WADA do about ... Corrections!

Hi ZENguys, and ZENdears,

Some astute readers have commented on my last post of late August, and I want to correct the record as much as possible.

Thus, comments included that I didn't have anyone on the UCI on my list: I didn't, this is true, but I don't feel that the UCI per se, is to blame for anyone's problems as of this point.

Head of the USADA, is Travis Tygart, not TAGGART (my apologies, Travis: But that error kept me off your radar screen until this comes through - heh heh)

The Equipe, master of the universe as to leaked cycling information, did not exactly do so as is their usual nefarious modus-operandi: in the Floyd Landis case, news was released from the UCI (perhaps because they knew that the Equipe would do its naughty work in a matter of short hours?)...

Pierre Bordry, is either past president of the LNDD, or current president of the LNDD, or past Minister of Sport and Youth... the French government wouldn't want you to be clear on this, and I will try and determine which is paying him his overly-generous salary, sooner or (yawn....) later!

There are some FONT size problems: I try to fix them but there are risks to reopening and re-editing these posts: basta!

Thanks for your input, to my friends that read these...

Courage, mes amis, amies!

........................................................ ZENmud

Tour de France syndrome 2007... part I

ZENers, my apologies for bein' damn silent. My apologies, I want to post this and will have to do the links later... (memory moment!)

My deepest regrets for not providing a nearly 'You were there' type of commentary on this year's Tour de France.

And 'chagrin total' that you are reading something different, perhaps negative, about this Tour, from ZENcentral.

It could have been different, this is true.
It could have been cleaner, also true.

But as far as we know today, of the 189 riders who were designated 'apt' to start their Tour, 2007, only //three// (watch this number change) were controlled 'positive' while on this Tour. Yet four riders left the race, ostensibly due to 'les affaires du dopage'.

One racer, Patrik Sinkowitz from the German T-Mobile team, was controlled positive in early June and announced positive July 18, 2007, was already sidelined from a post-race, severe collision with a spectator, was in the hospital and 'hors combat' before the news fell. T-Mobile stayed in the race.

Alexander Vinokourov, wearing the thorny crown of pre-race favorite, was victim of a fall, severely impairing his chances for “GC” (general category) victory, and, upon winning the Stage 12 time trial in Albi on Saturday, July 21, apparently was tested positive for homologous blood transfusions by the same laboratoire that impugned the 2006 Tour de France Champion, Floyd Landis, on his testosterone test.

//update: Iban Mayo controlled positive for EPO //

Astana, the team for whom “Vino” races, was requested to withdraw from the 2007 test, based on the information provided to it, and to the public by: L'Equipe. Astana did withdraw. Vinokourov is a man without a team.

L'Equipe: aka “The World Cycling PRESS Authorized Source of (Bona Fide) Test Result Leaks” is the national French daily sporting newspaper,. It alone provided the announcement of Vino's positive A Sample test result; this came prematurely, and illegally, on July 24, 2007, through L'Equipe. This came through the long-established fact that L'Equipe is without equal in having sources in at least the French national laboratory: the Laboratoire Nationale du dépistage du dopage, from which it culls and illegally publishes premature and unconfirmed A Sample test results.

That fact, combined with another fact, creates a huge Conflict of Interest. The other fact, is that the paper 'L'Equipe' is owned by Amaury Sport Group, owners/promoters of the Tour de France business.

The paper L'Equipe, being owned by the same group that owns the race, is perenially in violation of the World Anti-doping Agency (WADA) rules concerning 'Results Management' and their International Standards for Laboratories Appendix 'Code of Conduct'. Savour that thought-sequence, as we continue to surmise in the greatest French tradition of insinuation(s)...

Returning to our saga, Vino was the first of //three // controlled racers to be forced out of the competion, based on the positive results from A Sample tests; the second was Cristian Moreni, an Italian who rides for the French team COFIDIS. Third Mayo.

Also prematurely announced through the L'Equipe paper, from leaked, unconfirmed A Sample results, his test for testosterone 'revealed' him as being 'positive'.

COFIDIS happens to be a French team that has long pronounced itself in favor of draconian reprisals against teams that harbour dopers... it was obliged to withdraw based on its own damning attitude announced publically: that Astana should not stay in the Tour after Vino's 'positive'. Falling on its own sword, it nearly instantly announced its departure upon public disemination of this news.

Yet the pièce de resistance was the news-media-tornado that occurred when the Danish Cycling Federation announced, on July 19, 2007, that the current Maillot Jaune, Danish cyclist Michael Rasmussen, had missed at least two unannounced doping controls, which resulted in two warnings (ed: a third warning in an 18-month period would have incurred the equivalent of a confirmed doping test violation: a two-year suspension).

The furor around this incident was inflamed by the constant inuendo and rumour-mongering of L'Equipe and French TV. Added to it were other factors that appeared to augment these charges.

The case was built on a factoid, that the Union de Cyclisme International (UCI) had not received the mandatory quarterly submission of Rasmussen's actual whereabouts; he, as a professional racer, must offer the UCI accurate data concerning his location, so that these unannounced controls are not wild-geese chases, depleting the valuable financial resources of the UCI in their quest for clean sport.

Problem was that his claim of being in Mexico, and being only guilty because the Italian Post system had 'lost his mail', was countered by the submission of Italian reporter Davide Cassani of RAI, that he'd seen Rasmussen in Italy at the same time that the team Rabobank cyclist announced he'd been in Mexico, with his Mexican wife and her family. Further insinuations published by the L'Equipe, proferred evidence that a US-based Mtn Bike racer, accused Rasmussen of requesting his aid in bringing 'doping substances' into Europe in his luggage, under the guise that the box contained some new 'cycling shoes'.

A rumour and a case of lost mail, some leaked A Sample results (actually two: one (Vinokourov: blood transfusions) was the same 'modus operandi' that effectively ended Tyler Hamilton's career; second (Moreni: Testosterone) was the same as Floyd Landis), and ONE verified result (Sinkewitz' June tests based on A Sample, and B Confirmation results), were the nexus for all four to exit the Tour via la petite porte. Two of the known best (Vinokourov and Rasmussen), and Moreni, one of the domestiques (the worker bees of the peleton, who support team leaders, sprinters and climbers with various talents they may bring to a cycling team), while Sinkewitz was reaping the 'joy' from his hospital bed.

Now don't come down on ZENcentral, yet: all ZENmud people are against “doping” by pro athletes for temporary physical and professional advantage (in quotes because the term has expanded from substances (amphetimines, cocaine, etc) to include hormones, steroids, and “blood-packing” (transfusions from one's own stored blood or, from compatible human sources).

What the greater picture of MACRO-ZENism reveals, is that somehow, a very secret link exists, between the French Government, which oversees le Ministèrie de la Santé de la Jeunesse et des Sports (Ministry of Health, Youth and Sport: thus also the Agence Française de la Lutte contre le dopage (AFLD), which directs the LNDD), and Le Tour de France, via the leaking tandem of source provider and reporter (Marc Ressiot of L'Equipe). This exposed link via leaks has direct bearing on the Tour and its outcome.

Stand by, however, because the end of the Tour came about with the succession of Alberto Contador, a young Spanish star who was recently drafted into the Discovery Channel team, and who quickly became the next victim of French insinuendo. Given that this team, directed by Belgian Johan Bruyneel, has won eight of the last nine Tours de France, flames the questions that arose from Contador's association with Manual Saiz, who was forced out of cycling from the esteemed 'Operacion Puerto' case that has cast an evil light on a large number of cyclists and other sporting individuals.

A 2007 Tour, which began with the promulgation and signing of the newly-drafted UCI Charter, and the requisite pre-Tour testing for all 189 riders (all tested negative), ended with the second-best mountain rider (as long as we saw Rasmussen besting most of Contador's efforts, as and when needed) being awarded the prize. A 24-year old vanquished a decimated field of predicted leaders, some who 'fell by the wayside' by injury, others staggering under the race's demands, by imperfect training, improper mental focus or tactical errors.

And veritable bombs were lobbed between the ASO company and the UCI Federation, that will assuredly become the focus of these next two months of ZENtalk. ASO described UCI directors as 'incompetent, or bent to destroy the Tour', while UCI vented about its rôle and its desire NOT to be a (paraphrased) “Dick Pound toy for political use and gain”.

If we are to be assured of a future of cycling, my ZENfriends, and we are talking about the cleanest sport in all sports (3 of 189 of the Best cyclists in the world, my friends: find me 189 tennis players, NFL, NBA, MLB, soccer, track and field, or swimming stars, and we'll compare notes!), what has to happen is a fantastic ZEN experience.

An Epiphany, between those who cry “SCANDAL”, those who promote events, and those who promote the racers themselves: they share a Golden Egg that only they can break.

A Concord, the ZEN Cycling Concorde, if you will, that stipulates in any order you wish, that:

Racers will be clean, through force or voluntary methodologies to be determined, improved or repaced;

The WADA Codes and other Rules documents will be re-drafted to represent the better and best use of financial resources, to increase the burden of proof by laboratories of their honest efforts in following the mandatory and efficient ISO and WADA Standards at all times, with severe institutional and personal penalties accruing to the dangerous aspect of false, or negligent results and results-management, as is required.

The UCI will continue to apply the pressure necessary to change the culture of cycling, offering in its rôle, support to the redrafting of WADA Codes and Rules, and increased vigilance within the 'family' of cycling, the rather in-bred group of former cyclists that create the mechanics, the coaches, the medical and therapeutic staffs, the directors sportif, media announcers and cycling products sponsors or sales.

The UCI will re-consider its ProTOUR concept, and refine and revise with current membership how to insure licensing fees and Team promotions are to be objectively reformed and reviewed, in liaison with...

The major and minor event sponsors, from the ASO to the other Grand Tour directors, who all must continue to prepare in harmony with the UCI the proper means of promoting the sport and the races that define who The Best of The Rest may be, from tomorrow and the tomorrows to come.

Little time remains, and ZEN is going to publish here, and wherever else he can, the ideas that spring from an 'outside the box' mentality, or maybe...

An OUTSIDE THE PIE point-of-view.

Because even as the World of Cycling exists in its glory and history, cyclists earn nearly minimum wage, unless they are an Undestroyed Hero in a cycling world gone mad.


COURAGE ...

ç*””*”*”*ç*””* ZENmud *””*ç*”*”*””*ç

WADA do about Christian PRudhomme?

WADA do about Christian PRudhomme?

(quoi faire avec Christian PRudhomme?)

Encore une très mauvaise exemplaire de l'écriture de ZENmud en français, pour mes ami(e)s français(es), mes lecteurs et lectrices...

Car je voudrais essayer de vous convaincre, que la malaise qui tourne le monde du cyclisme, c'est une maladie à la française... et en tapant ceci dans mon 'français cowboy', vous pourriez bien comprendre que j'habite pas loin de vous tous, et j'admire le Tour de France, en sachant qu'il n y a pas aucune autre évent sportif, sur notre belle planète, qu'est digne d'en comparer.

Récemment, la direction dudit Tour a été confié à M. Christian PRudhomme, un journalist qui a ...

(mais t'as vu que j'ai tapé 'PR'-udhomme? Ben ouais! Car il était en journalisme, avec beaucoup de PR expérience ('Public Relations' à l'anglais))

... un journaliste qui a écrit beaucoup de choses concernant le Tour, autant de ses gloires comme ses plaies ouvertes.

Mais comment se passe-t-il, que ce Monsieur aux commandes de 'notre' navire de sport, ne voit-il pas les roches devant son proue? Et lui, en navigant notre navire de sport, veut-il pas les circumnaviguer? Veut-il nous détruire, les amateurs de ce sport, qui en fin du compte vont l'aider à gagner pas mal de salaire?

Je vous demande touts et toutes, d'y reflêchir longtemps.

Car PRudhomme exige ce rendement des comptes, par Bjarne Riis, ancien vainqueur du Tour de France 1996. Riis, qui a finalement su comment soulager son âme, en parlant de sa victoire du Tour et ses prises de dopage, notamment l'EPO.

Oui, Riis avait tort de le faire.
Oui, Riis nous a nié de sa participation.
Oui, Riis a été director sportif “ aux yeux fermées ”, évidement.

Mais a-t-on oublié déjà, nos douleurs en attendant les avoues de Richard Virenque, le 'chou-chou' de tous les français(es)? Et admettons-nous que le désir de voir un Tour enfin 'à l'eau claire' est devenu très possible, si on reste en concert ensemble: pêcher, c'est humain ; pardonner, c'est même plus humain, car on a tous besoin d'être soulagé de nos douleurs de temps en temps!

Mais regardons ses paroles, de Monsieur le Tour:

«Bjarne Riis l'a dit lui-même, il n'est pas digne d'avoir gagné le Tour de France parce qu'il a triché. [.....] Il a souillé le Tour .On chassera de notre mémoire cette montée de Hautacam. Ce n'était donc pas possible.» (l'Equipe)

Ce n'est pas à vous, M. PRudhomme, de faire quelque chose de Sovietique avec nos mémoires ! A qui voulez-vous nous passer nos souvenirs forts des années 90 ? Vers Jan Ullrich? Richard Virenque? Laurent Dufaux? Le moins qu'on puisse dire, c'est que Dufaux mérite plus que les autres, car dès qu'ils ont été pris, Laurent est le seule qui a avoué sur-le-champ, quoi!

Je vais partager avec vous tous, une idée que m'est écoeuré... C'est a dire que le Tour doit rompre tout liaison avec le Laboratoire national du dépistage du dopage, car c'est en passant des heures en suivant le Tour de Floyd et USADA, qu'on a appris le lassitude, et le négligence, qui règnent ensemble sous le tutellage de M le Directeur Professeur de Ceaurriz, qui préfère frimer avec Dick Pound et ses chefs au Ministre de la Jeunesse et du Sport, pour le gouvernement français.

Et notez-vous bien, mes ami(e)s : votre journal du sport, l'Equipe - n'a JAMAIS écrit quoi que ce soit, sur l'état grave de votre Labo français, le LNDD... ils le soutiennent même dans la lumière du litige Landis, dans la Californie...

Non, non, Christian, essaies-toi de te garder ta langue, et tes mauvaises pensées sous couvert ! Tu n'es plus le journaliste qui provoquera de la RAGE avec tes paroles insensées !

Laissons-nous voir comment et quand des autres parmi les équipes, les directeurs sportifs, les ex-racers aux micros, laissons-nous les entendre, pendant ils font le vide, cherchant les paroles pour dire à leurs propres enfants et femmes, leurs familles, comment ils ont 'tous' triché...

Faisant le lessive sera la meilleure chose pour ce sport que j'aime même plus que vous, évidemment!

Votre bloggeur humble...

ç*””*”*”*ç*””* ZENmud *””*ç*”*”*””*ç

FLOYDING FRENZY - who is COFRAC???

ZENistas know that the case against Floyd Landis rests on evidence accumulated by the Laboratoire national du dépistage du dopage (LNDD), a public French institution who maintains no evident public website, and which is spoken of in the past tense at the French Ministry for Youth and Sport website.

Wada??? :-)

Now we have heard recently that their LNDD facility has been audited by COFRAC, as this bit (at TrustbutVerify Monday Roundup, from a link to 7Sur7 in Belgium:

The second was performed by COFRAC, a certifying organization which audits the laboratory at Châtenay-Malabry every year to provide its certification.


Go to the website of COFRAC (parlez-vous??), there's a typical search square in the top yellow bar. Type in ° LNDD ° (only the initials).

You'll find three PDF documents: one is entered twice, and they are the "2002 Letter", of general information, such as this gem:

"The recent accreditation of the National Laboratory for Anti-dopage Testing (LNDD, as we know) of Chatenay-Malabry, which performs the testing on the Tour de France, is a good example." (of what COFRAC does, one presumes: translation by ZENmud himself).

Also is a 2001 Annual Report, which included this bombshell:

"With regard to health we should also mention the accreditation of the National Doping Case-finding Laboratory (LNDD) at Châtenay-Malabry for rapid analysis and confirmation of the presence of doping agents. This laboratory, referenced by the International Olympic Committee (CIO), is very active, owing to an increasing number of requests from the world of sport..."

ZENmud is suggesting, faithful readers, that COFRAC has no searchable data on the LNDD, which we have been assured is breathtakingly ahead of the scientific curve, able to develop strong new tests in a single bound! In an hour of time on this website, I find (famous last words?) evidence of 'testing request paperwork' but no archive (same word in FR) in which they publicly post the required data.

But the French don't seem to update their governmental websites: anyone from the French Ministrie du Jeunesse et Sport: please write to the ZENster! s'il vous plaît, RSVP avec les liens souhaités!!

Show us transparency, les gars ("you guys!")!

ç*””*”*”*ç*””* ZENmud *””*ç*”*”*””*ç

Que faire avec LNDD? // WADA do about LNDD???

e vais faire mon deuxième post en français pour mon blog, pour mes lectures et lectrices francophones, qu'est – comme on peut le voir – déjà rédigé en anglais.

Je l'écrirai car le but de mes paroles est de mettre en evidence les comportements des dirigeants et staff du Laboratoire nationale du dépistage du dopage (LNDD), des faits concernant 'leur cas' contre Floyd Landis, et bien cachés des lecteurs de la presse myopique de France.

[Moi? Je suis ZENmud – soyez les bienvenu(e)s – soyez “ relaxe ” ; et je vais prier de m'excuser de mon acccent français un peu 'cowboy'... venant du Colorado... ]

Pour quelle raison n'est-il pas possible de lire, en France ou en Suisse, et dans le monde entier, comment le LNDD a réagi la dimanche 22 avril, 2007? Pourquoi était-il nécéssaire, contre toute réglementation de l'AMA, d'exclure les deux experts de Landis, pourtant mandaté d'y participer et témoigner du bon déroulement de ces testes 'supplémentaires', ce dimanche-là?

Et en plus! On vient de savoir que le Labo LNDD sont dans le boue avec des rapportages à propos l'éffacement des disques durs des ordinateurs qu'ont stocké l'information et contenus crus du dossier de Landis! Du JAMAIS vu dans le monde de lutte anti-dopage...

Pour quelle raison, chères lectrices, chers lecteurs, a-t-il été nécéssaire d'accepter que les représentatifs omniprésents de l'USADA (l'Agence des Etats-unies d'anti-dopage), soit légale, soit scientifique, pour ces tests, pendant que les experts de Landis étaient exclus, évidemment, du dernier jour de ces tests?

Pour quelle raison encore , mes amies, mes amis, n'est-il pas dégueulasse à savoir que, pour le N-ième fois dans l'histoire courante des 'incidents anti-dopage', que le très influent journal sportif et français, l'Equipe, a réçu comme fuits, et contre le CODE d'AMA concernant le confidentialité, ces résultats concernant VOTRE vainqueur du dernier Tour de France, Floyd Landis? Et contre toute réglementation d e ce CODE, et en plus le “Code of Conduct” pour les staffs des laboratoires?

Ce dernier a été établi précisement pour empêcher ces laboratoires de permiter ces fuites, ces resultats précoces? Ces laboratoires, en tête du queue le LNDD, qui comme ses confrères sont tous Signatoires du CODE d'AMA, et qui ont un grand résponsibilité concernant les droits des athlètes? Quelle mobile est lié à ces fuites repétitives quasiment permit par l'AMA, qui fait rien les concernant, malgré les preuves, les 'confessions', et le conflit d'interêt entre l'Equipe et l'Amaury Sports Organisation (ASO), un société français qu'est propriétor de l'Equipe ET le Tour de France?

Mais? Ca vous concerne pas?

Je suis triste, moi, de l'entendre...

Par des paroles de l'expert américain Paul Scott, anciènnement directeur des services clients du laboratoire de l'UCLA (Uni. de la Californie en Los Angèles):

“ Dans mes années au labo de l'UCLA, je n'ai jamais vu des choses pareiles comme je les ai vécu au LNDD hier [ndlr: 22 avril 2007]. Des limitations sur Simon Davis (un expert du testing 'Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry', aussi selectionné comme observateur par Landis) et moi-même ont démontré un manque d'objectivité dans ce processus, autant que c'est montré l'interet de l'USADA de controller et limiter nos observations du 'retesting' est en tout, c'est qu'un examplaire d'un des plus énormes problèmes dans la science fondamentale d'anti-dopage que j'ai jamais vécu. [Traduction par ZENmud Language Srevices] ”

Comment était-il que vous n'avez pas lu ces phrases dans l'article de l'Equipe, ce dimanche-là, ou le lundi d'après?

Revenons aux choses sérieuses concernant le toujours-vainqueur du dernier Tour de France, et ses droits civiques, autants valides dans cette affaire que dans un litige d'un quelquonque Tribunal legal. En donnant le feu vert aux tests supplementaires des échantillons 'B' du coureur de Pennsylvanie, le panel arbitrationel a tranché l'utilité de ces 'retests' comme 'étude longitudinal du coureur' au lieu de les recevoir comme un “ Adverse analytical finding ”, ou 'AAF'. C'est à dire qu'on ne peut plus inculper Landis à cause des 'preuves' tardives, accumulée derrière les portes fermés et veillés par VOS policiers, évidement...

(Ou ai-je tort? Quelqu'un du labo, peut m'appeler n'importe quand!)

Il faut bien retenir comme fait, que la question à propos l'admissibilité des resultats de ces tests est une question legale, toujours devant le panel d'arbitration ; soit ils seraient admis, soit ils seraient exclus. Or, on peut imaginer, suite à des fuites, suite à des exclusions perpétré par le staff du LNDD contre ces experts mandatés par Landis, et le laisser-passer donné aux experts et jurists de l'USADA, qu'il y a quelque chose qui cloche dans le monde de la lutte anti-dopage en France.

Y-auront-il des langues mauvaises françaises, que diraient que LNDD 'est mondialement respecté' et donc ces allegations de Landis n'ont pas basé en aucune fondation juste ?

Ont-ils oublié, les françaises et français, ou n'ont ils jamais étaient informé, que le LNDD a été le sujet des lettres des hautes fonctionaires représentants des deux grands Fédérations sportives olympiques, suite à “ L'Affaire Armstrong ” où Lance a été mis dans le collaméteur grâce aux tests et fuites (encore merci à l'Equipe !) geré aux niveaux les plus hauts du LNDD? Que l'AMA s'est mise à balailler touts ces concerns légitimes sous le tapis? Regardons cette photo, montrante Professeur De Ceaurriz at M. Lamour, Ministre de la Jeunesse et Sports

Faut-il que je vous rappele encore, que l'UCI a publié un rapport substantif (en anglais), à plus que 120 pages, montrent les éfforts malsains prises entre l'AMA et le LNDD, par le très connu avocat néerlandais M. Vrijman, avec des faits grossiers donnant une très mauvaise impression du professionalism de ce labo français.

Venant des Etats-unies, mes frères, mes soeurs, je me bat pas contre vous...

Ayant vècu ces derniers dix ans parmi vous, en suisse romande, et en aimant ces paysages plein de paysannes, des vignerons, de la terre : ce sont ces terroirs que font sortir des coureurs qui vous adorez, qu'ensemble ils vous font rever, et alors cette magique me touche, moi aussi.

Je me bat, je vous encourage, comme j'éssaiais ces derniers quatres ans de convaincre mes concitoyennes et concitoyens américain(e)s, de vous lever en haut, et ne pas rester persuadés que votre journal l'Equipe, qui vola et volera l'information confidentielle, qui viola et violera les droits des athlètes, n'a pas publié tout le verité.

Tout ces athlètes ont besoin, et ont le droit, de savoir que le système les concernant va protèger leurs droits, pour que les 'convictions' de dopage ne trainnent derrier eux les sportifs et sportives innocent(e)s.

Après le 14 mai, date fixé pour le processus Landis devant ce panel d'arbitration, commencera quelques semaines de reflexion entre les avocats-juges de l'arbitration. Parmi vous, je reconnais que vous restez persuadés, grâce à l'Equipe, que Landis est autant 'culpable' qu'était Virenque ou, comme beaucoup parmi vous penser toujours, M. Armstrong.

Mais en lisant le CODE, le Standard international des laboratoires (ISL), le Standard international de testing (IST), avec ce “ Code de conduit ” offert exactement pour protégér tous les athlètes des fuites d'information par bias des inconnus payé par l'Equipe pour ce faire...

Moi, ZENmud, je serais un des plus décus si Floyd est rendu coupable, “ accablé ” par ces tests et analyses mal-administrés par des incompétents recherchers qui préfèrent tous et toutes de NE PAS faire leur boulôt, qui ont peut-être un certain nationalism dans leurs point de vu?

Est-ce plus que possible que le LNDD sera sanctionné après les fuites de cette arbitration ?

Bien sûr !

Est-ce possible que, pour ce prochain Tour de France, le Ministre du Sport aura besoin d'engager un autre laboratoire accredité par l'AMA, pour effectuer les testes des cyclists du prochain Tour de France?

C'est possible...

Ce, je sais bien : si Floyd Landis est inculpé sur l'évidence présenté par le LNDD, pendant que l'évidence contre le LNDD est MILLE fois plus acablant, l'injustice rendu se servira d'enterriner le Tour de France.

Là, vous pouvez vous rassurer, ZENmud vous a offert de la verité.

Le verité vous accueillerait, un jour...

COURAGE les français, et françaises!

ç*””*”*”*ç*””* ZENmud *””*ç*”*”*””*ç

WADA do about L'EQUIPE?? BOYCOTT!!!

ZENfriends:

There comes a time when the people of a country must rise against the oppression...

Doesn't sound like we're talking about a Sports-newspaper? Well, in France the tradition to take to the streets is omnipresent, and with the latest scandal-ridden spew published by L'Equipe, the French journal that was the original sponsoring paper behind the Tour de France, the farce continues...

Floyd Landis, valiant and memorable victor of the 2006 Tour de France, has been spared no pain in the on-going witch-hunt produced by the following listed entities:

LNDD: the French Laboratoire nationale du dépistage du dopage;

WADA: the World Anti-Doping Agency;

USADA: the United States Anti-Doping Agency;

L'EQUIPE: French sporting journal.

My various in-depth articles have described in depth how each of these agents has individually failed to officiate over any process of drug-testing, based on what is happening to Floyd Landis.

See:

Part One: WADA do about Floyd???

Part Two: WADA do about Floyd???

Part Three: WADA do about Floyd???

As well as these other subsequent, sequentially-listed articles:

FLOYD GOES FREE under the Pound Doctrine (March 7, 2007)

How not to Laugh with Floyd... Landis (March 8, 2007)

WADA do about WADA? (March 21, 2007)

WADA do about the (Landis) Chain of Evidence? (March 21, 2007)

Pound's new CRUSADE against justice in SPORT (March 22, 2007)

WADA do about Strict Liability... (April 5, 2007)

WADA do about USADA??? (April 13, 2007)


WADA has failed, the LNDD has failed, and the USADA also has; in its quest for success, the US taxpayer-financed Organization, has failed to protect the rights of a falsely-accused (so this legally-trained author believes) cyclist/athlete.

The ongoing case, slated for a hearing in two weeks, on May 14th, took a bizarre twist with the request by USADA for further 'B Sample' testing of remaining Landis urine samples, using IRMS technology designed to discern exogenous testosterone.
(Jacques de Ceaurriz, director of LNDD, Jean-François Lamour, and Colette Besson, president of CA; photo from French Gov't)

Any OBJECTIVE person may think, that with a Laboratory under the gun for past ... well 'shoddy' is the most scientific term I can think of... past shoddy work, with numerous errors at hand, well: that the USADA would have a compromise venue, another laboratory possessing a reputation of total integrity, to perform these 'longitudinal' studies, which could serve to allow a graphic display of Landis' naturally fluctuating Testosterone levels.

Didn't happen that way.

OH! Did I forget to mention, that the French l'Equipe has leaked each very prominent rider's result produced by LNDD? In every case presented to the Lab, in contravention (as to the Lab) of a WADA 'Code of Conduct', which places the strictest confidence on the Lab?

Here's what Netherlands attorney Emile Vrijman said about L'Equipe, writing about its collusion in the Lance Armstrong fiasco of 2005:

The investigator does not know how the research reports of the LNDD came into the possession of Mr. Ressiot, the journalist of L’Equipe. These reports however, must have been provided either by the LNDD, the Ministry or WADA, as WADA and the Ministry had received copies of reports drafted and sent by the LNDD. The investigator regrets the lack of cooperation of these three bodies. It is clear that only a thorough investigation within each of them might find the answer to this important question, that affects the confidence that athletes, ADO’s and the public are entitled to have in these bodies. (UCI Vrijman report, p.121: para 5.1)

So when l'Equipe published Monday (in FR), its most recent leak on the Landis case, its article was totally slanted towards erasing the memory of Landis' (as well as Lance Armstrong's) accusations of malfeasance:

"Floyd Landis, qui s'est évertué depuis plusieurs mois à décrédibiliser le laboratoire français, aura bien du mal, cette fois-ci, à user de cet argument : les nouvelles analyses, effectuées la semaine dernière et clôturées ce week-end, ont été réalisées en présence de deux experts désignés par le coureur américain, et de deux représentants de l'USADA."

[Floyd Landis, who has for several months lost all virtue in trying to discredit the LNDD, will have some illness, this time, to use the same argument again: these new analyses, which took place last week and finalized this last weekend, were undertaken in the presence of two experts designated by the American racer, and two representatives of the USADA.]

The article claimed that Landis' experts, as called-for in the WADA and USADA regulations, were to be allowed full and complete access to all aspects of the testing...

That is not what Floyd's named experts are claiming.

IF
... the world depends on one journalistic, European voice, for the source of the most important information from the world of cycling, that source IS the French l'Equipe;

IF
... the voice of that paper, its authority, its staff, is rank with the festering wounds of losing circulation, odoriferous with the pus of leaks, incapable of registering right from wrong, whether by potentially paying for information or providing a government sponsored and sanctioned violation of the WADA CODE and the ISL Code of Ethics;

IF
... the accusing French laboratoire in which Floyd Landis has been 'found abnormal in ratio of Testosterone to Epitestosterone', has failed in prior occasions to uphold standards, the failure of which is potentially a violation;


Then the boycott of l'Equipe should be organized, its reporter Ressiot should be dismissed, as a call to the sensibilizing of the sport to the science that is not as far into the cutting-edge as certain Pounds, or de Ceaurriz' (Director of the LNDD) might have indicated.

And the implementation of the investigation that would decide on a sudden, necessary dis-accreditation of the French LNDD lab should be initiated by WADA, as requested already by two Olympic Federations, the President of the ASOIF, and the President, IOC Athletes Commission, whose letter was a forceful but neglected request to WADA to rectify the errors of LNDD.

Please consider:

Ending Floyd's career is only justifiable if he was doping.

Ending the careers of reporters who buy or repeatedly acquire leaked confidential (think of YOUR doctor's records?!!) information, and their associated 'Confidential info Dealers/Leakers located variously in French governmental divisions, or in world-renowned Intergovernmental or international non-governmental organizations (WADA, USADA or UCI), is a much more noble goal.

Ending ambiguity, as seen in many articles of WADA's several controlling documents, is also the worthiest task ahead, for parties that represent the falsely, or 'inacurately' accused,such as the Alan Baxters of the world, or Floyd Landis.


When the Police need to be policed by those who are 'protected', then the wobbling imbalance may be too gone, too radically far to re-direct.

WADA already has signs of Roid-rage and overexertion, as directed now by Dick Pound, and (if rumours are true) to be directed by the French Minister of Sport Jean-François Lamour after November 2007.

Due to its haste to install itself as the top-pissing wolf in the Sports Forest... its future is now cast in doubt, as Machiavellian aspects, similar to the Bush-invasion of Iraq, now are riding Floyd Landis into a clear contest of evidence, of will and political support.

Floyd needs your objective and clear opinions.


COURAGE, Floyd - Champion of the Tour de France 2006

ç*””*”*”*ç*””* ZENmud *””*ç*”*”*””*ç

WADA do about USADA???

Hello ZENers: a post without fun fotoz and graphix, mostly fact-based!
Starting with the address you should use...

http://www.usada.org/contact/ (I wrote to 'Media') :-)

...if you want to contact USADA, after reading this:

Hello USADA,

As one involved in extensive reportage about WADA, the Tour de France, the French governmental laboratory (LNDD) and the Floyd Landis case, I would respectfully request answers to the following questions, by someone familiar with the Floyd Landis case (Mr Tygart, if he's available, would be perfect).

My Questions:

1. In the Landis case, either anomalous and irregular testing at LNDD, or theoretical mis-application of 'masking agents' on Floyd's part, would seem to be the only two plausible sources of the one 'positive' test that LNDD produced.

Yet USADA has systemically disallowed Landis' attorneys' requests for information, while seeking extensive extraneous data from Landis: why does it seem that you are favouring procedurally the French LNDD over the American Athlete?

2. There is not one WADA CODE provision that calls for 'B Sample re-testing': what legal authority at USADA allows for the circumvention of WADA rules and CODE, to which USADA is a Signatory?

3. Would Mr Tygart be willing to allow the press to examine any telephone call-list from his office, to WADA, arbitrators, LNDD, the French Ministry of Sport, or any individual official of those organizations (naming Dick Pound, Professeur De Ceaurriz, amongst others), for the purposes of establishing illegal 'ex parte' communications regarding the Landis case?

4. On what legal basis or grounds (article of Hiltzik, LA Times, Apr 12 2007) is USADA comfortable with LNDD performing NON-blind 'testing' of one rider: Landis, when his identifiable samples relative to this case may, if again 'tested' negative, would likely provoke LNDD to face a process of dis-accreditation on grounds of:

a) illegal testing (requested illegally by USADA) no matter what the result;

b) improper testing and diffusion of confidential information (if new and illegal 'tests' are negative for the seven previously negative Samples);

c) if 'validation' of LNDD prior results (one positive) are 'substantiated' through the bias of LNDD being allowed, without independent corroboration, to perform, against the WADA CODE (of which USADA, LNDD and UCI are Signatories), these non-blind tests?

5. In the Hiltzik article, the follow quote appears:

"USADA wishes to subject the samples to an ostensibly more rigorous test than had been done."
Question: is an "ostensibly more rigorous test" implying the acknowledged failure of LNDD to perform according to the WADA CODE, and ISL/IST standards?

Or is the implication that a newly-promulgated test is available?
IF the latter, is that test already certified through the adoption by more than two WADA-accredited laboratories, as set forth in WADA Rules and Regulations?
If THAT is true, is the entire proposed re-testing procedure yet another violation of the WADA CODE, of which the USADA is a Signatory?

6. If requested by Mr. Landis, is the USADA willing to have the CAS/TAS give an 'advisory opinion' prior to May 14th, as to the presumed legality that USADA has adjured regarding these extraordinarily unprecedented requests made in the Landis case?

I have posted these questions on my blog, and am anxiously awaiting your replies: I have sent a copy of this email to various, concerned US citizens.

Thank you in advance for your replies, I will respect your decision whether or not you would choose to allow me to post them on my blog.

[Sincerely, Moi]

COURAGE, friends of Floyd!

ç*”*”*””*ç”*”* ZENmud ”*””*ç*”*”*””*ç