Re: I'm torn on this one.....

I remember clearly the toilet paper to victims of hurricane Katrina proposal. What bothered me about it was, part of the donation was tied to buying the Midas report.

To me if intentions were good and honest, there should of been donations only and not tied to buying any product. That made it seem shady and like the TV commercials of giving to the poor where a nickel of every dollar goes to poor and the rest pays for the homes, yachts and cars of people running the commercials.

Also if the proposal was indeed legitimate, then there should of been proof available that TP was going to victims. Instead all I read was there was too much red tape to proceed with the project. In the mean time I suspect there are some people that actually bought the Midas Report with donation to TP to victims in mind. I wonder if they were offered a refund once project fell apart.

> I owe Don a lot for the time and advice he so willingly gave me, and I'm
> not going to let this board turn into A Bashing Place.

> On the other hand, many's the time I've become a "crusader" when
> I knew someone was scamming the public, even if I hadn't personally lost
> anything.

> I don't know the facts here...

> Jason doesn't think I'm open to the truth in this case, but I am.
> (Jason, I'm sorry I haven't dug deeper into this and followed up with the
> contacts you've sent me, but I have way more than I can handle right now;
> I just can't take on any more.)

> Jason's site is hard to follow, and it reads like a rant -- which, if he
> has his facts straight, is unfortunate, because it rubs people the wrong
> way and doesn't get the point across.

> If he has his facts wrong, then it's too bad for Jason because I expect it
> will land his hiney in court and it won't be pleasant.

> This is an anti-scam board, and it would be wrong to zap this... but I'm
> staying on the fence right now.

> I need proof, and disjointed emails are not proof enough for me.

> Specifically, what bothers me is the two-liner from the company.
> I've gotten plenty of threats from plenty of "legal
> departments," and they're always very specific. This doesn't
> give any details whatsoever; cripes, it doesn't even mention the
> pictures! (I'm not saying you made it up, Jason... just that it
> feels like something is missing.)

> It also bothers me that all of this is supposed to prove that the
> donations never went where they were promised. WERE there any
> donations (as in, did any people actually buy any products intending to
> donate a percentage)? DID they go or didn't they (that seems to have
> taken a back seat, now, to biz op scams)?

> In either case, I think people have to make their own decisions, and I
> can't actively hide this kind of information, although I really hate it...
> and if some government agency really did get involved, I'd like to wait
> and see how that turns out.

> For the record, Don screaming at people in emails is NOT evidence of
> guilt. It's what he does (or "did," until he turned over a
> new leaf a few months ago).

> Luv,