– BBC1’s late evening news programme last night covered the Indian Ocean earthquake tragedy extensively, including efforts to raise funds, supplies and assistance for those affected.
There was an interesting, arguably characteristic, contrast in the coverage of fund-raising efforts – in Ben Brown’s report on Kofi Annan and Colin Powell speaking at the UN (broadcast live on Sky News earlier), the clip of Colin Powell was cut as short as possible, completely omitting his mention of the substantial level of personal American donations (in addition to government donations), summed up by Brown with the line that “America is paying its share”.
Meanwhile, in related coverage of UK fundraising efforts, we had a cafe owner donating his day’s coffee takings to the disaster relief fund (getting a year’s worth of free publicity on the BBC in return!), followed by film of Muslim worshippers walking past a collection bucket in their mosque, voiced over by the reporter as “Muslims in Hendon are donating whatever money they can”.
I’m sure that Muslims in Hendon, along with all right minded people everywhere, are indeed donating whatever they can – but why downplay the efforts of one group (Americans – donating ‘their share’) whilst spinning the efforts of another (Muslims – ‘all they can’) who, it seems, from BBC News Online’s own coverage, along with others, are collecting funds outwith the nationally organised Disasters Emergency Committee. Of all the faith based collections listed on BBC News Online, I wonder how many, if indeed any of them, are focusing their help on those people and areas that share their particular faith? Perhaps there’s an interesting story there for enquiring journalists.
Another point that seems to escape most journalists is that, for all the collective feel-good about record public donations, the sum collected so far is still quite short of even a paltry pound per head. As usual, it’s probably a minority of people making reasonable donations, whilst the majority can’t be bothered or don’t get around to it or assume that the government has done it for them or whatever. So, if you haven’t made even a small personal donation yet, please do visit the DEC site linked above – it’s easy and quick to donate online. Even if it’s just the cost of your next take-away meal or a round of drinks you’ll still have done a lot more than most people have.
Interesting point and I was particularly annoyed when seeing someone from an Islamic charity on Sky News the other day boasting that the UK’s muslims were donating more generously, in so many words. Is this a time for point scoring against the tight fisted infidels?? Well he seemed to think so.
The question that came to mind was how much they donated to Beslan so I went to their site and only found mention of Palestine and other Islamic countries. It doesn’t seem their efforts extend to those of other denominations.
“The Disasters Emergency Committee – http://www.dec.org.uk – is an umbrella group of UK aid organisations – including Action Aid, British Red Cross and Oxfam – working to provide clean water, food and shelter to thousands. To call from the UK, dial 0870 60 60 900.”
The BBC gives predictable prominance to secular-driven charities(Oxfam etc.); in sharp contrast to its treatment of all faith-based charities. Just one more example of bias at the BBC.
Tessa Jowell is the responsible minister – although she is clearly out of her depth.
Yep, those Muslim buckets so out in force now were gathering dust following the Beslan massacre. Then again, all of those washed away AK-47s and useless ammunition needs to be replaced somehow.
“…donating whatever money they can”. ” Yeah, right.
If the BBC wants to bolt on stuff that doesn’t belong in a natural catastrophe, well two can play:
Compare a few US private-sector examples: Pfizer — $10 million in cash and $25 million worth of drugs to relief agencies; Coca-Cola — $10 million; J&J, $30 million; Exxon $5 million; Citigroup $3 million. The much loathed Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $3 million…and on and on and on.
…and contrast with: the largesse of: the Sultan of Brunei, the house of Saud, the Sheik of Dubai, the mullocracy of Iran. Or take a gander at the list of massive donations by French and German companies, please. And how about those blue-eyed arabs in Norway, the moral ciphers of the west? Oh, and don’t forget the g an t swilling Mancunians from the Guardian’s backyard now in deep denial under their umbrellas in Phuket. All heart, wouldn’t you say, just awash with goodness?
Few Brits realise just how much they are now lo
cont:
Few Brits realise just how much they are now loathed and despised by large numbers of Americans. The Americans, as usual, are correct. Europe is going to get awfully chilly out in the cold.
Well Wally, I’m surprised to hear that Brits are “now loathed and despised by large numbers of Americans” – I suspect you’re overstating the case, unless you mean large numbers in relative rather than absolute terms – in the same way that it could be said that “large numbers of Brits despise the American government” – it’s just not true though – most Brits probably don’t have an opinion on the matter – and those that do probably don’t feel strongly enough to use the term despised. (And the rest are queuing up at cinemas to watch American films and at airports to raid the shops in NY/Florida/etc.)
Of Americans who do have an opinion on this, I’d hope that most of them are discerning enough to distinguish between Britain and the Frances and Germanys of the world – and of course the sneering output of the BBC.
In my dealings with Americans, Britain, it seems to me, is quite highly regarded – more so than most other countries – not a scientific survey for sure, but r
…but reassuring enough for the likes of me in the face of doom laden predictions like yours!
“The BBC gives predictable prominence to secular-driven charities(Oxfam etc.); in sharp contrast to its treatment of all faith-based charities.” – that’s untrue Ken, if you’re referring to the prominence given to the DEC collection effort over a long list of different charities (both secular and faith-based).
The DEC is a coalition of major UK charities, including those you mention, but also including the likes of WorldVision, Tearfund, Christian Aid, CAFOD and Care – none of which it can be said are not faith-based (even though their assistance is generally available to all-comers on the basis of need rather than faith).
Personally I find the availability of the DEC as a point of focus most helpful – it strikes me as being an effective and efficient way to raise funds (rather than lots of replicated efforts), and saves me having to think too much about where best to donate.
Andrew:
I’m afraid that he isn’t. I don’t like it, but the british are adored by some for their enduring and unfailing friendship with the US in every time of need, and others (leftists) hate Britain for just that.
Others still (mainly in “blue-state” cities) are exposed almost exclusively to British Trotskyites in all it’s glory. There, they are placed on a pedestal by the left, or reviled by the right as underminers.
It’s a marriage for many. A friendship with a compact in which dramatic times and events strain us all.
Just so you know, as a conservative and an american, but more than anything as a human, I think of Britain as *my beloved* Britain – no matter what quarter opinions come from.
I use myself as an example becuase there are a great many here who feel the same way.
I would be very interested to know if the money collected by these muslims is inteneded and will be used to help non-muslims as well as muslims.
I ask because some muslims seem to think it’s only appropriate to help fellow muslims.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/004494.php
No, you can’t avoid the fallout. IMO, you inadvertently bang headlong into the platitudes and smug, addle-pated insipidity that are the hallmarks of Britain’s effete elites. Very bad bongos, that.
True, there is no statistical measure of the damage done by the rantings of the British left — how d’you measure the effects of/reactions to the vapors from a dessicated dog turd (vide Clare Shortpile-of-it)? — but they are real and pervasive, above all when peddled by the BBC.
Only time will reveal the exact measure of the fallout, but you can be sure everyone gets to live with the consequences. The best clue may be what happens to Chirac in the next year or two — a gallic shrug and a walk just won’t do it for Americans, who are pragmatic above all, and simply past getting mad with France; they require blood.
Meanwhile, Brits continue to overstate their own importance and underestimate Americans in all ways. As for the “special relationship”, well, it’s hard-e
cont:
Meanwhile, Brits continue to overstate their own importance and underestimate Americans in all ways. As for the “special relationship”, well, it’s hard-edged not mystical: America’s oldest ally is also America’s oldest enemy, and nothing says the wheel won’t go full circle.
The conversations Americans and Brits have out of earshot are probably a precursor. Quite often, I hear both — a Brit is now often referred to as “a J. Anus”, as in Janus, as in two-faced mask, as in liar.
Put bluntly, you’re either an Atlanticist or you aren’t. If you play both ends against the middle, you are French and beyond the pale. It ain’t complex.
So I emailed all my American pals in WA, FL TX AZ OR and do you know not ONE has heard of the J.ANUS phrase…..hmm. Must be in use amongst the NYT/Guardian set only….
Also: Islam Online Live Fatwa page:
Question Can we give those afflicted people a portion of our zakah money even if they are non-Muslims? How about giving them charity?
Answer
Thank you. The receivers of Zakah money are clearly mentioned in the Qur’an. Among them, the poor and needy people. Looking at the situation of those people who are afflicted, one can conclude that the Muslims among them fall under the category of needy people.
In this regard, those Muslims deserve to receive a portion of Zakah. As for non-Muslims, they might deserve donation or any other form of assistance but not Zakah.
Thus, Zakah should be given to poor and needy Muslims. Some non-Muslims may receive a portion of Zakah if there is hope that by giving them Zakah that might lead to their conversion into Islam. They would
Wally
Don’t you know how to make friends?! It may be helpful to use terms such as ‘the British’ or ‘the British left’ because I can’t see what your point is right now.
How much sneering should the mericans be willing to put up with ? France is, yes, now way beyond the pale. But we are complacent if we think that Americans really trust Britain any more. They see Blair as an aberration – facing criticism on his alliance with Bush not only from his own party but also from both main opposition parties. As for people like Clare Short and even Jack Straw …..
We don’t hate Brits and I’ve never heard any term like “Janus.” We just hate the BBC, the Guardian and the Independent. And even then, the French and German press are probably even worse than they are, but most of us don’t read French or German. The British press gets most of the flak for EuroLeft anti-Americanism just because we can read it and thanks to the Internet, have ready access to it.
The Catholic East Timor president urges the poverty stricken East Timorese to give all they can to the Indonesian tsunami victims:
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/041230/ap/d879t2r00.html
Hey Beeb — this is an example of REAL charity. The Muslim Indonesians slaughtered 750,000 East Timorese, and they are among the poorest people on earth — yet still they want to participate in the aid efforts.
Why not highlight this amazing display of Christian charity? Oh, wait — I know why. It’s the “Christian” in that whole charity thing that bugs you, doesn’t it?
Susan
Just as I thought. Would it be fair of us Brits to allow our views of the US and Americans to be shaped by Michael Moore, Dan Rather and the NYT only? Of course not. I know just a handful of people who have taken any notice of Michael Moore and they’re left wing anyway. Simply reading the Guardian/Independent/Observer such people will be exposed to Moore and his propoganda. Its simply much the same for the US MSM.
J. Anus. Hell, I don’t know. The Janus reference is probably from Free World by Timothy Garton Ash, but the adopted/adapted form is now used by “decision makers” (hate that, but it is at least fairly clear) in a range of jobs. I’ve heard it perhaps four times in the last couple of months, face-to-face, used by different people. Actually, fully deconstructed (hate that, too), it translates to “lying asshole.”
Mr Pete: Can’t dispel your confusion — are you slapping the wrong end of the telescope to your bad eye again? As I said, I believe Britain is faced by a stark choice: Europe or the US. You can’t have both. What’s unclear? All that remains is the dénouement.
Haven’t you ever been told to shit or get off the pot? I feel confident you have…
Wally
Has someone run over your dog?
“As I said, I believe Britain is faced by a stark choice: Europe or the US. You can’t have both.”
Not quite true. It can remain an independent nation state if it chooses. I’ll take the US or independence. Thanks for that. Plain English will do just fine.
Uhm, no, it won’t.
Clingy dependent population… nosebleed demographics… apocalyptic pension crisis… immigration fissures… exhausted political parties… corrupt and demoralized police… pervasive and systemic underperformance of unmanageable public sector…unchecked guzzling of favoured groups at public trough… and [screw it, enough — the point is clear]…
…in short, you opt for a solitary future in the face of the pervasive and systematic failure of government at all levels — where Britain will thrive on its own, like some superannuated Switzerland powered by Vicky Pollard’s classmates on Dunkirk spirit?
And there you will be, negotiating from strength like a latter-day Oliver Twist (no, on second thought, more like Walter Mitty rolled up w/ Robin Hood), on behalf of all.
You’re beyond plain English, mister.
I agree to a point, although you do overdo the apocalyptic vision somewhat. It doesn’t always have to remain this way, however. Your description of Britain sums up Europe, so you’ll agree it has no future. Britain must change and remain independent.
I can’t be bothered any more. You’re obviously incapable of holding a discussion without resorting to idiotic insults. Don’t bother replying, I’m not reading.
Wally: I don’t know what’s gotten into you. Yes, the British chatteratti are sublimely assholish but then so are ours.
The BBC is losing viewers; the Guardian’s readership is down by 5 percentage points. The reign of the chatteratti won’t last forever.
Brits are pragmatists just like we are, and in the end, I have faith that they won’t let their country go down the drain, especially not for the sake of whatever looney-leftist political ideology du jour is occupying the chatteratti at any given moment.
Of course, at times it does seem as if the resistance of stout Britons is a long time a-comin’, but I still have faith in them.
The wait for resistance is going to be a long one i’m afraid. The problem is that Britain is not a nation state, it is a state made up of nations which have clearly defined homelands. Each of the homelands has a parliament or national assembly apart from one, England. England is the only nation in the western world that within in its own borders that does not have a national parliament. The state wish to deny England a voice because it knows that is England spoke it would tell the Scots dominated BBC and UK Government where to get off as England gets very little benefit from being in the UK.
Things are starting to change but the BBC has an inbuilt anti-Englishness and seeks to conflate English with British at every opportunity. As an example i can use the fact that there is a BBC Wales, BBC Northern Ireland and BBC Scotland but there is no BBC England. They seek to deny us English a unified voice and a cultural identity of our own, resistance will only arrive with our own nati
cont:
arrive with our own national parliament from where we can tell the celts, in a traditional anglo-saxon way, where to shove their BBC and UK to the immesurable improvement of all who read and post here.
No, Susan, the British have many talents but pragmatism vanished long ago. Paralysis and denial are the order of the day. This is now a country that can waffle for literally generations about elementary public issues of all kinds, starting with basic infrastructure.
The result is a pervasive, dysfunctional stasis that transcends traditional Brit “muddling through” and has to be experienced first-hand for years to be understood. You are unlikely to pick it up as a visitor or student or employee on tour, so maybe that’s why you are surprised — also, of course this is OT re the BBC.
I agree with you that hate is appropriate for the British left — also, contempt and ridicule — for lots of reasons, all to do with human suffering and the serial inability to connect actions with consequences. But I am certainly not arguing that the US should hate the British generally, just that they can no longer be trusted to the degree that was once safe. I think Mr John here understands that
I think Mr John here understands that too. The “J. Anus” folks certainly do. Others don’t. Oh well.
Meanwhile, many Brits w/ get up and go have got up and gone. Many more will follow. So, ultimately, this is about damage control.
Destruction of the BBC’s tax monopoly is part of the solution. The UK as part of an enlarged Nafta, out of the EU. may be. An independent “Swiss UK” isn’t. Massive topic, so enough.
Back to the subject of discussion. It would appear that the BBC is suggesting that the amount of money contributed to the relief operation (with moral superiority to monies committed to the UN) is more important than the effectiveness of the operation on the ground. I reckon that the US Navy will save more people and initiate more re-construction per dollar/euro than the UN could – but this is not the BBC’s narrative or interest. Moreover, it is not clear how the monetary contribution of an American carrier task force can be evaluated. If the Americans released the expenditure figures, the BBC would attack it as either false, or a bribe.
More rubbish from the UN: Mr. Egeland: Our main problems now are in northern Sumatra and Aceh. In Aceh, today 50 trucks of relief supplies are arriving. Tomorrow, we will have eight full airplanes arriving. I discussed today with Washington whether we can draw on some assets on their side, after consultations with the Indonesian Government, to set up what we call an “air-freight handling centre” in Aceh. Tomorrow, we will have to set up a camp for relief workers • 90 of them • which is fully self-contained, with kitchen, food, lodging, everything, because they have nowhere to stay and we don’t want them to be an additional burden on the people there.Sounds great, eh? Well, according to one of the Diplomads, currently in one of the affected countries, the reaction of some of the USAID workers on the ground in Indonesia to Mr. Stingy’s claims to the press was “their heads nearly exploded”.
Then he provides a reality check:
The first paragraph is quite simply a lie. The UN is ta
The UN is taking credit for things that hard-working, street savvy USAID folks have done. It was USAID working with their amazing network of local contacts who scrounged up trucks, drivers, and fuel; organized the convoy and sent it off to deliver critical supplies. A UN “air-freight handling centre” in Aceh? Bull! It’s the Aussies and the Yanks who are running the air ops into Aceh. We have people working and sleeping on the tarmac in Aceh, surrounded by bugs, mud, stench and death, who every day bring in the US and Aussie C-130s and the US choppers; unload, load, send them off. We have no fancy aid workers’ retreat — notice the priorities of the UN? People are dying and what’s the first thing the UN wants to do? Set up “a camp for relief workers” one that would be “fully self-contained, with kitchen, food, lodging, everything.”
Silent running
Notice also that according to the current deployment of UN staff as announced today that the education of the children and the
Notice also that according to the current deployment of UN staff as announced today that the education of the children and the World Heritage sites must come first before relief supplies such as food and water….. you could not make this stuff up – it writes itself thanks to the fools in Turtle Bay (UN HQ) (Bugger this character limit it keeps chopping my comments)
wally
You are right in thinking that in Britain we may be too complacent – we really do have to sharpen up the choice, start to move away from the EU nonsense, start to recognise the importance of the Anglosphere.
But things are not as bad as you suggest. Mostly our pension industry is NOT failing or likely to fail, unlike the Europeans. nd we rolled back a great deal of the state – we can still be radical. I was involved in the suggestions to privatise British Telecom, a “crazy” idea that was accepted by Thatcher in a matter of months. The UK parliamentary system is not sclerotic. A backlash from the right may not happen in 2005 – but it is brewing, and when it comes it will still not be too late.
dave t
It would make the BBC choke to have to admit that the only real overseas aid for Aceh province in Sumatra – in large and now massive quantities – is coming from the US with help from the Aussies. They are the only ones with the C 130s for big airlifts, with really big helipcopters for moving the stuff around from the airstrip, with an aircraft carrier offshore with large water-supply capability. All this is over and above the money pledged by Bush, let alone the huge amounts that Americans will donate privately.
And the latest is the UN trying to persuade the US/AUS to wear blue berets….! “No fear mate..we don’t want to look like the child raping perverts in the UN forces in Congo or Somalia….!”
John: The UK public sector is between 43% to 45% of GDP, although it’s hard to trust the statistics — some would add 5%.
By way of comparison, the US is around 21% (plus individual state levies, which vary but are never more than 10%). Sweden is around 52%.
I wouldn’t call current plans for cuts either radical or rolling back a great deal of the state. Howard’s plans for further whacking are impressionistic; nobody sees Brown as a fearless champion of small government. Surely it’s premature to be optimistic about massive cuts.
The pension crisis IMO will be the great outrage of the next few years. The game of musical chairs and buck-passing by all parties will grind to a halt under its own weight. Public sector pensions are underfunded by “tens of billions” — either no one knows or won’t say — but massive hikes in property taxes and civil unrest are probable.
As for parliament generally, with few exceptions and regardless of party, all I see is Disraeli’s rows
cont:
As for parliament generally, with few exceptions and regardless of party, all I see is Disraeli’s rows of exhausted volcanoes. I expect the US will see a broken reed.
The Beeb does grudgingly report on US military cargo drops in Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Must have killed ’em to do it though:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4141499.stm
“The devastation here is still absolute and although aid is now arriving, the massive organised relief operation needed to distribute it is yet to get started.”
This from a ‘reporter’ allegedly on the ground in Aceh…? The pictures of the US and Aussie as well as the local military aircraft on the ground at Aceh etc are obviously of somewhere else…..what a twit. The operation has been going for days with US and Aus/Indonesian personnel getting little or no sleep as they DISTRIBUTE aid and the UN have yet to be involved…is THAT what he means? Or was it another swipe ?
Evidently the UN is claiming credit for things such as air traffic control that actually are being done by the the US or the Aussies.
There has been some excellent coverage of this, including quotes from people actually on the spot and watching the UN lies, at :
diplomadic.blogspot.com
I had to laugh at the guy wearing the Bin Laden T-shirt.
“The Great Satan” indeed lol.
America is actually saving lives and helping people, while the EU and UN are trying to take the credit while as usual doing nothing. This is how they operate; let the Yanks do the work, then they take the credit.
The American relief effort is being quite deliberately downplayed by the MSM.
Janus?
I can think of worse things to be called, although she’s looking a bit rough these days and I still haven’t got over how crap ‘Babes in the Wood’ was.