I remember the Red Cross thing -- it was after 9/11 -- people donated millions upon millions under the theory that it would go to help the victims, but the Red Cross decided they'd use some of it to help with their other operating expenses and save some away for future disasters, which ticked people off.
Is that even legal? I remember after the Asian tsunami, the blanket organisation that was made up of several Third World charities like Oxfam, ActionAid, etc, here in the UK had cash left over. But they carefully wrote to each and every donor asking them if it was okay to use it for other disasters/needs or if they wanted it returned to them. A very small portion wanted a refund, but the majority just said use it as you see fit.
I'm not sure if they just thought that was the moral/sensible thing to do or whether they believed it was a legal requirement as the cash had been donated for a specific purpose and legally could only be used for that purpose.
I recall that there was an rumour item on the news that they were doing what the ARC did and it caused quite an angry backlash - so their spokespeople had to hastily appear on the news channels and issue statements that it wasn't true and that all and any money needed for the tsunami victims would be used there.
LabRat
