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
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.
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?
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
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.
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
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.
Cos he's a blinkered uni kid, who thinks he knows everything. See back to a **** loads of my posts about conscription...
Apology accepted 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?
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.
