Apple Partners With Imagine Dragons and One4 Project to Aid in Refugee Relief Efforts

[SeattleMoose]

First time in history that a Muslim invasion of Europe has not been met by the military. This whole thing is fishy....

 

[sim667]

I'm British and am appalled by the response we given - only room for 20,000 refugees? My home town is bigger than that and that was small!
I think just not donations will help though, there needs to be a collective of Countries to do something about this and now a sticked up response with nothing working as it should as everyone thinks "its not our problem!"...

Generic donations aren't really helping, especially in Calais.

If you want to know what to donate get in contact with Calaid, you can go over to volunteer with them then, I'm thinking about going in Novemeber but I don't want to go on my own.

 

[sim667]

"Refugee"

What point are you trying to make with this post?

 

[sim667]

First time in history that a Muslim invasion of Europe has not been met by the military. This whole thing is fishy....

What invasion?

 

[sim667]

Exactly. This is all hype and lies. And charities only allocate 10% of donations to causes - the rest goes to "administration". Don't believe it? The Red Cross received a billion dollars from American citizens in donations after 9/11, and only dished out 10% of it to 9/11 victims. I know this first hand, as I lived in TriBeCa during and after the WTC attack, and received limited help from the Red Cross, while other charities were more generous.

Have you got a source for this?

Being a charity they have to publish this information, and seeing as you're so sure of it, I'm assuming you have a source to back it up.

Edit: No need to, your post has already been proved to be rubbish.....

However your percentages are about right for the bono foundation, I bet you didn't know that

 

[sim667]

The reality is that some 80% of the "refugees" are economic migrants from about 20 different countries.

They aren't in danger, they throw away all the aid packages, they cross numerous safe countries to get to the welfare states of Germany and Sweden. And by law, those seeking refuge must do so in the first safe country they arrive in.

Source?

 

[sim667]

It's original research. Something real men do.

The problem with "original research" is that there needs to be an element of research involved, not just an observation.

 

[Mums]

The problem with "original research" is that there needs to be an element of research involved, not just an observation.

You seem to undervalue your own experience. I engaged in empirical research and reported on it. Perhaps you are afraid to do the same?

 

[Mums]

Have you got a source for this?

Being a charity they have to publish this information, and seeing as you're so sure of it, I'm assuming you have a source to back it up.

Edit: No need to, your post has already been proved to be rubbish.....

However your percentages are about right for the bono foundation, I bet you didn't know that

I'm often astounded at just how gullible UK residents tend to be! You are convinced of something, so I will not try to open your mind. However, as you have requested a "source" - meaning socially approved consensus (which is all you believe in) - here are several:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/millions-donated-red-cross-haiti-earthquake-relief-havent-helped/
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/08/07/worst-us-charities.aspx
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/...e-Red-Cross-money-pit-quot-The-TRUTH-at-last#

 

[sim667]

You seem to undervalue your own experience. I engaged in empirical research and reported on it. Perhaps you are afraid to do the same?

Where is your research please? I'd be interested to read it.

 

[sim667]

I'm often astounded at just how gullible UK residents tend to be! You are convinced of something, so I will not try to open your mind. However, as you have requested a "source" - meaning socially approved consensus (which is all you believe in) - here are several:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/millions-donated-red-cross-haiti-earthquake-relief-havent-helped/
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/08/07/worst-us-charities.aspx
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/...e-Red-Cross-money-pit-quot-The-TRUTH-at-last#

None of these articles mention anything about only 10% of donations to the red cross make it to victims..... not one.

Additionally all of the articles you're referring to mention the American Red Cross, not the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Network.

So please re-iterate where you got this information from? Because currently your statements could be considered defamation. Unless you provided evidence to support the statement that only 10% of funds raised be the Red Cross reach victims, as you've stated here.

Exactly. This is all hype and lies. And charities only allocate 10% of donations to causes - the rest goes to "administration". Don't believe it? The Red Cross received a billion dollars from American citizens in donations after 9/11, and only dished out 10% of it to 9/11 victims. I know this first hand, as I lived in TriBeCa during and after the WTC attack, and received limited help from the Red Cross, while other charities were more generous.

 

[Mums]

None of these articles mention anything about only 10% of donations to the red cross make it to victims..... not one.

Additionally all of the articles you're referring to mention the American Red Cross, not the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Network.

So please re-iterate where you got this information from? Because currently your statements could be considered defamation. Unless you provided evidence to support the statement that only 10% of funds raised be the Red Cross reach victims, as you've stated here.

You ask too much. And the burden of proof lies with you to demonstrate that the Red Cross has historically distributed all of the money its charter mandates. Also, it is the activities of the American Red Cross at question here.

 

[Mums]

Where is your research please? I'd be interested to read it.

em·pir·i·cal
əmˈpirik(ə)l/
adjective
based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
"they provided considerable empirical evidence to support their argument"
synonyms: experiential, practical, heuristic, firsthand, hands-on


Nonetheless I have taken the time to copy and paste the following quote from my original post here again for your reference, as you seem to lack the understanding of what constitutes research and also the ability to conduct it of your own volition: "charities only allocate 10% of donations to causes - the rest goes to "administration". Don't believe it? The Red Cross received a billion dollars from American citizens in donations after 9/11, and only dished out 10% of it to 9/11 victims. I know this first hand, as I lived in TriBeCa during and after the WTC attack, and received limited help from the Red Cross, while other charities were more generous."

 

[sim667]

You ask too much. And the burden of proof lies with you to demonstrate that the Red Cross has historically distributed all of the money its charter mandates. Also, it is the activities of the American Red Cross at question here.

No it doesn't because I've made no statements based on conjecture and anecdotal evidence, and then tried to back it up with articles referring to a different organisation with the intention of being misleading. I've made not statements whatsoever about the percentages of donations the Red Cross use for administration or aid. You on the other hand have, false statements based on "research" that you are not prepared to share (i.e. it doesn't exist), but have chose to reference articles about the American Red Cross.

However since you've asked the Internation Committee of the Red Cross explicitly states on its website that 9.69% goes towards administrative costs, not 90% as per your claims.

In 2009, for example, the ICRC's administrative costs (calculated using the method mentioned above) represented 9.69% of total operational expenditure. The costs considered to be "administrative" are the cost of the headquarters units, i.e. the president's office, the directorate, human resources, fundraising, finance and administration, information systems and archives. Note: administrative costs do not affect the way in which your donation is used – it will be allocated directly to the field operation of your choice.

https://www.icrc.org/en/faq/where-your-donations-go

 

[sim667]

em·pir·i·cal
əmˈpirik(ə)l/
adjective
based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
"they provided considerable empirical evidence to support their argument"
synonyms: experiential, practical, heuristic, firsthand, hands-on


Nonetheless I have taken the time to copy and paste the following quote from my original post here again for your reference, as you seem to lack the understanding of what constitutes research and also the ability to conduct it of your own volition: "charities only allocate 10% of donations to causes - the rest goes to "administration". Don't believe it? The Red Cross received a billion dollars from American citizens in donations after 9/11, and only dished out 10% of it to 9/11 victims. I know this first hand, as I lived in TriBeCa during and after the WTC attack, and received limited help from the Red Cross, while other charities were more generous."

Yet you have no information to back up that statement, and choose to base your research on anecdotal evidence and conjecture......

I could say that pigs can fly based on "empirical research". Which is quite clearly a false statement.

 

[Renzatic]

Nonetheless I have taken the time to copy and paste the following quote from my original post here again for your reference, as you seem to lack the understanding of what constitutes research and also the ability to conduct it of your own volition: "charities only allocate 10% of donations to causes - the rest goes to "administration". Don't believe it? The Red Cross received a billion dollars from American citizens in donations after 9/11, and only dished out 10% of it to 9/11 victims. I know this first hand, as I lived in TriBeCa during and after the WTC attack, and received limited help from the Red Cross, while other charities were more generous."

an·ec·do·tal
[ˌanikˈdōtl]

ADJECTIVE

1. (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research:
   "while there was much anecdotal evidence there was little hard fact"

 

[sim667]

an·ec·do·tal
[ˌanikˈdōtl]

ADJECTIVE

1. (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research:
   "while there was much anecdotal evidence there was little hard fact"

I wouldn't stoop to the level of posting word definitions, but it was pretty evident that the poster had read something, misunderstood it, tried to save face by concocting a back story to the lie......

 

[Renzatic]

I wouldn't stoop to the level of posting word definitions, but it was pretty evident that the poster had read something, misunderstood it, tried to save face by concocting a back story to the lie......

Either that, or, going by what I've seen of him previously, he leans a little too much towards the crazy conspiracist side of things as a default.

 

[Altis]

Source?

In all honesty, what did you think would happen? If you offer free housing, free education, free food, and a fairly large amount of cash... to anyone who shows up, papers or not... guess what happens? An enormous amount of people will come. It's hardly shocking.

The figures from the UN state that the migrants are 72% (mostly young) men, 15% women, 13% children. How odd.

It's also interesting how far away people are travelling through safe countries to 'flee war'...

Take a good look at what's going on, from all kinds of sources (some of which may need to be translated from EU countries). The routes are littered with identification from countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh because it's easier to claim asylum with no papers than to not be from Syria.

Some of the other countries the migrants are arriving from: Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Iraq, Armenia, Macedonia, Albania, and a few from India.

Here they are throwing away aid supplies:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...rowing-food-and-water-away-onto-train-tracks/

Interesting how there are pretty much zero applications for asylum in the 'safe-but-few-benefits' countries, such as Croatia:
https://vlada.gov.hr/news/only-one-refugee-has-requested-asylum-says-croatian-fm/17745

Honestly, if you genuinely believe that all of these people are fleeing a relatively small war in Syria, you're really choosing to ignore reality.

Now I have a question for you: What is the long-term plan? Is the plan just to completely evacuate all of Syria? Is the plan to permanently relocate everyone to other countries around the world?

And if that's the case... why aren't the wealthy gulf states accepting refugees? None of this adds up. We're being so manipulated by appeals to emotions and shamed to avoid using evidence and reason to evaluate the situation.

 

[Altis]

Generic donations aren't really helping, especially in Calais.

If you want to know what to donate get in contact with Calaid, you can go over to volunteer with them then, I'm thinking about going in Novemeber but I don't want to go on my own.

This Calais? The one where women are in constant fear of being raped, and some are kept behind a locked fenced-in area?
http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...e-97-are-men-with-no-real-reason-to-be-there/

Quite a few non-Syrians... from the article:

The Jungle camp is roughly divided along ethnic lines. There's an Afghan area that some call the "market," there's a Kurdish area, and a Sudanese area. The Ethiopian section has the church, and the predominantly Eritrean part of the camp is home to the "nightclub."

https://news.vice.com/article/this-...ow-includes-a-church-a-school-and-a-nightclub

 

[sim667]

In all honesty, what did you think would happen? If you offer free housing, free education, free food, and a fairly large amount of cash... to anyone who shows up, papers or not... guess what happens? An enormous amount of people will come. It's hardly shocking.

That's not what's happening though is it? Otherwise it wouldn't be a refugee crisis would it? If it was that easy to bowl up to country and set up a life there, and all of these people only want to go to European countries for economic reasons, rather than to flee dangerous situations, then why haven't they all come and set up before hand?

 

[sim667]

https://news.vice.com/article/this-...ow-includes-a-church-a-school-and-a-nightclub

Why are you making out that I've said things that I haven't? That second quote is not something I've said, please don't try to put words in my mouth. Frankly that's totally unacceptable.

 

[sim667]

In all honesty, what did you think would happen? If you offer free housing, free education, free food, and a fairly large amount of cash... to anyone who shows up, papers or not... guess what happens? An enormous amount of people will come. It's hardly shocking.

The figures from the UN state that the migrants are 72% (mostly young) men, 15% women, 13% children. How odd.

It's also interesting how far away people are travelling through safe countries to 'flee war'...

Take a good look at what's going on, from all kinds of sources (some of which may need to be translated from EU countries). The routes are littered with identification from countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh because it's easier to claim asylum with no papers than to not be from Syria.

Some of the other countries the migrants are arriving from: Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Iraq, Armenia, Macedonia, Albania, and a few from India.

Here they are throwing away aid supplies:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...rowing-food-and-water-away-onto-train-tracks/

Interesting how there are pretty much zero applications for asylum in the 'safe-but-few-benefits' countries, such as Croatia:
https://vlada.gov.hr/news/only-one-refugee-has-requested-asylum-says-croatian-fm/17745

Honestly, if you genuinely believe that all of these people are fleeing a relatively small war in Syria, you're really choosing to ignore reality.

Now I have a question for you: What is the long-term plan? Is the plan just to completely evacuate all of Syria? Is the plan to permanently relocate everyone to other countries around the world?

And if that's the case... why aren't the wealthy gulf states accepting refugees? None of this adds up. We're being so manipulated by appeals to emotions and shamed to avoid using evidence and reason to evaluate the situation.

Frankly you're not looking at the basics of what is going on, and you are intentionally mixing up migrants and refugees as far as I'm concerned.

When I talk about the refugees, I am talking about ones that have been displaced because it is unsafe for them to remain in their homes, I am not talking about the migrants, which you've also listed.

There's been a lot made out of discarded donated clothes, and the reason they're just discarding donated clothes is because they don't need them, especially in the jungle. They do need firewood for example, building materials and other items, which is why I'd urge anyone thinking about making donations, particularly in Calais find out what they actually need before hand.

As far as the rest of your post, I'm not going to answer it, I'm talking now about refugees, you're talking about migrants, 2 different sets of people.

And I'm going to go out on a limb here and take a guess that you're not even in Europe..... So don't really know what type of impact this refugee situation will even have as it will barely effect you.

And just to be clear few Asylum seekers are applying for refuge in Croatia, 1 because it's in a dire economic situation (over 50% unemployment I think) and 2 because Croatia is something like 90% Croat and describes itself as 85% Roman Catholic, thus they tend to look for places with higher religious diversity.

 

[captain cadet]

Were you also appalled by the rapes of 1400 young girls by British Muslims? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal Please tell us your address so we can direct a saintly "refugee" family your way. Or just a group of young men who courageously left their wives and children back at the battlefront so they could come sign up for welfare in Europe. "I'll be right back hun!"

I was appalled by it - Not because it was Muslims but the way the police reacted.... Took them way to long stop it.
Being Muslim wasn't the reason they rapped. There are more terror attacks, rapes and crimes done by Christians (per 1000) in the UK than Muslims so please stop reading Britain First posts and get outside, stop blaming a religion and enjoy life!

 

[thekev]

It's original research. Something real men do.

When you make a bold claim of a factual nature, it's reasonable to point others to whatever information led you to that conclusion. Otherwise they can only guess.

I like your beard. You just go on defending big charities. It will do us all so much good.

I didn't set out to defend them here. I was just interested enough to search for financial data. None of it supported the claim of 90% administrative expenses. I also wasn't arguing over their effectiveness in terms of quantity and quality of services provided relative to donations taken in, which is not as easy to determine. I was also looking specifically at the Red Cross, not at an overview of all charities that take in at least one million, ten million, or whatever you consider large in donations per year.

I guess you just want everyone to commiserate because the Red Cross provided inadequate services when you needed them?