OT: Zimmerman, Howard file suit against Al Jazeera

[Class of 67]

Zimmerman: "I have always taken pride in my personal conduct. While I'm not a litigious person, I felt it was necessary to file this suit to restore my reputation and to hold Al Jazeera accountable for its actions."

I hope both win some $$. I guarantee that Zimmerman, for one, will give any settlement to charity.

 

[Grant Green]

Ryan Howard's case is a slam dunk.

"Um, your honor, have you seen me play for the past years?".
Judge finds in favor of Mr. Howard.

 

[Cletus11]

You knew this was coming. Have to believe Manning would file also. If Al Jazeera does a full recant, how much money do you think it would take beyond that for these guys to stop the lawsuit.

 

[PennStateNate]

Isn't Al Jazeera a middle eastern news agency. How are these guys going to collect and why would they listen to US Courts?

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

Isn't Al Jazeera a middle eastern news agency. How are these guys going to collect and why would they listen to US Courts?

Because I believe they have a U.S. Incorporated entity and "bureau" which is accountable to the US Judicial & Justice System and the citizenry (e.g., the republic) at-large.

 

[Ct. Lion]

Isn't Al Jazeera a middle eastern news agency. How are these guys going to collect and why would they listen to US Courts?

If I recall this correctly, a few years ago Al Jazeera bought out a U.S. media company started and owned by Al Gore so they could gain a U.S. presence. The publication of this news release is from a U.S. based enterprise with U.S. assets so there is no need to go to the Middle East to file the lawsuit or try to collect a judgement.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

IMO, I don't believe that the Aljazeera piece was that far from the truth. I believe that they were more right than wrong, including the Manning stuff.

This is all starting to shape up like Lance's suits against anyone who tried to speak truth to power. File away!

Key words being "I don't believe"...the reality is that what you do and don't "believe" is not the determining factor or authority on the suit referenced rendering the remainder of your post the opinionated substanceless arrogance and pablum that it is.

 

[Class of 67]

Isn't Al Jazeera a middle eastern news agency. How are these guys going to collect and why would they listen to US Courts?

Check your cable/sat TV listings. Al Jazeera has a US based all news channel, and in some respects is better than traditional news channels. For example, more neutral than Fox and MSNBC.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

Nor yours...this is a message board. We all read articles, watch tv news on various subjects and we form opinions. It's natural...it's one opinion. I have mine you have yours. It's not substance less, nor is it arrogance.

Relax Franklin.

It is substanceless when it based on nothing but an allegation and you haven't any personal knowledge on the topic of the allegation. You are essentially saying that you are going to take AJ's bold-faced allegation (which the counterparty is saying is untrue, unsourced and therefore tortuous libel & defamation) as fact with no reason or basis to accept their allegations as fact. We don't all have "an opinion" - I have no opinion on the matter so I'm going to presume that the writer is making crap up, including the allegation, for self-interested reasons - namely clicks & $$$. To claim AJ is not conflicted here and is "unbiased", when acting unethically earns them far more $$$ is preposterous, especially in today's "I'm Entitled" me, me, me world. Let's see them prove they had legitimate basis and sourcing for their claims - them being able to make lots of $$$ is not a legitimate defense against what they are being accused of.

 

[simons96]

It is substanceless when it based on nothing but an allegation and you haven't any personal knowledge on the topic of the allegation. You are essentially saying that you are going to take AJ's bold-faced allegation (which the counterparty is saying is untrue, unsourced and therefore tortuous libel & defamation) as fact with no reason or basis to accept their allegations as fact. We don't all have "an opinion" - I have no opinion on the matter so I'm going to presume that the writer is making crap up, including the allegation, for self-interested reasons - namely clicks & $$$. To claim AJ is not conflicted here and is "unbiased", when acting unethically earns them far more $$$ is preposterous, especially in today's "I'm Entitled" me, me, me world. Let's see them prove they had legitimate basis and sourcing for their claims - them being able to make lots of $$$ is not a legitimate defense against what they are being accused of.

remember the good old days when editors required corroboration for just that reason?

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

I am not looking to get into a pissing contest with you on this. You have your opinion that's fine.

I am saying I am not going to dismiss Aljazeera's allegations out of hand. They have hours and hours of video of guys stating that they provide HGH and other controlled substances to pro athletes. I might add that they also have video of an MLB player himself admitting that he has been receiving and using HGH from the guy in Austin who claims to have provided the HGH to Manning's wife.

Then there is the case of Lance Armstrong who for more than a decade, denied doping, passed every test and also viciously attacked anyone who tried to speak up and tell the truth. He hired lots of high priced lawyers and aggressively used the court system to silence people. He ruined several people's lives. (Frankie Andreau, his wife, Tyler Hamilton, Greg Lemond, Floyd Landis, the Postal Service team masseuse, etc, etc).

So, all I'm saying is I am not immediately condemning the allegations made by Aljazeera....

That wasn't "all you were saying".....your post said that Howard and Manning should be presumed guilty based solely on Al-jizz-era's allegations, and nothing more, despite the fact that both men strongly deny the allegations, say they are bold-faced lies and one of the men has sued Al-jizz-era in this regard. To claim you haven't taken sides on the matter is preposterous.

 

[CDW3333]

Because I believe they have a U.S. Incorporated entity and "bureau" which is accountable to the US Judicial & Justice System and the citizenry (e.g., the republic) at-large.

Hey, Bushy, you wouldn't know this because you're not a real lawyer or anything but who you sue when the defendant is a foreign entity makes a big difference. I had a fuel-fed fire case once involving Toyota. Suing and getting service of Toyota Motor Sales USA was a breeze, but it does you little good. It has minimal insurance, minimal assets, and actually claims to be independent of Toyota Motor Corporation, so if you send it discovery concerning design, manufacturing, etc., it'll say it has nothing.

To get any dough you gotta sue Toyota Motor Corporation in Japan. To do that you have follow the Hague Convention which requires that all your pleadings be translated into Japanese and you have follow a bunch of nit picky rules. Fail in any one of the rules and Toyota Motor Corporation will ignore your suit.

If the defendant is headquartered in a country that's not a signatory to the Hague Convention, you're SOL.

 

[Cletus11]

I would agree with the poster that said that I don't think 100% of AJ reported is false. Manning did not say his wife didn't get HGH but only he didn't use it. I can presume as much guilt or not based on what I read and history of PEDs in sports. I am not a court of law and can have any opinion I want. That is opinion is useless to anybody but me. But if I had to bet whether or not there were athletes who received HGH from this company and used them, I would bet $$$ that it did occur.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

Armstrong files response to USADA doping allegations - Story
www.wcpo.com/.../armstrong-files-response-to-usada-doping-allegations
AUSTIN, Texas - Lance Armstrong filed a scathing response Friday to the latest doping allegations against him, accusing the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency of violating its ...

Lance Armstrong responds to agency's doping allegations ...
www.cnn.com/2012/06/13/sport/armstrong-doping-allegations/index.html
Jun 15, 2012 · Video embedded · Champion bicyclist Lance Armstrong said the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency intends to "dredge ... As a result of the allegations, Armstrong …

• Lance Armstrong responds to U.S. Anti-Doping Agency’s ...
  www.nydailynews.com/sports/i-team/lance-armstrong-responds-u-s...
  Lance Armstrong has filed a scathing response to the latest doping allegations against him, ... READ THE FULL TEXT OF LANCE ARMSTRONG'S RESPONSE (.pdf)

• Lance Armstrong Files Scathing Response to Doping ...
  www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/Lance-Armstrong-Files-Scathing...
  Lance Armstrong Files Scathing Response to Doping Allegations Armstrong's lawyers called the claims "long on stale allegations disproved long ago and short on …

• Index of Lance Armstrong doping allegations over the years ...
  www.cyclingnews.com/.../index-of-lance-armstrong-doping-allegations...
  Index of Lance Armstrong doping allegations over the years. ... Allegations of doping hounded Lance Armstrong from the start of his ... Response to doping allegations

• Lance Armstrong: Global media reaction to Landis doping ...
  www.theguardian.com › Sports › Lance Armstrong
  ... Lance Armstrong, ... Global media reaction to Landis doping allegations ... Armstrong has had more claims of doping against him than he has won Tours de …

Lance denied his A$$ OFF for years and used his wealth to attack and destroy people who questioned him. I will not be fooled again. So I am not willing to accept athletes denials out of hand. Spend some time and read about what "Mr Fancy Pants Lance" did to those that opposed him. Read about the cycling reporters David Walsh and Paul Kimmage who raised questions for more than a decade on Lance and in the end, they were right all along. EVERYONE SHOUTED THEM DOWN because WE desperately wanted to cling to the myth that our sports heroes are clean.

Lance was so insidious because he coerced his own teammates to dope. THEY HAD to dope with him or they were off the team and he would destroy their careers if they tried to speak up.

View embedded media

Where did I say anything about Armstrong? So since Armstrong lied, it means that Manning and Howard are lying? Talk about strawman arguments - what you just claimed is the very definition of a "strawman" argument (e.g., Armstrong is an athlete, Manning and Howard are both athletes....since Armstrong is a liar all athletes are liars). Complete nonsense, what Armstrong did or didn't do and whether he lied about it has ZERO bearing on the credibility of Manning or Howard COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. Manning and Howard are individuals and are judged as individuals and what them being athletes has to do with anything in "Judging them" in your mind as individuals is rather bizarre - beyond bizarre honestly. You are sadly typical of our warped society which believes the opposite of "The Golden Rule" - rather than treat others in the same way you would demand to be treated under the same circumstances (e.g., a presumption of innocence unless proven otherwise), you make absurd arguments about how because one athlete lied regarding PEDs, they're all liars and should all presumed to be liars... You are one sad, sorry, warped, cynical individual. You must be a blast to be around.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

Wow.....

How old are you? 5?

How old am I? According to your absurd "theories", you should have never believed Armstrong in the first place based on Ben Johnson 20 years earlier. You're the one with the absurd nonsensical theories about the actions of one athlete impugning all athletes, not me champ.

BTW, stupid and arrogant is a very unbecoming combination.