I thought the reports about strange objects seen near the shuttle were just whacky conspiracy nutcases, but now even NASA is speculating:

Nasa says a small meteorite or piece of man-made space junk may have struck the Columbia shuttle causing it to crash.

Even a tiny scrap of debris grazing the shuttle could have damaged thermal tiles just enough to start a chain reaction.

The comments by Milt Heflin, the space agency’s flight director, cast doubt on the lead theory that a piece of foam insulation damaged the craft during blast off.

Now that Powell has gone to the UN and called their bluff by laying out a pretty convincing case that Iraq is hiding weapons from the UN inspectors and not fully cooperating with them in their work. I know a lot of people wanted Powell to pull an Adlai Stevenson and pound his shoe on the desk, demanding that Iraq account for the missing weapons, but let’s not forget that Iraq is not the Soviet Union and Saddam Hussein is not Nikita Khrushchev. The Soviets were intelligent enough to understand that war with the U.S. was neither profitable nor prudent. That’s why it was called the Cold War.

It is very likely that even if the Iraqis were faced with undeniable evidence of their violation of weapons bans and UN resolutions that they would still claim that the U.S. was trumping up charges against them. Why should we trust these people? What does Saddam really think he has to lose by engaging the U.S.? There’s no reason not to think by continuing to irritate the world with his non-cooperation, he will engage the U.S. and by doing so, draw the entire Middle East into a conflict with America, Britain, Israel, and any other coalition forces. That’s his sick fantasy.

And for all the morons who continue to think the U.S. is acting unilaterally, how about this

Statement by the Foreign Ministers of Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia in response to the presentation by the United States Secretary of State to the United Nations Security Council concerning Iraq:

Earlier today, the United States presented compelling evidence to the United Nations Security Council detailing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs, its active efforts to deceive UN inspectors, and its links to international terrorism.

Our countries understand the dangers posed by tyranny and the special responsibility of democracies to defend our shared values. The trans-Atlantic community, of which we are a part, must stand together to face the threat posed by the nexus of terrorism and dictators with weapons of mass destruction.

We have actively supported the international efforts to achieve a peaceful disarmament of Iraq. However, it has now become clear that Iraq is in material breach of U.N. Security Council Resolutions, including U.N. Resolution 1441, passed unanimously on November 8, 2002. As our governments said on the occasion of the NATO Summit in Prague: “We support the goal of the international community for full disarmament of Iraq as stipulated in the UN Security Council Resolution 1441. In the event of non-compliance with the terms of this resolution, we are prepared to contribute to an international coalition to enforce its provisions and the disarmament of Iraq.”

The clear and present danger posed by the Saddam Hussein’s regime requires a united response from the community of democracies. We call upon the U.N. Security Council to take the necessary and appropriate action in response to Iraq’s continuing threat to international peace and security.

Add that list of countries to this one:

The “new Europe” raised its voice Thursday, as eight of its leaders praised U.S. resolve in disarming Iraq and indirectly chided the traditional powers, France and Germany, for opposing U.S. plans for military action against Saddam Hussein.

In an op-ed column published in major U.S. and European papers, the leaders of Britain, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland and Denmark expressed solidarity with Washington over Iraq and urged strong U.N. Security Council action to force Baghdad to disarm.

That’s what you call a posse. There’s something ironic about the fact that so many of the nations throwing their support behind the U.S. are former Soviet bloc nations. These are people who lived behind the Iron Curtain and understand what it means to yearn for freedom from oppression. They know what it’s like to live under the constant fear of death and torture at the hands of evil dictators.

President Bush’s address to the nation following the Columbia tragedy employed his trademark use of religious language. It’s no surprise, since he has openly described his Christian faith and has surrounded himself by like-minded people. Not the least of which is Mike Gerson — Wheaton College grad and for staffer for Sen. Dan Coats and reporter for U.S. News.

Bush’s bent towards religious oration has left a lot of people confused. William Saletan writes for Slate.com:

In moments of tragedy, it’s natural to speak of God watching over us. But it isn’t clear whether Bush means what Isaiah meant, or what Reagan meant, or even what Bush meant 16 months ago when he spoke of God after the Sept. 11 attacks. There are two senses in which God can watch over us. Only one of them is compatible with the courage praised by Bush and Reagan. The other is the one invoked by the terrorists of Sept. 11 and by Iraqis who are rejoicing today in our misfortune.

Saletan posits that Bush and others have perceived God as sometimes being passive (knowing us, comforting us, watching over us, etc.) but have described God as passive at other times (God protecting us, ordaining events on our behalf, etc.) To Saletan, God cannot be both of these things. Either God is simply sitting on the sidelines cheering for us as a sympathetic audience OR he has chosen a side and is actively participating in the game. He cannot be doing both. Saletan fails to adequately deal with the problem of evil that necessitates this duality. Can he perceive of a God that does not will or cause evil to exist in this world but allows it to happen as part of a higher plan?

In the Wall Street Journal, Naomi Schaefer looks at the juxtaposition of faith and science in the lives of three of the astronauts aboard the Columbia — Lt. Col. Michael P. Anderson, Col. Rick D. Husband, and Col. Ilan Ramon:

Indeed, these men didn’t seem to see a conflict between maintaining their religious beliefs and exploring the outermost reaches of space, even though such missions have helped provide mankind with some of the most important information regarding the way in which the world was created. And they are hardly alone. A little-remembered 1997 survey of American scientists noted that about 40% of biologists, physicists and mathematicians say they believe in a God who actively communicates with humankind and to whom one may pray “in expectation of receiving an answer,” while only 15% said they had “no definite belief” in a deity.

Historically, religion and science, while often at odds on an institutional level, have spurred each other to greater exploration and examination. After all, if a person of faith believes that the universe and everything in it are truly creations of the one Creator, then what more appropriate to ascribe honor and glory to that Creator than by discovering His fingerprints on his work?

In the wake of the Columbia disaster, everyone seems to be trying to make sense out of the future of space exploration. One idea that sounds crazy is the idea of a “space elevator”:

Long imagined by science-fiction writers but seen by others as hopelessly far-fetched, the space-elevator concept has advanced dramatically in recent years along with leaps forward in the design of carbon nanotubes. Using the lightweight, strong carbon material, it’s feasible to talk of building a meter-wide “ribbon” that would start on a mobile ocean platform at the equator, west of Ecuador, and extend 62,000 miles up into space.

How about we just adequately fund NASA and start asking the international community to ante up for all the technological advances they’ve benefited from because of OUR space program? Better yet, why not send the leaders of Germany and France up the space elevator and leave them in outer space — a destination they seem familiar with.

With the tragic events of the weekend, it seems that this important story is being overshadowed:

Saddam’s bodyguard warns of secret arsenal

SADDAM Hussein’s senior bodyguard has fled with details of Iraq’s secret arsenal.

His revelations have supported US President George W. Bush’s claim there is enough evidence from UN inspectors to justify going to war.
Abu Hamdi Mahmoud has provided Israeli intelligence with a list of sites that the inspectors have not visited.

They include:

AN underground chemical weapons facility at the southern end of the Jadray Peninsula in Baghdad;

A SCUD assembly area near Ramadi. The missiles come from North Korea;

TWO underground bunkers in Iraq’s Western Desert. These contain biological weapons.

William Tierney, a former UN weapons inspector who has continued to gather information on Saddam’s arsenal, said Mahmoud’s information is “the smoking gun”.

I also thought it was particularly distasteful for Iraq to call the shuttle disaster “God’s vengeance.” Yeah, when Christians, a Jew, and a Hindu die in a tragic accident, that’s not God’s vengeance. God’s vengeance will be when the mighty American military reigns down upon Baghdad.

In an era of crisis and uncertainty, today’s loss of the space shuttle Columbia is a tragedy in the truest sense of the word. We cannot ascribe any blame to sinister terrorists in faraway countries. We cannot plot revenge or promise justice. We can simply mourn our loss and look to the future.

Like so many people, I can remember that day almost 17 years ago to the day when, as a third-grader, I watched the Challenger disaster live on television. I recall being comforted by President Reagan’s words then and was equally struck by President Bush’s words today:

In an age when space flight has come to seem almost routine, it is easy to overlook the dangers of travel by rocket, and the difficulties of navigating the fierce outer atmosphere of the Earth. These astronauts knew the dangers, and they faced them willingly, knowing they had a high and noble purpose in life. Because of their courage and daring and idealism, we will miss them all the more.

All Americans today are thinking, as well, of the families of these men and women who have been given this sudden shock and grief. You’re not alone. Our entire nation grieves with you. And those you loved will always have the respect and gratitude of this country.

The cause in which they died will continue. Mankind is led into the darkness beyond our world by the inspiration of discovery and the longing to understand. Our journey into space will go on.

In the skies today we saw destruction and tragedy. Yet farther than we can see there is comfort and hope. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, “Lift your eyes and look to the heavens. Who created all these? He who brings out the starry hosts one by one and calls them each by name. Because of His great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.”

The same Creator who names the stars also knows the names of the seven souls we mourn today. The crew of the shuttle Columbia did not return safely to Earth; yet we can pray that all are safely home.

May God bless the grieving families, and may God continue to bless America.