Manning linked to HGH by Documentary (key witness has recanted)

#578
#578
NCFisher said:
But we were buddies with Saddam. Does that make America, anti-American? How often have we supported and/or installed our own despots in the MEast and elsewhere? We still it and do it globally.

But we shouldn't talk about that, so long as we've talk-right radio/tv that glosses over it with pseudo-patriotic rhetoric. Meanwhile, there's a cadre of Repub candidates that can't wait to increase military spending and whip us into a lather for another war somewhere, anywhere, while tightening the screws on all these damn liberties we're running around with.

Some of us are old enough to detect the abject hypocrisy and blinkered, staid positions of both the left and right in America. Since we're wandering off topic and all...
Click to expand...

Different times and different enemy buddy. Soviet Union was a Superpower. Iran was an imminent threat. And Saddam and a proxy war allowed us to neutralize one of those threats. Same with Bin Laden in Afghanistan. But that's beside the point. Does any of that justify letting Arab controlled news agencies within our borders to promote their anti-American agenda today? Amazing how many people are conditioned to not see anything wrong with our gradual movement to the government achieving complete control. Rid the country of nationalism and patriotism and fundamentally change how the past is viewed through revisionist eyes. Too bad those of us who see clearly are outnumbered by the ones with blinders on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#579
#579
lawgator1 said:
It seems to me that it is likely that there will never be proof positive one way or the other. The wife probably got HGH delivered in her name. There's no way to prove it was for Peyton, or that he used any of it, at this point.
Click to expand...


Correct.

All that we have is witness testimony at this point.

It comes do to who is more credible. Manning or Al Jazeera and their only witness who has recanted his story.

I'm sticking with Manning, and based upon his record and reputation, I would shocked if he did anything wrong!
 
#580
#580
Is Peyton a Republican or Dem? Since Al J is staunch liberal then Peyton must love The Donald. This attack is all about politics.:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#582
#582
here's the thing, i watched Manning's interview with salter's, and to me he sounds pretty genuine.

but i also watched the Al Jazeera piece, and while i think they probably did a pretty good job of exposing this dark world of doping, the whole bit with Sly was just odd.......they way those questions were being asked, and as freely as he was in giving answers.....it almost seemed staged....or at least well edited.

who in their right mind, who was considered by his co conspirators to be "the smart guy", could be at the same time be the worse secret keeper on the planet?

he basically said half of the green bay packers are using......not afraid to name drop with our a care in the world to a guy he just met????

the story was framed well, well produced and provided some good drama....it flowed like a spy movie....the narration didn't hurt either.

in the end, there's a lot of context taken out, there's no back and forth....you get a question, and you get comments from Sly......after editing.

all that said, i don't think there's any doubt that they exposed some folks. but i don't know how believable this whole thing is. even the bit about where you would get HGH if you "qualified" as one needing that prescription....they asked the dr. who would be doing that, an anti aging clinic, and of course, the dr. said no, never, and gave the likely sources of such an prescription.

yet they really didn't offer any proof, except sly's recount of the story that he's now recanted, that anyone ever prescribed, got or took any GH.

just weird. if you're the center of the dark world of doping, how do you get to the point of being able to discuss, in detail, names, drugs, dates, amounts etc....if this is such a clandestine operation, the players suck at the game. it's amazing that they haven't been caught earlier with such porous security....

it looks like all you needed was a little want to, and you could bust this thing wide open. where were you WADA, Yahoo Sports, ESPN, 60 Minutes........anyone?
 
#583
#583
I doubt Al Jazeera had a political agenda here. They did what most news organizations do and ran with what could be a big story without checking their facts. Most media outlets are so interested in getting the "Scoop" they would rather run with a story to generate viewers and website hits. If it turns it to be wrong they just print a retraction that no one will read. American news sources do it all the time. It's a terrible practice that is part of why most people don't trust the media anyone (and rightfully so). But it's not exactly something new. Basically all cable news is a glorified tabloid at this point.
 
#584
#584
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Please watch the story before spewing this ignorance.

They got these guys who were willing to sell steroids and other banned substances ON HIDDEN CAMERAS. This isn't a case of a source on the record renegging on a story.

This was a sting operation. Al-Jazeera got a British Olympic hopeful to go undercover posing as an athlete trying to get an edge by using steroids. Al-Jazeera had hidden cameras and mics on Sly when he admitted that he gave all these athletes banned substances.

If you watch the story in it's entirety, I don't know how you could question it's legitimacy. It was well done. And I gotta say I found Sly believable when he didn't know he was being taped.
Click to expand...

So, you believe Sly was telling the truth because he didn't know he was being taped, but it never occurs to you that a drug dealer would exaggerate and lie about his client list to impress a potential new customer?

How do you prevent whiplash while switching from logical reasoning to obtuseness so quickly?
 
#585
#585
JCHateSteve said:
I doubt Al Jazeera had a political agenda here. They did what most news organizations do and ran with what could be a big story without checking their facts. Most media outlets are so interested in getting the "Scoop" they would rather run with a story to generate viewers and website hits. If it turns it to be wrong they just print a retraction that no one will read. American news sources do it all the time. It's a terrible practice that is part of why most people don't trust the media anyone (and rightfully so). But it's not exactly something new. Basically all cable news is a glorified tabloid at this point.
Click to expand...

that's not entirely accurate, it appears that there are indeed a lot of facts in the story as it relates to the who's and how's the drugs are trafficked. from that standpoint, it looks like they did a very good job.

where they didn't, and this is the sensationalized portion of the story that is needed to get views, hits, and publicity, is verifying the users role in the story. in that respect, it is very much a he said she said(except in the case of the Cubs baseball player they got on tape), and in reality not related to the point of the investigation.

if you believe the intent of the story anyway, it's not to incriminate the users, but to expose the trafficking and traffickers. that was the point of the undercover investigation, remember?:whistling:

the name dropping all but ensured a story that would be picked up every where. mission accomplished.

anyway, i still think it's weird that in the course of the investigation that they could get Sly to willingingly sell out basically everyone he's ever done business with little to no effort. question asked, question answered...next?

it's wrapped up to nice and neat.....waay too easy...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#587
#587
FatherVol said:
So, you believe Sly was telling the truth because he didn't know he was being taped, but it never occurs to you that a drug dealer would exaggerate and lie about his client list to impress a potential new customer?

How do you prevent whiplash while switching from logical reasoning to obtuseness so quickly?
Click to expand...

agreed...the story is geared to get the reaction that it got. the questions, answers etc...have all been edited and re formatted to "fit" the agenda of selling the story.

i doubt very seriously the unedited, raw footage is all that sensational or inflammatory
 
#588
#588
JCHateSteve said:
I doubt Al Jazeera had a political agenda here. They did what most news organizations do and ran with what could be a big story without checking their facts. Most media outlets are so interested in getting the "Scoop" they would rather run with a story to generate viewers and website hits. If it turns it to be wrong they just print a retraction that no one will read. American news sources do it all the time. It's a terrible practice that is part of why most people don't trust the media anyone (and rightfully so). But it's not exactly something new. Basically all cable news is a glorified tabloid at this point.
Click to expand...

That's a little naive. Al Jazeera is happy to tarnish the United States and its icons at any opportunity. It doesn't have to be a knockout blow at the political leaders, or an explicit attack on American values. It can be 100 little paper cuts at many levels of our society, including tarnishing widely known and respected members of our society.

Why? Well, that's simple. Because tarnishing America sells, to their primary market.

Al Jazeera has been called a propaganda outlet for the Qatari government and its foreign policy, by analysts and by news reporters, including former Al Jazeera reporters.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera

12 - The Two Faces of Al Jazeera :: Middle East Quarterly
13 - Why Egypt Hates Al Jazeera | Foreign Policy
14 - http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/w...mists-alienates-allies-near-and-far.html?_r=1
15 - Al Jazeera: Non-Arabs Should Not Be Fooled
16 - http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/4941
17 - http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/11/world/fahmy-al-jazeera-lawsuit/
18 - http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/sep/30/al-jazeera-independence-questioned-qatar
Click to expand...

The statement is less important than the links. Follow them, check out references 12 through 18--several respectable and reliable sources in there. Feel free to learn more about this very biased "news source."

Al Jazeera was happy to pursue this story, to give it an international outlet, with very little to no fact checking. Shoddy, shoddy journalism by an agent with a history of bias.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#590
#590
BP4Prez said:
It's not very credible if the source wasn't properly vetted, or vetted at all before airing it. It certainly appears he wasn't considering Sly was not even working at the Guyer Institute at the time of his claim.
Click to expand...

That is false. During the investigation they called Guyer and asked them if Sly worked for them in 2011. They said yes. Guyer has only denied this AFTER THE STORY came out.

I know you are desperate for this to not be true but at least educate yourself on the facts before believing the misinformation campaign coming from Sly and Guyer after they were caught on hidden camera.
 
#591
#591
omghulkhands said:
sly had no idea he was being taped, right?

Meaning what he recanted was about stuff from what he believed to be a private conversation?
Click to expand...

In other words he got caught with his pants down.

The guy is obviously lying now. Like I said earlier, even a kid can see through it.
 
#592
#592
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
That is false. During the investigation they called Guyer and asked them if Sly worked for them in 2011. They said yes. Guyer has only denied this AFTER THE STORY came out.

I know you are desperate for this to not be true but at least educate yourself on the facts before believing the misinformation campaign coming from Sly and Guyer after they were caught on hidden camera.
Click to expand...

That is open to dispute but should be easy to verify. The fact that Sly isn't a pharmacist as Al Jazeera has claimed is not.
 
#593
#593
i still want to know how on earth after years of being the center of doping in the NFL and MLB, how this cat could go off at the mouth so easily for THIS undercover investigation?

the insiders considered Sly to be 'the smart guy', almost sounding afraid of him in some respect....but they're undercover guy, whom sly has recently met, can ask him point blank questions about who was using, what they're using, when etc....and sly just sells them out?

yeah, there's something fishy here....that's for sure.....

savvy world renowned international drug dealer who deals with the who's who of professional sports around the world OR he's snake oil salesman and his cohorts understand the game they're running very well.........

you decide....:blink:
 
#594
#594
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
That is false. During the investigation they called Guyer and asked them if Sly worked for them in 2011. They said yes. Guyer has only denied this AFTER THE STORY came out.

I know you are desperate for this to not be true but at least educate yourself on the facts before believing the misinformation campaign coming from Sly and Guyer after they were caught on hidden camera.
Click to expand...

D4H, you don't really believe this guy, do you? He falsely tossed out names of some famous former clients of the firm to "establish his creds," not knowing the lie would ever come back to bite him as it has. Now he's coming clean because he knows how precarious his legal/financial position has become.

I must be misunderstanding...you don't think the guy believed what he was saying, do you?
 
#595
#595
sanddune50 said:
Women also have a higher growth hormone content than men. Studies show that growth hormone production correlates with a woman's estrogen production. So it stands to reason as a woman ages and her estrogen levels decrease so would her growth hormone production. I'm not even going to give any validity to this laughable attempt to smear a person's reputation. But I will say it is not that bizarre or even questionable if Peyton's wife is using HGH supplementation to increase her quality of life. They can definitely afford the treatments for her, so why wouldn't she do whatever it took to stay and feel young?
Click to expand...

God. Some of you need to actually watch the story before saying stuff like this.


They interviewed a doctor during the documentary that said it was ILLEGAL in this country to prescribe HGH to an adult unless they satisfy one of 3 factors. 1. They have a genetic disorder and need the growth hormone. 2. They have cancer. 3. They have HIV. And even then only a doctor at a cancer clinic or hiv center can prescribe it. Not a guy at a anti-aging clinic.

If this story is true, Guyer is most likely going to jail. This is why they are desperately trying to misinform the public right now.
 
#596
#596
AstonRoyal said:
I don't know anything about what the Guyer Institute does or much about hormones, but isn't this around the time that Ashley had the twins? Could that be a reason why they had been there before?
Click to expand...

It is illegal for a doctor at an anti-aging clinic to precribe HGH. It is illegal for an adult to take HGH in America unless they satisfy one of three specific medical needs.

Unless Ashley was born with a human growth deficiency, has cancer, or has HIV, she can't take HGH. And she definitely couldn't get is precribed at an anti-aging clinic.

This looks real bad for Manning if you actually WATCH the Al-Jazeera report.
 
#597
#597
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
God. Some of you need to actually watch the story before saying stuff like this.


They interviewed a doctor during the documentary that said it was ILLEGAL in this country to prescribe HGH to an adult unless they satisfy one of 3 factors. 1. They have a genetic disorder and need the growth hormone. 2. They have cancer. 3. They have HIV. And even then only a doctor at a cancer clinic or hiv center can prescribe it. Not a guy at a anti-aging clinic.

If this story is true, Guyer is most likely going to jail. This is why they are desperately trying to misinform the public right now.
Click to expand...
see, this is what i find hilarious about this story.

they don't provide with any proof that a prescription was written....they just say it was...they don't provide any proof that the drug was shipped, they just say it was...they don't provide any proof that a drug was taken, they just say it was........

then they provide you a DR. saying that "no, you would not get a prescription from an anti aging clinic". which is true, but not evidence that any of this actually took place......

you're literally just believing them at face value.
 
#598
#598
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
God. Some of you need to actually watch the story before saying stuff like this.


They interviewed a doctor during the documentary that said it was ILLEGAL in this country to prescribe HGH to an adult unless they satisfy one of 3 factors. 1. They have a genetic disorder and need the growth hormone. 2. They have cancer. 3. They have HIV. And even then only a doctor at a cancer clinic or hiv center can prescribe it. Not a guy at a anti-aging clinic.

If this story is true, Guyer is most likely going to jail. This is why they are desperately trying to misinform the public right now.
Click to expand...

It was not proven that Ashley Manning was either prescribed or sent HGH. You are presuming way too much. The burden of proof for these allegations falls on Al Jazeera and they have not proven that the Mannings were sent HGH beyond the word of Sly.
 
#599
#599
jakez4ut said:
see, this is what i find hilarious about this story.

they don't provide with any proof that a prescription was written....they just say it was...they don't provide any proof that the drug was shipped, they just say it was...they don't provide any proof that a drug was taken, they just say it was........

then they provide you a DR. saying that "no, you would not get a prescription from an anti aging clinic". which is true, but not evidence that any of this actually took place......

you're literally just believing them at face value.
Click to expand...

Why should I not believe them? Manning has not denied that his wife received HGH from Guyer. All he said is that it's her private medical matter.

If his wife didnt receive HGH from Guyer, why not just say it?
 
#600
#600
BowlBrother85 said:
It was not proven that Ashley Manning was either prescribed or sent HGH. You are presuming way too much. The burden of proof for these allegations falls on Al Jazeera and they have not proven that the Mannings were sent HGH beyond the word of Sly.
Click to expand...

True. But Manning hasn't denied it. They just said he didn't take any HGH and that his wife's medical matters are private.

If they show Ashley Manning has cancer, HIV, or a genetic disorder then Al-Jazeera will look stupid.

Right now it's Manning that looks bad since he hasn't refuted the allegations directly.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top