Mr. Tea,

And no comment feedback either? Its back to bed.

Semper Fidelis-

I'm guessing but the decision probably came from many levels above this person.

So when are they getting rid of the Red CROSS?

All part of the self-imposed decline of Western Civilization, thanks to liberalism.

The only way to answer these foolish acts is to actually stop donating to the Red Cross. For all the good work they do, there are other, Christian, charities who would benefit greatly by the money people usually give to the Red Cross.

One caveat is to do your homework and know that the charity you contribute to actually uses the money on charity and not administration.

So let me see if I understand...

In islamic nations the "Red Cross" goes by the name "Red Crescent" in an appeal to the mulsim faith. In Christian nations it goes by the name "Red Cross" but it forbids the use of any Christian symbols unless , of course, they can make money from it.

I have met countless WWII veterans who tell stories of how the hate the Red Cross and how it preyed upon soldiers in need.

It's time to dispense with the notion that the Red Cross is 1) humanitarian and 2) that it is a neutral actor.

In the first case it has a track record of using it's humanitarian mission and pseudo governmental status to force out private actors and reap huge financial rewards. It has charged the needy and vulnerable for services that it has gone begging for donations for. American soldiers in Europe in WWII were charged for food and clothing by the Red Cross sometimes having their pay docked by the Red Cross without warning.

As for #2 it has allowed its ambulances to be used as cover for terrorists and has covered for enemies of our country.

While the Red Cross does do some good, it has long been a despicable organization in its practices.

I gave up on the Red Cross a long time ago.

After 911 they were caught diverting donations.
Their performance after Katrina hit was lousy,
They're oversight sucks and 2 years ago they asked Congress for a $100 million infusion after their emergency response fund was depleted.

Then I read the info that jim m provided (post 6, thanks) along with the article referenced by this post.

I see I made the right decision years ago to donate elsewhere.

Just say no to the Red Cross, Barry clueless in joblessritaville and the souless UN dem libs.

What jim m said. Right on the money. ww

The Red Cross has ALWAYS been a lousy, liberal outfit. My father told me that in 1950, on returning from Japan and Korea, he stopped--in uniform--in New York. The Red Cross was SELLING coffee to soldiers for 10 cents. The Salvation Army was GIVING it to soldiers. That always stuck with him and with me.

#6 Jim m, I've heard the same stories from WWII vets. HATE. THEY HATE THEM!

USO, great. Salvation Army, terrific ... even Roman Catholic vets prefer them over the Red Cross.

The Red Cross/Crescent must have really done a lot of bad things to a lot of soldiers for them to be so angry for so long!

'The Red Cross is trying to be inclusive and we recognise there are lots of people who want to buy Christmas cards which they know will benefit us.'

That's what the Red Cross has to say for itself?

THEN SELL RAMADAN CARDS YOU FOOLS!

WHY, WHY?????????????????? DO THESE PEOPLE KEEP KOWTOWING TO MUSLIMS????
Tell them to go back to their own countries. Really I don't know who I can not stand more, Muslims or their sympathizers and ass kisser!

Nothing for any Red Cross....let their p.c. bury them.

Moslems are the biggest whinning cry babies on the planet.
The old rule suits,"Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke"

So let me get this straight. They created the Red Crescent for Muslim countries because Muslims were offended by what the Red Cross stood for (not to mention the actual symbol of a red cross).

Now they're afraid the Red Cross in non-Muslim countries "might offend" Muslims so they propose to eliminate anything that might be construed to be Christian (unless, of course, they can make money on it)? And even went so far at one point as to attempt to change the symbol?

Guys, we're losing.

Even Neville Chamberlain would be more cogent than a modern-day leftist appeaser.

More insipid stupidity from the country formerly called "Great Britain".

Your charitable contributions are better used by giving to other organizations that give more to the people that need it that to the organizations management.

What the Red Cross in the UK does isn't my concern - they are already lost to the pagan barbarians.

However, when Obama's jack-booted thugs use federal authority to tell banks to lose the "Merry Christmas" buttons and Nativity scenes, I take note: here and now, it is happening.

In case that link doesn't work, try this: http://www.koco.com/r/26162860/detail.html

The Christian right's intolerance and hatred, evidenced so pointedly during the hate-filled rallies against the Park 51 project, is causing a backlash.

So you do reap what you sow, after all...

Besides, the suggestion that Christians love their fellow man and care about anyone but themselves is proven to be hypocrisy on this blog on a daily basis. Some here think a foreign-sounding last name is enough to have you investigated.

I guess when some Christian extremists hate so much their hypocrisy effects all Christians.

Whoop crawled out from under a rock to spout his hateful anti-Christian blather again.

Merry Christmas..asshole!

Save the money. Buy ammo. Jesus wants a big finish.

From Post #6:

American soldiers in Europe in WWII were charged for food and clothing by the Red Cross sometimes having their pay docked by the Red Cross without warning.

My maternal grandfather was WWII vet, and he told me the same thing.

From Post #7:

I gave up on the Red Cross a long time ago.

After 911 they were caught diverting donations.

Actually, the Red Cross diversion of donations took place during the aftermath of the Oklahoma City Bombing.

When 9/11 occurred, a top Red Cross official did something to prevent a repeat of what happened after the Oklahoma City Bombing. She was rewarded for her action by being forced to resign from her job.

Regarding Post #19, once again Woop uses ad hominem instead of a sound argument, and ad hominem is the weapon of last resort for someone who is losing an argument.

Dodo David

The reason the head of the ARC was forced to resign after 9/11 was that she insisted on pushing for blood donations long after it was abundantly clear that they were not merely unnecessary, but dangerously counterproductive.

Blood is only good for 42 days. Without a patient needing transfusion it gets wasted. It costs significant money to collect, test, and store blood products.

She wasted over 250,000 units of blood by pushing for those donations. That was a mistake that cost them nearly $25 million.

That is why she was fired.

At the time there were rumors that the Red Cross was trying to quickly buy machines to allow them to freeze the blood and keep it for 10 years. The military does that. They have a strategic blood supply to take care of wounded soldiers.

Why would the ARC need a strategic blood supply? The easier to flood a regional market and drive independent competition out of business. That's why. The ARC has tried to do that several times before and was actually sued in LA, California for using its national reach to dump product at below cost with the purpose of driving local competition out of business. They settled out of court. They also were doing the same thing in KC in 1999 but failed when the community organized against them.

Jim m is citing myths, legends and outright bullshit in his hatred for the red cross.

Why hate the red cross? It's in fashion for Christinista extremists this week to hate the red cross.

They have so much hate to share, they just love to spread it around. Even tell lies if that furthers their extremist position.

Actually none of the issues I addressed are mentioned in you link.

I have worked in the blood bank industry for 22 years. I know what blood costs, who collects it and am more than familiar with the economics of it.

I am no fool and I know that it is a multi biillion dollar industry. No one is making an obscene profit on blood donations not even the ARC.

That was not my statement.

I said that they used their national reach to try to eliminate competition by using unethical business practices.

I said that the discharge of their president was due to mismanagement that cost them millions of dollars that otherwise could have easily been avoided.

I reported what dozens of WWII vets have told me including my father and uncles.

These are not myths.

The ARC is a deeply flawed organization. But it is also the largest provider of blood in the US providing fully 50% of the blood supply. We need them to keep providing blood for this nation. They do so despite the fact that they have been under consent decree for well over a decade and they are being fined over $5M per year for violating that consent decree.

Their bloated bureaucracy means that they are behind the curve in adopting the newest standards for blood banking and they have not adopted ISBT128 and can only receive conditional accreditation from the American Association of Blood Banks because of that failure. I believe they may be the only blood center organization in the country not in compliance with this regulation. compliance was mandatory as of April 2009.

This has nothing to do with Chirstianity. It is solely to do with a badly run organization

Troll hammer time

I wouldn't ban jim m just yet. Yes, the link I provided shows that the mythology jim is promoting and yes, jim seems unable to provide a link that backs up any of the hate he's spouting -- but give him a chance.

I'm sure he realizes that just waving his hand and declaring his myths are factual is bullshit and he'll soon provide some links to back up his claims.

Or maybe he won't. I for one am in favor of giving him the benefit of the doubt.

From Wikipedia:

"The American Red Cross felt that the terrorist attacks were a sign of increased instability and urged people to donate blood, even though it was not needed at that time. In the end, some unused blood was destroyed"

That some was 250,000 units. I suppose I could find some AABB newsletter that tallied the number for you but those are not on line.

Regarding the consent decree:

The FDA can impose penalties after April 2003 up to the following maximum amounts:

* $10,000 per event (and $10,000 per day) for any violation of an ARC standard operating procedure (SOP), the law, or consent decree requirement and timeline
* $50,000 for preventable release of each unit of blood for which FDA determines that there is a reasonable probability that the product may cause serious adverse health consequences or death
o $5,000 for the release of each unit that may cause temporary problems, up to a maximum of $500,000 per event
* $50,000 for the improper re-release of each unsuitable blood unit that was returned to ARC inventory
* $10,000 for each donor inappropriately omitted from the National Donor Deferral Registry, a list of all unsuitable donors

The Food and Drug Administration has continued to apply pressure and fines to the American Red Cross in order to enforce compliance with regulations.

The 2003 court order actually represents an increase in the fines as the court determined that the previous fines were not having the desired effect.

From the WAPO 6/10/08:

"In February, the Red Cross was fined $4.6 million after an FDA review found 113 instances in which the charity retrieved "unsuitable blood components," according to federal documents. That could mean using an ineligible donor, failing to conduct proper testing or shipping the blood at an improper temperature.

The Red Cross is congressionally chartered to provide relief during major disasters. It has been fined more than $21 million for safety lapses over the past five years but said it has implemented new measures. "

Hemacare settles lawsuit against ARC for anticompetative practices:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/HEMACARE+RESOLVES+LAWSUIT+RED+CROSS+TO+CHANGE+MARKETING...-a095585054

I won't bother with the WWII issues they have already been corroborated by others on the thread.

Opps! Someone took a huge galoob and out plopped Woop the poop.

What a clown.

And it isn't just the American Red Cross.

The Canadian Red Cross was relieved of it's blood collection operations after the Krever Commission recommended doing so following years of people dying from HIV and Hep C from contaminated blood.

Our ARC isn't that bad, but it has it's moments.

Bottom line is that the Red Cross has long since deviated from its roots as a service organization and has become more of a quasi-political organization. It is the attendant bureaucracy that prevents it from doing a decent job.

Once "great" Britain, whose craven electorate was never better represented than by the definitive appeaser, Neville Chamberlain, is already so abjectly islamicized as to be beyond recovery. And, as a kind of bonus, one imagines, is also the world's number one source of and/or haven for effectively once great British taxpayer sponsored islamanazi terrorists.

"That some was 250,000 units. I suppose I could find some AABB newsletter that tallied the number for you but those are not on line."

You can't find it online because its bullshit.

Form the link I posted above:

Blood is a perishable commodity, with a shelf life of about 42 days. Typically, between 1 percent and 3 percent of units collected reach their expiration date before they are used. That rate was only slightly higher (5 percent) for blood units collected from people anxious to help after 9/11, including more than a quarter-million people who gave blood for the first time.

In the uncertain days following the terrorist attacks, having a robust supply of blood available seemed prudent. It takes two to three days for blood to be collected, tested and processed, and only blood already on the shelf can be used in the immediate aftermath of an emergency.

Seems very prudent to ramp up collection efforts immediately after our nation was attacked.

Jim's BS: "That was a mistake that cost them nearly $25 million." - no proof of that, co news reports, no links. But Jim is sure of this - he just can't show that he didn't make it up.

Jim's BS: "That is why she was fired. - - no proof of that, co news reports, no links. But Jim is sure of this - he just can't show that he didn't make it up.

Isn't it ironic that no one over the centuries, Brits included, ever worried about upsetting Jews at Christmas? Nor Buddhists or indus.

Whenever you read the words "upset", "disrespect", or "insult" in a narrative about Muslim sensibilities, think FEAR. That word explains clearly, and succinctly, why no one worried about Jews or the others; and why they do worry about Muslims. Generally, the followers of the other religions do not set off bombs (well the Jews did in Palestine in the 1940s, pre-Israel). Followers of other religions do not stone, or behead, people who disagree with them.

Hypocrisy abounds.

It's natural for any group of Americans who are oppressed to push back to assert their rights.

Christian Americans fight against the rights of American muslims - the Park51 project a perfect example.

You're surprised that American Muslims are pushing back, having to assert and maintain their rights in the face of oppression?

Seriously? Would any group of Americans just roll over and let Fox News and the their nation of misinformed idiots restrict muslim-americans rights? I hope not. I hope no group of Americans who find their rights being restricted by Christian americans ever just roll over and accept it.

Choose to think what you may.

Again, this has been my career for over 20 years. Average cost for collection and distribution of a unit of blood approaches $100 all in. I'm sure that the ARC gets a better price for some of their costs but their bureaucracy is also very expensive. The variable cost per unit probably runs in the neighborhood of $60-$75 That's ~8 for the bag, $50 for the disease testing, and then you need to account for the labor for collection, testing, transportation etc. ARC collects and distributes over 7 million units per year.

Yes Healy may have also been fired for the attempted diversion of 9/11 benefits to other areas, but to say that the blood collection fiasco contributed nothing is foolish. It was a major money loser and created much anger and resentment in the industry (several industry organizations denounced the continued appeals for blood after it was obvious that it was not necessary).

You may accept my interpretation or not, but the issues I have raised are facts. ARC has been sued for unfair competition, they did collect blood and waste it, they did treat our WWII soldiers poorly.

Before moving to PA, I ran a blood drive in NJ, 4 years in a row. The last year we switched from Red Cross out of Philadelphia to a local blood outfit out of Trenton. The other outfit (Community Blood Services) was more professional and respectful of our building and organisation. We had complained to the RC for years about their people being late and unprepared, and for showing a lack of tact and sensitivity. Hint: When in the hall of a Catholic organization, do NOT mock the picture of the Pope or the statues of Jesus and Mary. We had also asked many times that they not schedule another drive in the same neighborhood that month, or if they did, to stop complaining that our numbers had fallen in the last 10 years. Community Blood Services also offered us an incentive in the form of a youth scholarship of a $500 for every so many units we collected that we in turn would pass along to the local Catholic elementary.
How did the Red Cross react to this change? They sent emails to the local schools and churches telling bald lies about the other blood organization. They said the blood would not go to the local hospitals, but would be sent to Newark, Jersey City etc exclusively. They said the blood would also not be given to Catholic hospitals. It was very ugly, and very spiteful.

You're the freakin red CROSS, fer gosh sakes!

This is right above the autonomous nervous system, folks. No thought involved. Just fear. Plain, raw, unadulterated FEAR. Well hidden. Not even admitted to, but - hey f##k Christians, right? Take care of the muzzies, right? Cause they gave so much last year, right?

No, cause THEY threated to kill you. Christians are nice, and don't do that. So spit on Christians.

Must kill PC. Must kill PC. Don't expect a cent from me.