Posted on 12/30/2004 1:40:58 PM PST by BJungNan
The Bali bombing may have been beyond most people's comprehension, but Viebeke Lengkong, who has poured her energy into helping survivors, cannot understand the actions of the Red Cross.
"If you are asking for money because of the Bali bombing, then it should come to the victims to help them and the people affected by the impact of the bombing in Bali," said Ms Lengkong, daughter of a shipping tycoon father and a film star.
She is riled that money is being spent on projects rather than alleviating the suffering of those injured and bereaved.
Few are better to comment than Ms Lengkong, a spokeswoman for Parum Samigita, a community group in Seminyak, Legian and Kuta. Her group is part of the Bali Recovery Group, a panel of indefatigable volunteers and NGOs.
She is critical of the Red Cross and says it has done virtually nothing to help the direct victims of the bombings. But the Australian Red Cross can operate in Indonesia only under the Indonesian Red Cross (PMI) auspices. And PMI and ARC have opted for long-term projects after seeing NGOs helping direct victims.
Not good enough, not by a long way, says Ms Lengkong, a construction company director.
"I remember when I was volunteering at Sanglah Hospital (after the bomb). We had a meeting with the PMI and the Australian Red Cross and Red Cross Geneva. They were talking about medical equipment and supplies, blood banks. But I didn't understand. We were over it already. It was 10 days after the bomb.
"I told them we didn't need the medical supplies. We had an overdose of medical supplies from Australia. We had over 22 tonnes."
She believes Australians do not realise the extent of the devastation in Bali. And she is confused by the lack of money from the Red Cross. "I actually do not know what's going on. I thought Red Cross should be coming with aid, direct to the victims.
"Right now there is so much unemployment. People are going back to the villages because the hotels are not full, but they are not used to being land workers. They are completely confused.
"People are sick and some do not have doctors. The pattern of eating has already changed. Many people only eat once a day, not three times a day any more."
Australia had a moral obligation to come to Bali's aid, Ms Lengkong said. "The tourists are not coming back - not yet. Now I think the condition is worse than right after the bomb. I don't see anybody in the street."
She was stunned to hear that Australian victims had received $10,000 payments. "Maybe Australian RC cares for the Australian victims only. Nothing for the Indonesian victims.
"If the people here receive $10,000, that is about 60 million rupiah. They could live, they could surely, surely support their lives and their children's lives. Why talk about long-term problems when the money is there and people are dying?"
The Red Cross, which has faced days of relentless anger following revelations in the Herald that only about $4 million of almost $14.5 million collected had reached victims, refused to name the bank or even to say if more than one institution was involved.
I'm missing something here. Muslim terrorists kill hundreds of Australians. Now Australians should send money to the people who fostered the terrorists because Australians don't vacation there anymore.
Bali is an extremely beautiful place. It is sad to see it victimized by TROP.
My conclusion, after several Red Cross episodes is: If you give money to the Red Cross, your are essentially drinking Sulfuric Acid.
Locally, a Director was found to be pocketing money --on top of her $100,000+ salary.
World, these are the same people who accused the United States of "atrocities" to captured enemy "combatants", i.e., terrorists.
This sort of misappropriation of funds is why I give to the SALVATION ARMY, not the Red Cross - American or International. I have a good friend who has worked for the SA for four years now and I have tremendous respect for the people I've met who make up the organization. It is a Christ-centered mission, not to mention the fact that they run a very tight ship, so I feel confident that my dollars will be put to good use.
AHHH. I see. Thanks.
I gave to Samaritan's Purse.
Bill Fritz recommended it and Franklin Graham is working with them. I trust both of them.
I always give to the Salvation Army instead also.
However, I don't know how organized they are in this particular situation and I know Samaritan's Purse is over there.
I'm giving through Samaritan's Purse also. My daughter has done a lot of work with them for Operation Christmas Child. They have a very good organization and already have people over there. I think the Salvation Army is very trustworthy also. I'd stay away from the Red Cross/Red Crescent.
"I'm missing something here"
There's no business kick-backs, salary bonuses, "consulting fee" skims, and sweetheart deals by handing out money to victims. The money is made by purchase unnecessary items, as here.
The other laundromat technique is "overhead." Remember after 9/11 the RC got billions and alotted 100s of millions to telephone upgrades and such? (and whom would be supplying the telephones and equip?). the RC's mistake their was they were so gleeful they forgot public release of the info might get a bad reaction.
I know the SA had outposts in Galle, Sri Lanka, and some of the Indonesian Islands before the tsunami hit and that they have organized as quickly as possible since the devastation. I'll have to look into Samaritan's Purse. I've heard lots of good things about their work in Sudan and I have tremendous respect for Billy Graham & family (raised Southern Baptist!). Sounds like we both made wise choices for our donations.
Saw a rep from the SA on Fox or CNN the otherday. They already have local offices in the areas hit. So they were there day one.
What I am hearing here is that beyond immediate emergency medical, food and shelter, foreign relief should not go to just rebuilding infrastructure, but in employing individuals and sustaining them economically.
The question arises how far did we go to employ and individually sustain our own people in the aftermath of the hurricanes.
I heard President Bush talk about America's efforts in the long term - that we would rebuild Asian industry. Yesterday, I heard that the areas affected had a textile industry that exported primarily to America. Then I think of the collapsed east coast U.S. textile industry and the global market. Qusestions arise in my mind. How far should we go to meet international expectations that we take care of the world?
The point of my post was to direct people to give to other than the Red Cross. But, I have the same question and agree with you. Disaster relief is one thing. Rebuilding their economy, that's another. It is not out of the question that we would help out in this way but for disaster victims to expect it, demand it, complain when it does not happen, that is not right.
And I do think the Bush team handled the "stingy charges" wrong. They reacted defensively, then responded by upping the ante for the killer wave relief making it look like the stingy charge worked.
Bush should have pointed out in no uncertain terms that no nation is more generous in times of world need than is the U.S. Calling this country stingy shows complete ignorance of the facts. And at a time like this when so many are suffering, politicizing a tragedy by throwing political darts is just plain wrong.
Those who want to play politics with disaster relief would do far more good getting their countries to match our $20 million plus that has been authorized by Bush and the $ millions more donated by U.S. citizens through priivate charity.
Bali is NOT Muslim.
They only spent 4 million of the money that was donated for Bali?
It's sad to say, but yes. Do not contribute to the Red Cross.
Also World Vision and Tzu Chi.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
