Charities And Controversy

[AK-47]

Vaheguru ji ka khalsa Vaheguru ji ki fateh

I think as a community we can be proud of having groups such as Khalsa Aid working to do a fantastic job around the world delivering aid and support wherever it is needed.

However, if we look at the state of a number of the largest charities in the world we see massive corruption, bribery, political gain, greed from the charity 'workers', etc etc.

Global Fund to fight Aids, Malaria etc http://www.economist.com/node/18176062?story_id=18176062

World Food Programe http://www.economist.com/node/15731546?story_id=E1_TVSPTVQG

More and more regularly we see such stories, even groups such as Amnesty International had issues recently where massive payouts had to be made to their ex-directors. The fund to fight aids, malaria etc (see above link) which governments actually directly fund and keep a seperate budget for ($20 billion !!!)was accussed of misusing the money and massive corruption allegations etc. There are so many problems that can arise, especially if for example the charity is religious based, where there may be an underlying expectation for religious conversion etc. As I said i feel we're very fortunate to say that Khalsa Aid is not one of these types!

The controversial issue I'd like to raise is to do with which projects are supported over others.

The tragedy in Japan has been seen around the globe and many people have suffered. Many charities and orgs are trying to lend support but from a news report i heard recently, japan has not accepted any help as yet (may have changed more recently). My controversial point is, that japan has the worlds 3rd richest economy, it has a history of disaster management and is a strategic partner of the worlds greatest military and global powers (i.e. they cannot afford not to help Japan because of the damage it would cause their relationships). As such, would and should charities concentrate their efforts elsewhere?

While thousands have died in Japan over the last few weeks, many more have probably died from water based diseases, starvation, civil war, drug abuse etc etc in many other countries. And these deaths happen week after week, day after day. Yet these are often missed by the media and people get immune to the sight of starving children.

Maybe its just me, but often charities seem to be jumping on bandwagons to increase their public profile (which i understand to an extent) and i guess it easier to raise money if people see the disaster daily on the news as well. But for some reason, this doesnt sit well with me. It could be just me, I dont know.

Again looking back at Khalsa Aid, these guys have made it clear that their efforts in Haiti will continue (long after the press and public memory has passed) and they are helping the libyan refugees also (again something that iv not heard many other charities doing). And that they will look at Japan but will not forget the other places. I was really impressed by this attitude and hope it continues.

If possible research the charities that you support and check how they use the funds you give them, check the projects they run etc. Just because something is a 'charity' doesnt mean it will be doing what you expect a chariity to be doing with your donations.

Just as an after thought, i thought I'd mention that Im not aligned or work for Khalsa Aid, I just admire their work and trust that Vaheguru will bless them with greater strength and achievement.

[BilKul]

<br />Vaheguru ji ka khalsa Vaheguru ji ki fateh<br /><br />I think as a community we can be proud of having groups such as Khalsa Aid working to do a fantastic job around the world delivering aid and support wherever it is needed.<br /><br />However, if we look at the state of a number of the largest charities in the world we see massive corruption, bribery, political gain, greed from the charity 'workers', etc etc. <br /><br /><br />Global Fund to fight Aids, Malaria etc <a href='http://www.economist.com/node/18176062?story_id=18176062' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.economist...ory_id=18176062</a><br /><br />World Food Programe <a href='http://www.economist.com/node/15731546?story_id=E1_TVSPTVQG' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.economist..._id=E1_TVSPTVQG</a><br /><br /><br /><br />More and more regularly we see such stories, even groups such as Amnesty International had issues recently where massive payouts had to be made to their ex-directors. The fund to fight aids, malaria etc (see above link) which governments actually directly fund and keep a seperate budget for ($20 billion !!!)was accussed of misusing the money and massive corruption allegations etc. There are so many problems that can arise, especially if for example the charity is religious based, where there may be an underlying expectation for religious conversion etc. As I said i feel we're very fortunate to say that Khalsa Aid is not one of these types! <br /><br />The controversial issue I'd like to raise is to do with which projects are supported over others. <br /><br />The tragedy in Japan has been seen around the globe and many people have suffered. Many charities and orgs are trying to lend support but from a news report i heard recently, japan has not accepted any help as yet (may have changed more recently). My controversial point is, that japan has the worlds 3rd richest economy, it has a history of disaster management and is a strategic partner of the worlds greatest military and global powers (i.e. they cannot afford not to help Japan because of the damage it would cause their relationships). As such, would and should charities concentrate their efforts elsewhere? <br /><br />While thousands have died in Japan over the last few weeks, many more have probably died from water based diseases, starvation, civil war, drug abuse etc etc in many other countries. And these deaths happen week after week, day after day. Yet these are often missed by the media and people get immune to the sight of starving children. <br /><br />Maybe its just me, but often charities seem to be jumping on bandwagons to increase their public profile (which i understand to an extent) and i guess it easier to raise money if people see the disaster daily on the news as well. But for some reason, this doesnt sit well with me. It could be just me, I dont know. <br /><br />Again looking back at Khalsa Aid, these guys have made it clear that their efforts in Haiti will continue (long after the press and public memory has passed) and they are helping the libyan refugees also (again something that iv not heard many other charities doing). And that they will look at Japan but will not forget the other places. I was really impressed by this attitude and hope it continues. <br /><br />If possible research the charities that you support and check how they use the funds you give them, check the projects they run etc. Just because something is a 'charity' doesnt mean it will be doing what you expect a chariity to be doing with your donations. <br /><br />Just as an after thought, i thought I'd mention that Im not aligned or work for Khalsa Aid, I just admire their work and trust that Vaheguru will bless them with greater strength and achievement.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Well said AK 47 !Khalsa Aid always seems to ask for donations once they have a concrete project , not just send few people and hold a few cans of food, take a photo and ask for $10000s ...

[GPS]

Khalsa aid is aligned with anti gurmat missionaries known as Gurmat gian missionary college.

Missionaries are more dangerous than any any other cult as they are eroding sikhism from inside.

So far they do not disassociate with this heretic group they will get a bad name and less and less support.

Word is spreading fast now. See below

http://forums.waheguroo.com/index.php?/topic/36065-khalsa-aid-partner-with-anti-sikh-forces/

Khalsa Aid have aligned with enemies of sikhi in Punjab such as Gurmat Gian Missionary college, Ludhiana.

Missionary college teachings are

1) No amrit vela for sikhs

2) Waheguru is not Gurmantra

3) No Karma and no reincarnation

4) Guru gobind singh ji did not write any bani . So only tweo banis of nitnem are there.

5) Their Guru kala afghna says that there waS NO AMRIT SANCHAR in 1699.

Will you like to teach your children this type of gurmat.

waheguru