Saturday, September 03, 2005

China offers U.S. $5 million in aid

BEIJING (Reuters) - China has offered $5 million in aid for victims of Hurricane Katrina ahead of President Hu Jintao's U.S. visit, the official Xinhua news agency said on Saturday.

The Chinese government would provide the aid in addition to a batch of emergency relief goods, Xinhua quoted Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang as saying.

If needed, the Chinese government would also send rescue workers, including medical experts, Qin said

An update on the current countries offering help

offers of help had been received from: Australia, Austria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Belgium, Canada, China, Columbia, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, the European Union, France, Germany, Guatemala, Greece, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, NATO, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, the Organization of American States, Paraguay, Philippines, Portugal, South Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the World Health Organization.


Anonymous Woody said...

If we got about five thousand Chinese in a brigade moving dirt in buckets and dumping it to shore up the levees, that would be a great start. They couldn't do worse, and if it didn't work then we could blame China.

September 04, 2005 5:56 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

hehehe , yup , dont worry , they would blame the chinese

funniest thing i have read so far on this tragedy was

"george bush today announced plans to wage war on south america , he accuses them of harbouring hurricanes"

any help should be accepted ,the UK have sent today half a million food rations , the EU is sending blankets/doctors/food . everything

September 04, 2005 6:03 pm  
Anonymous Woody said...

Better yet, instead of sending us supplies, let Europe take all those people who wouldn't get out of the city and see if they have better luck with them. You can bet that if a hurricane-like storm hit the dikes of Holland, that those people would be out of there in plenty of time. Somewhere along the line, personal responsibility has to be considered.

September 04, 2005 6:10 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

There is a certain undertone in yor comment that worries me a litle woody

you wouldnt want to fall into the reverse trap of what it is you complain of and making this political

you spend time highlighting the VERY small number of people that may have made the choice not to leave , but spend no time mentioning the thousands in hospital beds that could not go anywhere

the thousands in old people centres that probably could not even walk to the porch never mind get out of the city

the ederly , the children , the mentaly ill . the very very poor , the homeless , the list is endless

these people had NO choice at all , the government (local and national) has a responsibilty to help those people and they failed , big time

a few idiots refusing to leave is a side issue to deflect from the major abandonment of US citizens

the same as the looting is a side issue .. yes some idiots were stealing TV's (how stupid , where would they plug them in) but MOST were looking for food and water , and i would have bust into wall mart (spelling ) too ,

babies being left with no water for 5 days , just because they could not (not would not) get out

why are you focusing on a small number of idiots when a crime of HUGE proportions has happened here

you sound like one of those that is defending the indefensible

why ?

September 04, 2005 6:42 pm  
Anonymous Woody said...

_H_, I've said in comments outside of this post that I sympathize with those who couldn't leave. It's hard to assemble all of my comments or all of my thoughts here and each time I post. I know that thousands of people like you describe were evacuated. Some were left, and that's not their fault. However, this is turning out like some Hollywood disaster movie where people need to stay calm and cooperate to get to safety, like bailing out of a plane, but in which there is that one fat lady blocking the exit screaming and fighting being pushed to safety. These people fighting the rescuers are "fat ladies" holding up the rescue of others, and it's pretty disgusting. I never liked those characters in the movies and I especially don't like them in real life, because the lives they could cost are real.

September 04, 2005 7:08 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

Of course woody , On your own site you place adverts pointing people to the red cross and to housing help they may offer , the flip side of your early point is

Yes i know you do show you care in other places but my reply is purely to your comment above , please take it for what it is , i am very direct with my comments (so used to responding to simple rhetoric) but dont feel i am personaly having a go at you (ever) just to the content left on m site

on the main part of your point the "fat ladies" well you can look at this two ways

yes there was a break down in civl order , of course , and some people (not a large number) acted in a way that was unhealthy

the other way to look at this is to see your govenment (local and national) as responsible for keeping order at times of crisis , on the monday and the tuesday (so an american general has said on british TV) the national guard were ready and able to enter new orleans , in large numbers but he said "we could not leave the base until the order to do so came through , that order never happened), so the troops were playing basketball instead of saving lives and keeping order , not due to them , but due to no order being issued from above

to me it is the second point that is worth noting , some people will always act like idiots , but the state has a responsibilty to install order , they failed

most of the chaos is due to the stupidity of the slow response , and it seems you (in these comments) are pointing out the side issues and not looking at who is responsible to prevent such things , ie why you pay your taxes

September 04, 2005 9:05 pm  
Anonymous Woody said...

_H_, I never considered personal offense from your statements. I think that I know you well enough now not to infer that.

To be honest, no one, including you and I, have all the facts or a complete picture of problems with the preparation before the hurricane or the response afterwards. We see complaints and figer-pointing, we see pictures of people suffering and none of the people who are not, we hear people tell us who is wrong and who is right--yet, none of this provides the information needed to have an honest and complete analysis. It cannot be done with short-term snippets of editorials and sensational headlines. Help is being provided now and that help is more than sufficient.

Let's wait until full control and order is restored and then look back at the facts. There will be plenty of time to assess blame or, as I prefer, to assess the operations so as to improve them for future emergencies.

September 04, 2005 11:51 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

aslong as the is a full and open enquiry that looks at everything from the president to the bottom of the pile i am happy with that

the concern many of my (left winged) American friends seem to have is that a general distrust for this government means that they feel that unless alot of noise is made then the issue will be swept under the carpet

being in the UK all the media (from all political angles) are saying that george bush has been damaged very badly by this .

as for headlines , i assume i fall under the same trap as the real media , my stories appear on a few news feeds and the headline brings in readers , though i dont think to date i have reported anything that has been seen to be untrue

i can not assume that an american army general would lie when he said he was ready to go but it tooks day for the order

so in essense i agree with you , although i dont blame the left for wanting to keep this at the front of the media's mind

i have seen both the left and the right do a fantastic job of highlighting issues such as the red cross and the housing issues , and i see equal amount of genuine concern and help for the victims

so if the left wing sites are posting these stories then i see no harm being done , it is only if they are standing in the way of the rescue effort then it would cross the line

it is a fine line , we are only a few weeks after i was watching cindy sheehan being called a "bitch in a ditch" and "media whore" from the right , both sides cross moral boundries sometimes but if it keeps people asking questions of their government (any government ) then it seems to do more good then harm

but lets hope for a quick and OPEN enquiry as soon as possible and where ever the buck stops , something went wrong somewhere

September 05, 2005 12:10 am  
Anonymous Woody said...

I'm confident that an inquiry will be open, although I don't know how quickly it will be formed. This is government, after all. The opposing sides and the media will insure that at least President Bush gets his due.

Don't believe everything that you see in the British press (or a lot of the American press.) Based upon my historical views of the British press and what I know to be the truth here, I have absolutely no confidence it its accuracy and its objectivity.

Briefly on the general, that is very uncharacteristic of an officer to cast doubts on the mission and commands of his superiors. There has to be something wrong with that report, or it is an incomplete picture. For instance, he may have said that they had not been called up, but there was likely a reason besides incompetence, as is the presumption. Maybe they decided to call a closer group, maybe these are held in reserve for other emergencies (which they do), maybe their equipment was not adequate for those troops to be effective, etc. Don't assume that they weren't called up because Bush was derelict in his duties. If the general even implied that, then he would be breaking with his chain-of-command and isn't much of a general. I think that there is more to that story.

September 05, 2005 1:49 am  
Blogger _H_ said...

hehehehe , I didnt say "bush" didnt give the order , but some of your answers are funny

you have an entire city under water and a theory that comes to mind is "maybe these are held in reserve for other emergencies" really ? you can't believe that can you surely ?

as for the british press , they are infact very open , even to the point of when a D notice (censorship request by government)) are put in place we are informed of the fact , to compare the open natured non political british media to the american press is laughable , the american's have without doubt the most biast media of any 'democratic' country on earth , the worst news company of any that i have ever seen has to be fox , they actually make al-jaazera look honest , there is NO free press in your country ,

if you doubt me , all i ask is you scroll down to the video links i put up a few days ago , and compare what we are seeing to what you guys are seing

the american media is one of the main reason i started this site ,

the strange concept of 95% of your press accepting every word that comes out of the whitehouse is an enigma you will not see in the rest of the west

i am truly shocked , most people i speak to genuinly know how awful your press is , and always ask me to send the "real" news from britain as they can't get it in the US

you do suprise me woody , but what can i say , if it is what you feel i respect your view

but it is the first i have heard of it , even from my right winged american friends


September 05, 2005 1:59 am  
Anonymous Woody said...

Actually, it's true about the reserves. They do not commit all resources to one emergency as there could be other ones for which rapid response and resources would be needed. I know this for a fact, and it makes sense. There are other hurricanes coming across the Atlantic and there are terrorist threats for which other forces must be available to handle.

We definitely will not agree on the press. The main stream media in this country is overwhelming liberal. When I read your British papers, which are worse, I have to laugh. If you want to see it from my perspective, go to .

September 05, 2005 2:53 am  
Blogger _H_ said...

I doubt we will agree

on the troops not commiting to one emergancy


well no troops arrived monday , no troops arrived tuesday , only a small handfull arrived wednesday

so is it safe to assume that the whole american national guard was waiting for a bigger emergancy then new orleans droping under water ! .

i could accept your point woody if troops were actually there , but NO TROOPS turned up

now the best argument i hear is that nobody at all not one soldier , from anywhere ,from any camp in the whole country turned up incase there was a erm (cough) bigger emergancy ? really ?

as for the press , your right , we probably won't agree

the newspapers over here (just like yours) are slanted one way or another so i would ask which ones you read , they are about 50/50 split between left and right

half of the media in my country (as in yours) is owned by rupert murdock

the television media is a different thing

you can always tell when the media is doing a fantastic job because both sides of politics complain

recently the BBC was debated in the idiot chamber of parliment and i can not remember the exact numbers but the left thought the BBC was way way to right wing , the right thought the BBC was way way to left wing

journalists should be agressive in their pursuit of the truth , not as long arm of the government

your news for example on the iraq war is often mocked over here

you tv companies put patriotism above truth

they call the insurgents in iraq "the enemy"
they call the US forces "our boys"

and if for one second someone complained they would be attacked for being some kind of traitor

that is absurd , it is NOT the job of the news companies to promote "your side" the news company has one duty to your people and that is to tell the truth , regardless

6000 people (women and children etc) were murdered in fallujah , not one single american news company picked it up

now i am all in favour of patriotism my friend i have plenty my self

but i EXPECT better from the media

allow the white house to say what they want , but allow the press to be free to report "facts" not propaganda

i will give you one example of the thousands i easily could

(i studied propaganda at university)

cluster bombs

during an eight day study of US publications the US media (in all sources ) only mentioned cluster bombs 120 times (according to the nexus database that records all reports)

ny comparison british news agencys reported the use of these weapons in iraq mentioned this 394 times in the same period

so whilst cluster bombs are killing innocent iraqi civilians in huge numbers , you dont see it , they wont show you

during times of american conflict , the truth disapears from your screens and is replaced with the white house broadcasting company

what is more concerning the the world wide known fact that the US censors the truth from its own people , is that someone as intelligent as you can't actually see that they are doing it

when saddam offered his "evidence" to the UN of what weapons he had or didnt have , every country in the security council wanted the whole thing released , there was no secret details of how to make a bomb , so let people see it

but nooooo the usa insisted that 8000 pages of a 12000 page document be censored as it listed all the american companies and government agencies that helped saddam get what he got

now that is censorship

think about it , british , french , german and russian companies also helped saddam , but not one of these countries tried to prevent their own people from finding this out

yours did

propaganda is a fascinating subject i would enjoy debating with you

it is amazing what people don't know about their own media

September 05, 2005 3:21 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home