shuttle crew
p living space
CANAVERAL,
:e shuttle
Fla. (AP)
Atlantis’
:s closed the doors to
lational space station
ly after accomplishing)
h\rdc- onH
hores and more,
olanned to pull awayj
Atlantis late Sunday I
did a fantastic job,”
Mission Control, "and
the Expedition One
really appreciate all
t you put in ge.tting
home set up.”
tion One — the first
it space station crew
aduled to blast off Oct.
rd a Russian rocket
e at the complex two
r for a four-month stay,
their five days inside,
le astronauts stocked
:e station with more
iOO pounds of food,
soap, toothbrushes,
s, pens, notebooks,
igs, radios, vacuum
power converters and
ir.
‘ven men installed the
xygen generator and
in the new Russian-
g quarters and, during
jrsion outside last!
hooked up power and
>. They also plugged in
itteries and boosted
240-mile-high
miles higher
llonday, September 18, 2000
Show
the
THE BATTALION
Page 5B
money
Message of Olympic Games lost in financial gain and personal greed
>n into a
out 14
>re.
VING
ttinued from Page It
canopies of jumpers 11 iancial gain
md Georse.
W
NICHOLAS
ROZNOVSKY
hile orga
nizing the
first mod
em Olympic Games in
1896, founder Pierre
deCoubertin hoped to
establish “a four-year
ly festival of the
springtime of mankind.”
For more than 100 years, the Olympic
Games have united athletes from around
the globe to compete in a variety of athletic
events and foster peace among the nations
of the world.
Now that the 2(XX) Summer Olympic
Games are underway in Australia with
more than 10,(XX) athletes competing in
more than 300 events, it would seem that
Coubertin’s dream has been realized.
Along the way, however, other dreams
tiave been realized, too. For many of the
ities and companies involved, the
Olympics are the ultimate celebration of
r evenue and profit.
Over the past 104 years, the Olympics
lave grown from a simple athletic festival
nto a multibillion dollar industry, and busi-
tesses all over the world are trying to get a
liece of the Olympic gold for themselves.
The true motivation behind the modern
apparent — fi-
Id for a series of jumps,ik
t five victims will be® Carnes is becoming all toe
For this year's Games, the Sydney
ice to do what they lov
ht their
for life.
r roommate, Carol Geon
d to make their first
Mail Call
st time you get backintlt Olympic Games Organizing Committee
have to deal with aloto: SOGOC) will receive $627 million from
emotions." Hajovskysaid )6 sponsors and suppliers,
lends loved w’hat they wetr Surprisingly enough, this large sum is
there's no reason (orlistless than the amount The Atlanta Games ac-
jally helped a lot of peopl|cumulated in four years. In 1996, 102 com
be grief" Hianies paid $826 million to be part of the
e Aggies who will neve Olympic Games.
Considering that these figures do not in-
riends a newaf- r | ll( j e t| ie economic boom created for
_ , )lympic cities by increased tourism, it is no
itch. Class ot 92. dieda vender that Houston and Dallas are trying
iy. 1 he jump was a bir!ijt 0 | lire fhe Olympics their way in 2012.
t from her brother. -I The International Olympic Committee
Vlilller, a treshman, wmoq, the administrating body of the
t first jump as an Aggi;:o ames< a i s0 get its fair share of sponsorship
penues.
„ J Eleven major sponsors, including Coca-
1 together. Alter knowi# 0 i ai visa and IBM, have paid a combined
for only two weeks.t
become the closest m
e jump was to be one mot
;ir friendship. •
ryear. Class of ‘99 was# [
• Cessna 182 and a fciis Vatican message
n Warden, Class oN miSCOnStmed
debrated his one-year ail res p 0nse £ 0 Mark Passwa-
vith his wife, JoLynn. jlers’Sept. 14 column.
Goodings, Class ot ‘94.1c
ader, is described by H. Passwaters seems to have
an individual who missed the intentions of the Vati-
ort of incredible. Woo: |; an jhe Catholic Church has
fluent German, was a®' £)een teaching the notion of no
>iano and was an avid si salvation outside the Church for
wned Ags Over Texas,® fe| m0 st 2,000 years,
hat sponsored Aggies! Yet, when it tries to lead the ef-
fort to bring peace among differ-
the Sky Diving Club w- fc n t religions of the world, many
oLynn’s house to rente® people view this as the Church ac
iends. cepting salvation by any religion,
was two weeks before# Just because you do not agree
■ divers knew what thej with someone’s beliefs, it does
Get back in the air. Ho" hot mean you hate them. We are
ime it would be without |o love all people, whether we
I and with an even biggf agree with their beliefs or not.
;. ■ The Church is not trying to rec-
s nothing that makes o® oncile doctrines of different re I i-
life and beauty more that gions, but people’s attitudes to- 4
world, not to mention tk -Ward each other,
pus, from 13,000 feet ini The fact that people now see
■lajovsky said. the Church contradicting itself
p members began thelod shows that they have completely
:overy, grief continued® missed the pope’s attempt to
students were killed by! bring religious tolerance to the
' world.
$605 million to be recognized as ‘‘Olympic
Partners.”
Although such sponsorship provides
companies with incredible marketing expo
sure, IBM has decided that the price is be
coming too high and will end its partner
ship with the IOC after the 2000 Games.
The company in the United States most
visibly making money off of the Games is
General Electric Co., the parent company
of television network NBC. The network
has exclusive Olympic broadcast rights in
the United States through the 2008 Games.
For this year's Olympics alone, NBC
paid $705 million dollars for broadcast
rights. Despite the large cost. NBC an
nounced one week before the opening cere
mony in Australia that it had turned a profit
by selling a record $900 million in advertis
ing for the Games.
The Olympic Games are certainly bigger
and more profitable than ever, but are they
better?
In its quest to expand the Games and
maximize the revenue, the IOC has ignored
Pierre du Coubertin’s vision of the Games
as a showcase of amateur athletics.
Professional athletes now make up the
majority of Olympic basketball and soccer
teams and a sizable percentage of tennis
competitors. One cannot watch 15 minutes
of Olympic coverage on NBC without see
ing at least one ad featuring world-class
sprinter Michael Johnson.
In addition, it seems that the average
Olympic athlete today is far less an amateur
than his predecessors.
While the Olympic Games purport to
spread athletics and friendly competition
around the world, the IOC has been ex
tremely vigilant in cracking down on Inter
net broadcasts of the Games.
Web broadcasts of the Games have been
effectively banned because Olympic broad
casting contracts prevent companies from
sending video or audio signals outside their
own national or regional territories.
Instead of embracing the new medium
as a way of increasing viewership of the
Games, the IOC is buckling under the pres
sure from its broadcast licensees (like
NBC) to protect its investments.
“If someone has the capacity for major
distribution, it’s a copyright violation and
we will find some way to close it down,”
said IOC vice president Richard Pound.
The IOC has apparently chosen lucrative
television contracts over unprecedented
coverage. So much for spreading good will
and sports.
The upcoming 2002 Salt Lake City Win
ter Olympics created a crisis within the IOC
when it was revealed that committee mem
bers received over $1 million in gifts from
the Salt Lake City organizers.
The incident prompted a congressional
investigation and resulted in the resignation
of key Salt Lake City Organizing Commit
tee officials.
Although the IOC has revised its selec
tion process and prohibited its members
from visiting potential host cities, the IOC
has a long way to go before greed is purged
from its ranks.
For the athletes who have spent years
training and preparing for the Sydney
Olympic Games, the next two weeks still
represent a chance to prove themselves as
world-class athletes. To Americans watch
ing at home, however, the Games are just a
two-week festival of capitalism.
It does not matter who wins the gold, sil
ver, or bronze — the corporate world al
ready has captured the green.
Nicholas Roznovsky is a senior
political science major.
The pope is trying to stop
death and persecution because of
religion,’not create a new view of
salvation by any religion.
Besides — if people do not be
lieve the Catholic Church to be cor
rect, then why does one statement
affect so many non-believers?
Louis Mandanici
Class of ‘02
ver the following
^nths after the plane crasli
ifire collapsed, killing 1*
es.
;gies would not return It ;
eld until Memorial Da)
or a boogie, an event U >
divers together for an eit j
id of jumps and fellowship f
ct that the crash took on ’
made it even harder,” saii
ky diving adviser Jai
We were no longer abletc
; place we felt most coni'
Coulter Field. That firsi
there was a statement that
urn.”
turn will take place first
le fly over at 7 p.m. andl
;end as the club hosts af
the crash site in memorj
Miller, Puryear, Warder
ings.
mt to make sure canopies
) fly over Coulter Field
mid. “If s what they wot#
;d.”
The Battalion encourages letters to the
editor. Letters must be 300 words or less
and include the author’s name, class and
phone number.
The opinion editor reserves the right to
edit letters for length, style, and accuracy.
Letters may be submitted in person at 014
Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Let
ters may also be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
014 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
1111TAMU
College Station, Texas 77843
Campus Mail: 1111
Fax: (979) 845-2647
E-mail: battletters@hotmail.com
Columns and letters appearing in The
Battalion express the opinion of the authors
only. They do not necessarily reflect the opin
ion of other Battalion staff members, the
Texas A&M student body, regents, adminis
trators, faculty or staff.
CIT A Tjf OF T1TF TST AIVTF i- . , , .
JlA.lvJl. Ur 1H11 IS 1.AJY111 Engineering board not
free from fault in Bonfire collapse, hypocritically blaming others
o:
MARK
PASSWATERS
ne of the
most re
markable
things about
the Bonfire
tragedy*is so
few people
have been
looking for
someone to
blame.
Unfortunately, that situation has
changed in the past few weeks.
“You tell me who that you have
heard say, T was at fault,’ ” said Dr.
John Breen, father of collapse vic
tim Christopher Breen.
Nancy Brans, whose son Do
minic was injured in the collapse,
was quoted by The Dallas Morning
News as saying, “There has to be
somebody responsible for letting it
happen. It wasn’t a freak accident.”
People looking to point fingers
for the cause of the collapse got
their wish. On Sept. 8, the Texas
Board of Professional Engineers
released its findings on the col
lapse and included harsh words
for the students who worked on
the project and the Texas A&M
administration.
What it failed to do, however,
was recognize its own culpability
in the tragedy due to its unwilling
ness to take action.
Engineers are supposed to be
proactive, not reactive. If an engi
neer recognizes a problem, he or
she is supposed to take action to
rectify the situation before the pub
lic is harmed.
Otherwise, he or she will have
violated his or her social contract
with the public.
The board stood by and did
nothing for decades while Aggies
continued to build a structure that it
knew violated engineering guide
lines.
For the highest review board in
the engineering profession to be
forced into action by a trage’dy is
deplorable, as is the board’s gen-’
eral attitude regarding the entire
situation.
In its findings, the board noted
that the students building Bonfire
were in violation of the 1937 Texas
Engineering Practice Act, which
prevents anyone from practicing
engineering without a license.
Victoria
Hsu, the,ex
ecutive direc
tor of the
board, said
that the as
sumption was
made that
such a viola
tion existed
in previous
Bonfires.
“It’s possi
ble, because
it was a simi
larly complex
structure in
past years,”
Hsu said.
If this is
indeed the
case, such a finding is more damn
ing to the administration and to the
board itself than it is to the stu
dents.
The “wedding-cake” design had
been in use for more than four
decades, yet no questions were
asked concerning its safety.
Any violation of engineering
canons should be considered a seri
ous matter.
When the violation takes place
in the creation of a totally unique
structure, it should send up warn
ing signals.
The board also criticized the
University administration. While it
is still uncertain whether the Uni
versity technically broke the law.
The board criticized the University
for not paying closer attention to
the project.
If A&M spent more than $8,000
on Bonfire, it violated a clause in
the Engineering Practice Act that
states that any public work costing
more than $8,000 must be designed
and supervised by a professional
engineer.
The board has the ability to for
mally repri-
The boord stood by and
did nothing for decades
while Aggies continued
to build a structure that
it knew violated engi
neering guidelines. For
the highest review
board in the engineer
ing profession to be
forced into action by a
tragedy is deplorable.
mand the
school and
the students,
as well as im
pose a fine,
but declined
to do so at
the Sept.- 8
meeting.
Instead, it
appeared
content to ex
ert its power
over the Uni
versity and
others.
“Our ob
jective is to
send a clear
message to
the rest of the state that we will not
tolerate this,” said Kathleen Walk
er, Chairwoman of the enforcement
committee.
Its primary target would appear
to be Keep the Fire Burning
(KTFB). Members of the board
said they would request a cease
and desist order against KTFB.
If the board had acted this way
several years ago, it is highly likely
that last year’s collapse would not
have happened.
Instead, the board had to be
roused from its slumber by an event
that could have been prevented.
The board has considered sanc
tioning members of A&M’s Col
lege of Engineering for not previ
ously voicing their concerns about
Bonfire.
This accusation is not true; sev
eral members of the University’s
faculty did voice their concerns in
previous years, and they were ig
nored by all — including the Texas
Board of Professional Engineers.
Among those who voiced their
concerns were Larry Grosse, for
mer head of the Department of
Construction Science and faculty
adviser for Bonfire until 1994.
Grosse, along with civil engi
neering professor emeritus Louis J.
Thompson, repeatedly mentioned
possible problems, which fell on
deaf ears.
It seems odd that such a well-
researched report would make
such an incorrect assumption, un
less the board is embarrassed
about ignoring criticisms about
Bonfire’s design from engineering
professionals.
The Texas Board of Profession
al Engineers is perfectly within its
bounds to pass judgment on the
student body and A&M’s adminis
tration for their mistakes leading
up to the Bonfire collapse.
However, it should be remem
bered that the most powerful engi
neering review board in Texas was
either unwilling or unable to take a
stand against a situation that was in
plain violation of engineering laws.
Its silence allowed young men
and women to put their lives at risk'
building a structure they believed
was safe.
Now that those victims are
gone, the board has found its voice
and is capable of pointing fingers.
In this case, it should keep one
finger pointed squarely at itself.
Mark Passwaters is a senior
electrical engineering major.