Red Cross: How We Spent Sandy Money Is A "Trade Secret"

a reply to: Britguy

God forbid any of their competitor do-gooder charities find out that they spent money on helping people. The whole system would collapse.

Unless of course it DIDN'T go to helping people...

They dont wont you to know that the money (contracts)
that Line the pockets of just the right people.
and Not the one who will give them value for money.
or best deal. its all about keeping the rich, well rich.

The impression I've had over the last couple of years is that Cancer Research UK is just some kind of front scam to fund big pharma's gene patent enterprise. I honestly believe gene patents will be the end of us. What's the point in donating publicly when any real advancement is withheld and sold back to you at extortionate rates by profiteering mega-companies? If only the wealthy can afford the proper treatments (let's face it - the mainstream treatments are ineffective at best), funded by the general public, are we not funding our own eugenics program? How is it we can pay to develop new methods and find new genes and devise new tests and then have those discoveries hijacked by a company, regulated and extorted to the point it can either no longer be studied or no longer be afforded? The only conclusion I can come to is that the poor are supposed to die. They're exploiting our conscience and our wallet to facilitate that.

a reply to: Britguy

I looked into this charity thing years ago, can't remember the exact timeframe, but probably 15 years or so ago.

I was specifically looking at Cancer charities. I was thinking along the lines you are, wondering just how much money is given to cancer charities annually, and the amounts, for cancer charities at least, is staggering big.

Back then it was around £50 - £60 Billion worldwide...every year. And that was just donations, not pharma drugs sales, profit from medical procedures and treatments, but just charity donations!

The employment of people working in the 'cancer field' runs into the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of employees...people who the governments around the world would not want to be out of a job and not paying taxes.

I couldn't believe such sums of money were being sunk into this and the results of all of this massively expensive 'research' were so...meagre and sparce.

And it became clear. With such massive amounts of money coming into the 'cancer industry' (because that is exactly what we're talking about - an very profitable industry), with such huge numbers of people employed within that industry...any cure for cancer (or alternative and simple or cheap cure discovered) will not be good for 'the industry'.

I haven't given money to a cancer charity for around 15 years...and that is not a coincidence!
As far as this rubbish about secrecy from the red cross 'industry'...the way forwards is simple...publish open accounts showing exactly where the donations go, where they are spent and what investments are made, how much chief executives and other management staff are neing paid for their 'charity work' or people should keep they money out of your hands.

Who the hell do the red cross think they're kidding?

Trade secret indeed!

Speaking only of UK charities.

UK charities are covered by the Charities Act 1993, extended by the Charities Act 2008 and further extended by the Charities Act of 2011, are required to have their yearly accounts audited in full by registered chartered accountants. Those audited accounts are to be made available to the tax office, charity trustees, the government cabinet office, and the charities commission. This report goes into a document known as the Trustees Annual Report.

The amount of detail published in the TAR is dependant on the size of the charity. After all, a charity the size of Cancer Research UK, for example, could not possibly be expected to document every single receipt and invoice in a document aimed at its non-accounting trustees, but a smaller charity could do just that.

Most charities make this TAR document available for public viewing. They are not required by law to do so, but most do. In fact, I was able to locate the published TAR's for every UK charity I looked up, including the one named by a previous poster, Cancer Research UK, so he is incorrect in that they don't publish their accounts.

Since a previous poster singled out Cancer Research UK, here's a direct link to their TAR.
Cancer Research UK TAR

Also, took 2 seconds with Google, the British Red Cross TAR.
British Red Cross TAR

In conclusion, UK charities do publish their accounts. They are required to by law. I suspect they are also required to publish the full accounts somewhere or on request, and not just the overviews in those TAR documents. Although such accounts would be documents in order of several Megabytes or possibly even Gigabytes, so are probably only available on request.

I see many people referring to the Red Cross and other organizations as "charity organizations", but are they? Or that's just the idea people get?

Also, organizations like the Red Cross are independent, with each country's organization being an individual organization, with their own statutes, like BMorris pointed above.

I suggest people look at their own country's Red Cross organization (or whatever "charity" they want) and look for their legal status. Here, for example, is the Congressional Charter of The American National Red Cross, which says that "the corporation shall submit a report to the Secretary of Defense on the activities of the corporation during such fiscal year, including a complete, itemized report of all receipts and expenditures." and that "The Secretary shall audit the report and submit a copy of the audited report to Congress."

In Portugal, the Portuguese Red Cross is considered (by decree 281/2007) a "humanitarian, non-governmental", "non-profit" institution. The Ministry of Defence is the one responsible for the auditing of the Portuguese Red Cross accounts.

Here this talks about the red cross turning the 9/11 funds into a wartime fund.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Reminds me of my last/final incident with The Salvation Army. I was moving and needed to get rid of a lot of stuff, including a $7,000.00 Baldwin piano. I had lots of crystal, Wedgewood China, all sorts of perfectly good things in excellent condition.

When the truck got there, the main man turned his nose up at my donations and preceded to walk thru my house pointing out 'stuff' he DID want.

Needleess to say I had to kick most of it to the curb - including the piano.

Did you know lots of those 'bell ringers' you see at Christmas are really 'hired hands'?

Did you know the Salvation Army [in some states] is/has been hired as 'probation officers' for counties and get to collect fees from those individuals? If they don't get their fees they can send the individual back to jail.

Sad but true...

a reply to: Britguy

I think that it is pretty much a given that if an organization feels they cannot be transparent then they have something to hide.

If that something to hide is a genuine "trade secret" then I can understand why a for-profit company would not want to share certain information.

But dayum! a non-profit company refusing to share how they spent money given to them to aid in a crisis situation is unacceptable. There are no trade secrets a non-profit organization should have. Period!

If they cannot be open and transparent then screw them and the donation they ask for. Might as well give it to the supposedly homeless guy standing at the corner asking for money.

a reply to: Britguy

Why would anyone ever give a dime to the Red CROOKS? They still haven't accounted for the almost 1 BILLION dollars they collected after Katrina. And probably a similar amount after Hurricane Sandy.

a reply to: LeslieD

What is sad about the bell ringers being hired help?? I've done that bell ringing a couple seasons when I was a lot younger and they recruit first from their own shelter population. They give the most needy, most readily available to offer it to, the most likely to benefit from those paychecks. It's one of the reasons I definitely do look at the Salvation Army a bit apart from the rest. I've had personal contact with them enough, and never felt like I was in a corporate business. I've NEVER been in a Red Cross office that didn't feel like a quasi-government bureaucracy.

Several years ago, there was a fire in the apartment building where my SIL lived. The second group on the scene was the Red CROOKS! They were there to SELL coffee and doughnuts.
a reply to: EA006

a reply to: Britguy

Charities being business? OMG like parish the thought. WoW even giving out raised money for weapons programs, that's like totally surprising. Obviously the only cure now is to support the competitors of the red cross, maybe give all your hard earned moneys to the salvation army. Unless off carouse they to are less savory they they claim.

Maybe somebody should call them or knock on there office door and say "Um excuse me sirs, but would you all please direct me to the military wing of the salvation army" The forces of hell have ever feed on the good intentions of humankind. How does the saying goes, something about a road built on good intentions leading to somewhere hot and involving people with pointy horns carrying pitchforks. In this day and age like all the others that came before it, being good is just not a survival trait. Which is why most of them died and have gone extinct, and that gene has been wiped out in humankind.

And eventually the curtain will drop. And things will finally get more interesting.

I can't believe what i just read in the OP! I always knew alot of charities took most of the money for themselves but that is just ridiculous what a scam! I donate monthly to Amnesty because i like what they do and alot of it is for women, children and human rights but recently all they do is send me a bu ch of emails every day or 2 asking for more money, i did do my research before choosing them but i do often wonder if my money even makes a difference at all.. Sad sad world we live in we can't even donate to charities anymore because majority of them are just frauds and we can't trust them that really is sad, especially the red cross being one of the most major ones that people would donate too as say a 1 off tax time donation etc.

originally posted by: bbracken677
I think that it is pretty much a given that if an organization feels they cannot be transparent then they have something to hide.

I like that analogy and it fits perfectly in this case.

"Charities" are not always what they appear to be.

Many are in reality only masquerading as a charity.

This points directly to the same exact group of people who seem to have their fingers in every single pie on the planet.

The American Red Cross or the International Red Cross, like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or the World Bank, is an Illuminati-controlled front organization whose true purpose is completely opposite from their stated purpose.

The Red Cross is a disaster racket which is in the business of making money from disasters-especially from engineered disasters.

The history is clear, the Red Cross and other large so-called charities are in actual fact front group collection agencies for the military industrial complex. Many informed historians have even alleged that the Red Cross was used as a Skull and Bones cover to overthrow The Russian Czar and pave the way for the rise of the Bolsheviks.

www.illuminati-news.com...

The Red Cross (and other so-called large charities) are secret intelligence and money collection agencies of the British Intelligence Services since their inception. The Red Cross is very adept at stealing money and looting mail. They were caught innumerable times, but always allowed to get away.

After the San Francisco earthquake in 1989, the Red Cross passed on only $10 million of the $50 million that had been raised, and banked the rest. Similar donations after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 and the Red River flooding in 1997 were greedily withheld. Tsunami was a great money-making opportunity for the Red Cross. It called for donations in cash only.

Under the Liberty Fund, Red Cross collected $564 million in donations after 9/11. Months after the event, the Red Cross had distributed only $154 million. Then Red Cross President Dr. Bernadine Healy arrogantly stated, "The Liberty Fund is a war fund..." The rest of the money would be used in "war on terror". This meant the money was going towards bombing third world countries like Afghanistan and setting up surveillance cameras and expanding the police state in US cities, and not in helping the victims of disasters.

Red Cross is a hidden hand of Illuminati plan

Now, if you add human sacrifices to the cross, you get a bloody red cross and this is really where America got their Red Cross, which is a UN Lucifer Organization. The Red Cross of today, goes to battle fields because these people view war as a form of human sacrifice, which is why we are always at war now a days.

The Red Cross wasn’t formed by some woman, during the Civil War or even in 1863 as people may think but instead the Red Cross was founded by the Illuminati in Va State, as a form of ritual slaughter in effort to have Lucifer bless the land and of course Lucifer’s blessing are really a bloody curse.

hollywoodilluminati.com...

Before you write a check, sign a petition or declare your unwavering support for foundations or "nonprofit" organizations (NPOs), you may wish to investigate their agendas by using this step-by-step guide. Many large foundations and nonprofit organizations have destructive agendas in opposition to public interest or they receive funding from dubious sources and may be unduly influenced.

Is Your Favorite Charity Infiltrated?

Do Not Donate to Illuminati Charities

Dont they make a fortune out of blood donations ? get it for free then sell it on for something like $400.00 a litre ,which is why people get blood transfusions basically forced on them ,because its big money making racket and they dont give a damn if you catch some disease or bad reaction [including death] when your body rejects it ,and is why there is a push to Stop alternative treatments ,blood expanders etc which are safer ,because its a Big Money Spinner they dont want to lose it .I would not give one cent anymore to any charity, especially one run by a woman ,who are notoriously greedy ,dont give them a thing damn them

There is no charity in the US there never has been all they have done is used the 501c and media to brain wash America and all working class people to freely give them money in exchange for paper so that they can go out and get even more from others assets and life in essence the same as all other corporations with one bigg difference they lie cheat and steal as a for profit business from more people protected by the fed . .. or in other words the 501-c only tells others don't touch this it belongs to government... they do the same today with all public data sets by adding shopping carts to information that was paid for by your money stolen from you by the Numbers ..see the law for your self www.law.cornell.edu... reply to: Britguy

a reply to: BMorris
Ummmmm, huh?!

... Most charities make this TAR document available for public viewing. They are not required by law to do so, but most do.

In conclusion, UK charities do publish their accounts. They are required to by law.

So, which is it?
I ain't got no skin in the game. Literally. Just askin.

Dang. The silence. Was it something I said?