Skip to comments.Wounded warriors anti-gun?
Posted on 11/17/2012 7:46:59 PM PST by MtnClimber
Wounded Warriors declined to come on his (Tom Gresham) show on veterans day because they are against gun or religious organizations. At around the 5:00 mark. There is another orginazation "honoredveterans.org" that is non communist. I will be trying to get a return of this years donations to wounded warrior. They are so dissapointing! I am trying to find out more, but everything points to this being true. I really hate communists!
Email from WWP posted on http://losttarget.blogspot.com/2012/11/wounded-warrior-project-anti-gun_15.html
I cannot vouch for its authenticity.
Just another sell-out among many. Susan Komen, Girl Scouts, United Way, others can think of more. PC has so infected society that it has become apparent that conservatives must stay away from mainstream organizations. As most of us are Christians, conservatives understand the concept of being in the world but not of the world.
That sure sounds counter-intuitive for a veterans’ organization. Well live and learn. There are many other veterans’ organizations that don’t believe in living in rubber rooms.
Wounded Warrior Project is a tax-exempt 501(C)(3) nonprofit organization.
Would Tom Gresham like to see them LOSE this status?
This is sour grapes and it ill behooves Gun Talk to make such a ridiculous accusation against Wounded Warriors. For shame!
Wounded Warrior has done nothing but good things as far as I know. As long as they aren’t actively anti-gun, I have no problem with their stance. Being neutral is fine with me.
They try to help wounded warriors, and that’s plenty good enough for me.
HT, don’t go jumping to conclusions here. They got to deal with the irs the same as any 501.
Me too. I get to talk with a lot of others I know that are wounded veterans (like me) that have nothing but good things to say about it. From family support to you name it.
It is a program to support Wounded Vets; it is not Gun Owners of America.
This isn’t pc. This is dealing with irs rules and regs under which their charter was approved. They can’t be political or appear to have religious preferences. What is with Gresham that he would slander WW so badly just because they declined an appearance on his show? I mean really.
If being nonpolitical means they can’t advocate for issues... then we’ve all gone crazy.
Public policy advocacy causes an organization to lose this?
Greasham didn't make accusations. Gresham reported what happened, read the WW email response and let his listeners draw their own conclusions.
Listen for yourself then cast your aspersions .
I am still trying to find the therad and forum, but the WW PR person was pretty rude to Tom Gresham in multiple e-mails. We have given $1,00s of dollars to WW and am trying to determine if this is true. If WW went on MSMBC it would not jeopardize their tax exempt status.
Cool, being an advocacy group means you can’t even just TALK with a public figure. OK, so just talking with someone means that you support them. I like your interpretation of the first amendment. I’m sure that Obama would concur, he’s a constitutional lawyer.
The resopnse from Gun Talk is at 9:30 in the linked show. WW said that guns are undesireable and won’t participate. I saw the e-mail exchange and it was much, MUCH worse! I will find it and link it. It was as if it was directly from hussein.
He hasn’t slandered anyone. I’s pretty cut and dry. The PR person says they can’t be affiliated with firearms related companies/groups because so many veterans have problems with alcohol and when combined with guns leads to suicide.
Read it here
After Sunday’s show, we’ve gotten many emails about Tom’s remarks after WWP declined an interview request on Gun Talk Radio because it’s a firearms-related show. We’ve also seen the forums that are suggesting many things that are not true. So, I’m going to lay it all out right here.
We thought it would be great to book the WWP on the Veteran’s Day show to promote the organization, so I contacted them. I was flabbergasted when their PR contact, Leslie, sent me an email saying they could not participate because our show dealt with firearms. Knowing that WWP has had a booth at trade shows and various gun shows across the US, takes wounded warriors on hunts and range days, raffles guns and accessories as fundraisers, etc., their policy didn’t make much sense. I forwarded the email on to Tom to get his take.
The following is the complete email exchange:
Sarah forwarded me your email after I asked her to invite the Wounded Warriors Project to join me on “Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk” radio show.
I’m stunned at your email saying that the WWP doesn’t participate in an interview or activity related to firearms. Inasmuch as there are 90 million gun owners and most of them support wounded veterans, I think they would be shocked to hear that they are, by way of their hobbies, somehow not worthy of helping with the Wounded Warriors Project.
Does your policy apply also to police agencies and the military, since they are “related to firearms?”
I’m hoping that we have misunderstood your email. Can you confirm that it is, in fact, an official policy of the Wounded Warriors Project to not do interviews with or participate in any activity related to firearms?
Good afternoon —
While we appreciate your interest in Wounded Warrior Project® (WWP) you are correct that we decline the media opportunity.
Please note the following notice that appears on our website which also applies to WWP public awareness policy and inquiries from media outlets:
WWP does not co-brand, create cause marketing campaigns or receive a percentage or a portion of proceeds from companies in which the product or message is sexual, political or religious in nature, or from alcohol or firearms companies.
Thank you for your inquiry.
LESLIE A. COLEMAN
public relations director
Wounded Warrior Project
4899 Belfort Road, Suite 300
Jacksonville, Florida 32256
Thanks for confirming that, Leslie. It was a simple opportunity to promote the WWP on a national program in an effort to send donations your way.
I’ll pass along the info that you don’t want or need the help of America’s gun owners.
Good morning —
This policy is not a judgment on those who own and use firearms clearly every member of our armed forces has been trained in the use of firearms and then called on to use them in the course of their service to this country.
Our position regarding firearms and alcohol is in response to the struggles that many injured service members face with substance abuse and suicide and the roles those items often play in those issues.
LESLIE A. COLEMAN
public relations director
Thank you for that explanation.
I do think — and I’m being as kind as possible — that it’s the nuttiest thing I’ve heard in years. Suicides are not linked to firearms. Japan has a much higher rate of suicide than does the U.S., and they have essentially no firearms. Suicide is a serious issue irrespective of the methodology used.
This explanation doesn’t pass even the most simple “does this make sense” test.
Your policy does, in fact, brand firearms and the companies which make them as undesirables, and by association, you are saying that those who own and use firearms for recreation, hunting, self protection, and other safe and legal uses are to be avoided.
It’s certainly your option to ostracize the firearms industry, the 90 million gun owners in America, and the media which support firearms safety training.
At this point, I feel an obligation to make sure the millions who listen to my radio show and watch my two national television series know about your policy.
I cannot fully express how much I feel you are doing a disservice to our wounded veterans, and how disappointed I am to discover this bias at the Wounded Warriors Project.
“Im stunned at your email saying that the WWP doesnt participate in an interview or activity related to firearms. Inasmuch as there are 90 million gun owners and most of them support wounded veterans, I think they would be shocked to hear that they are, by way of their hobbies, somehow not worthy of helping with the Wounded Warriors Project.”
Are you seriously trying to tell me that this isn’t about as far over the top as you can get? NOTHING like this was even remotely implied.
similar to the daffy reply they gave to my post on their FB page.
...and a low percentage goes to the troops, as i understand it...
Wow.. sounds like Leslie is over her head and will be up for reassignment soon.
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.