Charities funding terrorism

Author
Discussion

SKP555

Original Poster:

1,114 posts

125 months

Sunday 15th January 2017
quotequote all
When they're not having it off with the people they're helping, anyway.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38419488

Broader point though, just how many charities are actually worthwhile?

As a rule I don't give to charities. I occasionally make an exception for the RNLI or a museum but in general it seems they're bad news.

Motorrad

6,811 posts

186 months

Sunday 15th January 2017
quotequote all
My main bone of contention with many charities is the amount of money that actually goes to the cause in question.

I also dislike the aggressive methods used by some, including the use of chuggers and 'sap lists' where they try to squeeze the last drop out of people they've known to be generous in the past.

Here's a link from everyone's favourite hackrag which I'm sure has come up before.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3357458/On...


Despite this I try to give directly to local charities where I can be sure the money will actually go to help people rather than pay for director's salaries and 'fact finding' missions to resort destinations.

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

122 months

Sunday 15th January 2017
quotequote all
Not only do a small number of charities fund terrorism but they also get money from the taxpayer through the gift aid scheme.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-i...

SKP555

Original Poster:

1,114 posts

125 months

Sunday 15th January 2017
quotequote all
True. Though if funding al Quaeda is their main activity I would probably rather they were all earning footballer money here.

rscott

14,690 posts

190 months

Sunday 15th January 2017
quotequote all
Nothing new - NORAID were funding terrorism years ago..

s2kjock

1,677 posts

146 months

Sunday 15th January 2017
quotequote all
The Charity regulators don't have the resources to supervise and monitor all charities unfortunately. It doesn't help that in England and Wales you don't have to submit accounts for very small charities nor that they recently increased the income threshold over which you need an audit from £500k to £1m.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
Motorrad said:
My main bone of contention with many charities is the amount of money that actually goes to the cause in question.

I also dislike the aggressive methods used by some, including the use of chuggers and 'sap lists' where they try to squeeze the last drop out of people they've known to be generous in the past.

Here's a link from everyone's favourite hackrag which I'm sure has come up before.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3357458/On...


Despite this I try to give directly to local charities where I can be sure the money will actually go to help people rather than pay for director's salaries and 'fact finding' missions to resort destinations.
Chuggers are pure scum. I am always surprised that when I visit Blackpool they are allowed to chug in such quantity. Some town really clamp down on them others seem to go soft.

Murph7355

37,651 posts

255 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
s2kjock said:
The Charity regulators don't have the resources to supervise and monitor all charities unfortunately. It doesn't help that in England and Wales you don't have to submit accounts for very small charities nor that they recently increased the income threshold over which you need an audit from £500k to £1m.
Perhaps the number of charities being allowed ought to be brought under control then, such that they can be effectively regulated?

The audit hike seems a little silly to me. Presumably it was the charity expected to pay it? Yes, it reduces the amount going to the charity. But at least there's a bit more surety it's all legit.

TTwiggy

11,500 posts

203 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
rscott said:
Nothing new - NORAID were funding terrorism years ago..
Indeed. But that doesn't fit the narrative du jour quite so well...

Silver Smudger

3,292 posts

166 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
Read the article again. All of you.

This is about two individuals hiding their cash smuggling within a legitimate aid convoy.

bbc said:
The humanitarian mission involved 100 vehicles including ambulances and large lorries packed with supplies. There was no suggestion in the trial that the convoy's organisers knew of the pair's plans.

TLandCruiser

2,788 posts

197 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
Air ambulance and rnli are the only two I will donate too when I see the collection pot

Hosenbugler

1,854 posts

101 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
I usually support PDSA , RBL , RNLI and at Christmas, the good old Sally Army.

Blair did big charities no favours at all by polliticising them, some , being no more "charities" than I'm an Armadillo.

Pints

18,444 posts

193 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
Makes me think of this rant from Steve Hughes.

xjay1337

15,966 posts

117 months

Monday 16th January 2017
quotequote all
There is a website where you can actually see how much money as a % goes on what.
Think it's Charity Commision.gov or something like that.