The vilification of Wal Mart is patently absurd. For the Germanna Foundation to be taking such a political stance akin to an “Occupy Wal Mart” position is far afield of what the mission of the Germanna Foundation truly is.  The Germanna Foundation may very well be flirting with the loss of its non-profit status and it is certainly creating political opponents when such a move is unnecessary and unwise. While the site on which Wal Mart is planning to build a store that is much needed and much wanted by local residents might have had some Civil War activity, that is true of virtually the entire area.  When the Germanna Foundation gave the land for the building of Germanna Community College it is certainly true that Civil War activities and evidence thereof was destroyed in the process.  The fact is that the land where the Wal Mart is to be built is NOT a significant Civil War site.  Period. To contrast the proposed Wal Mart site with the previous proposed site next to the Wilderness Battlefield is like comparing night and day in so far as Civil War significance is concerned.  The Wilderness Battlefield marks one of the most significant chapters in our Civil War history. The now proposed Wal Mart site does not even rate a footnote. The fact that other preservationist organizations recognize this most evident distinction is not a basis to attack the other preservationist groups nor to attack Wal Mart. We should thank Wal Mart for departing from the Wilderness Battlefield site and for building on a location that no serious historian of the Civil War would ever contend comes close to the significance of the Wilderness Battlefield. The Germanna Foundation appears to be more interested in scoring political points with certain groups than it does in recognizing the actual history of the area.   This is a misguided campaign apparently designed to attract attention to the Germanna Foundation and the attention is not particularly flattering upon any serious scrutiny.  Also, what does this blatant political action have to do with Germanna? Nothing.

As a businesswoman who is well acquainted with nondisclosure agreements (NDA), I find it appalling, embarrassing and insulting that the Germanna Foundation has chosen to use the term "gag" agreement to describe a nondisclosure agreement. Businesses often require an NDA to be signed before revealing business proprietary information to protect themselves and it is done so with the advice and counsel of their attorneys. An NDA does not prevent one who has signed it from speaking out on public stances taken by the entity with whom the NDA was signed. This political and misleading stance reflects poorly on the leadership of the Germanna Foundation. A point of fact--the Germanna Foundation owns 178.6 acres of land, not 279 acres as stated in the Germanna Foundation post. The details of the acreage owned by the Germanna Foundation is readily available online from the Orange County, VA public works site. Anyone desiring a more in depth explanation of NDAs, please contact me off list at holtzclaw.research@yahoo.com I will be delighted to explain more fully. Suzanne Collins Matson --- On Thu, 10/27/11, Michael Oddenino <oddlaw@pacbell.net> wrote: > From: Michael Oddenino <oddlaw@pacbell.net> > Subject: [GERMANNA] Wal Mart and the Civil War > To: "Germanna Colonies" <germanna_colonies@rootsweb.com>, "GERMANS-VA" <GERMANS-VA@rootsweb.com> > Date: Thursday, October 27, 2011, 2:33 PM > The vilification of Wal Mart is > patently absurd. For the > Germanna Foundation to be taking such a political stance > akin to an “Occupy Wal > Mart” position is far afield of what the mission of the > Germanna Foundation > truly is.  The Germanna Foundation may > very well be flirting with the loss of its non-profit > status and it is > certainly creating political opponents when such a move is > unnecessary and > unwise. > > While the site on which Wal Mart is planning to build a > store that is much needed and much wanted by local > residents might have had > some Civil War activity, that is true of virtually the > entire area.  When the Germanna Foundation gave the land > for the building of Germanna Community College it is > certainly true that Civil > War activities and evidence thereof was destroyed in the > process.  The fact is that the land where the Wal Mart > is to be built is NOT a significant Civil War site.  > Period. > > To contrast the proposed Wal Mart site with the previous > proposed site next to the Wilderness Battlefield is like > comparing night and > day in so far as Civil War significance is concerned.  The > Wilderness Battlefield marks one of the > most significant chapters in our Civil War history. The now > proposed Wal Mart > site does not even rate a footnote. > > > The fact that other preservationist organizations > recognize > this most evident distinction is not a basis to attack the > other > preservationist groups nor to attack Wal Mart. We should > thank Wal Mart for > departing from the Wilderness Battlefield site and for > building on a location > that no serious historian of the Civil War would ever > contend comes close to > the significance of the Wilderness Battlefield. > > The Germanna Foundation appears to be more interested in > scoring political points with certain groups than it does > in recognizing the > actual history of the area.   This is a > misguided campaign apparently designed to attract attention > to the Germanna > Foundation and the attention is not particularly flattering > upon any serious > scrutiny.  Also, what does this blatant > political action have to do with Germanna? Nothing. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GERMANNA_COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message