SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : CONSPIRACY THEORIES -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: sea_urchin who wrote (171)9/9/2005 3:48:35 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 418
 
Re: In fact, that was the main reason why I mentioned my small donation and also where I gave it -- and also the caveat that I hope the victims get it. After the tsunami, I considered Medicins Sans Frontieres the most worthy cause but, in this instance, no foreign charities are apparently permitted to operate in the US.

Médecins Sans Frontières?! Forget it! Chances are, your precious donation will end up in the hands of... Darfur bums in Sudan!! Clue:

Charity sets off storm with tsunami aid halt
By Katrin Bennhold International Herald Tribune

FRIDAY, JANUARY 7, 2005

PARIS
The Nobel Peace Prize-winning relief organization Médecins Sans Frontières has unleashed a storm of controversy through its decision to stop accepting donations for victims of the Asian tsunamis, adding a new dimension to the outpouring of generosity from wealthy countries in response to the disaster.

The organization says the €40 million, or $53 million, it has collected since the deadly wave hit 13 nations in the Indian Ocean on Dec. 26, killing about 150,000 people, is enough to finance its work in the region. While funds are sorely needed for other areas of the world, like Darfur in Sudan and Congo, it has pledged not to shift earmarked donations from one region to another.

"It's the first time that we have taken such a decision," Pierre Salignon, the organization's director general, said on its Internet site. "This may appear to run completely counter to the atmosphere of general mobilization, but it's a question of honesty: We don't want to bother the public for operations that are already financed."

The announcement highlighted the gulf between the charitable giving for the heavily mediatized Asian disaster compared with crises in areas devastated by chronic poverty and civil war that have gotten little attention and money over the years. It also drew criticism from other, less affluent, aid groups, who said it risked drying up funds vital to their own more long-term relief efforts.

Sylvain Trottier, spokesman for Action Contre la Faim, a French nongovernmental organization, or NGO, committed to relieving hunger in the developing world, said he was "astounded" by the way Médecins Sans Frontières had presented its decision.

"That they have enough funds and are honest about it is commendable," Trottier said. "But their announcement sort of suggests that they are honest and everybody else isn't. And we really worry that it will signal to the public that all NGOs have enough money for Asia, which is plainly wrong."

Action Contre la Faim has so far collected €2.6 million for tsunami relief work, of which most has already been spent. The organization's longer-term plans, involving water purification and efforts to rebuild people's livelihoods, are not yet financed, Trottier said.

Across the border in neighboring Germany, Deutsche Welthungerhilfe, another hunger relief group, is in a similar situation. In the Bonn-based headquarters of the organization, Médecins Sans Frontières's decision has also sparked surprise and little comprehension.

"We need every penny," said Hans-Joachim Preuss, secretary general of Welthungerhilfe. "MSF didn't make it clear that they are an organization that focuses just on emergency relief - we do longer-term work."

According to Preuss, Médecins Sans Frontières should have coupled the suspension of its emergency relief fund for Asia with an appeal to donors to give to other organizations.

In a sign of how broadly Médecins Sans Frontières's announcement had spread unease across Europe's aid community, the French government stepped up Wednesday, urging citizens and companies to keep giving.

"There are nongovernmental organizations that need funds, so contributions are always welcome," said Jean-François Copé, France's budget minister. "We have to keep sending contributions to associations that need them."

Meanwhile, many acknowledge that Médecins Sans Frontières's decision had sparked an overdue debate about the links between the media coverage of crises and the extent of charitable giving in response to them.

"The media keeps it on TV and that plays a huge role," said Devorah Goldburg, spokeswoman for the American Red Cross in Washington. "People are getting bombarded with the images day and night."

If Médecins Sans Frontières collected €40 million in eight days for Asia, it took the organization two months to gather €650,000 for the victims of civil war in Darfur. After the earthquake in Bam, Iran, a year ago, they only collected €600,000. And when it comes to malnutrition that kills hundreds of thousands in places like Mongolia, Haiti and the Congo, donations only trickle in.

"The real tragedy is that every day tens of thousands die of hunger and poverty-related disease," said Preuss. "If you add up a month of those deaths you surpass the Tsunami toll - but hunger and civil war are much less sexy for the media."

iht.com

Those charities are sort of a shell game, aren't they? You give them your money and after a few sleights of hand, you can't tell which shell the pea is under....



To: sea_urchin who wrote (171)9/9/2005 5:29:15 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 418
 
Re: In fact, that was the main reason why I mentioned my small donation and also where I gave it...

The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Donations....

Power to the victims of New Orleans

With the poor gone, developers are planning to gentrify the city

Naomi Klein

Friday September 9, 2005
The Guardian


On September 4, six days after Katrina hit, I saw the first glimmer of hope. "The people of New Orleans will not go quietly into the night, scattering across this country to become homeless in countless other cities while federal relief funds are funnelled into rebuilding casinos, hotels, chemical plants. We will not stand idly by while this disaster is used as an opportunity to replace our homes with newly built mansions and condos in a gentrified New Orleans."

The statement came from Community Labor United, a coalition of low-income groups in New Orleans. It went on to demand that a committee made up of evacuees "oversee Fema, the Red Cross and other organisations collecting resources on behalf of our people. We are calling for evacuees from our community to actively participate in the rebuilding of New Orleans."

It's a radical concept: the $10.5bn released by Congress and the $500m raised by private charities doesn't actually belong to the relief agencies or the government - it belongs to the victims. The agencies entrusted with the money should be accountable to them. Put another way, the people Barbara Bush tactfully described as "underprivileged anyway" just got very rich.

Except relief and reconstruction never seem to work like that. When I was in Sri Lanka six months after the tsunami, many survivors told me that the reconstruction was victimising them all over again. A council of the country's most prominent businesspeople had been put in charge of the process, and they were handing the coast over to tourist developers at a frantic pace. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of poor fishing people were still stuck in sweltering inland camps, patrolled by soldiers with machine guns and entirely dependent on relief agencies for food and water. They called reconstruction "the second tsunami".

There are already signs that New Orleans evacuees could face a similarly brutal second storm. Jimmy Reiss, chairman of the New Orleans Business Council, told Newsweek that he has been brainstorming about how "to use this catastrophe as a once-in-an-eon opportunity to change the dynamic". The council's wish list is well-known: low wages, low taxes, more luxury condos and hotels.

Before the flood, this highly profitable vision was already displacing thousands of poor African-Americans: while their music and culture was for sale in an increasingly corporatised French Quarter (where only 4.3% of residents are black), their housing developments were being torn down. "For white tourists and businesspeople, New Orleans's reputation means a great place to have a vacation, but don't leave the French Quarter or you'll get shot," Jordan Flaherty, a New Orleans-based labour organiser told me the day after he left the city by boat. "Now the developers have their big chance to disperse the obstacle to gentrification - poor people."

Here's a better idea: New Orleans could be reconstructed by and for the very people most victimised by the flood. Schools and hospitals that were falling apart before could finally have adequate resources; the rebuilding could create thousands of local jobs and provide massive skills training in decent paying industries. Rather than handing over the reconstruction to the same corrupt elite that failed the city so spectacularly, the effort could be led by groups like Douglass Community Coalition. Before the hurricane, this remarkable assembly of parents, teachers, students and artists was trying to reconstruct the city from the ravages of poverty by transforming Frederick Douglass senior high school into a model of community learning. They have already done the painstaking work of building consensus around education reform. Now that the funds are flowing, shouldn't they have the tools to rebuild every ailing public school in the city?

For a people's reconstruction process to become a reality (and to keep more contracts from going to Halliburton), the evacuees must be at the centre of all decision-making. According to Curtis Muhammad of Community Labor United, the disaster's starkest lesson is that African-Americans cannot count on any level of government to protect them.

"We had no caretakers," he says. That means the community groups that do represent African-Americans in Louisiana and Mississippi - many of which lost staff, office space and equipment in the flood - need our support now. Only a massive injection of cash and volunteers will enable them to do the crucial work of organising evacuees - currently scattered through 41 states - into a powerful political constituency. The most pressing question is where evacuees will live over the next few months. A dangerous consensus is building that they should collect a little charity, apply for a job at the Houston Wal-Mart and move on. Muhammad and CLU, however, are calling for the right to return: they know that if evacuees are going to have houses and schools to come back to, many will need to return to their home states and fight for them.

These ideas are not without precedent. When Mexico City was struck by a devastating earthquake in 1985, the state also failed the people: poorly constructed public housing crumbled and the army was ready to bulldoze buildings with survivors still trapped inside. A month after the quake, 40,000 angry refugees marched on the government, refusing to be relocated out of their neighbourhoods and demanding a "democratic reconstruction". Not only were 50,000 new dwellings for the homeless built in a year; the neighbourhood groups that grew out of the rubble launched a movement that is challenging Mexico's traditional power holders to this day.

And the people I met in Sri Lanka have grown tired of waiting for the promised relief. Some survivors are now calling for a people's planning commission for post-tsunami recovery. They say the relief agencies should answer to them; it's their money, after all.

The idea could take hold in the United States, and it must. Because there is only one thing that can compensate the victims of this most human of natural disasters, and that is what has been denied them throughout: power. It will be a long and difficult battle, but New Orleans's evacuees should draw strength from the knowledge that they are no longer poor people; they are rich people who have been temporarily locked out of their bank accounts.

· A version of this column was first published in the Nation

guardian.co.uk



To: sea_urchin who wrote (171)9/20/2005 10:29:56 PM
From: sea_urchin  Respond to of 418
 
> the Red-Cross kept most of the money collected after 9-11

It seems they have done the same trick again.

nytimes.com

>>In New Orleans and the coastal flood plains of Mississippi, many people are complaining that the American Red Cross was missing in their worst hours of need and are worried that its billowing relief fund may bypass them entirely.

The organization did not open shelters in flood-prone areas and was therefore unable to provide food and other necessities to people closest to the coast ravaged by Hurricane Katrina.

"The Red Cross has been my biggest disappointment," said Tim Kellar, the administrator of Hancock County, Miss. "I held it in such high esteem until we were in the time of need. It was nonexistent."

Even some volunteers are disgusted. "I will never, ever wear the Red Cross vest again," said Betty Brunner, who started volunteering in 1969 when Hurricane Camille destroyed her house but quit last week over the organization's response in Hancock County.

Two days after Hurricane Katrina struck, the Red Cross had only one shelter in the county, and it was far from some of the most populated coastal towns. It had no shelter in New Orleans.

It raised $55 million for the 1989 earthquake in San Francisco and spent only $12 million on direct disaster relief, angering local officials who wanted some money to build a homeless shelter.

It spent about a quarter of the money raised after the attack on the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995, and the Minnesota attorney general held public hearings to prod it to release $4 million retained after the Red River flood in 1997.<<