(kinda rhymes, doesn't it?)

Unless you've been in a cave somewhere, I'm sure you've heard about a French newspaper claiming Lance Armstrong tested positive for EPO, a performance-enhancing drug, in urine samples from 1999,  the first time he won the Tour de France.

Here's how it goes; in 1999, EPO was a banned drug for the Tour, but there wasn't a test back then to trace it in urine.  For some odd reason, Tour officials decided to keep the urine samples by freezing them, and now with new scientific breakthroughs are able to test for EPO.  They supposedly pulled them out of the freezer, and SURPRISE!  Lance was positive.

There's a lot of reasons to question this sudden "proof" that Lance is guilty.  First off, why would the labs keep Armstrong's sample for over six years?  If that's the case, then have they tested other riders from 1999, and have any of them come up positive?  Also, these were supposedly the backup ("B") samples.  Without the actual samples that were tested in 1999 ("A"), there's really nothing that Armstrong can do to challenge the validity of the samples.

Of course, the firestorm is about Lance because he's the most recognizable name in the Tour de France.  But it's a little too ironic how they kept Lance's samples, which are supposed to be anomyous.  I'm sure a simple DNA check could be done to see whether it's his urine, correct?  I'm not sure.

Besides, the jealousy of Armstrong's success by the French is well known.  Simply put, they don't like him.  He's an American and he's stomping them in their own sport.  Period.  And despite the fact that Armstrong is one of the most drug tested athletes in the world, the French media have been busy spreading rumors that Armstrong has doped before.  L'Equipe, the newspaper that "busted" him, is linked to the Tour and has led the way in criticism of Armstrong in the past. 

According to Armstrong, this wouldn't be the first time that the Tour has engaged in a witchhunt after him:

Armstrong told King that he was tested dozens of times during all his Tours, and was under exceptional scrutiny -- including right before his final race in June.

``Just a day before the start we had a knock on the door, and the minister of sport had sent a crew down there to collect two samples of urine and two samples of blood,'' Armstrong said. ``And we checked around and found out that nobody else in the peloton was tested that day. So I can't say 'witch hunt' loud enough.''

I don't blame him.  They have tested him throughout the Tours in his other victories, hence I don't see them being able to make a case of Armstrong being a doper.  Until they show without a doubt that he is one, I'm siding with Armstrong.

This sums it up:

"Armstrong always told me that he never used doping products," five-time winner Eddy Merckx told Le Monde newspaper. "Choosing between a journalist and Lance's word, I trust Armstrong."

Ditto.  Then again, I'm liable to go against the journalist every time, especially if he's French.