 |
| CCF World Housing homes 'gifted' to poor families |
Jim Brooke
Managing Editor
Khmer Times
Dear Jim
If you should ever decide to take off your 'friend
of Scott Neeson's' hat and put your 'Journalist's' hat
on, here are some questions you could ask Scott:
(1) Why do you refer to these houses as having been
'gifted' to poor families when they have been 'gifted' by 'World Housing' in
Vancouver, Canada, to CCF?
(2) Who owns the land on which the World Housing
'gifted' homes have been (or are being) erected? The Cambodian Children’s Fund?
You?
(3) How much do you invoice World Housing in
Vancouver, Canada, for each 'gifted' house erected by CCF? The figure
$2,800 has been quoted. Is this correct?
(4) How much does it cost CCF to have one house
built? The figure of $1,000 has been quoted? Is this correct?
(5) If these figures are correct, CCF is making
$648,000 profit out of the homes that have been 'gifted' to poor families but
are now owned by whoever own the land upon which they have been erected?
(6) 360 homes generating $15 a month = $68,000 per
year in rent. Where does this money go? To the owner of the land? Or to CCF?
I trust that you can see, Jim, that the question of
who owns the land is a significant one. S/he is not only getting around $1
million worth of free housing (based on the $2,800 per house figure) but is
collecting $68,000 a year in rent.
Given CCF's 100% rating on Charity Navigator for
transparency it should not be difficult to get Scott to answer these questions.
A few more:
(7) Could you show me a copy of the pro former
contract that families must sign before they are allowed to move into one of
these 'gifted' homes?
(8) What rules and regulations has CCF put into
place that residents in these 'gifted' homes must abide by?
(9) How many families have been evicted from their
'gifted' homes so far as a result of their not adhering to the rules and
regulations you have laid down?
(10) Have the houses been erected on ground that
has been built up far enough to keep water out of the compounds during heavy
rains?
cheers
James Ricketson
Scott Neeson, one scam after another. Robbing from the poor to keep for the rich. It is unconscionable that Neeson could could keep these funds for his own use and actually give the homes to the land owner. Wish we could find out who owns the land!
ReplyDeleteI have tried to find out who owns the land.
DeleteScott Neeson will not say. The CCF board will not say. And I have not been able to find out through the Cambodian Land Management and Planning office.
Hopefully, someone within CCF will leak this information.
This whole blog is a bore. The usual band of knuckle-draggers, all posting anonymously, covering the usual bullshit, and Ricketson trying to appear relevant by pretending that Neeson actually reads this.
DeleteDear Scott Neeson (aka Anonymous 1.32)
DeleteIf the blog is such a bore why do you waste your time coming back, time and time again, to remind us all of what a bore it is?
I will ask the question again, Scott:
"DO YOU OWN THE LAND ON WHICH THE 360 WORLD HOUSING HOMES ARE BEING CONSTRUCT AND SO ARE THE BENEFICIARY OF $1 MILLION OF FREE HOUSING?"
Every time you turn over a rock on Neeson, you find more snakes!
ReplyDeleteIn almost 12 months James, since the tragic loss of your nephew Tom in a fire in a nightclub in Siam Reap you have managed to post 129 blogs in an attempt to discredit Scott Neeson, Alan Lemon and James McCabe for the hard work they are carrying out in Cambodia to help the impoverished and child rape victims
ReplyDeleteYou have even thinly veiled some of your dislike of Scott by continually dragging his name into comments that he may or may not have made regarding a man who has been convicted and imprisoned on sex charges by legally convened courts in 2 separate countries. (as you recently commented it was actually 3 Judges in Cambodia who all agreed on the same verdict)
During this period I have not seen one post by you that would in any way help possible future victims of death because of inadequate fire exits in nightclubs or possible failure to comply with government regulations. We both know the way that many entertainment venues ignore the law in Cambodia.
Tom’s parents and the rest of the family must be really proud (not) of what a disgusting piece of work you have turned out to be James.
Scott Neeson, Alan Lemon (aka Anonymous 5.41)
DeleteThe death of my nephew has nothing whatsoever to do with Mr Fletcher's right to a fair trial and nothing whatsoever to do with the scams that you two are involved with - the most blatant of which, and the most easy to expose, is this World Housing scam.
You will not reveal who owns the land and who, therefore, is the recipient of $1 million worth of free housing and $68,000 a year in rent.
I have, as you say, dragged Scott Neeson's name in the mud because he played a major role in seeing Mr Fletcher jailed. I have dragged his name in the mud because he has been engaged in the illegal removal and detention of children from their families. I have dragged his name in the mud because he refuses to allow the parents of children in CCF residential care to retain copies of the 'contracts' that he (you, Scott) that he then uses to manipulate these poor families into obeying his every whim, wish and command.
You are a scoundrel, Scott. A con man. A liar.
As for my family and the death of my nephew, Tom, I will say only this. Tom's mother has been vigilant in following up the death of her son and seeking to make those responsible accountable. The day may well come when I do write about Tom's death but it will not be on this blog because it has nothing to do with Mr Fletcher and nothing to do your many scams, Scott.
Well said James. Team Neeson sure does work hard to divert the subject and shoot the messenger! Are you saying that they have illegally removed children from their homes?
DeleteIt still gets back to the fact James that you would rather spend your time putting down men that are doing great work than to do anything publicly to expose entertainment venues that are literally death traps and may well take the lives of other youngsters such as your nephew..
DeleteAs previously mentioned Fletcher has been legally convicted and imprisoned (by not one but a panel of three judges) of sex crimes in Cambodia. I somehow think they had more understanding of the law in Cambodia than you do when it comes to sentencing.
Anonymous 7:10, so you describe good work as illegally taking children from their families, or taking children from their families to be raised in institutional care, or creating a new slum for these impoverished families, or renting them housing that was to be donated to them, or locking a family outmof their home because they were $12.50 behind on their rent, or hiring a convicted felon (who stole drugs at gunpoint and sold the drugs) to run a child protection unit....?? Where is the story on the young CCF student that died (was it) last year for lack of medical attention?
DeleteDear Team Neeson (aka Anonymous 7.10)
DeleteScott Neeson is engaged, with World Housing, in a gigantic scam. The homes are not 'gifted' to poor families, as sponsors and donors are led to believe. They are 'gifted' to CCF or to whoever own the land on which the houses are erected. $1 million worth of free housing for the owner of the land - who then gets, on top of this windfall, $68,000 a yer in rent.
As for Mr Fletcher being "legally convicted", there was nothing legal about it. His arrest and trial breached pretty well every part of the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure and so, by definition, was illegal:
(1) Mr Fletcher not notified that court case was taking place.
(2) Mr Fletcher unable to present a defence of call witnesses.
(3) The alleged victim a virgin.
(4) Mr Fletcher not in Cambodia at the time of the rapes.
I could go on but what would be the point. You have no interest in the facts. You merely want to justify Mr Fletcher's having been found guilty without even the semblance of a fair trial. I should add here that Scott Neeson played a major role in this travesty of justice.
He still got found guilty by a panel of Judges James, no matter how much you might protest he was legally convicted. None of your allegations have ever been proven in court, they are merely rumor, scuttlebutt and innuendo.
DeleteOut of interest where has it ever been confirmed that the Andrew Drummond statement ref Scott was correct. I have seen you ask the question many times if it is true but I have never seen anybody actually give confirmation. Surely you are not doing exactly as you are blaming the court of which is convicting someone without evidence, would that not be a touch hypocritical of you (again)
Like Wes I am getting a little tired of the nonsense you publish on this blog and will go off for a while to have some interaction with people a little more mentally balanced than you appear to be some days.
You must be one stupid SOB Anonymous 8:16. Did you quit school before graduation or did you attend a school run by Scott Neeson?
DeleteDear Anonymous 8.16
DeleteI know that you are anonymous but really you should stop making comments that make you look stupid.
In the moral universe that you inhabit (unlike most of the rest of us) all that is required is that 3 judges find a person guilty. There is no need for the accused to be in court. There is no need for him (or her) to know what the charges are or to be able to present evidence in his/her defence! Why mess up a good trial by adhering to the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure!
As for the words of Scotts quoted by Andrew Drummond I have asked Scott many times if he uttered these words. He does not respond. He could very easily have said, at any point this past year, "I did not say those words to Andrew Drummond."
As for your being a little tired of the nonsense I publish on this blog it is not compulsory to read it and, if you are "a little tired" I suggest that you find some other way to spend your time.
James - I think you should automatically delete any post with references to your nephew. It is disgusting and beyond the pale that somebody would be so low as to use the death of a loved one as a tool in a debate such as this. Regardless of whatever else may be in the post, just delete it without further consideration. There is no reason you should be subject to that sort of hurtful personal abuse, and anybody that would use such a low and needlessly cruel tactic has forfeited the right to be heard or taken seriously.
DeleteDear Anonymous 5.35
DeleteIt is a year today since Tom died in the fire in Siem Reap. it is a very painful anniversary. And an even more painful one for Tom's mum, dad and sisters.
Yes, Team Neeson's use of my nephew's death to denigrate me and to discredit this blog is beyond the pale. I will not censor such comments, however, as the reveal the true character of those who wish to shoot the messenger. Team Neeson is without moral scruples and each time they refer to Tom they remind readers of this.
There is nothing wrong with the post, somebody referenced the death of Tom respectfully and just pointed out James Ricketson's priorities are totally wrong.
DeletePublishing their personal thoughts about James actions are no different to what James does daily to others.
I happen to agree with them, why not do something to expose the appalling lack of fire safety in nightclubs that people such as his nephew will perish in instead of repeating the same old nonsense you publish on this site weekly.
In what way are my priorities wrong?
DeleteThe death of my nephew in a nightclub fire has nothing whatsoever to do with the jailing of Mr Fletcher without even the semblance of a fair trial. Tom's death has nothing whatsoever to do with Scott Neeson's World Housing scam. These attacks on me regarding my nephews death speak volumes about the kinds of people Scott Neeson chooses to have as spokespeople. Neeson does not wish to argue with the facts (in this instance his World Housing scam) but must attack the person who is holding the facts up for scrutiny. And do so in a very personal and hurtful way.
If I ever decide to start up a blog which focuses on corruption within Cambodian ministries that allows nightclubs to breach safety regulations, I may well write about Tom. In the meantime, this blog is, broadly speaking, about corruption within the Cambodian judiciary and within certain NGOS that results in men like David Fletcher being jailed without a fair trial.
I do not write about a lot of things on this blog because I want, insofar as it is possible, to keep it focused. I wrote an entire blog about a corrupt NGO by the name of the Global Development Fund, and in it pointed out how GDF, Chab Dai and LICADHO either turned a blind eye to (or were deeply implicated in) the illegal removal of children from their families.
If you are interested, you can find out more at:
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2644388530161856474#overview/src=dashboard
And if you are interested to find out, on another blog, just how it was that became aware that Scott Neeson was not who he presented himself as being in his PR, you can go here:
http://cambodianchildrensfund.blogspot.com
And if you want to find out about a Brisbane, Australia-based church that illegally removes children from their families, you can find out mere here:
http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com
In the meantime, with Cambodia 440, I will stick with Mr Fletcher’s denial of a fair trial and the role that both Scott Neeson and APLE played in this.
As for my "repeating the same old nonsense...weekly" why do you bother to come to this site at all? Have you got nothing better to do with your life?
Nobody ever said your nephews death had anything to do with Fletcher. You have chosen to try and score some sympathy points that is all.
DeletePlease show me where Neeson has "attacked the person who is holding the facts up for scrutiny. And do so in a very personal and hurtful way" Just another lie you publish on your blog.
Why do I bother to come to this site - just waiting for the R.I.P Fletcher sign to be hung up and then I will sleep a lot better in my bed at night
Dear Scott, or is it Alan (pretending to be Anonymous 12.34)
DeleteYou are both making regular comments and pretending to be other than who you are. Fair enough. Your prerogative,but it is prerogative of two cowards.
I never raised the question of my nephew's death. You did. And now you accuse me of using it to gin sympathy. You have both lost the plot. I don't need or want sympathy from readers of this blog. I can get these from family and friends. This blog is, in part, about the scams you are both engaged in - the World Housing scam being the one under present discussion.
Do you own the land on which the 360 houses are being erected? The houses 'gifted' to poor Cambodians?
If not you, who? Whoever it is has certainly struck gold. $ 1 million of free housing and $68,000 a year in rent. Not a bad little earner for someone.
As for why you bother with this site, it has taken you a long time to ask yourselves this question. With a bit of luck you'll take your own advice and stop coming back. In a way I will be sorry if you do as you provide occasional comic relief and evidence (if any was needed!) of your priorities as human beings.
That you will sleep better at night when Mr Fletcher is dead is, under the circumstances, a statement whose stupidity is matched only by your callus disregard for Mr Fletcher's human and legal rights.
I eagerly await whatever foolish response you come back with.
Only response is that I am neither Scott or Alan Mr Ricketson. I know it gives you some sort of satisfaction to blame them. Once again however you are wrong.
DeleteP.S you still did not answer - Please show me where Neeson has "attacked the person who is holding the facts up for scrutiny. And do so in a very personal and hurtful way" Just another lie you publish on your blog.
Dear Scott/Alan (Anonymous 1.31)
DeleteIf you really want to know when and how Scott has "attacked the person who is holding the facts up for scrutiny” you could start here:
http://cambodianchildrensfund.blogspot.com/2014/05/is-scott-neeson-knight-in-shining.html
“You are a voyeur who has the luxury to romanticize a situation that you know nothing about.”
So writes Scott Neeson to me in Sept 2011. Scott is the founder and Executive Director of the Cambodian Children’s Fund.
Scott’s ‘voyeur’ observation is in relation to filming I had done over the previous few years with a family that worked and lived in the Phnom Penh rubbish dump.
“Your view that this family had a richer life than you and your community in Sydney is the paternalistic nonsense of someone who gets to fly in, film their hardship, then fly back to the luxuries of home, to pass judgment on those of us who remain here… Having Sokheng (Sokayn) remain on the garbage dump with her family may have fulfilled your vision of a life-lesson on the human condition.”
I had neither written nor implied what Scott suggests here but, as will become apparent, Scott does not allow the facts, the truth, to deflect him from the expression of his self-righteous indignation.
Your righteous indignation, Scott, arose from my having pointed out to you, in various emails, that you have a tendency (perhaps patholgical) to play fast and loose with the truth.
This World Housing scam is evidence of how you use your marketing skills (which I acknowledge are very good) to sell your product. Your product is the small kingdom within a kingdom you have created with CCF; a kingdom that has made you very wealthy and, at the same time, created the illusion that you are a secular saint here in Cambodia to rescue impoverished children.
In fact you are, by your own admission, taking in $4,000 per year per child in residential care and giving only a small part of this ($120 a year in rice support) to the families of the children you have in your care.
And from this $4,000 a year you take in per child you can’t even afford to buy flip flops for your kids. Here is what you have to say on your Facebook page this past couple of days:
"Flip flops may seem like a simple gift, but for the children of Steung Mean Chey these shoes mean a great deal.
When old shoes break or get worn out, our students often walk to CCF classes and around the community barefoot, stepping over rubbish and dangerous objects.
Thanks to My Ly Akara, hundreds of CCF students received flip flops last week, providing safe footwear for their walks to school (and a bright new look!)."
Really, Scott, you can’t afford, out of the $4,000 per year you receive per child, to buy them a $2 pair of flip flops.
You present this as a heart-warming story but really, if anyone reads it closely enough, it is an admission of how little is actually spent on the kids.
Now of course you will say, “I am not Scott. I am not Alan (Lemon)” but any halfway intelligent person (the kind of person who is not going to be fooled by this flip flops story) will know that it is highly unlikely that anyone, other than a CCF insider, would put so much effort to trying to shoot the messenger. You do it because you know that your frauds are being regularly exposed and your only line of defense is trying to discredit me.
Answer the question, Scott: “Who owns the land on which the 'gifted' houses have been erected? You?”
That isn't an attack James, Scott gave a very reasonable assessment of your position. I know attack sounds a little more dramatic for you though.
DeleteI'd like to know why Mr Ricketson has used the 440 brand to promote this blog when he has been so scathing of Khmer440 in the past, and says it is partly to blame for Fletcher's imprisonment.
ReplyDeleteIt seems hypocritical to attack it on the one hand, yet use its Google search friendliness to direct traffic to this site.
its a common trait of someone who lacks confidence and has failed in life to look to defame others who have been successful. Its very clear to all people who have some common sense that the blogs Rickets writes are exactly that - written by someone who has failed in life.
ReplyDeleteTalking to yourself again.
DeleteI'd like to know why you think it is work to take over 700 children from their families to be raised in institutional care.....something is serious misguided with you.
ReplyDeleteI see no mention of Friends International here Anon 9.33 but I think you will find they have many more than 700 kids in institutional care, any chance of a comment please James or is it just CCF you are gunning for. Don't get me wrong Friends International also most likely have good reason to have these kids in care. Sorry but I do not see the difference (apart from the fact James does not like Scott)
DeleteScott has so many scams going he is a very easy target! Everywhere Ricketson looks, he finds another scam by Neeson.
DeleteNo, there is no mention of Friends. Nor is there any mention of Hagar. Or World Vision. Or Chab Dai. Or the Global Development Group. I could write much about all of these (and others) if there were more than 24 hours in a day and if this blog was my full time job. It is not. It is a part time affair. The bulk of my time is spent doing other things.
DeleteAs for my liking or disliking Scott, I don't know the man. I have never met him. If I were to meet him perhaps I would like him. But so what?
It is Scott's scams that I don't like. This World Housing scam is but one of many.
I notice that neither you nor any one else actually defends this World Housing initiative. Instead you find the weakest of reasons to attack me.
I see, so it's OK for Friends to have over 700 kids in institutionalized care but not CCF.
DeleteFor whatever the reason James the word hypocritical seems to be getting used a lot by different people in reference to your good self recently, I wonder why ? (apart from your uncontrollable jealousy of successful people)
Unlike you and because I have a good understanding of the World Housing project I have absolutely no need to defend it. If CCF wish to spend time answering your silly questions one day then maybe they will.
What blatant stupidity Anonymous 11:43! Who said it was OK? You have a good understanding of the World Housing project, do you think it is fine to be telling donors that you are giving homes to the impoverished "that they can call their own", then give them to Neeson at an exorbitant profit, who then rents them to the poor? Let's be sure everyone understands this.... Put it on the CCF Facebook page!!! What a joke you are!!
DeleteFacebook, what a great idea! Why not use the photo of Ricketson's where the residents must walk through the raw sewage also?
DeleteWhy didn't you put it on Facebook anon 12.10 instead of asking fuckwit Ricketson to do it - I know why - its because you are fucking weak coward who sits behind a computer screen using an anonymous title and you dont have the balls to put your name to the bullshit you keep writing about people. Weak, low dog are appropriate terms for you and the other keyboard warriors.
DeleteAnonymous 7:29, and your name is? My comment wasn't asking Ricketson to do it, but for Anonymous 11:43 to do it since hs endorses Neeson keeping houses donated to the poor!
DeleteWhat is the story about the young CCF girl that died? Was there lack of care involved? Is this something that Neeson wants to keep quiet?
ReplyDeleteYes, sheer incompetence on the part of CCF staff. And then a cover up. Neeson, Mc Cabe and Lemon will neither confirm or deny the death. It is best they remain silent because there are too many people who know what happened and this is one skeleton that they would want to keep in their closet.
DeleteI'm betting that Scott Neeson, James McCabe, Alan Lemon, CCF, and APLE would really love to see this website taken down!!
DeleteRicketson - you are a fool. If there are so many people that supposedly know of an alleged death at CCF, then why hasn't anyone taken it to the press. The answer is that its just rumour and unproven bullshit - pretty much standard for you. You make allegations but you haven't produced one single piece of evidence to prove its true. Produce some evidence and stop making up bullshit to suit you blog. You are mirror Peter Hogan - hopefully you will end up the same as him ASAP!
DeleteThe death of the girl is not a rumour. Scott Neeson and the CCF board know which teenage girl I am referring to and the circumstances surrounding her death. And CCF knows that I know. For a variety of reasons it is not appropriate that I either name the young woman or go into any detail at this point. However, in the meantime, you could ask Scott Neeson, Alan Lemon and the CCF a simple question:
Delete"Is there any truth at all to the allegation made by James Ricketson that a teenage girl, in CCF's care, died and that CCF has sought to keep the death and the circumstances surrounding it secret?"
Neeson, Lemon, the CCF board could very easily respond with, "This is not true." They will not. Instead they will send their Anonymous Team Neeson Trolls out to do their best to shoot the messenger. Such attempts get weaker and weaker with the passage of time and only serve to highlight CCF's total lack of transparency and accountability.
They dont need to respond to bullshit allegations that you are making up. Your response above is typical you - "yes i have evidence but I'm not going to show it and the person I am defining needs to respond" - turn it up Ricketson - surely you aren't that dumb are you?
DeleteDear Anonymous 9.43
DeleteIf Neeson does not want to answer any questions, that is his prerogative. However, it is difficult to reconcile his refusal to answer questions with his claims that CCF is totally transparent and accountable.
In relation to the young women who died Neeson et al could very easily say, "Ricketson is quite simply wrong." They choose not to. This is CCF's prerogative.
There will be some reading this blog who will cheer Neeson on: "Why should Scott stoop so low as to answer questions from a blogger like Ricketson?"
Fair enough.
And there will be some who will read about CCF 'gifting' houses to poor people, learn online that this is a lie and wonder who owns the land and who is the beneficiary of the $1 million worth of free housing? If Scott owns the land and has 'gifted' himself $1 million worth of free housing, his credibility is in tatters with other readers of this blog.
Dear Graham Brewster, the World Housing board
ReplyDeleteand others in Canada who may be interested in the slums being build by Scott Neeson in Cambodia
World Housing cannot claim not to know of Scott Neeson's World Housing scam in Cambodia. And yet, it seems, World Housing in Vancouver continues to ask developers to stump up $50,000 for the privilege of paying for the construction of such slums! You know what is going on and will not, at some later point in time, when the scam is comprehensively exposed, be able to plead ignorance.
Given the large amounts of money involved and the potentially huge amounts of money that could be generated by this scam, I have to wonder if anyone at World Housing is in receipt of financial kick backs substantial enough to buy their silence regarding Scott Neeson's scam?
You should all be ashamed of yourselves for your exploitation not only of poor Cambodians but of Vancouver-based developers who believe that they are 'gifting' homes to poor families, when in fact they are enriching whoever is the owner of the land upon which the houses are being erected.
You have all seen the glossy photos. Here are a few less glossy ones.
http://cambodia440.blogspot.com/2015/11/166-scott-neesons-world-housing-scam.html
best wishes
Great idea to communicate direct with donors. I think Neeson will really like that!!
DeleteIs there anyone in the world that isn't involved in a scam or conspiracy Ricketson - you are a fucking joke!
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you point out where Ricketson is claiming a scam, but you don't think there is one? Would it be World Housing?
DeleteAnonymous 7:20, when you just make those broad statements without just one example, you look like a fucking joke.
DeleteDear Anonymous 7.20
DeleteIf you know the answers to any of the questions I have posed (like, who owns the land on which $ 1million worth of free housing is being built) please answer them. If you don't know the answers, perhaps you think the questions of such little relevance that they are not worth answering.
Over to you, Anonymous 7.20. See if, for once, you can do your homework, check the facts and answer a question.
Some people are quite angry at you James for publishing the truth. Some are angry that you haven't published football scores or information about the Paris terrorist attacks! Would these miscreants ALL be CCF employees?
ReplyDeleteScott Neeson, Alan Lemon, James Mc Cabe 3 Aussie con men), CCF board members, Jim Brooke....
ReplyDeleteWill one of you answer the fucking question:
WHO OWNS THE LAND ON WHICH HAVE BEEN ERECTED THE HOUSES GIVEN TO POOR CAMBODIAN FAMILIES BY GENEROUS DEVELOPERS IN VANCOUVER, CANADA?
Let's get real here. Whoever owns the land, and hence the houses, is in receipt of stolen goods. These houses were given to poor families, have been stolen by Neeson and his corrupt buddies and given to....WHO?
No, Scott, Alan
ReplyDeleteYour comment was your standard response to anyone who asks you questions or seeks to hold you accountable- shoot the messenger. By calling me a 'voyeur' you were able (or at least tried) to shift the discussion/debate away from your own illegal detention of two sisters, whose parents sought their return, back into me. Your 'voyeur' comment was a variation of the 'grooming' comment you made about David Fletcher. In his case you wanted to destroy someone you saw as a competitor; in my case to discredit someone who was in the process of exposing you as a fraud and a liar. You are still at it today and will continue in this vein for as long as this blog lasts. And this blog will last for as long as it takes to win a fair trial for Mr Fletcher. It took me six years to get two other daughters stolen by evangelical Christians returned to their family. I am sure, over the months and possibly years to come that we will have many interchanges such as this one.
This last comment of mine has wound up, for reasons unknown, separated from the comment it was a response to. These things sometimes happen - along with the disappearance of comments.
ReplyDeleteNeeson sits on $6.1 MILLION and lets his students (from his FB post):
ReplyDeleteWhen old shoes break or get worn out, our students often walk to CCF classes and around the community barefoot, stepping over rubbish and dangerous objects.
What a great humanitarian he is!!!
It is a time honoured tradition amongst NGOs to constantly scream poor so that sponsors and donors will, metaphorically speaking, hand over their thong sandles.
ReplyDeleteI am surprised that Neeson would try and pull a cheap stunt such as this when he knows that I (and others) are closely watching what he and CCF is up to. Both he and CCF are rolling in money but it is not enough, it seems. Neeson needs more, more, more and yet more again...whilst one former student I know has had to leave CCF to work in the dump because the $120 of rice support he gives to her family is not enough to feed them. She is a bright 14 year old.
I wonder when someone in the media, other than myself, will ask the simple question:
"Do you own the land upon which 360 houses have been or are being erected?"
If so, Neeson has 'gifted' himself $1 million in housing and will collect $68,000 a year in rent whilst the children of the families in these houses must rely on the goodness of others than CCF to be provided with a pair of thongs!
Then Neeson creates a field of raw sewage that his barefoot students must walk through! What a Saint!!
DeleteDon't sponsors pay $125/month to send these students to a HALF day of school?? WTF?
DeleteHey Rickets - I know you are a dumb fuck but foreigners can't own land in Cambodia. Its the law so i guess your question to Neeson answers itself.
DeleteDear Scott Neeson (aka Anonymous 9.35)
DeleteYou have taken out Cambodian citizenship so you can own own land.
Perhaps you do own the land on which the $ 1million worth of free housing is being erected. Perhaps you do not. You will not give a 'yes' or a 'no' to this question. This is your way.
Perhaps the land is owned by someone else who is now in receipt of this generous gift of houses - essentially stolen from the poor people they were given to; the poor people developers in Vanvouver THOUGHT they were giving the houses to.
This scam requires no guesswork from me. It is apparent to anyone who bothers to read CCF's and World Housing's various press releases. You are in this scam together and at some point someone will find out who owns the land and even Jim Brooke, CCF's PR man in the media, may start to ask some questions.
Looks like Anonymous 9:35 is the dumb fuck!
Deleteanonymous 9.35 pm - you are the dumb fuck because em not Neeson.
DeleteAnonymous 11:23, having a little trouble following the script? Think you better have another beer you dumb fuck!
DeleteGood safe bet you are a pedophile yourself 11.29pm. A lump of wood over the front of your head would be good medicine.
DeleteThe more you drink the stupider you become. Let us know if you run into Lemon's girl friend.
DeleteDear Anonymous 11.40
DeleteWhat a wonderful example of Team Neeson logic. You have never met Anonymous 11.29 and yet you can say, with confidence "good safe bet you are a pedophile yourself."
Wow! What powers of perception you have! Psychic! You could get a job with APLE and really speed up the process of catching pedophiles.
Not sure that even Thierry Darnaudet or Samleang Seila would endorse your "lump of wood to the front of the head" solution to the 'pedophile problem' though!
Keep the comments coming, please. Much needed comic relief.
Most slums come into being as a result of a lack of planing and foresight. Scott Neeson is building slums from scratch with no forethought at all. The people living in these little boxes, butted up against each other, can be kicked out of their homes at any time CCF wishes to get rid of 'trouble-makers'. This has happened on a few occasions. And, given that the families residing in these homes can never own them, they have no vested interest in seeing to it that this beehive of dwellings does not turn into a slum as bad as the ones they lived in before. The new World Housing slums constitute a health hazard.
ReplyDeletePeople kicked out of the homes that they were given 'a few times' - and of course you have evidence of this dont you Ricketson. More made up bullshit and scuttlebutt.
DeleteDear Scott Neeson
DeleteI am no longer going to go through the charade of writing 'Dear Team Neeson'. It will be Dear Scott Neeson from now on.
Yes, you have thrown families out of their homes for not abiding by CCF rules. Yes, you have thrown young men out of CCF for refusing to kowtow to your rules and regulations and for having the temerity to ask questions - about the young woman who died, for instance, whilst in CCF care.
Neeson aka Anonymous 9:23, go to YouTube and search "Locked Out" that will give some evidence to get you started!
DeleteIm not sure why you are making an issue of the model that CCF is running. I hate the NGO free this and free that - it creates a welfare society which Cambodia clearly is. So if CCF is building houses and then asking Khmer families to pay some form of money then thats a good thing. There also has to be rules that go with that so if families say yes they want a house and will pay it back and then dont then its only obvious that they may be asked to leave that house. Thats how the world operates. we need to stop giving the cambodians the poor sympathy vote.
DeleteDear Anonymous 11.32
DeleteI agree with you that the international donor community, along with NGOs has, for the past 20 years, created a welfare community that expects to be helped forever. This is not the issue here.
Scott Neeson lies when he says that homes are being 'gifted' to poor families.
What Scott could have done is come straight out and said "World Housing has given houses to the Cambodian Children's Fund that we will rent out at a modest fee to poor Cambodian families."
As it stands we do not know who owns the land and therefore who is the recipient of around $1million of free housing. This is not a small sum. Whoever own that land, right on the edge of the old dump, is now a millionaire. It is a perfectly legitimate question to ask - who owns it.
One answer could be/might be: "The land is owned by CCF and the rent accrued in a year ($68,000) goes into consolidated CCF revenue to be spent on..."
The point is that CCF conducts all its business in secrecy and there is no way that anyone can see where the money is going.
Just in the past 24 hours Scott has presented the heart-warming story of CCF kids now being able to wear $2 things and no longer having to walk barefoot to school as a result of a generous gift. This is nonsense. CCF takes in over $10 million a year. It can afford $2 thongs.
Here is what is written, today, on the CCFR website about sponsoring a child:
You can transform the life of a child living in poverty.
By sponsoring a child for $150 USD a month, you will provide:
Access to an award-winning education program
Nutrition, safe shelter and family support
Medical care for an entire family
Housing, savings funds and debt re-financing for eligible families
US$150 a month to sponsor a child adds up to $US 1,800 a year - around $1000 more than the Cambodian per capita income.
And CCF can't afford to buy $2 thongs for the kids who are bringing in $1,800 a year to the CCF coffers?
It is a source of continuous amazement to me that intelligent people do not simply do some basic maths based on CCF's own figures and realise that they do not add up; that there are huge sums of money being poured into CCF coffers but not enough into the pockets of poor families for them to be able to buy thongs for their kids.
To say nothing about duping donors who believe their donation is buying a home for the impoverished! I believe that it is called FRAUD!!
DeleteAnd of course Ricketson you have built a house for the poor haven't you and provided education for young boys & girls and provided medical care for the elderly in these poor communities. Oh thats right, you have done fuck all for the poor communities in Cambodia unless you call your predatory stalking of the poor family with 3 young children as helping someone. Stack the up you and against on who has helped the most people and I think its clear who the clear winner is. You are a fucking disgrace.
ReplyDeleteDear Scott Neeson
DeleteWhilst it is in no way relevant to the purpose of this blog, yes,I have bought houses for poor families. Three. On top of this I am, at present, paying the school fees for about a dozen kids.
As for the family that I am 'stalking' I would have thought you had learnt your lesson making the false allegation that Mr Fletcher was 'grooming' young girls.
You need to take three deep breaths and calm down a little Scott before firing off these comments. Or someone with CCF, someone on the board, for instance, should advise you to simply answer questions and not continues, in a very ham-fisted way, to shoot the messenger.
Most people I have spoken to - the people who you have defamed on your blog - have been advised by their Boards and legal teams to just ignore you. Basically your blog and constant bullshit means nothing to them and certainly doesn't affect any of their business or operations. So keep wasting your breath and demanding answers - no-one is listening. (well except you kiddie fiddler sympathising friends)
DeleteDear Scott Neeson
DeleteWhom have I defamed on this blog?
Do you not believe that your comment about Mr Fletcher 'grooming' young girls was defamatory? In any country in which the rule of law prevailed Mr Fletcher could have sued you for making this comment and had a very good chance of winning substantial damages.
As for those you believe I have defamed they are free to sue me for defamation. They would never dare to do so in any country in which courts were interested in evidence. They might well decide to sue me in Cambodia - where the verdict would be determined by who had the most money. Given that I have no money and those I ask questions of (you, in particular)have lots of money, the verdict is a foregone conclusion.
If my questions, my observations, mean nothing to the various board involved because they think what I write is bullshit, fair enough. This is their prerogative. When the Cambodian Children's Fund house of cards falls in a heap their reputations will be tarnished as a result of their having done nothing to stop scams like your World Housing initiative.
You've just defamed the kingdom of Cambodia and the ministry of justice, in violation of both defamation laws and Internet security laws. I would b very happy to see u behind bars on my next visit to pj
DeleteThen Neeson should go to pj for fraud, right?
DeleteRickets you are a classic armchair critic. You have done nothing yourself but always quick to criticise others that have done something. What community work have you done in Cambodia?
ReplyDeleteDear Scott Neeson
DeleteAs I have mentioned, I have bought three houses, a rice paddy, some tuk tuks and am paying the school fees for around a dozen kids from poor families.
On top of this there is a very poor community I visit twice a week whilst in Phnom Penh to deliver rice, buy tarpaulins for leaky rooves, give money to buy medicines for sick people and help out families who have got themselves into deep debt to money lenders.
This contribution to the welfare of materially impoverished Cambodians has nothing whatsoever to do with my role as a blogger/journalist.
By building housing for the poor Scott, are you referring to taking $2800 from World Housing, spending $1000 on a 120 sq. ft. box, then renting it to the poor? Is that your idea of building homes for the poor?
DeleteScott aka Anonymous 9:21, is taking children from their family to be raised in institutional care, what you call "helping"? Most of the world knows taking children from their families is not only harmful, but that the damage is irreversible!
hahaha typical Rickteson - everyone else who does some good is doing the wrong way but if Ricketson does it its ok. "Ive bought this and Im paying this" . Look in the mirror you fool. Every time you open your gob shit comes out.
DeleteSo just from this one post, let's just summarize what Team Neeson stands for:
ReplyDeleteThey could care less about Neeson keeping houses intended for the poor and renting them to the poor.
They could care less about Neeson taking over 700 children from their families to be raised in institutional care even though 80 years of research shows that it does irreparable harm.
They could care less about children walking barefoot to school and stepping over garbage and dangerous items or even walking through raw sewage, while Neeson sits on $6.1 million donated to help the children.
They could care less about duping donors who believe that they are gifting houses to the impoverished.
They could care less that impoverished families are locked out of their home for being $12.50 behind on their rent.
They could care less about a young girl who died because of lack of care.
BUT what they do care about is shooting the messenger for publishing the truth.
Interesting hey?
Only a blind person could fail to see that Scott Neeson and his corrupt former Australian Federal Police pals are involve in a huge scam that makes Somaly Mam look like Mother Theresa. Why the fuck has a scam as obvious as this one not been exposed in the mainstream media? Does Neeson own all the newspapers in Cambodia?
DeleteYou are exactly right Anonymous 5:31!! Where is the press?
DeleteIs there any truth in the rumour that the Cambodian Children's Fund is renting the 'gifted' thongs to CCF kids and that if they do not keep up with the rent the thongs are taken away from them and they have to walk barefoot to school?
ReplyDeleteI would expect that they are renting them to the children as that is their model used in the case of the World Housing homes. Why would they want to give the children anything for free when they can use gifts intended for the impoverished to build their own bank account!
DeleteYou are a lowlife cunt Ricketson. I hope Neeson sues you for defamation and donot give me your usual bullshit about how you havenpt defaed anyone. Fuck you.
ReplyDeleteNow why is he a cunt? Is it for exposing the truth? You must not like hearing the truth? Are you a CCF employee?
DeleteAnonymous 5:44, you sure look like someone who doesn't have an ability to think. I believe that you are someone that feels a sense of superiority by trying to belittle someone else.
Deletewow some of these comments are appalling! exactly the kind of comments you could expect people like that to leave. sincerest thank you for the article though, very informative.
ReplyDeletewow some of these comments are appalling! exactly the kind of comments you could expect people like that to leave. sincerest thank you for the article though, very informative.
ReplyDeleteNeutral reader: Reading your original post and subsequent rants between writer and anonymous.
ReplyDeleteTo the writer: The housing built are indeed low in cost. Its minimal steel structure, pressed aluminum sheets, bamboos and netting. You missed out on the interior accessories provided, example electrical, water, irrigation, fan etc. $68k per year in revenue to maintain 360 homes. Revenue or losses? Such housing will not be able to last more than 5 years and repairs and maintenance can be far more costlier than actual costing of building. As a neutral reader - you are quite vindictive to the organisation.
To the organisation or Mr Scott:
Charity organisation is never an easy task. Transparency of funds is needed at all times to appeal more donors and haters. The operation of such work require funds to operate, sometimes its difficult to reveal certain information to the public as its sensitive or critical to the survival of the project. For Example: when donations are low, you need to appeal for more donations and have to do more marketing. When funds are overwhelming and the organisation is in the dilemma to declare. Be it over or under-funding, its manageable. You can lay out your 10 years plan and declare the funds aside yearly to beef up the 10yr plan.
Overall: Its good work to the homeless. Using the homeless to be rich is quite far fetch especially in such countries. If i were the Local Chief of the town, I will force this foreigner out and take over the housing and raise the rent yearly. (That's making $)
Be it 1 day, 1mth, 1 year or 10yrs as a Samaritan, its still good work.