13 comments on “And Mr. Snowdon shoes that Oxfam really are ignorant toads

  1. Oxfam is not on an anti-poverty crusade, it is on an anti-wealth crusade, if the poor are collateral damage then so be it. It long since ceased to be a charity for the poor and became an activist organisation with a political agenda.

  2. Oxfam should stick to famine relief – which is what it is supposed to do. Instead, it has become a campaigning and lobbying organisation with a strident left-wing agenda. Wouldn’t be suprised to find out it was a ‘Fake Charity’ receiving significant taxpayer funding – virtually every other charity is, except for the real ones who do real charitable work, like the Salvation Army or Air Ambulance who have to rely on public donations. I listened to Oxfam’s Head on TV over Christmas – he is quite clearly a left-wing activist politician who never mentioned famine relief once. The Government should investigate how it is that the left have infiltrated and twisted the Charitable sector.

  3. Someone’s gotta say it.

    Won’t someone please think of the feckin’ children?”

    In this case, poor, starving little feckers.

  4. ReefKnot
    “Oxfam should stick to famine relief – which is what it is supposed to do. Instead, it has become a campaigning and lobbying organisation with a strident left-wing agenda.”

    This seems to be happening across the board though, Amnesty, RSPCA, even Greenpeace seem to be chasing the campaigning on more and more ‘left’ wing causes rather than what there orginal intent was. Amnesty seems to have been completely subverted by an Anti-American agenda.

  5. The Government should investigate how it is that the left have infiltrated and twisted the Charitable sector.</blockquote

    What a statist suggestion. A better solution is to publicise it and let individuals make up their own minds.

  6. What a statist suggestion. A better solution is to publicise it and let individuals make up their own minds

    If as Ian Bennett says at #3, 26% of Oxfam’s funding comes from the state, a ‘statist suggestion’ seems to be called for.

  7. If as Ian Bennett says at #3, 26% of Oxfam’s funding comes from the state, a ‘statist suggestion’ seems to be called for.

    So cut their state funding. An ideological witch hunt as suggested by ReefKnot seems a thoroughly illiberal overreaction

  8. And let the state provide whatever service its currently paying for?
    With no charitable subsidy to government.

  9. “And let the state provide whatever service its currently paying for?”

    You mean the leftist campaigning?

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>