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 ...
one of the things that is (in a way) funniest about the "gubmint apruvd pubic screwls currickulim" is that they tell the children (in their especial care) the MYTHS out of the REVISIONIST, leftist/socialist, SELF-serving, arrogant, SELF-righteous, lunatic fringe of "poison ivy league academia", KNOWING that the MYTHS are FALSE.
just one of those KNOWING LIES is that the merciless Kansas CRIMINALS that preyed on the (mostly peaceful) farmers & townspeople on MO & IT were "wunnerful, wunnerful"and/or "patriotic"& the people from MO & IT (who retaliated against the raiding by the Kansas criminals) were "renegades & ruffians".
as a direct descendant of PVT William J (Little Thunder) Freeman, late of the 4th MO Partisan Rangers, i find that you have perpetuated those KNOWING, REVISIONIST LIES, whether you KNOW that what you stated was false, or not.
the cavalry raid on Lawrence was a PUNITIVE EXPEDITION (allowable under the Law of War)in retaliation for the raids on towns in MO by the "garbage in semi-human form" that styled themselves "Jayhawkers", "Kansas volunteer cavalry" & "regulators". ALL of those KS groups made war on BOTH sides of the KS-MO-IT border for "fun, plunder & profit".(btw,the notorious murderer, rapist, robber, arsonist & jayhawker commander, "Doc" Jennison missed out on his richly deserved death, at the hands of the Lawrence raiders, because he was raiding UNIONIST farms in KANSAS on that date!)
frankly, you are defending FILTH & the WAR CRIMES that that FILTH committed.
free dixie,sw
just out of curiosity, do YOU believe the NONSENSE you're posting about the war in the Trans-Mississippi West???
repeating DAMNyankee lies does not make those lies magically become truth.
free dixie,sw
Orionblamblam regularly trolls theology threads, and now it looks like he's moving up to civil war threads. Not surprisingly, his grasp of history is as poor as that of theology (consisting of mainly hyperbole, non-sequiters, and insults). Probably got picked on a lot as a kid.
free dixie,sw
unfortunately, the federal courts have ruled that "free speech" trumps protecting our flag (just as the USSC refuses to protect the flag of the USA!).
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
i know not how much he knows/doesn't know about religion but he certainly is 100% WRONG, ignorant of the facts & obviously clueLESS about the WBTS!
perhaps "blam" is a TROLL, who is only on FR to "cause discord" & is sitting at his desk lol at the problems he causes.
otoh, we HAVE had people from the "DY coven" who were just THAT ignorant & whose eyes/minds were tightly closed to the truth. "m.eSPINola", "cvn76","jaguaretype" & #3fan" come to mind.
free dixie,sw
Well, you're as inaccurate and paranoid as always. Good to see you aren't changing.
just out of curiosity, do you actually believe ANY of the nonsense you've posted on this thread????
free dixie,sw
as you are THE PROPAGANDIST of the forum, i'll take that as a "backhanded compliment".
SADLY, for you, your propensity to attack every bit of ANTI-DAMNyankee facts (AND your ceaseless denial of the TENS OF THOUSANDS of DAMNyankee war crimes) makes EVERYONE (but the DUMBEST & most naive/ignorant) DISbelieve your posts.
free dixie,sw
And this is your idea of home rule, smaller government, less taxes, and individual liberty?
I don't know if I'd use the tax policies of the central Confederate government to prove my point - and that appears to be about 80% of your argument - since the states that comprised the Confederacy refused, in the main, to cooperate with the central government on the issue of taxation and, to a lesser extent, conscription (possibly because they believed in home rule, smaller government, less taxes, and individual liberty). It is precisely because of that refusal that the Confederate government had to resort to such drastic revenue measures as the massive issuance of bonds, and loans.
Martial law? You're correct. Jailing people without trial? Ditto. And I'll save you the trouble: does the "individual liberty" argument mentioned above represent blatant hypocrisy, given the institution of slavery? Of course it does.
Refusal to create a Supreme Court? Debatable, and a very interesting subject. "Failure" might be a more accurate word in any case. Please see Article 6, Section 1 of the permanent Constitution, which effectively cedes this issue to the provisional Constitution of February 8, 1861. The latter, in point of fact, defined and created the Confederate Supreme Court (see Article 3, Section 1.2 and 1.3) If one defines a quorum as a simple majority, and since at least 8 Confederate districts were created out of a possible 11, it appears that it is possible that a de jure Confederate Supreme Court did indeed exist, even if never met. Would be glad to hear your arguments to the contrary.
LOL, that's the really twisted type of humor I enjoy.
If he stops capitalizing and punctuating, then we'll know.
People forget that for most of the history of the Republican party the Middle West was its base. Conservatives in the forties and fifties looked to leaders like Taft and Bricker from Ohio. For that matter, you couldn't say that California was a reliable liberal state until quite recently.
Far from Reagan being influenced politically by the Southern migrants to LA, it looks like he influenced them -- he broke their ties to the Democrats. In the forties and the fifties, Reagan may have personally known more immigrants from Germany or Britain than from Mississippi or Arkansas.
like so many millions of smart citizens, Reagan left the party when it became the DIMocRATS party of:
1.the lunatic left,
2."hollywierd",
3."gun control"
4.baby MURDER,
5.an ever-increasingly intrusive welfare state and
6.the repository of every NUT-JOB splinter group in the country. (if tommorrow 1% of the voters decided to engage in cannibalism, the DIMocRATS party apparatus would welcome the "eaters of men" as full-fledged members!)
as President Reagan once said, "I didn't leave the Democrat party. It left me."
SMARTER southerners left the democrat party permanently about the same time as RWR did. that is why the DIMocRATS are a DYING party (which i predict will NEVER regain the Presidentcy).
free dixie,sw
It was the representatives of the states that enacted the tariffs in the first place, and since it protected local products like tobacco and molasses at the 20 and 25 percent rates it could be considered protectionist in nature. Something the constitution expressly forbade. And the fact that the extremely high income tax rates promoted by the Davis government were not passed does negate the fact that such high rates were proposed to begin with.
Refusal to create a Supreme Court? Debatable, and a very interesting subject.
Not debatable at all. Article 3 mandates a supreme court, it is quite clear on the matter. No such court was established. Likewise the provisional constitution required a supreme court without such court being established. The district courts defined by the provisional constitution were not a replacement for the supreme court and had no similar provision in the permanent constitution, so their role ended when the provisional constitution did. The long and the short of it is that the third branch of government required by their constitution was ignored by the other two branches.
if you are, please join either:
the Sons of Confederate Veterans (1-800-my dixie),
the Order of the Confederate Rose (for females) and/or
the United Daughters of the Confederacy.
you will be WARMLY welcomed home, as dixie NEEDS all of our sons/daughters to join!
free dixie,sw
could it be that a CSSC never got established because the CSA was more interested in trying to drive out the "filth that flowed down from the north" and that there was a war for national SURVIVAL being fought???
free dixie,sw
i once had a 14H, blood-bay w/4 black socks, "coon-hunting mule" who was the progeny of a racing QH mare & a Catalonian jack.
Molly (long gone to the great pasture in the sky) was SWIFT, surefooted on every terrain/surface, a easy jumper (6-wire fences were seemingly effortless for her) & a genuine pleasure to ride. i miss her, still, after these nearly 15 years.
free dixie,sw
As had been pointed out to you several times before the Articles of Confederation did not require a Supreme Court. But under the Constitution the Judiciary Act organizing the court was passed by the first session of the first Congress, the first justices confirmed that same year, and the first session sat in 1790.
could it be that a CSSC never got established because the CSA was more interested in trying to drive out the "filth that flowed down from the north" and that there was a war for national SURVIVAL being fought???
No. The confederate congress had no problems keeping the revolving door Davis cabinet fully stocked, though not a single one of those positions was required by the constitution. They didn't establish the court because they didn't want to. And the fact that their constitution required a supreme court was of no interest to them.
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.