77,000 and still counting - unbelievable

[Eric Jarvis]

Whatever gave YOU the idea he knows anything about organizations in
whatever country you're in?

Jeez, does everything on Usenet have to be international?

Yes.

However it's up to each of us to cover the stuff we actually know about
and if that's US based charities and NGOs then that's great and I'm
thankful for the contribution.

I'll add three obscure ones for people to not and support later when the
fir rush is over. Because the people in the region will continue to need
counselling and psychological support for many years to come.

Sri Lanka Sumithrayo (Samaritans)
60/7, Horton Place, COLOMBO 7, Sri Lanka
<http://www.suicide-helplines.org/srilanka.htm>
(they don't have a web site of their own)

The Samaritans of Bangkok
P.O. Box 11
Por Nor For Klong Toey
BANGKOK 10111
Thailand
<http://www.geocities.com/samaritansthai/>

Befrienders Penang
104-1A Mewah Court
Jalan Tan Sri Teh Ewe Lim
11600 PULAU PINANG
Malaysia
<http://www.befpen.org/>

All three organisations will be overwhelmed with the level of support work
they will need to do over the next few years. They already send groups of
volunteers on foot to the more isolated communities in their area. You
can't just pick up the phone when you are distressed in rural Sri Lanka,
there is no phone. So the telephone helpline people go to them. It costs
money to organise and equip the volunteers and they are going to have to
operate on a hitherto unimaginable level for a long while to come.

Right now the priority is to get money to the Red Cross, Medecins Sans
Frontieres and the other organisation that do the immediate emergency aid.
However compassion shouldn't be dependent on what's on the TV right now
and it would be nice to think that people will continue to support those
affected by the disaster for as long as they need it.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

True, True, True,

I guess if we had earthquakes everyday, people would stop caring.

Not really. Some people would continue to support the victims of
earthquakes just as some continue to support those affected by HIV, hunger
of poverty.

The important thing is to show compassion, so long as a reasonable number
of people continue to support causes on a long term basis there is no harm
at all in others reacting to a particular event.

For those who haven't done so, it feels better to concentrate on a
particular cause long term. You get to know about the issues involved over
time and it seems much more personal somehow. Which doesn't mean one
shouldn't also respond to an individual event, it's just a different way
of giving back and worth doing IMO if you aren't already.

What matters is that as many people as possible get what they need and we
all five what we can. It doesn't matter how we get to that point.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

The other is that people are complaining that the aid isn't reaching the
places it's needed quickly enough. FFS, if the stuff was held locally
it would have been washed away, which is why it has to be transported
from the UK, Europe, Asia, and Oceania.

Thanks. I've yelled almost exactly that at the TV several times in the
past few days.

 

[Robert Morien]

I make absolutely, positively, ZERO apologies for my post....either in
format, subject or content.

To sum up: The people affected by the quake and subsequent tsunami need
help. 117,000 people have died and 10s of 1000s more are going to die. We
can help ease some of the suffering by giving to organizations that are
working on helping these victims. I ask that everyone take 10 minutes out
of their day and give online to the redcross.org or some other agency.

That's all. Have a nice day.

--Tina

I for one take you at your word...but why should you be more concerned
about those that died from a single natural disaster that mostly could
not be prevented while seeming totally indifferent to the fact that
since you've first posted your requests another 24,000 people (mostly
children) have died, an ongoing disaster that IS preventable.

And tomorrow another 24,000 will die.

And every day after that.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

A couple of thoughts I have on this thread, this post, this train of thought
and this statement:

1) Everybody has an opinion and a right to their own opinion. Just because
somebody would rather see money allocated to support their own homeless or
people suffering from tragedy doesn't mean they are mean, evil, unkind,
unloving, uncaring, etc... Everybody has their own priorities and opinions
on whats important to them.

2) With this tsunami tragedy I think a case is building for people to be
bitter. Being in Canada I can only comment on what I've seen thus far
(which pertains to the US and Canada, we dont' get much coverage of other
countries here).
So what do we see so far? The US is sending over a crate of money now
and pledging up to $1B in aid... their "thanks" for this: Kofi Annan goes on
TV this morning representing the UN and says to the world that its not
enough and that Americans shouldn't be so cheap. Canada is sending over a
crate of money, part of its army and a mountain of water purifiers... their
"thanks" for this: the WHO goes on TV this morning and says that its not
enough and we should be forking over more.
So I can see people starting to get bitter about it when your country's
aid is rebuffed to the world by high profile agencies and organizations.

The fact is that it isn't enough. It needs to be said. It isn't a question
of ingratitude it's simple fact. If Kofi Annan were to go on TV and say
"thank you that's very generous you've given everything that's needed" and
then a million people died of water born diseases he'd not be doing his
job. I'm afraid that's how it is, we probably won't end up giving "enough"
from the entire developed world, simply because there's always a lot more
that could be done.

The aid hasn't been rebuffed, gratitude has been expressed for what's been
given so far, it's just that it's also been pointed out that much more
will be needed. I really hope that isn't making you feel bitter because it
really shouldn't. The priority here is to get the necessary aid to the
people who need it, not making the rest of us feel good about it.

3) As far as what somebody else said about the thread in general and that it
shouldn't have been posting in the first place: when it comes to top
posting, cross posting, multi posting, etc... people are very quick here to
quote usenet netiquette about why people shouldn't do it. Posting about
world news and tragedies that people are inundated with on TV and the papers
is also part of the whole "things you shouldn't do in usenet" according to
usenet netiquette.

This I agree with. However in this case I'd hope that eventually I'll get
to the point in the thread where we discuss what we can be doing
specifically as web professionals to help. I've emailed a Sri Lankan
charity that I know people from to offer to create them a web page that
they can use to solicit donations over the next few years as well as
offering some advice usable locally in Sri Lanka.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

I sent out an invoice Tuesday, and I immediately donated the full amount
to the Red Cross.

I realize we're not all in the same financial position, but even a small
portion of your next invoice would help.

Or time. I don't have any money at present, but I'm starting to get back
on my feet so I can provide a free web site to a Sri Lankan charity. If
that helps them to raise more of the funds they'll need over the next few
years then I'll feel I've done what I can. Though actually I also dropped
my change in the collecting tin at the Tamil corner shop too. Instant
gratification is also nice.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

Once upon a time, far far away, the king summoned "Viper"


Same here in the UK.

Though quite why our armed forces cant assist - rather than killing
people - is beyond me.

It's probably not likely to go down all that well in parts of Malaysia and
Sri Lanka. Colonial legacy and all that. Mainly, though, we aren't
prepared to pay taxes for that many squaddies.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

Good luck trying to get a billion for the homeless here at any time.

Oh they should all just go out and get jobs at wal-mart for a non-living
wage. *That's* what you'll get instead of a cool billion for the
homeless because they'll just blow it on liquor and drugs anyway.

<Homer Simpson>

Mmmm liquor and drugs!

</Homer Simpson>

 

[Neal]

I for one take you at your word...but why should you be more concerned
about those that died from a single natural disaster that mostly could
not be prevented while seeming totally indifferent to the fact that
since you've first posted your requests another 24,000 people (mostly
children) have died, an ongoing disaster that IS preventable.

And tomorrow another 24,000 will die.

And every day after that.

Might I ask what disaster you're talking about? I can think of several.
And certainly suggesting that people help for one disaster is not
prohibiting people from helping with others?

 

[saz]

I make absolutely, positively, ZERO apologies for my post....either in
format, subject or content.

To sum up: The people affected by the quake and subsequent tsunami need
help. 117,000 people have died and 10s of 1000s more are going to die. We
can help ease some of the suffering by giving to organizations that are
working on helping these victims. I ask that everyone take 10 minutes out
of their day and give online to the redcross.org or some other agency.

That's all. Have a nice day.

--Tina

You are 100% correct - never apologize for trying to make people realize
that we all have to give a little bit of time, talent or money to help
those less fortunate than us.

 

[Travis Newbury]

They've lost all the boats, but worse, not only have
they lost many of the experienced fishermen but many of those who survive
are going to be too traumatised to go back to sea without help.

And (sadly) those that aren't traumatized will be convinced they are.

 

[Starshine Moonbeam]

<Homer Simpson>

Mmmm liquor and drugs!

</Homer Simpson>

No, man. I guess I'm more pissed off than I thought. The poor can't get
a fucking break here and I'm pretty sure I can find a hundred thousand
families here that would like some aid. Yet, these same people that
couldn't give a shit about their neighbors who are hurting everyday fall
all over themselves for people half-a-world away.

There's an AIDS crisis where over 50% of the population of WHOLE
COUNTRIES in Africa have AIDS/HIV and it's been going on for years. And
nobody can be bothered to help.

So sorry if I'm not shedding as many tears as you'd like me too. I've
seen no compassion for people who need it desperately and this is the
cause of the moment.

 

[Eric Jarvis]

No, man. I guess I'm more pissed off than I thought. The poor can't get
a fucking break here and I'm pretty sure I can find a hundred thousand
families here that would like some aid. Yet, these same people that
couldn't give a shit about their neighbors who are hurting everyday fall
all over themselves for people half-a-world away.

There's an AIDS crisis where over 50% of the population of WHOLE
COUNTRIES in Africa have AIDS/HIV and it's been going on for years. And
nobody can be bothered to help.

So sorry if I'm not shedding as many tears as you'd like me too. I've
seen no compassion for people who need it desperately and this is the
cause of the moment.

To an extent I agree. However the way to get people to make a long term
commitment to making the world a better place is to get them to get to
grips with an issue. If that has to be done when the media are inundated
with a particular disaster then so be it. If they continue to take that
issue on afterwards then that's a real bonus.

The Red Cross and Medecins Sans Frontieres will do whatever it takes to
deal with the aftermath of the tsunami whatever it takes. The more they
get the less that will detract from their ability to intervene in other
places that they are needed. Giving money to immediate disaster relief
doesn't take away money that would otherwise go towards helping deal with
poverty, homelessness or HIV unless the donor was already giving towards
those and chooses to stop doing so. If instead they don't buy the latest
video game or album then they've not affected it at all.

I wouldn't guarantee that the people most compassionate about the tsunami
victims aren't also the people who make the most contribution year round
to other charities. It equally may well be true that some of the people
saying nothing are actually doing the most. There's no way of knowing.

The main thing as far as I'm concerned is that people should feel involved
with the world rather than pushing it away when it's uncomfortable. I
don't actually care if that means a one off donation of lots of money to
the Red Cross or a life long commitment to working as a volunteer in a
homeless shelter. The key is accepting all human beings as part of OUR
world and accepting that what hurts any hurts us all at least a little. If
that lasts a life time then that's great, but ten minutes is better than
nothing.

 

[Tina - AffordableHOST, Inc.]

To an extent I agree. However the way to get people to make a long term
commitment to making the world a better place is to get them to get to
grips with an issue. If that has to be done when the media are inundated
with a particular disaster then so be it. If they continue to take that
issue on afterwards then that's a real bonus.

The Red Cross and Medecins Sans Frontieres will do whatever it takes to
deal with the aftermath of the tsunami whatever it takes. The more they
get the less that will detract from their ability to intervene in other
places that they are needed. Giving money to immediate disaster relief
doesn't take away money that would otherwise go towards helping deal with
poverty, homelessness or HIV unless the donor was already giving towards
those and chooses to stop doing so. If instead they don't buy the latest
video game or album then they've not affected it at all.

I wouldn't guarantee that the people most compassionate about the tsunami
victims aren't also the people who make the most contribution year round
to other charities. It equally may well be true that some of the people
saying nothing are actually doing the most. There's no way of knowing.

The main thing as far as I'm concerned is that people should feel involved
with the world rather than pushing it away when it's uncomfortable. I
don't actually care if that means a one off donation of lots of money to
the Red Cross or a life long commitment to working as a volunteer in a
homeless shelter. The key is accepting all human beings as part of OUR
world and accepting that what hurts any hurts us all at least a little. If
that lasts a life time then that's great, but ten minutes is better than
nothing.

Very well said, Eric. I started to type up a similar response, but I wasn't
able to word it as nicely.

Thanks!

--Tina

 

[Neal]

To an extent I agree. However the way to get people to make a long term
commitment to making the world a better place is to get them to get to
grips with an issue. If that has to be done when the media are inundated
with a particular disaster then so be it. If they continue to take that
issue on afterwards then that's a real bonus.

What we should do is make reality TV shows with people with diseases. That
would raise awareness.

 

[Leanne]

and for Aus

www.unicef.org.au
1300 732 240

www.redcross.org.au
1800 811 700

www.careaustralia.com.au/

www.oxfam.org.au/

 

[Eric Jarvis]

What we should do is make reality TV shows with people with diseases. That
would raise awareness.

The UK has at least one. In fact I was even interviewed on it when I was
in hospital last year. It's called City Hospital and covers the Guys and
St Thomas's Hospitals. They do features on specific operations and medical
conditions, look at what the different staff do, and generally have a good
old nose around to see what's going on. Not something I'd ever watch
though.

 

[Starshine Moonbeam]

To an extent I agree. However the way to get people to make a long term
commitment to making the world a better place is to get them to get to
grips with an issue. If that has to be done when the media are inundated
with a particular disaster then so be it. If they continue to take that
issue on afterwards then that's a real bonus.

The Red Cross and Medecins Sans Frontieres will do whatever it takes to
deal with the aftermath of the tsunami whatever it takes. The more they
get the less that will detract from their ability to intervene in other
places that they are needed. Giving money to immediate disaster relief
doesn't take away money that would otherwise go towards helping deal with
poverty, homelessness or HIV unless the donor was already giving towards
those and chooses to stop doing so. If instead they don't buy the latest
video game or album then they've not affected it at all.

I wouldn't guarantee that the people most compassionate about the tsunami
victims aren't also the people who make the most contribution year round
to other charities. It equally may well be true that some of the people
saying nothing are actually doing the most. There's no way of knowing.

The main thing as far as I'm concerned is that people should feel involved
with the world rather than pushing it away when it's uncomfortable. I
don't actually care if that means a one off donation of lots of money to
the Red Cross or a life long commitment to working as a volunteer in a
homeless shelter. The key is accepting all human beings as part of OUR
world and accepting that what hurts any hurts us all at least a little. If
that lasts a life time then that's great, but ten minutes is better than
nothing.

Look, I'm not saying don't help them or it's not a tragedy. Of course it
is. The earthquake that caused the tsunamis was so powerful that it
affected the earth's rotation. Seriously. The think the earth sped up a
few millionths of a second because it's now more compact. The tsunamis
hit at about 500 mph. Construction there ain't like construction here.
Tragic. By all means help them because now disease is going to set in
and take even more. Outbreaks are already happening. I hate to say it
but the UN's right. They need more. Something that's wiped out a hundred
thousand people in 3 days, nobody's equipped to handle that.

You're right. It's good that people want to help. Apparently though,
it's only when disasters like this happen, something so sudden with so
much exposure is only when people want to help out. To the detriment of
the tragedies going on around them everyday.

 

[Robert Morien]

Might I ask what disaster you're talking about? I can think of several.
And certainly suggesting that people help for one disaster is not
prohibiting people from helping with others?

Nothing prevents it. Just not seeing much proof of it.

 

[Pistol Grip]

...something so sudden with so much exposure...

Hmmm.
Sounds like a fine time for a smallpox epidemic.
Maybe we should send blankets.

;-)