Apple's home page is full of links to donation pages. Does anyone know of a way I can donate to any of these organisations using PayPal or any other services which don't require a credit or debit card.
To follow up on our employees: I received a call a couple of hours ago from one of them, and they found the body of the other early today. They were together when the tsunami hit.
Interesting that the US, on the defensive about aid spending, gave the official statement, "We've given more aid over the last four years than any other..." yadda yadda yadda. Four years? Why mention four years? Did the US not give more aid during the Clinton Administration as well? Of course they did.
So why use the phrase "four years"?
Because even in such a dire, devastating situation, the Bush Administration chooses to play partisan politics!!!
They are so afraid of sharing credit with "the other guys" that they have to put in little phrases to differentiate themselves. Disgusting!
I'm so sick of seeing these moronic statments about the U.S. and its government in here. Now while you are intitled to your opinion it doesnt keep you from being a jerk under these circumstances. The U.S. gives out more aid and free money every year that any 10 countries combined so for you to say that whatever contribution they are making isnt enough is just stupid. You clearly have a very narrow understanding of how our government works so its probably best you focus your attention on other ways to help out with the situation rather than trying to shame the U.S. government into pouring more money over the situation so people like you can then complain about something else "The Bush Administration" is doing wrong. This situation is a real tradgedy and the U.S. is doing what it can to help out at this stage. Once the full damage has been assessed you will likley see more money flowing into the places its needed but as of right now its a bit premature to start pouring millions apon billions of dollars into groups that may squander the money.
What 'dirt' would that be? Until you clarify that, I'm going to assume that you're so freakin' racist it's pathetic.
more stupidity...
All he was saying is that nothing can happen without people blaming the U.S. or the Bush Administration. No reason to read so deep into a simple analogy. Bleh.
heres a link for all of the people who seriously thought the initial U.S. relief offering was all there would be. We are living in a sad time when relief offerings are viewed as insufficient if it doesnt resolve the problem.
In any case the death toll has risen to 80,000 and may reach as high as 100,000 in the coming days.
I'm so sick of seeing these moronic statments about the U.S. and its government in here. Now while you are intitled to your opinion it doesnt keep you from being a jerk under these circumstances. The U.S. gives out more aid and free money every year that any 10 countries combined so for you to say that whatever contribution they are making isnt enough is just stupid. You clearly have a very narrow understanding of how our government works so its probably best you focus your attention on other ways to help out with the situation rather than trying to shame the U.S. government into pouring more money over the situation so people like you can then complain about something else "The Bush Administration" is doing wrong. This situation is a real tradgedy and the U.S. is doing what it can to help out at this stage. Once the full damage has been assessed you will likley see more money flowing into the places its needed but as of right now its a bit premature to start pouring millions apon billions of dollars into groups that may squander the money.
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
For another perspective, the amount allocated for Bush's glitzy inauguration extravaganza in January tops $40 million, while $35 million has been approved for relief efforts for the tsunami victims. Or to put it another way: that $35 million would fund the nearly two year old Iraq war for just 6 hours.
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
For another perspective, the amount allocated for Bush's glitzy inauguration extravaganza in January tops $40 million, while $35 million has been approved for relief efforts for the tsunami victims. Or to put it another way: that $35 million would fund the nearly two year old Iraq war for just 6 hours.
Reminds me of Saddam and his palaces....
This was an initial offering (as you can read from the link I posted above) and when taken into consideration the fact that the U.S. gives more aid, donations, food, support, and any other measure of good will than most if not all of the other nations on this planet its quite unfair to look at America as stingy or whatever thankless statements are being used by the same people profiting from the food for oil scandal (as someone else here has already pointed out). The levels of hypocracy some will stoop to are unbelieveable.
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
For another perspective, the amount allocated for Bush's glitzy inauguration extravaganza in January tops $40 million, while $35 million has been approved for relief efforts for the tsunami victims. Or to put it another way: that $35 million would fund the nearly two year old Iraq war for just 6 hours.
Reminds me of Saddam and his palaces....
you know additionally the number of people killed from this tradgedy isnt that far off from the number of Iraqi citizens killed by Saddam when he was in power. And being that we seem to be footing almost the entire bill for liberating that country I'd say that an INITIAL $35 million dollar offering (before knowing the full extent of the damage) is hardly stingy. Next time you go pulling statistics out of your ass do a little research and find out what percentage of their overall worth John and Therisa Kerry are donating to the releif fund from their hundreds of millions of dollers in personal wealth (Honestly that wouldent be right either).
I will be happy that we leave political discussion outside this thread. People are free to open politically oriented discussion about this subject in an another thread.
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
...
Your accounting is inaccurate and wrong. You failed to account for the masive private donations that are rampent in the US.
But ... you've never been known to get things right.
And since when were'masive(sp) private donations' anything to do with the US Government's response....unless our government has been taken over and run by private parties, in place of the US people. Perhaps you' may have inadvertently said something accurate?
I will be happy that we leave political discussion outside this thread. People are free to open politically oriented discussion about this subject in an another thread.
Thanks
A political thread was started on this subject, but someone locked it.
Comments
Originally posted by SquidThing
Apple's home page is full of links to donation pages. Does anyone know of a way I can donate to any of these organisations using PayPal or any other services which don't require a credit or debit card.
Andrew
You can always mail a check to the Red Cross.
Here's the link, --> http://www.redcross.org/donation/formprint.html
Fill out the form, print it out & mail with your check.
[edit]
I just noticed your location says you are in the UK. You can contact the British Red Cross here:
British Red Cross,
UK Office,
44 Moorfields,
London EC2Y 9AL.
Tel: 0870 170 7000
http://www.bluepeter.redcross.org.uk...eal/appeal.htm
I'm sure they can tell you how to help.
Originally posted by Scott
Just remember all these private donations don't get counted in the UN's estimate of money contributed by countries. So don't be "stingy".
<insert heavy sigh of despair here>
The human race will be remembered for never quite getting the point.
Originally posted by Scott
Boy oh boy you are stupid. It was an EARTHQUAKE. EARTH is made of DIRT.
Thanks for clarifying your meaning. Sorry for the implication.
Originally posted by tonton
Interesting that the US, on the defensive about aid spending, gave the official statement, "We've given more aid over the last four years than any other..." yadda yadda yadda. Four years? Why mention four years? Did the US not give more aid during the Clinton Administration as well? Of course they did.
So why use the phrase "four years"?
Because even in such a dire, devastating situation, the Bush Administration chooses to play partisan politics!!!
They are so afraid of sharing credit with "the other guys" that they have to put in little phrases to differentiate themselves. Disgusting!
I'm so sick of seeing these moronic statments about the U.S. and its government in here. Now while you are intitled to your opinion it doesnt keep you from being a jerk under these circumstances. The U.S. gives out more aid and free money every year that any 10 countries combined so for you to say that whatever contribution they are making isnt enough is just stupid. You clearly have a very narrow understanding of how our government works so its probably best you focus your attention on other ways to help out with the situation rather than trying to shame the U.S. government into pouring more money over the situation so people like you can then complain about something else "The Bush Administration" is doing wrong.
Originally posted by audiopollution
What 'dirt' would that be? Until you clarify that, I'm going to assume that you're so freakin' racist it's pathetic.
more stupidity...
All he was saying is that nothing can happen without people blaming the U.S. or the Bush Administration. No reason to read so deep into a simple analogy. Bleh.
Find out how you can help (click here)...
addendum: according to USAID's website, the death toll stands at over 112,000 people throughout the region.
In any case the death toll has risen to 80,000 and may reach as high as 100,000 in the coming days.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=7200975
Originally posted by Playmaker
I'm so sick of seeing these moronic statments about the U.S. and its government in here. Now while you are intitled to your opinion it doesnt keep you from being a jerk under these circumstances. The U.S. gives out more aid and free money every year that any 10 countries combined so for you to say that whatever contribution they are making isnt enough is just stupid. You clearly have a very narrow understanding of how our government works so its probably best you focus your attention on other ways to help out with the situation rather than trying to shame the U.S. government into pouring more money over the situation so people like you can then complain about something else "The Bush Administration" is doing wrong.
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
For another perspective, the amount allocated for Bush's glitzy inauguration extravaganza in January tops $40 million, while $35 million has been approved for relief efforts for the tsunami victims. Or to put it another way: that $35 million would fund the nearly two year old Iraq war for just 6 hours.
Reminds me of Saddam and his palaces....
Originally posted by sammi jo
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
For another perspective, the amount allocated for Bush's glitzy inauguration extravaganza in January tops $40 million, while $35 million has been approved for relief efforts for the tsunami victims. Or to put it another way: that $35 million would fund the nearly two year old Iraq war for just 6 hours.
Reminds me of Saddam and his palaces....
This was an initial offering (as you can read from the link I posted above) and when taken into consideration the fact that the U.S. gives more aid, donations, food, support, and any other measure of good will than most if not all of the other nations on this planet its quite unfair to look at America as stingy or whatever thankless statements are being used by the same people profiting from the food for oil scandal (as someone else here has already pointed out). The levels of hypocracy some will stoop to are unbelieveable.
Originally posted by sammi jo
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
For another perspective, the amount allocated for Bush's glitzy inauguration extravaganza in January tops $40 million, while $35 million has been approved for relief efforts for the tsunami victims. Or to put it another way: that $35 million would fund the nearly two year old Iraq war for just 6 hours.
Reminds me of Saddam and his palaces....
you know additionally the number of people killed from this tradgedy isnt that far off from the number of Iraqi citizens killed by Saddam when he was in power. And being that we seem to be footing almost the entire bill for liberating that country I'd say that an INITIAL $35 million dollar offering (before knowing the full extent of the damage) is hardly stingy. Next time you go pulling statistics out of your ass do a little research and find out what percentage of their overall worth John and Therisa Kerry are donating to the releif fund from their hundreds of millions of dollers in personal wealth (Honestly that wouldent be right either).
http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/ts/...618700-9856619
Thanks
Originally posted by sammi jo
Time for some perspective. Charity should be measured, not by quantity, but by relative and proportionate ability to donate. None of the world's wealthiest nations donate even 1% of their gross national product for aid programs. Of the wealthy industrial nations, Norway was top of the list, at 0.92%, while the United States is at the bottom of the list, at 0.14%.
...
Your accounting is inaccurate and wrong. You failed to account for the masive private donations that are rampent in the US.
But ... you've never been known to get things right.
Please show some dignity and take your discussion over to another thread.
Originally posted by Scott
Your accounting is inaccurate and wrong. You failed to account for the masive private donations that are rampent in the US.
But ... you've never been known to get things right.
My accounting huh? Take it up with Associated Press, from where the fugures were culled in this CNN article.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html
And since when were'masive(sp) private donations' anything to do with the US Government's response....unless our government has been taken over and run by private parties, in place of the US people. Perhaps you' may have inadvertently said something accurate?
Originally posted by Powerdoc
I will be happy that we leave political discussion outside this thread. People are free to open politically oriented discussion about this subject in an another thread.
Thanks
A political thread was started on this subject, but someone locked it.