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 ...
Second, revelations that Lincoln was not perfect are every bit as "shocking" as revelations that Jefferson actually owned slaves. When people say, "the South was right," they're saying, "The South was right to start a major shooting war because they thought a non-abolitionist might impose abolition." That wasn't justification for killing anybody.
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!)
and:
"YES he participated in the cavalry raid on the KS filth"
and:
every one of the men on the "kill lists" was wanted for common crimes in KS/MO/IT. EVERY ONE!.
That's clearly the 1863 attack. He also tells us that his ancestor rode with Quantrill, but Quantrill didn't participate in the Sack. That was in 1856, when Quantrill was still an Ohio schoolteacher. He passed through Kansas in 1857, then headed out to Utah. he returned in 1859. When the war started, he was briefly part of the formal Confederate army, and it was only when they were run out of Missouri by the US Army that he turned into a guerilla leader.
Now, I suppose it's possible that the same person attacked Lawrence twice, seven years apart, but that still means Watie's wrong about the Raid, since Freeman was dead in the ground three months at that time.
Very good! I can't believe I missed that!
What he is, mainly, is a whole big ball 'o fun. I gave up being surprised by anything he posts or upset at all his denials and his shoddy 'documentation' a long, long time ago. The truly amazing thing is that I am sure that he honestly believes every single thing he says is the gospel truth, and all evidence to the contrary are Yankee lies manufactured by some grand Yankee conspiracy. Thorton Wilder once wrote that 99% of the people in the world are insane, and the rest of us are in danger of contamination. So long as stand doesn't bite us I think we're safe.
I read it a long time ago. I love a good comedy, don't you?
Like what?
I respectfully beg to differ with you on all accounts, Mr. Silverback. First and foremost, I am a great-great granddaughter of a Confederate private from The Army of Tennessee. I am quite proud of this fact. I will always be, and that's, that.
#2- I have researched and written a book regarding the family of General Lee. More specifically, his daughter Annie. My research has been quite extensive and I have become quite good at deciphering a tone and hidden agendas with regards to what I read and/or research. I am not in any way dumber than a box of rocks, and am quite capable of figuring out whom to trust/believe/or anything else anyone cares to add to that partial list.
#3-And lastly, I totally RESENT any accusations that you or any other poster puts forth toward anyone whom I know. I do not care what your reasoning is. It is a slam against me, when someone attempts, what I consider to be a slanderous post against someone I know. SO THERE!
Mrs. Schwerin's posts are most entertaining when read aloud in your best Scarlet O'Hara impression.
Are you saying that with God as her witness she'll never be hungry again? ;-)
He's either a DU troll or dare I say it a troll of the mods that we are supposed to practice on, personally I'd like to believe that no one with as much hatred for Lincoln could ever be a Republican party official as STAND WATIE claims to be.
Having read enough of the Kennedy brothers to be able to form an opinion, do you detect any tone or agenda, hidden or otherwise, in their book? Just curious.
Well, as I stated I am only up to page 32. So far, this book has told about a specific colonel, Colonel Turchin, who was responsible for setting his troops free to rape, pillage, and plunder women and children in the South. In other words, terrorize. When these atrocities were discovered by another, a court martial began. And in the process of a court martial, Lincoln promoted the man. One can only surmise...was it to carry out these atrocities on a much grander scale? That would be my guess.
I surmised this because I read in my own research that General Garfield(yes, before Presidential times) was also promoted and sent off to Washington for questionnable behavior. NO ONE liked the man. But, guess what? Somehow, Mr. Lincoln liked him. And what did he like him for? I don't think it was because of his predisposition to behave like a boy scout. BTW, I found in my own research that Garfield ordered a hanging for spite, and I would guess this was the reason Lincoln adored him. But NONE of these examples are lone rangers. My research was quite extensive as I had a tough time believing the North could be so deliberately cruel. And there is a difference between deliberate cruelty, and cruelty that occurs as a consequence of thus and such...
I'm sure the Kennedy boys would want you to believe that as well. I'm familiar with Turchin's career. Tell me, were these actions supposed to have taken place during Sherman's march?
I surmised this because I read in my own research that General Garfield(yes, before Presidential times) was also promoted and sent off to Washington for questionnable behavior.
The questionable behavior you're thinking of must have been his election to Congess in 1862. Prior to that his service had been very distinguished, rising from regimental commander to brigade commander to corps chief-of-staff under Rosecrans.
No hidden agenda at all. And I say that because, what I am reading pulls together bits and pieces I came across in my research. Which, the reasoning for only finding bits and pieces, was mostly due to the shame of such a thing occurring to the women. My mother and grandmother never spoke of these atrocities to me, and I definitely sensed there was shame involved(me doth thinks they protested too much). Didn't know why, until reading it all for myself. There is just the tone of being fed up with all the propaganda that the South was nothing more than dirt to be stepped on, and so they so very much deserved all they got when daring to be so arrogant as to fight the North...
I congratulate you on your perception. I agree that there is no hidden agenda in any of the books from the Kennedy brothers. Their agenda is clear and their pro-southron bias is obvious.
No. And that's the beauty of it all. It was right upon war's beginning. The court martial business began in July of 1861, and them Northern boys gave all their fellow soldiers entirely too much lee-way regarding atrocity committers. So when a Northern boy starts griping about atrocities, it's all much more horrendous than is fit to be heard...
Okay, now when you say pro-southron bias...it ain't soundin' good. It sounds as though I've just got the same thing wrong with my thinker as they do... Is that an incorrect conclusion?
Enough is enough. The court martial could not have begun in July 1861 because the sack of Athens, Alabama didn't occur until May 1862. And far from the orgy of killing and raping that you, and the Kennedy boys, claim, the facts of the matter are quite different because unlike the Kennedy brothers others have studied what happened at Athens. One of them, Theordore Karamanski, wrote an article on the incident available here. Based on that, the actions of Colonel Turchin's men weren't all that much worse than, say, the activities of Lee's army in Pennsylvania in 1863 or Early's men in Chambersburg in 1864. But I don't expect you'll find any of that in the Kennedy's books.
There was a land of Cavaliers and cotton fields called the old south...--Margaret Mitchell, Gone With The Wind
Here in this pretty world Gallantry took it's last bow...
Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their Ladies Fair, of Master and Slave...
Look for it only in books, for it is no more than a dream remembered.
A civilization gone with the wind...
Depends. I don't know enough about your thinker to say.
But getting back to Turchin for a moment. Even you admit that his actions, regardless of the truth behind them, led to a court martial. How many courts martials resulted from the southern actions in Maryland and Pennsylvania? How many officers were held accountable for the looting of farms, the destruction of private property, the abduction of free blacks who were taken south to slavery? Any ideas?
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.