Author Topic: Open response to Millard Baker re letter  (Read 6446 times)

Millard Baker

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #25 on: June 05, 2009, 09:36:35 AM »
Not likely...although Lee is a close friend, it has much to do with people like you putting in their 2 cents when it was never asked for in the first place. Perhaps you should tell Jim Manion personally, what he needs to do next time you see him...i'm sure you'll be welcomed with open arms.

While you're at it...why dont you bestow your ideas to GM, or the Banking institutions?  I'm sure Obama could use your expertisein the middle East



You may not be aware that people exist outside of your delusional ego-driven world. And just because you "don't know who I am" and are unwilling or incapable of intelligently acknowledging/discussing relevant issues with "people like me" doesn't lessen the validity of the issues at hand.
SteroidEducation.com

LMV

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 932
  • Time Out
Bob Chick can we have your attention please ..........
« Reply #26 on: June 05, 2009, 09:40:42 AM »

You were quite strong in your opninions regarding the enforcement of the IFBB Pro Rules concerning the "mr olympia invitation" of Mr Ed van Amsterdam.

Do you feel equally strong about these rules Bob ?

From the IFBB Pro Rules:

Rule 6 – Medical

6.1 General:
The Pro League advocates a clean, healthy and fit lifestyle, with regular exercise
and proper nutrition. The Pro League encourages its members to engage in
health-promoting activities and not to engage in practices which may endanger


6.3 Medical Committee:
The Medical Committee has authority over medical issues, to include drug
testing matters. The committee will assist its Members with any questions they
may have regarding issues of a medical or drug testing nature. The Pro League
regularly provides relevant information on health, nutrition, training and doping
control.

Rule 8 – Drug Testing

8.1 Policy Statement:
Sport involves physical health and fitness, mental application and dedication to
training. Doping – the use of prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods –
to artificially enhance performance is unethical, contrary to the concept of fair
play, undermines the values of sport, and can endanger the health of the athletes.
8.2 Power and Authority:
As a condition of membership and competition in the Pro League, all Athletes
agree that the Pro League has power and authority to conduct in-competition
and/or out-of-competition drug testing.
their health.

Rule 9 – Discipline

9.1 General:
Athletes, Judges, and Officials join the Pro League of their own free will and, in
so doing, agree to abide by the Pro Rules.

9.10 Code of Ethics:
Disciplinary action may be taken against any Member who contravenes the Code
of Ethics, which forms an integral part of the Pro Rules.

CODE OF ETHICS

Athletes:

1. To fulfill our responsibility to society, to other Athletes, Judges and
Officials of the Pro League.
7. To work for the Pro League, not against it, in promoting its values, morals
and ethics.
15. To oppose the use of banned substances and methods

Officials:

3. To safeguard the health and physical fitness of the Athletes
9. To work for the Pro League, not against it, in promoting its values, morals
and ethics.
15. To oppose the use of banned substances and methods.

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #27 on: June 05, 2009, 09:43:41 AM »
You may not be aware that people exist outside of your delusional ego-driven world. And just because you "don't know who I am" and are unwilling or incapable of intelligently acknowledging/discussing relevant issues with "people like me" doesn't lessen the validity of the issues at hand.

The relevant issue, is that you have no standing. You are not an official of the IFBB/ NPC, you're not a part of the Pro League, you're not even an athlete within the organization, and no one has asked for YOUR input as to how we should address issues that pertain to the IFBB/ NPC.

If you dont like the laws, then take your case to your Senator/ congressman...

Sir Humphrey

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1288
  • It's only gay if you want it to be.
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #28 on: June 05, 2009, 09:45:49 AM »
The relevant issue, is that you have no standing. You are not an official of the IFBB/ NPC, you're not a part of the Pro League, you're not even an athlete within the organization, and no one has asked for YOUR input as to how we should address issues that pertain to the IFBB/ NPC.

If you dont like the laws, then take your case to your Senator/ congressman...

Do YOU like the laws, Bob?  :P

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: Bob Chick can we have your attention please ..........
« Reply #29 on: June 05, 2009, 09:45:50 AM »
The Pro League is free to enforce any rule listed in the official rulebook...

LMV

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 932
  • Time Out
Re: Bob Chick can we have your attention please ..........
« Reply #30 on: June 05, 2009, 09:46:39 AM »
The Pro League is free to enforce any rule listed in the official rulebook...

Please answer the question Bob.


G o a t b o y

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 21431
  • Time-Out in Dubai, India with Swampi the Cocksmith
Re: Bob Chick can we have your attention please ..........
« Reply #31 on: June 05, 2009, 09:47:08 AM »
7. To work for the Pro League, not against it, in promoting its values, morals
and ethics.

Ron: "I am lazy."

G o a t b o y

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 21431
  • Time-Out in Dubai, India with Swampi the Cocksmith
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #32 on: June 05, 2009, 09:50:16 AM »
Open response to Millard Baker:

I don't know who you are, but I know you HAVe nothing to do with the NPC or the IFBB in any capacity (official or otherwise). With that said, there have been no statements made from any official source on the issue at hand concerning Lee Thompson. The Ifbb has been in existence since the 1940's and the NPC since the early 80's. Somehow and by some miracle... We have managed without your infinite wisdom and expertise all these years. We have your contact information if the need for your input should suddenly be warranted. Sincerely.

Bob Cicherillo. IFBBpro, IFBB Athletes Representative








Typical Bob...  instead of addressing the issues, he attacks the messenger.  ::)
Ron: "I am lazy."

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: Bob Chick can we have your attention please ..........
« Reply #33 on: June 05, 2009, 09:51:21 AM »
Please answer the question Bob.



The answer is NO...I don't give equal value to all the rules, especially when t comes to qualifications.

G o a t b o y

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 21431
  • Time-Out in Dubai, India with Swampi the Cocksmith
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #34 on: June 05, 2009, 09:54:24 AM »
The answer is NO...I don't give equal value to all the rules, especially when t comes to qualifications.


But Bob...  Ed getting invited to the Olympia is NOT against the rules.  In fact, it is expressly provided for in the rules, and has precedent.

The use of AAS and other performance-enhancing drugs, however, is clearly against the rules.
Ron: "I am lazy."

Tapeworm

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 29107
  • Hold Fast
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #35 on: June 05, 2009, 09:55:37 AM »
Quote
An Open Letter to the International Federation of BodyBuilders Pro Division (IFBB), and the National Physique Committee (NPC), on the Recent Federal Indictment of NPC Texas Chairperson Lee Thompson on Steroid Conspiracy Charges
 
Dear Jim Manion, Scott Lyons, Brad Craig, Miles Nuessle, Chad Nicholls, Jon Lindsay, Steve O'Brien, Jeff Taylor, Darrin Montanari, Jerry Montanari, Todd Howe, Pete Fancher, Peter Potter, Patrick Sporer, Tyrone Felder, Cindy Lee, Greg Wright, Chuck Sanow, Ed Sanders, Ernest Bea, Sandy Riedinger, Luke Tesvich, Dave Follansbee, Rich Siegelman, Will Dabish, Christine Bongiovanni, Don Hollis, Rick Kasten, Steve Karr, John Kemper, Clark Sanchez, James Rockell, Steve Weinberger, Mike Valentino, Rick Bayardi, Eileen Luis, Ron Smith, Gary Udit, Maggie Blanchard, Tres Bennett, Roger McConnell, Lee Thompson, Steve Schmall, Marvin Chappell, Al Modrzejewski:

The Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 1990 criminalized the non-medical use of anabolic steroids (AAS) for the purpose of improving muscle strength, body composition and physical appearance. Bodybuilders who use anabolic steroids for physique enhancement have since faced the possibility of arrest and prosecution if caught in possession of steroids even for merely personal use. This has had disastrous effects on gainfully-employed, otherwise law-abiding individuals who have been arrested and prosecuted under federal steroid laws. The stigma and loss of reputation associated with federal drug charges persist even when charges are dismissed or downgraded.

The use of anabolic steroids in competitive bodybuilding is, by all accounts, widespread and pervasive. Not surprisingly, numerous individuals associated with the network of competitive bodybuilding, including IFBB/NPC competitors, have been entered into the criminal justice system due to their alleged involvement with AAS. The IFBB/NPC has been conspicuously silent on the increasing number of bodybuilders, personal trainers, and gym owners specifically targeted by overzealous prosecutors.

The recent arrest and indictment of NPC Texas Chairperson Lee Thompson on federal anabolic steroid conspiracy charges presented an opportunity for the IFBB/NPC to publicly criticize existing steroid laws and the application of those laws in a modern-day witch-hunt. Regrettably, IFBB/NPC official(s) instead may have attempted to cover up and suppress the information. When the attempted deception was embarrassingly exposed, matters were made worse when the public disclosure of the truth was maligned. The IFBB/NPC failed to recognize that the real enemy is NOT the disclosure of the truth BUT the flawed anabolic steroid law enforcement policy that unfairly affects those involved.

The IFBB/NPC leadership has gone to great lengths to maintain the illusion that anabolic steroids are not an issue in competitive bodybuilding. Discussion of the existence of AAS in the IFBB/NPC is strictly prohibited. Any connection between competitors’ steroid-related legal problems and IFBB/NPC sanctioned contests is not permitted. The IFBB/NPC has even revoked press credentials for writer(s) who have violated these unwritten rules.
It is time for the IFBB/NPC to embrace honesty and confront the reality of steroid use in the IFBB/NPC. The IFBB/NPC should openly address the steroid witch-hunt that has affected many IFBB/NPC competitors (and at least one top IFBB/NPC official). The IFBB/NPC needs to speak out against the mainstream steroid hysteria and the war on steroids that have demonized and criminalized the use of AAS for bodybuilding and physique enhancement.

Hopefully, the IFBB/NPC will act, not only to protect its own, but to also protect the legal and physical well-being of the hundreds of athletes who participate in IFBB/NPC sanctioned contests. Such an agenda would include steroid law reform and steroid harm reduction. Competent and forward-thinking leadership is required to transform the perception of the IFBB/NPC from an organization that hypocritically and distrustfully addresses the AAS issue to one that candidly and credibly addresses AAS use.

Respectfully yours,

Millard Baker

Founder, MESO-Rx

Well said, but you are assuming that the IFBB gives a shit about anything more than profit.  Unless you compel them to support your cause in some way, such as through the unionization of athletes, judges, etc, the IFBB won't spend a dime trying to fight legislation or lend real support to members facing prosecution.  

A well reasoned argument won't cut it.  You're going to have to make them do it.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #36 on: June 05, 2009, 10:03:08 AM »
it's getting ugly up in here

G o a t b o y

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 21431
  • Time-Out in Dubai, India with Swampi the Cocksmith
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #37 on: June 05, 2009, 10:04:10 AM »
it's getting ugly up in here


deleted.  ;D
Ron: "I am lazy."

Tapeworm

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 29107
  • Hold Fast
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #38 on: June 05, 2009, 10:13:40 AM »
it's getting ugly up in here

Please don't think I'm saying the IFBB is doing something bad.  All businesses first priority is profit.  Ensuring the continuation of that profitability, however, sometimes requires change.

In a way, the IFBB should be grateful to Millard Baker for pointing out a situation which is only going to get worse and which threatens to erode the authority which it has over its members.  Now it can address the issue in some way while it still retains the power of decision. 

A more ambitious man than Mr. Baker might have attempted to quietly obtain a concensus of opinion among IFBB members on this issue before going public, thereby sweeping the rug entirely out from under IFBB management and cementing his own position as union head, but he seems like a more reasonable guy than that.

IronMagazine.com

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2758
  • IronMag Bodybuilding Blog Online Since 2001
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #39 on: June 05, 2009, 10:23:36 AM »
Not likely...although Lee is a close friend, it has much to do with people like you putting in their 2 cents when it was never asked for in the first place. Perhaps you should tell Jim Manion personally, what he needs to do next time you see him...i'm sure you'll be welcomed with open arms.

While you're at it...why dont you bestow your ideas to GM, or the Banking institutions?  I'm sure Obama could use your expertisein the middle East


it's called journalism Bob, people can write about whatever they want, get over it.

Millard Baker

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #40 on: June 05, 2009, 10:29:06 AM »
The relevant issue, is that you have no standing. You are not an official of the IFBB/ NPC, you're not a part of the Pro League, you're not even an athlete within the organization, and no one has asked for YOUR input as to how we should address issues that pertain to the IFBB/ NPC.

Bob, thank you very much for your concise explanation of how the IFBB/NPC operates.

This is exactly what is wrong with the IFBB/NPC.
SteroidEducation.com

Army of One

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30388
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #41 on: June 05, 2009, 10:34:36 AM »
Bob, thank you very much for your concise explanation of how the IFBB/NPC operates.

This is exactly what is wrong with the IFBB/NPC.

Bob is just a puppet Millard, designed by the higher ups to answer any question directed at him with another question or a personal attack.

G o a t b o y

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 21431
  • Time-Out in Dubai, India with Swampi the Cocksmith
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #42 on: June 05, 2009, 10:35:35 AM »
it's called journalism Bob, people can write about whatever they want, get over it.


I suppose Bob would feel the same way if a reporter offered an opinion on some NFL or MLB policy too, huh?
Ron: "I am lazy."

Millard Baker

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #43 on: June 05, 2009, 10:35:55 AM »
It's refreshing to note that at least some NPC/IFBB officials, unlike Bob C., are willing to intelligently discuss the issues in my letter.

Lee Thompson called me this morning to thank me for the letter. He told me he "got my message" outlined in the open letter and assured me that he was going to vocally speak out against the unfairness of steroid witch-hunt that has affected him when the time is right.
SteroidEducation.com

dan18

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7307
  • I DID WHAT I DID BECAUSE I DO WHAT I WANT.
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #44 on: June 05, 2009, 10:38:00 AM »
Bob, thank you very much for your concise explanation of how the IFBB/NPC operates.

This is exactly what is wrong with the IFBB/NPC.
bottom line without gear there would be no ifbb/ npc no one would attened shows.
The rule book is nothing more than white wash pros do g4p drugs and not just gear.And its out in the open if the so called committee suspended pros for whats in the rule book Then Mr getbig would be the only show in town..
p

Army of One

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30388
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #45 on: June 05, 2009, 10:39:18 AM »
It's refreshing to note that at least some NPC/IFBB officials, unlike Bob C., are willing to intelligently discuss the issues in my letter.


You picked the wrong guy when you expected to see a combination of those two.

Millard Baker

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #46 on: June 05, 2009, 10:41:40 AM »
Well said, but you are assuming that the IFBB gives a shit about anything more than profit.  Unless you compel them to support your cause in some way, such as through the unionization of athletes, judges, etc, the IFBB won't spend a dime trying to fight legislation or lend real support to members facing prosecution.  

A well reasoned argument won't cut it.  You're going to have to make them do it.

Very true. The lack of an athletes' union makes this unlikely.

Obviously, the IFBB athlete's rep is anything but that. The owners in the NFL or MLB would be so lucky to have such a self-serving arrangement.
SteroidEducation.com

Tapeworm

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 29107
  • Hold Fast
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #47 on: June 05, 2009, 10:46:00 AM »
Very true. The lack of an athletes' union makes this unlikely.

Obviously, the IFBB athlete's rep is anything but that. The owners in the NFL or MLB would be so lucky to have such a self-serving arrangement.

There's no law against the athletes forming a union and electing their own union head.  Bob could remain as athlete's rep in his present capacity.  Everybody wins.

dan18

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7307
  • I DID WHAT I DID BECAUSE I DO WHAT I WANT.
Re: Open response to Millard Baker re letter
« Reply #48 on: June 05, 2009, 10:52:19 AM »
There's no law against the athletes forming a union and electing their own union head.  Bob could remain as athlete's rep in his present capacity.  Everybody wins.
trust me they will find one in there little ifbb rule book to squash that fast,they dont want theses guys haveing minds of there own...go ahead and do g4p go ahead and burn a woman in a trunk do drugs but dont start a union takes away there control..
p

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7115
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: Open response to Millard Baker
« Reply #49 on: June 05, 2009, 11:00:47 AM »
The relevant issue, is that you have no standing. You are not an official of the IFBB/ NPC, you're not a part of the Pro League, you're not even an athlete within the organization, and no one has asked for YOUR input as to how we should address issues that pertain to the IFBB/ NPC.

what an amazing reply.  The NPC:  we report to no one.