So with a title like that, I had to read the blog post

Don’t donate money to Japan

No, it's not about being a Scrooge. Felix Simon has a very good point. During disasters, well-intentioned people give restricted funds to charities to be used in one area, ensuring that some funds may be unspent while needs remain elsewhere. He gives one of my favourite charities, MSF (Doctors Without Borders), as an excellent example of a non-governmental organisation whose position on giving helps prevent this:

The ability of MSF teams to provide rapid and targeted medical care to those most in need in more than 60 countries around the world – whether in the media spotlight or not – depends on the generous general contributions of our donors worldwide. For this reason, MSF does not issue appeals for support for specific emergencies and this is why we do not include an area to specify a donation purpose on our on-line donation form. MSF would not have been able to act so swiftly in response to the emergency in Haiti, as an example, if not for the ongoing general support from our donors. So we always ask our supporters to consider making an unrestricted contribution.

So the point is to give, but do not give restricted funding for a particular disaster. This hobbles organisations like the Red Cross and others. Instead, give generally, allowing money to be spent where it is needed most, including the disaster area but also in areas just as needy that don't get such mega-attention.