Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 282 of 554 FirstFirst ... 182232272279280281282283284285292332382 ... LastLast
Results 5,621 to 5,640 of 11069
Like Tree282Likes

Thread: Chicago Fire Exam, March 2006

  1. #5621
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    66

    Default Owning a bar

    Does anyone on the job already know if CFD allows its FF's to own a bar? I've heard from people yes and no.

    Also, if no, would a spouse be able to own one?

    p.s. Here's one for the rumor mill- I heard there's a possibility of 2 academy classes at THE SAME TIME (day and night classes) once this contract and promotions get settled. Chew on that for awhile.....


  2. #5622
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daaaabears View Post
    Does anyone on the job already know if CFD allows its FF's to own a bar? I've heard from people yes and no.

    Also, if no, would a spouse be able to own one?

    p.s. Here's one for the rumor mill- I heard there's a possibility of 2 academy classes at THE SAME TIME (day and night classes) once this contract and promotions get settled. Chew on that for awhile.....

    VERY hard to believe, but who knows

  3. #5623
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Thanks for the info. I remember how excited I was to have a pretty good number when I received the test results, but that was almost 4 years ago! From what I have read on this thread, it sounds like this is quite a lengthy process.

    Another question, would the fact that I have had a couple knee surgeries in the past be held against me or make me ineligible? My knees are good now, but I've had some issues in the past.

  4. #5624
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daaaabears View Post
    Does anyone on the job already know if CFD allows its FF's to own a bar? I've heard from people yes and no.

    Also, if no, would a spouse be able to own one?

    p.s. Here's one for the rumor mill- I heard there's a possibility of 2 academy classes at THE SAME TIME (day and night classes) once this contract and promotions get settled. Chew on that for awhile.....
    Two classes at the same time, I love that rumor. Obviously I will believe it when I see it, but that would really speed things up. My hope for everyone waiting was that after this lengthy wait, they have 2 consecutive classes and maybe get 250-300 guys through over those two classes, but 2 at the same time would obviously speed it up even more and be great for all of us, including those that just passed the PAT in April.

  5. #5625
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Where do you go to find out when they are testing for fire or medics? i have looked everywhere and cant find anything...

  6. #5626
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tazman7 View Post
    Where do you go to find out when they are testing for fire or medics? i have looked everywhere and cant find anything...
    Every ten years so it would be around 2016 for FF. Medic exams are more frequent I hear.
    Here is a website dedicated to CFD medics:

    http://cfdmedics.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum.php

  7. #5627
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    478

    Default

    This is something you need
    Last edited by harrynuts; 11-07-2013 at 10:56 PM.

  8. #5628
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daaaabears View Post
    Does anyone on the job already know if CFD allows its FF's to own a bar? I've heard from people yes and no.
    Unless something has changed in recent years. It is perfectly fine to own a bar. My uncle had owned or partnered on numerous bars. Besides, i don't see how the CFD can legally tell you what to own or do on your off time as long as it is a lawful act. And owning a Bar is not only Lawful its a private business so its none of there business unless it directly effects your job when on duty i.e. coming in hungover, too many personal calls or shady acts that give you court time to name a few.

  9. #5629
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zstarsales04 View Post
    Zstar Electronic Co.Ltd, Sell fire cards for DS/NDSL/NDSi, also have Wii, DSiLL, NDSi, NDSL, PSP2000, PSP3000, PS2, PS3, PSPgo, PSP, Xbox360 accessories, all kinds of phones are available
    www.zstar.hk
    www.tigersupermall.com
    FYI to an Admin...spammer. There are 25 posts of the same thing. This isn't a classified thread.

  10. #5630
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chi7112 View Post
    Thanks for the info. I remember how excited I was to have a pretty good number when I received the test results, but that was almost 4 years ago! From what I have read on this thread, it sounds like this is quite a lengthy process.

    Another question, would the fact that I have had a couple knee surgeries in the past be held against me or make me ineligible? My knees are good now, but I've had some issues in the past.
    Do yourself a favor and be proactive.
    Get any an all medical records pertaining to your knee surgeries now so your can hand them in as soon as they ask for them. And they will ask for them.

  11. #5631
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    High court: Blacks can sue Chicago over firefighter exam!


    Not sure what if anything this has to do with us in the process but I guess we'll soon see...
    Last edited by blue2520; 05-24-2010 at 12:27 PM.

  12. #5632
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    High court rules for Chicago black firefighter applicants
    May 24, 2010 1:05 PM | UPDATED STORY
    WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court dealt a potentially costly defeat to the city of Chicago today, reinstating a discrimination ruling in favor of 6,000 black applicants for firefighting jobs in the 1990s.

    In a 9-0 decision, the justices said Chicago had used an entry-level test for the Chicago Fire Department that had a "disparate impact" based on race. And therefore, they said, the city was liable for paying damages to those applicants who had "qualified" scores on the test, but were excluded in favor of those who scored higher.

    Earlier this year, a lawyer for black applicants estimated the total damages in the case could reach $100 million.

    Monday's ruling is the latest twist in a long-running set of lawsuits over the use of civil service exams for hiring police and firefighters, both in Chicago and elsewhere.

    Fire department engineer Gregory Boggs said that he smiled when he heard the news.

    "I got a phone call from one of our attorneys," said Boggs, who is also president of the African American Firefighter's & Paramedic's League of Chicago, a plaintiff in the lawsuit. "I was very excited. It's been a hard fight. Fifteen years is a long time."

    The office of Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley released this statement on the court's ruling: "For decades we have tried to diversify the Chicago Fire Department. But at every turn, like most cities, we have been met with legal challenges from both sides. Still, this administration remains committed to ensuring that the Department more reflects the racial make-up of the City. For the 2006 entrance exam, we made it pass/fail; we engaged in an extensive recruitment campaign in African-American neighborhoods; and we continue to use nationally recognized, African-American outside experts to create and administer the exam. We will continue this effort."

    Justice Antonin Scalia, speaking at the court Monday, said he and his colleagues were applying the civil rights laws as written by Congress, not necessarily as he and others think it should be written. Since 1991, federal law has made it illegal for employers to use an "employment practice" that had a "disparate impact on the basis of race."

    The Chicago case began in 1995 when 26,000 applicants took a written test to become a city firefighter. Faced with the large number applicants for only several hundred jobs, the city decided it would only consider those who scored 89 or above.

    This cut-off score excluded a high percentage of the minority applicants. And after a trial in 2005, U.S. District Judge Joan Gottschall ruled the test had an illegal "disparate impact" because the city had not justified the use of the cut-off score. Experts had testified that applicants who scored in the 70s or 80s were shown to be capable of succeeding as firefighters.

    The city did not contest that conclusion, but it won a reversal from the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on a procedural technicality. The appellate judges said the applicants had waited too long to sue. They had not sued during the year when the test results were released, but sued only after the scores were used to decide who would be hired.

    Civil-rights lawyers appealed on behalf of Arthur Lewis and the other black applicants. They were joined by the Obama administration, which said the federal civil rights law forbids the "use" of discriminatory tests. And by that standard, the suit was filed on time.

    The high court agreed Monday in Lewis v. Chicago. "Our charge is to give effect to the law Congress enacted," Scalia said. The class of black applicants had sued at the time the test was used, and it resulted in their not being hired, he concluded.

    The unanimous ruling stands in sharp contrast to the deep split within the Supreme Court last year over a case involving white firefighters from New Haven, Connecticut. They sued after they were denied promotions when the city scrapped a test because its impact on black applicants. They won a 5-4 ruling from the Supreme Court saying they were victims of illegal discrimination.

    Chicago's case involved the opposite situation. Where New Haven had backed away from using its test results, Chicago pressed ahead and was later sued for using a test that had a discriminatory impact on blacks.

    In Monday's opinion, Scalia acknowledged this law creates "practical problems for employers" and can "produce puzzling results." He concluded, however, "it is a problem for Congress, not one that federal courts can fix."
    Last edited by blue2520; 05-24-2010 at 02:09 PM.

  13. #5633
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Beverly
    Posts
    415

    Default

    See more news releases in: African American-related News, Domestic Policy, Legal Issues


    NAACP Legal Defense Fund Succeeds in Defending Rights of 6,000 African-American Applicants for Chicago Firefighter Jobs

    The Supreme Court unanimously rejects Chicago's attempt to avoid accountability for hiring discrimination

    NEW YORK, May 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- After years fighting for justice, qualified African-American job applicants will finally have a fair opportunity to land a job with the Chicago fire department. Today the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the City of Chicago can be held accountable for each and every time it used a hiring practice that arbitrarily blocked qualified minority applicants from employment.

    "Today, the Supreme Court affirmed that job-seekers should not be denied justice based on a technicality," said John Payton, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., (LDF) who argued the case before the Court this past February. "This victory goes well beyond the immediate results in Chicago. It should ensure that no other fire department or employer uses a discriminatory test, and LDF will go the extra mile to make sure that they do not."

    The only issue in the case, Lewis v. the City of Chicago, was whether or not the plaintiffs filed their claims of discrimination within the time frame required by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – the nation's core equal employment law. Between 1996 and 2002, the City of Chicago hired more than 1,000 firefighters using the results of a test in a manner that unjustifiably excluded qualified African-American applicants. Although the City knew this from the outset, it used the test results for the next six years to hire eleven disproportionately white firefighter classes. After a federal district court found that the City's hiring practice was discriminatory and violated Title VII, the City did not appeal. Instead, the City tried to escape liability for its illegal hiring practice by arguing that the plaintiffs' claims were barred because they did not file their claims within 300 days after the City first announced its hiring plan. Vindicating LDF's arguments, the Court held that the City discriminated each and every time it hired firefighters and, therefore, the plaintiffs' claims were timely.

    "I am happy to know that the thousands of qualified firefighters who were denied a fair shot at a job with our department will finally have an opportunity to join our ranks in service to the people of Chicago," said Greg Boggs, President of the African American Firefighters & Paramedics League of Chicago.

    LDF represents the Lewis plaintiffs with co-counsel from the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Miner, Barnhill & Galland, P.C.; Hughes, Socol, Piers, Resnick & Dym Ltd.; the Law Office of Patrick O. Patterson, S.C.; Robinson, Curley & Clayton, P.C.; and solo practitioner Bridget Arimond.

    ABOUT LDF

    The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) is America's legal counsel on issues of race. Through advocacy and litigation, LDF focuses on issues of education, voter protection, economic justice and criminal justice. We encourage students to embark on careers in the public interest through scholarships and internship programs. LDF pursues racial justice to move our nation toward a society that fulfills the promise of equality for all.

    Available Topic Expert(s): For information on the listed expert(s), click appropriate link.

    John Payton:

  14. #5634
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bugsy2007 View Post
    See more news releases in: African American-related News, Domestic Policy, Legal Issues


    NAACP Legal Defense Fund Succeeds in Defending Rights of 6,000 African-American Applicants for Chicago Firefighter Jobs

    The Supreme Court unanimously rejects Chicago's attempt to avoid accountability for hiring discrimination

    NEW YORK, May 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- After years fighting for justice, qualified African-American job applicants will finally have a fair opportunity to land a job with the Chicago fire department. Today the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the City of Chicago can be held accountable for each and every time it used a hiring practice that arbitrarily blocked qualified minority applicants from employment.

    "Today, the Supreme Court affirmed that job-seekers should not be denied justice based on a technicality," said John Payton, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., (LDF) who argued the case before the Court this past February. "This victory goes well beyond the immediate results in Chicago. It should ensure that no other fire department or employer uses a discriminatory test, and LDF will go the extra mile to make sure that they do not."

    The only issue in the case, Lewis v. the City of Chicago, was whether or not the plaintiffs filed their claims of discrimination within the time frame required by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – the nation's core equal employment law. Between 1996 and 2002, the City of Chicago hired more than 1,000 firefighters using the results of a test in a manner that unjustifiably excluded qualified African-American applicants. Although the City knew this from the outset, it used the test results for the next six years to hire eleven disproportionately white firefighter classes. After a federal district court found that the City's hiring practice was discriminatory and violated Title VII, the City did not appeal. Instead, the City tried to escape liability for its illegal hiring practice by arguing that the plaintiffs' claims were barred because they did not file their claims within 300 days after the City first announced its hiring plan. Vindicating LDF's arguments, the Court held that the City discriminated each and every time it hired firefighters and, therefore, the plaintiffs' claims were timely.

    "I am happy to know that the thousands of qualified firefighters who were denied a fair shot at a job with our department will finally have an opportunity to join our ranks in service to the people of Chicago," said Greg Boggs, President of the African American Firefighters & Paramedics League of Chicago.

    LDF represents the Lewis plaintiffs with co-counsel from the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Miner, Barnhill & Galland, P.C.; Hughes, Socol, Piers, Resnick & Dym Ltd.; the Law Office of Patrick O. Patterson, S.C.; Robinson, Curley & Clayton, P.C.; and solo practitioner Bridget Arimond.

    ABOUT LDF

    The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) is America's legal counsel on issues of race. Through advocacy and litigation, LDF focuses on issues of education, voter protection, economic justice and criminal justice. We encourage students to embark on careers in the public interest through scholarships and internship programs. LDF pursues racial justice to move our nation toward a society that fulfills the promise of equality for all.

    Available Topic Expert(s): For information on the listed expert(s), click appropriate link.

    John Payton:


    What the hell does this mean?

    "I am happy to know that the thousands of qualified firefighters who were denied a fair shot at a job with our department will finally have an opportunity to join our ranks in service to the people of Chicago," said Greg Boggs, President of the African American Firefighters & Paramedics League of Chicago".

  15. #5635
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Beverly
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blue2520 View Post
    What the hell does this mean?

    "I am happy to know that the thousands of qualified firefighters who were denied a fair shot at a job with our department will finally have an opportunity to join our ranks in service to the people of Chicago," said Greg Boggs, President of the African American Firefighters & Paramedics League of Chicago".
    I believe the original ruling was 132 or 152 have to be hired within one year......there's links to the ruling on this thread if you want to read it.....it will **** you off....they get back pay, retro seniority as a date of hire of 1997 or 1999?....will start out with 10+ years of seniority!!!!!!!!!!!!!!start the academy making around 80k......makes me sick

  16. #5636
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bugsy2007 View Post
    I believe the original ruling was 132 or 152 have to be hired within one year......there's links to the ruling on this thread if you want to read it.....it will **** you off....they get back pay, retro seniority as a date of hire of 1997 or 1999?....will start out with 10+ years of seniority!!!!!!!!!!!!!!start the academy making around 80k......makes me sick
    Well if that is true then we're pretty much fuc***... How do they pick the 130+ that get on the job? This blows my mind. I think it's best that I just leave this alone.
    Last edited by blue2520; 05-24-2010 at 02:44 PM.

  17. #5637
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Beverly
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Court says black firefighter lawsuit can proceed
    By JESSE J. HOLLAND (AP) – 33 minutes ago

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a group of African Americans did not wait too long to sue Chicago over a hiring test they challenged as discriminatory, freeing them to collect a lower court judgment.

    It is the second time in as many years that the high court has tackled discrimination in testing within the firefighting ranks. In a landmark case last year, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision said New Haven, Conn., violated white firefighters' civil rights, throwing out an exam in which no African-Americans scored high enough to be promoted to lieutenant or captain.

    In Monday's opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the court that the applicants' lawsuit over a city of Chicago test used to weed out potential firefighter trainee applicants was not too late.

    "Today, the Supreme Court affirmed that job-seekers should not be denied justice based on a technicality," said John Payton, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., who argued the case. "This victory goes well beyond the immediate results in Chicago. It should ensure that no other fire department or employer uses a discriminatory test, and LDF will go the extra mile to make sure that they do not."

    Anyone who scored 64 or below was deemed not qualified. But the city set a second cutoff score of 89 points.

    Officials told applicants who scored below 89 but above 64 that although they passed the test, they likely would not be hired because of the large number of people who scored 89 or above. The majority of those in the top-scoring group were white; only 11 percent were black.

    People are supposed to sue within 300 days after an employment action they seek to challenge as unlawful.

    The city says the clock started when it announced the use of the test scores on Jan. 26, 1996. The first lawsuit in the case was filed on March 31, 1997, 430 days after the city announced the results.

    But the plaintiffs say a new act of discrimination also happened each time the scores were used in hiring firefighter trainees between May 1996 and October 2001.

    A U.S. District judge agreed with the black applicants. After an eight-day trial, the federal judge ordered the city to hire 132 randomly selected African American applicants who scored above 64. The court also ordered the city to count up the backpay and divide it among the rest of the applicants.The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago overturned that decision.

    In Monday's high court ruling, Scalia said: "It may be true that the City's January 1996 decision to adopt the cutoff score (and to create a list of the applicants above it) gave rise to a freestanding disparate impact claim. ... But it does not follow that no new violation occurred — and no new claims could arise — when the City implemented that decision down the road. If petitioners could prove that the City 'used' the 'practice' that 'causes a disparate impact,' they could prevail."

    City officials and business groups argue that the court's decision allowing the black firefighter lawsuit and judgment will cause a host of legal problems for them, including opening them to lawsuits claiming unintended discrimination "for practices they have used regularly for years."

    "It is not our task to assess the consequences of each approach and adopt the one that produces the least mischief," Scalia wrote. "Our charge is to give effect to the law Congress enacted ... Congress allowed claims to be brought against an employer who uses a practice that causes disparate impact, whatever the employer's motive and whether or not he has employed the same practice in the past. If that effect was unintended, it is a problem for Congress, not one that federal courts can fix."

    The city's firefighter applicant test is now pass/fail, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said.

    "For decades we have tried to diversify the Chicago Fire Department," Daley said. "But at every turn, like most cities, we have been met with legal challenges from both sides. Still, this administration remains committed to ensuring that the department more reflects the racial make-up of the city."

    The case is Lewis v. Chicago, 08-974.

  18. #5638
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bugsy2007 View Post
    Court says black firefighter lawsuit can proceed
    By JESSE J. HOLLAND (AP) – 33 minutes ago

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a group of African Americans did not wait too long to sue Chicago over a hiring test they challenged as discriminatory, freeing them to collect a lower court judgment.

    It is the second time in as many years that the high court has tackled discrimination in testing within the firefighting ranks. In a landmark case last year, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision said New Haven, Conn., violated white firefighters' civil rights, throwing out an exam in which no African-Americans scored high enough to be promoted to lieutenant or captain.

    In Monday's opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the court that the applicants' lawsuit over a city of Chicago test used to weed out potential firefighter trainee applicants was not too late.

    "Today, the Supreme Court affirmed that job-seekers should not be denied justice based on a technicality," said John Payton, president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., who argued the case. "This victory goes well beyond the immediate results in Chicago. It should ensure that no other fire department or employer uses a discriminatory test, and LDF will go the extra mile to make sure that they do not."

    Anyone who scored 64 or below was deemed not qualified. But the city set a second cutoff score of 89 points.

    Officials told applicants who scored below 89 but above 64 that although they passed the test, they likely would not be hired because of the large number of people who scored 89 or above. The majority of those in the top-scoring group were white; only 11 percent were black.

    People are supposed to sue within 300 days after an employment action they seek to challenge as unlawful.

    The city says the clock started when it announced the use of the test scores on Jan. 26, 1996. The first lawsuit in the case was filed on March 31, 1997, 430 days after the city announced the results.

    But the plaintiffs say a new act of discrimination also happened each time the scores were used in hiring firefighter trainees between May 1996 and October 2001.

    A U.S. District judge agreed with the black applicants. After an eight-day trial, the federal judge ordered the city to hire 132 randomly selected African American applicants who scored above 64. The court also ordered the city to count up the backpay and divide it among the rest of the applicants.The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago overturned that decision.

    In Monday's high court ruling, Scalia said: "It may be true that the City's January 1996 decision to adopt the cutoff score (and to create a list of the applicants above it) gave rise to a freestanding disparate impact claim. ... But it does not follow that no new violation occurred — and no new claims could arise — when the City implemented that decision down the road. If petitioners could prove that the City 'used' the 'practice' that 'causes a disparate impact,' they could prevail."

    City officials and business groups argue that the court's decision allowing the black firefighter lawsuit and judgment will cause a host of legal problems for them, including opening them to lawsuits claiming unintended discrimination "for practices they have used regularly for years."

    "It is not our task to assess the consequences of each approach and adopt the one that produces the least mischief," Scalia wrote. "Our charge is to give effect to the law Congress enacted ... Congress allowed claims to be brought against an employer who uses a practice that causes disparate impact, whatever the employer's motive and whether or not he has employed the same practice in the past. If that effect was unintended, it is a problem for Congress, not one that federal courts can fix."

    The city's firefighter applicant test is now pass/fail, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said.

    "For decades we have tried to diversify the Chicago Fire Department," Daley said. "But at every turn, like most cities, we have been met with legal challenges from both sides. Still, this administration remains committed to ensuring that the department more reflects the racial make-up of the city."

    The case is Lewis v. Chicago, 08-974.
    Well anyone that was worried about age...You're out. The ones that just took the PAT, it's gonna be years before they get to us if ever. The ones that are waiting for that final letter..better hold on to your jobs cause you ain't goin anywhere..

  19. #5639
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    36

    Default

    How are they gonna hire 132 of them? Most are probably to old. I doubt if they can find that many who wont take the money. I think they still have to have the qualifactions ( age, drug, backround, and pass pat, etc.) what a blow to us waiting. I just took pat in april. If its not one thing its another...

  20. #5640
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Beverly
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blue2520 View Post
    Well anyone that was worried about age...You're out. The ones that just took the PAT, it's gonna be years before they get to us if ever. The ones that are waiting for that final letter..better hold on to your jobs cause you ain't goin anywhere..
    I really don't see the City putting a class through the academy of all blacks....they may throw a few of you guys waiting with other races in with them...but this is the City so anything could happen....this could be another nighmare in the making

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. World Of Fire Report: 03-19-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-21-2005, 11:02 PM
  2. World Of Fire Report: 03-15-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-18-2005, 08:15 AM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 03-09-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-10-2005, 07:41 PM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 03-29-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-30-2004, 10:52 PM
  5. World Of Fire Report: 03-28-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-29-2004, 09:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts