Red Cross surrenders: Bill O'Reilly declares victory in battle with stingy victim-relief agency

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Thursday, November 15, 2001 | Bill O'Reilly

[JohnHuang2]

---

The sign of the Cross

---

Editor's note: Purchase a copy of Bill O'Reilly's new book, "No Spin Zone," autographed and personalized, and receive a free "No Spin Zone" bumper sticker and a free three-month trial offer to Whistleblower magazine. Take advantage of this exclusive offer now.

© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com

The Red Cross has surrendered. In a press conference today, it stated: "We deeply regret that our actions over the last eight weeks have not been as sharply focused as the American public wants or the victims of the tragedy deserve."

So now, after six weeks of controversy, the Red Cross will donate all $543 million dollars generous Americans gave it for "The Liberty Fund" to the 9-11 families. Previously, the Red Cross was only going to give approximately 25 percent of the donations to the families … keeping the rest for general Red Cross programs.

It was pressure by my TV program "The O'Reilly Factor" that put the Red Cross on the hot seat. Night after night, I pounded away at the injustice of asking Americans for specific donations and then not living up to the pitch. Finally, "The New York Times" stepped up as well, challenging the Red Cross in an editorial.

But the rest of the elite media was missing-in-action on this story as they have been on so many other major developments concerning working Americans. And I simply can't figure it out. Local newspapers across the country were extremely supportive to the Factor and focused on the situation immediately. But the national press – especially the TV networks – could not be bothered.

That is very strange indeed. As part of my continuing investigation into the charity chaos, I have zeroed in on "The September 11th Fund" run by the United Way and a New York bank. That's the fund that received all the money from the TV telethon and the big New York concert. We're talking $337 million bucks here. And there is no question that the United Way is having trouble getting those funds directly to the grieving families. The reason is because they contract out to local charities to actually hand the money to the families. And some of those charities are inefficient, to say the least. The entire situation is one big mess.

Yet Matt Lauer on "The Today Show," and the "Entertainment Tonight" TV program – to name just two – challenged my integrity in pushing this investigation. They certainly have a right to do that, although ET didn't even bother contacting me, but I was amazed at their point of view. There are not two sides to this story. As the Red Cross has now admitted, some of the charities have been callous and inefficient in dealing with the 9-11 families. That is, simply, a fact – so what is the journalistic point in attacking the messenger, me, in establishing that fact?

I believe it once again comes down to the powerful protecting each other. Hollywood stars helped raise the millions given to the United Way, but few of them want to push the charities to get the money to the people for whom it is intended. That's because that kind of advocacy may alienate some powerful people. And programs like "Entertainment Tonight" exist to promote celebrities. So their agenda is obvious.

But why didn't the news departments of ABC, CBS, and NBC report on the situation? If those entities had, the Red Cross and others would have changed their policies weeks ago and the money logjam would have broken up. My program is powerful, but the combined weight of the networks is fearsome.

Once again, Americans are seeing first-hand that many in the elite media are simply not interested in righting wrongs. The national TV media is timid. Years of chasing profits have dulled their journalistic edge. Reporters are supposed to challenge the powerful and expose wrongdoing. Is that what the network nightly news programs are doing? You decide.

As for the Red Cross, I applaud their turnaround, and hope Americans accept their policy change and don't hold the past six weeks against the agency. The organization has a new president and its mandate has always been to help others. Yes, the bureaucracy is too big, and the Red Cross must work to regain credibility. But the bottom line is that all $543 million dollars that generous Americans donated to help the 9-11 families will finally be available to those families. A good thing has happened.

---

Related offers:

Purchase a copy of Bill O'Reilly's new book, "No Spin Zone," autographed and personalized, and receive a free "No Spin Zone" bumper sticker and a free three-month trial offer to Whistleblower magazine.

Check out WorldNetDaily's full line of Bill O'Reilly products at ShopNetDaily.

[JohnHuang2]

Quote of the Day by Faraday

[GeronL]

points at Red Cross leader - 'haha'

[Cold Heat]

Good! Now maybe Bill can move on............

[Concentrate]

Finally, "The New York Times" stepped up as well, challenging the Red Cross in an editorial.

I've noticed that they are trying to save their tratorous a$$es as of late. Expect a return to marixism as usual very soon.

[rockfish59]

i heard an ad for this weekends seattle seahawk game that kids will be giving their money to the red cross!!!

i wonder if they put that 1/2 a billion in an account to collect the highest interest? i'm glad i didn't give any to them.

[danmar]

...Bill, you da' man...

[cgk]

Does this mean he's back to going after Jesse Jackson's finances?

Mrs Kus

[FreedomPoster]

I wasn't aware he had ever stopped. I saw him mention Rainbow Coalition tax return shenanigans the other night, as part of the bigger picture, which is misuse of funds by tax-free charities, and the lack of accountability of these charities.

I think O'Reilly is doing a great job uncovering an injustice. I don't always agree with his politics, but at least he doesn't let politicians, charities, and others in the public eye, get away with not answering tough questions.

[backhoe]

O'Reilly: 'I'm on a Jihad Against Elite Media'

[mommadooo3]

O'Reilly had the red crass VP on last night. This VP said that they were releasing monies to the victims who were already in their 'system'. That the victims of the WTC attacks should just 'wait' to be contacted by the red crass. And that in about 6+ months, the red crass would evaluate the various needy cases on file, and dole out the monies, as needed.

Sorry, but I HOPE O'Reilly doesn't find that acceptable. Because what was said is nothing more than a ruse to continue keeping the monetary windfall. How MANY victims' survivors haven't made it into the red crass system yet? How many have been turned away?

And personally....if I sent money to help the victims of those attacks, I wouldn't CARE if in 6+ months they were financially on their feet, I would STILL want the money to go the victims. I Wouldn't care if they were financially better off than I in 6+ months....because NO AMOUNT of money can EVER make up for the nightmares they've been through and will have to live with, for the rest of their lives.

[Texbob]

The Red Cross have already been terminally hurt by their previous actions. Doing the right thing after being forced to, will not cut it.

[Jmouse007]

Thank you Mr. Bill O'Reilly, America owes you a debt of gratitude.

Next = The United Way and the rest.

[FreedomPoster]

Exactly! These non-profits need to be held accountable. We should start with a solid audit of The Rainbow Coalition tax returns, as Bill has been advocating for quite some time.

[Psalm 73]

"...hope Americans accept their policy change and don't hold the past six weeks against the agency."

Yea, right. Like we should trust them now after they changed only because of mounting pressure - not because it was the right thing to do.
They, like the United Way, are so wrapped up in PC that they do not know what is right, only what is popular.
I'd rather just do a little research and contribute to smaller charities directly.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Thier power derives from thier HUGE coffers, not from thier will to do the right thing.

[Twodees]

OhReally says he straightened the Red Cross out, so we aren't to hold this against them and should now hand them some more money and move on. Right.

[joathome]

You know, as long as the bulk of the money was going directly to the victims, I don't think the majority of the public would have been upset if the Red Cross had kept a small amount of the money to handle other issues.

However, the fact that so much of the money was given to oganizations to "care for" and "service" and "provide for" the victims, instead of just getting a list of the victims and giving them the money to use as they need, is what completely galls most Americans.

And I still don't think they get it. :(

And it appears that the list of "victims" is growing daily. If Uncle Joe lost his job miles away from Ground One, and I live with Uncle Joe, I probably qualify for assistance. I might really need assistance, but again, I don't think that's why most people gave.

[GailA]

They still haven't done the RIGHT THING. The victims that they are giving the money to are NOT the victims those who gave to the Liberty Fund ment the money to go to.

A shop owner who lost their business in NYC because of the 911 atrocity, a kid in Memphis who is having nightmares because of the 911 atrocity, a radio station who lost their antenna ARE NOT the VICTIMS folks gave the money for.

Those who had a loved one killed and those who were severely injured and will need extensive rehab, or who were to severely injured to ever work again THOSE ARE THE VICTIMS we expected the money we gave to go to.

The American's public view of Victim and the ARC view are two different critters

[joathome]

Exactly my point! Well said.

[rockfish59]

yeah, 'don't call us, we'll call you'! typical. i'll bet they're scrambling to get their 'paper in order'.

i also gave blood, but found out it will be used locally and not tossed out or burned.
toss out the RED and hoard the GREEN!

[GOPJ]

The United Way and Red Cross are down but not out. In the next few months count on the New York Times doing a story on some WTC family using the money unwisely. The kicker will be that Red Cross and United Way would make better choices than the families.

O'Reilly thinks he's dealing with people of good will. He's wrong. He's dealing with liberals who got caught, are ticked off, and will get even.

The fact that WTC families will be hurt all over will not occur to the liberal "care givers".

Let the games begin.