Posted on 12/29/2004 8:30:40 AM PST by publius1
That figure is "for initial rescue efforts in Thailand".
I've yet to hear other countries sending ships to the region filled with soldiers/Marines ready to help out. Not one country, to my knowledge.
And when the presstitutes comment about how much we've donated, they won't mention this tidbit which, as you mentioned, accounts for millions of dollars.
EU ready to give $41 million? That's rather amusing, considering the amount of nations that make up the Union, and our little single lonesome country is probably gonna give exponentially more money, and they call us stingy. Not to mention how embarassing it is that just Australia alone has already given half of what the EU *might* give.
It does not matter how much they give.
The BBC has already done a story on how the UN is sending relief, how NON-government groups are sending relief, AND they did an interview with the true FEMINAZI who runs Unicef for the UN.
If you watch that story the USA is not even included or doing ANYTHING.
Why is this important. Becase BBC radio and shortwave is the ONLY news source for some of those areas of the world.
There is no radio free world by America to counter the BS.
We could give a BILLION IN CASH, and the BBC would only cover the fifty cents paid by france.
What a great opportunity. Ask then to get their checkbooks now, and fill it out with big numbers that hurt. Only when they have given more than the rest of us, do they stand in a place to criticize. That goes for FFrance, and the swishy Europeons.
France only giving $136,000 vs our $35,000,000 for disaster relief but we are stingy!!
US - $35 mil
Japan - $30 mil
Australia - $20 mil (I think)
France - $135,000 (that's thousand)
Germany - $7 or 8 something thousand
Britain - I don't remember, but in the top 4
The posts here http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1310200/posts say the $136,000 read was an error. The chart on the screen said $1,360,000.
"We could give a BILLION IN CASH, and the BBC would only cover the fifty cents paid by france."
BINGO !
I'm confused. France...stated as 135,000. but read as 1.35 million. Which is it?
Salavation Army South Asia Fund
https://secure3.salvationarmy.org/donations.nsf/donate?openform&projectid=IHQ-Asia_Fund&t=US_USC*USE*USS*USW
The media? Recognize a contribution from the military?? Never!
This military assistance is easily gonna cost roughly $250 million just to get in place, and then continue to cost every day that they are there, from wages to the costs of just having military vessels in foreign docks. Not to mention that the millions in pure cash we're shoveling over will probably become billions before it ends, as Powell said.
But the media will bash the United States, and applaud the Frogs for their $136k.
Remember, to these idiots, politics is more important than human lives. As they have previously proven in Afganistan and Iraq.
136,000!!!
thats about 25 times as less as the United States Of America
Thats about right for france....( 25 times as less as US)
I hate the media too (as I detected you did from your post). LOL
They are the western bureau of Al Qaeda, imo.
Guess which Finger I am pointing at France?
This figure does not include aid sent by individual EU countries. Anyway, all these figures floating around are just initial numbers (for example at first batch of US aid was 100,000$ to India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Maldives each). I'm sure US will send more aid than EU, but none of these numbers are final.
Ok, $ 1.36 million then, if the original amount WAS a mistake.
US: At least $300 million overall so far, probably to be $1.5 billion at the end
France: $1.36 million, probably never to give anything more
The mainstream media will pat France on the back.
What I've been hearing is thousands, not millions
Let's try this again. Here's the post #8 from the link http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1310200/posts:
To: Next_Time_NJ
I heard that too, so I had to look at the TV screen from my computer screen (it was on Fox News), and he actually mispoke. It was 1.36 MILLION. I think it was John Scott who misread it.
8 posted on 12/29/2004 7:50:41 AM PST by Watershed
It sounds as if the chart said $1.36 Million but the reporter, numerically challenge as most are, read it as $136 thousand. That's what I take it to mean.
I imagine all the numbers on the chart will change anyway as more info comes in.
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.