Lance Armstrong – A Tale of our time

First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

Let me say right here that I do not know if Lance Armstrong has ever taken performance enhancing drugs and having read widely on this subject, in my opinion, no-one has as yet proved that he has.

I do know this; Lance Armstrong won his first Tour de France in 1999 and went on a seven win streak ending in 2005.  The first question I would like answered is this; why has it taken this long for evidence to be brought to court to prove his guilt or otherwise?

By my reckoning, it is now 13 years since his first win and 7 years since his final victory.

Why has it taken this long for the United States Anti Doping Agency (USADA) to bring their evidence to the courts and let the law take its course?

Is there a Statute of Limitations on the charges that have been brought against Lance Armstrong and if not why not?  I will return to Statute of Limitations later in this piece.

Can USADA simply keep making allegations for as long as they want?

What is their agenda?

I repeat again that I do not know if Lance Armstrong has ever taken drugs but I do know that the has always denied taking performance enhancing drugs and I repeat that in my opinion, no-one has as yet proved that he has.

How is it that the biggest drug expose ever, that of Ben Johnson in the 1988 was done and dusted in three days.  Let me repeat that three days!

It was in the 100m final that Johnson ran a time of 9.79 seconds.  Three days later the IOC confirmed that he had been found guilty of taking banned substances and stripped him of his Gold medal.  He was immediately sent home from the Games.  Canada’s then Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney said it was a correct decision, but a tragedy for Johnson and a great sadness for all Canadians.

Johnson was banned for 2 years and returned to racing in 1991 however in 1993 he tested positive again and was banned for life.

Now if we were talking about Lance Armstrong and this had happened after any of his Tour de France  wins then nobody, including Armstrong himself, could have complained.

But it didn’t

In June of this year, 2012, the USADA officially charged Armstrong with doping and trafficking of drugs, based on blood samples from 2009 and 2010, and testimonies from other cyclists.

Armstrong, has denied all doping use in a statement.

So these drug samples have been sitting there since 2009 and 2010 respectively but only now, 3 and 2 years later are they going to be put into evidence?

I repeat in the case of Ben Johnson it was done and dusted in 3 days.

Now I am not suggesting that drug testers always get it right.  I quite well remember my trip to the 1994 Commonwealth Games in Victoria Canada and without doubt the biggest story of the Games was the exclusion of Diane Modahl on the accusation that she had taken performance enhancing drugs.  She received a 4 year ban.

I am proud to say that Diane as a friend of mine and I was shocked.  I could not believe that she would do that.

12 months lated Diane was cleared of drug taking after an independent appeals panel accepted evidence that bacterial activity could have increased testosterone levels while the sample remained unrefrigerated.  In 1996 Diane was cleared to compete internationally when the IAAF also accepted the report.

A few days ago Lance Armstrong decided that he was no longer going to fight to clear his name.

This is part of his statement making that announcement:-

There comes a point in every man’s life when he has to say, ‘Enough is enough.’ For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999.

Over the past three years I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart’s unconstitutional witch hunt.

The toll this has taken on my family and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense.

Read the full statement here.

USADA issued their own statement in response:-

USADA announced today that Lance Armstrong has chosen not to move forward with the independent arbitration process and as a result has received a lifetime period of ineligibility and disqualification of all competitive results from August 1, 1998 through the present, as the result of his anti-doping rule violations stemming from his involvement in the United States Postal Service (USPS) Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy (USPS Conspiracy).

Read the full statement here.

So there we have it some people are supporting Lance Armstrong’s stand while others are suggesting that this actually proves his guilt.

I come down on the side of the former.

I am not surprised that Mr Armstrong has had enough of all this nonsense.

This has been going on for over a decade and I fully agree with him when he says Enough is Enough.

USADA may think that having stripped Lance Armstrong of his trophies, they have achieved some sort of victory.  If they have, and I doubt it very much, then it will have been a pyrrhic victory because it will cost them what ever shreds of self respect they once had.

The world is now waiting to see what the International Cycling Union is going to do.  Will they support USADA’s action or will they stand up for what is right?  Only time will tell.

I said earlier that I would return to the question of a Statute of Limitations.

I do not know whether there is a Statute of Limitations on the behaviour of the USADA but, on this occasion I hope there isn’t.

Why I hear you say?

Well in 10 years or 20 years or maybe even 50 years I want the world to look down on the behaviour of the USADA in the way that we now look down on the actions of that other famous bully of our time, The Senator for State of Wisconsin, Joseph Raymond McCarthy.

Later

Mike S

Alternative Version

First they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Photo credit 1 – Business Week

Photo credit 2 – The Costarican Times