Tom, you and your board of rubber stamping strokes are both full of
shit: Rennaker has repeatedly violated your own "ethics" policy, and one
memorable occasion was when this fat piece of shit got on cavers and
said that Jablonski ( another IANTD instructor -  or at least he was at
the time )  "killed students". 

Lamar Hires had to make this asshole apologize while you sat back with
your pud in your hand and refused to intervene. You of course come
screaming out with full turkey feathers aloft in defense of this slcb
Rennaker every last time he gets the citicism he so badly deserves.

You keep reinforcing the need for alternatives to your little sanctum
sactorum of mediocrity known  as "IANTD". By the way, are the words
"DEEP AIR" still part of your logo?


Mike Bruic wrote:
> 
> Okay Tom, If IANTD chooses to hide things and hold Kangaroo Courts, so
> be it. I really didn't think I would get anywhere pursuing this one
> with you, and you proved me right. Tom just like you, I cc this letter
> also, it went to cavers, so any comments you wish to make you can make
> to them also.
> 
> Bruic
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
>      From: Tom Mount
>      To: Barb Lander ; Barrie Heard ; Mike Bruic
>      Cc: William J Turbeville II ; Victor Williams ; Vebjørn
>      Karlsen ; Shelley orlowski ; Richard Pyle ; Richard
>      Nordstrom ; Richard Bull ; Reg Creighton ; Paul Neilsen ;
>      Paul Lijnen ; Nancy Romanica ; Morgan Wells ; Mitsu Tanaka ;
>      Kim Cochrane ; Kevingurrphoenix@cs*.co* ; Kevin Denlay ; John
>      Thornton ; Johan Candert ; Jim Mims ; Jill Heinerth ;
>      iantdhq ; iantdfrance ; IANTD UK ; IANTD Sweden ; IANTD
>      South Africa ; IANTD Scandanvia ; IANTD S.E. Asia ; IANTD
>      Portugal ; IANTD Philippines Alex ; IANTD Micronesia ; IANTD
>      Korea ; IANTD Japan Training ; IANTD Ireland ; IANTD Greece
>      ; IANTD Germany ; IANTD Czech ; IANTD - BRAZIL ; Gregg
>      Stanton ; Gil ; gary taylor ; Garry Howland ; Frans
>      Vandermolen ; Fabio Ruberti ; Fabio Amaral ; Erika Haley ;
>      EGIL ; Dick Rutkowski ; Dick Long ; David Thompson ; Casco
>      Antiguo ; carl douglas ; Bill Nadeau ; Lamar Hires
>      Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 9:23 AM
>      Subject: Re: NAMES PLEASE
> 
>      Mike
> 
>      One as I told you if you think the BOA will feelthis is
>      worth and ethics charge compared to the other issues we have
>      to deal with then I will give you all their names and you
>      may pursue it.
> 
>      I do not know of the past events where Rennaker has
>      performed unethical actions that reflect on IANTD. Matter
>      off act Bill has done little to effect IANTD one way or the
>      other
> 
>      I seem to get the blunt of your attention I guess because
>      IANTD is the only agency that even reviewed the
>      circumstances and I'm the only one who even discusses it
>      with you. So I guess that makes us the bad guy to you. So be
>      it.
> 
> 
>      Mike no one supports any negative behavior. I personally did
>      give Bill a warning that if he had said such things it could
>      not happen again, as I have already told you. I and Lamar
>      and others on the IANTD bOA that I have talked to do not
>      consider this to be a magnitude nor circumstance to warrant
>      additional actions. We feel this is something you and Bill
>      could and should ,as the N Fl cave community is rather
>      small, work out among yourselves.
> 
>      Now Mike this is copied to the entire BOA so any comments
>      you wish to make to them do so.
> 
> 
>      Respectfully yours,
>      Tom Mount
>      CEO IANTD World HQ
>      http://www.iantd.com
> 
>           ----- Original Message -----
>           From: Mike Bruic
>           To: Tom Mount
>           Cc: Lamar Hires
>           Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 6:44 PM
>           Subject: Re: NAMES PLEASE
> 
>                Tom, you wrote;
> 
>                <Now no one is accusing anyone of lying
>                accept you when you accuse them>
> 
>                Tom, I think you are missing the whole
>                point here, "I AM ACCUSING RENNAKER OF
>                LYING", and I have caught him lying
>                twice trying to save his ass on this one
>                already. I thought I already proved this
>                to you, and the third time will be when
>                I find out who the so-called witnesses
>                are.
> 
>                <The only reason anyone other than a
>                couple of you know anything about this
>                is because you made it a public
>                knowledge>
> 
>                Tom read the letter, Bill himself
>                acknowledges telling other people these
>                lies, so I guess I should just sit there
>                and take it huh.
> 
>                <Lamar did say he did not smell beer on
>                your breath  but that he also was not
>                very close to you.>
> 
>                I find that hard to believe since me and
>                Lamar discussed in every detail where I
>                looked, and where he should look. This
>                even included drawing maps in the sand,
>                but if this is what Lamar truly said,
>                then I will accept it.
> 
>                <I have not told Bill who supported you
>                just that you had someone and he has not
>                demanded the names>
> 
>                Tom, you know that Bill does not need
>                the name, I CC'ed everything to him.
>                Read my letter again, I do not have
>                nothing to hide
> 
>                < why should I give these names to
>                you..............you are not defending
>                yourself from anyone or anything.>
> 
>                Tom, stop and think for a minute, why do
>                you think I filed this complaint???
>                Rennaker tells people that I show up to
>                cave recoveries drunk and screaming at
>                him. That I I'm so drunk that I didn't
>                even realize that I'm not wearing a
>                drysuit when I get into the water.
>                That he himself could have found the
>                girl, but instead the sheriffs choose
>                the drunk and stopped him from getting
>                into the water. So, correct me if I'm
>                wrong, but I take what you are
>                saying here is that if someone is being
>                prosecuted for lying the defense
>                (Rennaker) can call any witness he wants
>                to say anything they want and the
>                prosecution (that is me) is not entitled
>                to here this??? This sounds like a
>                reverse angle to a Kangaroo Court to me.
> 
>                <the two of you should set down and work
>                it out>
> 
>                I tried to Tom, I even called "you" and
>                Lamar on this one. Sadly, I think the
>                only thing Rennaker would understand is
>                a ass kicking, and I doubt that would do
>                any good. Yes, I think he is that
>                stupid.
> 
>                <I do not think it is reveleant whether
>                you had beer on your breath or not if
>                you were not diving.>
> 
>                Ah Tom, wake up, I was diving.
> 
>                 <this is not a serious issue nor one
>                that has really affected you
>                professionally or personally in any
>                significant way.>
> 
>                Great, then you and Lamar won't take any
>                offense at all when I start promulgating
>                bullshit and lies about the two of you
>                then will you. As a matter of fact, what
>                you have demonstrated to me is that I
>                can do it over and over again. I came to
>                the you guys for resolution, not
>                cover-up. You both know that it is not
>                the first time Rennaker has done this
>                kind of stuff before, and the way
>                you choose to handle it in the past
>                tells me it will undoubtedly not be the
>                last. Rennaker has already disgraced and
>                caused all the organizations he
>                represents allot bad PR, and I have only
>                started where others have left off.
> 
>                Bruic
> 
>                ----- Original Message -----
>                From: Tom Mount
>                To: Mike Bruic
>                Cc: Lamar Hires
>                Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 6:07 PM
>                Subject: Re: NAMES PLEASE
> 
>                Mike
>                I have been teaching thus not even
>                thinking about this or reading emails
> 
>                Now no one is accusing anyone of lying
>                accept you when you accuse them
> 
>                I have not told Bill who supported you
>                just that you had someone and he has not
>                demanded the names
> 
>                Thus why should I give these names to
>                you and put then in a line of fire from
>                you, they do not need to get a lot of
>                heated emails because thy have made a
>                statement. No one has made a complaint
>                against you so you are not defending
>                yourself from anyone or anything. Bill
>                would have had more of a right to know
>                as he was accussed by you, but he does
>                not. If a action had been taken yes then
>                he would have known the people who
>                started the action.
> 
>                I had a long talk to Lamar today on this
>                issue, he does not think this situation
>                would result in anything accept a BOA
>                action stating the two of you should set
>                down and work it out as it is more
>                personal than ethical. The only reason
>                anyone other than a couple of you know
>                anything about this is because you made
>                it a public knowledge
> 
>                Lamar did say he did not smell beer on
>                your breath  but that he also was not
>                very close to you. He does not look at
>                this as a serious event and does not
>                (like me) understand why it is being
>                blown so far out of proportion. Have you
>                read some of your own published post.
> 
>                I do not think it is reveleant whether
>                you had beer on your breath or not if
>                you were not diving. nor do I think
>                anyone else would. And I definitely
>                believe you were not drunk. I see no
>                need to contact the sheriff deputies as
>                no formal action is going to be pursued
>                .
> 
>                We take a lot of actions on a lot of
>                issues this is not a serious issue nor
>                one that has really affected you
>                professionally or personally in any
>                significant way.  If you want to push it
>                then contact Lamar who is quite active
>                on the BOA and I think he will state
>                what I have just stated. Lamar is CCed
>                on this post
> 
>                If you still are not satisified I will
>                give you the entire BOA contacts and you
>                can get everyones opnion but I think it
>                will be about the same. Especially as
>                some of your actions most likely would
>                be considered as well . You know the old
>                kittle and pot return
> 
>                Respectfully yours,
>                Tom Mount
>                CEO IANTD World HQ
>                http://www.iantd.com
> 
>                     ----- Original Message -----
>                     From: Mike Bruic
>                     To: Tom Mount
>                     Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000
>                     3:00 PM
>                     Subject: NAMES PLEASE
> 
>                     Tom, Monday has come and gone
>                     and you still have not told me
>                     the names of Rennaker's
>                     witnesses. They have had all
>                     weekend to collaborate and get
>                     their lies straight, and just
>                     like Rennaker has a right to
>                     see my witnesses, I do to. Or
>                     does he really have any?
> 
>                     Bruic

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]