Off Topic Immigrants drowning

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
John Cardew said:
Probably because of all the borders being blocked off...Perhaps the world just hasn't turned me as cynical as it has you yet. Saying you are "sick" of the adverts about little children who walk 5 miles for a sip of dirty water tells me that any remaining human emotion or sympathy left you a long time ago.
Click to expand...
because all the borders are blocked off ,have you seen the size of africa ? we have been giving these countries money for years and years digging wells for years and years and people give money to these countries for years and years, of course all of the money goes to the needy,i mean pakistan didnt give any of the uk's over seas aid to the taliban for arms did they ,oh sorry correction required
 
Last edited:
grandpops said:
I object to organisations (whose executives cream off massive salaries) trying to send me on a guilt trip while the aid (to which I already contribute) is creamed off by the corrupt leaders.

The problem is within the countries the people are trying to get away from, not the EU.
Click to expand...
There are many people who don't give though who might after seeing these adverts. I don't care if some executive somewhere is creaming a big bonus for himself, if it saves a few extra lives.
 
pauljohnhutch said:
because all the borders are blocked off ,have you seen the size of africa ? we have been giving these countries money for years and years digging wells for years and years and people give money to these countries for years and years, of course all of the money goes to the needy,i mean pakistan didnt give any of the uk's over seas aid to the taliban for arms did they ,oh sorry correction required
Click to expand...
You're quite correct but going off on a totally different tangent now...
 
pauljohnhutch said:
you were putting it across that i was being hard hearted i probably am, but at the same time im sick and tired of being asked time and again to give to the same causes
Click to expand...
Sorry I may have been a bit unfair before, but how are those adverts any more annoying than the ones on every single ad break trying to persuade you to buy Loreal's latest product? A cause that saves children's lives will always be far more worthy than any consumerist **** in my eyes.
 
John Cardew said:
Sorry I may have been a bit unfair before, but how are those adverts any more annoying than the ones on every single ad break trying to persuade you to buy Loreal's latest product? A cause that saves children's lives will always be far more worthy than any consumerist **** in my eyes.
Click to expand...


does not charity begin at home?
 
John Cardew said:
Of course not, but then you'd rather more kids died and the executive at the top didn't get a big bonus. Does that seem right to you?
Click to expand...

That`s a ridiculous thing to say. I find that objectionable and insulting.

The executives helping themselves to donations means those donations are not going where they were intended. Why can you not see that?
 
whats stopping them going to dubai, saudi arabia, quatar,jordan egypt,turkey, they even speak the same language and are muslim, cos they wont get any dole and child allowance and go top of the housing list. if the ****ers can pay thousands to people smugglers, they are economic migrants who are looking for a welfare state to care for them. and all the pics i saw were of Africans not syrians, god help us if some of these fukkers have ebola
 
commachio1 said:
does not charity begin at home?
Click to expand...
Yes, to an extent. We're all humans at the end of the day.
grandpops said:
That`s a ridiculous thing to say. I find that objectionable and insulting.

The executives helping themselves to donations means those donations are not going where they were intended. Why can you not see that?
Click to expand...
Apologies for any offence, not intended. I won't deny that executives of charities take big bonuses. But they still do send a lot of aid to those who are suffering. Hey, if only 50p of my 2 quid donation finds it's way to where I intended, that's still better than not making the donation at all, imo.
 
grandpops said:
That`s a ridiculous thing to say. I find that objectionable and insulting.

The executives helping themselves to donations means those donations are not going where they were intended. Why can you not see that?
Click to expand...


Cos he's a blinkered uni kid, who thinks he knows everything. See back to a **** loads of my posts about conscription...
 
John Cardew said:
Yes, to an extent. We're all humans at the end of the day.

Apologies for any offence, not intended. I won't deny that executives of charities take big bonuses. But they still do send a lot of aid to those who are suffering. Hey, if only 50p of my 2 quid donation finds it's way to where I intended, that's still better than not making the donation at all, imo.
Click to expand...

Apology accepted <ok>

If you donate £2 to help, why is it acceptable for 50p to go where you intended and £1.50 to the directors lavish lifestyle?
 
grandpops said:
Apology accepted <ok>

If you donate £2 to help, why is it acceptable for 50p to go where you intended and £1.50 to the directors lavish lifestyle?
Click to expand...
I think you've misunderstood me, for clarification, I in no way think it is acceptable that charity executives scoop large portions of donations. Show me a charity that has no such issue and I will donate my money to them. All I'm saying is, in a choice between helping no one, and helping both a greedy **** and a starving child, I'd rather pick the latter option.
 
John Cardew said:
I think you've misunderstood me, for clarification, I in no way think it is acceptable that charity executives scoop large portions of donations. Show me a charity that has no such issue and I will donate my money to them. All I'm saying is, in a choice between helping no one, and helping both a greedy **** and a starving child, I'd rather pick the latter option.
Click to expand...

Good answer. <ok>
 
  • Like
Reactions: John Cardew
John Cardew said:
I think you've misunderstood me, for clarification, I in no way think it is acceptable that charity executives scoop large portions of donations. Show me a charity that has no such issue and I will donate my money to them. All I'm saying is, in a choice between helping no one, and helping both a greedy **** and a starving child, I'd rather pick the latter option.
Click to expand...


So a choice of some boat person on the look out for welfare, or an English kid in need?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back