http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550

I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be doing what their given name suggests?

On Monday, September 17, 2012 7:57:35 AM UTC+1, Steerpike wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550



I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be doing what their given name suggests?

Interesting that no one involved with helping this dodgy charity to operate, seems able to defend its practices putting 30% of donations into swish new buildings, and keeping the rest for admin costs?

Steerpike wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550

I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be doing what their given name suggests?

What is heroic about invading a foreign country and killing its people?

--
Where are the songs of Summer?--With the sun,
Oping the dusky eyelids of the south,
Till shade and silence waken up as one,
And morning sings with a warm odorous mouth.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550



I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be doing what their given name suggests?



What is heroic about invading a foreign country and killing its people?



--

Where are the songs of Summer?--With the sun,

Oping the dusky eyelids of the south,

Till shade and silence waken up as one,

And morning sings with a warm odorous mouth.

I had difficulty working that out too.........not one of the countries recently invaded by UK forces posed any sort of threat to our security, so one wonders why exactly the attacks were carried out in the first place?

It is NOT a dodgy charity, stop trying to cause trouble, it won't work
simply because people will either killfile you or not read you. I
hope your next post is about gardening.


None of his posts are about gardening, probably never will be.
The charity is first class so ignore the idiot.

Thanks, Baz!

I was always brought up to believe that a good helping of Bull Sh**
helped things grow.

"David Hill" wrote in message
...

It is NOT a dodgy charity, stop trying to cause trouble, it won't work
simply because people will either killfile you or not read you. I
hope your next post is about gardening.


None of his posts are about gardening, probably never will be.
The charity is first class so ignore the idiot.

Thanks, Baz!

I was always brought up to believe that a good helping of Bull Sh** helped
things grow.

I am learning ... ;o)

--
--

http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:04:27 AM UTC+1, Tony99 wrote:
On Monday, September 17, 2012 7:57:35 AM UTC+1, Steerpike wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550







I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be doing what their given name suggests?



Interesting that no one involved with helping this dodgy charity to operate, seems able to defend its practices putting 30% of donations into swish new buildings, and keeping the rest for admin costs?

Why should charities pay for everything that a wounded service person needs to carry on their normal life?

The government agreed to fight the war in the first place, so it is their responsibility to pay for the costs of their decisions. Except of course that would mean using taxpayers money, and taxpayers want to keep as much of it as they possibly can.

So, if you feel the need to blame someone, blame yourself for not insisting that you pay more to the MOD each year and they can use it to improve rehabilitation conditions, instead of relying on those who are far more generous than yourself.

None of his posts are about gardening, probably never will be.

The charity is first class so ignore the idiot.



Baz


Several on here seem to support and maybe even fund raise for this dodgy charity, so it seems to be a valid topic for discussion?

Personally if I were a disabled ex serviceman, I would find something like a properly fitting artificial limb, a great deal more useful than a flashy new building, that may well be to far away to be of any possible use to me anyway.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 7:32:34 PM UTC+1, John wrote:
On Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:04:27 AM UTC+1, Tony99 wrote:

On Monday, September 17, 2012 7:57:35 AM UTC+1, Steerpike wrote:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550















I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be doing what their given name suggests?







Interesting that no one involved with helping this dodgy charity to operate, seems able to defend its practices putting 30% of donations into swish new buildings, and keeping the rest for admin costs?



Why should charities pay for everything that a wounded service person needs to carry on their normal life?



The government agreed to fight the war in the first place, so it is their responsibility to pay for the costs of their decisions. Except of course that would mean using taxpayers money, and taxpayers want to keep as much of it as they possibly can.



So, if you feel the need to blame someone, blame yourself for not insisting that you pay more to the MOD each year and they can use it to improve rehabilitation conditions, instead of relying on those who are far more generous than yourself.

101% correct...........in this case though it would seem "Help for Heros" are colluding with the MOD in providing donated money to part fund lavish new building projects, which are of no conceivable use to many ex service people. Except for the ex servicemen, trebles all round I would say.................

David Hill wrote:

I was always brought up to believe that a good helping of Bull Sh**
helped things grow.

My more gently spoken farmer friends call it "heifer dust."


--
Gary Woods AKA K2AHC- PGP key on request, or at home.earthlink.net/~garygarlic
Zone 5/4 in upstate New York, 1420' elevation. NY WO G

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:02:37 PM UTC+1, Gary Woods wrote:
David Hill wrote:



I was always brought up to believe that a good helping of Bull Sh**

helped things grow.



My more gently spoken farmer friends call it "heifer dust."





--

Gary Woods AKA K2AHC- PGP key on request, or at home.earthlink.net/~garygarlic

Zone 5/4 in upstate New York, 1420' elevation. NY WO G

Bull Shit has certainly assisted "Help for Heros" in becoming on of the most profitable "charity" operations in the UK.............

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:04:27 AM UTC+1, Tony99 wrote:
On Monday, September 17, 2012 7:57:35 AM UTC+1, Steerpike wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550







I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising
for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be
doing what their given name suggests?



Interesting that no one involved with helping this dodgy charity to
operate, seems able to defend its practices putting 30% of donations into
swish new buildings, and keeping the rest for admin costs?

Steerpike and Tony99 are one and the same person (Chris Stevens) How sad
he needs to agree with himself to disrupt the group.

I think anyone from the Services, or their families, would agree that the
government should provide all the care and facilities required to give
injured personnel the best care available. In fact there should be no need
for a charity to be involved with any of that. However, the reality is that
the budget available to the MOD can either be spent on providing the best
equipment available to minimise casualties or it can be spent on treating
those who become casualties. Let's ignore the waste, that happens in any
branch of government. the only way to provide for the best care and
equipment for both the troops on the forward line and those who need care
afterwards would be to raise taxes to raise the MOD budget. That impacts
everyone regardless of their personal circumstances or beliefs. So to bridge
the gap, despite the fact it should not be there, charities are needed.

Those flash buildings on which you 'accuse' H4H of spending money include
the UK's first and best rehabilitation pool and centre specifically for
Service amputees , and some of the best staff, equipment, and after care
available anywhere! Ask any of the soldiers who have been through there if
they think it has all been wasted on admin costs. You might as well accuse
the British Legion or SSAFA of doing nothing for ex-soldiers or their
families. typical of the sort of comment from someone who has never been
there and is talking from ignorance rather than actual knowledge!

Apologies to the gardeners, I am here to learn about gardening, but I
couldn't let that one go!

H4H is a wonderful charity, one that I wholeheartedly support and which does
wonderful work! Chris Stevens should hope he never needs that kind of
assistance.

O
--
--

http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:45:09 PM UTC+1, Ophelia wrote:
On Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:04:27 AM UTC+1, Tony99 wrote:

On Monday, September 17, 2012 7:57:35 AM UTC+1, Steerpike wrote:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550















I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising

for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be

doing what their given name suggests?







Interesting that no one involved with helping this dodgy charity to

operate, seems able to defend its practices putting 30% of donations into

swish new buildings, and keeping the rest for admin costs?



Steerpike and Tony99 are one and the same person (Chris Stevens) How sad

he needs to agree with himself to disrupt the group.



I think anyone from the Services, or their families, would agree that the

government should provide all the care and facilities required to give

injured personnel the best care available. In fact there should be no need

for a charity to be involved with any of that. However, the reality is that

the budget available to the MOD can either be spent on providing the best

equipment available to minimise casualties or it can be spent on treating

those who become casualties. Let's ignore the waste, that happens in any

branch of government. the only way to provide for the best care and

equipment for both the troops on the forward line and those who need care

afterwards would be to raise taxes to raise the MOD budget. That impacts

everyone regardless of their personal circumstances or beliefs. So to bridge

the gap, despite the fact it should not be there, charities are needed.



Those flash buildings on which you 'accuse' H4H of spending money include

the UK's first and best rehabilitation pool and centre specifically for

Service amputees , and some of the best staff, equipment, and after care

available anywhere! Ask any of the soldiers who have been through there if

they think it has all been wasted on admin costs. You might as well accuse

the British Legion or SSAFA of doing nothing for ex-soldiers or their

families. typical of the sort of comment from someone who has never been

there and is talking from ignorance rather than actual knowledge!



Apologies to the gardeners, I am here to learn about gardening, but I

couldn't let that one go!



H4H is a wonderful charity, one that I wholeheartedly support and which does

wonderful work! Chris Stevens should hope he never needs that kind of

assistance.



O

--

--



http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

I wonder why H4H feels plush new buildings (which are of no conceivable use to most ex service people), are so much more important than things such as artificial limbs, which are required for everyday living?

If you are an ex service person, then your comments about these operators are worthy of serious consideration, but if not I for one feel that these views are of far more value: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550

In terms of donation revenues I would imagine that H4H is in the top 5 of the UK operators, and in common with the others around about 75% of these revenues, will be directed toward "admin" costs..............a "wonderful" charity indeed!

On Friday, September 21, 2012 10:02:44 AM UTC+1, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:03:04 -0700 (PDT), Tony99

wrote:



On Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:45:09 PM UTC+1, Ophelia wrote:

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 8:04:27 AM UTC+1, Tony99 wrote:



On Monday, September 17, 2012 7:57:35 AM UTC+1, Steerpike wrote:







http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550































I wonder as lots of group members seem to be involved with fund-raising



for "Help for Heros", if anyone can explain why they dont appear to be



doing what their given name suggests?















Interesting that no one involved with helping this dodgy charity to



operate, seems able to defend its practices putting 30% of donations into



swish new buildings, and keeping the rest for admin costs?







Steerpike and Tony99 are one and the same person (Chris Stevens) How sad



he needs to agree with himself to disrupt the group.







I think anyone from the Services, or their families, would agree that the



government should provide all the care and facilities required to give



injured personnel the best care available. In fact there should be no need



for a charity to be involved with any of that. However, the reality is that



the budget available to the MOD can either be spent on providing the best



equipment available to minimise casualties or it can be spent on treating



those who become casualties. Let's ignore the waste, that happens in any



branch of government. the only way to provide for the best care and



equipment for both the troops on the forward line and those who need care



afterwards would be to raise taxes to raise the MOD budget. That impacts



everyone regardless of their personal circumstances or beliefs. So to bridge



the gap, despite the fact it should not be there, charities are needed.







Those flash buildings on which you 'accuse' H4H of spending money include



the UK's first and best rehabilitation pool and centre specifically for



Service amputees , and some of the best staff, equipment, and after care



available anywhere! Ask any of the soldiers who have been through there if



they think it has all been wasted on admin costs. You might as well accuse



the British Legion or SSAFA of doing nothing for ex-soldiers or their



families. typical of the sort of comment from someone who has never been



there and is talking from ignorance rather than actual knowledge!







Apologies to the gardeners, I am here to learn about gardening, but I



couldn't let that one go!







H4H is a wonderful charity, one that I wholeheartedly support and which does



wonderful work! Chris Stevens should hope he never needs that kind of



assistance.







O



--



--







http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/



I wonder why H4H feels plush new buildings (which are of no conceivable use to most ex service people), are so much more important than things such as artificial limbs, which are required for everyday living?



If you are an ex service person, then your comments about these operators are worthy of serious consideration, but if not I for one feel that these views are of far more value: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19112550



In terms of donation revenues I would imagine that H4H is in the top 5 of the UK operators, and in common with the others around about 75% of these revenues, will be directed toward "admin" costs..............a "wonderful" charity indeed!



The facts are here -



http://www.charitiesdirect.com/chari...s-1120920.html



Your post libels the administrators.

--



Martin

Not at all..........they are almost certainly behaving properly, the scamming will be related to money being skimmed off the building project work.

This is something that has been endemic for many years in relation to works linked to the MOD, and I see little reason why those running H4H would not want to get their snouts in the trough too.

http://www.charitiesdirect.com/chari...s-1120920.html







Your post libels the administrators.



--







Martin



Not at all..........they are almost certainly behaving properly, the scamming will be related to money being skimmed off the building project work.



This is something that has been endemic for many years in relation to works linked to the MOD, and I see little reason why those running H4H would not want to get their snouts in the trough too.



"In terms of donation revenues I would imagine that H4H is in the top

5 of the UK operators, and in common with the others around about 75%

of these revenues, will be directed toward "admin" costs..."



is both untrue and libelous

--



Martin


What untrue in the same way those involved in illegal wars designed to further the political and economic ambitions of the US, are being referred to as "heros"?