“The ambitious goal was to create
community-oriented homes that operated on a principle of a one-for-one real
estate gifting model that allows families to rent homes at an affordable price.
Post Property spoke with Graham Brewster, the managing director of World
Housing about the success of the project.”
 |
| Communal spaces! |
It is a step in the right direction
that Scott Neeson is now admitting, in a public relations interview conducted
with the Phnom Penh Post, that homes are not ‘gifted’ to poor families but
rented to them.
It is also a step in the right
direction that Scott Neeson is being a little more open about the cost of these
homes:
“How much does it cost for
each home to be constructed?
The cost is approximately
$2,500 for the home itself.
Why then are World Housing and the
Cambodian Children’s Fund asking donors for $5,000 per house? The answer could
be found in the following:
“…what we’ve learned is
that there is much more that goes into building a successful and thriving
community, from the initial land preparation to community facilities like
wash-houses, playgrounds, communal spaces, fencing, pathways and gardens. This
is what makes it a true community, which can thrive long term, rather than a
cluster of homes.”
 |
| Another communal space! |
On my visits to two such communities
I saw no evidence of ‘communal spaces’, ‘playgrounds’ or ‘gardens’. Perhaps I
did not look closely enough. I will do so the next time I am in Cambodia.
As to whether these things “make it
a true community” I have my doubts. A true community is created by members of
the community and not by an academic in Vancouver, Canada (Dupuis) and a PR Man
(Neeson) in Cambodia. The question arises:
“To what extent do the
families renting houses/homes from CCF/World Housing have a say in how their
communities are set up?”
Despite CCF and World Housing now
admitting that the houses are rented and not ‘gifted’ to families, the Phnom
Penh Post has not yet quite got the message; asking the following question:
“Since the beginning, how
many homes have been handed over to families?
We’ve built 360 homes and
housed 1,800 people and are building more all the time. While most of these
have been in communities in Steung Meanchey, we’ve also built a number of
communities in different provinces across the country.”
Memo to journalist:
The question should have been “How
many houses are now being rented to families?”
 |
| Communal gardens? |
Given that less than 200 houses have
been put up in Steung Meanchey it seems that around 160 have been erected in
“different provinces across the country.”
It is interesting that none of these
provincial houses have been featured in any photos or previous
publicity! Which provinces have these houses been put up in? Are journalists
welcome to visit these pilot schemes and talk with the families who are now renting
their homes from World Housing/Cambodian Children’s Fund? Are these same
journalists also welcome to visit the communities in Steung Meanchey and talk
with the families renting homes?
 |
| Future slum under construction? |
The advertisement in the Phnom Penh
Post, posing as journalism, shies away from the question of who owns the land
upon which the houses are being erected:
“In terms of issuing land
titles for the homes that are built, do they belong to the families, the NGO or
government property?
As for land, the most
common arrangement in Steung Meanchey is to arrange a long-term lease on a
large parcel, where families can live with the security that they will not be
evicted off the land at a moment’s notice. In other cases, the land is owned by
the local partner, or in some cases (particularly in the provinces), the land
is owned by the families themselves.
Families living on the
leased land in Steung Meanchey make a monthly contribution of $15, which
contributes to the upkeep of their community, land rental, and maintenance of
the communal facilities. More importantly however, this small payment provides
a sense of pride of ownership in the home and community.”
 |
| The community drainage system in operation! |
It would be interesting to ask the
family members themselves if they believe their $15 a month in rent gives them
a sense of ownership. And, given that families can be (and have been) evicted
for not obeying Scott Neeson’s rules and regulations, it would be intersting to
ask if they feel secure within the communities or if they feel they have no
choice but to toe the line in order to avoid eviction.
A whole host of questions that still
require answers; questions that the Phnom Penh Post is clearly not going to
ask.
Whoever owns the land that is being
leased and upon which the houses are being
erected is becoming, month by month, increasingly wealthy. Who is this person?
Or, if there is more than one, who are they?
This is the $64,000 question.
 |
| Were families consulted in the design of the new community being constructed for them? |
The Phnom Penh Post advertorial can be found in full at:
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/real-estate/world-housing-builds-community-oriented-homes
Keep going mr Ricketson. Getting Neeson to admit to having lied about the gifting of houses to families is a major step in the right direction. My guess is that he is under pressure not only from yourself but others asking questions . And maybe the CCF board also now that they know teir CEO is a habitual liar. So Neeson and Brewster have seized the day by contacting their PPP mates and writing a crafty story that tells a little bit more of the truth but not much. Just enough they hope to stop any more questions being asked like who owns the land. As you say this is the $64,000 question.
ReplyDeleteIs Chad Williams working full time for CCF now or just part time?
DeleteCan the families who are forced into signing contracts to rent homes allowed to show contracts to anyone who can give them some advice?
DeleteWhy don’t the newspapers mention that CCF has hundreds of children locked up in their institutional care. Earning Neeson, Lemon, Mc Cabe and members of the CCF millions in funding. The CCF board and members should be charged and convicted of their crimes against Cambodian families whose kids they steal. CCF destroys families all so Neeson can make more money. How much does he need? The damage to the children will last a long time.
Delete1 I’ve heard the real cost was 30per month for the families renting the homes that were gifted to them. I wonder if CCF double dips? Asking kids sponsors to help pay for the rent on the homes?
ReplyDeleteScott Neeson the largest slum landlord in Scambodia
DeleteI wonder how 1st world buyers feel to hear their gifted homes are rented! Will now Neeson and Brewster retract their media gifting claims that they have been fooling the world with for 3 years? Cutting ribbons, media posts and families with their new homes?
ReplyDeleteHow many families have moved out of their so called gifted houses, Scott? Quite a few I hear. Why? Couldn’t cope with your rules?
ReplyDeleteOne of the strict rules families who want to be part of the Neeson Brewster cult have to abide by is keeping their children living in one of CCF’s institutions so that Neeson can milk donors for $4000 per year from child sponsorship per kid. If they take their kids out of a CCF institution they have to give up their house. The PPP would have found this out if it bothered to ask a few questions and not just give free advertising to the Neeson/Brewster scam. Or maybe it wasnt free?
DeleteLet me get this straight. Neeson spends $1000 to buy a pre-fab home, tells the Phnom Penh Post it cost $2,500 and then tells people who want to buy a house that it costs $5,000. Does he realize that he is admitting to it all being a scam?
ReplyDeleteThe day when people like Neeson get out of Cambodia will be a huge leap forward. Anyone who in some fucked up way believes children are better in institutional care should be locked up! Sponsors need to stop giving these sham charities money.
DeleteSeems that we've known he was a liar, but now he is admitting to being a thief? When will he begin admitting that institutional care harms children and the taking children from families, harms families? When will he admit that he swindles donors and the IRS? Welcome to Neeson's world of scams!! GREAT work James!!
ReplyDeleteWhy is it that Global Village Housing can build homes so much cheaper than Neeson can? Their homes include solar power and they produce on a smaller volume, which would lower their efficiency and drive their costs higher. Could it be that Neeson lies when he says "ABOUT $2500?
ReplyDeleteThe houses that CCF & World Housing build are the same as the ones Global Village Housing construct - so someone is making a hell of a profit along the way!!!!
DeleteI wonder WHO that would be? The GVH Housing has solar also!
DeleteA MESSAGE FOR SCOTT NEESON FROM DAVID FLETCHER
ReplyDeleteDear Mr Neeson,
I must confess it is very noble of you to provide more 'gifted' houses to poor Khmer families in the various provinces, well done!
As the interest of the poor families has always been close to my heart, and of course I am unable to visit these locations, I would be very grateful if you would publish the whereabouts of these 'gifted' homes and photographs please, thank you!
I would likewise like to see photographs of the wash houses, playgrounds, community fencing, pathways and garden spaces. These all costing, according to your published figures, $500,000. It all must look fantastic! Well done! I rest easy that you are taking such care of the welfare and feelings of security you give to the families I used to help. It would be a wonderful Christmas present for me to see all this evidence of spending for the comfort of the children.
I do hope you will not ignore my grateful request, as you have done so far my legal inquiry via FOI/DPA1998.
Also you have ignored my request of evidence of the statement you published, that I was grooming children at Stung Meanchey.
Sadly, all I have seen of the surrounding areas of your ' gifted ' homes, is floating excretion, sewer water and flooding.
I have not seen the evidence of your kind donors investment of half a million dollars to enhance these 'gifted' homes surroundings.
Happy new year to you, the UK authorities await, as I.
David Fletcher
Beautiful gardens!
ReplyDeleteDoes Scott Neeson own the Phnom Penh Post?
ReplyDeleteGood news that Neeson is admitting that for the last 3 years he and his partners in the World Housing scam have been lying about giving houses to poor people. What other lies of Neeson’s are yet to be exposed?
ReplyDeleteThe question is not what lies of Neesons are yet to be exposed but does he ever tell the truth about anything.
DeleteSeems that he is a compulsive liar, doesn't it? So are some that work for him!
DeleteI am guessing that Lindsay Murdoch's recent article in Fairfax media on the Orphanage scams in Cambodia may have led to CCF putting out this piece of spin via their propaganda channel i.e. Phnom Penh Post, makes you wonder about anything the Post publishes???
ReplyDeleteIs it permissible in Canada or Cambodia to tell donors that you are going to do one thing with their donation, and the do anything that you want with it? In many places, they would call this FRAUD! Where are the criminal charges?
ReplyDeleteWhere is the media on this? Why isn[t this scam BIG news?
DeleteLots of questions need to be asked of newspapers like the Phnom Penh Post.
ReplyDeleteWorld Housing has been heavily promoting itself as being the worlds first one for one home gifting program, creating the impression that it was giving homes to poor families around the world. That idea came from the Toms shoes business marketing model where when someone buys one pair of shoes one pair of shoes is donated in the 3rd world. Great idea except that the shoes being handed out are poorly designed, with thinnest and cheapest soles that let even the tiniest of stones push through. And not forgetting the sweat shops where these cheap shoes are made . Selling a pair of shoes for $30-40 USD and gift a pair of shoes that cost around $1.00 hardly makes it One for One!
It is a disgrace that Neeson, Brewster and Dupuis will exploit the poor in the same way as Tom’s One for One shoe scam Neeson, Brewster and Dupuis sells the marketing concept for $50.000.00 - $100.000.00 per year to developers in Canada that sell apartments and condos worth up to million each. These developers add $5,000 to the cost of a condo which in theory goes to a poor family. The condos are sold through marketing agents S&P restate who just so happen to be the founders of World Housing – Brewster, Dupuis and Neeson.
It’s a win win situation for World Housing - sales commissions on the condos and profits made through their housing program which when it gets down to it is a basic square metal box shelter that costs under 1.000.00 each to manufacture. Hardly a balance of one for one . ‘Gifted’ so they said the last three years but now they have finally come out after families have been forced out for unpaid rents or failing to abide by the terms and conditions demanded by Scott Neeson's Cambodian Children's Fund .
The latest news from the paid-for-comment Cambodia's Phnom Penh Post is that the houses are rented to families, as James Ricketson has been saying for months now with Team Neeson snapping at his heels and making all kinds of stupid threats. I reckon this World Housing scam is just the tip of a massive ice berg of lies and deceit. Newsweek went after Somaly Mam for much less than Neeson is guilty of. Why is he left alone by the media?
What's with Scott Neeson's self promoting his own Scott Neeson Facebook page. This is a page I haven't ‘liked’, but yet l see his page appear time and again on my timeline . His posts are marked as paid promotions "adds" - glossy photos of him and children. There must be some huge bills added onto his charity’s running costs.
ReplyDeleteEven though the $2500 to build the home is lie, they are going to spend another $2500 on land that the people will never own! The square footage under the home is about 121 sq. ft., so for taking donors money ($5000)the people will never own the home or the land that it sits on, AND will pay month for the rest of their lives, whatever fee Neeson decides to extort from them?
ReplyDeleteWorld Housing is nothing more than a marketing scheme to trick property developers and apartment buyers in believing they are helping the poor. I'd like to see the proof they have built 360 homes in Steung Meanchey and in the provinces of Cambodia. Every angle of this greasy story that I’ve read refers that less than 200 have really been built. And why aren’t there any photos on Facebook of houses in the provinces. All the photos are close-ups that hide the fact that World Housing is building slum dwellings as close to each other as they can.
ReplyDeleteChad Williams
ReplyDeleteEditor
Phnom Penh Post
Dear Chad
Does Scott Neeson pay the Phnom Penh Post to have articles like this one published? Or do you provide a free public relations service to all of your mates?
This is not journalism. It is not even hagiography. It is the Post being used in a very crude way by Neeson to paper over his ‘gifting’ lie. He hopes that by substituting the word ‘gifting’ with ‘renting’ that no one will pay any attention to the other questions raised by this World Housing scam. If you or anyone else at the Post had been paying attention and even asking the most basic and obvious of questions of Neeson an article such as this one would never (or at least should never) be published.
Bad journalism!
If you ever felt inclined, as editor, to instruct one of your journalists to actually ask some questions, do a little research, a little investigation, and not be seduced by Neeson spin, the first question s/he should ask is: “Who owns the land upon which the World Housing houses are being built?”
Why is this question important? I would have thought it was obvious but it seems not.
Whilst a 20 minute visit to one of the sites where the houses are being put up would reveal that Neeson is constructing slums, it would also be apparent that whoever owns the land is in receipt of a lot of free housing. Do a little arithmetic, Chad, and then run it by Neeson and see what he says.
Let‘s presume that 360 homes have been built. (There is no evidence that this is so but lets just presume that it is so)
Each house generates $5,000 in income for World Housing. That’s $1,800,000.
Subtract the cost of manufacturing the houses @ $1000 each. That’s $360,000.
Leaving aside what happens to the remaining $1,440,000, it is safe to presume that the owner of the land upon which they are erected is in receipt of at least $360,000 of free houses.
Or, if you work off the World Housing quote of $2,500 per house, the owner is in receipt of $900,000 of free housing.
Whether the sum is $360,000 or $900,000 the owner of the land must be a very very happy person.
Then of course there is the rent. 360 homes x 12 months x $15 = $65,800 per annum. Not a bad return for the owner of the land considering s/he has not paid one cent for the houses that have increased the value of the land.
Now, if you can accept my arithmetic as being more or less accurate, the next question is:
“Why won’t Scott Neeson reveal who the owner of the land is that is being leased and upon which the houses have been built?”
Perhaps it is Scott Neeson himself? Or someone within CCF acting on his behalf? Or a senior member of the armed forces? Or a politician?
Or perhaps CCF owns the land and leases it to World Housing – in which case the 360 houses belong to CCF and the $64,000 a year in rent goes into a CCF bank account.
If the land is not owned by CCF (and leased to world Housing) but is owned by Neeson or someone within CCF he or she should be publically exposed as being, in a sense, in receipt of stolen goods. Donors and sponsors thought they were ‘gifting’ homes to poor families; not to a slum landlord.
There are, of course, a whole host of other questions that need to be asked of Scott Neeson. If you need any help with these, Chad, refer to the half dozen or so blog entries I have made that focus on the World Housing scam.
If you wish to retain any credibility as an editor, if you wish to demonstrate that the Post is not the PR arm of CCF (and APLE, for that matter) you need to send a journalist or two out to have a look at the World Housing projects in Steung Meanchey and ask Scott:
“Who owns the land?”
Oh, and ask about the houses being build in the provinces. Where abouts? Would it be possible to visit these and talk with the families?
If Neeson refuses to tell the Post journalist who owns the land you will now that you are onto a good story. Any halfway decent journalist based in Cambodia should be able to find out who owns the land regardless of Neeson's fervent desire to keep it secret.
According to your post rickets, you cant find out who owns the land. So does that mean you are less than a halfway decent journalist. Moron!
DeleteIt funny how Ricketson dint reply to this post. I will answer it for you anon 6.24 - Ricketson isn't a halfway decent journalist, in fact he isn't even a journalist at all. He has no official accreditation.
DeleteDear Anonymous 6.24 and 9.37
DeleteAre you serious? Only a journalist with 'official accreditation' can be deemed to be a true journalist? Does this mean that if I am accredited in Cambodia to film that I can call myself a journalist? If so, I am, in accordance with your own definition, an 'accredited journalist' as I pay my $5 each time I come to Cambodia and get a laminated photo of myself to wear around my neck like all other journalists.
As for my inability to find out who owns the land, not easy whilst I am in Australia. Perhaps you could make a few phone calls for me?
Your posts stink of stale piss and wind ricketson. How about doing somthing yourself for poor people instead of complaining about the actions of everyone else. You reek of jealousy
ReplyDeleteThe notion that anyone would be jealous of the perpetrators of a scam such as this one says a lot about you, Anonymous 6.22. You believe that success is a goal in itself even if this involves scamming donors and sponsors and exploiting the poverty and powerlessness of families who find it difficult to say ‘no’ to what looks like a good deal – a house to live in.
DeleteThese families are not in a position to read the fine print of the ‘contract’ they enter into with CCF. And I mean ‘fine print’ in both a literal and a figurative sense. They are not allowed to keep a copy of the contract and so have no way of checking to see what arrangement they have entered into with CCF at some later point. They have no ‘contract’ they can take to LICADHO, for instance, and ask for assistance if they feel they are being exploited. Mind you, LICADHO has demonstrated no interest at all in this scam; no interest at all in the multiple scams that involve the removal of children from their families to be sold to sponsors and donors as ‘orphans’.
If you think you are doing Scott Neeson a favour by continuing to shoot the messenger as you do here (again!) you are sadly mistaken. If you are in any way representative of Team Neeson (which it seems you are) you are slowly but surely destroying whatever credibility Neeson might have left.
As for finding out who owns the land, I live in Australia so visiting the various government departments where this information might be gleaned is not an option for me. On top of this I do not have the list of contacts that a local journalist would have within various ministries. Nor do I have the mobile phone numbers of those within the ministries who leak information that cannot be gleaned through regular channels. Hopefully there will be a Cambodian-based journalist putting a good deal of effort into finding out who owns the land. We shall see.
The fact that CCF's donor base is growing and not one UN, NGO or Media group will write anything negative about CCF's programs is because they are doing great work (and before you say you are media, you are not!). It is only you Ricketson who is so obsessed with trying to destroy Neeson's reputation that you have been overcome by jealousy and refuse to take your head out of the sand. I pity you!
DeleteDear Scott Neeson (aka Anonymous 5.52)
DeleteGiven how often you play fast and loose with the truth I will take with a grain of salt your comment about CCF's donor base growing.
As for no-one writing anything negative about CCF, no-one was writing anything negative about Somaly Mam in the months, weeks and days before her exposure as a liar either.
I am not obsessed with destroying your reputation. I am merely asking you to be transparent and accountable for your actions - whether it be accusing Mr Fletcher of 'grooming' or lying to sponsors and donors about 'gifting' homes to poor families.
Your lies will catch up with you, Scott, and whilst you think you are invulnerable I doubt very much that you are. Time will tell.
Between 2013 and 2014, the number of "top donors" dropped from 5 to 3. While these 3 donors gave more money than the previous 5. They were a much larger percentage of the overall revenue. Leads me to be leave that the number and amount of small donors are both DECREASING! Easy to prove from the tax returns.
DeleteAs Neeson is forced to tell the truth of his scams, this will continue to decline.
DeleteSo then these two Team Neeson posts (Anonymous 6:22 and 6:24 who are actually the same idiot), you are advocating that defrauding donors and renting to the impoverished is a good thing? I can see your language demonstrates what we are dealing with here in your NGO community.
ReplyDeleteCambodian charities are wealth creation schemes for many western "entrepreneurs"........it's appalling
ReplyDeleteDear Scott Neeson
ReplyDeleteYou should read this article by Lindsay Murdoch and take note:
Phnom Penh: Tara Winkler, a former NSW Young Australian of the Year, says it is "highly unethical to expose vulnerable children to serious risks in order to engage donors and raise funds".
Ms Winkler says potential abusers are not being vetted among a high volume of visitors to Cambodia's 600 orphanages and children's residential care centres who are allowed to physically interact with children in intimate ways, such as playing games and hugging.
"Even though the majority of people who want to visit centres are good people who only want to help, if they are allowed in to provide love and affection, then the same access is provided to potential predators and sex tourists," she said.
Fairfax Media has reported that strangers can walk uninvited off the street into a Phnom Penh orphanage, where they are greeted in bedrooms with children trained to engage visitors and encourage them to donate money.
A record 47,900 children are living in orphanages and residential care centres in Cambodia, despite research showing that the institutions scar their emotional and personal development through seemingly endless broken relationships, and that they should be living with their families in their own communities.
Seventy-two per cent of children in Cambodia's orphanages and children's centres have at least one parent.
In a blunt message to Australians who are believed to be the largest supporters of Cambodia's orphanages, Ms Winkler said "orphan tourism" violates a child's right to privacy.
"You wouldn't visit a group home for vulnerable children when on holiday in Australia, the UK or the USA, so why do it in countries like Cambodia?" she asked.
Ms Winkler, who established the Cambodian Children's Trust in 2007 after rescuing 14 children from a corrupt and abusive orphanage in Cambodia's Battambang province, said children should not even be in orphanages and residential centres, even those operated "with the best intentions at heart".
"They are children from poor families who have been entrusted into the care of the orphanages by their families in the misguided hope that it will lead to a path out of poverty to a better life," she said.
One Australian charity that cares for what it calls 400 at-risk and disadvantaged Cambodian children campaigns to raise more than $4 million each year.
Ms Winkler said many orphanages in developing countries are corrupt and run as profitable businesses that intentionally keep children in poverty to shock and elicit sympathy from foreigners, who are then moved to donate.
"I fell for this trap myself when I first arrived in Cambodia in 2005," Ms Winkler said.
"These orphanages generate donations which are then embezzled by corrupt orphanage staff," she said. "Even goods that are donated to the children, such as rice and toys, will often be resold after the donors have left."
Ms Winkler said she had made her own mistakes by visiting and volunteering to work in orphanages and had even set one up herself.
She said people wanting to help should support organisations working to keep families together and reintegrate children out of orphanages back to their families.
"This issue has become an international crisis in which 8 million children around the world are living in institutions despite the fact that more than 80 per cent of them are not orphans," she said.
About 30 per cent of the reports of sexual abuse made to the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse have been made by people who were abused in orphanages.
Most of Australia's orphanages closed decades ago.
Lindsay Murdoch’s article can be found at: http://www.smh.com.au/world/dont-fall-into-cambodias-orphanage-trap-australians-told-20151222-glt8ae#ixzz3vapznj00
James, you must be under the misguided impression that Scott Neeson cares about and wants to help children. Please take a look at the makeup of his board and you will see, it is ALL about the money!
DeleteIts ok for Winkler to come out now and jump on the bandwagon criticising organisations when she has secured 100's of 1000's of $$ from donors whilst she was selling the care for kids theme. She is full of shit and I can guarantee that if the theme changed tomorrow, she would be chasing what best secures donor $$'s.
DeleteOnce again Ricketson you are picking and choosing media articles that best suit you interests. Give it up - your drivel has become so boring its laughable.
Yes Anonymous 11:26, your drivel is so boring it is laughable! Where are your articles advocating taking children from their families??
Delete"AnonymousDecember 27, 2015 at 11:26 PM Its ok for Winkler to come out now and jump on the bandwagon criticising organisations when she has secured 100's of 1000's of $$ from donors whilst she was selling the care for kids theme. She is full of shit and I can guarantee that if the theme changed tomorrow, she would be chasing what best secures donor $$'s."
DeleteLooks like you've got them running in circles now James. They are actually defending orphanage tourism and the exploitation of children for no other reason than to contradict you.
Actually maybe they see an end to the exploitation of children by foreign NGOs in Cambodia as a threat to their pocket book.
Either way you have forced them to show their true colours. You are having an impact.
Dear Anonymous 11.26
ReplyDeleteIf you can recommend some articles that recommend the removal of children from their families I will happily, in the interests of debate and discussion, publish them here on my blog. Please send me the links or you could, if you chose, publish them yourself.
As for chasing dollars, what else is Neeson's Workd Housing scam but a chase after dollars - treating well-meaning donors and sponsors as suckers and lying to them by saying houses are gifted to families.
Where did Anonymous 5:52 who claimed a growing donor base go?
ReplyDeleteWhere did Anonymous 11:26 go with his articles on the benefits of removing children from families?
You see James, their unsubstantiated claims are not intended to be factual, only intended to be disruptive.
oops - looks like you dropped your dummy on the ground anon 6.59. Would you like a tissue?
DeleteSpeaking of dummies Anonymous 9:41, you certainly qualify. Feeling badly for Team Neeson with you on board, they are at a huge disadvantage!
Deletehahah you fuckwit. I can't see any disadvantage our end. Business is great! How is school teaching going?
DeleteAnonymous 10:33, great vocabulary! Are you a product of Neeson's education system? I'm sure he's proud of you.
DeleteWhy does self appointed saint Scott Neeson need 4 body guards. If he is doing such good work who is he guarding himself from?
DeleteThere is a reason why the Cambodian Government will never stop CCF and Neeson from operating - if they do then the government will have to provide social support for poor people. CCF is doing the governments work. Imagine if all the NGO's and UN groups suddenly closed up shop tomorrow - Cambodia would have one massive social issue and 10000's of poor people struggling to get a feed.
ReplyDeleteAnother way of putting this is that the NGO community, in doing the work that the Cambodian government should be doing, is propping up a government that is now addicted to aid. Not a healthy state of affairs. Whilst there are undoubtedly some NGOs who do good work there are also many engaged in scams such as World Housing who take advantage of donors, sponsors and the poor people these donors and sponsors think they are helping. The NGO sector should police itself and let the Neeson's of the NGO world know that scams are not acceptable.
DeleteThe bigger problem is that the deck is stacked against these children brought up in institutional care. Cambodia will end up paying this debt for generations.
DeleteDear Anonymous 11.15
DeleteI hope, when true democracy comes to Cambodia, that lawyers will commence a class action suit against the Cambodian Children's Fund and other NGOs for the suffering caused to children removed from their families for no other reason that that it suited the NGO's business model.
"There is a reason why the Cambodian Government will never stop CCF and Neeson from operating - if they do then the government will have to provide social support for poor people. CCF is doing the governments work. Imagine if all the NGO's and UN groups suddenly closed up shop tomorrow - Cambodia would have one massive social issue and 10000's of poor people struggling to get a feed."
DeleteVery good point, but there are two big problems with this rationale: 1) in recent years it has been demonstrated repeatedly that the institutionalization of children in Cambodia is self-perpetuating, and is actually creating 'orphans', breaking up families and is ultimately damaging to the children; 2) As James rightly says, in so far as the practice does actually provide the service you claim it does, it is helping to prop up the Cambodian government and creating a situation in which they will never have the incentive to provide proper social services. It is perpetuating, entrenching and enlarging the problem, not alliviating it.
I see that those feral fucktards at Khmer440 didn't write anything to celebrate that cunt Peter Hogans death 1 year ago. Fucking hyenas - great mates with him when he was running that shit blog and then a second after he is dead, which was no loss to society, they drop him like a dirty rag. I suggest the same will happen here once Ricketson gets arrested which I hear is going to happen soon - you won't see any of his so called supporters coming out to support him, but you will see a few guys having a nice cold beer.
ReplyDeleteFollowers of Khmer440 such as this guy, who come here to report on what's going on over at 440 and call Khmer440 followers names like feral fucktards, are actually rather funny. I wonder if they get the joke they are making of themselves. And KIR, for all his faults, was a master of name calling. 'Feral fucktards' is rank amateur compared to what KIR could come up with at the drop of a hat. Twatflannel.
DeleteDear Scott Neeson (aka Anonymous 11.03)
ReplyDeleteI have been hearing for a year now that I am just about to be arrested or to suffer some other form of grievous bodily harm. You need to put up or shut up, Scott. Yes, I am sure you could arrange to have me arrested, just as you played a major role in having David Fletcher arrested and sentenced to 10 year sin jail. Go for it, Scott. Between you and Samleang Seila I am sure you can cook up some charge and 'arrange' for a court case to be held without my being aware of it until some journalist calls me up to ask me why I did not appear in court. Such a play would, I think, backfire on you - drawing much more attention to the is blog, and hence your scams, than is the case at present. Your call, Scott.
Defamation, Rickets. You've been defaming Neeson for a year now and he's had enough. Your goose is cooked.
DeleteIs it defamation to call Neeson a liar, or is that something that everyone can agree on?
DeleteDear Anonymous 1.34
DeleteYes, he is a dreadful liar. And I mean 'dreadful' in both meanings of the word. He is not very good at it. He has really shot himself in the foot by admitting that the houses are 'rented' and not 'gifted' - thereby admitting that he has been lying this past 3 years about World Housing.
Hopefully the owner of the land on which the houses are being erected (now a very rick person) will be revealed soon and the whole scam will collapse.
I take my hat of to people like Ricketson who's working to expose the truth. Rest assured James there are plenty of people who support your work.
DeleteDear Scot Neeson (aka Anonymous 11.33)
ReplyDeleteI do hope that you will arrange for me to be invited to the court proceedings, even if the verdict has already been arranged in advance. The same goes for the media. Or do you plan on this being an in camera (secret) trial?
Lets see how brave you are when you are in a Cambodian jail cell Ricketson. One things for sure - none of your coward keyboard warrior friends will turn up to prison to help you or protest on your behalf.
DeleteHow do you know this Anonymous 6:18? First of all, Neeson will never sue Ricketson, though he may hate him. But how do you know Rickson's friends won't support him? You have made this statement many times, but you are all bla bla bla and know nothing!
DeleteDear Scott (aka Anonymous 6.18)
DeleteYou and your Team Neeson trolls have been issuing thinly veiled (and not so thinly veiled) threats this past year. Time to put up or shut up.
I doubt very much that you would have the nerve to sue me for defamation in Australia. The media would be present in court and both you and CCF would come under the kind of scrutiny you do not want.
No, if you wish to go down this path you will choose the Cambodian legal system and hope that you can control both the process and the outcome. And, of course, with your money and the power it gives you, you can.
The media in Cambodia could be a problem also, so you will need to arrange that any trial that takes place is not open to the media or the public. I am sure this can be arranged, just as it was with David Fletcher.
Alternatively, if you wish to sue me in Cambodia the legal process that needs to be followed is clearly laid out in the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure. Read it, Scott. Yes, it can be circumvented and most often is but perhaps, if you wish to go after me, you will be advised (by the CCF board, at least) to do it cleanly; in accordance with Cambodian law.
cheers
James
How does the Australian government sit back and allow Australian tax funded dollars to support charities that openly remove children from their poor families? Charities that employ convicted criminals. Institutional care poor kids has not operated in Australia for decades . Wake up charity world see what is happening here. Help the families, not Neeson’s bank balance.
ReplyDeleteHow is that your are working in cambodia anon 2.49 when you have no work permit?
DeleteWait for it . Neeson will read the latest Ricketson blog and knee jerk himself onto Scott Neeson Facebook fan page along with a paid promotion. There’ll be a pic of Neeson and someone's child. He’ll present himself as having saved another child. “I found this child while out shopping for kids around the old dump . Warm fuzzy story . “Please share. Please give.” All while sitting on the deck of a million dollar yacht.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the loud mouth that said the CCF donor base was growing?
ReplyDeleteIs it defamation to say that Neeson has taken over 700 children from their families or that McCabe is a convicted felon who sole drugs at gunpoint and sold methamphetamines and heroin?
ReplyDeletePeople that work for Neeson (not just McCabe and Lemon), who hide the truth, deceive donors, take children from their families, prevent a child's right to have a family, lure volunteers, are complicit in these scams also!
ReplyDeleteBeware, you could be part of any legal action also!
That's right, same as people following orders from Pol Pot, still liable!
DeleteHow nice to have a break from the Team Neeson stupidity!! Happy New Year!!
ReplyDeleteHow nice to have a break from Rickets bullshit
DeleteLooking forward to your next blog James. Thanks for exposing these crooks and liars!!
DeleteDoesn't look like the crooks and liars are having much fun with this!!
DeleteMr Ricketson!
ReplyDeleteDo you know if there's any truth in the rumour that World Housing will have completed 400 homes in Cambodia by the end of Jan 2016?
387 complete at this moment I have heard!