American Red Cross: A Corporate Fleecing Operation ... ???

[dipmicro]

Someone forwarded me this article, it has caught me by surprise and I am quite angry if this is true:

http://www.infowars.com/american-red-cross-a-corporate-fleecing-operation-exploiting-natural-disaste...

Quoting:

... striking examples of Red Cross fraud: in the wake of the “disastrous San Francisco earthquake in 1989, the Red Cross donated only $10 million of the $50 million that had been raised, and kept the rest ...

... resulted in a fake relief effort during Hurricane Isaac that was “worse than the storm,” according to Jim Dunham, a truck driver. Dunham said Red Cross trucks were dispatched “just to be seen” and were “sent way down on the Gulf with nothing to give.

...

The lesson learned from the Red Cross scam is that only small organizations and local, non-corporate charities are capable of providing honest humanitarian assistance following natural disasters. Large centralized organizations dominated by government, corporations and banks are not interested in helping people. On the contrary, they are designed to loot the public ...

[nuvistors]

The results are about the same for any large scale  "charitable"  organization.

Charity starts at home and the fund raising company and the CEO  gets the largest portion.

A few years ago their was an article about MADD canada and the amount used for the actual cause was even less than 20%.   The professioanl beggars  (fundraisinf company)  kept about 80% of the donations and the CEO and staff got a large portion of the remainder.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

I've read many articles like this about different groups and it's hard to know what to believe and if all the information is there. So what I started to do long ago, is donate to none of them and instead pick local groups who I am familiar with and have information that I can verify to donate to instead. 

Lately there have been ads on TV asking people to donate to an association to help prevent Ebola. Who are they, where does the money go, how much are the organizers taking home in wages etc etc etc .......no one knows.

There was a time people did good things from the heart and then at some point someone said "we can make a living at this and a good living at that" and then it ceased to be from the heart and more towards the bank accounts.

Neither is it big organizations like the Red Cross. There are donation boxes in our area (and probably others) that look like charity boxes but in truth the items are collected by a company that is privately owned and the items end up in their stores in Toronto. Great business when you think about it, especially when your stock is given to you free.   

[owlgebra]

Wait a minute, nevermind the story, which might actually be accurate anyway, but why source the infowars site? I mean, that's Alex Jones's thing yes? The talk radio guy who entertains his listeners with all manner of weird and wacky (and sometimes accurate, I suppose, once in a while) conspiracy theories?

[dipmicro]

---

@owlgebra wrote:
Wait a minute, nevermind the story, which might actually be accurate anyway, but why source the infowars site? I mean, that's Alex Jones's thing yes? The talk radio guy who entertains his listeners with all manner of weird and wacky (and sometimes accurate, I suppose, once in a while) conspiracy theories?

---

Some of Alex Jones articles are "opinions", especially his own opinions I find far-fetched, but some articles are good investigative journalism. Senator Ron Paul contributes to Alex Jones's sites, also some of intelligence community. Article about Red Cross if untrue would be libel, but Red Cross is not launching, that can only mean they prefer this to be on rather obscure website than going to court, where all kinds of dirt could be revealed and become mainstream news.

Don't discard info "because Alex Jones". Yes, he is conspiracy nutcase, but has some good sources. I occasionally skim through his articles, some subjects he likes to report on entirely skip, others just start reading and quit after 2-3 sentences, but 1 out of 5 is good. I don't go to his website very often but this particular one was brought to my attention by someone.

[pierrelebel]

The problem is global, not exclusively in the USA.

We all remember the tsunami in Sri Lanka nearly ten years ago (December 2004),  Canadians were very generous and quickly donated $360 millions (including partial matching share from the government) to the Canadian Red Cross.

Several years later, the Canadian Red Cross was still sitting with $200 million (more than half) in its bank account.

We have long stopped giving any money to that organization after checking their high level of expenses and salaries/benefits.

[femmefan1946]

When I get this sort of message on the interwebs, my first move is here:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/charities.asp

The headline on this specific topic is "Mostly outdated and inaccurate".

Internet chatter about salaries and disbursements for several charities are reproduced.

Specifically for the American Red Cross the story reads:

American Red Cross: The information presented above is outdated (as of October 2010), as Marsha J. Evans resigned her position as CEO of the American Red Cross in 2005. The current President and CEO of the American Red Cross (since 2008) is Gail J. McGovern, whose total yearly compensation for 2010 was about $1,037,000 (considerably higher than the $651,957 figure mentioned above) and for 2011 was about $561,000. Charity Navigator and Forbes both rate this organization's efficiency at 92%, much higher than the 39% figure claimed in the e-mail.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/charities.asp#zOqCUZE5HfMwT0kR.99

Apparently the CEO salary varies from year to year, although I don't understand on what basis.

the Red Cross donated only $10 million of the $50 million that had been raised, and kept the rest ...

"Kept"? It would be a responsible act to spend the money that was not needed for Hurricane Isaac relief (in a wealthy, insured, first world situation) and use it when it is needed, even if the donors did not consider it.

This reminds me of people who get annoyed that their donations of unwanted household goods to Sally Ann or Goodwill are not given directly to 'the poor', but are sold. Gosh, people, money is more useful if what is needed is tables and all your donations are teapots!