Posted on 06/14/2006 5:58:12 PM PDT by Oshkalaboomboom
Confederate flags flown aboard the international space station — and seemingly signed by a NASA astronaut — showed up last week on the online auction site eBay.
The original eBay listing indicated that the 4-by-6-inch flags were brought aboard the space station by Russian cosmonaut Salizhan Sharipov in 2004, and an accompanying photo showed a sample flag that seemed to bear Sharipov’s signature as well as that of Leroy Chiao, his NASA colleague on the station. Yet another photo showed several of the rebel flags floating in a space station module.
The item was pulled from the auction on Monday by the seller, Alex Panchenko of USSR-Russian Air-Space Collectibles Inc. in Los Angeles — and on Tuesday, Panchenko told MSNBC.com that he removed the items from sale because he had concluded the flag and the authentication documents were forgeries.
However, Robert Pearlman, editor and founder of CollectSpace, said he believes the flags are authentic.
“The picture taken of the flags aboard the station says a lot,” he said. “It would be difficult to fake, given the style and I couldn't see the motivation to do so.” The “onboard-the-ISS” stamp, added Pearlman, is not known to have been counterfeited anywhere."
The disappearance of the flags followed a round of criticism over the weekend from former space scientist Keith Cowing, publisher of NASA Watch, an independent Web log. He cited the Confederate flags as an example of “bad judgment on the ISS.”
“You'd think that someone on the U.S. side of the ISS program would have expressed some concern about flying a symbol on the ISS that many Americans associate with slavery,” Cowing wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
in point of fact, the elites in the NORTH favored a continuation of slavery, permanently, where it was PROFITABLE. that was ALL the elites cared about = $$$$$$$$$ & POWER.
there was a SMALL group of abolitionists in both north & south, who wanted slavery ended before the WBTS. they had only MINORITY support anywhere. as long as slavery remained PROFITABLE, the elites of the social/financial/big business world favored slavery.
those are the facts.
free dixie,sw
Actually, I think you're wrong on abortion. Most people want Roe v. Wade repealed, all that does is turn it back to the states. The federal government is no more qualified to issue an outright ban then it is to issue an outright mandate. It's a 10th amendment issue.
The only thing the South has in common with Boston is Catholics and historic architecture, other than that, two different places entirely, for one thing, Southerners by birth have more sense than Bostonians, though Boston is a wonderful town to visit. As for Reagan, Reagan became the great President he was because during his time in politics, the area he lived in was infatuated with Southern culture, which made sense considering the number of Southern immigrants living in Los Angeles at the time, and the fact that Western culture was shaped by Southerners. Illinois is just a side fact, sort of like Ike being born in Texas. I notice Reagan didn't return to Illinois.
!!!!!!!!!!!
PC reporting is drawing my ire.
My God! Could it be we're seeing the beginning of stand watie lite?
in point of fact, Blacks could NOT be drafted. freemen COULD volunteer to serve. slaves could NOT serve in the forces as they were NOT ((obviously) free to take the Oath of Enlistment, though SOME (a few hundred) were contract laborers.
i KNOW it hurts you preconceived notions & anti-dixie PREJUDICES, but what i posted is FACT. furthermore the south had a FEW (it is estimated that the number was somewhere between 10-20)""other than white" officers" (they were elected by the members of the three, large, all-Black CSA units.), while the north had (surprise, surprise) NONE!
you really should read Blacks in Blue & Gray, by Professor H R Blackerby of Tuskegee University; you'd then LOOK smarter.
free dixie,sw
Sherman was a hero who saved tens of thousands of Southern boys from death and dismemberment in a hopeless cause. Anyone who believes otherwise is spouting bottled piety.
troops under the command of sherman, THOUSANDS of innocent civilians & helpless POWs were slaughtered for NO good reason. sherman was a WAR CRIMINAL. nothing more;nothing less.
free dixie,sw
Lies, pure and simple.
So what would you call the Eagles then, or the original music by the Doobie Brothers, Linda Ronstadt, can't forget the Bakersfield sound, and the fact that old Ronnie pardoned Merle Haggard. Before California was taken over by the fruits and nuts, it was a laid back place, just like the South, and during the 70s, much of the music that was popular in California became popular in the South and vice-versa.
Reagan spent much more of his life in California than he ever did in Illinois, and when he retired, he returned to Los Angeles. Are you going to honestly deny this? Spend enough time in a place, and you'll become part of it, no matter how much of your original home you still carry with you.
Glenn Frey was born in Michigan, Bernie Leadon was born in Minnesota, Joe Walsh is from Witchita. Some southrn influence.
...the original music by the Doobie Brothers
Tom Johnston born in Visalia, California. Jeff Baxter was born in D.C.. Michael McDonald was born in St. Louis.
...Linda Ronstadt...
Born in Tuscon, Arizona.
So where is the southern influence again?
You'd look smarter if you'd stop saying that Blackerby's initials were HR. They were HC. Nor was he a professor at Tuskegee. He was a publisher of pulp western magazines and comic books. And the book doesn't even come close to making the assertions that you claim it does.
Country music is known as "Country-Western" in old school parlance. That means it was a music that was based on two traditions, Southern and Western. Last I checked, Tucson is in Arizona, and during the settlement of the west, many Southerners found there way into the Southwestern states. For all intents and purposes, St. Louis is both a Southern city and a Midwestern city. A large number of blues musicians resided in St. Louis, and the blues was a form of music first pioneered by Southern blacks. The blues is also the basis of rock n' roll. Also, DC was traditionally a Southern city.
> Actually, I think you're wrong on abortion.
It is a separate debate, and one I suspect we wouldn't find a whole lot to argue about (and how boring would that be), but the abortion debate has people on *both* sides wanting Constitutional amendments. Heck, I'd *love* for the fedgov to come and bitchslap a few of the states... states that have ridiculous, un-constitutional gun laws, for instance.
> The only thing the South has in common with Boston is Catholics and historic architecture
And an un-earned sense of specialness and importance.
> I notice Reagan didn't return to Illinois.
Nor did he move to the South. Unless, of course, y'all want to claim D.C.
I'm hoping I'll find an ancestor in the 20th Maine (I'm from the Portland area originally) but I've never had the time to go digging.
BZZZZZZTTTT! No, sorry, the raid on Harper's Ferry by a serial killing abolitionist nutcase has no more relevance to the Union cause than Eric Rudolph has to the pro-life movement. No, the answer was "Edmund Ruffin, for the Confederacy, at 4:30 am on 12 April, 1861."
Luckily for me there was no digging involved. My great grandmother told me about them.
[chortle!] Yeah, sure. Let's see...
First electoral skullduggery: Pro-slavery Border Ruffians crossing from Missouri in the thousands to cast illegal votes for a pro-slavery Congresscritter. Only half of the ballots in the election were legally cast. In one location, only 20 votes out of over 600 were legal.
Second electoral skullduggery: Thousands of Border Ruffians cross over to vote illegally in the elections for the territorial legislature.
First attack: Pro-slavery renegades sack Lawrence, KS.
What John Brown did in response to the Lawrence raid was monstrous, but Brown was the Eric Rudolph of his day, a man responding to despicable actions with equally despicable violence.
More blather. The loss of civilian life was small, no abuses against civilians (such as rape or murder) were ordered by Sherman or were a matter of policy and certainly those deaths were equal to or less than the civilian deaths that would have occurred if the war had gone on for years. You'll find Sherman's orders are clear and have nothing to do with killing any civilians, much less thousands.
Neo-confederates such as yourself who wish to rewrite history must denigrate Sherman, because if he hadn't smacked Hood around like a little girl, you guys might have been dealing with President McClellan in March of 1865, instead of trying to hold Grant off. You hate him because he's the man who beat you, not because of how he did it.
By the way, why did Johnston give honor and friendship to a war criminal? (Here's a hint: He didn't, because Sherman wasn't one.)
Glory, glory hallelujah,
His truth is marching on!
For Joshua Chamberlain and John M. Schofield,
Mr. Silverback
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.