by Brad Balfour

To read this article in Deutsch, Francaise, Italiano, Portuguese, Espanol, Korean, Japanese, Chinese and Russian, copy and paste the complete URL("http://www.g21.net/nystate7.htm") and enter it in the box after you click through.

New York, NEW YORK, USA - As the remains of the Columbia astronauts were flown in flag-draped boxes to be further identified, former astronaut Charles Bolden speculated on a morning talk show about the causes of its destruction. The first woman astronaut, Sally Ride, did the same on "Good Morning America".

A day or so earlier former shuttle pilot Eugene Cernan talked with GMA's Charlie Gibson on the need for the space program to continue. Even actor Matthew McConaughey rang in with his thoughts on the Today show, "When I was in[the film] 'Contact', I got to speak with [astrophysicist] Carl Sagan; I learned from him that we have to take risks."

Sadly, only this tragedy pushed talk of war off the tabloids' front pages and shifted the focus to the unexpected destruction of this, the oldest shuttle craft. Because of this fatal mission, the news media recalled the days when it led the way in trumpeting our scientific achievements and when the astronauts were regular fare for talk shows.

Early Saturday morning, anyone tuned in to 1010 WINS heard a broadcast of the shuttle's disintegration as it happened. Before that 9:15 am news flash, few heard about the shuttle's mission, let alone thought about it. Except for news about the first Israeli astronaut Ilan Ramon (an item buried in the back of the NY Times), the press passed up the opportunity to highlight this authentic rainbow coalition working in space before calamity struck.

From the paper of record on down, the media missed an opportunity to counterbalance this war-making administration's obsession with stories on this confluence of cooperation. From African American astronaut vet Michael Anderson to Indian scientist Kalpana Chawla, this mission provided a counterpoint to international divisions.

As the debris rained down, what had happened several miles in space with these highly trained yet relatively modest-minded individuals finally got reported. Experiments organized by New York high schoolers were noted and the destroyed drawing by a 14-year old Holocaust victim was prominently displayed. Their emails of hope and work for knowledge came to everyone's attention ... even the President's.

President Bush uttered these words:

"These astronauts knew the dangers and they faced them willingly, knowing they had a high and noble purpose in life."

At the memorial he vowed that

"Our journey into space will go on."

Great words - yet his administration - and more so the previous one - had cut back funding on the space program.

Naysayers, such as NY Times columnist Paul Krugman chimed in with such words as,

"The sad truth is that for many years NASA has struggled to invent reasons to put people into space - sort of the way the Bush administration struggles to invent reasons to . . . but let's not get into that today.

It's an open secret that the only real purpose of the International Space Station is to give us a reason to keep flying space shuttles. I'm not giving up on the dream of space colonization. But our current approach - using hugely expensive rockets to launch a handful of people into space, where they have nothing much to do - is a dead end."

But at least he was prompted to jump in where otherwise he might not have. Hopefully such "realism" won't hold sway, but it's about time we got to thinking about these things again.

Over 30 years ago a media-generated space program commanded international attention with its multicultural, multiracial and interspecies crew. Though it was rich in silly moments, it so captured the imagination that it spawned four television series, a set of film conventions and icons for our culture. Of course, "Star Trek" is that vision. And while it retreads lots of ground (with the last film and the current TV series, Enterprise) it still refers to the optimism of life in space and a science that can offer new horizons and positive prime directives.

The Columbia astronauts represented the best among us - and they reminded us how everyone has a part of the dream. Wrote Women's Enews commentarian Caryl Rivers,

"It was not all that long ago - in my lifetime, to be exact - when women had no right to dream, when African Americans could not vote in many places nor even walk into lunch counters, when Jews were being murdered in Europe. Now, when I am a grandmother, a Jewish man has died after touching the face of the sky, so joyful at being in the heavens that he told a colleague he wished he didn't have to go home. As it turned out, he didn't get home, but like all the astronauts, he died doing what he loved to do, reaching, of his own free will, for the stars."

If nothing else, Columbia's fate has forced a rethink that the Wall Street Journal editorialist best summed up:

"We focus on the human element of this tragedy because the question will inevitably arise again whether human space travel is worth the risks - can't robots or computers do it as well? Our answer is it is well worth the dangers to expand human knowledge as has been the case through human history. We would betray not only the legacy of the Columbia crew but also something fundamental to the human condition were we to stop now."

The people of the United States should wage a campaign to divert money from making war (and domination over the planet a la the Nazis) and return to the American ideals of exploration and knowledge by enhancing and further funding the space program.

We should be uniting the planet in an effort to get colonies on the moon and to Mars where we can explore alternative energy sources. We should be continuing and expanding international efforts that bring people together through the space station rather than flaunt our technological (read military) superiority

As bad as Saddam is, Bush's efforts to destroy him seem more like a vengeful child's concerns (and of his supporters' greed - since his Texas oil interests want control of those Iraqi resources) than that of a statesman who genuinely desires a just and democratic state in place of a dictatorship.

I wouldn't be surprised if, before 9/11, Bush couldn't name all the countries in the Middle East let alone know exactly where they are or who their leaders are. Maybe he should take a trip up to the space station where he might get a sense of the planet's totality rather than think he or his cohorts have a right to dominate it.

THE PREVIOUS NEW YORK STATE | THE NEXT NEW YORK STATE |