-Caveat Lector- Over the past coupla weeks, you've delved into the plight of the families affected by the events of 9/11/01 and how they've not been adequately serviced by charities that raised funds for their benefit.
The bragging about the nagging about shagging the ragged do-gooders is all well and good. Monies donated for a specific cause should indeed go to that cause. There is one thing amiss, though, and that is educating the donating public on what their expectations should be when doing their part to aid others in need. As a long-time donor to charities, I came to the realisation early on that there were administrative costs associated with running a charity. Personnel, infrastructure, utilities, and the like all cost money and depending upon how the it is set up, these costs will vary from charity to charity. The one with the lowest associated costs is not necessarily the best; nor is the one with the highest. Herein lies the problem with expectations; donors have to do research on who is doing what with their money. The thing I object to in your broadcast journalism content provision is the implied condition these families are in. The impression is that without the aid of the charities, these people would be almost out on the street. These families include not only the survivors of the ones lost in the NYC WTC (other cities have WTCs), but the firefighters and police persons and so on. We all know that many of those lost were civil servants who have pension plans and insurance policies. Many probably had investments and savings as well. It tugged at the heartstrings to listen to that poor woman whose husband worked at Cantor/Fitzgerald who was living from paycheck to paycheck; tugged until I realised that C/F had something to do with financial management. Hmmm ... I am afraid that you have been attempting to engage your viewing public in the murk resulting from your "no-spin zone" (the truth filters may be clogged). We, of course, do not have any right to pry into the personal financial affairs of those who would qualify for the various funds. However, we need not be blind to all of the programs in place that are there for their benefit and assistance. Just how much hand-wringing is for show and just how many people are close to being forced out on the street? Is there a reality check? One who is uncaring might suggest that "a lack of planning on their part doesn't represent an emergency on others' parts," planning including investments, savings, insurance and the like. But as you pointed out in your continuing diatribe against Jesse the Jackson, charities can be a scam. That begs the question as to how well some may be planning given all the resources available to them. Let's investigate ... leave the reflex hammers at the doctors' offices. A<>E<>R Red River of the North <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
