OPEN LETTER TO THE SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS AND OTHER FELLOW AMERICANS FROM A...

Facebook ^ | 7/8/2015 | Tom Baurle

[fhayek]

Full title: AN OPEN LETTER TO THE SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS AND OTHER FELLOW AMERICANS FROM A GREAT-GREAT GRANDSON OF A FOUR-YEAR UNION SOLDIER. FEEL FREE TO SHARE.

Baurle is a WBEN Radio talk show host Buffalo. It said 'feel free to share', so I don't think we have any copyright issues hers.

[DiogenesLamp]

Link doesn’t work. Probably the FaceStapo objected to the content and censored it.

[KrisKrinkle]

“Sorry, this page isn’t available
The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed.
Go back”

No picture pictured.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

Black confederates

Dr. Lewis Steiner, Chief Inspector of the United States Sanitary Commission while observing Gen. "Stonewall" Jackson's occupation of Frederick, Maryland, in 1862: "Over 3,000 Negroes must be included in this number [Confederate troops]. These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured United States uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons, etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in the rebel ranks. Most of the Negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabers, bowie-knives, dirks, etc.....and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army."

[fhayek]

Link works for me. Maybe you have to be on Facebook.

[x]

The brave men who enlisted to fight under the eventual battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia did so to protect their home states from federal domination and invasion.

Plenty of Southerners fought for the Union, or didn't care for secession or the Confederacy, or tried to stay out of the war altogether. You could say that those who went to war for the CSA did so because their friends or relatives or neighbors did, and that made them think the war was about Northern domination, rather than something else.

This neo-revisionist view of the "hate symbol" of the Confederate battle flag is where I draw a line in the sand and say: no more.

The revisionist view is the one the writer represents. Ask how people felt in 1861 or 1865 and it wouldn't have much in common with the warm fuzzy feeling many Americans had about the CBF during the 1961 centennial.

Not only did it fly for 80 years over a SLAVE nation, but flew as the USA engaged in a policy of "lebensraum" in the war with Mexico in 1848, and it flew over the wanton destruction and mass murders of Southerners during Sherman's "March to the Sea" from Atlanta. Atlanta was destroyed by Sherman just a surely as Lidice was obliterated by the Nazis. "Old Glory" flew over a campaign of aggressive wars and outright genocide of First Nations' people both before and after the Civil War. Our national flag waved in the air as the US Government cheated the indigenous peoples of their lands and rights, and engaged in an imperialist war with Spain in 1898. Oh, and Hawaii was brought under the control of the US despite having its own royal family and way of life. Shall we talk about the Mengele-like syphilis experiments performed on blacks well after the Civil War or Jim Crow?

Okay, so Baurle hates America. Where do we go from there?

[cripplecreek]

The sons of Union veterans of the civil war Officialy support displaying the Confederate battle flag.

http://rowanfreepress.com/2015/07/03/from-the-sons-of-the-union-veterans-of-the-civil-war-our-position-on-the-confederate-battle-flag/

GENERAL ORDER NO.26

SERIES 2014-2015

SONS OF UNION VETERANS OF THE CIVIL WAR

Display of the Confederate Battle Flag

By the authority vested in me as Commander-in-Chief of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, the National Constitution and Regulations, and National Policies, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1:
Recently many individual Brothers, Camps, Departments and the National

Organization have been contacted regarding the position of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War (SUVCW) on the display of the Confederate Battle Flag.

Section 2:
The SUVCW already has an official position on file regarding this issue, as

adopted by the 119th National Encampment. As the National Encampment is the supreme governing body of the SUVCW, and as no subsequent National Encampment has revisited this issue, the SUVCW’s official position remains the same. Neither the Commander-in-Chief nor the Council of Administration has the authority to amend the position.

Section 3: For clarity, the official position of the SUVCW regarding the display of t

he Confederate Battle Flag is included in this order, as follows:

RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT

DISPLAY OF BATTLE FLAGS OF THE CONFEDERACY

119TH NATIONAL ENCAMPMENT OF THE

SONS OF UNION VETERANS OF THE CIVIL WAR

LANSING, MICHIGAN AUGUST 19, 2000

A resolution in support of the display of the Confederate Battle Flag.

WHEREAS, we, the members of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War,

condemn the use of the confederate battle flag, as well as the flag of the United States, by any and all hate groups; and

WHEREAS, we, the members of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War,

support the flying of the Confederate battle flag as a historical piece of this nation’s

history; and

WHEREAS, we, the members of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War,

oppose the removal of any Confederate monuments or markers to those gallant soldiers in the former Confederate States, and strongly oppose the removal of ANY reminders of this nation’s bloodiest war on the grounds of it being “politically correct;” and

WHEREAS, we, as the descendants of Union soldiers and sailors who as

members of the Grand Army of the Republic met in joint reunions with the Confederate veterans under both flags in those bonds of Fraternal Friendship, pledge our support and admiration for those gallant soldiers and of their respective flags;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we, the members of the Sons of Union

Veterans of the Civil War in 119th Annual National Encampment, hereby adopt this

resolution.

Dated in Lansing, Michigan, on this nineteenth day of August, in the year of our

Lord Two thousand.

SUVCW General Order No. 26, Series 2014-2015

Section 3:

Individual Brothers, Camps and Departments shall be mindful of the official

position of the SUVCW when addressing issues involving the Confederate battle flag. It is recommended that inquiries about the SUVCW’s official position be directed, without further comment or elaboration, to the Order’s website (http://suvcw.org/flagres.htm) where it can be read in its entirety.

The foregoing General Order is proclaimed this 25th day of June in the year of our Lord two thousand fifteen, and of the Independence of the United States of Ameri

ca the two hundred thirty-ninth, in the City of Gilroy, County of Santa Clara, State of California.

Tad D. Campbell, PDC

Commander-in-Chief

[piroque]

marked,, Good post,,some here can’t stand the truth.

[fhayek]

I listen to Baurle. He does NOT hate America. His point is that if you rationalize banning the Confederate flag, how long before the leftist PC police call for the banning of the American flag on similar grounds?

[Major Matt Mason]

I believe you are missing his point - he is stating the reasons that libtards will make for getting rid of the American flag. And he is correct - this is not haphazard, but is part of their drive to destroy this nation.

[apocalypto]

One thing for sure, the left and Gov. Nikki Haley (who appears to the left of even Ted Turner) will not stop with removing the Confederate flag. U.S. flag will be next.

[ifinnegan]

I’m a descendent of at least two Confederate veterans.

I was enjoying and agreeing with this post until you got to this: “It wanted freedom from DC’s tyranny and more autonomy...”

This is patently false and in fact the exact opposite of the reasons for secession.

The Democrats of the south had most of the power in Congress and the Federal government and used it to their advantage. They also had the courts on their side, like the Dems now, and benefitted from that.

To the extent there was tyranny from DC Pre-war it was from the southern power brokers.

It was when they began to lose their monopoly on federal power that they decided to secede.

And the idea that the war was not fought over slavery is a communist propaganda idea that the Communists did take from the sore losers of the south (who are not the ones you describe in the initial,paragraphs).

[Inyo-Mono]

Bttt.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Memo to Nicki Haley: Hey Nicki I have General Crook’s sidearm which was taken off him by my father’s relatives who rode with McNeal’s raiders. So kiss my grits you immigrant no nothing. Try to come and get that.

[x]

They want power over the country. If they get rid of the US flag or get rid of the country, what happens to their power? There may be some ethnic activists who'd like to see a Black Power or a La Raza flag replace the Stars and Stripes, but for somebody who wants power over the US to get rid of the US flag would have to be nuts. They'd try to redefine America and its flag and before they'd give up power.

As a political tactic, though, does it work to rub Americans faces in past missteps? When somebody tries to defend a foreign country's aggression or occupation by bringing up the Mexican war, does that really make you more inclined to agree with them? Do you really think that questioning Hawaiian annexation or bringing up the Tuskegee syphilis experiments when you have a political disagreement about something is a) going to win the argument for you or b) going to make Americans more patriotic and dedicated to the country?

[KrisKrinkle]

“It was when they began to lose their monopoly on federal power that they decided to secede.”

I’ve said they lost the election of 1860 and then had a hissy fit.

[uncitizen]

is he trying to educate The Sons of Confederate Veterans about the meaning of the Confederacy? Or asking them to get involved in the flag issue?

[fhayek]

I won’t attempt to speak for Mr. Baurle, but my guess is that he, a descendant of a Union soldier was expressing his solidarity with descendants of Confederate soldiers.

[Gator113]

None of this history matters, all that matters is what OBAMA and his tribe wants.

[rockrr]

Unlike Hitler's Nazis, the CSA didn't want to conquer. It wanted freedom from DC's tyranny and more autonomy for the states as promised under the Tenth Amendment. And now, the money-shot: If you are like most ignorant (not stupid) Americans, you've been brainwashed to believe the "free North" fought the "slave South" to free "negroes."

This is just silly. Of course the south didn't have a plan to "conquer" the north - it merely wanted to knock it to its knees because it planned to set up shop as a direct competitor to the continents resources.

And what tyranny? The south was represented in Congress, half of the presidencies, and the supreme court during much of the nation's first 70 years.

And I don't know anyone who believes that the north fought the south in order to free the slaves. The north went to war because the south went to war against us. The south went to war to defend the Peculiar Institution.