Author Topic: ASK ISABELLE  (Read 3125 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« on: December 08, 2006, 02:09:52 PM »
Seems one of the issues surrounding CAICA is it's lack of transparency on the question of whether it's a non-profit tax exempt organization (aka 501 (c) Corporation)?

Given that CAICA has published material on it's public educational website suggesting that it was a soon-to-be non profit tax-exempt organization (see links below) perhaps this is a question Isabelle Zehnder would not mind answering on a public forum?  

Please note CAICA has filed for tax-exempt status and we await our confirmation letter from the IRS. Donations received in the same tax year as IRS confirmation is received are tax-deductible. The IRS estimated we should receive our tax-exempt status by or before October 2005.

http://web.archive.org/web/200612081835 ... 20clip.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/200612081835 ... ution_Form[1].pdf

Board of Directors:

http://www.caica.org/Brochure%20-%20Mic ... 0final.pdf
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #1 on: December 12, 2006, 07:22:44 PM »
CAICA appears to be a spin-off of another Isabelle Zehnder website called Kids In Captivity.com that went online sometime early last year.

As for it's current status, it appears to me that there is NO board of directors for CAICA.  If there were, I would imagine Zehnder would make this information known to the public by way of providing a link to verify it's IRS status as a nonprofit tax-exempt public charity.

Not sure what happened to cause her to abandon her original intentions. The disclaimer only states that CAICA is not for referrals to treatment programs and is not funded directly or indirectly by treatment programs.  

One thing I did notice is CAICA's new advocate for the month.

Poor Jeff Berryman.   :wink:


It takes a special person who isn't afraid of hard work and heartache to be a true child advocate.
- Isabelle Zehnder
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Poor Jeff Berryman
« Reply #2 on: December 12, 2006, 07:44:25 PM »
Hey Jeff---Ya'll have good grounds for a defamation lawsuit against Izzy for naming you "advocate of the month."  To be associated with Isabelle Zehnder and CAICA is truly the "kiss of death" for anyone taking you seriously.  You're doomed Jeff.

:skull:                      :skull:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2006, 09:49:18 PM »
Well, IZZY does say Jeff is "motivated by pure morale outrage," and goes on to name his co-defendant,

So much for "poor little Jeff" as far as I'm concerned.
oops, that's just my opinion, lawyers!.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2006, 10:33:05 PM »
Jeff lost his credibility when he refrained from sending out any of the accounts concerning Whitmore published in the media; or any info concerning the civil case and criminal charges that were brought. Had that been any  program, anywhere, that didn't pay Susan, he would have been all over it.  Apparently Jeff's advocating comes with conditions, and his moral outrage can be tempered by other concerns. Just exactly what those concerns are, one can only guess. But one thing is Chrystal clear, they involve not upsetting the referral diva. Its pitiful, really.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #5 on: December 12, 2006, 11:10:44 PM »
IMO, Jeff Berryman needs to wake his ass up and face the fact that the windmills ain't exactly trembling anymore when he mounts his horse (soapbox).

And yeah, not standing up for the Whitmore kids and parents sure doesn't meet my personal definition of a "REAL" child advocate.  But then Isabelle Zehnder didn't stand up for them either and in fact, to this day, still doesn't even have Whitmore listed on her closed facility watch list.  Imagine that.  A program where the owners have a track record that stretches from Utah to Mexico to Canada and God only knows where next yet they don't make the CAICA program watch list.   :roll:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Jeff Berryman
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2006, 10:20:58 PM »
Seems that Jeff's windmill ain't a' spinn'en any longer and his old horse is dead.

He's Sue Scheff's and Fat Izzy's bitch.
 :x
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2006, 09:03:47 AM »
Guest wrote:
Subj: Re: [Trekkers] From DT's Board-To Charlotte and all

Date: 10/20/02 8:42:18 PM Central Daylight Time

From: intrepid-l@fully-baked.org

To: intrepid-l@fully-baked.org

Sent from the Internet (Details)







Charlotte and all,



I have been in touch with Deborah Thomas (DT). I am not 100% on her mission, and Donna H. and I felt she was all over the map, with an agenda that is not exactly clear. She is at times, very anti all programs, when in fact some children really do need help. Just the right help. And then she can go into the medication, school districts and other issues of discern "to her." I am glad Jeff is there monitoring it for us, just in case they do get some good information for us.



The fact that she has both Barbe Stampe and Alexia Parks (both woman that Donna H. had a bad taste for, with good reason) on her board, makes me wonder. I am not sure who you are sending Phil's diary to, but please let me know first. I don't want it to end up in the wrong hands. Some people are in this for monetary reasons, while we are here for the children. That is the difference in a nutshell.



Sue "



Well it appears that Jeff was monitoring others for Sue Scheff.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2006, 04:44:45 PM »
Well---Jeff couldn't speak out against his referring diva friend, Sue Scheff about Whitmore Academy, now could he?

It appears that NO ONE, including Jeff, could speak out against Sue Scheff referring to Whitmore Academy, and remain on her "little friend list."  NOT EVEN AFTER Sue Scheff continued to refer children to Whitmore AFTER the criminal investigation began, and EVEN AFTER Cheryl Sudweeks was charged with criminal child abuse.

And who, except IZZY, really considers this man to be a "child advocate" anyway?

He's a CO-DEFENDANT of Sue Scheff's.
Nice title.

All that's my opinion.
Can still have opinions, I suppose.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Nihilanthic

  • Posts: 3931
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2006, 04:47:59 PM »
Shakespere and the roman patrician class got NOTHIN on this shit.

I want some fucking popcorn.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
DannyB on the internet:I CALLED A LAWYER TODAY TO SEE IF I COULD SUE YOUR ASSES FOR DOING THIS BUT THAT WAS NOT POSSIBLE.

CCMGirl on program restraints: "DON\'T TAZ ME BRO!!!!!"

TheWho on program survivors: "From where I sit I see all the anit-program[sic] people doing all the complaining and crying."

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2006, 04:34:29 PM »
Here's a question for Izzy:

Have you indirectly or directly referred anyone to PURE?  If so, did you also advise the person that PURE is listed on ISAC's facility and referrer watchlist?

Given that you consider yourself a children's advocate, surely you would want to promote other resources helpful to enabling parents to make an informed decision about their child's care and treatment. Yet ISAC is not listed on your resources page.  This makes no sense given that ISAC is widely regarded as the number one industry-related watchdog organization and is a 501 c3 non-profit organization not a competitor in the teen help business.

Care to explain?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2006, 05:52:24 PM »
Let's not forget about the "invisible ink" links to Fornits and ISAC which mysteriously disappeared from the CAICA website not long after someone posted on Fornits that they had inadvertently been discovered.   Oy, what a wizard Izzy appears to be.  Making and playing by her own rules and then erasing her magic marker "mistakes" (like the CAICA disclaimer that at one time contained material that looked very much like the material published on the Paula Reeves website disclaimer) seemingly with the speed of an airborne disease.  Tell me, does this woman ever sleep?

 :rofl:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
CAICA and PURE
« Reply #12 on: December 27, 2006, 07:58:51 PM »
Yes, I can answer your question. I do admire my friend Sue Scheff and feel she provides a great service!  When parents talk with me I hear their suffering and know they need a great "Advocate of the Month" so I refer them to my friend Sue-Sue.  Maybe Sue-Sue and her Texan friends "donate" to me--I mean CAICA--and maybe they don't.  Ya got a prob. with that?!!

Cause if you do-my friend Sue-Sue has $$$$$$$$ and she will get a lawyer on your ass for t-h-i-n-k-i-n-g.  Got it jerkoff?  Just for having a thought my friend Sue-Sue will sue ya.  So maybe I benefit and maybe I don't. That's my answer.  Like it or lick it Beeswax.  

Repeat after me:

I AM A CHILD ADVOCATE.
I AM A DEEP THINKER.
I AM CAPABLE OF COMING UP WITH CORNEY SONGS IN THE SHOWER.
I AM WONDERFUL.
I LOVE SUE-SUE.
I AM GREAT.

KISS MY BLUBBERY ASS.
 

Quote from: ""Guest""
Here's a question for Izzy:

Have you indirectly or directly referred anyone to PURE?  If so, did you also advise the person that PURE is listed on ISAC's facility and referrer watchlist?

Given that you consider yourself a children's advocate, surely you would want to promote other resources helpful to enabling parents to make an informed decision about their child's care and treatment. Yet ISAC is not listed on your resources page.  This makes no sense given that ISAC is widely regarded as the number one industry-related watchdog organization and is a 501 c3 non-profit organization not a competitor in the teen help business.

Care to explain?
:rofl:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Re: CAICA and PURE's message to GINGER WARBIS
« Reply #13 on: December 27, 2006, 08:14:19 PM »
Isabelle I am sooo flattered again.  Thank you. I'm crying and bowing to you for admiring me in the way I sooo deserve.

I am the CAICA Advocate of the Month whatever that thing is.

Thank you for your loyalty to me as your leader and your goddess of everything to everyone and saver of children and parent advocate plus parent advocate of the month.

Thank you for loving me and admiring me and sticking up for me no matter how much I screw people and no matter how much I love to con parents (oopsie did I say "con") and take money I don't deserve.  

Did I mention how FANTASTIC Ashlyn MY daughter is and what a FANTASTIC gymnist MY daughter is?  Am I boring you yet?

I just love my self so much that I can't stop the flow of love I feel for my self.

I just want to stand at the top of the stairs hopefully on a balcony and wave to every one of my fans and let them know that I am crying because they love ME so much. ME! They all love ME.  Am I boring you yet?

Sue Scheff


Quote from: ""Isabelle Zehnder Joke""
Yes, I can answer your question. I do admire my friend Sue Scheff and feel she provides a great service!  When parents talk with me I hear their suffering and know they need a great "Advocate of the Month" so I refer them to my friend Sue-Sue.  Maybe Sue-Sue and her Texan friends "donate" to me--I mean CAICA--and maybe they don't.  Ya got a prob. with that?!!

Cause if you do-my friend Sue-Sue has $$$$$$$$ and she will get a lawyer on your ass for t-h-i-n-k-i-n-g.  Got it jerkoff?  Just for having a thought my friend Sue-Sue will sue ya.  So maybe I benefit and maybe I don't. That's my answer.  Like it or lick it Beeswax.  

Repeat after me:

I AM A CHILD ADVOCATE.
I AM A DEEP THINKER.
I AM CAPABLE OF COMING UP WITH CORNEY SONGS IN THE SHOWER.
I AM WONDERFUL.
I LOVE SUE-SUE.
I AM GREAT.

KISS MY BLUBBERY ASS.
 

Quote from: ""Guest""
Here's a question for Izzy:

Have you indirectly or directly referred anyone to PURE?  If so, did you also advise the person that PURE is listed on ISAC's facility and referrer watchlist?

Given that you consider yourself a children's advocate, surely you would want to promote other resources helpful to enabling parents to make an informed decision about their child's care and treatment. Yet ISAC is not listed on your resources page.  This makes no sense given that ISAC is widely regarded as the number one industry-related watchdog organization and is a 501 c3 non-profit organization not a competitor in the teen help business.

Care to explain?
:rofl:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
ASK ISABELLE
« Reply #14 on: December 27, 2006, 10:16:01 PM »
Personally, neither of these women impress me with their apparent self or mutual adoration.  In fact, I'd have to say my reaction is just the opposite in that (in my mind) people who believe or otherwise buy into their own hype are not attractive.  They are repulsive.

 ::puke::
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »