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 ...
he never owned a slave & was so poor that his parents-in-law had to send "care packages" to the Lees so that the children would "eat regularly".
free dixie,sw
Either you are a bald-faced liar or Douglas Southall Freeman is. Would you care to hazard a guess as to which one of you I'm putting my money on?
Freeman is WRONG on any number of other things, too.
free dixie,sw
Lincoln was fully on record denouncing slavery. Read the Cooper Union speech. But before he even got into office southern states were seceding. The crisis of the union disintegrating was far more important than a statement of moral indignation. Lincoln was also caught, in those early days, in a balancing act of trying to keep the loyal slave states from joining the confederacy.
I'll let Frederick Douglass give his opinion on the matter:
His great mission was to accomplish two things: first, to save his country from dismemberment and ruin; and second, to free his country from the great crime of slavery. To do one or the other, or both, he must have the earnest sympathy and the powerful co-operation of his loyal fellow-countrymen. Without this primary and essential condition to success his efforts must have been vain and utterly fruitless. Had he put the abolition of slavery before the salvation of the Union, he would have inevitably driven from him a powerful class of the American people and rendered resistance to rebellion impossible. Viewed from the genuine abolition ground, Mr. Lincoln seemed tardy, cold, dull, and indifferent; but measuring him by the sentiment of his country, a sentiment he was bound as a statesman to consult, he was swift, zealous, radical, and determined. link
So is a bank robber's.
Yes. I will quite happily tell you. It is all bound up with the hidden, veiled intent behind the way such information is sought. All people can sense when someone else is trying to bull-doze them with the way the words are flying at them. Many are ill-equipped to respond to such verbal assaults, and thus, that is the reason writers are to be valued by a society. A society needs its writers, for they have developed that necessary insight for shedding light on a situation. And one does not have to be a rocket scientist to realize the truth in that one. Just think about the books, newspaper articles, & magazines you've read and how you have come away from a read with enlightenment regarding whatever was necessary to learn about...
Okay, I already know that you have a God-Forsaken tendency of being slap-happy toward the South. Your senseless attitude is just that, a senseless attitude...
FedEx or UPS?
Freeman is WRONG on any number of other things, too.
I'd still take his track record against yours any day of the week.
"Enslaving your fellow man? Read up on the state Consititutions of the Confederates. It was quite clear what they represented."
You have a need for a serious history lesson. Let me see if I can make it clear for you.
American Flag - Flew over slavery for around a hundred years, give or take a few.
Confederate Flag - Flew over slavery for 4 years.
American Flag - Flew over ships that brought slaves from Africa.
Confederate Flag - Flew over no slave ships.
American Flag - Flew over the utter destruction of the American Indians.
Confederate Flag - Nope.
Yes, the Confederate Constitution included slavery, but as I recall, the US Constitution did so as well, up to and including making slaves 3/5th human.
Your arguments are old and lame. If saying that the only reason not to fly the flag is slavery, then you'd better be prepared to hall down Ole Glory as well. In fact, you're probably going to be halling down the majority of the flags of the world, as one time or another, they've flown over slavery.
Your polemic is interesting, after a fashion, but quite irrelevant. Let me see if I can make it clear for you: yes, the US flag flew over slavery. But: the US flag was not formed to *protect* the institution of slavery.
Is that clear enough?
you are WELCOME to. it's called FREEDOM of choice.
nonetheless, i'm correct on this one. & DSF is wrong.
it's essentially the same argument we've had over census v. tax records. you wish to believe the census figures. i, otoh, KNOW the tax man "always gets his pound of flesh" & thus i regard tax record data as MORE likely to be correct, if there is a discrepancy between figures.
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
You are wrong on this one, as on so many others.
it's essentially the same argument we've had over census v. tax records. you wish to believe the census figures. i, otoh, KNOW the tax man "always gets his pound of flesh" & thus i regard tax record data as MORE likely to be correct, if there is a discrepancy between figures.
I thought you were relying on shipping records from Arlington.
your post, at best is SILLY. at worst, IGNORANT, evasive & FOOLISH.
"blam" perhaps you can sell that to persons whose best 5 years were 3d grade, but it is unlikely that you can to anyone with a higher intellectual ability.
free dixie,sw
yeah, right. you know PRECISELY which discussion i'm talking about.
"playing dumb" does NOT become you, N-S. stick to spouting DY PROPAGANDA. you are good at that.
free dixie,sw
That's the only way I can come close to understanding you sometimes.
free dixie,sw
LOL! Well, I guess you and I will just have to agree to disagree. Thanks for being reasonable and have a great week.
Back that charge of corruption up with a historical cite, please.
As He died to make men Holy, let us die to make men free
Glory, glory hallelujah!
For Joshua Chamberlain and the Schofields,
Mr. Silverback
A person with "preconceived notions & obvious prejudices" does not ask invite soemone to provide evidence proving him wrong. Stop projecting and cite sources.
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.