Nixon Had Statement Ready in Case Apollo 11 Astronauts Couldn't Return
joem...@earthlink.com
Nixon Had Statement Ready in Case Apollo 11 Astronauts Couldn't Return
Associated Press
Sunday, July 11, 1999; Page A14
When man first landed on the moon 30 years ago, President Richard M. Nixon
had a speech all ready in case man could not get off the moon again. Nixon
would have delivered a poignant tribute while the astronauts were still
alive but when there was no longer any hope for them.
"Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace
will stay on the moon to rest in peace," says the statement, incorporated
in a memo entitled "In Event of Moon Disaster." The memo is dated July 18,
1969, two days before the moon landing.
Fortunately, Nixon never had to read the statement drafted by William
Safire, then a Nixon speechwriter and now a columnist for the New York
Times. Neil A. Armstrong and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin made it safely off the
moon, back into the Command Module with Michael Collins, and home.
The memo ended up in the National Archives and was reported last week by
the Los Angeles Times. Safire did not return a phone call seeking comment.
According to the memo, in the event of disaster Nixon was advised to call
each of the "widows-to-be" before reading the statement to the nation.
Then the National Aeronautics Space Administration would cut off
communication with the stranded astronauts and a clergyman would "adopt
the same procedure as a burial at sea, commending their souls to 'the
deepest of the deep,' concluding with the Lord's Prayer."
It has long been rumored that astronauts landing on the moon carried
suicide capsules in case their return became impossible.
The Apollo 11 astronauts spent more than 21 hours on the moon, watched on
television by millions around the world. Nixon had the happy duty of
putting in a phone call to them while they stood on the dusty lunar
surface.
But had something gone terribly wrong with the moonwalk and only Collins,
still in the Command Module, had been able to return, these words were
prepared:
"Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace
will stay on the moon to rest in peace.
"These brave men, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, know that there is no
hope for their recovery. But they also know that there is hope for mankind
in their sacrifice.
"These two men are laying down their lives in mankind's most noble goal:
the search for truth and understanding.
"They will be mourned by their families and friends; they will be mourned
by their nation; they will be mourned by the people of the world; they
will be mourned by a Mother Earth that dared send two of her sons into the
unknown.
"In their exploration, they stirred the people of the world to feel as
one; in their sacrifice, they bind more tightly the brotherhood of man.
"In ancient days, men looked at stars and saw their heroes in the
constellations. In modern times, we do much the same, but our heroes are
epic men of flesh and blood.
"Others will follow, and surely find their way home. Man's search will not
be denied. But these men were the first, and they will remain the foremost
in our hearts.
"For every human being who looks up at the moon in the nights to come will
know that there is some corner of another world that is forever mankind."
© Copyright 1999 The Associated Press
Ian Stirling
>"For every human being who looks up at the moon in the nights to come will
>know that there is some corner of another world that is forever mankind."
Am I the only one for who this jarrs?
"that is forever earth.", or "forever ours" both would seem to scan
better, or even adding an s.
Any thoughts on why this wording might have been used? Just to refer
back to the "giant leap for mankind" line, and damn the grammar?
Chris Dearlove
: <snip>
Well the original is (from memory) "some corner of a foreign field that
is forever England" (Rupert Brooke, "The Soldier").
--
Christopher Dearlove
Ian Stirling
I know, but to me, the original poem is stating "by their deaths,
xxx is extended, to the place where they died.", and the line in question
does not change the meaning of the original poem.
This makes sense, if xxx is a place, or a state of being, but not to me,
if xxx denotes a set, such as for example "englander".
It makes a little more sense, if you add the s, to indicate that the
set now owns the place, but not as much, as if xxx is the place where
the set resides, such as "earth", "the USA", "florida"
As you can probably tell, I'm not an english major...