Matt, Gunjan and Karen have offered the Hope Chest assistance with preparing a financial report. We’re at present discussing what an adequate report may look like. Thank you to all three.
We may put one out and then ask you if that’s what you’re seeking. If you want more detail, we’ll go back and produce another until we find what level of detail and granularity satisfies.
Of course we’ll protect the anonymity of both donor and recipient. That goes without saying, as far as I’m concerned.
Again this is a useful exercise for me because I’ll need to do it with the Bridge Fund, which will be the successor to the Hope Chest, so I’m looking forward to seeing what our three financial advisors counsel us on how to proceed.
A number of comments to the last Memo focussed on the two readings with Linda and asked questions such as would the radio interviews be paid for from the Hope Chest? Let me reply to those comments.
The two interviews that were paid for by the Hope Chest were only paid for because I’m running low on funds with the increased expenses that go along with developing the Bridge Fund. To date, I’ve paid a fairly hefty sum for many. many matters related to this blogsite, the Bridge Fund, the needs of readers, and so on.
But I’m nearing the end of my ability to continue doing so. Perhaps two more months at this level of outlay and I’m in the soup along with everyone else. This won’t occur however because I anticipate the Bridge Fund starting shortly and I’ll earn a reasonable (not excessive) salary for my work there as will others who also join it.
It’s also true to say that the two interviews were held exclusively to ask questions that pertained to the setting up of the Bridge Fund, which is the successor to the Hope Chest. As such I considered charging them to the Hope Chest to be a justifiable business expense.
A reader asked if the radio interviews would also be charged to the Hope Chest. A donor has come forward and offered to pay for all the radio interviews. If she hadn’t, Graham and Linda can vouch for the fact that I intended to pay for them myself.
I wasn’t entirely sure how I would have done it, but somehow I would have. However I haven’t heard from Linda that she intends to charge for them, though I’ve asked her. So nothing is settled for sure.
A third comment was that Linda should give me interviews for free because I give her so much business. This site does not promote anyone, although sometimes I do promote an event that also happens to have a charge to it if I feel that the event is worthy of our attention, whether or not it charges.
If Linda Dillon benefits from my use of her services, that benefit is incidental, as far as I’m concerned. It’s no reason for me to ask Linda to waive her professional fees and I wouldn’t ask her to do so.
Once NESARA arrives, of course, all these considerations will go away. They may even go away with the advent of the Bridge Fund. Until then, we all need to earn our living – me, Linda, you.
I’d also like to mention a discussion I had with Sanat Kumara on Dec. 7. I asked him if I was a NESARA custodian and he said, no, you are the equivalent of an ombudsman. Your job is to bring clarity and integrity to the NESARA work in the particular area I live in.
I asked him if he had put me in charge of the Bridge Fund and he said he had. I asked him why he had when I had very little interest in money and not much financial expertise. He said that was exactly why he had put me in charge of the Fund. He said he didn’t want a Wall Street or Bay Street type in charge of the Bridge Fund. He wanted someone who was not much interested in money.
So I guess I’m telling you right off the bat, dealing with money in the way I’ve been asked to do by Archangel Michael and Sanat Kumara is not my idea of an enjoyable and challenging position. It is my idea of what service entails. I’m doing it because the two Bosses have requested it and I’ll do the best job I can.
But I’m going to need help and I’m going to need a wee bit of slack as to what one needs to know and what one needs to do. And as soon as the job is done, I’m back on my regular beat of writing. This for me is an interlude and not the start of something big, as the song says.
I promise you we will move money to where it needs to go. I’m not sure I can promise you that we’ll do it elegantly or according to the books. We may make mistakes, but we’ll learn from them. We’ll offer transparency and accountability and we’ll get the job done.
The way we do it certainly won’t be the way that others might.
One last point: the same people who last week were saying hurry up and get this started are this week saying slow down and be accountable. I can hurry up or I can slow down. But I can’t do both at once. Either you want me to get the money out quickly or you want me to proceed slowly and cautiously. Just be aware of when you’re asking me what and whether it’s consistent with what you asked me last week. That’s all I ask. For the rest, I’m itching as much as you are to get this show on the road.