On Wednesday 24 December 2008 18:43, Phil Nash wrote: > Geoffrey Plourde wrote: > >> Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a > >> memorial project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in his > >> concerns about the motives behind this proposal. > > I'm in some agreement here because my experience of UK charity law is that > it is not generally permitted to have a "political" purpose, and certainly > taking such a strong line on any "repression", "genocide" etc, would appear > to be anathema to a charitable objective. It's OK, I suppose, if the United > Nations has used such terminology, but I don't think we should be seen to > be taking partisan sides in political disputes, because that dilutes the > educational charitable status of the Foundation. It's entirely a different > issue to support humanitarian aid to the victims, however, and I am open to > the idea that such memorial projects might have that idea as a focus. > However, the way it's been put forward seems to militate against that > construction. >
I fail to see how simply presenting a list of peoples' names and telling their stories constitutes "taking partisan sides in political disputes." It's educating people about the impact of these events, plain and simple. -- Kurt Weber http://blog.kurtweber.us <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
