Things have not fared well, recently, for Monsieur Bordry; most recently he had (by circumstantial evidence) been roundly (or severely?) chastised for his 'biased accusations' (which appear now to be mostly unfounded) against the UCI, in claiming favouritism over Lance and the Team Astana.
Yet what you want to know now, is what charges Floyd faces, and based on what proof?
Let WADAwatch take you back to the summer of 2009, and our two (no - Three!) articles about this sordid affair. Their pertinence is one-hundred percent pure...
Remember! The 'paid hackers' were a French firm (now bankrupt) whose staff and contacts/agents were former French Secret Service operatives (????), whose other clients were MASSIVE French entities, and whose work efforts infiltrated lawyers or activists whose own efforts were in seeking to expose 'nasty French corporate or Government secrets'... and is not Loyalty one of the 'qualities' of the French culture?
One dark and foggy November night... read:
Friday, 5 June 2009
INTERPOL FLASH ALERT:
Wanted: on international arrest warrants issuing from France, two dangerous hacking financiers;
Crime: allegedly funded computer hacking/theft of authentic, sub–quality laboratory documents that proved French anti-doping incompet... *some text missing* ... or Alive.
One might think that Bordry has become addicted to 'news–makers syndrome', à la Dick Pound, former WADA president and the veritable 'Mouth that never stopped'. Hearing Pierre Bordry and the names 'Lance...' or 'Floyd...' is liking hearing GW Bush saying 'Axis of Evil'... empty of meaning, truth very very questionable.
Actually, this recent 'Bordry news Flash' is twice very old news, centering on the claimed computer–hacking by 'someone' of the LNDD laboratory's computer system in 2006; a case which, of itself, took a two and a half–year submarine tour of the French legal 'instruction' system. However, as 'evidence' in Landis' original 'case', it was never mentioned by USADA and Richard Young, for reasons that can only be due to... the negative weight of these allegations?
Did AFLD 'control' their data systems to a degree of professional security reasonable for their industry as demands the WADA ISL, and which is recognized as sufficient within its professional community? (if it's facing a hacking case, to prove it was not 'negligent' or 'insufficiently protected', AFLD /LNDD must offer evidence of its (their) control systems in place, and prove that the 'Hacking' from Kargus (who was paid only Euro 2,000) was of "an unexpectedly–sophisticated capability" to win)
Read more from our first article in this three-part series.
+ + + + + + + + +
Only three days later we made further information available, from an intense Internet search of French sites and much reflection:
Monday, 8 June 2009
This is a “thinking out loud” post, continuing a focus on the French Anti–doping Galaxy's apparent obsession with Floyd Landis. From a weekend of reflection, several salient points rebounded time and again. These are:
1 how (not to forget one big -IF-) did Baker first contact Kargus?
How easily could a Doctor in San Diego 'infiltrate' the French corporate–espionage culture, to find a well–situated 'partner in crime' such as Kargus consultants? Admittedly such could be done with a 'couple of phone calls', but it seems incredible that Baker would do this after Floyd's A Sample results were announced. What if Floyd (and thus Baker) didn't know the number (995474) before Kargus had infiltrated (with instructions from 'client' to seek documentation under the number?) we know that Judge Cassuto requested the 'date from which Landis had access to his Sample(s) 'control number'?
6 Lastly, was Landis/Baker 'the client', or a silent 'third–party beneficiary'?
As touched upon in item #2, the alleged 'Anglo–saxon client' could have been someone that was willing to do anything that might help Floyd, without having a direct tie to Team Landis. As you may be a 'beneficiary' of your parents' life insurance policy, a contract can benefit an unnamed 'third party'. Anyone so inclined as to provide Landis with 'help' from outlaw–shenanigans, and set up the means to do so, ought to be smart enough to receive Kargus' discovered E–files and send them on a CD to Baker, so as to eliminate any network–traces. The only link between Baker and the hacked files is known through his having sent these outward after receiving them.
Read the full (long, dry and detailed) second of three WADAwatch post here
+ + + + + + + + +
Our third essay attempted to provide the English audience with even more detail on the 'French Société' that was at the core of this French hacking case:
Thursday, 11 June 2009
It is an interesting company: Kargus Consultants, the company that constructed the hacking transaction into the French laboratoire LNDD. A company offering industrial surveillance, according to Societe.com, Kargus Consultants was founded on November 14, 2003: it has been out of business since October 22, 2007, only two weeks short of its fourth 'birthday'. Paying the price of its success?
Kargus Consultants indubitably provided the sole alleged 'hacker' – Alain Quiros – offering an info–tech commando squad that has made news for three prominent French 'hacking cases': the LNDD–'Landis' affair, the EDF–Greenpeace case, and one involving an activist French attorney (counsel to a French association of small–shareholders), not in that order. The French magazine Médiapart published a detailed article [Ww: controlled access], which was re–posted on the website/forum linuxquimper.org.
Mediapart does not expand their inflection regarding EDF and Greenpeace, and how the revelations of the LNDD affair brought forth that EDF/Greenpeace process. Intriguing, tantalizing, and yet unfulfilling, as to the interrelationships regarding the three French targets. Using the word 'anonymous' as to the emails described above, seems contradictory to the claims of Baker's involvement, which are discussed throughout the article.
That was the third of three biting probing posts brought to you last summer, by WADAwatch.
Is Plucky Pierre Bordry charting his course of revenge from last fall's UCI/Astana 'J'Accuse!' debacle? Is the French gouvernement a neutral forum, a witting or unwitting player in the latest chapter of:
In the L'Equipe article that appeared yesterday, it is VERY notable to record that the French sporting journal discusses (Translation service: Ww) "Baker and his accomplices".
They do not state that those 'accomplices' were French, were arrested in other affairs, were former French 'secret agents' and were 'very very close' to the French gouvernement.
Why would L'Equipe...
(we remind readers that we boycott linking to L'Equipe... you can find this article (if you read or translate from FR) at L'Express)
... not want it's readers to know the full truth? They should: they're the taxpayers that are paying both AFLD, and the Nanterre Court Judge Cassuto (a bio of him is in the first cited Ww post above...), to either expose or deceive about the involvement of the French former secret agents in this case.
What conclusion to this new-for-2010 state of French affaires?
More French publicity for Bordry, stoking the world Media Machine while all the world is focussing on Vancouver? At least, in this case, everything stated by Bordry is going to be 'On the Record', in court, and appealable to a Fair body without conflicts-of-interest.
Our opinion remains the same: there are more 'elements' in this case pointing to a Watergate-style inside operation, designed to 'add on to' the 'facts' against Landis, 'just in case' their 'Testosterone evidence' was not 'sufficient'.
That's the 'official WADAwatch' theory, at least... and there's certainly more to come