Tom, you wrote,

I see no
>                need to contact the sheriff deputies as
>                no formal action is going to be pursued

Correct me if I am wrong here, but what you are really saying is that your
taking Rennakers word because he sells allot of your c-cards. You know,
money in your pocket.

Bruic

----- Original Message -----
From: Trey <trey@ne*.co*>
To: Mike Bruic <mikebruic@di*.co*>
Cc: Barrie Heard <bheard@dc*.ne*.au*>; Barb Lander
<blander@un*.co*>; Tom Mount <TOM.MOUNT@wo*.at*.ne*>;
<cavers@cavers.com>; Lamar Hires <lamar@di*.co*>; Bill Nadeau
<tekdiver@na*.ar*.co*>; carl douglas <carl.douglas@sl*.se*>;
Casco Antiguo <buceo@ca*.co*>; David Thompson <DThomp@te*.es*>;
Dick Long <dicklong@du*.co*>; Dick Rutkowski
<dick@hy*.co*>; EGIL <egil@ad*.pp*.fi*>; Erika Haley
<haley@ca*.ky*>; Fabio Amaral <fabio_amaral@ya*.co*>; Fabio Ruberti
<fabio.ruberti@ti*.it*>; Frans Vandermolen
<75204.1243@co*.co*>; Garry Howland <ghowland@fw*.gu*.ne*>; gary
taylor <diveonmix@ao*.co*>; Gil <gildiver@di*.co*.br*>; Gregg Stanton
<gstanton@ma*.fs*.ed*>; IANTD - BRAZIL <iantdbrazil@uo*.co*.br*>; IANTD
Czech <kony@un*.cz*>; IANTD Germany <iantd@su*.de*>; IANTD Greece
<ia
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: NAMES PLEASE


> 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]