Flipping the Bird to the American People
The Arrogant Red Cross

November 9, 2001


In a country with a rich history of generosity, there is no longer a legitimate place for the Red Cross. 

In a country under the nervous siege of terrorist attack, there is no longer any legitimate place for the Red Cross. 

In a country that operates on trust, there is no longer any legitimate place for the Red Cross. 

When 2 + 2 does not equal 4 there is usually an explanation and the explanations rolling off the lips of the Red Cross are equal to the drivel on bin Laden’s beard. 

As the Associated Press reported on 31 October 2001, “The Liberty Fund held $547 million in pledges as of Monday. More than $200 million in uncommitted money will be held to meet future needs arising from the attacks and the aftermath.” 

The Liberty Fund is a separate fund created by the Red Cross exclusively for 9/11 disaster aid.   

“Liberty Fund money also will continue to be held separately from other funds,” Decker (the charity's temporary leader) said, “and will be devoted to aiding victims' families and other relief efforts arising from the attacks.  That is the way the fund was set up. That is what donors expect,” he told reporters. 

There is an old saying in America which rough translates to, “Don’t pee down my back and tell me it’s raining”.  And, in this situation, the Red Cross is doing a copious amount of peeing. 

On 30 October 2001 The New Hampshire Union Leader reported that, "The American Red Cross yesterday acknowledged that some of the $550 million in donations to a special fund established for the victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks will be used for other broad-based needs instead." 

Those other “broad-based needs” include, “an additional $29 million…spent on relief infrastructure, including telecommunications, information systems, database management, contribution processing and other overhead costs”. 

“It takes a lot of money to do a lot of work. We believe very much that we are honoring donor intent,” Red Cross spokesman Mitch Hibbs said. “Yes, we are helping the families, but we’re also helping everyone else.”  

Yes, the Red Cross is “helping everyone else”…especially themselves! 

There are more versions of this story than a Bill Clinton saga.  Starting with Viet Nam and continuing through Watergate, the American public has grown accustomed to its politicians not telling the truth.  But…and this is a big BUT…when the American Red Cross starts not only to misrepresent, but, also, to implement a confusing campaign of disinformation to cover-up its misrepresentations, it is time for the Department of Justice to intercede. 

In simple verse, charitable people, with the understanding that their money was exclusively targeted to aid the victims of the 9/11 disaster donated $547 million.  Now, the Red Cross is arrogantly retaining at least $200 million of that money and spending countless other millions on its bureaucratic administration.   

And, do not be confused…the Red Cross is practicing misrepresentation if not outright fraud.  The donors to the Liberty Fund gave their money with one set of clearly stated expectations; the money was going exclusively to aid the families and victims of the 9/11 disaster.  At no time, until after the fact, were the donors informed that millions from the fund would be diverted to the Red Cross bureaucracy. 

New York State attorney general, Eliot L Spitzer, believes that donations should not be diverted from the victims of Sept. 11.

“I’m of the belief that most individuals, if not all individuals, who made contributions in the aftermath of Sept. 11 fully expect those contributions to benefit those affected by Sept. 11,” Spitzer said. “It is my strong belief that charities should honor that donative intent.” 

If any lesser-known organization practiced this brand of misrepresentation and fraud it would be labeled a scam and prosecuted.  Why is the Red Cross (and also the United Way) allowed to perpetrate this self-serving misrepresentation on the American public?  And why would the Red Cross risk losing the public trust it has cultivated for over a century? 

Where are the blessed saints from the national media who should condemn this misrepresentation?  Too busy whining about the Afghan “civilians” ravaged by U.S. bombing?  Or, is this just another game of “bending the average citizen over and passing them around” that the “elite” of this country take such delight in playing? 

As the widow of one WTC victim so simply states, “I was turned into a widow on Sept. 11 and a single mother, and now they’re turning me into a beggar,” 

Decker, the interim head of the Red Cross, justifies the scheme in limp terms, “Is it always perfect? No. It can't be perfect," he said. "That's what disasters are all about. We work in a tough, tough business.  We work in the disaster business…." 

Is Decker re-playing some version of a macho Jack Nicholson role and telling the American public that, “You can’t handle the truth”? 

Well, Mr. Decker, the American public can handle the truth and…they know the truth.  The Red Cross has unethically and arrogantly pocketed sincerely made donations by making insincere representations.  And, now the Red Cross is covering the tracks of its money grab with confusion and creative accounting. 

And one more truth Mr. Decker…. there is a legitimate place in America for those that misrepresent like the Red Cross…it is in jail.


return to 2000 - 2001 archives

home - columns - images - bio - contact - links

dansargis.org is proudly listed as a townhall.com RightPage

All content copyright 2000 - 2025 dansargis.org