🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 02:55:15 GMT, in ba.mountain-folk,David
Scruggs <bcfd36@aol.com> wrote:

>Glen Appleby wrote:
>
>> On 22 Jan 2002 23:00:03 GMT, in
>> ba.mountain-folk,robert@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Robert Kennedy)
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm kinda glad that you posted this to the whole string of groups
>> to which Scrubbs posted this, initially.
>
>BS Deleted

Very telling, Dave.  I wanted to make it very clear that I do not
have bad feeling about all firefighters.  I tried to make it
clear that some of the BCFD were not baffoons and that probibly
most firefighters were doing something of value.  You snip is and
call it "BS".

>> In the early/mid 80s, one of the crew seemed to think it was
>> great fun to drive a fire vehicle down Hwy 9 at way too high a
>> speed and happened to take out some person crossing the road,
>> near a curve, where the driver could not see at the speed that
>> they were traveling.
>
>The guy was 17 years old, in his personal vehicle. The lady in question
>was wearing a black sweater with black pants. Not an excuse, but it does
>change the situation. A tragedy for all.

OK, yer right.  If a woman happens to wear a mini skirt, it is
somewhat understandable that she would be raped.  Not an excuse,
exactly, but it changes the picture.

>> At around that time, I saw the crew of the day trying to help
>> some babe get into her locked Volvo wagon.  They tried all of the
>> standard tricks to accomplish it, but had no success.
>>
>> This lady had two adolescent kids along with her.  They were
>> rushing about, trying to see what was going on and trying to
>> help.
>>
>> Apparently, between the frustration of not being able to get the
>> car unlocked and not looking as macho as they would like, they
>> told the kids to get outta there.  ("Go away, kid.  You bother
>> me.")
>>
>> So, instead of hanging around the doors to watch and help, the 2
>> kids went around to the back of the wagon and simply opened the
>> back door.
>>
>> Not a single one of the firemen gave the kids their do.  The kids
>> got no thanks for what they did.
>
>My guess is you are twisting things again. 

Yer guess, true, since you were not even around at the time and
you couldn't possibly accept that some of yer buddies are
assholes.

>Why didn't you stop to help.

LOL!!  These guys were playing macho duck.  "I'M IN CHARGE!!
EVERYBODY STAND BACK WHILE I WORK!"

I was standing right next to the Volvo while Kathy was in the
store.  I didn't have a slick (but neither did they, apparently)
and I knew that any attempt by me to help would gain no better
results than those boiz were getting from their twisted coat
hanger.

They wanted to play the game, it was fine with me.  I considered
it to be entertainment.

Given the methods that they were attempting, I was betting with
myself about their chances of success.

Well, BC doesn't allow slot machines, yet.  What do you want from
me?

>> But those are fairly minor incidents.  They simply showed that
>> some of the firefighters had issues that really needed to be
>> dealt with before being allowed to wear the funny hat and pants.
>> Heck, one can find that type in almost any organization.
>>
>> What *really* torques me, though, is that some of the
>> firefighters seem to have no concept of confidentiality or
>> propriaty.
>>
>> On at least two occasions, I am aware of them being involved in a
>> situation (where they served no good purpose) and afterwards, we
>> *know* that they told uninvolved parties of what happened.
>>
>> On one of those occasions, it was our own dear David Scrubbs who
>> took part in spilling the beans, right here.
>
>Not of our calls. 

Well, then, you better look into folks driving around in yer
trucks and dressing up like you boiz.

>You are still pissed because Emily got ahold of your
>posts/lies/distortions about Hoot. Once again, she didn't get them from
>me. Since I do know who it was, I'll ask for permission to reveal the
>name.

Different situation, but let's go with it.

Oh, please do -- and have that person post it from his own
account, please.

See, I'm guessing that I know who it was (another bet with myself
-- just for entertainment purposes, mind you) and I'm guessing
that they don't hang out here, either.

This would strongly suggest that you made the post available to
him and he to Em.

Proud of yerself?

>> Now, I don't know what anybody else thinks that they can expect
>> as far as confidentiality, but I know that there is need for
>> medical folks to retain confidentiality.
>
>We did what? I don't think so.

Really?  *You* are the one who, in one of those situations,
posted it right here on this newsgroup.  And you deny it?

Simply amazing.

I'll adderss the last part of your response all by itself,
because it deserves special attention.

"Who we are and who we become depends, in part, on who we love."
-- "A General Theory Of Love"  Thanks, Mom
______________________________________________________________
Glen Appleby  glena@armory.com <HTTP://www.armory.com/~glena/>