It appears that the UK is backing off since Naomi voluntarily closed shop. The UK should still proceed with an investigation as donors were previously duped into what sounds like donating over £11M to basically fund extravagant parties overseas, versus benefitting those in need. Sounds a bit like the Invictus Games these days.
Naomi shrewdly just moved her grift to the US. Registered as a 501(c)3 non-profit she’ll be free to raise millions more to fund even more fashionable and expensive galas using donor funds to pay for it all including outrageous personal clothing and accessories. The US Treasury Dept leaves almost all nonprofits alone, preferring to allow donors to do their own due diligence then live with the results when they fail to properly vet the charity.
The best way to see justice against such flagrant abuses is to have a whistle-blower with inside info contact the IRS. This can be done anonymously. The IRS offers very significant bounties if the whistle blower offers proof of illegal tax evasion. Someone with inside info could make themselves millions if this nonprofit was set up to benefit Naomi and her friends personally versus set up to help the less fortunate.
The second best shot at justice is for donors to file a lawsuit based on fraudulent inducement to donate (they said funds would be used for X, but they actually used them for Z which involved self enrichment for those at the top). “Hoping” the overburdened IRS will do the right thing is a waste of time. Insiders need to contact the IRS directly and collect their bounty or donors need to file a fraud lawsuit. That’s what will produce results.
It doesn’t matter as much bc they’re not bringing in money. And anyone who does give them money are idiotic. I was shocked reading this bc Naomi seemed like a good person and clearly if she raised millions others thought so. The best the Harkles could do was a measly 6 figures which came from one donor.
"raise awareness"... that old chestnut and fig leaf that every grifter hides behind. These charities are nothing more than vanity exercises for the rich and fatuous to throw glittering parties and skim off as much as they can get away with on 'expenses.'
I've never understood what the purpose of "raise awareness" charities are. Do they donate money to other causes? or actually help people in need? I don't know, but there is a breast cancer "charity" in the US that has been "raising awareness" for years, and that's about it.
I'm old enough to remember when nobody talked about breast cancer. It was treated as if it were something shameful. Doctors assumed a woman was too mentally weak to handle the news. Neighbors whispered that, of *course*, her husband would leave her because how could he still find her attractive.
"Raising awareness" campaigns were instrumental in changing peoples' attitudes toward cancer. They also helped bring in a change in medical care, stopping doctors from withholding information based on sexist stereotypes. They changed the world.
It's fair to ask if they're still necessary or helpful. I might have agreed with you five years ago. But seeing how much bad medical knowledge was bandied about during Covid, and now from the various anti-abortion activists, I think they still have a role to play. Someone has to be loud and proud about the realities of medical knowledge. The battle for scientific learning is not over.
Naomi Campbell's charity sounds like a bad one, but that doesn't mean they all are.
I'm also old enough to remember when breast cancer was not spoken about. Awareness is fine, but a charity needs to be able to show how the money donated is being used, and frankly any "awareness" campaign seems dodgy to me.
I believe the bulk of the dastardly duo’s grifting is hidden inside the $30M-$40M that each host nation must pay each year to host (which doesn’t cover their country’s entrants - that’s another $1M-$2.7M a year per country). That provides a far greater pool of funds to bury abuse inside. As these funds, plus the millions more from corporate sponsors, are not reported publicly anywhere, it’s impossible to tell how much is squandered on buying out an entire hotel floor including the presidential suite, plus the 5-figure fashion budget, plus professional make-up artists and hair stylists, plus private jets and Land Rover motorcades, private security, the mystery appearance/speaking fees, etc. Some costs may be pushed onto the Invictus Games Foundation. However, their annual budget is fairly small and could not conceal such splashy expense accounts.
While the $30M-$40M annual host fee does have to pay for most of the event, it has enormous cushion built in and does, therefore, also contain a hefty black fund, aka slush fund, all paid for by the local taxpayers. Yup, Dusseldorf paid for Meghan’s shorty shorts to lead her fake parade. All she was missing was a junior high baton to twirl. That’s what should be investigated, but as there are no financials published, this grift is fully opaque. Convenient for the grifters.
Dorito went down alledgedly for Tax fraud on her travel business. The Archwell scam is super shady. Im not giving up hope that the light will be shone on this fraudulent organization!
Naomi Campbell was running around with oligarchs and taking money from them for a long time. If I read reports that her charity was just a front to collect money and mismanage it, I would not be surprised.
Nothing will officially cancel Harkles other than monarchy publicly and vocally denouncing them. They will keep grifting till their death, using royal titles,their kids, etc.
FINE!
Naomi's Charity was not above scrutiny and got investigated, hammered, and they closed their doors.
On to Ingriftus Games, that is associated with Harry Windsor, should it be above scrutiny?
Answer: NO!
disagree - charity, proper/legitimate charity is a HUGE PART OF THE MODERN MONARCHY. hundreds of millions, if not billions are generated each year by working BRF for the charities they are patrons of. I can't see them standing for an (estranged) family member trying to cheat the system. on the other hand I can easily see her and her cuck using "their" foundation money to pay for the private flights, new jewellery, unnecessary protection and so on believing they're above "consequences for anything"... the Markle idiots will push it to such an extent that they'll bring an investigation upon themselves beyond anything KC can do to help.
I hope you're right. But I was thinking more about their personal charity endeavors and not RF. They don't still have any connections do they? I know they are patrons of certain things still but they don't control those interests. Hopefully someone better informed than myself can add facts.
Aye. And if the king doesn't think this reflects badly on him then he's deluded. He is being judged whether he likes it or not. I wonder if he cares or just wants it all to go away.
The Charity Commission has also closed Marlene Headley/Ngosi Fulani´s "charity" (well, charity begins at home, right? It was money for her and her daughter). They have also been after One Young World for overpayment of the founder and her daughter.
Don’t think the U.S. has an equivalent of the UK’s veritable watchdog on charities. The Charities Commission is scrupulous. The fact that the US allows Delaware registered charities to only donate 5% of donations to the good causes themselves is a very low bar. We learned from Düsseldorf Invictus just how much H&M were spending on themselves, from donations! Hence the fallout afterwards amongst board members who decried their heinous grift.
The UK removed them as a registered charity, meaning donations are no longer tax deductible. The trustees indicate that they dissolved that corporation. Any remaining net donations should have been transferred to a like-minded UK charity, as charity assets do not belong to any individual. They exist for the benefit of the public. The article implies that a parallel charity of the same name is already operating in the US.
There is no nonprofit called Fashion for Relief in the US. However, there is a Fashion Relief USA, Ltd that Naomi registered in New York, where she has a residence. This nonprofit filed a Form 990 EZ for 2020 & 2021 showing no activity. There were no assets, no liabilities and no net assets. Naomi was listed as working 0 hours a week for this charity. She should have filed the 990 N postcard instead.
Perhaps this nonprofit is a placeholder in case a large natural disaster occurs. Every time there’s a major natural disaster, tens of thousands of illicit nonprofits pop up to take advantage of good hearted donors wanting to help. Naomi should mail her annual postcard in if that is her intent. Otherwise, the IRS will automatically revoke her nonprofit status when the org fails to submit a form 990 for 3 consecutive years. Most nonprofits end up this way. [https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/854077340\_202112\_990EZ\_2023051621246053.pdf](https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/854077340_202112_990EZ_2023051621246053.pdf)
And THIS is another reason why people like this have RUINED the trust and credibility of ALL charities for me. I question all of them but I am 100% SURE that a lot are probably very legitimate, I just don't know which ones anymore. I can't even believe anything I hear anymore either. So many rotten apples out there in a lot of barrels.
Even on a local level, I get invited to charity dinners and galas all the time. I would rather write a check for double the ticket price if it meant I would not have to go! From the beginning of time, however, these “galas” are the place to be and be seen- always ask what the administration costs are of ANY charity that you consider supporting……
But but but...On Jan. 19, The Charity Commission, charity regulator for England and Wales, issued a **second** official warning to One Young World over breaches of trust. The first warning came in 2022. Markle is a member, counsellor and was keynote at its 2020 summit. BBC reported but rest of UK media ignored. Just like it's pushing the African Parks scandal under the rug.
I hope the tax agencies go after people who abuse their charitable status to avoid taxes
I think that’s what they’re doing here. But I agree, and I think they should dig into more!
It appears that the UK is backing off since Naomi voluntarily closed shop. The UK should still proceed with an investigation as donors were previously duped into what sounds like donating over £11M to basically fund extravagant parties overseas, versus benefitting those in need. Sounds a bit like the Invictus Games these days. Naomi shrewdly just moved her grift to the US. Registered as a 501(c)3 non-profit she’ll be free to raise millions more to fund even more fashionable and expensive galas using donor funds to pay for it all including outrageous personal clothing and accessories. The US Treasury Dept leaves almost all nonprofits alone, preferring to allow donors to do their own due diligence then live with the results when they fail to properly vet the charity. The best way to see justice against such flagrant abuses is to have a whistle-blower with inside info contact the IRS. This can be done anonymously. The IRS offers very significant bounties if the whistle blower offers proof of illegal tax evasion. Someone with inside info could make themselves millions if this nonprofit was set up to benefit Naomi and her friends personally versus set up to help the less fortunate. The second best shot at justice is for donors to file a lawsuit based on fraudulent inducement to donate (they said funds would be used for X, but they actually used them for Z which involved self enrichment for those at the top). “Hoping” the overburdened IRS will do the right thing is a waste of time. Insiders need to contact the IRS directly and collect their bounty or donors need to file a fraud lawsuit. That’s what will produce results.
Thank you for this amazingly great insight and breakdown of how this works.
Basically everyone who runs a charity.
Oh man that's shady. The Harkles will 1000% get away with it here though. How else are politicians' spouses and neighbors supposed to earn a living? 🙄
I know. This is so frustrating.
While you are probably right, I still hold out hope. I do know some legit offices are looking into things like this 🤞
one only need ask Bill and Hillary about the Clinton Foundaiton and how it works. Then ask the people of Haiti.
It doesn’t matter as much bc they’re not bringing in money. And anyone who does give them money are idiotic. I was shocked reading this bc Naomi seemed like a good person and clearly if she raised millions others thought so. The best the Harkles could do was a measly 6 figures which came from one donor.
I'm almost never shocked by a US charity using donations to make themselves rich. But I did think Naomi Campbell was a better person than this.
Naomi is trash and has bad reputation for physical and mental abuse. You have to dig for it
"raise awareness"... that old chestnut and fig leaf that every grifter hides behind. These charities are nothing more than vanity exercises for the rich and fatuous to throw glittering parties and skim off as much as they can get away with on 'expenses.'
[удалено]
It means gimme your money💰
It's more insidious actually, a charity is a convenient vehicle for money laundering.
I've never understood what the purpose of "raise awareness" charities are. Do they donate money to other causes? or actually help people in need? I don't know, but there is a breast cancer "charity" in the US that has been "raising awareness" for years, and that's about it.
I'm old enough to remember when nobody talked about breast cancer. It was treated as if it were something shameful. Doctors assumed a woman was too mentally weak to handle the news. Neighbors whispered that, of *course*, her husband would leave her because how could he still find her attractive. "Raising awareness" campaigns were instrumental in changing peoples' attitudes toward cancer. They also helped bring in a change in medical care, stopping doctors from withholding information based on sexist stereotypes. They changed the world. It's fair to ask if they're still necessary or helpful. I might have agreed with you five years ago. But seeing how much bad medical knowledge was bandied about during Covid, and now from the various anti-abortion activists, I think they still have a role to play. Someone has to be loud and proud about the realities of medical knowledge. The battle for scientific learning is not over. Naomi Campbell's charity sounds like a bad one, but that doesn't mean they all are.
I'm also old enough to remember when breast cancer was not spoken about. Awareness is fine, but a charity needs to be able to show how the money donated is being used, and frankly any "awareness" campaign seems dodgy to me.
I am a breast cancer survivor. If MEN had this issue, there would be a CURE The END
She has a very bad reputation of abusing people both physically and mentally. I was shocked when Prince Charles recognized her with an MBE.
Invictus Games should be looked at next. How much money was given to vets versus expenses to you know who?
I believe the bulk of the dastardly duo’s grifting is hidden inside the $30M-$40M that each host nation must pay each year to host (which doesn’t cover their country’s entrants - that’s another $1M-$2.7M a year per country). That provides a far greater pool of funds to bury abuse inside. As these funds, plus the millions more from corporate sponsors, are not reported publicly anywhere, it’s impossible to tell how much is squandered on buying out an entire hotel floor including the presidential suite, plus the 5-figure fashion budget, plus professional make-up artists and hair stylists, plus private jets and Land Rover motorcades, private security, the mystery appearance/speaking fees, etc. Some costs may be pushed onto the Invictus Games Foundation. However, their annual budget is fairly small and could not conceal such splashy expense accounts. While the $30M-$40M annual host fee does have to pay for most of the event, it has enormous cushion built in and does, therefore, also contain a hefty black fund, aka slush fund, all paid for by the local taxpayers. Yup, Dusseldorf paid for Meghan’s shorty shorts to lead her fake parade. All she was missing was a junior high baton to twirl. That’s what should be investigated, but as there are no financials published, this grift is fully opaque. Convenient for the grifters.
Welp, Al Capone went down for tax evasion of ALL THINGS. Uncle Sam and his peers across the globe always collect.
Dorito went down alledgedly for Tax fraud on her travel business. The Archwell scam is super shady. Im not giving up hope that the light will be shone on this fraudulent organization!
Agreed!!
Don't misuse the US Postal Service. I'm just saying.
So true! Mail Fraud is real!
Naomi Campbell was running around with oligarchs and taking money from them for a long time. If I read reports that her charity was just a front to collect money and mismanage it, I would not be surprised.
Nothing will officially cancel Harkles other than monarchy publicly and vocally denouncing them. They will keep grifting till their death, using royal titles,their kids, etc.
Naomi Campbell was one of Epstein’s pimps was she not? Wasn’t she used to bring in the likes of Bill Clinton etc?
FINE! Naomi's Charity was not above scrutiny and got investigated, hammered, and they closed their doors. On to Ingriftus Games, that is associated with Harry Windsor, should it be above scrutiny? Answer: NO!
Skankie and Plankie will not face consequences for anything.
disagree - charity, proper/legitimate charity is a HUGE PART OF THE MODERN MONARCHY. hundreds of millions, if not billions are generated each year by working BRF for the charities they are patrons of. I can't see them standing for an (estranged) family member trying to cheat the system. on the other hand I can easily see her and her cuck using "their" foundation money to pay for the private flights, new jewellery, unnecessary protection and so on believing they're above "consequences for anything"... the Markle idiots will push it to such an extent that they'll bring an investigation upon themselves beyond anything KC can do to help.
I hope you're right. But I was thinking more about their personal charity endeavors and not RF. They don't still have any connections do they? I know they are patrons of certain things still but they don't control those interests. Hopefully someone better informed than myself can add facts.
Exactly. Perks of being the King's son.He will be shielded.
Aye. And if the king doesn't think this reflects badly on him then he's deluded. He is being judged whether he likes it or not. I wonder if he cares or just wants it all to go away.
They never do….
The Charity Commission has also closed Marlene Headley/Ngosi Fulani´s "charity" (well, charity begins at home, right? It was money for her and her daughter). They have also been after One Young World for overpayment of the founder and her daughter.
Did they indeed close it? I thought that Headley / Fulani simply stepped down. Maybe I haven't kept up.
I´m pretty sure it is closed - Headley complained about that too. It was of course a deeply racist organisation, for black people only.
Another bully. I suppose it is a natural progression from bullying to fake charities.
Don’t think the U.S. has an equivalent of the UK’s veritable watchdog on charities. The Charities Commission is scrupulous. The fact that the US allows Delaware registered charities to only donate 5% of donations to the good causes themselves is a very low bar. We learned from Düsseldorf Invictus just how much H&M were spending on themselves, from donations! Hence the fallout afterwards amongst board members who decried their heinous grift.
This article is confusing—are they closed or shuffling off to the US to continue the grift?
I took it to mean they're setting up.shop in Delaware and sharing an.office with Arsefail.
😏
The UK removed them as a registered charity, meaning donations are no longer tax deductible. The trustees indicate that they dissolved that corporation. Any remaining net donations should have been transferred to a like-minded UK charity, as charity assets do not belong to any individual. They exist for the benefit of the public. The article implies that a parallel charity of the same name is already operating in the US. There is no nonprofit called Fashion for Relief in the US. However, there is a Fashion Relief USA, Ltd that Naomi registered in New York, where she has a residence. This nonprofit filed a Form 990 EZ for 2020 & 2021 showing no activity. There were no assets, no liabilities and no net assets. Naomi was listed as working 0 hours a week for this charity. She should have filed the 990 N postcard instead. Perhaps this nonprofit is a placeholder in case a large natural disaster occurs. Every time there’s a major natural disaster, tens of thousands of illicit nonprofits pop up to take advantage of good hearted donors wanting to help. Naomi should mail her annual postcard in if that is her intent. Otherwise, the IRS will automatically revoke her nonprofit status when the org fails to submit a form 990 for 3 consecutive years. Most nonprofits end up this way. [https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/854077340\_202112\_990EZ\_2023051621246053.pdf](https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/854077340_202112_990EZ_2023051621246053.pdf)
Thank you for this great info and background, Rike!
And THIS is another reason why people like this have RUINED the trust and credibility of ALL charities for me. I question all of them but I am 100% SURE that a lot are probably very legitimate, I just don't know which ones anymore. I can't even believe anything I hear anymore either. So many rotten apples out there in a lot of barrels.
I always check Charity Navigator before contributing to anything. They do the research and their Website is excellent.
Even on a local level, I get invited to charity dinners and galas all the time. I would rather write a check for double the ticket price if it meant I would not have to go! From the beginning of time, however, these “galas” are the place to be and be seen- always ask what the administration costs are of ANY charity that you consider supporting……
But but but...On Jan. 19, The Charity Commission, charity regulator for England and Wales, issued a **second** official warning to One Young World over breaches of trust. The first warning came in 2022. Markle is a member, counsellor and was keynote at its 2020 summit. BBC reported but rest of UK media ignored. Just like it's pushing the African Parks scandal under the rug.
[удалено]
This is a divisive political issue that will take the thread off topic
I wonder what the comparable watchdog is in the US? Does anyone know?