<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"

	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Corruption At The Heart Of The UCI</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cyclismas.com/biscuits/corruption-at-the-heart-of-the-uci/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cyclismas.com/biscuits/corruption-at-the-heart-of-the-uci/</link>
	<description>a fresh take on cycling news and commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 May 2015 20:10:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: hepular</title>
		<link>http://www.cyclismas.com/biscuits/corruption-at-the-heart-of-the-uci/#comment-181</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hepular]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyclismas.com/?p=3257#comment-181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m suspicious.  

 

Article above claims that writer possesses copy of letter from McQuaid to team(s).  Article includes detailed paraphrases, but does not directly quote said letter.  

 

Why not?  

 

If a compelling legal or ethical reason exists to refrain from quoting this letter (or, even better, from providing a .pdf copy of it for public examination), why is this reason not explained in the article?

 

Rhetorically, at the very least, asserting the existence of a letter and then not quoting directly from it raises credibility questions.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m suspicious.  </p>
<p>Article above claims that writer possesses copy of letter from McQuaid to team(s).  Article includes detailed paraphrases, but does not directly quote said letter.  </p>
<p>Why not?  </p>
<p>If a compelling legal or ethical reason exists to refrain from quoting this letter (or, even better, from providing a .pdf copy of it for public examination), why is this reason not explained in the article?</p>
<p>Rhetorically, at the very least, asserting the existence of a letter and then not quoting directly from it raises credibility questions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: no_use_for_a_name</title>
		<link>http://www.cyclismas.com/biscuits/corruption-at-the-heart-of-the-uci/#comment-180</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[no_use_for_a_name]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 21:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyclismas.com/?p=3257#comment-180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Questions regarding &quot;the letter.&quot;

 

Whose letterhead?  UCI? GCP?

Did the signature have a title?  ex. Boss of the UCI or maybe Boss of GCP

 

So much for Alain&#039;s claim that GCP is like any other race organizer...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Questions regarding &#8220;the letter.&#8221;</p>
<p>Whose letterhead?  UCI? GCP?</p>
<p>Did the signature have a title?  ex. Boss of the UCI or maybe Boss of GCP</p>
<p>So much for Alain&#8217;s claim that GCP is like any other race organizer&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
