aaron foresees bonds breaking hr record

[runningshoes Saw Yaz launch one in '78 Find all posts View Profile Close runningshoes]

neither simpson, armstong nor bonds have been found guilty of wrongdoing in a criminal court (simpson guilty in civil court), yet many think them to be guilty of crimes.

i think that most americans have moved on past the simpson case, most of the french are not champing at the bit about armstrong (they love that he lives there half-time and speaks french fluently and promotes the sport) and most of those who presume that bonds llegally used banned substances do so without restricting their decision to the facts of the matter.

human emotion plays a large part in the three stories.

No offense, but I don't live my life in either denial or with my eyes closed to the obvious. I don't need others to let me know when something is a fact or not.

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

^^^ that is terrific, but that is not what this is about.

[runningshoes Saw Yaz launch one in '78 Find all posts View Profile Close runningshoes]

nothin' wrong in my book with someone not prejudging, which is what interpret 63's post to mean.

I think it's a little vague. Open to interpretation. He doesn't say whether it's wrong or right. Maybe he can expand on it a little.

[kdiddy63 Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close kdiddy63]

I don't think i have to let you know what my feelings are on steroids. That does not make a difference. All that I am saying is that according to law, Bonds has not yet been tried and/or suspended for using steroids. There was a grand jury leak, but since then, I have heard nothing. And that grand jury leak sounds a lot like the CIA leak in the news. It is against the law.

But, my point was that Bonds has NOT been found guilty of using steroids, so I am holding a main opinion that he has not taken any steroid. I still have my doubts. All signs seemingly indicate that he took the roids. However, just like all over America, 53, you are innocent until proven guilty. I don't think there is anything wrong with teaching kids the foundation of the legal system in America.

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

I don't think there is anything wrong with teaching kids the foundation of the legal system in America.

bravo.

[runningshoes Saw Yaz launch one in '78 Find all posts View Profile Close runningshoes]

ah..what's the use. It just dawned on me, you're both Ginats fans.

Yeah, I know..what's that got to do with it?

[Honus Wagner Rules xFIP?! I laugh at you! Find all posts View Profile Close Honus Wagner Rules]

what does OJ have in common with Armstrong ? OJ is supposed to be a murderer....depending on what you think..Armstrong did roids..or said
the french..who are chomping at the bit, that an ' american ' has been
whumping euro butt on the tour, the past seven yrs...so to save face,
the froggies are suggesting that Armstrong did...something...

as for Bonds and whether or not..hard to say..the line is drawn by many fans..and the public...again, draw yer own conclusions....

Lance is not "accused" off taking steroids. He's "accused" of taking EPO, a drug that increases the red blood cells in a person.

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

so, bonds is the master of the universe, and has it all worked out.
it is time, then, to put "if you do not like the system then change the system" into works.

the thing about sosa and pitchers and "other players" getting a free pass -- is this a call for action against these additional players? the ones who have been mighty vocal about bonds have not expressed the same outrage about players known to have used banned substances. this is possibly emotion overshadowing actual fact. or maybe it is simply that they have a disdain for bonds and the banned substance story is a convenient outlet.

whichever, johnny roulette has got it correct: hypocrisy.

i communicate with many people about the bonds/banned substances issue and have yet to come across anyone pretending that he does not see what is right in front of him. actually, most of them know more about the situation than most because they are willing to look at things factually rather than with emotion steering the way.

[kdiddy63 Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close kdiddy63]

Hey at least Sammy can't play his damn music in the locker room. Thank you Kerry Wood.

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

i do not understand why my words were quoted re "bonds supporters"; "grips of reality"; "denial, denial, denial". i began discussing the bonds thing with lots of people even before the federal grand jury convened in san francisco... as have a number of those with whom i speak about the issue.

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

curious minds still wanna know how the wearing of #25 is an indictment of bonds using banned substances.

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

did he telephone you in 1993?

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

if "pursue" must include tendering a k, then i can use "indictment" re this:

"His leaked testimony, the fact he wears #25 (yes, there's something to that), his physical appearance, his number increase at such a late age, his mistress' claims, his diversion attempts whenever questioned about it...
it all adds up."

[west coast orange and black Registered User Find all posts View Profile Close west coast orange and black]

^^^ i have suspicions of literally hundreds of players. bonds is included in that group. perhaps you have missed some of my posts along the way.

bonds' physical appearance has nothing to do with my suspicions, though. nor does his "attitude". this would be heading in the wrong direction - like the "#25 theory".

you continue to use the wording: "you hide behind the 'nothing has been proven' shield". i do not know why.
i am not hiding. more importantly, your suggestion that one of our most basic tenants of law need not be applied to everyone (or is it just bonds?) is bad news, at best.

in the end, you will never change my mind. just accept this as fact.
my position even before the story broke in the chronicle is: "i do not know whether bonds used banned substances." and if my position does change it will be because of facts. not supposition. not innuendo. not what jersey number he happens to wear. facts.

[runningshoes Saw Yaz launch one in '78 Find all posts View Profile Close runningshoes]

more importantly, your suggestion that one of our most basic tenants of law need not be applied to everyone (or is it just bonds?) is bad news, at best.

I wonder what the jury in the OJ civil trial was thinking when they awarded all that money to Brown family.

What did they call that, again? He was responsible for Nicole and Ron's deaths.

How could that be? He was aquitted.

Could they possibly have thought the blinds will now be pulled up and we'll let a light shine in?

In contrast to the criminal trial, wasn't the civil trial largely ignored by the media.

Maybe a few people need stop reading the newspaper for awhile.

You can all keep watching television; those guys couldn't coax monkeys to live in trees if thier lives depended on it.