Media treatment of Bonds has been foolish

Please follow directions carefully. I have already posted detailed information regarding this issue on this board previously. Anybody should be able to find my previous post without much trouble. Do a search of Bonds at sfgate.com and reread the article about his testimony published on December 3, 2004. Read what is in quotations regarding what Bonds said. He never said he used "the clear and the cream." This is simply speculation on the part of the prosecutors, period. Go read the article again and then come back and report how slam dunk the evidence is that the two Chronicle reporters published. They simply wrote a narrative that provideds a misrepresentation of the facts. Bonds may have said that several trainers including a specialist for strength, running and stretching as well as the team trainer routinely rubbed white, clear, yellow and blue creams on him. What does that mean? He may have said that he was taking what he thought was flaxseed oil and was told that by not only his strength coach, but his running coach as well. How does that become an "admission of using steroids?" The article is simply an inaccurate representation of the facts. There was no kind of admission made regarding any kind regarding steroids. Just because the prosecutors speculate something means nothing of consequence. The Chronicle reporters wrote an article that contains a couple extremely weak quotations surrounded by a narrative that ignores the context which paints an entirely different interpretation of the real facts of the matter. While your waiting, find my previous post which provides much greater detail. Just because inaccurate information is reported over and over again doesn't make it true.

 

Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic . . .

 

well fuckorover, that clears it up for me. bonds never took PEDs. his head and his feet just grew because of excessive conditioning.

 

Or his inflated sense of self.

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/12/03/MNGGFA0UDU65.DTL&hw=BALCO+2004&sn=015&sc=354

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/08/MNS8RESCK2.DTL&hw=BALCO&sn=003&sc=426

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/07/26/SPGDLR77BF1.DTL&hw=BALCO&sn=006&sc=205

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/10/16/MNG0D9B5K21.DTL&hw=BALCO+2004&sn=003&sc=533

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/03/02/MNGNM5C3AV1.DTL&hw=BALCO+2004&sn=009&sc=392

Some of those stories are nearly three years old. And yet, no one has sued.

 

My tolerance of Barry Bonds just reached its limit. As a member of Red Sox Nation, I know Schilling can be just as big an asshat as anyone in the game, but when we start throwing around lawsuits over anything anyone says into a microphone...
It's just a damn shame Schill was on the DL when the Jints came to Fenway. Barry would've had to reinforce the earflaps.

 

Creamora, what say you now that Ralph Waldo Emerson provided the journalistic backing to the claim that Barroid said he used?

 

Alley, don't confuse him with documentation.

 

Creamora has no idea what the heck he/she is talking about. Bonds admitted to using a substance called "the Clear" and one called "the Cream" provided to him by BALCO. He claims he thought they were flaxseed oil at the time (har har), but he clearly admits using the substances. The substances are now widely known to be sophisticated steroids.

 

Bonds did not admit to using "the clear and the cream."
Read the article by the Chronicle again and look and what's in quotations. It is very weak. It's simply a narrative by the Chronicle that is misleading the public regarding the statements made b y Bonds.

The secret tape recording of Anderson does not talk about Barry Bonds at any point. Bonds' name is not mentioned.

It's basically conjecture by the prosecutors. The authorities do not have beyond a reasonable doubt evidence of steroid use by Bonds. If they did, there would have an indictment a long time ago.

If anyone thinks differently, then provide a reasonable explanation for the lack of an indictment. What are they waiting for if they already have the evidence they need?

 

See: straws, grasping at . . .

 

... while his guitar gently weeps.