Thursday, August 18, 2016

# 197 Scott Neeson seeks feedback about the Cambodian Children's Fund! Here's a little.

Dear Scott

You want to hear what people think of the Cambodian Children's Fund, right?

An opportunity too good to pass up, though I imagine that you will have the results of your survey already. 


The report you write for yourself, for CCF (based on feedback of course!) will be glowing. 90 something percent will think yours is the best in Cambodia (maybe even in the world!) You will get 90 something percept for transparency and accountability and, no doubt, you'll be able to organize for someone to give you another award; wrap another red sash around your shoulders. And you’ll find some hack journalist to write a hagiographic piece about how you gave up your life in Hollywood to come to Cambodia to save the children etc. and then post it on Facebook as if it is real journalism.

In one respect, Scott, you are totally transparent. Blind Freddy can see that you are a fraud.


Let's start with this post on your Facebook  page:



This page is no longer online. You took it down. For those reading this, who saw the post and wonder why it was taken down, here's the reason.


One person made a comment in response to it to the effect that they wished you had shown as much interest in the death of one of your students as you did in the death of one of your bodyguards. In making such a comment this person was opening up a can of worms that you do not want opened. So let’s open it a little.

Nget Kim Loat, died in CCF care
A few years ago this CCF girl died whilst in your care. Her name was Nget Kim Loat. CCF decided to hush up her death. As far as the world knew, Nget Kim Loat was not in CCF residential care.

I wrote the following to Bob Tufts, one of CCF’s board members, on 26th September 2015

Dear Mr Tufts

As you know, Scott Neeson refuses, as a matter of policy, to answer any questions.

The Cambodian Children’s Fund likewise refuses to answer any questions.

I will, nonetheless, put some questions to you and have them on record:

Did CCF know that a child resident at CCF suffered from a readily treatable condition by the name of Nephrotic syndrome?

Did CCF provide this young girl with appropriate treatment for her condition? This includes medication and the special diet required by her illness?

Did a nurse at CCF refuse to act appropriately when this girl complained of fainting and other symptoms associated with her condition?

When alerted to the graveness of this girl’s illness, did CCF respond with appropriate speed to her need to be transported by ambulance to hospital?

After the girl died, did CCF refuse to allow her friends to attend her funeral?

best wishes

I received no response from Bob or from any other member of the CCF board whom I notified about the death of Nget Kim Loat. The board had no interest; just as the board has shown no interest in any of the multiple Neeson/CCF scams pointed out to them this past couple of years. From a moral point of view, from a legal point of view, the CCF board is complicit in your breaches of the legal and human rights of both the children in your care and of the families you force to sign illegal contracts.

Nget Kim Loat died as as a result of CCF incompetence. And then, to add insult to injury, you refused to allow her fellow CCF students to attend her funeral.   

One friend of Nget Kim Loat’s kicked up a fuss about not only the way in which she had died but the CCF cover up. James Mc Cabe let this student know, in no uncertain terms, that if s/he were to say anything about the girl's death in public he would sic the Cambodian police onto him/her. A few days later this student was expelled. This is the way CCF deals with problems - threaten and intimidate into silence the person who may make the problem public.

When this student commented on your post about the death of your bodyguard (one of three!), linking it to the death of Nget Kim Loat, you took it down post haste.

Now what about Alan Lemon and the Oasis Bar - a girlie bar owned by his former de facto wife; a bar that Lemon ran, with his de facto, before falling foul of the Australian Federal Police through aiding and abetting James Mc Cabe when he was on the run from the AFP. 


Here's Alan, recently, paying the Oasis Bar a visit.

 Now of course, there is nothing wrong (at least not illegal) about a middle aged man visiting a girlie bar. But really, Scott, this is not a good look for a man who co-runs a Child Protection Unit - to be frequenting a girlie bar wearing his CCF t-shirt! 

Or do you think this is OK?

Here's what can be found on the internet about Street 136 (where the Oasis Bar is located) and about the Oasis Bar itself:

“Phnom Penh is a giant red light district, with go-go or ‘hostess’ girly bars the most public example of Cambodian sex tourism…There is no centralized red light district in Phnom Penh, but the area around Street 130, Street 136 and Street 51 is where the majority of bar girls can be found, at any time of the day or night. Most of the ‘bars’ are little more than brothels with beer…We walked into (the Oasis Bar), unknowing that it was a hooker bar. And as soon as we entered the door we were hounded by girls who were absolutely barkin. Lots of old men come in to pick up some cheap Cambodian girls and is a very unpleasant place to be.”

Let’s end this latest episode of “This is Your Life, Scott Neeson” with a couple more photos taken from inside one of your facilities. 

The beds look pretty good, I must say – though they would be a bit cramped with 3 or 4 kids sleeping in each bed. Still, this problem is easing now that you are kicking out so many kids to make ends meet financially. As for the bathroom, it looks as though the sink needs cleaning but it’s OK.

My reason for publishing these photos (no photos with kids in them, note) is to let you know what you know already – namely that I have my own spies within CCF. As you may or may not be aware you are not much liked by your staff. Feared, yes, but not liked. They feel intimidated by your non-disclosure contracts; knowing full well the dire consequences for them if they speak to the media or to anyone else about what they know.

So, Scott, do your survey, publish the results and, with a bit of luck, there will still be some suckers out there who believe the spin you generate about yourself and who will open their wallets.


Until next time.

166 comments:

  1. Any chance that this organization is run by a cocaine addict or a high school dropout? Do they employ drug dealers armed robbers and Pimps for young girls?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If that is really a picture of Alan Lemon, is it any surprise that his old girl friend dumped him, for a new Nigerian lover?

      Delete
  2. Interesting that there is nothing in either of the supposed photos of CCF facilities to connect them to CCF James. They could just as well be taken (and probably were) in the cheap boarding house you seem to enjoy in within the red light district (maybe due to its close proximity to the girlie bars you are renowned to visit), just look at the number of adult sized clothes hanging in racks and on ends of beds. This is not a CCF dorm as you portray but just another of your pathetic poorly executed plans to discredit Scott Neeson. Whoever was in the Oasis Bar with Alan Lemon was obviously one of your stooges who set Alan up to be there for the photo. My guess is that he invited Alan there on some conjured up excuse for the photo session.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are a retard Anonymous 5:37! Do you believe that Ricketson dressed Lemon in the CCF shirt also? By the way, was the shirt paid for with donor money??

      Delete
  3. The good old days, eh Al! Back when you and Mc Cabe and Neeson hung out together at the Oasis. Lots of very young pussy then. Didn’t need to be as careful as you do now. Back when you were taking care of Mc Cabe when he was on the run. The AFP wasn’t too happy about that was it? One of their own taking care of a fugitive rogue AFP drug runner. But you’ve landed on your feet, haven’t you, Al. Now you’ve got a cushy job protecting girls from men who…well, you know…men who go to places like Oasis looking for young girls to fuck. And all tax deductible! Gotta give it to you, Al, you and Jimmy Mc Cabe and The Neese have got one helluva scam going. Good work buddy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is that Alan Lemon proudly displaying his "colors" with whores and hookers and underage girls?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Very telling what kind of people write here with the sole intention of shooting Ricketson for exposing Scott Neeson and CCF. These are people who have nothing to say about Neeson taking over 700 children from their families. Nothing to say about Neeson taking hundreds of homes from the impoverished, to give them to a wealthy landowner. Nothing to say about locking a family out of their home because they were $12.50 overdue on their rent, at the same time that he was taking in over TEN MILLION DOLLARS intended to help the impoverished! Nothing to say about a young who did because of CCF neglect. Nothing to say about Neeson's cocaine addiction or McCabe's drug dealing or Lemon's involvement in a take out bar. Nothing to say about Neeson's lies. Nothing to say about Neeson's false accusations that lead to Fletcher's illegal arrest and conviction. What kind of vermin are you and how can you stand to look yourselves in a mirror without vomiting??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no rule of law in Cambodia other than that which can be bought. Neeson has a lot of money. He can buy whoever he wants; whatever he wants.

      Blind Freddy can see that, in the absence of rule of law in Cambodia, scamsters and criminals can breach the human and legal rights of whomsoever they choose without fear of adverse consequences.

      Delete
    2. James. Keep up the gr8 work. These ppl r Australians mostly running this heinous NGO. The ppl of Cambodia, esp children, r starting 2 speak out as they grow older. These foreigners r taking advantage of these children 4 decades & using generous, caring ppl 2 pay 4 it. This NGO needs 2 b exposed. 1 day of torture lasts 4ever. These men have complete control of their 'ORPHANS' from the moment they r 'rescued' from their families. Ur life's goal is commendable. Im behind u in this goal in anyway ethical.

      But it is interesting 2 consider the yrs of abuse that is not being acknowledged & the occurrence of arrests initiated by APLE of provably innocent foreigners. Re: David Fletcher & his virgin rape victim, with on film, conflict of stories. U need 2 know Cambodia 2 understand these 2 very related facts. Im now going back 2 read everything I've missed.

      Will u b writing David's story? He is a feature of my book

      Delete
  6. Like the world press I suspect, I would have volumes to say if there was any degree of truth in these statements. Sadly they are purely the ramblings of a mentally ill old man. He is really no different to the guy who stands on the street corner punching his bible telling us all to repent as the end is nigh. I think he even believes his own stories and badly needs medical help for his state of mind.

    If it were not for a few gullible trolls such as yourself (and I stress a few) I suspect he would be back to one of his many other media campaigns attacking NSW health, Screen News Australia etc. Nobody from any of these relentless attacks on them answers his questions because understandably they realise he is not in a mental state of mind to take the information in and evaluate it sensibly. Perhaps instead of following blindly you should take his publications a little less seriously.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You sound like one of the disgraced ex-policeman that run the CPU. Are you the pimp or the drug dealer?

      Delete
    2. Dear Scott Neeson (aka anonymous 6.17)

      Which statements are you referring to that are not true?

      Your reference to me as a "mentally ill old man" as a reason not to answer questions raises the question:

      If it were not a mentally ill old many such as myself asking you these questions, would you answer them?

      Fortunately, for you, no journalists in Cambodia right now are prepared to ask you questions of the kind I ask. You hace good reason to feel cocky; to think that your run of good luck with the media will last forever.

      This is hubris in your part, as I think you are smart enough to know. There is a phone call that you dread (or an email) in which a journalist from Time Magazine, from Newsweek or some other prominent mainstream media outlet:

      "Scott, this is xxx, from yyy. I am writing an article about you and CCF and I wonder if you would like to answer a few questions?"

      You will freeze. You have gone out of your way to make it impossible for the media to ask you questions. "How the fuck did this journalist get through to me?" as you wonder how you can get off the phone before you are hit with the questions. Questions like:

      Are you the owner of the lease on the Black Bamboo restaurant?

      Were CCF donor and sponsor dollars spent on the renovations of Back Bamboo - providing you with an upmarket restaurant in which you could wine and dine government officials who, amongst other things, wrap blood red sashes around your shoulders as they present you with awards?

      Are you the owner of the land upon which 360 houses have been erected and which, according to your public relations PR, have been 'gifted' to poor families?

      Did you have sex with the teenage girl who appears in photos of yourself and the girl? Photos in which it appears that you are stoned on some drug?

      Are you addicted to drugs?

      Why do you refuse to allow the parents of children in CCF residential care to retain copies of the contracts that you force them to sign?

      Why did CCF cover up the death of a CCF student and forbid her friends from attending the girl's funeral?

      Did you, James Mc Cabe and Alan Lemon regularly frequent the "Oasis Bar" (owned by Lemons de facto wife) in the hopes of having sex teenage girls, in contravention of Cambodian law?

      You can, of course, dismiss the journalist who asks you such questions as someone suffering from a mental illness. Whether this ply will work or not, well, let's see. Right now you are in the clear because there is no journalist who will ask such questions. But you know, and I know, that the day will come when you are asked these questions by someone whom you cannot ignore.

      The day of reckoning is coming,Scott, as you know it will. Enjoy your extended honeymoon whilst it lasts.

      cheers

      James



      Delete
    3. Point proven, sadly these are purely the ramblings of a mentally ill old man. Good to see that once again everybody who posts here must be Scott according to James (further proves my point of his mental illness)

      Delete
  7. And not one fact to defend your position that it is not true. I think you, Anonymous 6:17, are the one that is dilutional.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Let me amend to gullible and ignorant trolls anon 9.05. If you are going to use big words like dilutional then better you check their meaning first. For your future reference

    Adjective
    (comparative more dilutional, superlative most dilutional)

    Of or pertaining to dilution
    That dilutes

    Read more at http://www.yourdictionary.com/dilutional#gZ4pCWxCb2oHukpi.99

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice attempt at trying to focus on the trivial, as you are harming hundreds of children daily that you have removed from their families. Nothing to say about the cocaine addict, the drug dealer or the pimp, Anonymous 11:16?

      Delete
  9. Yes, Anonymous 4:30. People with small penises tend to magnify the trivial. They have no concept of what is important. Please don't give up on them just because they are ignorant.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Who is the cocaine addict, the drug dealer and the pimp?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would be the liar, Scott Neeson, and the two disgraced ex-policeman, armed robber James McCabe, and the pimp Alan Lemon.

      Delete
  11. Are those really the role models for children at risk? Scott Neeson, James McCabe and Alan Lemon?? If that wasn't so serious, it would be laughable! A cocaine addict, an armed robber/drug dealer and a pimp? Was this designed by a high-school flunk out???

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Or do you think this is OK?"

    Yes, absolutely. There is nothing wrong with sex. There is nothing wrong with being a man. After a long hard day of helping children, he should be entitled to relax as he sees fit. He should be entitled to a normal life. Like many men, after work he seems to enjoy a cold beer and the company of women. More power to him. If I see him in the bar I'll buy him a beer for the good works he has done here in Cambodia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's nothing wrong with sex! With consenting adults, yes. With young women whose only reason for hanging out in girlie bars is to make money to feed themselves and their family? This is OK too? And while wearing a t-shirt that says he works for an organization that protects underage women from sexual predators of his age? You have a weird set of moral values Anon 2.55

      Delete
    2. @ Anon 2.55 Bars like Oasis are just brothels for young Khmer women to milk what they can from sex-starved ugly expat men who no women want to fuck. And if you want extra young pussy all you have to do is ask for it and be prepared to pay for it like certain men who will remain anonymous

      Delete
    3. Anonymous my ass! Anonymous 4:15, you are referring to Scott Neeson, James McCabe and Alan Lemon, right?

      Delete
    4. No comment :-)

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 2:55,. If you think Alan Lemon is "helping children" by taking them from their families (hundreds of children) to be raised in institutional care, then you are as big a fool as Alan Lemon is!

      Delete
    6. "There's nothing wrong with sex! With consenting adults, yes. With young women whose only reason for hanging out in girlie bars is to make money to feed themselves and their family? This is OK too? And while wearing a t-shirt that says he works for an organization that protects underage women from sexual predators of his age?"

      Yes, that is all okay. We all work because we need money to feed ourselves and our families, including hostesses. And hostesses are people too. SJWs, especially western SJWs who would try to diminish their personhood and free-agency in order to push some sexually constipated social agenda are the problem in this case. Though I do agree that I probably would have taken off the work shirt before going, but it's really no big deal except perhaps for prudes and shit-stirrers who would put it on internet and try to spin it into an issue.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous 4:57, so you have no problem if the girls that work at Oasis are underage??

      Delete
    8. "so you have no problem if the girls that work at Oasis are underage??"

      What an incredibly stupid thing to say.

      What would make you ask such a vile thing?

      If you are looking for underage girls in the bars you need to go to Khmer KTV or disco or to the old beggar women in tourist areas that sell street kids. The hostesses that work barang at the bars in the 136 area are known for not only being of age+, but in many cases, of age twice over.

      Delete
    9. What an incredibly stupid thing for you to say!

      Delete
    10. How old was James McCabe's wife when he first met her?

      Delete
    11. So if as many believe, McCabe's wife was under age and working in a bar when McCabe met her, doesn't make what you say sound true. Makes it seem like you have an agenda to hide the truth and deceive readers. IF as you say, many of the "workers" are legal twice over, is it possible or even likely, that she was working there with her mother??

      Delete
    12. On Trip Advisor, Oasis bar is ranked 2 star out of 5 and ranked number 69 out of 89 similar bars. Are you still wondering why Lemon and the CCF staff frequent the place? Here are the reviews: https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g293940-d2693659-Reviews-Oasis_Bar-Phnom_Penh.html

      Delete
    13. "So if as many believe..."

      Many believe in Flying Spaghetti Monsters and that Ricketson's interest in the children in the Citipoite case was unhealthy and suspicious. Doesn't make any of that worth considering or discussing, especially when worded as innuendo and said with the obvious intent of character assassination.

      "Are you still wondering why Lemon and the CCF staff frequent the place?"

      Do you mean why do they go there as opposed to other hostess bars like Angry Birds or @ the Office, which get better reviews? Perhaps the better Lady Drink Specials.

      Delete
    14. Read into it what you want Anonymous 1:07/1:06, You haven't grasped anything written here yet.

      Delete
  13. "So if as many believe..."

    Many believe in Flying Spaghetti Monsters and that Ricketson's interest in the children in the Citipoite case was unhealthy and suspicious. Doesn't make any of that worth considering or discussing, especially when worded as innuendo and said with the obvious intent of character assassination.

    "Are you still wondering why Lemon and the CCF staff frequent the place?"

    Do you mean why do they go there as opposed to other hostess bars like Angry Birds or @ the Office, which get better reviews? Perhaps the better Lady Drink Specials.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dear Anonymous 1.06

    As I have mentioned before to me it is a red herring that Mc Cabe's wife was 15 when he met her. They are still married so her age is, in my view, not an issue worth pursuing.

    However, that said, it places Mc Cabe in a difficult position if he is called upon, as his job requires, to prosecute men who have sex with 15 year old girls.

    As for my 'interest in the children in the Citipointe case', this is all very well documented. See:

    http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/citipointe-church-in-phnom-penh-2008.html

    The girls 5 & 6 years old at the time that they were illegally removed from their family by Brisbane-based Citipointe church, running an NGO by the name of SHE Rescue. The removial and illegal detention of these children was not only condoned by Helen Sworn of Chab Dai but applauded by her. (read blog). Naly Pilorge was complicit in this illegal removal of the children. (Again, read blog). So was yet another NGO that goes by the name Global Development - financially supporting Citipointe church in the full knowledge that the NGO was illegally removing children from their families. This is all very well-documented.

    It took me six years to get the children returned to their family. During this time I was threatened by Citipointe's Pastor Brian Mulheran (see blog) and dragged into court by Citipointe and charged with having essentially defamed the church by pointing out that Pastor Leigh Ramsay should be in jail for kidnapping. If there were rule of law in Cambodia, she would have been charged in court.

    As for the Oasis Bar I have never been inside it but have walked past it many times and have never seen any young women in the street who looked underage. However, I repeat the question I asked in this blog:

    "Is it a good idea for a man whose job is running a Child Protection Unit, whose job it is to protect young women from sexual predators, to be frequenting, in his CCF t-shirt, an establishment whose clientele is made up, in part, by sexual predators?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "During this time I was threatened by Citipointe's Pastor Brian Mulheran (see blog) and dragged into court by Citipointe and charged with having essentially defamed the church by pointing out that Pastor Leigh Ramsay should be in jail for kidnapping."

      I thought that you were not just charged but convicted. And they spread nasty rumors about you too, like your supporters do here about McCabe, Lemon and other men who work to help abused children in Cambodia.

      "Is it a good idea for a man whose job is running a Child Protection Unit, whose job it is to protect young women from sexual predators, to be frequenting, in his CCF t-shirt, an establishment whose clientele is made up, in part, by sexual predators?"

      So what exactly is your concern here? That a man would go to a hostess bar or that he would go to a hostess bar wearing a CCF shirt?

      If the former, if he likes hostess bars, yes, it is a good idea. I wish him a good time. He has clearly earned it.

      If it is the latter, I probably would have taken off the work shirt before going, but it's really no big deal except perhaps for prudes and shit-stirrers who would put it on internet and try to spin it into an issue.

      And the more I think about it, it seems like a particularly good idea to wear that shirt in an area like that. If there are "sexual predators" lurking in the shadows as you imagine, it will signal to them that there are eyes upon them.

      Delete
    2. James, the fact that he is "still with her" does nothing to absolve him if he was banging that girl when she was 15!

      Delete
    3. "James, the fact that he is "still with her" does nothing to absolve him if he was banging that girl when she was 15!"

      Sure. According to you, an anonymous internet poster, with the intent of damaging the reputation of a reputable child protection organisation in order to defend a convicted pedophile. You are clearly a reliable source.

      Delete
    4. You mean a "child protection unit" started by a cocaine addict high school flunk out, and run by 2 disgraced ex-policemen, one an armed drug dealer, the other a pimp.

      Delete
    5. "You mean a "child protection unit" started by a cocaine addict high school flunk out, and run by 2 disgraced ex-policemen, one an armed drug dealer, the other a pimp."

      If I were Fletch or even Ricketson I would cringe at having somebody like you on my side. You sound like a loon, a bitter one.

      The CPU handles cases of child abuse, murder and other crimes against crimes. In the last 3 years has been involved in more than 500 case, more than 400 resulting in arrests. They have been central in several high profile pedophile cases including the recent arrest and deportation of the notorious Dutch pedophile Pieter Ceulen. Your hysterical smear campaign against CPU in defense of the convicted pedophile Fletcher is just embarrassing. Whatever smidgen of truth that might be behind your accusations is completely lost hysterics and hyperbole, and are not to the point regardless.

      Delete
  15. Neeson's getting treatment right now at Bumrungrad Hospital in Bangkok for his drug problem

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will they treat him for compulsive lying also?

      Delete
    2. @ Anon 3.28

      Total bullshit. He[s getting treatment for a skin allergy problem.

      Delete
    3. @ Anonymous 3.37

      There's no cure for compulsive lying except someone telling the truth about the compulsive liar.

      Delete
    4. "Neeson's getting treatment right now at Bumrungrad Hospital in Bangkok for his drug problem."

      Just what Fletch and Ricketson need. More blatant and obvious lies smearing well intentioned people involved in good works helping abused women and children. This will surely help their cause and lend Ricketson's blog that air of credibility it lacks and so desperately needs.

      Keep up the good work.

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous 4.18

      If you are not a Neeson Troll (and so must defend Neeson at all costs) please answer some of the many questions I have been asking this past two years. If you don't know the answers then you are not really in a position to know the truth or otherwise of any observations made about Neeson.

      Let's just try one question: "Do you believe it right, appropriate, that Neeson should travel the world telling any and everyoine who would listen that CCF was 'gifting' homes to poor families when, in fact, these homes were being 'gifted' to the owner of the land upoin which they were erected??"

      Given that these 360 homes add between $500,000 and $ 1 million to the value of the land this is not a question that can be lightly passed over.

      I doubt very much that you will answer this, or any other questions. You will stick to your vague generalisations about "well intentioned people involved in good works.." This applies to all NGOs. Apart from the outright crooks, they are all 'well-intentioned' - in their own terms. As you will be aware, the pathway to hell is indeed paved with good intentions.

      Delete
  16. Dear Anonymous

    It’s the t-shirt that bothers me. But its not just the t-shirt and the poor judgment it shows on Alan Lemon’s part. It’s the accumulation of errors of judgment, misdemeanours, lies and outright crimes associated with CCF that bother me. Any one of them might (and I emphasize ‘might’) be easily dismissed but the sheer number of them raises a whole host of questions. Here is a partial list:

    Scott Neeson’s complicity in having a man (Mr Fletcher) jailed for 10 years without a trial.

    Scott Neeson lying about the houses ‘gifted’ to 360 materially poor Cambodian families.

    CCF’s illegal retention of children in care whose parents have requested their return to the family.

    CCF’s refusal to allow parents of children in residential care to retain copies of ‘contracts they have entered into with CCF with a thumb print.

    The eviction of families from the slums they were renting in for being less than $20 behind in their rent.

    Scott Neeson’s lying about the success of CCF’s educational program.

    The use of CCF funds ($300,000) to renovate Black Bamboo so that Scott can wine and dine government officials and others he needs to perpetuate the myth he has so carefully cultivated this past decade – the humble man who gave up his million dollar a year job to rescue poor kids from the rubbish dump.

    And so on. The list is a long one.

    And, of course, there is the fact that CCF’s Child Protection Unit is run by a convicted criminal and that CCF’s third most powerful figure is also disgraced former AFP cop.

    It is the accumulation of all these, not any one in particular, that should set alarm bells ringing for journalists, for human rights organizations, for the Cambodian government, for other NGOs. This has not happened. Scott Neeson is a law unto himself. He can afford to be. He has plenty of money to splash around to guarantee that certain questions do not get asked. By anyone. He has total immunity from questions and from being held accountable for the tens of millions of dollars that have passed through CCF’s bank accounts.

    At the risk of belabouring the point, there is no way that the Cambodian media, human rights organizations and other NGOs would, in 2016, allow a Somaly Mam to get away with all this. But then Somaly Mam is a brown-skinned woman and Scott Neeson is a white-skinned man!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Except none of that is true. It's just a list of controversial claims and spins that you have made at some point or another, never with enough evidence or reason to interest any credible commentator or media outlet, but only the few kooks who post here. (Not there is nothing in there worthy of further discussion, but it is not a list of facts.) And now the race card. Ha. Gimme a break. How's that white male privileged working out for you, your blog and Fletch?

      Delete
    2. Neeson’s scams are well documented – here on this blog – using his own words; his own figures. The World Housing scam, for instance:

      http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2015/11/166-scott-neesons-world-housing-scam.html

      http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/177-scott-neesons-world-housing-scam.html

      http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/178-scott-neeson-admits-that-homes-are.html

      Delete
    3. And here's CCF locking a poor family out of their home for being $12.50 behind in their rent:

      http://cambodianchildrensfund.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/25-scott-nesson-locks-poor-family-out.html

      Delete
    4. "Neeson’s scams are well documented – here on this blog – using his own words; his own figures. The World Housing scam, for instance:

      http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2015/11/166-scott-neesons-world-housing-scam.html

      http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/177-scott-neesons-world-housing-scam.html

      http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/178-scott-neeson-admits-that-homes-are.html"

      The first thing I notice about this list is that it is, as I said before, a list of controversial claims and spins that you have made at some point or another. Nobody else. Only you. No credible media outlet has picked up on any of it. Pointing at a single source (yourself) of heavily spun controversial claims hardly counts as "well documented."

      Delete
  17. And here's some figures gleaned from CCF's own tax statements and annual published reports:

    https://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/192-us37-million-spent-by-ccf-since.html

    Do your homework, Anonymous 4.49, if you want to shoot the messenger.

    ReplyDelete
  18. And if you want to acquaint yourself with the facts surrounding the role Scott Neeson played in the jailing of David Fletcher without a trial you could start here:, Anon 4.49

    http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2014/10/1-scott-neeson-accuses-david-fletcher.html

    # 1 Scott Neeson accuses David Fletcher of 'grooming' young girls

    “Little doubt!” is one of those slippery expressions intended to vilify but which leaves Neeson with a ‘Get Out Of Jail Free’ card of sorts if it turns out that there is no evidence that Fletcher devoted “his time to grooming young girls.”

    Scott Neeson’s background is in marketing. He knows how to use words to sell his product (children in distress) or to destroy the reputation of a competitor – in this case, David Fletcher.

    Did Scott Neeson have any evidence to support his defamatory assertion that Fletcher was grooming young girls? There is none to be found in Andrew Drummond’s 20th June 2010 article:

    “Preying On The Garbage Dump Children”.
    “Convicted child sexual abuser runs ‘charity’ for rubbish dump kids in Cambodia.”

    Or had evidence been found by APLE, SISHA, CEOPS, the Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection unit of the Ministry of the Interior or the British Embassy – all of which organizations were, by their own admission, looking for such evidence?....

    ReplyDelete
  19. You mention that your photo is Alan Lemon recently paying a visit to Oasis bar. How recent is recently James - maybe one or two weeks or one or two months ? As an investigative journalist I am sure this will be one of your easier questions to answer.
    To his credit he does seem to be sitting outside and not inside so maybe as an earlier blogger commented it might do the world of pedophiles good to know there are a few decent men keeping eye on what happens in this area.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 7:48, you call Alan Lemon a "decent man"? On what basis? Is it because he is a disgraced ex-policeman? Is it because he works for an organization that takes children from their families? Is it because he drinks in (some say owns) a bar with whores and hookers? Do you think that taking children from their families to raise them in institutional care is an honorable thing to do? Do you think being an accomplice to taking homes intended for the impoverished is a decent thing to do? Do you think attempting to cover for an armed drug dealer, especially while working FOR enforcement, is a decent thing to do? You must live an a different planet!

      Delete
    2. So still no answer about how recent the photo is James ? Just apologise for having lied and lets move on

      Delete
  20. "You mention that your photo is Alan Lemon recently paying a visit to Oasis bar. How recent is recently James - maybe one or two weeks or one or two months?"

    He is significantly grayer in his facebook photos from more than 4 years ago, if that is any indication.

    ReplyDelete
  21. What - you means James has distorted the facts to suit his agenda. I wonder how often this has happened in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  22. “There are none so blind as will not see.”

    As Neeson Trolls (Anon 7.48, 10.11 & 5.00) you are clearly not going to let anything as awkward as verifiable facts get in the way of the story you wish to tell here.

    As regards World Housing it boils down to this. It is really simple:

    Neeson himself claimed, in a very public fashion, to be ‘gifting’ houses to poor families.

    Neeson himself admitted, under pressure and having been exposed as a liar, that in fact he was not ‘gifting’ houses to families but renting the houses to poor families.

    I am just the messenger here of Neeson’s pubic statements.

    Given that, under Cambodian law, the owner of the land upon which the houses have been built is the owner of the houses, it follows, as sure as night follows day, that the owner of the land has had the value of their land increased by whatever 360 houses are worth. There are some conflicting figures here regarding how much each house cost but the value of these 360 houses is between $500,000 and $ 1 million.

    One does not need to be all that smart, or to make up ‘facts’ to figure out that the owner of the land upon which the houses have been built has won the lottery – and all thanks to money provided by kind-hearted donors who believed (because Neeson had told them) that the houses were being gifted’ to poor families.

    If this is not a scam please do explain this ‘gifting’ in such a way as to place Neeson and CCF in a positive light.

    And what about the girl who died whilst in CCF care as a result of CCF incompetence and whose death Neeson covered up? Are you going to tell me that she did not die? Are you going to suggest that Neeson’s refusal to allow her fellow CCF residents to attend her funeral is a fact that I am making up?

    And as for the figures I have used often in relation to how much it costs, her child, for CCF to keep them in residential care, have I made these figures up also? Or did I get them from CCF’s tax returns to the IRS and from what CCF declares in its financial statements – to be found online by anyone interested in the facts as presented by CCF.

    ReplyDelete
  23. James, how about you just verifying how "recent" this photo of Alan Lemon is or just admit to it being a lie.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "James, how about you just verifying how "recent" this photo of Alan Lemon is or just admit to it being a lie."

    It is things like this that tell you all you really need to know about this blog by Ricketson. He distorts and twists and spins, and perhaps even out and out lies, routinely.

    There is no point in considering his questions, or looking at his so-called 'documentation,' because it requires that the reader first sift through it for Ricketson's distortions and half-truths. So then it all becomes about Ricketson and his writing, and that is just not worth the time or effort.

    This is why no media outlet has picked up on any of this and why, if it was even a little bit true, it still hasn't generated any general interest.

    Better to wait for a credible media outlet to pick up the story, and if they don't, that would be a better indication that there is no story than Ricketson's spun tales indicates that there is one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Der Anonymous 12.31

      Again, many thanks for yet another of your foolish 'shoot the messenger' comments. I can see that I am going to get lots of page hits tonight. (I'm up to well over 100,000 so far.)

      I suspect that you are not just a run-of-the-mill troll out to start a fight about anything at all. I suspect that if you are not Neeson, Mc Cabe or Lemon you are a troll working on their behalf trying, desperately (and without much success) to justify the non-answering of questions.

      If you really want to destroy my credibility you should go through whatever you consider to be my 'distortions' and 'half-truths' and expose them. This should be easy for you to do since all the facts and figures I quote are available to anyone who has a computer connected to the internet and who can use 'Google' to do a little basic research.

      As for the lack of media interest, a couple of points. If you go back through this blog you will find that before Newsweek published the Somaly Mam story that exposed her as a liar I had already written about her as a liar. it is not that I was cleverer than any other journalist. it was just that it had been obvious for years that Somaly Mam was a liar. Not just to journalists but to other NGOs, to foreign embassies and expats.

      Why didn't the media expose Somaly Mam earlier? You could ask them.

      Today there are plenty of journalists who know that Neeson and CCF are corrupt. I've spoken with a few of them. That no-oner at the Phnom Penh Post will write anything negative about Neeson is understandable given that he is a part owner of the newspaper. As to why the Cambodia Daily remains silent about Neeson's many scams is a mystery to me. I have my theories but, regardless, the fact is the Daily will not publish anything that even vaguely approximates an investigative story about Neeson. i have invited their journalists on several occasions to meet with some of the families I know who have been screwed by CCF. These offers have been ignored.

      This will change. One day the mainstream media (in the daily and Post can be thought of as mainstream) will expose Neeson. As with Somaly Mam, however, it will probably be long after the rest of the world already knows that Neeson is a pathological liar who has, for years now, been running what is probably the biggest NGO scam in Cambodia's history.

      Delete
    2. Then how about you just verify how "recent" this photo of Alan Lemon is.

      It is an easy, simple, straightforward question.

      You say the photo is "recent."

      When was it taken?

      Delete
    3. Of what relevance is the question? Does it matter if it was taken last week, last year or three years ago? The point that I was making, and which you seek to obscure, (as you seek desperately for reasons not to answer questions of significance) has nothing to do with when the photo was taken but to do with the appropriateness (or otherwise) of Alan Lemon, in his CCF t-shirt, in a girlie bar.

      Delete
    4. "Of what relevance is the question?"

      Because whether you lied or didn't lie here will help your readers know whether to trust you and the things that you write here on this blog.

      If you lied here, then there's a good chance you have lied and distorted the facts in other parts of this blog. If you can't be trusted to report the facts accurately then it is simply not worth trying to sort through your distortions to try to figure out if some kernel of truth may be there.

      Better to wait for a reliable, trustworthy reporter to pick up the story, which to date they haven't. I wonder if that is because there really is no story here or if you have done so much damage to it that you have poisoned it for real journalists.

      Delete
  25. For Anonymous 10.02

    In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,[3] often for their own amusement.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Dear Anonymous 12.31

    Which of the many lies you think I have told do you wish me to confess to?

    Does it matter how old the photo of Alan Lemon is? My point, as I have made clear a few times now, is to question the appropriateness of Lemon visiting a girlie bar whilst in his CCF uniform.

    You clearly choose to focus on the irrelevant detail of when the photo was taken in the hope that no-one will notice that you do not respond in any way to any of the other issues/questions I raise = which are much more significant.

    You say that i make up facts. Did I make up the death of the girl in CCF care?

    Did I make up the story about Neeson defaming David Fletcher and being complicit in his arrest and jailing?

    Did I make up the figures given by Neeson to the IRS? The figures published on the CCF website?

    Did I make up the various quotes about Neeson 'gifiting' houses to poor families?

    Deal with these and other questions of greater import rather than when a photo was taken.

    You will not do so, of course, because you are either a Neeson Troll grasping at straws in the hope of shooting the messenger or you are just a run of the mill troll who just wants to start a fight. Whichever it might be I have to thank you. Each time you make one of your foolish comments I get a bump in my page hits - from readers, I guess, who hope for a good online stoush. Keep it up. Many thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Which of the many lies you think I have told do you wish me to confess to?"

      Just answer the question. Show us that you weren't lying (or were) when you wrote: "Here's Alan, **recently,** paying the Oasis Bar a visit."

      When was that photo taken?

      Delete
    2. "Does it matter how old the photo of Alan Lemon is?"

      Bizarre question.

      James is asking here "Does it matter whether I lied or not?"

      Even little kids now the answer to that question. How can you not?

      Yes James, it does. Integrity and honesty matter.

      Any decent person should now that. Your integrity and trustworthiness (or lack thereof) reflect on everything you say and write.

      Delete
  27. "Does it matter how old the photo of Alan Lemon is?"

    Yes. Big time.

    Whether you lied or didn't lie when you said "Here's Alan, recently, paying the Oasis Bar a visit," will help your readers know whether to trust you and the things that you write on this blog.

    If you lied here, then there's a very good chance that you have lied and distorted the facts in other parts of this blog. And if that is true it is simply not worth trying to sort through your distortions to try to figure out if some kernel of truth may be there.

    Better to wait for a reliable, trustworthy reporter to pick up the story, which to date they haven't, which is telling.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So the same criteria would apply to your friend, Scott Neeson? We know that he can't open his month without lying! Compulsive liar was a term just designed for him.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous 1.43

      If you read what I actually wrote you would realize that, for me, the fact that Alan Lemon visited a girlie bar was not a big deal:

      ""Of course, there is nothing wrong (at least not illegal) about a middle aged man like Alan Lemon visiting a girlie bar where teen and early 20’s girls strut their stuff. But really, Scott, it is not a good look for a man who runs a Child Protection Unit, to be frequenting a girlie bar wearing his CCF t-shirt! Or do you think this is OK?"

      I used it as one example (of many) that raises questions about CCF in general. You have chosen to focus in on one small detail (the word ‘recent’) rather than deal with/address the more serious issues raised here:

      - The cover up by CCF of the death of a child in CCF’s care.

      - Scott Neeson’s lying about the ‘gifting’ of homes to poor families.

      - Scott Neeson’s role in seeing a man sentenced to 10 years jail without a trial.

      - Scott Neeson’s illegal removal and detention of children from their families.

      - Scott Neeson’s refusal to allow parents to retain copies of ‘contracts’ they entered into with CCF.

      - Scott Neeson's lies about CCFs educational programmes.

      - Scott Neeson forcing kids in CCF care to work for no wage as a condition for getting an education.

      - Scott Neeson telling kids in their late teens what they can and cannot study in university.

      - Scott Neeson refusing to allow residents in World Housing homes (rented from CCF) to have their families from the provinces stay with them when in Phnom Penh.

      - Scott Neeson using CCF funds to renovate the Black Bamboo restaurant.

      - Scott Neeson paying for the privilege of appearing onstage with the Dalai Lama.

      - Scott Neeson arranging, on a regular basis, to have various people and organisations give him awards.

      The list goes on. And on. And on.

      And you want to present the proposition that because a photo of Alan Lemon may not be ‘recent’ this means that all of the questions I have asked of Neeson (see above and in many many posts) do not need to be answered.

      You are right about one thing, though, Alan (and it is you, Alan, isn’t it, writing all these comments about yourself and the Oasis Bar?) is that another journalist will come along one day and be asking all these questions. And he or she will be decidedly unimpressed with yours and Scott’s ‘shoot-the-messenger’ response to questions. It’s just a matter of time.

      In the meantime, please keep making the kind of observations you have been making, keep banging on about the word ‘recent’ and remind readers of the lengths Team Neeson will go to to avoid answering questions.

      Delete
    3. If it turned out that it wasn't a "recent" photo after you said "Here's Alan, recently, paying the Oasis Bar a visit," that it was in fact a 5 or 10 years old photo as it appears to be, it would have been easy for you to turn around and say, "oh, sorry, I made a mistake. I thought it was recent, but it turns out I was wrong about that," and then move forward from there.

      But no. Not only did you lie when you said "Here's Alan, recently, paying the Oasis Bar a visit," you tried to dance away from the question and change the subject when confronted with it. You not only lied, but you acted like you lied afterwards, like you are trying to hide something, and that it wasn't just a mistake. You appear to have no integrity as a reporter.

      It's this kind of thing that makes reading through your claims about Neeson and Fletcher a pointless exercise, because you might be just lying again. And why would any reasonable person, especially one who is concerned about the way NGOs are run and the welfare of the children under their care, want to wade through the myriad Lies of Ricketson to see if they might discover some kernel of truth? It doesn't make sense.

      Until you are able to establish yourself as a reliable reporter, your repeated lists of dubious claims are not worth consideration by any serious reader.

      Delete
    4. "And he or she will be decidedly unimpressed with yours and Scott’s ‘shoot-the-messenger’ response to questions."

      There is no messenger here. You are a teller of tales akin to the boy who cried wolf, not a messenger. That's why people don't believe you, and that's why there is no reporter following up on your claims, and that's why, in so far as there is any truth in what you say, the abuses continue. When there really is a wolf, nobody believes or even listens to the boy.

      Think about that.

      Delete
  28. So it was the lying cocaine addict (Scott Neeson, in case you don't know), whose lies got Fletcher arrested, convicted without a trial,got Fletcher what amounts to a life sentence, after APLE told the girls family that they would receive $30,000 if Fletcher was convicted. The medical report clearly indicates that she was a virgin and the girl has recanted her story. The Cambodian justice system refuses to give Fletch a trial in spite of the evidence AND Scott Neeson is to blame for this huge injustice? What a POS that "man" is!!

    ReplyDelete
  29. I think thats about as close as we are going to get to James admitting he lied folks. He is a gutless slimeball who does not have the balls to admit when he lied and is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you are getting James Ricketson confused with Scott Neeson when you see the terms "gutless slimeball who does not have the balls to admit when he has lied and is wrong. RECENT in terms of lives, could be years, or more accurately, since Lemon had been kicked off the police force. The whole story of the young girl dieing due to CCF lack of care, is nearly two years old. How long have you been kicked out of the police force Alan?

      Delete
    2. "I think you are getting James Ricketson confused with Scott Neeson when you see the terms "gutless slimeball who does not have the balls to admit when he has lied and is wrong."

      If Neeson is half of what Ricketson claims him to be, such a confusion would be easy to make. I don't think admitting Ricketson is easily confused with a "gutless slimeball who does not have the balls to admit when he has lied and is wrong" is his best strategy for establishing himself as a credible and trustworthy reporter. A better strategy would be for Ricketson to not be a "gutless slimeball who does not have the balls to admit when he has lied and is wrong."

      It would have been even better if he had just told the truth in the first place.

      Delete
    3. Alan Lemon (aka Anonymous 3.29)

      When you need to resort to calling someone a ‘slimeball’ in order to negate the questions they are asking, you have lost the battle for credibility. To call someone a ‘slimeball’ is a very crude, and very unimaginative, way of admitting that you have no answers to legitimate questions’; that you have at your disposal only personal abuse to destroy the credibility of the person asking the questions.

      If you had any arguments in support of the proposition that I have my facts wrong, that I am a liar, that I am a ‘slimeball’ you would present them. That you don’t does you no credit. I must say I expected better from you. You are a lawyer and so are, by training, someone who should understand that ‘slimeball’ is not an argument but an epithet used to avoid dialogue, debate, discussion; to avoid answering questions. You may be fooling some foolish Khmer440 readers for whom logic is a foreign concept with such nonsense but I would be very surprised if anyone with a modicum of intelligence reading this will see your ‘slimeball’ comment as anything other than a pathetic admission of defeat.

      If you want to make a complete fool of yourself, keep making these inane comments. If you want to retain whatever credibility you might have left I would suggest that silence is your best option.

      Delete
    4. Are you the same person that has no problem if Scott Neeson, James McCabe and Alan Lemon, are boinking underage girls, taking children from their families, stealing houses from impoverished families?

      Delete
    5. "If you had any arguments in support of the proposition that I have my facts wrong, that I am a liar, that I am a ‘slimeball’ you would present them."

      To present some facts (again):

      You wrote, "Here's Alan, recently, paying the Oasis Bar a visit," as a caption to the photo above.

      Now look at Lemon's facebook page. Photos of him from more than 4 years ago show him to look significantly older than the photo which you caption as "recent."

      You apparently lied about the photo, and given the opportunity to explain yourself, you danced away like a guilty man.

      I didn't call you a "slimeball," but even you would seem to agree that somebody who would lie like this is fairly captured by that moniker.

      Delete
    6. "Are you the same person that has no problem if Scott Neeson, James McCabe and Alan Lemon, are boinking underage girls, taking children from their families, stealing houses from impoverished families?"

      There is no such person.

      Delete
    7. What part do you have a problem with? Is it taking children from families? Is it Neeson, McCabe and Lemon banging underage girls? Is it stealing homes? You seem to endorse it all!

      Delete
  30. Oh dear!

    Alan, you need to take a few deep breaths, calm down and think for a moment before responding to my comments off the top of your head; in the moment.

    Let's just sway that the word 'recent' is wrong. OK? The photo was taken a couple of years ago. What? Three, Four? What difference does this make to the original point I was making? Was it sensible for you to wear your CCF t-shirt whilst visiting an establish men which, as you know, is dedicated to providing predatory men of a particular age with easy access to young women whom, if they are prepared to pay,they can fuck?

    Most of the young women at the Oasis Bar may well be over the age of 18 but you know all too well that the reason they are employed as they are is not because they want to fuck men your age but because there are not other (or few other) options open to them to earn the money they need to survive and, most often, to help families survive.

    You know this. It is blindingly obvious to anyone who has spent a week in Cambodia with their eyes ands ears open. If you cannot see that to walk into such a bar (a brothel, in fact) with your CCFt-shirt on was an error of judgment, no wonder CCF is held in such contempt by so many. You are a trained lawyer and should know better.

    If you really do insist on banging away here about the meaning of the word 'recent' would you please explain why it is relevant whether the photo was taken in 2016, 2015, 2014 or 2013?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "What difference does this make to the original point I was making?"

      Because your lies speak to your credibility, and and your credibility speaks to everything you have written on this blog, including your deceptive questions.

      If one's mission is to fly the colors so that the "bad guys" can see that good eyes are upon them in places like the hostess bars, why wouldn't he where the CCF shirt?

      The real question here is whether anybody can trust anything you have written, even your so-called questions which are really just thinly veiled innuendo.

      You are not a credible source or a trustworthy reporter. Everything you write here oozes that fact. Even when it would be easy not to be, you are still dishonest. You don't seem to be able to control yourself.

      Delete
  31. Alan Lemon

    You have decided for your own (blindingly obvious) reasons to make a feast out of the word ‘recent’, in hopes of destroying my credibility. Instead you have made it clear to all readers (other than Team Neeson Trolls) that you will answer no questions.

    OK, so here’s another question for you not to answer.

    You are the lawyer who handles CCF’s legal affairs, right? You have drawn up a contract that parents have to sign if they wish their children to go into residential care with CCF. That these extremely poor parents should wish to enter into such an agreement is understandable. They love their kids. They want their kids to be properly fed. They want their kids to get an education. They want their kids to grow up with more opportunities in life than were available to them.

    If CCF were abinding by the spirit of such an agreement the NGO would be worthy of praise, However, not only do you not allow parents to retain copies of the contract they have entered into (and which they, for the most part, did not understand) you also oblige them, if they wish to remover their children from CCF care, to pay back all of the money CCF has spent on the children. That this money has come from sponsors and donors has no relevance in terms of the contract you force these parents to sign.

    Such contracts are not only illegal; they are, more importantly, immoral. You know that these parents can never repay the donor and sponsor money that has been spent on their kids. So, they are trapped. CCF has the parents and the kids under their complete control.

    The model that CCF is using here is not that different from that used by brothel owners: “If your daughter leaves the brothel she will need to repay all of the money we have paid you.” I cannot find the right words to express the contempt I feel for CCF’s use of ‘debt’ to control the lives of parents and children alike.

    And you, a disgraced former AFP officer, now a lawyer, are the one who has drawn up the contract that these parents have no choice but to sign.

    I hope that, one day, you are not judged harshly for your breaking of Cambodian, for your multiple breaches of the human rights of Cambodian families, but for immoral behaviour that should not be tolerated by the NGO community, by human rights organisations or by the Cambodian government.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "You have chosen to focus in on one small detail (the word ‘recent’)..."

    That's the thing about getting caught lying or stealing or engaging in other dishost behavior. You only need to get caught once to be thought a liar or a thief. It destroys your credibilty and shatters trust. That's why you don't ever do it. Not even once. Because it calls into question everything else you've said or will say, whether it true or not. And as we all know, nobody ever gets caught on the first time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Recent is a relative term. Recent as opposed to long ago. You are not the ultimate authority of determining what is recent. You want it to mean yesterday. James uses it to mean as opposed to long ago. It is the writers judgement that it is recent, not some ass, such as yourself that appears to do anything, no matter how narrow, in your little mind, to be the sole determinant of what recent means. He didn't say it was yesterday!

      Delete
    2. Dear Alan Lemon (aka Anonymous 9.30)

      I remember one time, close to 30 years ago now, visiting a young woman in a police cell who had been arrested for holding up a taxi driver the night beforehand with a knife. I had been trying to help this young woman escape a life of crime and drugs and, as I had before, I tried to impress upon her, in the cell, the importance of obeying the law. “You don’t obey the law,” she replied with indignantly. “You smoke marijuana and that’s against the law.” She was right. Back then I did smoke the occasional joint and it was, indeed, illegal., In her drug-addled mind she could see no difference between smoking a joint and holding up a taxi-driver at knife point.

      Thirty years on I am having a similar conversation with a man (trained in the law) who believes that the perhaps imprecise use of the word ‘recent’ is not just a sin equivalent to but a sin greater than defrauding 360 families out of the homes that were ‘gifted’ to them; a sin far greater than lying to a journalist about ‘grooming’ and playing a significant role in the pursuit, prosecution and persecution of a man (Mr Fletcher) now in his 7th year in jail as a result. And the list goes on.

      The far more sensible approach to this would have been to say, “James, what is wrong with me joining some mates for a drink at the Oasis Bar,” to which I would have replied, “None at all, Alan; I just think it would have been a good idea to change out of your CCF t-shirt.” Instead, you have drawn attention to CCF’s general refusal to answer any questions at all by coming back here time and again to argue about the meaning of the word ‘recent’. Really, Alan, you are letting the Team down.

      Before coming back at me with another of your tirades about how I am a liar and cannot be trusted, check out your dictionary – where you will find something along the following lines by way of a definition of ‘recent’: “Having happened, begun, or been done not long ago; belonging to a past period comparatively close to the present.”

      The person who took this and other photos described as having been taken ‘recently’. Whether this was a month ago, six months ago or a year ago I have no idea. You do, however, so why not come out and say, “Yep, that’s me in Dec 2014 with a mate I met at the Oasis Bar for a drink. What’s your problem?”

      Delete
    3. "Recent is a relative term. Recent as opposed to long ago. You are not the ultimate authority of determining what is recent."

      Yah, like when I recently sold that car 6 years ago.

      Delete
    4. Yes, as opposed to the one that you sold 16 years ago. It is competitive. Too dense to understand?

      Delete
    5. Comparative,. Your most recent car sale.

      Delete
  33. "Comparative,. Your most recent car sale."

    Except James isn't comparing anything. In an attempt to distort the facts, Ricketson wrote:

    "Here's Alan, recently, paying the Oasis Bar a visit."

    Making matters worse, he has all but confirmed that he deliberately lied here by guiltily dancing around his attempted deception once he was caught, and yet again trying to distort the facts by claiming "it's relative," "it's comparative," "it's just a detail," and generally that he didn't say what he said, i.e. that "Here's Alan, recently, paying the Oasis Bar a visit."

    Distorting facts and then doubling down on the lie like this is a large part of what makes him appear so untrustworthy as a reporter. In light of things like this, he hasn't written anything here worth serious consideration and is probably part of the reason no real journalist has picked up the story after 2 years of blogging about it.

    You are doing him no favors by making these transparent juvenile excuses for his lie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Ricketson I don't think this is Alan Lemon you are arguing with. Alan (who I know) is too bright to write this nonsense. My guess is its James Wright a fully paid up Neeson Troll. Don't encourage him. He's a pain the butt

      Delete
    2. That's Wright! James Wright, the one with the small dick that true to magnify the miniscule! Haha!

      Delete
  34. Maybe next we can talk about Ricketson's recently released movie 'Candy Regentag.'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous 1.43

      My recently released movie, 'Candy Regentag, a feature film, was released in 1987 - 29 years go. Ancient history, but if you think there is something worth talking about, please kick of the discussion. Did you like the movie? Oh, did you actually see it? No, I doubt it. It is for you that the word 'troll' was invented.

      have you got nothing better to do with your time?

      Delete
    2. Yes James, I think Anon 1.43 was actually taking the piss when he used the word "recently". That one certainly went straight over your head dopey. I doubt he saw it either, he most likely had something better to do with his time than watch the crap that you release.

      Delete
  35. So James Wright, anything to say about the coke head, the armed drug dealer or the pimp? That would be Scott Neeson, James McCabe, and Alan Lemon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. "Recently" and other lies and distortions in the Cambodia440 blog. Right in line with Ricketson's prior criminal offenses against child protection NGOs in Cambodia:

      From the Phnom Penh Post, 3 April 2014 (far more 'recently' than that photo of Lemon):

      "A Phnom Penh Municipal Court judge yesterday gave an Australian filmmaker a wholly suspended two-year prison term after finding him guilty of threatening a Brisbane-based church doing work in Cambodia.

      Judge Keo Mony also levied a six-million riel ($1,500) fine against 64-year-old James Ricketson after he was convicted of threatening to dishonour the Citipointe Church by broadcasting accusations that the church sold children, Mony said...

      According to the church, Ricketson then bribed the girls’ parents into asking Citipointe to return their children, but after finding out why the parents asked for their children back, the church declined.

      “Ricketson has tried to get two girls who are vulnerable to human trafficking, whose mother was a victim . . . out of our shelter in order to continue making a film . . . for his personal benefit,” part of Citipointe’s complaint reads.

      When the church did not return the children, judge Mony said, Ricketson threatened to broadcast allegations that Citipointe sold children abroad."

      Delete
    2. So James Wright, anything to say about the coke head, the armed drug dealer or the pimp? That would be Scott Neeson, James McCabe, and Alan Lemon. This is far more serious than a suspended sentence James Wright. Once again a little boy trying to magnify a small dick!

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous 12.55

      A couple of observations:

      I have not, as I so easily could, deleted this comment from my blog. I am often accused of doing so.

      This article is journalism at its worst. I need not expound on this right now but for anyone interested in the true story, the facts, it can be found in full at the following site:

      http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/44-letter-for-judge-who-tried-me-in.html

      “Threatening to dishonour”, as a description of a crime should give you some clue as to the seriousness with which the charges were. There is no such crime in Cambodian law.

      As for bribing the parents into asking Citipointe into asking Citipointe for the return of their children, it is well established, and beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the children were illegally removed from their family and illegally detained by the church with the tacit approval of both Naly Pilorge and Helen Sworn (Chab Dai); accompanied by total silence from the Phnom Penh Post and Cambodia Daily – both of which newspapers were in possession of the facts surrounding the illegal removal.

      And that I “threatened to broadcast allegations that Citipointe sold children abroad”, really! This does not pas the laugh test and even if it did, where is the evidence that I made such a threat?

      Even if the story were an accurate record of the facts (well known to the Phnom Penh Post at the time), of what relevance is it to the question of whether or not Scott Neeson defrauded the donors and sponsors who believed that they were ‘gifting’ homes to poor families when in fact their donations were going to enrich the owner of the land upon which they have been erected to the tune of between US$500,000 and US$1 million.

      Neeson is lucky that there is not one newspaper in Cambodia prepared to ask him such questions, and the list of questions is long and and fairly obvious.

      It will happen, in time, despite your efforts to shoot the messenger. Another messenger will come along who, because he or she represents a respected newspaper, will not be intimidated into silence by the sort of nonsense that you and others write by way of avoiding answering questions or dealing with facts.

      Delete
  36. Yes.

    You claim that 'Alan Lemon is a pimp.'

    Here are two simple questions for you:

    Has Alan Lemon ever been charged with profiting from prostitution?

    Has James Ricketson ever been charged with profiting from prostitution?

    (Hint: the answer to the first question is no. The answer to the second is yes.)

    And who is the pimp again?

    ReplyDelete
  37. So let me get this right, Ricketson has been convicted and received a suspended prison sentence, has profited from prostitution and defends child sex offenders.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Am dying to know more about my 'profiting from prostitution'. Do tell. Sounds exciting! Sensational even. I wait with bated breath :-)

      Delete
    2. Perhaps, Anonymous 2.43, you are referring to this:

      http://jamesricketson.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/guilty-of-posting-porn-and-profiting_10.html

      If so, perhaps you'd like to quote from the part of it that confirms your contention that I have profited from prostitution?

      I am not quite sure how this works but your nonsense 'profiting from prostitution' comment has resulted, this past half hour, in a little spike of page hits - 22 to be precise. Perhaps you'd like to become official publicist for this blog.

      Delete
    3. Neeson pays him James, are you willing to do that?

      Delete
    4. Ricketson, James Wright is a little twit. Don't bother with him.

      Delete
    5. I think "piss ant is Australian for James Wright"!

      Delete
  38. Dear Anonymous 12.55

    Whether you are Alan Lemon, James Wright, Scott Neeson or simply a member of Team Neeson clutching at straws matters not to me. You can accuse me of whatever you wish (and I am sure you will continue to do so) but you should get your facts right.

    Let’s deal with Judge Keo Mony first up.

    As luck would have it I was in Judge Keo Mony’s office on the morning of the court case making enquiries about the charges that had been levelled against me by Citipointe church – about which I had heard on the grapevine. I had no idea that the case was to be heard that afternoon. Nor did I know what charges had been laid against me. And, that morning, Judge Keo Mony, did not bother tell tell me that I was due in his court in a few hours.

    ReplyDelete
  39. MY FIRST LETTER TO JUDGE KEO MONY

    Judge Keo Mony
    Phnom Penh Municipal Court
    Criminal Case number 3730

    3rd April 2014

    Dear Judge Keo Mony

    When I came to your office yesterday morning I knew nothing at all about the accusations made against me by Citipointe church. I did not know when my case was to be heard. No-one from the court had informed me.

    You kindly gave me copy of the original summons that was never delivered to me at my hotel. The proposition that I threw a bowl at the policeman who tried to serve me with the summons, as I read in this morning’s newspaper, is nonsense. If I had done so, the policeman would have been quite justified in arresting me. He did not.

    I had the Summons translated into English but did not receive this until after 2 pm yesterday. The Summons gave no indication of what time I was supposed to be in court. When you asked me for both of my phone numbers and for my address I understood that you would be making contact with me regarding this case. It seems that there has been a misunderstanding.

    I did not find out about the court hearing until 6pm last night when a journalist contacted me and asked for my response to the verdict.

    Could you please provide me with a copy of all the documents I am entitled to in relation to this matter. If the newspapers can be in possession of these documents I, as the defendant, should also be provided with them.

    best wishes

    ReplyDelete
  40. MY SECOND LETTER TO JUGE KEO MONY

    Mr Keo Mony
    Prosecuting Judge
    Phnom Penh Municipal Court

    17th April 2014

    Dear Judge

    re Case Number 3730

    Citipointe church versus James Ricketson

    I would like to place on record the following:

    (1) I was not provided with any warrant or summons to let me know that I was due to attend your court on 12th March.

    (2) I only heard about the 12th March court case the following day when it was pointed out to me by a journalist that I had failed to attend.

    (3) On 2nd April I attended your office at around 10 am and spoke at length with you about the failure of the Phnom Penh Municipal Court to provide me with a summons in relation to the 12th March hearing.

    (4) You arranged for me to be provided with a copy of the summons. You asked me for my address and phone numbers and led me to believe that you would make contact with me later regarding my case.

    (5) Shortly after I received the summons I took it to be translated from Khmer into English.

    (6) I received an English translation of the summons mid-afternoon of 2nd. April.

    (7) At 6pm on 2nd April I received a phone call from a journalist to ask why I had not appeared in your court at 2pm. I replied that despite speaking with you at length during the morning you had failed to tell me that I was due in court at 2pm.

    (8) When I spoke with you the following day (3rd April) in your office you eventually agreed to allow me to read through and copy out the accusations leveled at my by Citipointe church. You also informed me that I could appeal your sentence and file a complaint against Citipointe church.

    (9) It was not until one day after you sentenced me to a two year suspended jail sentence that I learned I had allegedly ‘threatened to dishonour’ Citipointe church. It was not until 3rd April that I learned I had allegedly thrown a bowl at the police who tried to serve me with a summons. Did any police testify that this was so?

    (10) I do not want to appeal the conviction 2nd April conviction. I do not consider it to be valid and I do not wish to waste my time and money coming back to Cambodia again to go to court.
    (11) I will be making an application to the Supreme Court of Queensland in Australia to be provided with copies of the MOUs that Citipointe believes gave the church the right to remove Rosa and Chita from their family in 2008. I am going to such lengths because the Phnom Penh Municipal Court refuses to ask the church to prove that removed the girls in accordance with Cambodian law.

    (12) The Phnom Penh Municipal Court clearly does not care whether the church’s actions in removing Rosa and Chita were legal or illegal.

    (13) The Cambodian government and the Cambodian legal system do not care if foreigner NGOs come to your country, illegally remove the children of poor parents and exploit them to make profits for the NGO. The Cambodian government and the Cambodian legal system does not care if families are broken up and if the children of Buddhist parents are forced to become Christians.

    Why do you allow these human rights abuses to occur?

    When I am in possession of the 2008 and 2009 MOUs I will send them to the court. They will reveal that Citipointe had no legal right to remove the girls in the manner they did. When the truth is revealed by the MOUs I expect my conviction to be overturned and for Citipointe to be charged with the ‘illegal removal’ of Rosa and Chita in 2008 in accordance with Cambodian law.

    yours sincerely

    ReplyDelete
  41. It was never Citipointe church’s intention that I be in court to hear the charges laid against me. And it was never Judge Keo Mony’s intention that I should appear in court. This would have complicated what was intended to be a simple matter – the silencing of a journalist who was in the process of exposing Citipointe church as an organization that kidnaps children from poor families for its own religious and economic purposes.

    The same principle applied with David Fletcher. APLE wanted a conviction in the case of Mr Fletcher and did not want him in court presenting evidence in his own defence. If this had occurred it would have been very difficult for APLE (even in a closed court) to argue against the mountain of evidence in support of the proposition that Mr Fletcher was innocent – including the fact that that he was not in Cambodia at the time of the alleged offenses, the fact that the alleged victim Yang Dany was still a virgin and the fact that she and her mother had been told (and probably would have admitted in court) that there was a $30,000 pot of gold waiting for them (compensation) if they charged Mr Fletcher with rape.

    Mr Fletcher’s presence in court would have thrown a potential spanner in the works so he, like me, was only informed of his court case after he had been convicted in absentia.

    This is the way the law operates in Cambodia for those with the money to pay for the outcome they wish to achieve. And you know this, whoever you may be.

    ReplyDelete
  42. A year before Citipointe used the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in a ham-fisted way to try and silence me I had lodged complaint with ‘Anti Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection Department’ regarding Citipointe church’s kidnapping of children. If you have any interest in facts (and you show little evidence of being so) read the letter I wrote to Mr Lao Lin after the interview I had with the ‘Anti Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection Department’

    Mr Lao Lin
    ‘Anti Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection Department’
    Ministry of Interior
    #275 Preah Norodom Boulevard
    Khan Chamkar Morn
    Phom Penh, Cambodia 17th May 2013

    Dear Lao Lin
    It was good to meet you on Thursday 9th May, though frustrating for me that the interviewing policeman did not ask any of the questions that would have furthered this investigation. On the two occasions when I tried to tell him about the events surrounding the removal of Rosa and Chita (which I filmed at the time) he cut me off. He was not interested. And, when I did try to say anything at all about Citipointe he made no notes.
    You will, perhaps, appreciate my frustration at having failed, for close to five years now, to get Rosa and Chita returned to the care of their family – only to find, on travelling to Cambodia specifically to talk to the police, that the interviewing policeman was more interested in how much money I paid for a bicycle in 1998 than in what happened in July, and August 2008 – recorded by me in forensic detail. The investigating officer conducting the interview was more interested in Citipointe’s complaint about me than in collecting evidence in relation to this investigation.
    I never did find out what the nature of Citipointe’s complaint about me but it was easy to read between the lines of your investigating officers;’ questions. Had I ever been arrested? Did I have a criminal record ?Had I ever been alone with Rosa and Chita? How much money had I spent of the girls? Did I want to take them to Australia? Clearly, Citipointe, in its desperation, is playing the pedophile card’. My interest in this family must, in the distorted world view of these Christians, be motivated by my base desires! Really, Lao Lin, if I was a pedophile and wanted to have my wicked way with children there are much easier ways of going about this than helping a poor family for 18 years. The easiest way would be to start up an NGO for ‘orphans’ or ‘victims of human trafficking’. One thing is certain. MOSAVY would not apply any checks to see if the NGO was bona fide; to see whether the ‘orphans’ were in fact without mother and father; to see whether the ‘victims of human trafficking’ were in fact victims and not merely the daughters of poor parents who had been tricked into signing, with their thumb prints, a document that they are then told gives total control of the girls over to the NGO. This is what Citipointe did on 31st July 2008 when the church got Chanti and her mother, Vanna, to put their thumb prints on a fraudulent ‘contract’. Your interviewing officer admitted on Thursday that this is not a legal document. So, Citipointe had no legal right to be holding Rosa and Chita in August 2008 contrary to the express wishes of their parents – unless, that is, Citipointe had already entered into an agreement with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (or any other Cambodian government department) to hold the girls against their parents’ wishes.

    ...to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  43. ...continuing...

    I am not trained as a policeman but I am also not stupid. The obvious next step (obvious since August 2008) is to request of Citipointe that it immediately produce whatever agreements the church had entered into between 31st July 2008 and 11th August 2008 with any Cambodian department that gave Pastor Leigh Ramsay, Rebecca Brewer and Helen Shields the legal right to retain Rosa and Chita against the wishes of their parents. If Citipointe cannot supply documentary evidence of the legality of its action the church it is guilty of breaching Article 8 Cambodia’s ‘Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation’.

    Article 8:Definition of Unlawful Removal

    The act of unlawful removal in this act shall mean to:
    1)      Remove a person from his/her current place of residence to a place under the actor’s or a third persons control by means of force, threat, deception, abuse of power or enticement, or
    2)      Without legal authority or any other legal justification to do so to take a minor person under general custody or curatoship or legal custody away from the legal custody of the parents, care taker or guardian.

    Article 9 of Cambodia’s ‘Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation’ makes quite clear what the punishment for such an offence is:

    Article 9: Unlawful removal, inter alia, of Minor

    A person who unlawfully removes a minor or a person under general custody or curatorship or legal custody shall be punished with imprisonment for 2 to 5 years.

    Citipointe’s ‘version’ of events and my ‘version’ of events leading up to and surrounding the removal of Rosa and Chita may well be useful as background information but in terms of an investigation the most (I am tempted to say ‘only’) fact of any relevant is whether Citipointe’s maintenance of custody of Rosa and Chita through the second half of 2008 and for most of 2009 was lawful or not. The continued reference to ‘versions’ and ‘points of view’ are of little consequence when there is hard evidence available. That Citipointe induced Chanti and her mother (but not, for some reason, Rosa and Chita’s father, Chhork) to sign a ‘contract’ on 31st July 2008 is an indisputable fact. That Rosa and Chita were held in the custody of Citipointe church in August 2008 is an indisputable fact. That the 31st July ‘contract’ is not a legal document is a fact. These three facts are unaffected by either Citipointe’s ‘version’ or my ‘version’ of events. My ‘point of view’ is irrelevant here.

    ...to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  44. ...continuing...

    These three facts point very strongly towards Citipointe being guilty, on 31st.July 2008, of using deception to the ‘unlawful removal of a minor…by means of deception, abuse of power or enticement.’

    The three indisputable facts that are strongly suggestive of Citipointe’s guilt can, of course, be countered by the church’s producing documentary evidence that it had a legal right, in accordance with Cambodian law, to take custody of Rosa and Chita on 31`st July regardless of the wishes of the girls’ parents; that the church had a legal right to tell Chanti and myself, on 11th August 2008, that Rosa and Chita would remain in the custody of the church until they were 18. It seems that no-one is interested in asking Citipointe to prove the legality of its actions on 31st July 2008x – not MOSAVY, not Chab Dai, not LICADHO, not the Australian Embassy and not, to date anyway, the ‘Anti Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection Department’.

    Your investigating officer on Thursday 9th May was interested only in collecting a whole lot of irrelevant data that bears little or no relationship to the matter in hand. Whether this was incompetence on his part of if there is another reason I will not conjecture here. Either way, if the ‘Anti Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection Department’ is serious about its investigation I fail to see how you cannot ask Citipointe to produce the documentation that demonstrates the legality of its actions. And copies of this documentation should be provided to Chanti and Chhork and to myself as their advocate – as I have been requesting since Nov 2008.

    On 10th May I wrote yet another letter to Pastor Leigh Ramsay – the woman who was responsible back in mid 2008 for removing Rosa and Chita from their parents’ care - a woman who lies with impunity (and this can be proven) and who has never kept one of the promises she has made to return Rosa and Chita to the family soon over the past close to five years. Leigh Ramsay has been able to breach Cambodian law because MOSAVY simply has not care, this past five years, what foreign NGOs do with the children of poor parents. There are signs that there may be a change of heart within MOSAVY; that sham orphanages and ‘rescue homes’ for alleged ‘victims of Human Trafficking’ will be shot down. I certainly hope so for the sake of all the parents and relatives of children who are neither orphans nor victims but are merely the children of poor families that have been induced, by poverty and/or deception, into giving up their children to unscrupulous NGOs. These NGOs then present themselves to the world, to their donors, their sponsors, as the saviors of these children in order to raise money – little or none of which flows to the families and communities from which these children have been removed.

    ...to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  45. ...continuing...

    I have attached a copy of my latest letter to Leigh Ramsay, written on 10th May. I have also published it online along with other letters I have written this past few years in an attempt to get Rosa and Chita returned to the care of their family:

    http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-july-31st-2008-contract-citipointe.html

    One of the frustrating aspects of Thursday 9th May’s interview was the continual reference made by the investigating officer to Rosa and Chita as ‘victims’. They are not and never have been victims of human trafficking.  In mid 2008 they were merely the daughters of poor parents who asked for and were offered short term assistance by Citipointe whilst in the midst of a financial crisis. This crisis had passed by November 2008 but, when Chanti and Chhork asked for their daughters to be returned, Citipointe church refused. And has refused ever since – despite many promises made to the parents that reintegration would happen soon.

    I was filming the day that Citipointe was recruiting 'victims of human trafficking' in mid-2008.   My footage shows clearly that Citipointe was recruiting 'victims' by handing out food parcels to the children and their parents. Other footage I shot in Nov 2008 shows Chanti and Chhork running two businesses down by the river: (1) A stall selling sinks and snacks to tourists and (2) a boat that the family both lived on and used as a second source of income. This footage also shows Chhork on the phone to Citipointe asking that his and Chanti's daughters be returned to them.

    My footage also shows a conversation between Chanti and two other young women who lived down by the river about the fact that not one of the girls at the She Rescue Home in Nov 2008 was a ‘victim of human trafficking’; that all were the daughters of poor families who had, like Chanti, been made false promises and had their daughters removed from their care as a result of their applying their thumb prints to a document they could not read and did not understand.

    My footage, had I had an opportunity to show it to the ‘Anti Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection Department’ would, at the very least, have led to the realization that there were some important questions to ask of Citipointe. The opportunity to screen the footage never arose because the interviewing officer brought the interview to an end before he had managed to ask one relevant question. It was for this reason that I refused to sign the record of interview.

    best wishes

    As for the other observations you make in your comments I will respond to these in due course. Right now I have other matters to attend to.

    Before I go, however, and given your intimate knowledge of when the photo of Alan Lemon was taken, would you like to make a comment on Scott Neeson and CCF’s World Housing scam? Just pretend for a moment that I am a Cambodia Daily or Phnom Penh Post journalist asking a simple question:

    “Who owns the land upon which the 360 houses have been erected that were ‘gifted’ to poor families by generous donors?”

    ReplyDelete
  46. So let me get this right, Ricketson has been convicted and received a suspended prison sentence, has profited from prostitution and defends child sex offenders. On top of that he is a liar apparently

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Come son Anonymous 5.04! You can do better than this! Use some imagination and hurl some really stinging insults, not this kind of timid nonsense.

      As with all members of Team Neeson you are clearly not going to let anything like facts stand in your way. Fair enough, but at least come up with your own original material.

      As it happens I have not profited from prostitution (great story, though) and nor do I defend child sex offenders. What I do do is advocate the right for anyone charged with a crime to be given a fair trial. I would apply this same principle to you even though you are a pain in the arse. Being an unpleasant human being is no reason to deny you a fair trial. Even those accused of genocide in Cambodia are entitled to a fair trial.

      Delete
  47. "As it happens I have not profited from prostitution (great story, though) and nor do I defend child sex offenders."

    But you were recently charged with profitting from prostitution (or at least more recently than that photo of Lemon you posted,) and you have dedicated a major position of this blog to defending Fletcher who is a (twice over) convicted child sex offender.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Dear Anonymous 12.43

    Mr Fletcher, like you, like anyone accused of a crime, is entitled to a fair trial. This has been denied Mr Fletcher.

    Anyone trying to post comments that don't appear, keep trying. Not all comments are going up and it is not because I am censoring them.

    ReplyDelete
  49. What happened to the post about Ricketson harassing Citipointe and CCF and his hypocrisy and lack of integrity in attacking Lemon. I was about to comment on it but it disappeared.

    Are you deleting posts James?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope, not deleting any posts. Keep trying.

      Delete
    2. The problem posting comments may be due to the sheer number of comments that have been made. This has happened in the past. When the number of comments exceeds 100 some start to disappear.

      Delete
    3. That is not the way blogger works. Sounds like a BS 'I never received your email' style lie. We all know how internet works James, and this isn't it. You are deleting responses you don't like and lying about it.

      Delete
    4. Stop whinging, Anonymous 4.54, just post it again

      Delete
    5. No whine. Just calling a spade a spade. You are a liar. I saw the post, read it, left for a while, came back a couple of hours later and it was gone. Posts don't just disappear on their own. You deleted it because he/she has you pegged and you don't like it. Lying about deleting it just goes to support what that post said about you. You are not an honest reporter.

      Delete
    6. Dear Anonymous 5.52

      When someone comment son this blog a copy of their comment appears in my email. Given that I received no copy of the comment you are referring to I can only presume that it either was not made and you are just trolling here or that it was made and, for some reason deleted itself or was deleted by someone without. This would be impossible, as far as I can tell, without my receiving a copy of it in my email. I think it is fairly clear by now that I do not delete comments made about me that are negative. Instead, I respond to them. If someone makes a comment that does not appear they should try again. There have been times when this has happened to my own comments. At first i thought that maybe I was being hacked but, in time, I figured that this was just an imperfection in the system. Keep trying and say what you like. I will respond with fcts and evidence and not with abuse, cheers

      Delete
    7. This has just arrived in my email box but did not make it onto the blog. I have no idea why.

      I will read and respond to it later:

      Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "# 197 Scott Neeson seeks feedback about the Cambod...":

      "Nope, not deleting any posts. Keep trying."

      Per your request, here it is again:

      Very odd, James. It appears you deleted my post and then went ahead and posted a 3500 word response to it. That would seem unfair and unjounalistic of you, but perhaps it was just an accident. I mean, why would you delete it, except perhaps that it puts you rhetorical techniques in a questionable light? The post was factual, I cited my sources, I didn’t use innuendo, loaded questions, lies or name calling and it was relevant to a question at hand, unlike what you and your cohorts here use on Lemon, McCabe and Neeson here regularly. If you can lie and distort in your attempted character assassination of Lemon, you can allow me to impart some media-supported facts about the credibility and motivations of the person making those accusations. Surely what is good for the goose is good for the gander, especially when I have been kinder and more honest in my presentation of you than you have of them. So now that you have inserted your say first, here again is the post of mine that you were reacting to, and that somehow got deleted.

      “Am dying to know more about my 'profiting from prostitution'. Do tell. Sounds exciting! Sensational even. I wait with bated breath :-)”

      By your own admission you were charged ‘profiting from prostitution’ in Cambodia. You wrote extensively of it in one (or more) of your blogs and it is a matter of public record. Because of conflicting information online, it is not clear whether you were convicted of it or you managed to beat the charge (this being Cambodia,) but you did face that charge (and a porn charge) in Cambodia.

      What is certain also is that you were not only charged but convicted of “blackmail” in Cambodia for your harassment of another child protection organisation, doing essentially the same thing you are now doing to CCF and the people who work for it. This is documented in both the Phnom Penh Post as well as the Cambodia Daily. How does this speak to your fair-mindedness and credibility these matters?

      And all of this occurred much more recently than that old photo you posted and said was taken “recently.” That photo is at least 6 to 10 years old. Your court case for profiting from prostitution and conviction for blackmailing a child protection organization was just 2 years ago. And here you are again, doing much the same thing to another child protection organisation.

      How does this speak to your credibility these matters?

      Speaking of which…

      “Even if the story were an accurate record of the facts (well known to the Phnom Penh Post at the time), of what relevance is it to the question of whether or not Scott Neeson…”

      It is relevant in that you and your cohorts here have repeatedly accused a man of being a “pimp.” This man is a former policeman with a no criminal record, who is now dedicating his time helping protect children for one of the most reputable child protection organisations in Cambodia. Whereas you, James Ricketson, really have been charged with ‘profiting from prostitution’ in Cambodia, and have been convicted of charges stemming from harassing a child protection organisation, are currently involved in a campaign to defend a convicted pedophile and damage the reputation of a child protection organisation. Do you not see the hypocrisy if not the irony in this, let alone how it speaks to your credibility when you accuse NGO workers of “pimping”?

      Perhaps before you choose to distort facts, lie and engage in character assassination against good men in order to further your private little war with yet another child protection organization, you should consider whether sticking to the issues and being an honest reporter of the facts might be a better course of action.

      Delete
  50. “•
    James RicketsonAugust 30, 2016 at 1:50 AM
    Nope, not deleting any posts. Keep trying.

    James RicketsonAugust 30, 2016 at 2:52 AM
    The problem posting comments may be due to the sheer number of comments that have been made. This has happened in the past. When the number of comments exceeds 100 some start to disappear.
    James RicketsonAugust 31, 2016 at 1:14 AM
    Now that is interesting. I saw your comment, Alan and responded to it with my own a minute or two after you posted it. I can assure you I did not delete it and will retrieve it from my email and post it for you.”

    I see it come and go. Again and again. It’s pretty clear now James that you have been caught lying again, and that you’ve been deleting posts.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Perhaps you should just leave the post in place. We've all read it. We can all see how you are deleting it James. Nobody is fooled by your claims that Google is somehow doing this. If that wasn't obvious before, it is now, Just leave it in place as you should have to begin with and move on.

    ReplyDelete
  52. "Perhaps you should just leave the post in place. We've all read it. We can all see how you are deleting it James. Nobody is fooled by your claims that Google is somehow doing this. If that wasn't obvious before, it is now, Just leave it in place as you should have to begin with and move on."

    Agreed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yah, also agreed. He should just leave it and answer it. Right know it looks like James is deathly afraid of it.

      Delete
  53. Why did you delete my quote James?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Hey what happened to my post? What did I do wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  55. mantap mas infonya dan salam sukses selalu

    ReplyDelete
  56. makasih gan buat infonya dan semoga bermanfaat

    ReplyDelete
  57. ok mantap bos infonya dan salam kenal

    ReplyDelete
  58. You make so many great points here that I read your article a couple of times. Your views are in accordance with my own for the most part. This is great content for your readers. Kinderkleding online

    ReplyDelete
  59. GET YOUR BLANK ATM AND CREDIT CARD AT AFFORDABLE PRICE......

    We sell this cards to all our customers and interested buyers worldwide, the card has a daily withdrawal limit of $5000 and up to $50,000 spending limit in stores and unlimited on POS. *email blankatm988@gmail.com* you can also call or whatsapp us today for more enlightenment.

    *BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND FAKE HACKERS IMPERSONATING US BUT THEY ARE NOT FROM US CONTACT US ONLY VIA THIS CONTACT * WE ARE REAL AND LEGIT....2019 FUNDS/FORGET ABOUT GETTING A LOAN *email blankatm988@gmail.com.
    CONTACT US NOW AND BE HAPPY FOREVER, WE OPERATE ONLY TO ASSIST THE POOR AND HOPELESS WORLDWIDE TO LIVE A GOOD LIFE AND BECOME RICH FAMILY, AND BE ABLE TO PAY THEIR DEPT AND START A GOOD BUSINESS OF ANY AMOUNT, THIS IS A DREAM COMES TRUE TO THE POOR AROUND THE WORLD.

    NOTE: this will only cost a little charge for the preparation and the shipment of the card to your various countries, Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Dr. Williams JohnsonNovember 7, 2019 at 1:41 PM

    MAKE YOUR LIFE BETTER AND APPLY FOR A FAST RELIABLE LOAN NOW TO GIVE YOUR CHRISTMAS AND NEW YEAR A BEFITTING CELEBRATION AND PAY BACK YOUR DEPT...

    Are You A Business Man Or Woman? Are You In Any Financial Mess Or Do You Need funds To Start Up Your Own Business? Do You Need A Loan To Start A Nice Small Scale And Medium Business?
    Do You Have A Low Credit Score And You Are Finding It Hard To Obtain Capital Loan From Local Banks And Other Financial Institutes?. - Intermediaries / Consultants / Brokers Are Welcome To Bring Their Clients And Are 100% Protected. Interested Parties Should Contact Us For More Information
    Through Via E-mail: quickloan9888@gmail.com.

    I will Like To Inform You That Our Main Goals Are To Help Companies And Entrepreneurs Raise Their Business To better Heights By Investing, Consulting And Raising Capital Without Bank Lending. We Are Qualified In All Aspects Of Financing, Banks And Asset Based Lending. We Have The Ability To Handle All Aspects Of The Financial Needs And Challenges Of Our Clients, Including; Interested Parties or persons Should Contact Us For More Information.
    Through Via E-mail: quickloan9888@gmail.com,

    WE OFFER ALL KIND OF LOANS - APPLY FOR AFFORDABLE LOANS.


    *BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND FAKE HACKERS IMPERSONATING US BUT THEY ARE NOT FROM
    US CONTACT US ONLY VIA THIS CONTACT *
    WE ARE REAL AND LEGIT.
    Through Via E-mail: quickloan9888@gmail.com,

    SEND US YOUR DETAILS THROUGH OUR EMAIL OR WHATSAPP FOR THE PROCESSING OF YOUR LOAN, THANK YOU:
    - Your full Name:
    - Loan amount needed:
    - Loan Duration:
    - Purpose of loan:
    - City / Country:
    - Telephone:
    - How Did You Hear About Us:

    NOTE: This loan requires little charges for the processing and trust from our customers worldwide...we have change many life and willing to do more, contact us through our office email and somebody will attend to you fast...thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Info menarik dan boleh sekali dicoba, Makasih buat infonya dan sukses selalu.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Mau mendapatkan pelayanan yang baik dan ramah???

    Modal Kecil bisa mendapatkan hasil yg luar biasa...

    ReplyDelete
  63. Menarik sekali, perlu saya coba ini..
    kebetulan lagi cara tentang hal ini.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Kabar Baik Untuk Para pencinta Game
    Karena di Bulan januari ini Sudah keluar Game RPG Online Terpopuler Se-Asia
    Penasarankan Game nya Seperti apa???
    Kalian bisa dilihat game nya dari link di bawah yaaa

    ReplyDelete
  65. artikelnya sangat bagus, terima kasih telah membagi informasi tersebut

    ReplyDelete
  66. Yah begitulah, backlink dari google ini memang perlu untuk kita kejar dan kita dapatkan

    ReplyDelete
  67. Great article Lot's of information to Read...Great Man Keep Posting and update to People..Thanks
    dg casino

    ReplyDelete
  68. Thanks you very much for sharing these links. Will definitely check this out..
    Asia Gaming

    ReplyDelete
  69. Great post full of useful tips! My site is fairly new and I am also having a hard time getting my readers to leave comments. Analytics shows they are coming to the site but I have a feeling “nobody wants to be first”.
    dominoqq

    ReplyDelete
  70. Whether you are involved in affiliate marketing, selling items through ClickBank, or promoting your own personal business and website, ads are an important part of one's success. Some people make a recurring income simply by placing advertisements on the websites that get a lot of traffic.
    www.ufa365.info

    ReplyDelete
  71. I definitely enjoying every little bit of it. It is a great website and nice share. I want to thank you. Good job! You guys do a great blog, and have some great contents. Keep up the good work.
    เดิมพันกีฬาออนไลน์

    ReplyDelete
  72. I must say, I thought this was a pretty interesting read when it comes to thisC topic. Liked the material. . .
    ufa365

    ReplyDelete
  73. Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I'll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon. Big thanks for the useful info
    joker-gaming

    ReplyDelete
  74. Hi I found your site by mistake when i was searching yahoo for this acne issue, I must say your site is really helpful I also love the design, its amazing!. I don’t have the time at the moment to fully read your site but I have bookmarked it and also add your RSS feeds. I will be back in a day or two. thanks for a great site.
    หวยลาว

    ReplyDelete
  75. Daisy Limousine provides the best black car service in the tri-state area. We can provide limo service or airport service in New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut. Our on-time ground transportation service will drive you pretty much from A to B anywhere in the North East of America. Give us a call or book a ride online at your convenience
    แทงบาสออนไลน์

    ReplyDelete
  76. Yah begitulah, backlink dari google ini memang perlu untuk kita kejar dan kita dapatkan

    ReplyDelete
  77. Menarik sekali, perlu saya coba ini..
    kebetulan lagi cara tentang hal ini.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Info menarik dan boleh sekali dicoba, Makasih buat infonya dan sukses selalu.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Mau mendapatkan pelayanan yang baik dan ramah???

    Modal Kecil bisa mendapatkan hasil yg luar biasa...

    ReplyDelete
  80. artikelnya sangat bagus, terima kasih telah membagi informasi tersebut

    ReplyDelete