Disgraced General Tosses Portrait of Robert E. Lee (Because his wife told him to )

On November 21, 2018 the Washington Post published an article written by Retired U.S. General Stanley McChrystal entitled 'Good Riddance: Americans need to set aside icons like Robert E. Lee to live up to our potential'.

The article contains a picture of a (digitally) vandalized portrait of General Robert E. Lee, which one can only assume, given the history of the Washington Post, is not only an approval of past attacks on Confederate monuments but also a wink and a nod to future attacks as well.

In the article McChrystal admits that a portrait of General Robert E. Lee hung on his wall, wherever he went , for over 34 years and that the portrait was given to him as a gift from his wife, who coincidentally is the one who told him to take it down.

The reason? McChrystal states:

"In the summer of 2017, my wife, Annie, urged me to take down the picture. Disgusted by the images of hate and white supremacy that had descended on Charlottesville in the form of angry, torch-bearing men, she felt that Lee’s picture risked offending guests to our home by sending an unintended message of agreement with the protesters who had sought to preserve a statue of the Marble Man. Initially, I argued that Lee was an example of apolitical loyalty and stoic adherence to duty. But as days passed, I reflected on the way that Lee’s legacy looked to people who hadn’t grown up with my perspective or my privilege. So, on an otherwise unremarkable Sunday morning, I took the painting off the wall and sent it on its way to a local landfill for its final burial. Hardly a hero’s end."

Where does one even begin in response to McChrystal's actions? I guess since he took down General Lee's portrait and tossed it into the garbage at the urging of his wife we can begin with that.

First of all I think it is safe to say a healthy marriage is about compromise. That being said, a healthy marriage is also about respect . Neither the husband or the wife are required to hold the same beliefs but it is necessary for both the husband and the wife to respect each others beliefs. So given McChrystal's statement it is easy to conclude that his wife has no respect for his beliefs, furthermore, McChrystal has no respect for himself.

While interviewing Southern historian Shelby Foote , J.L. Wall asked the writer if he had been alive during the war would he have fought for the Confederacy?

To which Foote replied:

"No doubt about it. What's more, I would fight for the Confederacy today if the circumstances were similar. There's a great deal of misunderstanding about the Confederacy, the Confederate flag, slavery, the whole thing. The political correctness of today is no way to look at the middle of the nineteenth century. The Confederates fought for some substantially good things. States rights is not just a theoretical excuse for oppressing people. You have to understand that the raggedy Confederate soldier who owned no slaves and probably couldn't even read the Constitution, let alone understand it, when he was captured by Union soldiers and asked, What are you fighting for? replied, I'm fighting because you're down here. So I certainly would have fought to keep people from invading my native state. There's another good reason for fighting for the Confederacy. Life would have been intolerable if you hadn't. The women of the South just would not allow somebody to stay home and sulk while the war was going on. It didn't take conscription to grab him. The women made him go."

There is a big contrast between the men and women of the 1860's and today. In the 1860's men had principles. Honor and duty were important to them and the women made sure that the men adhered to these principles.

It's especially worth noting that in the case of Mr. and Mrs. McChrystal the General throws away all of his principles because his wife tells him too. Why does she tell him to? Because "bad" people were protesting the proposed removal of a statue of General Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, Virginia and she doesn't want to offend visitors to their home.

The saddest part about this story is that she is based her concerns and he caved into her demands on the grounds of a false narrative.

The fires of civil unrest were stoked by a racist black supremacist named Wes Bellamy (who was Vice-Mayor for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia at the time). Bellamy , who was demanding the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee on the grounds that it was racist, was exposed as being a racist himself after the discovery of numerous anti-white posts on his Twitter account.

Bellamy, however , was just one bit player in the Charlottesville set up. As Professor James Fetzer writes:

"The Charlottesville production was staged in three distinct parts:

Act I: A torch-lit protest around the statue of Thomas Jefferson on the campus of the University of Virginia, designed to draw the attention of the nation for the events the following day;

Act II: Local police stand down so VA State Police and National Guard could channel peaceful protesters of the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee into a violent confrontation with Antifa and Black Lives Matter;

Act III: At an intersection several blocks away, the actors were set and the vehicles in place to film dramatic—and carefully contrived—video footage.

The objective was to transform Donald Trump (who wants to reallocate American resources from the Middle East to benefit the American people by putting “America First!”)—by successive stages in a semantic sleight-of-hand—into a White Nationalist, into a White Supremacist, into a neo-Nazi, and to promote the unraveling of American culture by an assault upon our history through the removal of icons of the past and an excess of “political correctness.”

Fetzer lists the key players in this event as:

"George Soros, who financed the event, Executive Producer; Terry McAuliffe, Governor of Virginia, Director, who controlled the National Guard and the VA State Police; Michael Signer, Mayor of Charlottesville, Assistant Director, who ordered the local police to stand down; Richard Spencer and Jason Kessler, who impersonated White Nationalist leaders to give the event a neo-Nazi flavor; Brennan Gilmore, a U.S. State Department operative who appears to have served with the CIA in Africa, Witness; Ford Fischer, as the On-scene Videographer; with Antifa, Black Lives Matter and stuntmen as Extras."

General McChrystal's military career came to abrupt end in June, 2010 when critical comments he made about the Obama administration were published in a Rolling Stone magazine interview. 

"In the profile, Mr McChrystal aides mocked Vice President Joe Biden, called the president's national security adviser "a clown," and said the general was "disappointed" by his first meeting with Obama."

Interestingly enough , Michael Hastings, the author who exposed McChrystal died in a car crash three years later in June , 2013.

I think Stanley McChrystal knows that the 2017 Charlottesville, Virginia riots were a set up and I think he is virtue signaling because he is planning to run for political office. Either for President, Vice-President or some other high ranking post in an attempt to regain his dignity.

The reality is that McChrystal will never regain his dignity no matter how many times he "cucks out" or "virtue signals".  He will never be the man that General Robert E. Lee was. Neither as a military commander, in stature or as a respected citizen. There will always be those who will  remember and respect Lee while McChrystal will continue to fade into obscurity as a minor footnote in history.

- Clint Lacy is the author of:

Blood in the Ozarks: Union War Crimes Against Southern Sympathizers and Civilians in Occupied Missouri

and

A Truthseeker's Guide to False Flags