I am sure that the victims of the Tsunami would be happy to quietly receive a couple of billion in assistance from the Saudis and others who have a similar world view. It won't happen, because any giving is going to attract media attention. The excuse that giving will attract a fuss therefore we won't give is pathetic!

Atli

Newsroo, oops, that last sentence of mine on Jan 15 was a bit harsh for this site! Please let me substitute this: You say Muslims give aid to the less fortunate in their community as a matter of course. I don't doubt that, but how were they going to send it to Indonesia? They wouldn't give it to the main aid agencies, because most of them [if not all] are Christian based. I would be interested to know how it was done [if indeed it was done]. At all events, I am confident that the response by non-Muslims was many times per capita what Muslims contributed. Considering that the recipients in Sumatra are almost all Muslims, this was a noble contribution which deserves recognition, not ingratitude.

Islamic countries can make funds available through Red Crescent - an Islamic version of Red Cross which has been so strapped for cash in this case it has been forced to accept fund transfers from Red Cross and Western Governments. NO excuse!

I read Murdocks article in the National Reveiw on line a few days ago. Like so much of the furore surrounding the tsunami to our north it struck me as another contribution to the International pissing contest that has so typified the tragedy.

First we had the league ladder of deaths then we had the top ten giving nations, a coalition of the compassionate and increasingly conspicuous. And all of that has ben surrounded by the writings of people like Murdock as further means to run thier essentially one dimensional line that the Christian west is good and the Islamic East is not.
I do not care that some countries have contributed little; I am gratified that many have contributed a great deal. In a sense that is where it ends for me. It is not for me to judge who is the greater nation based on how much any one gave and when.

It might be worth our while however to review the situation in, say five years time, when the eyes of the world are diverted elsewhere; when the front pages of our papers arent splashed with images of devastation, or weeping parents or doe eyed orphans.

While international corporations make millions from sweat shops in places like Indonesia by paying slave wages to people to produice deigner label shoes for example - I'll fail to be impressed by overt signs of seasonal generosity.

Critics of the situation of the giving seem more concerned with using it as further propaganda; they use every opportunity to shore up and justify their position against the interests of nations that are predominately Muslim. If their position was so strong I suggest it might be self evident and not attract so much criticism; incisive and justifeid criticism at that. While we have plenty to crow about we do not have a mortgage on righteousness, we do not occupy the high moral ground on many issues all that often, we are driven by self interest and greed. And slinging a few dollars to nations we inherently despise and exploit may make us feel warm and fuzzy for a while at best.

We should simply give and shut up.

Inkeemagee

I checked out IslamOnLine - there are many, many ways listed there so that Muslims can provide aid for the Tsunami victims. I suggest those casting aspersions on muslims check their facts first.

Ringtail, glad to hear it. I hope they used those facilities to give generously and maybe proved me wrong on that score. We'll never know for sure one way or the other.