Nobody claimed otherwise. The claim was that he gave money to nothing except his own life extension fund. And you agree that he's given money to other things.

Ah I see my mistake. I had noticed grandparent being about charity and was responding to that.

It depends on your definition of "charity". If you're talking about Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, Wikipedia says:

>The organization states that it is the official U.S. charity authorized to collect donations for IDF soldiers.

>Charity evaluators have generally rated the organization favorably.[9]

>The organization is recognized as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) charity in the United States and has been tax-exempt since July 1983.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends_of_the_Israel_Defense_...

Would you consider a “charity” for Nazis or for an org that has killed and maimed tens upon tens of thousands of children to be a good thing or even charity?

The listed criteria for what they evaluate is not what the issue is. Did you check Charity Navigator? An org that focuses on abusing kittens will be evaluated as good by them as long as its governance is by the books.

Wikipedia regardless is not something that should be cited directly when it comes to anything remotely political.

>Would you consider a “charity” [...] an org that has killed and maimed tens upon tens of thousands of children to be a good thing or even charity?

I do not consider Planned Parenthood a good thing. However, I will still admit they are technically registered as a charity with the US government.

Friends of the Israel Defense Forces is rated 98% and 4/4 on Charity Navigator.

https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/133156445