This statement comes from an internet user. He tells what he has seen with his own eyes in India :
"Four children shared each bunk bed, which was just a metal frame with no mattresses. The food was just watery rice with a little overcooked vegetable. I was told the children would have had no clothing to wear except for the generous donations of clothing from some local Indians. When I asked who was paying for the few caretakers I saw there, I was told the state was paying them, since they were the children’s teachers."Is it true? This orphanage is highly advertised as one of Amma's charitable achievement. He also speaks about the houses for the poor :
"The ashram will not build a dwelling unless the people own the land on which it is to be put. Obviously, not many of the poor are land owners."Really? He seems to also have some informations about AIMS :
"...less than 5% of the hospital’s resources were devoted to servicing the poor, and even that amount wouldn’t have been there had it not been paid for by the government of India. Even the few poor people who were given medical care had to pay for their medications, which many could not do."Her devotees say that she brings so much to the world. Does she precisely bring too much?
"Kerala, a state the size of California, already had 5 free medical colleges before this one, and wasn’t in need of another."Anyone who dares utter criticism about Amma is compelled to read the endless list of her charitable achievements. This list is just made of words and sentences scrolling on computers screens and printed on leaflets. But who knows how these charities actually operate?