The first crime in space?
In a dispute between a divorced lesbian couple, a NASA astronaut has now been accused of illegally accessing the bank account of her wife during a tour on ISS.
Nasa is reported to be investigating a claim that an astronaut accessed the bank account of her estranged spouse from the International Space Station, in what may be the first allegation of a crime committed in space.
Anne McClain acknowledges accessing the account from the ISS but denies any wrongdoing, the New York Times reports. Her estranged spouse, Summer Worden, reportedly filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission.
Ms McClain has since returned to Earth.
The astronaut told the New York Times through a lawyer that she was merely making sure that the family’s finances were in order and there was enough money to pay bills and care for Ms Worden’s son – who they had been raising together prior to the split. “She strenuously denies that she did anything improper,” said her lawyer, Rusty Hardin, adding that Ms McClain was “totally co-operating”.
And who is the victim here? The boy, who it appears has been subjected to two divorces, an unnatural parentage arrangement, and finally a fight over care and custody, all simply because he had he temerity to be born and thus interfere with the selfish interests of all the adults around him.
Meanwhile, if it is determined and then proven in court that McClain did access that bank account illegally while on ISS this would make it the first crime ever committed in space.
Readers!
My annual February birthday fund-raising drive for Behind the Black is now over. Thank you to everyone who donated or subscribed. While not a record-setter, the donations were more than sufficient and slightly above average.
As I have said many times before, I can’t express what it means to me to get such support, especially as no one is required to pay anything to read my work. Thank you all again!
For those readers who like my work here at Behind the Black and haven't contributed so far, please consider donating or subscribing. My analysis of space, politics, and culture, taken from the perspective of an historian, is almost always on the money and ahead of the game. For example, in 2020 I correctly predicted that the COVID panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Every one of those 2020 conclusions has turned out right.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
In a dispute between a divorced lesbian couple, a NASA astronaut has now been accused of illegally accessing the bank account of her wife during a tour on ISS.
Nasa is reported to be investigating a claim that an astronaut accessed the bank account of her estranged spouse from the International Space Station, in what may be the first allegation of a crime committed in space.
Anne McClain acknowledges accessing the account from the ISS but denies any wrongdoing, the New York Times reports. Her estranged spouse, Summer Worden, reportedly filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission.
Ms McClain has since returned to Earth.
The astronaut told the New York Times through a lawyer that she was merely making sure that the family’s finances were in order and there was enough money to pay bills and care for Ms Worden’s son – who they had been raising together prior to the split. “She strenuously denies that she did anything improper,” said her lawyer, Rusty Hardin, adding that Ms McClain was “totally co-operating”.
And who is the victim here? The boy, who it appears has been subjected to two divorces, an unnatural parentage arrangement, and finally a fight over care and custody, all simply because he had he temerity to be born and thus interfere with the selfish interests of all the adults around him.
Meanwhile, if it is determined and then proven in court that McClain did access that bank account illegally while on ISS this would make it the first crime ever committed in space.
Readers!
My annual February birthday fund-raising drive for Behind the Black is now over. Thank you to everyone who donated or subscribed. While not a record-setter, the donations were more than sufficient and slightly above average.
As I have said many times before, I can’t express what it means to me to get such support, especially as no one is required to pay anything to read my work. Thank you all again!
For those readers who like my work here at Behind the Black and haven't contributed so far, please consider donating or subscribing. My analysis of space, politics, and culture, taken from the perspective of an historian, is almost always on the money and ahead of the game. For example, in 2020 I correctly predicted that the COVID panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Every one of those 2020 conclusions has turned out right.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
Just look and see if she was putting money in the account or taking it out. I’ll go along and say she shouldn’t have been in her account, but not changing your bank account password is just stupid. It would be interesting to see if this was the first time, or has she been in the account since they’ve been separated.
What’s an appropriate punishment for this nefarious behavior? Locking her up in a small space for 6 months?
mike shupp,
Heh. Sentence her to time served.
mike–
hilarious! (I almost spewed my coffee all over my keyboard.)
Alan Watts / Akira the Don Meaninwave
“It Takes Two”
https://youtu.be/HVcSXKCXoHo
6:37
“The Buddhists in Japan call it “jiji muge “(事事无碍). Ji ji mu ge: “Between event and event, there is no block.”
Lisa Nowak
A Crime In Space? – News Conference
Dulcefino Consulting 8-24-19
https://youtu.be/AKGKzqa9Ens
15:59
“Summer Worden holds news conference to talk about her wife, NASA astronaut Anne McClain, and the fight for her son, who was born before the couple ever met.”
This IS, quite the pair.
The intensity of this relationship, is literally outa-this-world. (Dysfunctional, as the day is long.)
-Astronaut McClain needs to take some vacation time, on Earth, immediately. Her attention is NOT directed at her job.
-As for Miss Worden– welcome to Family Court. (I hope it’s everything you dreamed it would be!)
Wayne: Two lesbian women who have adopted a boy cannot be a family. A family is composed from a father and a mother and their children. Nothing else. Anyone who does not share this view is simply – in a nutshell – a Communist. What a clown world we live in.
Wayne: Two lesbian women who have adopted a boy cannot be a family. A family is composed from a father and a mother and their children. Nothing else. Anyone who does not share this view is simply – in a nutshell – a Communist. What a clown world we live in.
Shiny saver–
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but I don’t think we need to go there on this one. The problem at hand isn’t how many X chromosome’s this couple has between them.
Just from the bare minimum of factoids, Astronaut McClain apparently has unresolved issues with her x-partner, and as for Miss Worden’s “news conference” an extremely
unproductive public display of matters which should be handled out of the public eye.
It’s bad news all around when heterosexual couples play out their divorce dramas in public, and from my clinical experience lesbian couples tend to be very emotional about break-ups.
Persons experiencing this amount of stress, maybe shouldn’t be flying in space….
Q:
During the Apollo program– was anyone going through a divorce/custody case,entrusted to fly in Space?
Shiny saver:
While you might be technically / Biblically correct, what might the little boy say? Do you think he would agree with you? And I have witnessed both the broken up and quite insane and toxic relationships of both the “normal” gay and “normal” hetro family units. And the one just like the other seems just as likely to succeed or fail.
Captitol “N” Normal, what more than 50 percent of the population does in the course of their solving the universal survival / reproduction equation, and lower case “n” normal might not be in exact coordination with your statement. PS: We are all lower case “n” normal as individuals within the main group whether we are gay or hetro, or something in between. Their are no upper case “N” Normal individuals, “Normal” or what might be considered the best model to operate under is an average calculation.
Yours is more of an intellectual / Biblical argument, and I fully understand it and ideally probably agree with you, ideally. But existence is not done ideally, especially in todays America. Would things be better if the one did not exist in its full blown and politically correct accepted state?
Maybe, maybe not.
wayne: As to your last question, in the 1960s messy personal affairs such as a divorce would have put an astronaut low on the priority list, and would have likely gotten them grounded.
Cotour: The little boy is innocent, literally, and wouldn’t know what is the right thing, for him or anyone. The point is that adults are supposed to teach that child this stuff, and these two women are certainly not doing that, while putting him through a hell he doesn’t even understand.
The lack of empathy in our modern society for the needs of children sometimes downright astonishes me.
Mr. Z.,
-Thank you
Speaking of communists….
I think it was a crime, what the soviet union did to Laika the Space Dog in 1957.
Laika, the Space Dog
https://youtu.be/-8ThE479bNY
2:35
I do not disagree with you, I agree in the strongest terms with you, the women are selfish and self interested.
But this is not exclusive to gay relationships.
The boy is indeed innocent and these two ignorant and self interested women need to understand that. But the boy knows the two people that he knows as his family. He is not the one determining what is good or right, but he knows what he knows and that we must assume is what he believes is good.
Before beginning a family or soon there after you realize that you are now secondary and the children that you become responsible for are primary. The reality is that these family units and most all other family units seldom operate within this ideal model all of the time.
Wayne & Cotour:
The legalization of marriage for homosexuals was a big mistake, it sets false standards and diminishes the meaning of real marriage between a man and a woman. The marriage should be limited to the man-woman pairs. The purpose of marriage is the promotion of new offspring, the legal protection of children and also of wives, especially if that woman care for the well-being of the family instead of being part working market. Only such real families are the foundation of every nation and of a stable society. It is also extremely bad when boys grow up without a father, only with two lesbian “replacement mothers” or other cases only with a single mother. The boy needs male education and guidance, preferably by his biological father, a function and task, which cannot replaced a woman.
Wayne & Cotour:
The legalization of marriage for homosexuals was a big mistake, it sets false standards and diminishes the meaning of real marriage between a man and a woman. The marriage should be limited to the man-woman pairs. The purpose of marriage is the promotion of new offspring, the legal protection of children and also of wives, especially if that woman care for the well-being of the family instead of being part working market. Only such real families are the foundation of every nation and of a stable society. It is also extremely bad when boys grow up without a father, only with two lesbian “replacement mothers” or other cases only with a single mother. The boy needs male education and guidance, preferably by his biological father, a function and task, which cannot replaced a woman.
Wayne & Cotour:
The legalization of marriage for homosexuals was a big mistake, it sets false standards and diminishes the meaning of real marriage between a man and a woman. The marriage should be limited to the man-woman pairs. The purpose of marriage is the promotion of new offspring, the legal protection of children and also of wives, especially if that woman care for the well-being of the family instead of being part working market. Only such real families are the foundation of every nation and of a stable society. It is also extremely bad when boys grow up without a father, only with two lesbian “replacement mothers” or other cases only with a single mother. The boy needs male education and guidance, preferably by his biological father, a function and task, which cannot replaced a woman.
Wayne & Cotour:
The legalization of marriage for homosexuals was a big mistake, it sets false standards and diminishes the meaning of real marriage between a man and a woman. The marriage should be limited to the man-woman pairs. The purpose of marriage is the promotion of new offspring, the legal protection of children and also of wives, especially if that woman care for the well-being of the family instead of being part working market. Only such real families are the foundation of every nation and of a stable society. It is also extremely bad when boys grow up without a father, only with two lesbian “replacement mothers” or other cases only with a single mother. The boy needs male education and guidance, preferably by his biological father, a function and task, which cannot replaced a woman.
What you stated I generally agree with and support, it is the foundation of civilizations throughout time, biology and DNA.
And I also reiterate what I stated previously.
I think what my main point is, although I do agree with what you state, I also see some wiggle room for others who are lower case “n” normal in these sub groups who want some level of accomodation and cultural acceptance. And I can argue that to bend to these demands creates a gray area and that could be deliterious to our country in the long run, the slippery slope (?).
But we live in 2019 and these people who find themselves “different” are now becoming more and more affluent and need to become more Conservative and not more Liberal or Leftist. To not recognize this and form that accomodation will drive them away and it will in the end become even more of a deficit.
I look at this much like I look at the “Plastics in the environment” issue, although my initial thinking is based in respect for other people who want to be included, much of this is none of my business nor the governments business. People will do as they please not matter what morality might be thrown at them.
There is a sencondary reason to accommodate them at some reasonable level and that is a strategy to co opt another issue from the Left that they think they own. I tell my friends who consider themselves Liberals that they could list any 10 issues in the news or in politics and at the end of a discussion they will agree with me on 8 out of the 10. And they will also probably give back to me at least 50 percent of what they think they differ with me on after I drill down on the specific issue and reveal to them what it is that they actually believe and understand.
It would be a shame to draw a hard black and white moralistic line on issues like this, again, issues that I can agree with you on. The majority of Americans react emotionally to these issues and really are not well versed in the theories, biology or DNA reasons for things to be the way that they are.
So this issue, like the plastics in the environment issue, are issues where Conservatives / Republicans can make reasonable accomodations with and make them their own. If not, just like the abortion issue the Liberals and now Leftists will be able to without much effort throw out the abortion, racist or misogynist card and draw that bright line to solidify their ranks where no one will be able to cross even though they might want to. Because they have no accomodation, they can see no respect and can not cross because of that single issue. This must change.
Sometime it is Strategy Over Morality, and morality is never a winner in politics. Who ever attempts to use it is in deseraperate condition and is a looser. Why? Because government and by extention those who push and pull the levers of power are not empowered to be moral judges. Give people reasonable choices, give them some respect and include them as best as you can, and win.
Cotour:
I understand now your suggestions for the tactical-orientated approach regarding the serious societal dislocations that we are talking about here. However, in the longer term, the natural order, which is based on a metaphysical reality beyond human political ideology, must be restored. This includes the moral standards derived from it. Of course we are talking about God. Genuine, not false conservatism can only be based on the recognition that this world has a metaphysical foundation like God.
In the context of our discussion, I would like to suggest thinking about whether the sexualization and of homo-sexualization of Western societies is promoted also – and perhaps mainly – for reasons of power politics and control. So we have to ask ourselves for example why the access to pornography, which has a destructive influence on young men, is facilitated by the certain social media corporations like Google more and more.
Could it not be that hedonistic, non-reproductive homosexuals are the ideal proxy-warrior of the ruling billionaires when it comes to enforcing the latter’s economic and political interests in America’s society. Does not the entire so-called “sexual liberation” serve such power-political purposes, because it has driven the population into new mental and physical dependencies by promoting immorality, vices, passions and lust? The ruling elite have been using those described stimuli to control and manipulate masses. The masses has become not liberated but even better controlled and depended, but in a more subtle manner as ever imagined.
I again philosophically agree with much that you state, but.
Has God breathed life into human beings that he means to be ostrasized and not recognized or respected? Is that what the Founders of our country intended by recognizing the Creator in our naturally born Rights? By their own words IMO they must not have.
This sub group in our country becomes more and more affluent, and many tend to be Conservative but the party that they might actually believe in and support draws bright political moral lines which do not include them and so they are compelled towards the Liberal now Leftist among us. That is not acceptable to me.
Would God fashion through his agents in 1776 a system that would free the people of America and free many others on the planet and draw that bright moralistic political line? Require those who are now free to shun those who are different?
These, IMO, confused but fully indoctrinated full blood feminized Marxists are a product of this movement growing to the point where they can have a convention and more formalize and legitimize themselves. And many of those who might see through their fraudulent and perverted, with the best of intentions of course, political movement may have no other place to go.
https://youtu.be/UPLQNUVmq3o They become more and more organized and more and more dangerous, truly dangerous. Don’t want to follow the rules? Well these people will be able to justify your elimination for the good of the movement. Very, very dangerous people in America.
This specific Democrat / Socialist movement, which truly embarrasses me, how shameful that grown American men and women could come to such conclusions about America, is apparently growing. And what is offered to those who might not be so radical and delusional? Nothing from the Right? Just bright lines of moral rejection. Any politico who uses their “superior” morality is IMO desperate.
This political warfare will not be won, especially in the paradigm shifting era of the internet and instant communication and social media, by not reformulating the approach that the Conservatives / Republicans take.
So if one was to use the God argument in drawing these bright moralistic lines within politics, has God himself made a mistake in his creation? Or has God fashioned an opportunity in todays world in America to condenm bad behavior and counter productive biological human relations, but also offer a political compromise within his political masterpiece the American Constitution where at least these fellow humans, Gods own creations, can live as good citizens as they see fit within the society and culture that he has fashioned? Must Gods intent and instruction always result in political and physical warfare? Blood shed in the name of political morality? Really?
These people know they are “different”, most have spent many confused years trying to figure things out for themselves and they need instruction, specifically political instruction that reconciles their being different than the capitol “N” Norm. We are all deficient in our own lower case “n” normal existence ways and that is IMO what the Biblical instruction is really about and not so much drawing these hard bright moralistic political lines.
People are going to pretty much do has they please with or without anyones moralistic feed back, especially politically driven moralistic feed back and instruction. Their religion is where they need to seek moralistic instruction, not politics.
Cotour:
Does not this blog (and its owner) claim to be conservative? This is not credible to me! I find here and in Mr. Z positions hardly anything that I would call conservative, something that is really conservative and not a fake conservative ideology. Both of us have recently discussed some points that belong to a real conservatism. This is practically never discussed here. Only Wayne, who mainly follows his libertarian erroneous course, seems to have some conservative reflexes left (besides you).
It is often said: American conservatism is dead or just an empty shell, just like the Republicans. What really seems to be true. Actually conservative were the American Catholics who, after 1965, were almost completely ousted by certain political power groups and networks from influencing society (politics, culture, etc.). One of the last men left of those who became known as a true Conservative, was and is Pat Buchanan.
What is sold as conservatism in America today (also here on this page) is actually false conservatism. Let’s call it what it really is: neo-conservatism, made by Strauss and Co., which has virtually nothing to do with genuine conservatism. Neo-conservatism helped much rather to destroy the real conservatism.
In that sense, I would classify the political position of this blog (and that of its operator) more somewhere between neo-conservatism and libertarianism (in Europe it would rather be described as neoliberalism), but never conservative. What do you mean?
Shiny saver,
You wrote: “What is sold as conservatism in America today (also here on this page) is actually false conservatism.”
Would you please watch these videos and tell me whether this is what you believe is conservatism? I am asking you to commit over an hour of your time, but I think that these ideas are what the conservatives on this site generally believe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLD6VChcWCE&list=PL5_z6DAA07VQz_5GECnD3Ep0L_Bp0mxy3 (Bill Whittle: “What We Believe” 7-part series)
I think you mean Libertarinaism (?).
Which as I have pointed out many times here is a personal philosophy and not a real political movement or political party, mostly comprised of self righteous politcal Neanderthals. I point out the recently launched presidential Republican campaign of Libertarian Joe Walsh. Who I would classify as an unsustainable line drawer and an actual racist by his own words. Going nowhere fast.
You will have to flesh out your position for me a bit more for me to appropriatly respond to you.
My foundation positions are based in rational thought and respect for others, whether they be comprised of these minor but politically active lower case “n” sub groups and finding new ways of finding a method to do what must be done in politics, WIN!
Your knee jerk religious based I have to assume need to draw these bright moral lines is a road to unnecessary internal political warfare and ostrasizing people who need not be ostracized. Are all of these people salvagable for the Conservative / republican purposes? No, too many of them are so fully indoctrinated into this Leftist / Progressive, 9 month abortion Democrat dream world that they are for all intents and purposes lost.
But there are a good portion of them that just need some reason to change their minds. I do not propose surrendering political standards, I only propose offering a reasonable alternative or these fellow Americans who will have no choice but to support the likes of AOC, Warren, Biden, Sanders, DeBlasio. Anti and un Americans all. Do you really want that?
And as for the Zman and what he thinks or proposes for his website, thats his business. And my positions are my positions and if you can refute and successfully argue against me and what I propose then I encourage you to do so. Are you suggesting that I be banned from posting here because I do not meet your Conservative posting standards?
Up to this point you have not really addressed any of my points or suggestions.
Is your God imperfect? Does your God make mistakes? Is not your God forgiving?
Contour:
Thank your for your response! However, why do you prefer to stick to a blog where you have to fear that its operator are going to ban you, if he potentially do not like your opinions, if you’re practicing free political speech at this place?
I do not fear being banned at all, where did you get that idea?
Just follow the reasonable rules of conduct and you can say what ever you like on BTB.
I find it interesting that the subject is about God, religion morality, respect and the differences between people and you are worried about what I need to fear on a web site? No comment on anything of substance?
A little over your head here? Just based on your sentence structure, if I were to guess I might guess that you were from, China?
Shiny saver: Why do you suggest I would ban anyone for their opinions? Why are you even implying it? I have never done so, nor will I ever do so. The only people I have banned were those who could not abide by my only two rules: no obscenities and no insults.
I must add that I like hearing from people who disagree with me. When they do so from reasoned knowledge and rational thought I find myself educated, and have even changed my opinion.
I also have to add that I have had to manually approve some of Shiny saver’s comments, which for some reason were labeled spam incorrectly by my site’s spam filter. Sorry about that.