Welcome to the Circus, a response to Canmore Leader:
From this article I would caution several things;
1) Let it serve as a reminder, "don't believe everything you read in the paper."
a) I assure you that I never worked for the Calgary Police Service, but as my website points out I worked as a transit cop for Calgary Transit.
I don't blame the reporter, as the conversation was circular and he made the mistake of letting me ramble on at which point we covered ten or so subjects at one time. The printing of my street name while working plain clothes was another mistake, but mine for assuming was just part of our general conversation and again assuming was not going to be used in the write up. I should have pointed out to the reporter what the use of this name could mean or could do, but I assumed he understood the nature of that information from our conversation and that all of such information would be generalized - assumption, the mother of all fuck ups :)
It is no wonder, as well that so many people who are connected to addiction in some fashion; whether addicts themselves, their family, friends, or lovers have such difficulty understanding the difference from then (active addiction) to now (sobriety).
The process I attempted to outline for the reporter started in active addiction where indeed I lived a hundred lies every day, but we also talked about the progression to the now where I and other addicts/alcoholics have to be dilligent in our efforts to not only seek the truth about self, but act it out in daily life. The "liar" point in his mind was pushed home when he asked for the information about the University professor who was using my book in her course. I provided it with no hesitation because there is no reason not too, but the look on his face was that of a child who could see only bits and pieces of a puzzle from the outside looking in and he simply did not believe.
I don't blame him for his sometimes innacurate report, as it comes from his mind and a scrambled session of two men talking about everything under the sun related to one of the men. I am sure his recording sounded like a madman chatting non-stop about everything whenever he was asked a question. I think he is a good man even though these mistakes were made, as I believe he made them not realizing they were mistakes.
It was a good hour of coffee and talking at the end of the day and I appreciated then as much as I do today, his interest in the books and the purpose they play in my life and maybe in the lives of others. My only hope is that no one was negatively affected by some of the information which is not 100 percent accurate or the information that should have been simple background for the author that is accurate.
Thank you for all of the support,
David Lewry
From this article I would caution several things;
1) Let it serve as a reminder, "don't believe everything you read in the paper."
a) I assure you that I never worked for the Calgary Police Service, but as my website points out I worked as a transit cop for Calgary Transit.
I don't blame the reporter, as the conversation was circular and he made the mistake of letting me ramble on at which point we covered ten or so subjects at one time. The printing of my street name while working plain clothes was another mistake, but mine for assuming was just part of our general conversation and again assuming was not going to be used in the write up. I should have pointed out to the reporter what the use of this name could mean or could do, but I assumed he understood the nature of that information from our conversation and that all of such information would be generalized - assumption, the mother of all fuck ups :)
It is no wonder, as well that so many people who are connected to addiction in some fashion; whether addicts themselves, their family, friends, or lovers have such difficulty understanding the difference from then (active addiction) to now (sobriety).
The process I attempted to outline for the reporter started in active addiction where indeed I lived a hundred lies every day, but we also talked about the progression to the now where I and other addicts/alcoholics have to be dilligent in our efforts to not only seek the truth about self, but act it out in daily life. The "liar" point in his mind was pushed home when he asked for the information about the University professor who was using my book in her course. I provided it with no hesitation because there is no reason not too, but the look on his face was that of a child who could see only bits and pieces of a puzzle from the outside looking in and he simply did not believe.
I don't blame him for his sometimes innacurate report, as it comes from his mind and a scrambled session of two men talking about everything under the sun related to one of the men. I am sure his recording sounded like a madman chatting non-stop about everything whenever he was asked a question. I think he is a good man even though these mistakes were made, as I believe he made them not realizing they were mistakes.
It was a good hour of coffee and talking at the end of the day and I appreciated then as much as I do today, his interest in the books and the purpose they play in my life and maybe in the lives of others. My only hope is that no one was negatively affected by some of the information which is not 100 percent accurate or the information that should have been simple background for the author that is accurate.
Thank you for all of the support,
David Lewry