The Smail's kid picks his nose! You'll get nothing Malmo and LIKE IT! -- --------- Original Message ---------
DATE: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 20:25:07 From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Richard McCann'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"'T&FMail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "'Martin J. Dixon'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Are you freakin nuts or what? > >1) The B Kunneth post does NOT say anything about banishment without a >hearing. FAILED > >2) The Jonas Mureika post: You've spliced to posts together, so who can >tell who posted what or in what context? WHO KNOWS? So far, what you >posted tonight doesn't prove anything. In fact, it appears that Jonas is >saying that it is YOU WHO SAID something about guilt and no hearings, >which makes your tautalogical lunacy even more difficult to decipher. > >Given your record of mendacity here, you're going to have to do better. >If you can find Jonas' original post and put it up UNREDACTED, the hours >you've wasted might show for once you can tell the truth. > >I don't suspect that your are unable to show us one post where someone >has said that athletes should be banned WITHOUT a hearing. > >WELL, WE'RE WAITING? -Judge Smails > >malmo > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 7:21 PM >To: T&FMail List >Cc: Martin J. Dixon; George Malley >Subject: Re: Proof positive.... > > >At 05:20 PM 10/29/2003 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote: >>Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 13:19:19 -0500 >>From: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Subject: Re: t-and-f: Kelli White & narcolepsy >> >>"There have been innumerable calls for athletes to be banned >>immediately upon certification of the B test, WITHOUT a hearing." >> >>Absolute nonsense. Totally with malmo here. Show me the exact words in >>this thread where I said that. And show me one of the "numerous" >>messages you refer to where it was said by anyone. Laughing at a >>ludicrous defence and calling for someone's head without due process >>are 2 completely different things. I've engaged in the former but >>certainly not in the latter. Can't think of anyone who has. > >Below is but two examples of statement made here, in this thread no >less, >that athletes should be banned WITHOUT a hearing..... > >RMc > > > >Re: t-and-f: Kelli White & narcolepsy > >From: B. Kunnath >Subject: Re: t-and-f: Kelli White & narcolepsy >Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:06:37 +0000 > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >-------- > >This whole drug debate is like flogging a dead horse. > > People on drugs find ways (and sympathizers) to get off the charges. >People who arent on drugs are susupected of doping, rightly or wrongly. > > Remember, this is their JOB. Its not a game or a hobby. > > Think for a second that you are in the World Champs. Would you risk >not >putting down every single pill your popping from Aspirin to modafinil? >Esp >if you had been busted once before? Yes even soy just in case they >suspect >you off having too much protein! I know I would, I'd have too much to >lose...like my paycheck. > > Its got to be clean cut: if you're busted, like White, Jerome Young >etc, >you've got to go. NO EXCUSES, NO SYMPATHY. > > If you're not, play on until you get caught. > > And if they havent been caught its absolutely meaningless to come here >or >anywhere else spreading rumors about it. Its a waste of time. Why? >Because >its hard enough getting a conviction. > >By the way, who was the last athlete to get busted and admit to it? > >Finally, if watching grown men getting into a hissy fit is your idea of >entertainment, Im sure Drummond will be around to keep you happy. > >bob > >Re: t-and-f: Kelli White & narcolepsy > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >-------- > >From: Jonas Mureika >Subject: Re: t-and-f: Kelli White & narcolepsy >Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:23:29 -0700 > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >-------- > >On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Richard McCann wrote: > > > There's a reason for the statement "innocent until proven guilty": > >... in a court of law! *That* is the real application of this statement >(and even that backfires, or the letters OJ wouldn't resonate in our >minds). > >This point aside, however, they *are* guilty of having a substance in >their system which is not supposed to be there according to the rules of >competition. > > > Your statement that if someone is "busted" then they are guilty, >with > NO hearings or procedures to determine if (1) the testing >procedures > was faulty (i.e., false positives, which are extremely >common in > medical testing) > >Don't forget that there are *two* samples which are tested. This >redundancy is to reduce the chance of false positives. It does not >eliminate them, but it does reduce the probability of an erroneous >result. > > > Second, no one, I repeat, NO ONE, is able to record absolutely every >event > or influence in their life. For example, I suspect that ALL of >us have > mistakes in our tax returns, ... > >A more appropriate tax analogy: suppose we were required to file on >January 1st, and on Dec 31st you won the lottery. If you fail to claim >this income on your return, then it's probably not an accident. > >When an athlete has taken medication immediately prior to running -- and >the medication has *enabled* the athlete to compete in lieu of >succumbing to their medical condition -- you have to question how they >could possibly forget to note it on the testing form. > > > You're implying that White should have gone so far as record > >absolutely everything that she ingested--where does she make the > >cutoff as to what to report? She may not have realized that the drug > >had some type of stimulant. > > >See my comment above. Also, how can something that combats narcolepsy >*not* be a stimulant? It certainly isn't a depressant. Some claim that >modafinil is this a class of wonder-drug termed "eugeroic", but a quick >check of the standard journals (JAMA, NEJM) and the National Library of >Medicine/NIH reveals *no* such term in the database. It does, however, >reveal quite clearly that the drug in question is a CNS stimulant. > >--JRM > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ FREE ADHD DVD or CD-Rom (your choice) - click here! http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;6413623;3807821;f?http://mocda2.com/1/c/563632/131726/311392/311392 AOL users go here: http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;6413623;3807821;f?http://mocda2.com/1/c/563632/131726/311392/311392 This offer applies to U.S. Residents Only
