Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wife of Flight 93 Hero Gets Cold Shoulder from 9/11 Charities
NewsMax ^ | 12/13/01

Posted on 12/13/2001 2:38:51 PM PST by AmericaUnited

Thursday Dec. 13, 2001; 4:45 p.m. EST

Wife of Flight 93 Hero Gets Cold Shoulder from 9/11 Charities

Three months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the wife of Flight 93 hero Jeremy Glick is struggling to make ends meet, since an array of charities created to help 9/11 victims have given her the brush off because of a technicality.

Lyzabeth Glick tells the New York Daily News that the national United Way hasn't been much help, telling her recently, "(your husband) was not in the World Trade Center, we're not giving you any funds."

The Federal Emergency Management Agency also gave Mrs. Glick and her two children the cold shoulder, explaining, "We're not giving any money to Flight 93 victims."

Even a promise from singer Kristy Jackson, who recorded "Little Did She Know" as a tribute to Jeremy Glick with an eye towards donating the proceeds to victims' families, hasn't panned out. Mrs. Glick says she has yet to see a cent from the song.

She, her young daughter and five-month-old son were at the White House Tuesday to commemorate the three month anniversary of the attacks, where they heard President Bush honoring the husband and father as "one of the heroes of Sept. 11" whose "courage may have saved the White House" when he and fellow Flight 93 passengers foiled the plans of the kamikaze hijackers at the cost of their own lives.

But her husband's hero status hasn't meant much in terms getting some of the money donated to 9/11 victims. After collecting a mere $5,000 from her local United Way and $25,000 from the Red Cross, she's now all tapped out.

With charity after charity giving Mrs. Glick the runaround, she now hopes to find a teaching job to keep the bank from foreclosing on her home.


TOPICS: Editorial; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-197 next last
To: Question_Assumptions
Yes, I suppose I'm curious about life insurance, too, but I'm willing to cut this lady some slack.

Why? Why not let her take responsiblity for HER poor planning, too? I'm more than willing to give them money, but I don't think we owe them "the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed."

61 posted on 12/13/2001 3:40:08 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: JD86
...in the real world, if you don't save money....and spend more than you make....and the breadwinner dies...and you don't have life insurance, then you sell the second car, you move to a less expensive house and you get a job.

If it weren't for the damned blood-sucking attorneys, I'm sure this wouldn't be necessary.

By the way, do your rules apply if someone divorces the breadwinner? If so, would you mind informing my ex wife's attorney and the judicial officials at King County Superior Kangaroo Court of the rule? Thanks.

62 posted on 12/13/2001 3:41:01 PM PST by PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: JD86
I guess she's not dependent on the kindness of strangers? I think not. IMO, it's THEIR fault, they were living beyond their means -- I know PLENTY of people who live in NYC and do NOT make anything near that.
63 posted on 12/13/2001 3:41:28 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: JD86
Why do you think questions are unreasonable?

You're not asking questions. You're making statements about them as if they are fact and/or making insinuations that may or may not be true.

64 posted on 12/13/2001 3:42:33 PM PST by paul51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: paul51
Easy to condemn, judge and advise when you don't know anything about what has gone on with them

I can add. It's not that hard to figure out. They quite simply lived for the moment, or as we call it around here, "a bad case of the IG's," instant gratification. He might have been a great guy, but he didn't give him wife and children one thought.

65 posted on 12/13/2001 3:43:36 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: paul51
Easy to condemn, judge and advise when you don't know anything about what has gone on with them.

If you know something else about this family, please tell the rest of us. Instead you are critisizing me....and I am not asking for charity.

As for knowing what has gone on with them, I have an educated opinion. I see it all the time. Check it out in your own home town. Look in the obituary section of your newspaper and find someone who died under the age of 65. In three months, if that person did not have adequate life insurance, the odds are 90% that the family home will be for sale.

66 posted on 12/13/2001 3:44:06 PM PST by JD86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
Don't forget funeral expenses--that's not an everyday expense item, you know.

I hate to say this but, there was no body to "funeralize". These people were cremated in the crashes. Sad, but true. No coffin, no wake, no funeral "home" expenses. Just a memory.

67 posted on 12/13/2001 3:44:53 PM PST by mc5cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JD86
Well, in the real world, if you don't save money....and spend more than you make....and the breadwinner dies...and you don't have life insurance, then you sell the second car, you move to a less expensive house and you get a job.

You should be teaching Economics to the American People. This is exactly what America is all about but nobody wants to learn or practice. People live in debt, do not save and when bad things happen they expect the U.S. Taxpayer Insurance Company to bail them out. However, I still feel really bad for all of these families and but I am not too sure that the Bond Trader’s family has more of a right to prosperity than the family of the man selling hotdogs on the observation deck of the WTC.

68 posted on 12/13/2001 3:45:17 PM PST by Austim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #69 Removed by Moderator

To: Howlin
They should have KNOWN better and I don't feel the least bit bad for them.

Man you are cold!

70 posted on 12/13/2001 3:45:45 PM PST by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

Comment #71 Removed by Moderator

To: Question_Assumptions
Turn away because they were rich.

How about we not feel sorry for them because they have already GOTTEN money and will get more. This woman should be out looking for a job -- unless, of course, her job has now because whining on TV so that WE, the good hearted people of this country, will support her and her children in the style her husband accustomed her to, but failed for provide for in case of his death.

72 posted on 12/13/2001 3:45:59 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
...in the real world, if you don't save money....and spend more than you make....and the breadwinner dies...and you don't have life insurance, then you sell the second car, you move to a less expensive house and you get a job. If it weren't for the damned blood-sucking attorneys, I'm sure this wouldn't be necessary.

Please show me any evidence that one red cent of the $30,000 went to attorneys.

73 posted on 12/13/2001 3:46:59 PM PST by JD86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
Cold? You mean because this guy never gave his wife and kids a second thought as he flew off that morning? He may have been a 'hero' on this flight, but apparently this wife is not willing to face the fact that her husband didn't want to PAY for life insurance to support her and his own children in case of his death.
74 posted on 12/13/2001 3:47:51 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: JD86
I don't know the family. That's why I wouldn't have made some of the comments that have been made about them here.
75 posted on 12/13/2001 3:48:26 PM PST by paul51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Austim
Yes, but should the United Way and Red Cross be expected to keep the survivors living in the same lifestyle they had prior to the attack?

Obviously the red cross can't be expected to do that, but these families need to be financially helped through this (the money is there, after all), and given at least a few months and a fighting chance of being able to sell their homes instead of losing them to forclosure. A lot of younger people put their money into their homes as an investment. When you are only 31 and have a young family and live in an expensive area, you don't necessarily have a lot of savings. The family home may be the only investment they have. Unfortunately, it seems that many of widows didn't know much about the legal, financial side of their lives. I hate it when I hear a woman say that her husband takes care of all the bills. Look at the awful cost to some of these poor families in the wake of 9/11.

76 posted on 12/13/2001 3:48:41 PM PST by NewHampshireDuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
And, of course, I meant financially.
77 posted on 12/13/2001 3:49:58 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
This needs to be made as public as possible.
You could smell this a mile away. Although I certainly never had any intention of ever giving the United Way one thin dime in my lifetime, I always wondered about the Red Cross. All I knew about them was that they were involved in some blood-selling scandal a few years back. Guess I should have realized that they are as corrupt as the United Way.

The "September 11th Fund" collected what - - a billion dollars? And now the kind souls who thought they were helping the families of victims by giving money to United Way and Red Cross feel like utter dupes. Of course, they were utter dupes, but now (hopefully) they are also a little smarter.

78 posted on 12/13/2001 3:50:37 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Austim
However, I still feel really bad for all of these families and but I am not too sure that the Bond Trader’s family has more of a right to prosperity than the family of the man selling hotdogs on the observation deck of the WTC.

I agree, I think the donations should be divided among all the families on a per capita basis. Take the number of victims divide it into the money donated and issue the checks. That is the only fair thing to do. Each family lost a loved one. Each family should receive some assistance. After that, if a family has to make adjustments in their lifestyle....that is just the way life goes sometimes.

79 posted on 12/13/2001 3:51:56 PM PST by JD86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: JD86
Who thinks Jeremy Click earned $10,000/month? And why is his wife "tapped out" after three months when she received $30,000? There is something about these victim stories that don't add up. These people lost a family member, they didn't win the lottery.

Last night, O'Reilly was complaining about one of the "victims" not getting enough money from the charities. He said - without blinking an eye - that she had gotten $90,000 but that has already been spent. He didn't recognize the idiocy of that statement. $30,000 a month in expenses? Is she related to Donald Trump for crying out loud?

80 posted on 12/13/2001 3:51:56 PM PST by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-197 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson