In the early afternoon hours of November 22, 1963, the Dallas Police Department received word that President John F. Kennedy had been shot. Details were sketchy, but early reports stated that the alleged gunman was a slender white male, in his mid-thirties, about 5'10' and 175 lbs (Oswald was 24 years old, 5'9'' and 150 lbs).
Responding to the call that afternoon was Officer J.D. Tippet, an 11-year veteran of the Dallas Police Department. Tippet was also a U.S. Army veteran, a husband and a father of three children (at the time ages 14, 10 and 5).
According to official police reports, along with reports issued by the Warren Commission, Tippet responded to a radio call to help set up a perimeter around the central Oak Cliff area, just outside where President Kennedy had been shot. While in route to the area, Officer Tippet pulled alongside a pedestrian who resembled the vague description of the gunman that had been provided just minutes prior. According to witness reports, Officer Tippet opened the door of his patrol car and exchanged words with the man. Just seconds later, witnesses stated that the man suddenly drew a handgun and fired three shots at close range, all of which struck Officer Tippet in the chest. The gunman then approached Officer Tippet, who had fallen from the first three shots, and fired a final round into his head. Officer Tippet was dead before help arrived.
Shortly thereafter, responding Dallas police officers took a young man named Lee Harvey Oswald into custody. It was reported that Mr. Oswald was "acting suspiciously" when approaching units arrived in the area. After finding his gun and obtaining positive witness identification that he was indeed the shooter, Dallas Police arrested Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of Officer J.D. Tippet.
It wasn't until later that police officers and Secret Service personnel were able to piece together the facts and conclude that Oswald was indeed the man who had assassinated President Kennedy. Had it not been for the quick response and thinking of Officer J.D. Tippet, who stopped Oswald just 20 minutes after having shot Kennedy, Oswald might have had the serious chance of fleeing from Dallas before being caught.
Kudos to a forgotten hero who gave his life but in the process caught one of the most notorious villains in American history.
Officer J.D. Tippet Age: 39 Tour of Service: 11 years, 4 months End of Watch: November 22, 1963
It was 50 years ago that America lost a portion of its innocence as its 35th president was assassinated in broad daylight on the streets of Dallas.
The death of President Kennedy rocked a nation that had already endured (and would yet endure) a number of struggles, ranging from the death of Martin Luther King to the horrors of the Vietnam War.
But why was President Kennedy in Dallas to begin with? That is a question that often goes overlooked.
Though he had not officially announced his reelection campaign, President Kennedy had, in the weeks prior to his Dallas trip, laid out an introductory plan of sorts that would eventually culminate in his bid for a second term. At the end of September, President Kennedy traveled west, speaking in nine different states in less than a week. During his visits, President Kennedy highlighted his plan (which was to become a large part of his reelection plan) to focus on natural resources, renewable energy, education, world peace proposals, an aggressive conservation agenda, and further plans for space exploration.
During these initial trips, President Kennedy expressed to his closest advisers his belief that victory in both Florida and Texas would be essential if he hoped to win a second term in the White House. As a result, further visits to both of those states were scheduled for the future. President Kennedy was particularly concerned about a growing number of extremists, especially in cities like Dallas, Houston and San Antonio, where were beginning to pose resistance to Democrat strongholds (even U.S. Ambassador and former presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson had been assaulted earlier in September while delivering a speech in Dallas). In addition, the trip was meant to resolve some issues that had come up between opposing factions within the Democratic Party in Texas. For the President and his advisers, the trip to Dallas, which was sure to be the first of many to the Lone Star State, was a no-brainer.
Of course, the rest of the story is known by virtually every American. President Kennedy met an untimely demise while making his way to Dealey Plaza. Once there, the President planned to make the following speech. Below are some of the words of the Speech that John F. Kennedy was never able to deliver. They highlight some of the "coming attractions" that we never got to see. You can read the speech in its entirety by clicking here:
---------------------------
There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternatives, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable. But today other voices are heard in the land --- voices preaching doctrines wholly unrelated to reality, wholly unsuited to the sixties, doctrines which apparently assume that words will suffice without weapons, that vituperation is as good as victory and that peace is a sign of weakness. At a time when the national debt is steadily being reduced in terms of its burden on our economy, they see that debt as the greatest single threat to our security. At a time when we are steadily reducing the number of Federal employees serving every thousand citizens, they fear those supposed hordes of civil servants far more than the actual hordes of opposing armies.
[...]
About 70 percent of our military assistance goes to nine key countries located on or near the borders of the Communist bloc --- nine countries confronted directly or indirectly with the threat of Communist aggression --- Viet Nam, Free China, Korea, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Greece, Turkey, and Iran. No one of these countries possesses on its own the resources to maintain the forces which our own Chiefs of Staff think needed in the common interest. Reducing our efforts to train, equip, and assist their armies can only encourage Communist penetration and require in time the increased overseas deployment of American combat forces. And reducing the economic help needed to bolster these nations that undertake to help defend freedom can have the same disastrous result. In short, the $50 billion we spend each year on our own defense could well be ineffective without the $4 billion required for military and economic assistance.
Our foreign aid program is not growing in size; it is, on the contrary, smaller now than in previous years. It has had its weaknesses, but we have undertaken to correct them. And the proper way of treating weaknesses is to replace them with strength, not to increase those weaknesses by emasculating essential programs. Dollar for dollar, in or out of government, there is no better form of investment in our national security than our much-abused foreign aid program. We cannot afford to lose it. We can afford to maintain it. We can surely afford, for example, to do as much for our 19 needy neighbors of Latin America as the Communist bloc is sending to the island of Cuba alone.
I have spoken of strength largely in terms of the deterrence and resistance of aggression and attack. But, in today's world, freedom can be lost without a shot being fired, by ballots as well as bullets. The success of our leadership is dependent upon respect for our mission in the world as well as our missiles --- on a clearer recognition of the virtues of freedom as well as the evils of tyranny.
That is why our Information Agency has doubled the shortwave broadcasting power of the Voice of America and increased the number of broadcasting hours by 30 percent, increased Spanish language broadcasting to Cuba and Latin America from 1 to 9 hours a day, increased seven-foid to more than 35 million copies the number of American books being translated and published for Latin American readers, and taken a host of other steps to carry our message of truth and freedom to all the far corners of the earth.
And that is also why we have regained the initiative in the exploration of outer space, making an annual effort greater than the combined total of all space activities undertaken during the fifties, launching more than 130 vehicles into earth orbit, putting into actual operation valuable weather and communications satellites, and making it clear to all that the United States of America has no intention of finishing second in space.
This effort is expensive --- but it pays its own way, for freedom and for America. For there is no longer any fear in the free world that a Communist lead in space will become a permanent assertion of supremacy and the basis of military superiority. There is no longer any doubt about the strength and skill of American science, American industry, American education, and the American free enterprise system. In short, our national space effort represents a great gain in, and a great resource of our national strength --- and both Texas and Texans are contributing greatly to this strength.
Finally, it should be clear by now that a nation can be no stronger abroad than she is at home. Only an America which practices what it preaches about equal rights and social justice will be respected by those whose choice affects our future. Only an America which has fully educated its citizens is fully capable of tackling the complex problems and perceiving the hidden dangers of the world in which we live. And only an America which is growing and prospering economically can sustain the worldwide defenses of freedom, while demonstrating to all concerned the opportunities of our system and society.
[...]
My friends and fellow citizens: I cite these facts and figures to make it clear that America today is stronger than ever before. Our adversaries have not abandoned their ambitions, our dangers have not diminished, our vigilance cannot be relaxed. But now we have the military, the scientific, and the economic strength to do whatever must be done for the preservation and promotion of freedom.
That strength will never be used in pursuit of aggressive ambitions --- it will always be used in pursuit of peace. It will never be used to promote provocations --- it will always be used to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes.
We in this country, in this generation, are --- by destiny rather than choice --- the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of "peace on earth, good will toward men." That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago, "except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain."
On this day, 150 years ago, President Abraham Lincoln delivered a two-minute speech that would go down in history as arguably the greatest speech in American presidential history.
The Gettysburg Address, which wasn't even meant to be the primary speech of the day (the Honorable Edward Everett had prepared a two-hour discourse to commemorate the occasion), has been rightfully praised as a landmark moment in the already stellar legacy that was Lincoln's presidency. Even 150 years later, the words of his short speech stir our deepest emotions of patriotism and respect for those who give "their last full measure of devotion" in the service of their country.
Below are the words to the Gettysburg Address. Take a couple of minutes today to reflect on them. As you will see for yourself, there is only one major flaw in the speech. Lincoln stated that, "The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here."
He couldn't have been more wrong.
---------------------
Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who gave their lives that this nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but we can never forget what they did here. It is fur us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have this far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave their last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that the government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Thirty-five years ago today, 918 people lost their lives in what became known as the "Jonestown Massacre." Until September 11, 2001, the Jonestown Massacre held the unfortunate distinction of being the event that resulted in the largest loss of life among American civilians.
It is from this horrible incident that we draw the metaphor, "drinking the Kool-Aid," because the victims of this terrible tragedy drank a poisoned concoction that combined Kool-Aid and cyanide.
Virtually all of us see Jonestown for what it ultimately was: a horrific cult whose membership had been brainwashed by their evil leader, Jim Jones. Most of us would like to think that we would be intelligent enough to avoid becoming members of such an organization. After all, only "crazy people" join cults, right?
Wrong.
The members of the "Peoples Temple" (this was the official name of Jim Jones' movement) came from all walks of life. Though it is true that the majority of its members came from blue collar roots, the Peoples Temple also had members who were employed as doctors, teachers, bankers and even a couple of lawyers. Simply put, Jim Jones' message appealed to a wide range of people from all walks of life.
And who could blame them? Here are just a few of the more popular teachings of Jim Jones (keep in mind, Jones founded his organization in 1955 and many of these beliefs were cutting edge for the day):
-God wanted racial integration and for all people to be treated equal.
-Poverty and hunger are unacceptable to God and should be eradicated by any true disciple of Jesus Christ.
-We should all live together and attempt to establish a Utopian society that is free of social status, hunger and poverty.
-We are to be "in the world" but not "of the world," meaning that true disciples will band together, regardless of race, and work to shed the evil ways of the world.
-All men are created equal under God, and deserve the chance to fully develop themselves as they see fit.
Not exactly the ranting of a madman, right!?!
So why then did the Peoples Temple movement degenerate into utter chaos and downright madness? This has, of course, been a topic of conversation for many sociologists, psychologists, historians and theologians for nearly four decades, and it will likely continue for many more in the future. Obviously we have to recognize the leadership abilities of Jim Jones and his capacity to persuade his flock as being a major contributing factor, but at the same time we cannot give him all of the credit. Why is is that people, intelligent and dim-witted, get sucked into groups like these? Do such groups exist today? How do you recognize them? Might we unknowingly be members of such groups right now? All of these questions are worthy of consideration.
According to the research of Dr. Janja Lalich and Dr. Michael Langone, two Ph.D. Professors of Psychology who have studied the characteristics of cults in great detail, it can be difficult to conclusively pin down a cult, since many organizations (even businesses, musicians and professional athletic teams) exhibit cult-like behaviors or have cult-like followings. With that said, they do provide a few key characteristics that all cult organizations seem to have in common. They are:
1.) Excessive, zealous and unquestioning commitment to a leader, who is not accountable to anyone in the organization (and in some cases society at large).
2.) Mind-altering practices (i.e. meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, debilitating work routines) used to suppress doubt about the group and its leader.
3.) Leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, feel, etc., and defends it with severe punishments for violation of these new rules.
4.) The group becomes elitist, claiming special or exalted status for its members and leaders over the rest of humanity. This creates an "us v. them" mentality in which members of the cult see outsiders as undesirable and potentially dangerous.
5.) The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends and purpose justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members participating in activities that most would deem reprehensible or unethical (i.e. suicide bombing).
6.) Leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and control its members.
7.) The group becomes preoccupied with bringing in new members.
8.) The group is preoccupied with making money.
9.) Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group or group-related activities.
Dr. Ron Rhodes, an Evangelical minister, essentially agrees with the assessment above, but simplifies what he sees as cult-like behaviors into 6 key attributes: Authoritarian leadership, exclusivity, isolationism, fear of being "disfellowshiped," threats of satanic attack, and opposition to critical thinking. In essence, both the scientific perspective of professional psychologists and the appraisal of religious leaders are in agreement on this matter.
Personally, I agree with the assessments mentioned above. In my estimation, all cults exhibit these attributes. I do not, however, believe that we should liberally apply these categories to all alleged cults. In fact, I believe that the term "cult" is used far too freely in the world today and in reality, very few organizations can and should be considered true cults.
As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) I have seen how the term "cult" can be applied in a wanton and reckless manner. Whether it be Pastor Robert Jeffress' accusation during the Romney campaign or the Reed Smoot hearings in which many members of Congress made the same allegations, the term "cult" is oftentimes employed as a "scary word" to invoke shock more than being a true appraisal of an organization's actual behavior.
With that being said, and instead of arbitrarily pointing fingers at which groups are and are not cults, I believe that a far better way to learn from cults like Jonestown is to focus on the behaviors of the individual as opposed to the group as a whole. Too often we lump people in with others simply by their association with a group or cause. And though it is true that association can tell us a great deal about an individual, it is a far too simplistic method of understanding why people do what they do. After all, most followers of the Jonestown community were good, honest and sincere people who left long before the Peoples Temple ventured down the path of the insane.
What I am ultimately trying to say is this: instead of labeling a group or organization as being cult-like, perhaps the correct course of action is to assess the behaviors of individuals (and certainly assess our own behaviors by looking inside ourselves) to determine if they are cult-like. For example, a devout follower of liberal or conservative politics, who cannot or will not even consider the opinions of those who do not share his/her views, is, in my opinion, drinking the Kool-Aid every bit as much as his/her Jonestown counterpart. Does this make the Democratic/Republican Party a cult?
Or take the example of my faith, which as I have mentioned above has been accused of being a cult on numerous occasions. To be certain, there are Mormons out there (I know many of them) who esteem their leaders as demigods, who become elitist in their views, who believe that only fellow Mormons will be saved in heaven, etc., etc., etc. They are, however, the exception and not the rule. Most Mormons are free thinking, non-elitist and at least try their best to accept all people and views. They come from different walks of life and have differences of opinion (i.e. Mitt Romney v. Harry Reid). They participate in many different types of activities, jobs and trades (everything from Quarterback Steve Young to lead singer Brandon Flowers of The Killers).
And it's not just faith traditions that could be (at least according to the guidelines listed above) considered cult-like. Take for instance many atheists, who esteem the writings of Dawkins, Hitchens, etc. above all others. Many will become elitist in their world view, never questioning the "doctrines" of atheism as prescribed by science. They see their world view as being THE WORLD VIEW and all others are either diluted in their thinking or too stupid to reach their level of "enlightenment."
Of course, I'm not suggesting that Democrats, Republicans, Mormons or atheists are cults, but I am suggesting that many of their respective followers are often very cult-like in their world view and behavior. They drink the "Kool-Aid" of their respective "creeds" every bit as much as the Jonestown dead.
I think my point here is clear (or at least I hope it is). Though cult-like organizations certainly exist and need to be opposed, they are few and far between. What is far more prevalent is the existence of cult-like individuals, who adopt absolutist mentalities about their respective positions, creating an "Us v. Them" mentality in the process. They fully drink the Kool-Aid, oftentimes unaware of the poison that exists therein. They allow personal pride, peer pressure and cognitive dissonance to convince them that their way is THE WAY. And these cult-like people are everywhere: in business, politics, religion, science, etc. The key to guarding against this plague is to recognize the poison that exists in every single batch of Kool-Aid. As Author Robert Anton Wilson put it:
Virgil "Gus" Grissom, Edward H. White, Roger B. Chaffee, Francis R. Scobee, Michael J. Smith, Ellison S. Onizuka, Judith A. Resnik, Ronald E. McNair, Gregory B. Jarvis, S. Christa McAuliffe, Rick D. Husband, William C. McCool, David M. Brown, Kalpana Chawla, Michael P. Anderson, Laurel B. Clark, IIam Roman.
These seventeen (17) names are the forgotten heroes of America. The brave men and women on this list were not soldiers (though some had served in the Armed Forces), thus their legacy has nothing to do with war or dying in battle. They never stormed a beachhead or secured a strategic hill; they never triumphantly lead a force into combat or eliminated some foreign threat. Yet with all of that being said, these seventeen souls are the greatest of human heroes. Why? Because they dared to venture into the unknown for nothing more than the quest for greater knowledge and further exploration. And while the soldiers of war are certainly deserving of the honor they have dearly earned, these seventeen soldiers of curiosity, whose battlefield lies in the stars and whose enemy is the ignorant, dared to escape the bonds of Earth to dance with the gods on a stage far greater than anything our puny little planet has to offer, thus making them, in my opinion, the greatest of heroes.
For over 50 years, one organization has done more to wage this war for greater knowledge and exploration than any other in human history. Founded in 1958, NASA has given America (and the world at large) more opportunities for growth, more avenues for progress and more desires to dream that big dream than any other organization in the history of our species. And throughout its history, brave men and women have answered the call to breach our earthly atmosphere and to reach for the stars, and today provides us all with an opportunity to say thanks.
Ten years ago today, the Space Shuttle Columbia was destroyed while attempting to return to Earth, claiming the lives of seven brave astronauts. And though this day belongs primarily with their memory, I believe that this occasion also affords us the chance to recognize the sacrifice of all seventeen brave NASA astronauts who have died in the ultimate line of duty: the quest for greater human knowledge. The Apollo I, STS-51L (Challenger) and STS-107 (Columbia) missions all serve to remind us that our greatest possible quest, the human pursuit to explore, comes, at times, at a very high cost.
Ironically enough, all three NASA tragedies occurred on roughly the same dates (they are separated by 6 days on the calendar), so it's only natural for us to remember all of them when we honor one of them. Twenty-seven years ago (January 28, 1986) the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded during liftoff, while forty-six years ago (January 27, 1967), the astronauts of the Apollo I mission were burned to death in a cabin fire during a routine launch pad test. These two national tragedies, along with the Columbia disaster which we mark today, are hallowed anniversaries that should compel us to reflect upon that which we hold most dear. The natural human drive to explore, expand and soak in all the knowledge that we can is, by far, the single greatest characteristic that separates humans from all other known living things. We aspire. We dream of the impossible. We fantasize about becoming more than we are. In the words of Mark Twain, we humans dare to "Throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in [our] sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
But sadly, this dream is dying a quick and painful death. The drive to continue our exploration of the heavens is running out of fuel faster than a rocket during liftoff. The public, by and large, has grown ignorant of the immensity of the challenge before us and has erroneously regarded space travel as "routine." This, coupled with the fact that incompetent leaders have lost sight of the vitality of space exploration to the human race, has mothballed NASA and placed its agenda on the back burner. Too often we hear national leaders and ignorant citizens foolishly proclaim that we have "nothing more to explore" or that there is "nothing out there worth our while" or that "other pressing matters take precedence." These idiotic statements, along with many others like them, would be laughable if the implications weren't so tragic. Space exploration is, without question, the most important, most galvanizing, most essential endeavor that we can hope to embark upon. There is absolutely zero justification for us to simply discard or downgrade the space program. As Gene Krantz, the former flight director for NASA during the Apollo program stated:
We have the young people, we have the talent, we have the imagination, we have the technology. But I don't believe we have the leadership and the willingness to accept risk, to achieve goals. I believe we need a long-term national commitment to explore the universe. And I believe this is an essential investment in the future of our nation.
No financial crisis, no global pandemic, no natural disaster, however severe, can serve to justify our wanton disregard for humanity's greatest challenge and adventure.
But that is EXACTLY what we have done. We have allowed economic pressures, global fears and partisan political paranoia to derail us from what is absolutely essential to our survival, and yes, space exploration is absolutely essential to our survival. I say that not because of the fact that eventually our species will be forced to migrate to another world, but because space exploration lies at the very heart of human exceptionalism. If we truly hope to become more than we are we must push ourselves towards the horizon. Space exploration is vital because of what it brings out in us as a society. It forces humanity to look past the pettiness of so much that we esteem to be of "value" in this world. It affords us the chance to discover new scientific, technological and medical breakthroughs. It inoculates our culture from becoming too complacent and too lazy. It makes us dream bigger, work harder, and think deeper. In short, space exploration is the "hard thing" that will make us all stronger. In the words of Kirk, Spock and Picard, space truly has become "the final frontier."
Now, you may be thinking to yourself that all of this is achievable without sending rockets and astronauts into space and you may be right...to a point. I suppose we could achieve much of this without landing a man on the moon or venturing to Mars and beyond but I maintain that NOTHING has forced us to dream bigger, think deeper or work harder than NASA and the manned space program. As a result, there is no more efficient manner in which we could improve conditions than by continuing to push the envelope of space. Yes, more astronauts will die and more multi-million dollar space vehicles will be destroyed, but the ends more than justify the means.
Consider for a moment what the Apollo program gave humanity. Aside from bringing home moon rocks and cool pictures, the Apollo astronauts (and NASA as a whole) gave society some very practical and important innovations such as:
Memory foam, freeze-dried food, hand vacuums, CAT scans, MRI scans, cordless power tools, ear thermometers, huge improvements in insulation, satellite television, GPS navigation, shoe insoles, scratch resistant lenses, smoke detectors, improved water filtration, fire resistant suits, solar panels, pacemakers, improved and simplified kidney dialysis, athletic equipment, physical therapy, cochlear implants, LED technology, artificial limbs, anti-icing for aircraft, radial tires, enriched baby food, powdered lubricants, Velcro, AED heart resuscitation, invisible braces and Tang!
And this doesn't even take into account all of the innovations that the Apollo program brought to computers. Everything from smaller and more reliable components to the development of micro-chip processors, digital watches, fibre optics, flat screen televisions (eventually), video games and much more can be directly linked to the great space race of the 1960s...that's right...the 1960s!!! One can only imagine what we could have achieved by now had we not simply chosen to give up on serious space exploration. For too long we have been content with doing circles around our own globe and putting satellites into space (which is all fine and good) when we could have been venturing out much deeper into the infinitude of space. By now Mars should even be in our rear view mirror. Pathetic that we haven't done more, isn't it! If there is a God in heaven, he must surely be disgusted with the fact that we have settled for the scraps when we could have had the stars.
But all of these technological advances pale in comparison to what the space program has done for American culture. The Apollo program not only gave birth to the next generation of scientists, but it also redefined American culture. In the following lecture, Astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson illustrates, in great detail, just how dramatic the space program was on American culture, in ways most people don't even realize:
Too often we hear partisan political hacks on both sides complain about the erosion of American culture taking place before our very eyes. And though their assessment of the situation is accurate, their solutions for the problem are bogus. Having been hampered by the near-sighted vision of partisan bigotry, their remedies almost always consist of petitions for society to adhere to the narrow and one-sided view of their respective political leanings. In other words, as long as society accepts the tenants of their particular dogma all will be right with the world. But these proposals, unfortunately, fail to address the larger picture. American (and world) culture is eroding not because of political strife or religious apathy; it is eroding because we no longer dream the impossible dream.
Sure, we still have collective dreams as a society, but more times than not, those dreams consist of narcissistic ambitions based on the meaningless acquisition of personal wealth. We dream of "striking it big" by picking the right combination of numbers in the Lotto or winning a huge lawsuit. We define success as getting that job promotion or creating the next "big idea" that guarantees us a huge pay day. And though these dreams are, for the most part, acceptable, not a one is capable of delivering us the desired cultural change we seek.
The problem is that the "American Dream" is a self-serving dream. Sure, a white picket fence and a stable job is great and is a noble thing to work for, but it doesn't bring about cultural change. To truly change a culture we must shift our paradigm of thinking. We must dream the impossible dream. And I'm not talking about the impossible dream of becoming the next NFL or NBA star, or of becoming the next winner of American Idol or Next Top Model. I'm talking about those big dreams that come to us all as we gaze up at the night sky. Is it any wonder why so many children want to become astronauts or fantasize about traveling to new worlds? This isn't just science fiction taking over their minds. It is pure, raw, undisturbed imagination at work. The dream that we can shoot for the stars. This is what we need in order to change our culture. The LeBron James', Kim Kardaishian's and even the Barack Obama's and/or Ronald Reagan's of the world can only do so much. It takes a Neil Armstrong or a Christopher Columbus to truly expand our collective world view.
But the fact of the matter is that nobody wants to make the necessary change because we are now a culture that is based on fear. The collective paranoia of the masses has created a society that cannot embrace the needed change because we are too frightened by our own shadow. And I'm not just talking about a fear of terrorists or plots to destroy our democracy. The fear I speak of is far more subtle. It is the fear of letting go and embracing the unknown. Like the starving man who frantically scavenges for the scraps under the table, thus missing the feast above him, we as a culture cling to our iPod, cell phone, On Demand, flat screen, GPS society without realizing that we could have something even greater. Our frantic paranoia prevents us from embracing the unknown, which then reinforces the fear factor.
We are no longer the "Home of the Brave."
We are the home of the complacent. The lazy. The self-serving. The comfortable. But certainly NOT the "Home of the Brave." And yes, it takes much more than valiant soldiers and mighty armies to be considered a truly brave society. We've convinced ourselves that the pointless political and social matters that we obsess over today actually reveal our valor when in fact they reveal our cowardice, unwillingness to embrace the unknown and our lack of resolve to make any actual change in the way we perceive the world. There is nothing brave about our collective rejection of dreaming the big dream.
Case in point: as the clocks turned to February 1st, the top stories on all the major news websites were:
Fox News: More gun crap, an article on Obamacare, and a deadly explosion in Mexico.
In fact, not a SINGLE MAJOR NEWS OUTLET featured any leading story about the Columbia anniversary!
This is an obscenity! The collective lack of recognition for humanity's greatest achievement and most daunting quest, that being manned space flight, reveals just how warped we have truly become. We insult the memory of the crew of STS-107 (Columbia), along with all the others who have died for the cause of exploration by essentially blotting them from our collective memory and discourse. We have belittled their contributions to little more than a "special interest" or a novelty act.
But make no mistake, NASA and the manned space program is no special interest. In fact, it should be our MAIN interest. All other concerns and priorities pale in comparison. What could possibly be more important than exploring God's playground? We can either use our resources to uncover the mysteries of this tiny and relatively insignificant blue rock or we can use them to reveal the wonder of the cosmos.
How much would you be willing to pay for the universe?
As we remember the seven brave astronauts who perished on board Columbia, along with the ten others who died during other missions, let us recognize the fact that our ability to dream the big dream is what truly makes humanity special. Without it we might as well return to our caves and draw stick figures on the walls. If the legacies of Apollo I, STS-51L and STS-107 teach us anything it is that mankind can achieve just about anything it sets its mind to...so long as we dream big and act brave. As Christopher Columbus stated:
You cannot discover a new world unless you first have the courage to lose sight of the shore.
Thank you, brave astronauts for revealing to us the true nature of humanity and the correct perspective we should all embrace!
A brief video tribute to the seventeen brave astronauts of Apollo I, Challenger and Columbia:
Neil Degrasse Tyson on the importance of space exploration:
Situated just outside of Rome, and stretched across the TiberRiver is an old stone bridge named Ponte Milvio. Originally built in 206 B.C., this bridge served as a main thoroughfare to the capitol city of the Roman Empire. It is a peaceful and well-preserved monument that serves as a beautiful ornament to the natural beauty of the Roman countryside. But 1,700 years ago this week, the Milvian Bridge was anything but a calm and peaceful place. In fact, it was the sight of arguably the most important and influential battle in world history: The Battle of Milvian Bridge. To be able to truly understand and appreciate the importance of this battle, we need to travel back in time to an era when Roman might was at its peak. The year is 285.The Roman Empire is under the reign of Emperor Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus (Dioletian).Emperor Dioletian had just delivered Rome from a period marked by military and social anarchy, and a long-awaited, but unsettling sense of peace had finally fallen upon the great empire.Unsettling due to the fact that “Barbarians” lay and wait at nearly all of Rome's borders.Franks and Goths surround the Rhine region in the North, while Persian invaders are a constant threat in the south.War was on the minds and hearts of nearly every Roman frontiersman.Emperor Dioletian was also troubled with the lack of cohesion that infested his army and empire The Western (Latin) world had all but separated itself (culturally and socially) from the Eastern (Greek) portion of the empire, and both seemed content to live without the other. In addition, a newly emerging movement, originally started by an unlikely but charismatic peasant Jew named Jesus of Nazareth, had begun to spread throughout the empire, angering pagan traditionalists like Emperor Diocletian. As a result, Emperor Dioletian elected to open a new chapter in Roman History by creating what he saw as a permanent solution to Rome's problems. By creating what became known as the Roman "Tetrarchy" (rule by 4), Diocletian divided the empire in half (the Western Latin and Eastern Greek), and assigned two rulers to each half: an "Augustus" to rule, with a "Caesar" to assist. Diocletian assigned himself ruler of the Eastern portion, while his friend, Maximianus, ruled the west. Under this system, each Augustus/Caesar duo would (ideally) be able to address the needs of the empire with greater efficiency. And for Diocletian, he would be able to more successfully eradicate the "infection" that was Christianity.
To assist Maximianus in the west as Caesar was a young but very successful military man named Constantius Chlorus. Chlorus was your typical rags to riches story. As the son of poor peasants, Chlorus should never have become a great leader, but his military prowess and bravery proved irresistible to the Empire. Chlorus quickly climbed the ranks of power, eventually becoming second in command (Caesar) of the West. To keep him loyal, however (you could never TRULY trust a peasant), Diocletian had Chlorus' oldest son, Constantine, live with him in the East.
As a "hostage"/guest in the East, Constantine grew up seeing first-hand the progression and attempted suppression of this strange new religion called Christianity. Like many earlier emperors, Diocletian saw Christianity as a vulgar and lame movement of the ignorant masses. It's doctrine of forgiveness and suppression of worldly wealth surely appealed to the peasantry, making Christianity a possible threat to the security of the empire. It is therefore no surprise as to why so many Roman leaders sought its eradication. In addition, Constantine benefited from living in the East by experiencing a culture different than his own. It would be an experience that would define him for the rest of his life.
Now, fast forward a few decades. Diocletian is dead and Rome has (once again) plunged itself into Civil War. Constantine, who was finally reunited with his father, was busy fighting the "savage" Picts, who were natives of a strange island called Britannia. Sadly, Constantine's father had fallen mortally wounded on the battlefield, leaving his son in change of the army. Back home in Rome, things were even worse. A young man named Maxentius had taken control of the capitol city and proclaimed himself the ultimate ruler of the empire. There was only one problem: Constantine was his father's son, and he (along with his army) didn't want to see Rome fall into the hands of Maxentius. Long story short, Constantine turned his army towards Rome to "liberate" the empire.
"BY THIS SIGN YOU SHALL CONQUER"
For nearly 5 years Constantine and Maxentius remained at constant odds with each other over the throne of the Western Roman Empire.While Constantine had the love and backing of his father’s army, and had proved a very capable military leader, he still lacked one very important asset: control of Rome itself.Maxentius had not only the backing of the Roman Senate (who would have backed anyone that ruled the city) but he also had the luxury of being on the defensive.Constantine had the massive burden of having to bring the fight to Rome’s doorsteps.
Finally in late October of 312, Constantine's army was greeted by the forces of Maxentius on the outskirts of Rome. The final decisive battle was just days away, and Constantine had to quickly figure out a way for his army (outnumbered 3-1) to defeat the entrenched forces of his foe. Legend has it that on the eve of the great battle (October 27th) Constantine separated himself from his army to find a moment of solitude and reflection. It was during those moments that Constantine, according to his historian Eusebius, looked up to the sky and saw a burning cross upon the sun with the Greek letters XP (Or the “Chi-Rho,” the first 2 letters in the Greek word for Christ)entwined with the cross.Constantine then claimed he heard a voice say to his heart, “In hoc signo vinces” meaning “By this sign, you shall conquer.”
Knowing that this sign represented Jesus Christ, the hero of Christianity, Constantine took the heavenly manifestation as a sign that the Christian God would lead him to victory. As a result, Constantine ordered the Chi-Rho image to be placed on the shields and uniforms of his soldiers. These first "Christian soldiers" would be the first to march into battle with the cross at their vanguard...even though most probably had no clue what it represented.
THE BATTLE
Very little is known about the actual Battle of Milvian Bridge. What we do know (again, most coming from Eusebius) is that Maxentius' superior numbers and entrenched forces were unable to stop the onslaught of Constantine's army, which forced Maxentius and him men to flee across the Milvian Bridge. Unfortunately for Maxentius (and certainly a "divine" intervention to Constantine), the Milvian Bridge suddenly collapsed under the weight of the fleeing army. Maxentius' body, which had plummeted with his men into the depths of the Tiber, was fished out on Constantine's orders, beheaded, and put on a pike as a trophy for Constantine's triumphant march into Rome (VERY Christian of him).
But not only did Constantine and a decapitated Maxentius march through Rome's gates on that cold October day 1,700 years ago. Christianity, which amounted to maybe 10-15% of the population (but was growing fast), received its greatest victory. With his victory at Milvian Bridge, Constantine (forever after remembered as Constantine the Great) became the premiere leader of Rome. And remembering his supernatural experience at Milvian Bridge, Constantine granted Christianity the chief seat at his table. The religion that had primarily been a movement and belief of persecuted peasants was now the sanctioned faith of the most powerful man on the planet. Eventually the entire western world and billions across the globe would convert to its teachings and embrace the Christ as the one and only true God.
To truly appreciate the importance of Constantine’s victory at MilvianBridge one should imagine the world as it would have become had he lost.Maxentius would have been hailed the supreme emperor of Rome, and the pagan gospel of his ancestors would likely have continued as the premiere faith of the empire. Christianity would have continued to be an institution that in the eyes of most aristocrats was undesirable and evil.Its patrons would have most certainly continued to be persecuted and hunted like dogs.The Nicean Creed, along with the formation of the Papacy (which all took place under Constantine's eye) and other institutions would have never occurred.This in turn would mean that the invading Germanic tribes, like the Franks and the Goths, would never have become Christians to the massive degree that they became.
Sure, Christianity was a growing and flourishing movement at the time of Constantine, and one could argue that eventually the faith would have spread even further. However, there is little doubt that Constantine's stamp of approval gave Christianity an advantage it had never before experienced. The subsequent evolution and development of Christianity (primarily through its Roman Catholic roots) would never have happened without Constantine and his victory at Milvian Bridge. As a result, the Christianity we have today would have looked VERY different (if it would have survived at all) without Constantine's initial spark.
Christians today owe their FAITH to Christ. His doctrine and teachings are the defining markers in the lives of billions. With that said, Christians today owe their CHRISTIANITY to Constantine. The brand of Christianity, with its 1,700 years of evolution and development, all trace back to a random little bridge that spans the Tiber River. Without Milvian Bridge, it is likely that you, me and every other professing Christian would have a VERY different type of faith today, even if that faith were still Christianity. Of course, I'm not saying that Constantine was somehow more important than Christ himself; only that his impact (starting at Milvian Bridge) should have its due recognition.
Milvian Bridge: the most influential battle in world history!
On this day, Americans from all over the nation pay homage to our brave men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom (and no, that isn't just some cliche thing that we say but is the literal truth). This is a solemn day of reflection, reverence and remembrance that should inspire every citizen of this nation to be a better and more grateful person.
Most Americans are probably unfamiliar with the history of Memorial Day, a history that dates back quite a ways in our nation's book of remembrance. Officially, Memorial Day (which was actually called Decoration Day) began in May of 1868, almost immediately following the American Civil War. General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, declared May 30th of that year to be a day set aside for the "decoration of graves with flowers for Union and Confederate forces at Arlington National Cemetery...and all other cemeteries of the nation." This first "Decoration Day" was to remember the high price that the nation had paid in the cause of freedom.
And make no mistake, this first generation of Americans that celebrated "Decoration Day" knew very well the high price of war. The American Civil war, unlike any American war before or since, gave our nation a front row seat to the carnage of war. With more than 750,000 dead (more than all other American wars combined) Americans everywhere had cause to mourn. This massive loss of life was an obvious reality for every American in every corner of the still infant nation. Celebrating a memorial/decoration day only made good sense.
But the story of General Logan and the first "official" Memorial Day celebration of 1868 was not the precedent-setter for this national holiday that so many have come to accept. The very first Memorial Day is actually a beautiful (an forgotten) story that deserves recognition. The story takes place in the city of Charleston, South Carolina, where by the end of the Civil War the town lay in virtual ruins. The city had been abandoned by White citizens and Confederate troops and was on the verge of surrendering to the Union. Finally on April 29th, Union forces, including the 21st U.S. Colored Infantry, took the city and accepted the official surrender of Charleston.
Just a couple of days after the official surrender of the city (on May 1 to be exact), thousands of Black Charlestonians, most former slaves, held a series of memorials to those who had paid the ultimate price for their new found freedom. Scores of Black citizens made their way to Charleston's horse race track, the Washington Race Course and Jockey Club, which had been converted into a prison for Union soldiers. The conditions in the prison had been horrific, and at least 260 men perished due to disease. Most of the dead had been hastily buried in mass graves just months prior. On this day, this group of Black citizens worked tirelessly to see that all of these deceased Union soldiers received the proper burial they deserved. The grounds of the race track were also repaired, cleansed and given a sense of reverence all to honor a small group of fallen heroes.
This simple act of kindness, in memory of a group of "enemy" soldiers, spawned a massive movement that captured the entire city of Charleston. As Yale historian David W. Blight points out:
Black Charlestonians in cooperation with white missionaries and teachers, staged an unforgettable parade of 10,000 people on the slaveholders' race course. The symbolic power of the low-country planter aristocracy's horse track (where they had displayed their wealth, leisure, and influence) was not lost on the freedpeople. A New York Tribune correspondent witnessed the event, describing "a procession of friends and mourners as South Carolina and the United States never saw before."
At 9 am on May 1, the procession stepped off led by three thousand black schoolchildren carrying arm loads of roses and singing "John Brown's Body." The children were followed by several hundred black women with baskets of flowers, wreaths and crosses. Then came black men marching in cadence, followed by contingents of Union infantry and other black and white citizens. As many as possible gathering in the cemetery enclosure; a childrens' choir sang "We'll Rally around the Flag," the "Star-Spangled Banner," and several spirituals before several black ministers read from scripture. No record survives of which biblical passages rung out in the warm spring air, but the spirit of Leviticus 25 was surely present at those burial rites: "for it is the jubilee; it shall be holy unto you… in the year of this jubilee he shall return every man unto his own possession."
Following the solemn dedication the crowd dispersed into the infield and did what many of us do on Memorial Day: they enjoyed picnics, listened to speeches, and watched soldiers drill. Among the full brigade of Union infantry participating was the famous 54th Massachusetts and the 34th and 104th U.S. Colored Troops, who performed a special double-columned march around the gravesite. The war was over, and Decoration Day had been founded by African Americans in a ritual of remembrance and consecration. The war, they had boldly announced, had been all about the triumph of their emancipation over a slaveholders' republic, and not about state rights, defense of home, nor merely soldiers' valor and sacrifice.
According to a reminiscence written long after the fact, "several slight disturbances" occurred during the ceremonies on this first Decoration Day, as well as "much harsh talk about the event locally afterward." But a measure of how white Charlestonians suppressed from memory this founding in favor of their own creation of the practice later came fifty-one years afterward, when the president of the Ladies Memorial Association of Charleston received an inquiry about the May 1, 1865 parade. A United Daughters of the Confederacy official from New Orleans wanted to know if it was true that blacks had engaged in such a burial rite. Mrs. S. C. Beckwith responded tersely: "I regret that I was unable to gather any official information in answer to this." In the struggle over memory and meaning in any society, some stories just get lost while others attain mainstream dominance.
We are fortunate to have the history of this first Memorial Day for all to enjoy. The imagery of Black slaves, reverently and humbly providing a proper burial for Union soldiers, is a reminder of just how precious freedom really is, and the high cost that we are sometimes required to pay for it. On this Memorial Day, I am grateful to the God of Heaven for the freedoms I enjoy. God bless this great land that we live in!
I am always fascinated to hear people today complaining about the Supreme Court. For whatever reason, it seems as though a large number of Americans these days esteem our Supreme Court as a group of corrupt, disinterested socialites who care more about individual status than about delivering justice. And while I am certain that some Supreme Court justices of the modern era have given a less-than-stellar performance while in office, I firmly believe that the past 2-3 generations of Americans have been blessed to have (overall) a strong Supreme Court. Of course, I am not suggesting that our judges (and their decisions) have been perfect. Far from it. Mistakes have been made and I am sure that with the 20/20 hindsight of history, future generations will come to question a number of the court decisions made in our day. With that said, I again maintain that the past couple of generations has been very fortunate to have the justices and court decisions that we have seen.
Sadly, the same cannot be said of past generations. During the 19th and early 20th centuries, for example, Americans witnessed first-hand how the decisions of the highest court of our land could utterly devastate a nation and its people. Cases like Elk v. Wilkinsin 1884, which essentially stated that Native Americans could not become American citizens and were considered "less human" than Whites. Or the 1927 case Buck v. Bell, whichgranted mental health institutions the right to sterilize the "unfit" and "mentally retarded" for the "protection and health of the state." And then there is the infamous 1857 case, Dread Scott v. Sandford(in my opinion, the worst Supreme Court decision ever), which essentially held that African American slaves were to be considered as "property" rather than people, and that any fugitive slave was to be returned to his/her rightful "owner" without question.
And today we have the honor (or better put, responsibility) to recognize another shameful decision from our nation's past. 116 years ago today, the Supreme Court rejected the petitions of one Homer Plessy, who years earlier had attempted to travel from New Orleans to Covington, La. on a "White Only" railroad car. Plessy, who was considered an "octoroon" (someone of seven-eighths Caucasian descent and one-eighth African descent) by his contemporaries, refused to be segregated based on his race and protested the railroad's policy of separating its passengers based on skin color. Eventually, Plessy was escorted from the train and booked into jail where he began a campaign to eradicate the budding but still infant practice of racial segregation in the South. Long story short, Plessy's case ended up making it all the way to the Supreme Court in 1896, where sadly his appeals fell on deaf ears.
In what has become one of the most important and atrocious legal cases in American history, Plessy v. Fergusonstated that there was nothing unlawful about a state, business or institution choosing to separate members of different races, so long as they provided the same goods/services to all. In what became known as the doctrine of Separate but Equal, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was not in violation of the 14th Amendment (which prohibits local and state governments from depriving its citizens of life, liberty and property without due process) as Mr. Plessy had claimed, but that the railroad company (and anyone else who wanted to follow suit) was completely justified in choosing to keep the races apart from one another. Needless to say, Plessy v. Ferguson paved the way for extreme racial inequality to once again rear its ugly head in the South. And though the ruling stipulated that all separate goods/services needed to also be equal, reality is that Southern governments refused to provide anything resembling equality for Blacks. In short, racial segregation and inequality became standard operating procedure in the South.
For nearly 60 years, Plessy v. Ferguson and its gospel of "Separate but Equal" kept the South from seeing things in any other way but Black and White. It wasn't until 1954 and Brown v. Board of Education that the chains of segregation would finally start to come off. And as we are all aware, the struggle to eradicate segregation from America took more than a Supreme Court decision to accomplish. It was only after decades of petition, protest, blood, hate and pain that the scars of segregation began to fade away (some rightfully maintain that those scars are still visible today). This was the shameful legacy of Plessy v. Ferguson.
But thankfully we live in a more "civilized" world today...
...right?
After all, we would NEVER think of repeating those painful lessons of "Separate but Equal."
Or would we?
--When we suggest "separate but equal" health care for any patient in need, we are forgetting Plessy v. Ferguson.
--When we implement "separate but equal" laws for illegal immigrants, we are forgetting Plessy v. Ferguson.
--When we demand "separate but equal" schools and/or funding for affluent neighborhoods v. the inner city, we are forgetting Plessy v. Ferguson.
--When we recommend "separate but equal" tax rates for the rich and the poor, we are forgetting Plessy v. Ferguson.
--When we believe in "separate but equal" restrictions for those of a different religion than our own (i.e. the New York mosque), we are forgetting Plessy v. Ferguson.
--When we preach "separate but equal" laws for those in the LGBT community, we are forgetting Plessy v. Ferguson.
In short, whenever we seek to divide humanity because of our perceived differences, we will be sure to reap our own hell. Life is hard enough. Why would anyone want to endure it all alone? Sorry, but you cannot "divide" and "conquer" and the same time. We don't have the luxury of simply changing the rules for those we don't like and/or understand. Such an action is the epitome of bigotry.
On this day, 100 years ago, the HMS Titanic sank after striking an ice berg, taking with her the souls of 1,514 passengers and crew to a cold, dark Atlantic grave. The Titanic disaster has been deemed one of the worst peacetime maritime disasters in history. The ship, which was the crown jewel of White Star Line, was considered the first truly "unsinkable" boat in the world. At the time of her launch, Titanic was the largest and most luxurious ship in the world. Among some of her most popular luxuries, Titanic prided herself on offering its guests access to an on-board gymnasium, swimming pool, four libraries, a high-class restaurants and opulent cabins.
One of the most interesting of Titanic's luxuries was its high-tech, super-powered "wireless" radio transmitter, which afforded passengers (mostly upper class) the ability to send and receive Morse Code dispatches to and from the eastern United States, Great Britain and parts of Europe. The transmitter also had a practical benefit for Titanic's crew, giving them the ability to easily communicate with other ships on the Atlantic and receive up to date weather reports. Needless to say, the device was in great use on the night of Titanic's horrific tragedy. For us today (especially on this day) these Morse Code messages provide an interesting and compelling narrative of Titanic's final hours and the struggle that her passengers and crew faced as the reality of their fate became more obvious. These messages, which read almost like an early 20th century version of Twitter, are the final glimpses that historians will ever have into the last moments of life for both Titanic and her human compliment. It therefore goes without saying that these messages deserve the interest and the reverence of all who read them.
Titanic's chief radio officer was a 25-year-old man named John (Jack) Phillips. On the surface, the job of a radio operator might appear somewhat boring, since most radio traffic consisted of monitoring weather reports and other dispatches from ships at sea. Titanic, however, was quite different. Jack was also responsible for meeting the needs of passengers who wanted to communicate with friends and family. This kept Jack quite busy and engaged with some of the most prominent of Titanic's compliment. For just 12 shillings and sixpence for the first 10 words, and 9 pence per word thereafter (a substantial sum in 1912, although not for a First-Class passenger) Jack Phillips or Harold Bride (Titanic's deputy radio officer) could send a message roughly 2,000 miles away.
But none of Jack Phillips' experience could have prepared him for what he would endure on the night of April 15, 1912. At approximately 11:40 P.M., Captain Eward Smith received the first reports that Titanic had struck an ice berg on its starboard side. It took the crew an additional twenty minutes before they could assess the actual damage done to Titanic, but once the truth was discovered, Jack Phillips became the most important man on board.
The following are some of the actual surviving Morse Code transcripts between Titanic and responding vessels. They serve to illustrate just how real and tense this tragedy was for those who participated in it, and the efforts made by those (like Jack Phillips) who tried to save Titanic's human compliment. I have added my commentary and explanations of the transcripts in bold, otherwise everything else comes from the transcripts that were made 100 years ago today:
12:14- Titanic: "C.Q.D., C.Q.D., C.Q.D. This is MGY. This is MGY. This is MGY. Position 41.44 N. 50.24 W. ***"C.Q.D." was the Morse Code sign for distress that was implemented by the Marconi International Marine Communication Company. The letters stood for "Come Quick Distress" or "Come Quick Drowning." Even though "S.O.S." had become the accepted international sign of distress in 1908, many radio operators still used "C.Q.D." out of habit, especially when Marconi communication equipment was being used, as was the case on Titanic. "MGY" was the official call sign for Titanic.***
12:15- La Provence, Mount Temple, Cape Race and Frankfurt receive Titanic's first distress signals.
12:18- Titanic: "C.Q.D., C.Q.D., C.Q.D. Position 41.44 N. 50.24 W. Require assistance."
12:25- HMS Carpathia: "Do you know that Cape Cod is sending a batch of messages for you?" ***The Carpathia was eventually the ship which arrived to save Titanic's remaining surviving passengers. Ironically, Carpathia herself was sunk on July 17, 1918, the result of a German U-Boat torpedo during WWI.***
Titanic: "Come at once. We have struck a berg. C.Q.D. Position 41.46 N 50.14 W."
Carpathia: "Shall I tell my Captain? Do you require assistance?"
Titanic: "Yes, come quick. Are you coming to our assistance? We have collision with iceberg. Sinking. Please tell Captain to come."
12:27- Titanic: "I require assistance immediately. Struck by iceberg in 41.46 N. 50.14 W."
12:34- Titanic (to Frankfurt): "Are you coming to our assistance?" Frankfurt: "What is the matter with you?"
Titanic: "We have struck an iceberg and sinking. Please tell Captain to come."
Frankfurt:"O.K. Will tell the bridge right away."
***This type of exchange between different ships continues for nearly an hour.***
1:51: Titanic issues its first S.O.S. message. HMS Frankfurt responds, "What is the matter with u?" Titanic replies: "You fool, stdbi and keep out." ***It is obvious from this exchange that stress is mounting on Titanic. Frustrated at the Frankfurt's reply, Phillips becomes hostile. This exchange also highlights some of the struggles that different crews had with distress calls. The "C.Q.D." warnings from before did not trigger as big of a response as did the "S.O.S."***
1:52- Titanic: "We are putting passengers off in small boats. Women and children in boats. Cannot last much longer. Losing power," said the Titanic as the situation grew ever more desperate. This is Titanic. C.Q.D. Engine room flooded."
1:55- Virginia hears Titanic calling very faintly, power being greatly reduced. Titanic reports to Virginia: "The Captain visits the wireless room for the last time and says: 'Men, you have done your full duty. You can do no more. Abandon your cabin. Now it's every man for himself'" ***Phillips refuses to abandon post***
1:56-2:15: Several ships receive faint messages from Titanic but are unable to get a reply through.
2:17- At this point, Titanic is beginning to lose power. Water has flooded the engine compartments and is even beginning to fill up in the radio room. There are a series of messages that Titanic is able to get out (along with several replies from other ships) but some of it becomes jumbled in transmission. Eventually, Jack Phillips and his partner, Harold Bride, are forced to abandon the radio room. All transmissions from Titanic cease at 2:17 with the final message being "C.Q.D. MGY", a final plea for help. Jack Phillips was last seen climbing the rooftop of Titanic's radio tower in a desperate attempt to make it to an inflatable life boat. Hypothermia, however, had already severely limited his physical abilities. Jack Phillips' body was never recovered.
And though the story if Titanic is esteemed by most as a terrible tragedy, it can and should also be appreciated as a tale of human endurance in the face of certain death. For the 1,500+ souls who perished together, their death reminds us all of the frailties of our mortal existence. But it also reminds us of how bravery, true bravery, when facing one's ultimate demise, is worthy of our reverence and respect. I'm sure that even after another 100 years passes away, Titanic will still be remembered as a story of tragedy, but hopefully, and more importantly, of human bravery.
Just off of Highway 52 in Charleston, South Carolina rests the beautiful and famous Washington Park. Along with being a popular location for weddings and other social gatherings, Washington Park also serves as the location for several historical monuments, including statues of George Washington, memorials for the southern Confederacy, and plaques dedicated to the memory of local and national heroes.
Amongst these various plaques, tucked away in an obscure corner of the park, resides an obscure memorial to one Francis Salvador:
He came to Charles Town from his native London in 1773 to develop extensive family landholdings in the frontier district of ninety six. As a deputy to the provincial congresses of South Carolina, 1775 and 1776, he served with distinction in the creation of this state and nation, participating as a volunteer in an expedition against Indians and Tories, he was killed from ambush near the Keowee river, August 1, 1776.
Born an aristocrat, he became a democrat, an Englishman, he cast his lot with America.
True to his ancient faith, he gave his life for new hopes of human liberty and understanding.
Erected at the time of the Bicentennial celebration of the Jewish community of Charleston.
Approved by the historical commission of Charleston SC
Chances are that most Americans have never heard of Francis Salvador. If I am being honest, I can't recall ever hearing about him until graduate school, and even then it was only in passing. In reality, Salvador's story isn't all that dramatic, which is probably one of the many reasons he goes relatively unrecognized. Yet despite his historical obscurity, Salvador's story is worthy of our attention, for it is a story of faith, patriotism and sacrifice.
Born in 1747, Salvador was the fortunate decedent of the very successful Joseph Salvador: businessman and leader of the Portuguese Sephardic Jewish community in Britain. Thanks to his sharp business instincts, Joseph Salvador had gained incredible wealth and prestige, which made him the natural choice to become the head of the British East India Company. In addition, Joseph Salvador also became an advocate for impoverished Jews living in Britain, whom he aided by assisting in their settlement in Georgia (a difficult prospect, since Jews were a relatively unwelcome group in the "New World").
Thanks to his family's success, Francis Salvador's early years were spent in luxury. But as is often the case with life, the storms of economic and world turmoil caused the Salvador family to lose much of its wealth and prestige. After the Lisbon earthquake of 1755 destroyed their Portuguese property and the East India Company collapsed, draining the family's resources, the Salvador family was left with only one prospect: immigrate to the American colonies (where they held property) and start anew.
Francis Salvador arrived alone at South Carolina in 1773. His hope was to establish himself on his family's land and then send for his wife (Sarah) and their three children. The timing of his arrival, however, brought a new set of unanticipated challenges that eventually pulled Salvador in a different direction. The fires of the American Revolution, which were blazing hotter with each passing day, led Salvador to become a passionate and vocal voice for American independence. Within a year of his arrival, Salvador won a seat in the South Carolina General Assembly. In 1774, South Carolinians elected Salvador to the Revolutionary Provincial Congress, which began to meet in January 1775, and in which Salvador regularly revealed his passion for the cause of independence.
In addition to his political service to South Carolina, Salvador also fought in the South Carolina Militia, where he earned the nickname, "Southern Paul Revere" for his brave late night ride to warn the countryside of an impending Cherokee attack. And though his service in both the militia and the elected assembly were, by all accounts, exemplary, Salvador's service to the cause of liberty was short-lived. During a military engagement on July 31st, 1776, Salvador was shot and later scapled by a group of hostile Cherokee Indians and local Loyalists. And though he lived long enough to see the militia defeat the Cherokee/Loyalist attack, Salvador eventually succumbed to his wounds and died at the tender age of 29.
The response to Salvador's death was felt throughout the colony. As historian Michael Feldberg points out in his book, Blessings of Freedom:
A Friend, Henry Laurens, reported that Salvador's death was "Universally regretted", while William Henry Drayton, later chief justice of South Carolina, stated that Salvador had "sacrificed his life in the service of his adopted country." Dead at twenty-nine, never again seeing his wife and children after leaving England, Salvador was the first Jew to die in the American Revolution. Ironically, because he was fighting on the frontier, Salvador probably never received the news that the Continental Congress in Philadelphia had, as he urged, adopted the Declaration of Independence.
Francis Salvador's legacy is usually nothing more than a side note in the history books. For the most part, Salvador is remembered for being the first Jew killed in the American Revolution and little more. And though his death is noteworthy, the life of Francis Salvador is deserving of much more than a simple side note or an obscure memorial. In reality, Salvador is the embodiment of what made the American Revolution special. He was a foreigner, a Jew and a wealthy English aristocrat who became a trusted comrade alongside his fellow native, Christian American revolutionaries.
Perhaps the words of his Washington Park memorial capture the true legacy of Francis Salvador best:
Born an aristocrat, he became a democrat; An Englishman, he cast his lot with the Americans; True to his ancient faith, he gave his life; For new hopes of human liberty and understanding.
***Interesting Side note: Despite Salvador's incredible service, the South Carolina Constitution of 1776 prohibited anyone not of the Christian faith from being elected to office. Interesting that the very state, which benefited from Salvador's impeccable service, would prohibit those of his faith from following in his footsteps.***
