to know.
Back to your picnic basket antics with Yogi.
Obviously, the nutters here are trying to do a “Glenn Greenwald” on Ian and me to try to get us to leave the site so that they can bitch and moan among themselves. Sorry, as far as I’m concerned, it won’t work. Although it is funny watching the nutters flailing, though.
Comment by raj — July 26, 2006 @ 10:43 am - July 26, 2006
Again nothing but ad hominem attacks and outright lies from the Rajian BS machine.
Comment by Attmay — July 26, 2006 @ 11:12 am - July 26, 2006
Additionally, I see that you haven’t given up your “guilty until proven innocent” schtick, have you?
Comment by Attmay — July 26, 2006 @ 11:22 am - July 26, 2006
RajIan
In #25 you state “Whether or not he carries his burden sufficient to satisfy me in regards my opinion is of no matter in regards either the government or the sport regulatory agencies or you, for that matter.”
In #94 you state “even if we were to provide you with the evidence, you wouldn’t believe it. Apparently you are too ignorant to understand the difference.”
I think that you have just described yourself as ignorant. Well done! Probably the most accurate observation you’ve ever made on this blog.
Comment by BoBo — July 26, 2006 @ 11:46 am - July 26, 2006
Too bad, Raj, that your statement is specifically documented, with comment numbers.
On the other hand, I don’t know what my IP address is–it’s assigned by my ISP–and I certainly don’t know what Ian’s IP address is–it’s assigned by his ISP. But the webmaster here certainly knows what our IP addresses are, at any point in time that we log on and post comments.
Unfortunately, though, Raj, there are means of “scrambling” one’s ISP address by going through cloaking sites. Therefore, since you claim that Landis is guilty because there are ways of beating drug test regimens, you are guilty because there are ways of beating ISP tracking.
Furthermore, you’ve already slipped up twice — once, when you stated that Ian’s comment was your own, and second, when you tried to argue that the fact that your ISPs were the same “meant nothing”.
You’re right, you’re done — and you lose.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 26, 2006 @ 12:42 pm - July 26, 2006
Sounds like we need to stick a fork in raj/ian/sybil – he/she/they/it is done. Or overdone, as the case may be.
Poor libtard(s). Three posts and they are 0-3.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — July 26, 2006 @ 1:36 pm - July 26, 2006
Sounds good to me although I think that it’s a good idea to refer to the “twins” as IanRaj , RajIan or something along those lines. Just to remind us of the level of credibility that we’re dealing with.
Comment by BoBo — July 26, 2006 @ 2:03 pm - July 26, 2006
Postiert ohne Kommentar:
Aus Deutsche Welle (per Email-bericht):
Positive Dopingprobe bei Tour-de-France-Sieger Landis
ZÜRICH: Der diesjährige Sieger der Tour de France, Floyd Landis, ist
positiv auf Doping getestet worden. Dies bestätigte sein Schweizer
Rennstall Phonak. Die Dopingprobe, die der Amerikaner nach der 17.
Tour-Etappe abgab, habe einen zu hohen Testosteron-Wert aufgewiesen.
Landis hatte diese Etappe gewonnen. Sollte die so genannte B-Probe
das Ergebnis bestätigen, könnte dem Phonak-Fahrer der Tour-Sieg
aberkannt werden. Der Zweitplatzierte Oscar Pereiro aus Spanien
könnte dann nachträglich zum Gewinner erklärt werden. – Es wäre das
erste Mal, dass ein Sieger der Tour de France tatsächlich des
Dopings überführt würde. Unmittelbar vor dem Start der diesjährigen
Rundfahrt waren die Favoriten Jan Ullrich und Ivan Basso
ausgeschlossen worden, nachdem die spanischen Behörden ihre
Ermittlungen wegen verbotenen Blutdopings vorangetrieben hatten.
Aus dem Spiegel:
DOPING: Tour-Sieger Landis positiv getestet
Die Tour de France 2006 endete wie sie begonnen hatte – mit einem Doping-Skandal der Superlative: Vier Tage nach seinem Triumph in Paris ist Floyd Landis als Dopingsünder enttarnt worden. Dies bestätigte sein Team Phonak.
Die sind leider auf Deutsch, aber ich nehme an, dass der Matt die fuer euch uebersetzen kann.
Comment by raj — July 27, 2006 @ 3:30 pm - July 27, 2006
Guess who was disqualified from Tour de France competition to begin with in Operación Puerto?
Jan Ullrich. A German, no less.
Comment by Attmay — July 27, 2006 @ 4:29 pm - July 27, 2006
But of course, Raj was screaming that this was wrong, that Ullrich shouldn’t automatically be assumed to be guilty, that it was unfair to test him, blah blah blah……LOL.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 27, 2006 @ 6:03 pm - July 27, 2006
So what’s your anti-France, nationalistic response now that Landis is being officially investigated for steroid usage? How easily people on thrones can be toppled.
Comment by Kevin — July 28, 2006 @ 6:15 am - July 28, 2006
#102 Attmay — July 27, 2006 @ 4:29 pm – July 27, 2006
Guess who was disqualified from Tour de France competition to begin with in Operación Puerto?
Jan Ullrich. A German, no less.
Oh, yes, that’s true. I’m not exactly sure how relevant that is to much of anything that I mentioned here, but it’s true. And he was disqualified ab initio, probably never to return.
What is amazing to me is that Americans would get so excited about the idea that a cyclist of American birth would win the Tour de France, while cycling for a Swiss team Phonak–a team that, according to the Spiegel article that I linked to, in the past has been hit by prominent doping scandals (for Matty’s benefit “Das Phonak-Team war in der Vergangenheit schon öfter von prominenten Dopingfällen betroffen, unter anderem durch den ehemaligen Weltmeister Oscar Camenzind und Zeitfahr-Olympiasieger Tyler Hamilton”).
As I said above, I just presume that all high-class athaletes are doping, and so I’m not disappointed to find out when they are. Perhaps it is time to end the charade that sport-regulating concerns can end doping altogether, particularly in high-class, and therefore high-income, sporting activities. Of course, if they did, that would merely trickle down to lower-level sporting activities.
Better living through chemistry.
Comment by raj — July 28, 2006 @ 9:11 am - July 28, 2006
I didn’t bother to read the article from Der Krautrag, (I read English-language news) and I will not make judgements on this issue until the organization makes its decision, and whatever it is, I will respect it.
You, on the other hand, convicted him without any investigation into the matter, which at least he is getting from the organization. You didn’t even need a urine sample. You just knew automatically.
Comment by Attmay — July 28, 2006 @ 1:02 pm - July 28, 2006
#106 Attmay — July 28, 2006 @ 1:02 pm – July 28, 2006
I didn’t bother to read the article from Der Krautrag, (I read English-language news)…
Your comment reminds me of a comment made to us by a British matron (you remember Britain, currently ruled by Bush’s lapdog Tony Blair) on a train somewhere in France: “Americans….they are very keen on themselves.”
Comment by raj — July 29, 2006 @ 7:43 am - July 29, 2006
Typical Eurocentric arrogance from a Kraut-loving, anti-anglosphere pig. Your beloved Deutschland is irrelevant in the 21st century, and, quite frankly, has never been more than an annoyance to real countries. Our country was around decades before Otto von Bismarck tied a bunch of German-speaking provinces together. And the British (the only relevant country in Europe today), whom you also apparently detest, date back even further.
But if they don’t want you as a citizen they can’t be all that bad.
Comment by Attmay — July 29, 2006 @ 3:47 pm - July 29, 2006
#108 Attmay — July 29, 2006 @ 3:47 pm – July 29, 2006
Your beloved Deutschland is irrelevant in the 21st century…
Silly boi. I guess to you the Swiss are relevant. After all, it was a Swiss company, Phonak, for which Landis rode. Not an American company–at least Lance Armstrong rode for the US Postal Service’s team. Although US Postal Service customers might want to know why the USPS were wasting their US customers’ stamp money on a cycling event in–of all places–France.
And not for a German company.
BTW, you seem to have a rather silly idea of what makes a country “relevant” or “irrelevant.” I guess by “relevant” you mean a military power. If so, I will merely remind you that, in the mid and late 19th century, the British Empire was king of the hill. Only a few decades thereafter, the British Empire was bankrupt. Be carefull what you wish for–it may come back to bite your children in their rear ends.
Comment by raj — July 30, 2006 @ 10:01 am - July 30, 2006