posted on September 26, 2001 12:55:37 PM new"Enough of the sicko liars bashing the Red Cross. Are you Red Cross-bashers really Arab Terrorists?"
Well, I see they didn't lock it at your first outcry of "foul" for not agreeing 100% with you, so now you'll knock it up a step and get it closed because you are "insulting" AW users. Sad, sad, sad.
I personally think everyone should donate 10% of their annual income to charity. That's my personal belief and practice. I would not call anyone a sicko liar or an Arab terrorist for not accepting my point of view as the only one nor use it as a cheap trick to get a thread locked.
This is America. You can do and say what you want. So can I. You can relate your personal experience or someone else's whom you know personally. So can I.
I live what I preach, I would like to think everyone does.
I also believe that the RED CROSS will survive this little bit of critizism. They have become an American institution. Actually a worldwide one. So, I don't think anyone really needs to get too bent over a couple of perceived negative remarks made by a couple of folks on an open forum. I also don't really see how anyone can call the few less than glowing remarks about RC in this thread as "bashing". Since when has it become "bashing" to relate a true story? Even if it happened 60 years ago or even if it had a profound affect on someone that has lasted those same 60 years. You'd think they would have gotten over it by now wouldn't you? Have you ever watched the History channel? Those old geezers from WWII just won't let anything go.....enough already!!!!! This is 2001! You'd think they would all be dead by now! (just so nobody misunderstands-yes, I'm being just a bit sarcastic here)
edited to add that I have thought it over and just wanted to close this with:
It was not my intent to drive anyone to a frenzy, and so to make all of you feel better, who think I am a sicko liar, I'll go and stick my tounge on an ice tray and rip all the skin off...will that be suitable retribution for my shameful statement???? Of course, since I typed it instead of actually speaking it, perhaps it would be more appropriate for me to go out and slam by fingers in the car door so I can't type such "rubbish" for hopefully a long while????? Just let me know which you prefer and I'll try to accomodate you! It has to be one or the other, though, I won't do both!
edited to get my absolutely last 2 cents in without bumping this thing to the top again. Maybe it'll fade to the bottom and not come back up....May it rest in peace!
posted on September 26, 2001 01:35:26 PM new
Well, I vaguely remember hearing that story from my dad too, who was in Korea. I don't remember if it was the red cross or the united way. I do remember, as a teenager, working a parking lot for a United Way annual party. This was not a donor's banquet, these were UA employees, and they had some of the most expensive cars I'd ever seen. That marred my judgement of them. On the other hand, I have a friend who is a RC volunteer. There was a storm that ripped through a VERY expensive neighborhood nearby. Tons of money donated to help them. She told me, the sad thing is, all of the oney donated for this incident, HAS to go to these people, and most of them don't need it. They have homeowners insurance, etc, and, while a few people had to be housed in hotels for a week or so, the amount of money donated FAR outweighed the expenses, but the Red Cross had to use it up in this area.
She was a nurse in her former career, and she told me alot of what they do. She gave voucher's for medications vouchers for food, clothing, etc (no cost to the victims). I don't agree with charging GI's for donuts, but, for homeland causes, I dont' think the Red Cross can be beat.
posted on September 26, 2001 01:36:00 PM new
to the Red Cross Basher(s)
PIFFLE
Yes--your free blood is collected by the Red Cross, who has to pay for supplies, transportation, staff, etc etc
The blood may be given free to the Red Cross by great people, but the process to get to delivered to the patients who need it is an expensive one....and I can bet they write-off quite a few gallons along the way
posted on September 26, 2001 03:11:33 PM new
.."RC is a basically good organization but in our are they are run based on need of services ie income based."
So what!
Patient free care service at our Hospital is based on level of income so what is your point.
CEO Donaghue receives over $280,000 annual compensation. Read the fine print,
* July 1, 1998 - June 30, 1999; Compensation includes annual salary and, if applicable, benefit plans, expense accounts, and other allowances.
After all said and done he may not have much at all and plus over 85% of their money goes to programs very respectable #'s
posted on September 26, 2001 08:24:04 PM new
$280,000 is the highest payed exec at a $2 Billion organization! Name one other multi-billion $ organization that pays their execs such LOW salaries!
Red Cross bashers strike out again. Go crawl back under that bridge.
I guess it IS true about everyone at AW being laid off. I'm surprised this discussion is still here.
posted on September 26, 2001 11:04:55 PM new
83 percent of Red Cross funds goes to it's programs. 17 percent goes to salaries, operating expenses and cost of fundraising.
posted on September 27, 2001 04:02:47 AM new
Don't want to bash Red Cross. But I remember my Grandmother talking about their
doing something similar during WWII.
I am sure they do good work, but I heard Paul Harvey say they would have to destroy, dump, whatever quite a lot of the recently given blood because it will only last 42 days. Is this true or can't they do something else--don't know what.
I thought their very pious refusal of donations from the shooting range who used
Bin Laden as targets was just a little too silly and PC, but everyone has a right to their beliefs. Since, I am rather weary of this Political Correctness, I will leave others to donate to Red Cross and I will
give to Salvation Army. As long as we all give, that is what matters.
Does anyone remember the poem of the 6 blind men who went to see an elephant. Since each one touch a different part of the elephant everyone had a different opinion as to what it was like. That is the way with all of us. We form our opinions based our own experiences. We have a right to do so without being attacked and without someone attempting to silence us.
posted on September 27, 2001 06:30:07 AM new
nnt, yes there is a shelf-life for blood. The Red Cross is very aware of that. I do know a little bit about what they're doing WRT this problem. My family (mostly my mother) organizes a blood drawing in Vermont several times a year. The next one is tomorrow. The Red Cross will be doing something VERY different at this drawing than they ever did before. They're actually going to be turning people away. They normally set a "goal" and we get a certificate for meeting the goal (no, never a penalty if we don't meet goal, they won't even reposess the donuts and cofee). This time, they're setting a quota, and when that quota is reached they're turning people away. They're going to have a person at the front door, handing out numbers. The first X number of people to get numbers are the ones who will give blood. After that, they're asked to come back to our next blood drawing. They can anticipate what they will need, and are making arrangements to make sure that they will not have to destroy any excess. So, anyone wanting to give blood, go ahead and give, but it might be even more useful to give six months from now, especially if we have people getting injured in combat.
posted on September 27, 2001 06:35:19 AM new
Thanks for the information. I just never thought of blood having a shelf-life - of that short duration. Also, I just thought there might be something that could be salvaged from it.
posted on September 27, 2001 09:43:45 AM new
I'm not hearing too many good things from the Police in NY regarding this event. The food, etc. is not reaching them. As for the RC, it's still a great idea. How it's run reminds me of United Way whom I'd never give another nickle too in my life. Didn't like the administration or marketing ploy's. Careful who you give your money too...
posted on September 27, 2001 10:03:03 AM new
I'm not an expert on much of anything and especially NOT blood! The sight of it makes me a bit woozey, but I did hear somewhere that it's the "whole" blood that has the short shelf life. It can also be seperated out into other componets I think, like platelets (sp?) and plasma and it could also go to the research facilities that work with blood.
