The right thing to do is to make a donation to help those poor buggers in Haiti.
But give it to who? The Red Cross so they can redecorate their grand offices? Pay for their new executive cars?
I'm sorry, they lost me a long time ago. Along with sending money to any 3rd world dictatorship that routinely syphons off all money sent to help the country.
Look at the fiasco that occurred in Burma after the cyclones left 2 million homeless in 2008.
The poor are still waiting for help. An increasingly suspicious & neurotic government turned back UN aid teams sent to deliver the supplies meant to rebuild the place. Food was left to rot on the docks rather than allow an opportunity for an anti-government political message to be spread.
Better those 5 star generals hold onto power than bother with the needs of their fellow countryman.
And the millions donated? I am sure the same generals appreciated the increase in their personal living standards.
And so it goes. Now we are expected to think that our money will directly benefit Haiti. All corrupt practices are stamped out so don't worry.
Sorry, we don't know who will benefit directly but you can be sure little will get through to those most desperately in need.
I see the charity quickly thrown together by Wyclef Jean has come under scrutiny for having no distribution plan, no strategy as to how the money will be spent. What exactly does he plan to do with it?
Surely this can't be another scheme designed to cash in on the good motives of those in the affluent west? I would like to think no but where is the condemnation for all the previous money drives for past catastrophes where the money never arrived?
I know cynicism at a time when so many people are in need may not sound charitable but if someone could show me how my money could help feed a hungry family or put a roof over their heads, I would be first in line.
But give it to who? The Red Cross so they can redecorate their grand offices? Pay for their new executive cars?
I'm sorry, they lost me a long time ago. Along with sending money to any 3rd world dictatorship that routinely syphons off all money sent to help the country.
Look at the fiasco that occurred in Burma after the cyclones left 2 million homeless in 2008.
The poor are still waiting for help. An increasingly suspicious & neurotic government turned back UN aid teams sent to deliver the supplies meant to rebuild the place. Food was left to rot on the docks rather than allow an opportunity for an anti-government political message to be spread.
Better those 5 star generals hold onto power than bother with the needs of their fellow countryman.
And the millions donated? I am sure the same generals appreciated the increase in their personal living standards.
And so it goes. Now we are expected to think that our money will directly benefit Haiti. All corrupt practices are stamped out so don't worry.
Sorry, we don't know who will benefit directly but you can be sure little will get through to those most desperately in need.
I see the charity quickly thrown together by Wyclef Jean has come under scrutiny for having no distribution plan, no strategy as to how the money will be spent. What exactly does he plan to do with it?
Surely this can't be another scheme designed to cash in on the good motives of those in the affluent west? I would like to think no but where is the condemnation for all the previous money drives for past catastrophes where the money never arrived?
I know cynicism at a time when so many people are in need may not sound charitable but if someone could show me how my money could help feed a hungry family or put a roof over their heads, I would be first in line.
Comment