Monday, September 21, 2015

# 147 Scott Neeson's 'gifted' World Housing homes!




Dear Scott

When you erected these World Housing dwellings you forgot to provide drainage for the families you rent the houses to.

What you are looking at in these photos is raw sewage in amongst water that rises to 2 feet when it rains heavily. These photos were taken after a light rain.

At a cost of $1000 to yourself and $2,800 to World Housing you have managed not only to build a slum but to become a slum landlord.

I wonder how long it will be before there is a serious outbreak of illness in this newly constructed slum and what lengths you will go to to cover it up.

Other than acquiring these photos over the weekend I also managed to talk with two young CCF kids who told me, as have many others, just how many young men and women sleep in one room. In the case of one it was 15 in a 3 bed room. In the case of the other it was 9 in a 3 bed room.

And you claim, CCF claims, that it costs $4,000 a year to feed, accommodate and educate in child in residential care.

cheers

James






116 comments:

  1. Yes James, and I have spoken to young kids in the past who have told me that the moon is made out of cheese and that Santa and the Easter Bunny are real. Should I believe these facts also ?

    Your photo of a little water in the rainy season does nothing other than to confirm your spiteful attacks on Scott and CCF who are achieving more for the community in a week than you will do in a lifetime. You truly are a nasty human being, Karma is such a great thing and I am sure you will get what you deserve at some point in the future (hopefully sooner than later)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is not just water that they are tracking into NEESON'S HOMES, it is sewage! You do know the difference, right?

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous 6.56

      Do you work for CCF?

      Have you been into any of the children's rooms at bedtime and so are in a position to know, first hand, just how many children sleep in one bed and how many sleep on the floor?

      These are questions that you may or may not be in a position to answer. They are not a spiteful attack, as Team Neeson chooses to describe any questions posed by journalists Neeson does not want to or cannot provide.

      The answe to the question of 'how many children per bed' is one best answered by the children themselves, but, as you know, any child that talks about what takes place behind closed doors at CCF is kicked out.

      Open your doors to the media if you have nothing to hide.

      As for your thinly veiled Karma threat, this is tiresome. You know where I am staying. If you wish to put your threats into practice, go for it. Your choice.

      Delete
    3. Sorry James, am I to understand that you have been into any of the childrens rooms at bedtime ?? No, I do not work for CCF.

      Please note there was certainly no threat despite your paranoia and your liking to twist the way things are said, I merely made an observation that Karma is a great thing and that I hope it will catch up with you sooner rather than later. I certainly have no interest in where you might be living or even which country you might be in at the moment.


      Delete
    4. No, Anonymous 7.50

      I rely for my information on the testimony of EVERY CCF resident Ai talk to.

      Where do you get your information from?

      Delete
    5. Ah - I see, these must be the same CCF residents that are so terrified of getting thrown out if they talk to anyone I guess. If they are CCF residents it would be interesting to know how and where you get access to these children that according to your previous blogs are locked up behind razor wire fences so that nobody can rescue them right ?

      Delete
    6. Dear Anonymous 8.06

      Some young men and women leave CCF because they cannot abide the conditions and the rules.

      Some have left because the were kicked out for asking questions or making observations that Neeson, Lemon and McCabe were not happy with.

      Some are taking advantages of the educational opportunities CCF has made available to them, whilst at the same time being critical of many aspects of the way CCF is run.

      Not all CCF young men and women have been cowed into silence by Neeson. Their voices will be heard in due course

      Delete
    7. Thanks for explaining, now I fully understand - your sources are totally reliable and are unbiased students who have a gripe against CCF for whatever reason, that would be a very trustworthy source of information I'm sure (if it actually exists).

      I wonder if you could enlighten us to where all these kids that have been sleeping so many in a bed manage to escape to and how they are able to break out. If they leave as you say because they cannot abide the conditions and the rules does that not suggest that they are at CCF of their own free will if they have the freedom to leave at any time they want. There seem to be so many contradictions in your stories Mr Neeson.

      It does however make a bit of a mockery of some of your previous comments that suggest these kids are kept under lock and key so that Scott can make money from them to poor unsuspecting sponsors. Interesting to see that at last you appear to admit that CCF is offering educational opportunities. In the past it has been suggested by you and your trolls that these kids are sent to public schools.

      Delete
  2. Mr. Ricketson, thank you for all you do to expose Neeson for the fraud that he is.

    Now can you explain if these homes are gifted or rented? Who owns this land? Do the homes have their own sanitation facilities? Where does the difference between the $2800 donated and the $1000 cost go?

    Does Neeson run this slum or does some independent, benevolent organization run it? What would Neeson's or for that matter his board of directors, have as qualifications to run such a community? I'm afraid that your photo clearly demonstrates their qualifications!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The questions you are asking are valid ones, though the Team Neeson commentator would characterize your questions as a 'spiteful attack'.

      CCF has zero commitment to the precepts of transparency or accountability and so will never answer your questions, my questions or questions put to Neeson by any member of the 4th Estate

      Delete
  3. James, it so rarely rains in Cambodia, even during the rainy season, that it seems a bit unfair of you to expect that Neeson could have predicted or avoided this from happening!!

    Could you help me with the math and tell how many children Neeson has to bed?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Where did this $1000 figure come from? Just another baseless lie from Ricketson that he deems as fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Since you seem to know the figure, please let us know what it is? If I have made a mistake re the cost of each building I will correct it

      Delete
    2. It doesn't work like that. You are the one saying they are pocketing $1,800. Based on what?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 8.59

      Let's see if we can agree on something, OK?

      Scott Neeson does not answer questions. Not just from me but from anyone in the media. Various reasons and explanations have been given for this but can we agree that of the dozens of questions I have asked Neeson this past nine months he has not answered one? Agreed?

      OK, now I presume that you read newspapers, follow the news. You will be familiar with the role that investigative journalists play. They get a tip-op or, in their research, discover that something is going on that is wrong and/or illegal.

      The diligent journalist then does his or her research obtains as many facts/evidence as possible. S/he then approaches the person who may or may not have done something wrong and asks/him/her to comment. The person can then say, "This is nonsense and here is why...", say "No comment" or (as with Neeson,) simply not respond at all.

      Once the journalist has as much information as possible, from as many sources as possible, the editor then has to decide whether or not to publish. "Is the article defamatory?" will be a key question on the mind of the editor.

      If it is decided that the journalist, the newspaper, has a story that is factually correct, it is published.

      The person about whom the story has been written is not happy. There are some errors of fact in the article. ANd s/he can prove it with documents. The newspaper corrects its error with, perhaps, an observation to the effect that the error arose from the subject's refusal to answer questions.

      So, what is a journalist to do with Scott Neeson, who simply does not answer questions? Wait until s/he has written affidavits from several people signing in the presence of a Magistrate?

      In the case of serious offences, the answer is often 'yes'. In the case of less serious offences the answer is 'no'.

      Now I can answer your question, though I doubt it will satisfy you.

      I have obtained my $1,000 figure from more than one source. This does not mean to say that I can be 100% certain that it is correct. However, if it is incorrect I will be happy to quote the actual figure and admit that I made an error. This is part and parcel of our job - those of us who work in the 4th Estate

      Delete
    4. So you have no evidence at all. Great work Mr 4th Estate.

      Delete
  5. Sorry James, forgive me, I forgot that if you said it then it must be true

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is just another classic example of how Ricketson is driven by hate and is looking to destroy Neeson and CCF. Is there anything that Neeson does well Ricketson? Is there anything that you have given him praise for. You are a jealous coward Ricketson!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Neeson is brilliant at marketing. He is brilliant at raising mone and could do so much to assist disadvantaged children within a family and community context if he chose to. And if or when he does he will have my support. Until then I will continue to ask questions - as is my right and duty as a member of the 4th Estate

      Delete
    2. You are a fuckwit Ricketson

      Delete
  7. So this place is a sewage dump created by Neeson. Now that would make him a piece of shit, right?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Has SISHA gone out of business? They haven't posted to their FB page since January, their website has been suspended, and Mr. Morrish has a website saying that he resigned SISHA in September 2014 and now works for a different company. Is SISHA dead?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who gives a shit what Morrish is doing.

      Delete
  9. As a major player in the Fletcher situation, I would think the current status of that organization would be relevant to the discussion. As well as information about what happened to it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Steve resigned from sisha in May 2014. he now runs his own private company. How do i know? I drink with the dude!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Steve resigned from sisha in May 2014"

      Yes, that is what I posted. It is also on his website, so no need to drink with him to find out. But he didn't post what happened to SISHA. Did he mention to you whether SISHA has gone out of business? Is SISHA dead?

      Delete
    2. You posted in September 2014 mornon! Why should he post what happened to sisha. he is an employee who resigned from his job. Does he have to give a running commentary of what he is doing each day? Fucking delusional idiot!

      Delete
    3. From Morrish's website: "In 2007 Morrish established non-profit foundation SISHA International to tackle human trafficking and child abuse around the world. In September 2014, Steve resigned as Executive Director of SISHA International to focus more time on his growing family and private business." http://www.steve-morrish.com/about-us/ Maybe he gets confused when drinking, or you do, or both of you. It wouldn't be the first time he screwed up when drunk. I don't know. It is not what I asked anyway. I'm not sure why you want to tall about Morrish. I did not ask about Mr. Morrish. I asked about the organization SISHA. Has SISHA gone out of business? Is SISHA dead?

      mornon :-)

      Delete
  11. Ricketson - the fact that you are now trying to defame Neeson by showing these bullshit images and insinuatingn that he is profiting form putting people into sub standard houses. just shows how much of a reptile you are. The people now getting these houses were once living in rundown wooden shacks with dirt floors. Are you saying that they are now worse off? Its clear that all this blog is about is venting your jealousy for not being able to achieve what neeson has done. Loser!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Team Neeson

      (1) Why are the images bullshit?

      What they show are houses that were constructed with no thought given to drainage. Raw sewage floats in the water, posing a health threat to residents.

      (2) These houses were paid for by Developers in Vancouver who, having paid $50,000 to join World Housing, believed that they were 'gifting' houses to poor people in Cambodia. These developers did not realise that they had been lied to; that in fact the houses were being 'gifted' to to the Cambodian Children's Fund, which then RENTS them to the people to whom they were GIFTED.

      (3) Given that Neeson invoices World Housing (and hence these generous developers) considerably more than it costs him to build the houses, yes, he is profiting. The Cambodian Children's Fund is profiting.

      (4) Profit is also being made through the rental of these 'gifted' houses. The question is: "Who is the rent going to?" The answer would be, "To whoever owns the land on which the houses have been erected." If this land is owned by CCF, then the rent is going to CCF. However, no-one at CCF - not Scott Neeson, not Alan Lemon, not James Mc Cabe and not the CCF board is prepared to say who owns the land.

      (5) Whoever own the land now effectively owns the houses built on it - houses that were intended for poor families; not a slum landlord. The more houses that are built on this land, the greater the value of the land to the owner.

      (6) As to whether the families are better off living in an open sewer than they were before, living in shacks with dirt floors, is a question you might like to ask the families that are renting these houses?

      (7) As for your 'jealousy' jibe (often made), let me remind you that the role of the 4th Estate is do ask questions. It is, amongst many other things, to expose corruption. This World Housing initiative has been corrupted by both World Housing and Scott Neeson lying about the 'gifting' of homes/houses. To 'give' a home to a poor family, no strings attached, is quite different to renting a poor family a home with lots of strings attached.

      Delete
    2. I think its a great idea that homes are not given to poor people for 'Free" - it creates a society that expects things instead of working for them. Unfortunately the culture of cambodia is driven by the foreign aid generation that think that its easy and there will be free money from an NGO. Just look at the PM's speech 2 days ago where he is still saying that western countries are stingy and he wants them to give more money. Thats what the majority of the country thinks as well. So if a model can be created where a house is given to poor people for a modest fee and they need to pay that fee off, and it teaches them value and they feel that they have earned the house instead of just being the recipient of free gifts - then isn't that a good thing? I personally would like to see all NGO's gone from the country and the foreign aid to stop - however that would then mean that a great number of Khmers would be out of work, a lot of poor people would become poorer and the economy would take a hit because that free foreign aid would stop.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 3.59

      Thank you for your sensible comments. They are, alas, a little too rare.

      I agree that the 'culture of dependency' needs to come to an end. The ideal situation is one where families such as the ones who have been 'gifted' homes get to pay them off over a period of time with what amounts to a low interest loan.

      What is wrong with this Neeson/World Housing initiative (apart from the lies about 'gifting') is that the families living in these homes can and never will be able to own them. I suspect that one of the consequences of this will be a lack of respect for the homes they are renting - with predictable consequences.

      If, however, each of the families had genuinely been 'gifted' their home they would all now have a vested interest in solving the drainage problem that they are clearly faced by. As it stands, I suspect that they will expect their landlord (whoever that might be) to solve the problem.

      The ideal scenario here (given that the houses have cost CCF nothing) would be to allow the families to form their own community, take responsibility for this little cramped village and do whatever is necessary to keep it from becoming a slum.

      Neeson and CCF treating them like children, forcing them to obey Neeson's rules, is a step in the wrong direction - not just for CCF but for Cambodia generally.

      Delete
  12. Ricketson is a hater of people who succeed. Neeson is a doer and has achieved so much for Cambodia. Do the maths!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Team Neeson is sure out in force today!

      Yes, do some maths.

      Neeson claims in CCF's 2013 IRS Tax Return that CCF is spending $4,000 a year per child in residential care who is also attending a CCF school.

      So, take a hypothetical family living in one of these houses surrounded by raw sewage. Imagine that there are 2 children from the family who are in residential care and at a CCF school.

      That's $8,000 a year flowing into CCF coffers to care for these two kids. Remember, I am using CCF figures here; not figures I have dreamt up.

      And the family of these two kids is RENTING a home that was GIVEN to them (according to press releases) by developers working under the World Housing umbrella.

      Yes, Neeson is surely a doer, but what is he doing?

      Delete
    2. A lot more for the community than you are doing Rickets

      Delete
  13. Well said anon 1.55am - you dont have to be einstein to work out who Cambodia thinks has done more for the country.

    ReplyDelete
  14. So this place is a sewage dump created by Neeson. Now that would make him a piece of shit, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What kind of ridiculous comment is that? rickets, even with your low level of integrity and ethics, I would assume that you would think such a comment is ridiculous. The only sewage connection is this blog site.

      Delete
    2. One of many problems is that there is no sewage connection. The sewage is running into the yards of impoverished people who are forced to track it up their stairs and into homes that they rent from Neeson. Take a look at the stairs and you will see it!

      If you think your boss is such a great guy, how do you reconcile the harm done to over 700 children that he has taken from their families? Permanent harm!!

      Delete
  15. something was said about karma; I am also a believer in karma and it looks to me as if karma is coming back to bite neeson and his blind followers; they vent their anger without offering any defense to their boss or buddy or what ever neeson is to them.
    why not just offer some hard evidence rather than name calling and attempting to discredit anyone; if you know something to help defend neeson, then do so. do you live in one of the houses in question?
    James has offered neeson a chance to answer questions. neeson has sent his followers instead;
    All of this was uncovered while looking into the framing of David Fletcher; one lie follows another. neeson can no longer lie his way out of the truth; in Cambodia, the truth matters a lot less than the money it took to pay for favors from corrupt officials but the truth will eventually result in neeson house of cards falling down around his ears; yes karma does work

    ReplyDelete
  16. The problem with Neeson is that everything is for show. Once he's got the photos of the happy families smiling because thy are so happy to have a home, he is finished with them. They have served their purpose. A photo opportunity to put on his Facebook page. Same with the Dalai Lama. Neeson is a fraud through and through and he is supported in his scams by a dim-witted Hollywood actress by the name of Heather Graham and a board of corrupt individuals along for the ride and to enjoy the perks. Shame on them all. If Neeson was a Khmer woman, as Somaly Mam was, the press would go after Ms Neeson with a vengeance but because he's a guy, because he's well connected, because he has loads of dough, he gets off Scott-free. (Pun intended) Correction: Cambodia Daily excluded. The Daily has finally seen the light.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Ricketson, I think you make a fundamental mistake in believing that Neeson actually wants to help impoverished Cambodians. Everything that you have turned up, indicates that he could give a shit about other people! Look at his record and it is quite evident that his objective is to create St. Neeson. Look at the make up his board and you will see the vast majority have no skills or experience in running an orphanage for 700 or integrating these children back into their families or running an educational institution, or running a community for impoverished Cambodians. Follow the money you fuckwit!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous 5.12

      I have to agree with much of what you say -except, of course, the bit where you call me a fuckwit :-)

      I would, however, like to give Neeson the benefit of the doubt and say that I think he started out with good intentions but became corrupted along the way. I think this applies to a lot of NGOs.

      I have made a few enquiries about the 16 year old girl who died when in the care of CCF and it is pretty clear that there was, in this instance, a failure of duty of care. The young woman in question suffered from Nephrotic syndrome, a disorder that results in abnormal kidney function and one that requires a special diet, quite specific medication and the attention of a qualified doctor. And it requires a nurse who, when confronted by certain symptoms, knows how to respond and not merely recommend the taking of a few Panadol. The failure of duty of care that led to the death of this girl has been covered up by CCF because a thorough investigation into how and why it occurred would take some of the sheen off Neeson’s halo.

      The same applies with an 13 year old girl I know who, though she is a student in a CCF school, must work half of each day in the Phnom Penh rubbish dump, along with her 11 year old brother (who does not go to school at all) in order to help fed the family.

      Neeson has the money to address all these problems but, it seems, he is more interested in photo opportunities than in actually helping families in a community context.

      Delete
    2. Of course Neeson only cares about himself! Look at how he got ball rolling against Fletcher!! Now how do we get the MOJ to see the scandal perpetrated by Neeson, APLE, FCO, Morrish, Khmer 440, and others??

      Delete
    3. A scandal - you really do believe that these groups got together and conspired all this. the only scandal here is the fact that you anon 5.50am will be allowed to breed and have children - very frightening seeing that you have an IQ of 6.

      Delete
    4. As I have written elsewhere, when it comes to a choice between a 'conspiracy' and a 'cockup', it is almost certainly a cockup. In this instance, as the evidence would reveal in court, there have been a series of cockups which, if they had become public knowledge, would have left egg on a lot of faces. This is where the 'conspiracy' kicks in. It was (and still is) a conspiracy of silence.

      Neeson's original statement about Fletcher 'grooming' young girls was not part of a conspiracy. It was merely Scott wanting to be King of the (Dump) Castle and seeing Fletcher as competition. Stupid ego-driven teenage boy motivation.

      Scott's comment gave Drummond just what he needed (as Scott knew it would) to make a fantastic tabloid story. This in turn gave all the others who had been looking for evidence of 'grooming' for two years (without success) to do what they needed to do to justify their existence. 'Karl', the only person who knew where Mr Fletcher was staying in Bangkok, gave him up to the Thai authorities - which were then paid to keep Mr Fletcher in custody (no charges laid) until such time as a 'victim' could be found. ANd, lo and behold, Yang Dany's mum, Sekun was told that if her daughter was prepared to play the role of 'victim' there was a $30,000 pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

      'Karl' had made a few mistakes, however, and unwittingly left an electronic trail to his front door.

      When it became apparent, from Mr Fletcher's passport, that he was not in Cambodia at the time of the alleged rapes, the passport had to disappear. And we have seen how that happened.

      Yes, I know that this all sounds like the plot from a second rate John le Carre novel but I can only rely on the facts and evidence that I now have in abundance. A bunch of amateurs and incompetent professionals have sought, in their own different ways, and for different reasons to see to it that David Fletcher never ver gets anywhere near a court in which evidence for the Prosecution is presented and challenged; where evidence for the Defence is able to show that for David Fletcher to be guilty of rape requires that it occurred in a location that didn't exist,whilst he was not in Cambodia and which did not break Yang Dany's hymen. Of course, in Cambodia, such verdicts can be arrived at if the will exists on the part of certain parties for it occur.

      PS My IQ is a little higher than 6 and I have bred. My son seems to be OK despite my incredibly low IQ

      Delete
  18. Interesting that James whinges about those that post as anon and then proves he actually supplies posts himself as anon (as he did in his 5.50 am anon post) It would be really interesting to see how many real supporters he has opposed to the number of posts he puts up as anon to make it look as if other people have the same spiteful hatred for Scott as he does.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He thinks you wrote the anonymous 5:50 post. Unfortunately, thinking is not his strong point.

      Delete
  19. Correct Anon 12.49, I believe James posts as both anon and as James Ricketson in order to make it look as if he actually has people stupid enough to fall for all his bullshit. Will anon or James come back to respond to this post I wonder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous 5.37

      If was going to write an Anonymous comment I would do a little better than Anon 5.50.

      Whether you are a member of Team Neeson or not, I cannot be sure but you are certainly someone (and there are lots of you posting on this blog) more interested in diverting attention away from questions being asked.

      These are so many attempts to shoot the messenger. No doubt there are those who nod to themselves and say, "Wow, he really showed Ricketson to be an idiot with that comment." And there will be other who wonder why on earth Neeson, Lemon, Mc Cabe, along with the Cambodian Children's Fund board refuse to answer questions.

      Unless these photos are fake, they reveal a problem that needs to be addressed and which is not being addressed.

      All I can do is post what I discover. It is up to you and other readers to make what you will of what I post.

      What do you make of these photos? Are you curious to know who owns the land upon which these homes have been erected? Do you want to know what plans are afoot to rectify the drainage problem?

      Delete
    2. 1st I'd like to know if these photos are fake James. Some believe they are. That seems to be the basis of Team Neeson's argument.

      Then, YES I'd love to know who owns the land as well as who picked the flooded property to put impoverished families on it??

      Delete
    3. The photos are not fake. If they were/are CCF could quite easily take a photo from the same position and demonstrate that the photos are fake.

      CCF claims not to own property so, if this is true, one can assume that the land on which the houses have been erected, is owned by some private individual. This private individual is thus benefiting from the rent the families are paying for houses that did not cost the owner of the land anything.

      Just who owns the land is one of a multitude of questions that CCF refuses to answer. Instead, Neeson allows others to respond on his/CCF's behalf with vague references to my disseminating "misleading information."

      When I ask for examples, none are forthcoming, though as sure as night follows day, a little further down the track I will be accused, yet again, of publishing "misleading information" - though the attack on my credibility is not usually expressed in such polite terminology!

      Delete
  20. I was just going along with the line of thought that you have James that believes anybody responding to your comments in a negative way must be Scot Neeson or Alan Lemon, or the thoughts of the goose who recently said that any post with the word moron in it must have been placed by Alan Lemon.

    As the post of 5.50 had negative comments about Scott I think it is only fair to assume it was made by you under one of your many aliases under the description of Anon. You are very skilled at trying to produce misleading information in your continued attempts to discredit the achievements of Scott and the team at CCF.

    The response you will make to this criticism of your blogs is so predictable even before you put pen to paper but I could do with a good laugh today so please go ahead

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 6.24

      A few observations:

      (1) With very few exceptions, and only when it seemed that comments were potentially defamatory, I have deleted no comments at all and NONE that could best be described as not very complementary to myself.

      (2) The 'negative' comments you refer to never address the issues being discussed; never attempt to answer questions; never attempt to argue a case.

      (3) If I am "very skilled at trying to produce misleading information", please do argue your case by presenting me with some example of my misleading information.

      (4) As for discrediting Scott Neeson, he could very easily discredit me by providing answers to my questions that make it quite apparent to reader of this blog that I am indeed peddling misinformation in an attempt to hurt Scott. He has had many opportunities to answer questions and prove me wrong.

      And here is yet another opportunity for him to do so or for you, as his spokesman, to do so.

      Please, shoot me down in flames with facts; not with wishy washy references to "misleading information."

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous 6.24

      As you know, I do not delete anything from this blog other than comments that may defame people whose names are mentioned. And I do not delete comments that defame myself or make unflattering observations about my IQ etc. Nor do I delete comments that disagree with me on the basis of facts. There have been precious few of these. For the most part, comments from people such as yourself make very generalized statements about my 'misleading' readers but without ever offering up examples of when I did so and what it was I wrote that was factually incorrect.

      Here, again, I offer you or anybody else reading this who wishes to attack me in the basis that I have my facts wrong to do so. Present me with one, two or ten examples (as many or as few as you like) and I will not censor them. I will respond to them. If I have got my facts wrong, I will both apologize for having done so and correct my error. I would also be quite happy to hand over an entire blog entry to CCF to respond to any and everything in my blog that CCF believes to be misleading. I will neither edit nor censor whatever I am presented with.

      Delete
  21. Funny how you took off your last blog that was accusing the Minister of Justice of being corrupt - did you create the blog while you were drunk Ricketson or were you just your limited IQ again - I feel sorry that Fletcher has you in his corner - you are only making matters worse for him. One thing is for sure - if Fletcher loses his appeal, he will have to bear the price of causing a storm but you can just go back to your little protected world in australia - you have used Fletcher to boost your own ego!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh dear, here we go again!

      Please quote me where I accused the Minister of Justice of being corrupt?

      As for Fletcher losing his appeal and me having the "bear the price", there would be no appeal if I had not spent the past year advocating on his behalf to be provided with a fair trial.

      If Mr Fletcher's appeal fails we will take the case to the Supreme Court. If it fails there also I will, at least, have the satisfaction of having done all I could to see justice done in this case.

      Delete
  22. hahaha praising yourself again - proof that you are only looking to butter your own nest at the expense of Fletchers. So why did you take you last blog about the Minister off the internet? And will anyone stick up for you when you get put in gaol in Cambodia? - its going to happen!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "looking to butter your own nest" has a lovely poetic ring to it, Anonymous 8.54. When I write my book I will include in it a segment dealing especially with your tortured use of the English language.

      Delete
    2. Its all coming out - Rickets is using Fletcher to add value to a book that no-one will read - you are a piece of work Ricketson! Cant wait until its released - there will be a lot of people lining up to sue you for the lies your write.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 9.15

      Do you have nothing better to do with your time than spend the day reading my blog and looking for opportunities to make inane comments?

      I will ask this one last time and then not bother to do so again:

      Provide me with an example of when I have lied? Provide me with a few examples. Provide me with as many as you like. The same goes for 'facts'. Point to those you believe to be wrong.

      Unlike you, I do have other things to do and do not want to waste any more time on responding to your comments. If you want to make a sensible contribution, please do. If not, whilst I will not censor your comments, nor will I bother to respond to them.

      Delete
  23. you know when you are fucked when you divert from answering the question. Once again - why did you put a blog on the internet about the Minister of Justice and then suddenly take it off after?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. non 9.11pm - there is one certain fact about the cowardly bloggers - they all eventually overstep the mark and defame the wrong person. I think Rickets is in the shit on this one.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous 9.11

      I did not place anything on my blog ABOUT the Minister of Justice. I posted a letter I had written to him and then decided to withdraw it on the grounds that it was not appropriate to post such a letter at this time.

      As is my right, I have written several times to the Minister advocating Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial. I have posted some of these on this blog.

      I can't remember if I posted this one or not but it is an example of my advocacy:


      Mr Ang Vong Vathana
      Minister of Justice
      Samdech Sothearos Road
      Sangkat Chaktomouk
      Daun Penh

      1st April 2015

      Dear Mr Ang Vong Vathana

      re David John Fletcher

      Contrary to the doctors’ expectations, David Fletcher is not going to die. At least not in the near future.

      However, Mr Fletcher does have a serious pulmonary infection that requires treatment in hospital. It may be tuberculosis. The doctors are not sure just now.

      It is not appropriate that a sick 70 year old man be returned to jail, where there will be no proper treatment available to him – especially not a man who, on the basis of the evidence available, cannot possibly be guilty of the crime he has been charged with - rape.

      I would like to suggest that Mr Fletcher be released on bail and allowed to receive the treatment he requires to be returned to full health.

      I will post the bail for Mr Fletcher. I know him to be an honourable man who will not breach whatever bail conditions are imposed on him. I do not have any fear at all that I will, as a result of a breach, lose my bail money.

      Mr Fletcher is determined to prove his innocence in a properly constituted court of law – on the basis of the clear evidence of his innocence. If Action Pour les Enfants, CEOP, SISHA, the British Embassy or Naly Pilorge of LICADHO have evidence of Mr Fletcher’s guilt let them present it to the court.

      Given that Mr Fletcher has been provided none of the legal rights due to him in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure and has, as a result, spent close to five years in jail without once being interviewed by police or an investigating judge, without being able to present any defense in court, I believe that his release on bail is the only just path open to the Cambodian judiciary.

      yours sincerely

      James Ricketson

      Delete
  24. Maybe you need to review your claims about having an IQ higher than 6 James after your posting (and removal) of a letter to the Ministry of Justice. Like anon 9.13 I have a feeling you have dropped yourself right in the shit over this one and at last the messenger might thankfully get shot.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Luckily a few people took screen shots of the blog - so there is no shortage of evidence to pass to the Minister of he wants it. Rickets is due for a big smack - shit canning too many people and it is coming to bite him on the ass. I will piss myself if he gets summonsed to appear in court!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well if he does get summonsed and locked up, you can guarantee that all the keyboard warriors frineds he has won't be lifting a finger nail to stand up in his defence. Rickets will soon learn that he is all on his own when it comes to crunch time. Maybe Fletcher can act on his behalf.

      Delete
  26. I have mostly refrained from making comments when the corrupt criminal element of PP defame me, I am only too familiar with their ignorant profanity and drivel of bar room rhetoric, I take the view of a very great Englishman;

    ' I never engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent '

    The misinformed Plebeian view that James is using me is total fantasy and ridiculous. I have written my own book relating to facts, hard evidence and my first hand experience. Which the trolls do not have the intelligence to see, DUH!

    If James makes any money out of this there is no person more deserving. He, as I, will be helping those poor children with anything that is earned. Not in a bar room, shooting ones foul ignorant mouth off with Plebeian misinformed rhetoric.

    James is the only person ( which is not surprising in PP) that has the intelligence and integrity to seek out the truth in a completely neutral corner.

    What have you Plebs done? Shoot off your mouths without putting you ignorant brain into gear.

    David John Fletcher.
    (Not anonymous as you cowards and misinformed by your master, team Neeson)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jail giving you access to the internet Fletcher - strange that!

      Delete
    2. Quit talking to yourself.

      Delete
    3. You must be missing those 15 year old girls Fletcher

      Delete
  27. Yes - and I could also set up my posts to show that they were from David John Fletcher if I wanted, nice try James but again you are raising the question of the level of your IQ if you think people are going to buy that story that this post was from Fletch the letch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, word for word from David Fletcher.

      If you don't believe me, send me a question. I'll make sure Mr Fletcher gets it and he can reply to you personally. It make take a few hours or a day or so but if you have any questions, ask away.

      Delete
    2. Looks like at last guys we get a chance to ask Fletch the fetch why he performed unlawful sex acts with an underage girl in the UK. That can be the first question James but I am sure some of your readers will think of other questions.

      Cheers and we are looking forward to his reply

      Delete
    3. I will pass your question on to Mr Fletcher. And any others that others may wish to ask.

      In the meantime, a partial answer to your question can be found in the first paragraphs of Mr Fletcher's book:

      "It was a beautiful spring dawn in 2004. The sun came up streaming over the flat countryside of south Cambridgeshire in the UK. I loved the early mornings wherever I was in the world, but Cambridge dawns were always special.

      The work I was doing always demanded that I be 'up and at it' by 4am at the latest. I didn’t mind; for me this was always the best part of the day! I would get up at 3:30 am, shower and have my black coffee to get my body motor running, and be on my way by 4am to collect my client, who was due at London Stansted airport by 5 am. He would be catching the first flight to Zurich and would be back around 9 pm that evening. I would be waiting at ‘Arrivals’ and we would be on our way back to his home in minutes. I would drop him off by 9:45 pm and get instructions for the next day. My working life was the same as his - 100 hours a week. He was a Vice President of Merrill Lynch investment banking.

      ....to be continued...

      Delete
    4. ...continuing...


      I had JP Morgan, an overseas director of D.T.I., a movie star, a movie director and many high-ups in the business world as private clients. I preferred these VIP clients as they needed far more than just a driver. I had certain skills to offer that I had learned in a previous profession, about which I am now allowed by law to say much. It was not just these skills that my VIP clients needed. The required my confidentiality also. And I knew how to keep my mouth shut. It’s not that part of my job description required that I be dishonest. No. The likes of movie stars and high flyers in the world of business do not want to put about where they are, or when they are there.

      As well as my ‘regulars’ there was a local company always wanted me for V.I.P. or ' difficult ' work other people would not take on, if I had any time free. I never failed them. I had a 100% success rate. My clients called me bomb proof. Even my multi-billionaire Austrian client, in the top 100 richest men in the world, who could afford Dirty Harry to take care of him, always wanted me for his security - especially when his young son had to be moved around the country. This boy was kidnap material, so I had to use all the skills I had learned over the years, and then some, to protect him and make sure he was delivered safe.

      From the age of 10 I had always owned a rifle, with a ‘sound moderator’ (a ‘silencer’ in Hollywood movies) and my sight was more than perfect until the age of 50, when AD took over. AD meaning ANNO DOMINI, a polite PC way of saying you are getting to the point of having senior moments and making silly mistakes.

      I always worked alone, unless I had a non-risk job or non V.I.P. In these cases I would use a trusted friend who knew how to take care of himself if need be and get up early in the mornings. You would be surprised how many in my line of work cannot do this and be reliable. I kid you not! Even if I was busy, I preferred to do everything myself.

      The police did not like me because of my ' previous ' and would always give me hassle if they knew where I was. I would get stopped at night for no reason. I they recognized my car, so would kept as low a profile as I could. They found it hard to track me. I figured that if the police had problems finding me, so would the bad guys.

      The police didn’t like me because I had a criminal record. I had a fling with a 15 year old girl when I was 50. Yes, stupid, I know (there’s no fool like an old fool) but she was a good time girl, loved to party and had been around the block a few times. I gave her a good time and got seven and a half months in the slammer for statutory rape. This was to cause me a lot of bother a few years later when some gutter journalists decided to drop the ‘statutory’ and go after me for…I’m jumping ahead of myself. More about this later on.

      I always used 7 series BMWs. I had three or four at my disposal. They were at least 10 years old, with full BMW service history. I would get 300,000 miles out of them with never a problem, provided I serviced them on a regular basis. They were powerful and a driver’s car - for offensive or defensive driving. I could take on anything with these vehicles. My single-seater motor racing experience came in very handy indeed. I always had the cars registered in different names so the police, bad guys and speed cameras would find it hard to catch up with me. My clients demanded a fast, low profile and high security service from me. They got it!

      .....

      Delete
  28. The best thing about this blog is you can be whoever you like! And you can decide for yourself who everyone else is too. Whatever conspiracy theory you want can be proved - then claim someone else made them.

    Signed, Mr Fourth Estate

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 12.06 (aka James Ricketson)

      Have you really got nothing better to do with your life than to perform silly schoolboy pranks here?

      Delete
    2. Have you got nothing better to do with your life than operate a gutter blog Ricketson?

      Delete
    3. Quit talking to yourself

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 12.14

      Thank you for your concern. Actually, I do have a lot of things that I do in my life. This blog is but one one of them. It is not really all that time consuming - other, that is, when I have to waste a minute or two respond to people such as yourself.

      I know that rational thought is not one of you strong points but please do cite one instance in which this blog has descended, as they say, into the gutter - other than when people such as yourself think that using foul and insulting language can pass as comment or dialogue.

      Delete
  29. COMMENTS

    I have discovered this last year that Trolls can, so easily, (particularly if they prowl in a pack) shift the topic of conversation away from (in this instance) CCF's World Housing initiative and into personal attacks on myself and Mr Fletcher.

    Some trolls do this in an effort to shoot the messenger and some simply because they are spoiling for a fight and it really doesn't mater who they fight with or what they fight about.

    Whilst I have, this past year, let anyone write whatever they like here, (including making abusive comments) I am now changing this policy.

    If you are a Troll and interested only in personal abuse, I will simply delete your comment.

    I will not delete comments that are critical of myself, David Fletcher or anyone else if they are constructive criticisms or observations worthy of consideration.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do not agree with the type of criticisms and attacks you are making on Neeson and CCF. But I agree completely that you have a troll problem here and that their intent is to change the subject, shoot the messenger and distort and bury the discussion in garbage. They do not want honest and open debate on these subjects any more than they want Fletcher to have a fair trial. I fully support your decision to start moderating this discussion and deleting trollish comments.

      -mornon

      Delete
    2. You are a hypocrite James, when you have been asked previously to delete comments you have refused on the basis that you made it clear that when you started this blog you would allow free speech unless it could be considered to be defamatory. As with most things you have no honour or decency and your word is worth nothing.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 2.33

      Please tell me which criticisms and attacks on Neeson you don't agree with.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 3.08

      This past few hours the sheer volume of abusive comments has, alas, induced me to change my rules. If Trolls want to have slanging matches with each other let them start their own blog.

      Delete
  30. So when it is abusive comments to Scott, James McCabe and Alan Lemon it is OK but when things start getting tough for you the rules change. I stand by my statement you are a first class hypocrite. How about instead you change the rules so that only those who put their names to the abusive comments are published. I suspect there will be a lot less abuse if those posting abusive blogs have to show their names.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 3.43

      It has been a level playing field this past year. Everyone who has wanted to has been able to abuse whoever they want here. This has often been to the detriment of the dialogue taking place..

      Imagine if, in your own conversations with others in which there was an exchange of ideas, disagreements and maybe even angry exchanges, some twerp were to keep butting in with the sorts of comments that keep occurring here. Would you tolerate it? No. So why should any of us.

      You are still free to call my a hypocrtite, so what is your problem?

      As for the notion that there would be a lot less abuse if people had to use their real names, yes, this is so. You don't use your real name, so who do you think SHOULD use their real name and who do you think is entitled to remain Anonymous?

      Delete
    2. The ones who are now kicking and screaming because they cant spout abuse anymore could now do something useful like answer questions.

      Delete
    3. We can only hope!

      Delete
    4. Make one honest comment on Neeson's FB page and they will block you forever.

      Delete
    5. Out of interest anon 5.13 what honest comment have you ever made on Neesons FB page that you have been blocked forever for

      Delete
    6. I can't answer for Anonymous 5.13 but I can from my own experience confirm that I have been blocked from the CCF Facebook pages, from the World Housing Facebook pages and from Charity Navigator. All of these are designed to paint a pretty picture of CCF's good works and will not tolerate anything that might strip any of the tarnish from the image of himself that Neeson likes to project.

      One can understand this in the case of CCFD's Facebook pages. I cannot understand it in the case of Charity Navigator, however - if, that is Charity Navitator were to be genuine. It is not. It is a scam that people like Neeson can use to make statements such as "We score 100% in 'transparency'"

      Really! OK, then answer some questions, Scott!

      Who owns the land on which these houses, currently awash in raw sewage, have been built?

      Delete
  31. A lot of fearmongering from the Neeson friendly anon-crowd. You don't
    know what a joke you make of yourself by hiding behind your
    keyboard.Does the NGO crowd really have nothing better to offer than
    verbal abuse and total incompetence when it comes to human rights ?

    The Justice Minister has certainly the will to look into the matter and
    set things right as he has already proven by taking up the issue on the
    David Fletcher case. Your day's (foreign NGO Pest in Cambodia) is
    numbered and you know it. The Cambodian Gov. already made clear that it
    doesn't tolerate NGO's messing up the country and will continue to do so
    now with the NGO (LANGO)law firmly in place.

    Your wish that James Ricketson disappears from your nightmares forever
    may never come true. you have no respect for any kind of human rights
    and your vocabulary is a constant abuse to distract from the core issue.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dear Anonymous 4.13

    The point of the name-calling, the abuse, has always been to divert attention away from the topic under discussion.

    I have asked countless times now for those who claim that I publish 'misleading' information to point this 'misleading' information out to me and other readers. They never ever availed themselves of the opportunity to do so. Personal abuse has been their response. Shoot the messenger.

    Again, as I have written many times now, Scott Neeson could so easily demolish my credibility by demonstrating, with some answers, that I have my facts wrong. Team Neeson's response to this has always been, "Scott Neeson doesn't read your blog. He has more important things to do."

    I happen to know this is not true but even if it was, why does no-one in Team Neeson (all of them clearly reading this blog) answer these questions? Or suggest to Scott that he answer them? Why do Bob Tufts and others on the CCF board not say to Neeson, "Scott, why don't you answer Ricketson's questions and destroy his credibility?"

    I have more than once praised Scott's marketing skills. He knows how to sell a product. He is hopeless, however, when it comes to damage control.

    In the case of this World Housing drainage cockup, instead of acknowledging and fixing the problem he sends in Team Neeson to discredit me. The end result was the largest number of page hits this blog has had in one day - 500. So, given that most of these page hits are in Cambodia, there are a few hundred more people who now have good reason to doubt the value of the World Housing scheme and Scott's integrity.

    ...to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ...continuing...

      If I had been Scott's PR advisor I would have said, "Scott, you have a damage control problem here. Put your gum boots on and take control. A few tons of gravel may well provide a short - term solution to the problem and you wading through the dirty water directing workers would make CCF sponsors and donors realise that you are really a hands-on kind of guy..."

      A great opportunity missed.

      As I know you will be reading this, Scott, a word of advice:

      "Stop relying on your Team Neeson attack dogs to do your dirty work. Do it yourself. Answer questions. In the context of this particular thread please explain to all readers of this blog why it is that you do not 'gift' the homes to the families to whom World Housing has 'gifted' them? Who owns the land on which these houses have been built and is so collecting the rent and, as it happens, not taking care of the drainage?

      The decision made by yourself and, presumably, the Cambodian Children's Fund Board to ignore all questions put to you by the media may well work in the short term but in the long term it simply won't work. You must know that. We all knew about Somaly Mam's lies for several years before she was finally exposed in public. Your various scams (World Housing being but one) are now on display for anyone who wants to look at the facts. ($4,000 per child per year, for instance) and one day (perhaps when your biography comes out) someone with more journalistic clout than myself is going to come after you. And when s/he does, your House of Cards will collapse very quickly because the sources of your funds will realise that you are not the saint you present yourself to the world as being but a man whose good intentions have been corrupted by your desire to acquire the power, prestige, reputation and money that comes with your job. If this means that families under your care must live in a sea of sewage, so be it. If this means kids in your care die through the incompetence of your staff, so be it. If this means that even kids enrolled in CCF educational programs must work in the dump to survive (whilst CCF pockets $2,000 a year for educating them) so be it. If this means kids sleeping 2 and 3 to a bed and on the floor, so be it.

      No doubt you will send in Team Neeson to attack all these comments. You will instruct them not to answer any questions but to write whatever needs to be written to destroy my credibility. I will not delete any of their comments - unless, that is, they are nothing but personal abuse. The accumulation of Team Neeson comments that do NOT answer questions is, itself, an answer to one question: "Just how accountable and transparent is CCF?"

      Delete
  33. your choice of which posts to allow and not allow are interesting, ive submitted several posts yet they all seem to disappear

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Since I've received numerous 'Anonymous' comments that are little more than personal abuse, I do not know which ones you have sent.

      Send in a comment that does not contain personal abuse, that is not designed to shoot the messenger, that is not designed to derail the topic in hand, and I can assure you it will be posted.

      If it were one which sought to answer a question or two that would be helpful.

      Delete
  34. Interesting that you have not published my post about the unwarranted attack on Heather Graham James. Your blog is totally biased and nothing more than a personal attack on Scott, Alan and James.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have received no post regarding Heather Graham, Anonymous 5.08.

      Send it again.

      Heather Graham, along with the rest of the board members at CCF, have sat by and allowed Scott Neeson to lie about the World Housing initiative.

      Indeed, the CCF board is either oblivious to how Scott Neeson runs CCF or endorse his modus operandi.

      The photos of the World Housing homes speak for themselves of a problem. A competent board would be onto Neeson immediately, saying "Solve it." They do not. They remain mute.

      A competent board would say to Neeson, "Have you looked into the circumstances surrounding the death of the young girl whilst in CCF care? Is the member of staff most responsible for this death through her inaction, through her incompetence, still caring for children? Can we be sure that there will not be a repeat of this shameful episode?"

      There are a multitude of questions the CCF board should ask of Scott Neeson that have not been asked. In not asking them the CCF board is failing in its duty of care to CCF's 'clients' - for want of a better word.

      Heather Graham is a member of the board. Heather Graham is a celebrity actress whose name and image is used to raise money for CCF. AS both a board member and as part of the the CCF publicity machine she should be accountable for her actions.

      I know that this question never ever gets a response but please do cite one instance in which I have 'attacked' Scott, Alan and James?

      What I have done is asked questions. Team Neeson, of which you seem to be a fully paid up member, believe that the asking of questions or the publishing of facts constitute an attack. This says much about Nesson's and Team Neeson's commitment to transparency and accountability.

      As I have stated many times, Neeson andTeam Neeson could so easity shoot me down in flames,destroy my credibility, in any of them had facts at their disposal to demonstrate that I am wrong.

      Agin, please do shoot me down if you have the facts at your disposal.

      Delete
  35. No-one wants to shoot you down on the basis of facts, Mr Ricketson. That is obvious. And no-one is going to answer your questions. This is obvious. My guess is that when a mainstream journalist with a reputation starts asking the same questions and refuses to take silence as an answer that the demise of CCF will be swift, as it was with the Somaly Mam Foundation.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Previously someone asked a question about posts on FB getting you banned to post further. These comments might be able to be found at http://greatnonprofits.org/org/cambodian-childrens-fund GreatNonProfits has taken these posts down over 100 times in an apparent attempt to mislead the donor about CCF. Try posting any of them on the CCF FB page and you will be deleted and banned from further posting. Please tell me what is not true.

    WHAT THEY DON’T WANT YOU TO READ:
    haha, they have $6.1 million in cash and investments. $11.8 million in total assets, and YOU think they need your money!! Was it PT Barnham that said, 'There is a fool born every minute"?

    CCF (Cambodian Children's Fund) has as the head of its child protection unit (CPU), a convicted felon who stole drugs and money while he worked in drug enforcement for the Australian Crime Commission. According to 'The Australian', he fled to Cambodia after the PIC hearings and was informally extradited back to Australia to stand trial last year (2007). The full article is here: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/news/ex-nca-cops-plea-deal-over-drug-sting/story-e6frg6o6-1111116525996

    If you'd like to see how CCF actually deals with the impoverished, check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve280RWEV5w

    Recent survey data from Lumos (headed by J. K. Rowlings, yes that J. K. Rowlings) showed the following outcomes for children who grew up in institutions:

    1 in 3 became homeless

    1 in 5 had a criminal record

    1 in 10 committed suicide

    1 in 7 became involved in prostitution

    In 2014 this group took in over $30,000 per day. They have taken over 700 children from their families to be raised in institutional care. Their support for the families is very small, mostly consisting of a small amount of rice. Support organizations, that help families stay together, not organizations that take children from their families.

    This organization has taken over 700 children from their families, to be raised in institutional care. If you think that is such a good idea, then please send your own children to institutional care. In 2013, they raised over $10.6M or nearly $30,000 per DAY 365 days a year.

    This organization has as the head of its child protection unit (CPU), a convicted felon who stole drugs and money while he worked in drug enforcement for the Australian Crime Commission. According to 'The Australian', he fled to Cambodia after the PIC hearings and was informally extradited back to Australia to stand trial last year (2007). The full article is here: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/news/ex-nca-cops-plea-deal-over-drug-sting/story-e6frg6o6-1111116525996

    If you'd like to see how CCF actually deals with the impoverished, check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve280RWEV5w

    Does anyone think that this is a great example of management that you want to give your hard earned money to??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So lf McCabe stole drugs as you claim.... What would he do with them then......SELL???

      On a slightly different subject, where he and Alan Lemon drinking buddies during that same timeframe?

      Delete
    2. Why haven't we heard that mccabe has resigned from the CPU? Along with the board members that allowed him to be hired?? Let me see.... leaving anyone out???

      Delete
  37. This forum is a joke - so its ok for you Ricketson to criticise and defame others with your constant so called questions but when it comes to people criticising you or your fans its not ok and you will delete the posts - you are a disgrace! There are numerous posts throughout your entire blog that fall under the category of abuse or personal hatred against people like Neeson. McCabe, Lemon, Morrish and the like - are you going to now go back through all of your blogs and delete all the comments that are abusive to the people and not based on facts. I think not! You are pathetic!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is getting somewhat tiresome but I'll try again:

      Give me one, two, ten or as many as you like instances when I have defamed others?

      As for people criticising me, I have no problem with this and do not stop them doing so. It would be preferable if their criticisms were based in facts but I have long since given up any hope of their being so. What you and others in Team Neeson hate is the fact that I am asking questions in a public forum. Both Neeson and Team Neeson wish to operate in secret and only let the world (sponsors and donors) what they want them to know. So, Neeson tells sponsors, donors and developers in Vancouver that homes are being 'gifted' to poor families when they are, in fact being gifted to CCF. ANd then, with happy smiling tenants in their new homes (with no mention that they are renting) Neeson presents this as a great success story. And when photos emerge of the effects of a lack of appropriate drainage,w hat does CCF do? Solve the problem or attempt, through Team Neeson, to shoot the messenger?

      I have never met Neeson, McCabe or Lemon and so have no basis upon which to base an assessment of them as people. I can only assess them on the basis of their actions and, as a member of the 4th Estate, ask them questions about these actions. That they do not wish to answer any questions is, of course, their prerogative but they must be aware by now that their silence speaks volumes.

      As for Morrish, yes, I have met Steve a couple of times, fond him to be good company and sympathise with the shoddy treatment meted out to him by Peter Hogan and the other Trolls who set out to destroy him, just as they set out to destroy Fletcher.

      These Trolls are alive and well and it is their abusive posts, more tan anything, that I am culling from the comments here.

      As for deleting abusive comments my original deal was any and everything could be published. This has resulted in a few people being 'abused' - including myself. Now, a little wiser and war weary, I realise that there are plenty of people in cyberspace with anger management issues who like to vent their rage online. They will now have to go and vent it elsewhere.

      Delete
    2. Threats of defamation suits was the same threat that Morrish used when trying to shut down discussion of his mob's raid on Garage bar and assault on its patrons. In the end, it didn't work. The truth came out. But now who is making threats of defamation here on this blog, trying to shut down discussion. Perhaps the same guy who claims to "drink with" Morrish? Or...?

      Delete
  38. Previously James, you suggest that you have further information about the girl with the health care issues and died? Anything more you can tell us about this or is it secret cover up by Neeson and the employees of CCF? Oh! And don't forget the board.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I know a good deal more, but it would nit be appropriate for me to comment further at this point.

      Delete
    2. Inquiring minds want to know! Looking forward to your 'reveal', but how could this even happen in what should be first world care??

      Delete
    3. So anon 11.01pm you are making an assumption that this incident occurred based on the fact that you dont know if it occurred or not. Your comment just shows that you are one of the many gossipers who look to create stories simply to cast negatives about people. Provide some facts yourself instead of sitting under the protection of your computer room and asking others to go and dig up information.

      Delete
    4. No, Anonymous 12.18

      I think that Anonymous 11.01 was basing his comment on his presumption that I am telling the truth.

      Delete
    5. And that there is MUCH more truth that you have and are not talking about yet! Was it a week or so ago that Team Neeson proclaimed "no child died under CCF care AND that is the end of the story". I don't think it is the end of the story, but it may be the of the cover up!!

      Delete