O'er the Land of the Suspects and the Home of the Fearful
In 1814, Francis Scott Key penned a four stanza poem after experiencing a massive bombardment by the British navy on Fort McHenry in Baltimore. People who watch "The History Channel" think that the attack Key was observing was during the revolutionary war. It was not. This was the War of 1812 -- a second round between the new republic and their former benefactors over trade embargoes and colonial accusation of on-going subterfuge by Britain.
The first stanza to Key's poem was declared our national anthem in 1931, and despite it's continued "airplay" for 75 years, most Americans know only the first and last two lines. Don't believe me? Go to a ball game and watch em! They mumble through the middle portion until they get to that glorious line at the end, "O'er the land of the fre-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e (pause) and the home of the b-r-r-r-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-v-v-e-e."
The self contradiction is staggering. Are we the land of the free and the home of the brave? Hardly. We are trading our freedom like unwanted baseball cards for a promised security bearing the disclaimer, "we have to be successful 100% of the time, but the terrorists only have to be successful once." Okay, so what guarantees do we have then? None. I'd rather take my chances with the meat sticks in Al Qaeda then turn my civil liberties over to Chancellor Bush.
The administration claimed we were attacked because "Islamo-fascists" (whatever that's supposed to mean) hate our freedom. We're also in Iraq to "protect our freedom." So, why sacrifice freedom in the name of protection? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? What is freedom anyway?
Is it freedom to say as you please? Yes. But that's being undermined now. Is it freedom to check out books, make purchases and phone calls without warrantless searches? Yes. But that's no longer the case. Is it freedom to travel without undue search and seizure? Yes. But just try to get through the TAS without getting selected for frisking and an opening of your belongings.
Is it freedom to go about your day without being filmed by surveillance cameras? Yes. You can kiss that goodbye. Is it freedom to keep your money generated from labor without having it automatically seized by the state to fund perpetual war? Yes. Go get your pay stub. Is it freedom to keep your property when the state wants it for civil purposes? Yes. The Supreme Court did away with that last year. Shall I go on?
So, we are losing freedoms. That's factual. If the Islamo-fascists (I can't help but giggle when I read that) hate us for our freedom, then isn't it ironic that their acts of terror HAVE removed some of our liberties? If we really wanted to "show those terrorists a thing or two," shouldn't we be expanding freedom to demonstrate how the "land of the free" will not be intimidated by terrorists? After all, we don't "negotiate with terrorists," why in the world would we allow them to erase our Constitution?
We are not the home of the brave either. We're a land full of scared wet cats. If the media features a big picture of Bin Laden we get a chill down our yellow spines. If the president of Iran is shown we yell and scream like the hate rallies in Orwell's 1984. And when the neo-gestapo SWAT teams are roaming U.S. streets we finally allow ourselves a few moments of hesitated solace. How shameful. How disgraceful. How un-American.
So, after "the rockets red glare, and the bombs bursting in air," the point is to "give proof that the flag" is still there waving over a free land full of brave people. Yet, after the red glare of 9/11 there was no more proof of a free land of brave people over which the "broad stripes and bright stars" could wave. We have lost the "perilous fight."
For your enjoyment, here are the last two stanzas of this great poem. The part we don't sing:
The first stanza to Key's poem was declared our national anthem in 1931, and despite it's continued "airplay" for 75 years, most Americans know only the first and last two lines. Don't believe me? Go to a ball game and watch em! They mumble through the middle portion until they get to that glorious line at the end, "O'er the land of the fre-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e (pause) and the home of the b-r-r-r-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-v-v-e-e."
The self contradiction is staggering. Are we the land of the free and the home of the brave? Hardly. We are trading our freedom like unwanted baseball cards for a promised security bearing the disclaimer, "we have to be successful 100% of the time, but the terrorists only have to be successful once." Okay, so what guarantees do we have then? None. I'd rather take my chances with the meat sticks in Al Qaeda then turn my civil liberties over to Chancellor Bush.
The administration claimed we were attacked because "Islamo-fascists" (whatever that's supposed to mean) hate our freedom. We're also in Iraq to "protect our freedom." So, why sacrifice freedom in the name of protection? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? What is freedom anyway?
Is it freedom to say as you please? Yes. But that's being undermined now. Is it freedom to check out books, make purchases and phone calls without warrantless searches? Yes. But that's no longer the case. Is it freedom to travel without undue search and seizure? Yes. But just try to get through the TAS without getting selected for frisking and an opening of your belongings.
Is it freedom to go about your day without being filmed by surveillance cameras? Yes. You can kiss that goodbye. Is it freedom to keep your money generated from labor without having it automatically seized by the state to fund perpetual war? Yes. Go get your pay stub. Is it freedom to keep your property when the state wants it for civil purposes? Yes. The Supreme Court did away with that last year. Shall I go on?
So, we are losing freedoms. That's factual. If the Islamo-fascists (I can't help but giggle when I read that) hate us for our freedom, then isn't it ironic that their acts of terror HAVE removed some of our liberties? If we really wanted to "show those terrorists a thing or two," shouldn't we be expanding freedom to demonstrate how the "land of the free" will not be intimidated by terrorists? After all, we don't "negotiate with terrorists," why in the world would we allow them to erase our Constitution?
We are not the home of the brave either. We're a land full of scared wet cats. If the media features a big picture of Bin Laden we get a chill down our yellow spines. If the president of Iran is shown we yell and scream like the hate rallies in Orwell's 1984. And when the neo-gestapo SWAT teams are roaming U.S. streets we finally allow ourselves a few moments of hesitated solace. How shameful. How disgraceful. How un-American.
So, after "the rockets red glare, and the bombs bursting in air," the point is to "give proof that the flag" is still there waving over a free land full of brave people. Yet, after the red glare of 9/11 there was no more proof of a free land of brave people over which the "broad stripes and bright stars" could wave. We have lost the "perilous fight."
For your enjoyment, here are the last two stanzas of this great poem. The part we don't sing:
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation,
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n-rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserved us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto -- "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
