Capitol police shut down Christian children's choir singing national anthem. "Too offensive".

[Anti Federalist]

Thanks for sharing! My first (and only really) exposure to the merchant marines was that episode of Taxi where one of the cabbies temporarily joined them. This was their "sea chanty."

Now that made me laugh

It was good to see Mr Fudderman from Gremlins again

 

[Anti Federalist]

OK, now back on the rails...

Bottom line: the kids and the choir leader were telling the truth, and the cops were lying through their teeth.

They had written permission all along from both of their congressmen and the speaker of the house, to perform.


Children’s Choir Singing National Anthem Silenced by Capitol Police

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ging-national-anthem-silenced-capitol-police/

ELAINE MALLON 4 Jun 2023

Capitol police silenced a South Carolina children’s choir during their rendition of the National Anthem in National Statuary Hall.

David Rasbach, the founder and director of the Rushingbrook Children’s Choir, had received prior written approval from three congressman — including Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) — to perform five songs at the Capitol on Friday, May 26, the Daily Signal reported.

Micah Rea, founder and principal of The Rea Group and organizer of the trip, said the group received written approval from South Carolina Republican Reps. William Timmons and Joe Wilson. In addition, he had a staffer from Rep. Wilson’s office to confirm it was still approved.

Upon arriving at the Capitol that day, the choir from Greenville, South Carolina, was momentarily stopped by Andrew Tremel, the visitor operations manager at the Architect of the Capitol, but he allowed them to continue once he received approval through his earbud, the Western Journal reported.

But before the choir could finish the fourth verse of the National Anthem, a female officer instructed a staffer to tell Rasbach to end the performnance.

Video footage shows the officer talking with the staffer for more than 30 seconds. When he proceeds to walk away, she taps him on the shoulder, prompting him to shut down the perfromance.

“I was shocked, I was dismayed, I was stunned,” Rasbach told the Daily Signal. “I couldn’t believe that was happening, that they would stop the National Anthem of all songs.”

Rabach said the officer told him that the demonstration was not allowed and that people complained about its offensiveness.

In an email to the Daily Signal, the Capitol Police denied the claim that it was shut down because people were offended.

Capitol Police said, “Recently somebody posted a video of a children’s choir singing the Star-Spangled Banner in the U.S. Capitol Building and wrongfully claimed we stopped the performance because it ‘might offend someone'”:

Of course, because the singers in this situation were children, our officers were reasonable and allowed the children to finish their beautiful rendition of the Star-Spangled Banner. … The Congressional staff member who was accompanying the group knew the rules, yet lied to the officers multiple times about having permission from various offices. The staffer put both the choir and our officers, who were simply doing their jobs, in an awkward and embarrassing position.

Rea and Rabach both called this an outright lie.

“That’s a bald-faced lie,” Rea, told the Daily Signal. “You can see clearly in the video, they literally stopped him before they finished singing ‘The Star-Spangled Banner.’”

Capitol Police later released a statement apologizing for the miscommuniation in a statement to Newsweek.

“Although popup demonstrations and musical performances are not allowed in the U.S. Capitol without the proper approval, due to a miscommunication, the U.S Capitol Police were not aware that the Speaker’s Office had approved this performance,” the statement read.

However, that is simply not true. On March 29, a group of 80 pastors sang in the Rotunda

 

[ClaytonB]

Double Secret Really Extra Hard Voting?

 

[jmdrake]

Well, all we're arguing about here is war strategy.

Was it handled wrong by Madison and his generals, yes, I acknowledged that already.

I'm not anti war so much as I am anti arbitrary force with no proper legal oversight and no end in sight.

I would have no problem with a Congressional declaration of war against Mexico for the invasion on our border.

Nor would I against Communist China for the millions dead from the China Virus.

The armed enslavement of thousands of US citizens on the high seas by the British is an act of war as far as I'm concerned.



I'm not following you here...

Look, even if Key meant by "slave" specifically African slaves, I still do not find the line inherently racist in any way.

He not singling out any particular group, he is wishing defeat on the enemies of his country, including those assisting them.

Whoopie Goldberg infamously said the Holocaust was not about racism. In a way she has a point similar to the one you're making. Hitler had a reason to consider Jews "Enemies of the state." There is an article I read decades ago on the pro-Jewish, pro-Zionist website jewishvirtualhistory.org titled "Could we have stopped Hitler." That article admits that prior to World War 2 there was an organized international boycott of Germany by Jews who saw Hitler as dangerous. The Zionists conspired with the Hitler to undermine the boycott in exchange for Hitler allowing more German Jewish emigration to Palestine. I look at this as undermining the legitimacy of Zionism as they would sell out their own. But of friend of my, who's ethnic Mexican, had a different take. He viewed the boycott as an act of war and concluded this justified rounding up Jews and putting them in concentration camps. (That literally blew my mind.)

So really all of this comes down to statism and collectivism versus individualism. From the "state" point of view, almost anything can be justified to ensure the "state" continues, thrives and propagates. Slaves might act in their own interest and against the state? Threaten them with death! Jews might act in their own interest and undermine the state? Set up the concentration camps! Anti vaxxers and pro gunners might threaten the state? Well....I think you can see where that goes.

Anyhow, above the state, above my race, above my family, is God. And I truly believe God's hand was with Canada in repelling the U.S. invasion. Andrew Jackson invaded and took Florida to prevent escaped slaves from having a haven there. But Canada remained a haven for escaped slaves as it did not respect the "fugitive slave law." The U.S. Civil War was our nations bloodiest. I believe it was God's punishment on the South for having slaves and God's punishment on the North for complicity with slavery. If you disagree you can take that up with God when we both get to heaven.

 

[jmdrake]

Well, it is still the national anthem, all four verses of Key's poem.

It has not been memory holed yet.

And my point still stands: you think they would have shut down those other choirs I mentioned for singing all of the national anthem?

That said, unlike, say, the roads built and designed by Robert Moses, that we discussed once before, I see no overtly "racist" line in the second verse (or any verse).

I'm assuming this is the line in question, which is actually in the third verse:

Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution!
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave

"Their blood", in this context, are American soldiers.

"Their foul footsteps", are the steps of the invading British troops.

Key is saying, in his patriotic fervor, that the fight that his fellow country men gave the British, will defeat them, and will not save their mercenaries or hired slaves.

There is nothing racist about that statement.

Complete version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" showing spelling and punctuation
from Francis Scott Key's manuscript in the Maryland Historical Society collection.

O say can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hail'd at the twilight's last gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight
O'er the ramparts we watch'd were so gallantly streaming?
And the rocket's red glare, the bomb bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there,
O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore dimly seen through the mists of the deep
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream,
'Tis the star-spangled banner - O long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

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 wash'd 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.

O thus be it ever when freemen shall stand
Between their lov'd home and the war's desolation!
Blest with vict'ry and peace may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the power that hath made and preserv'd 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.



Let me ask you this: We both have sons who are young men now.

If Volodymyr Zelenskyy sent armed troops out all across America, and in every town and city started randomly dragging off in chains, randomly chosen young men of a fighting age, the same age as our sons, and then shipped them off to fight as conscripts in the Russian - Ukrainian war, under threat of death, would you consider it an act of war?

Because that is what the British had been doing to our merchant seamen and fishermen, by the thousands, for years up until the war.

Congress lawfully declared war for that reason and the economic reasons that went along with it, and as a strategy of war, then invaded Canada, to hopefully use that as a bargaining chip to force the British to acquiesce to our demands.

One of the primary ones being: the cessation of enslaving seamen

Let me ask you. If a bunch of Dutch farmers moved into New Hampshire, kicked you off your land and killed anyone who resisted, and if when the American government tried to make them stop they rebelled and declared "independence" like the Dutch Boers did to the British, how would you feel about the Boers? Then, years later, they quit oppressing you directly...but didn't give back your family farm?

Oh, and just a couple of generations after the war of 1812 both sides in the U.S. Civil war started using conscription and the South started conscription first. So that whole "We had to invade Canada to stop the British draft" rational is pretty thin.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Let me ask you. If a bunch of Dutch farmers moved into New Hampshire, kicked you off your land and killed anyone who resisted, and if when the American government tried to make them stop they rebelled and declared "independence" like the Dutch Boers did to the British, how would you feel about the Boers? Then, years later, they quit oppressing you directly...but didn't give back your family farm?

I'd be pissed and I'd be singing songs of rebellion and slaughter of my enemies and I would want to do so.

Own it.

I know a song of genocide when I hear one.

It is what it is...don't blame me for sounding the alarm.

If Julius Malema gains power next year in South Africa, every white person in the country will be in mortal danger.

https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1687538493696704513

 

[Anti Federalist]

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 wash'd 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.

And I maintain there is nothing at all racist in that verse.

 

[jmdrake]

I'd be pissed and I'd be singing songs of rebellion and slaughter of my enemies and I would want to do so.

Own it.

I know a song of genocide when I hear one.

It is what it is...don't blame me for sounding the alarm.

If Julius Malema gains power next year in South Africa, every white person in the country will be in mortal danger.

https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1687538493696704513

And I maintain there is nothing at all racist in that verse.

You are free to defend racist lyrics all you want. But compare apples to apples. Not all white people are Boers or farmers just like not all black people are hirelings or slaves. There was a particular context to when the "hireling or slaves" lyrics. I don't think it was justified but I get it. There was also a particular context to the "kill the Boer, kill the farmer" lyrics when they were written. You don't think it was justified but I think you get it. The question for 2023 is are either set of lyrics justified now i 2023? Seriously, why would anybody sing the second verse of the national anthem now?

 

[Anti Federalist]

The question for 2023 is are either set of lyrics justified now i 2023? Seriously, why would anybody sing the second verse of the national anthem now?

Now that's a whole 'nother question.

Why would you sing any verses of the national anthem in 2023?

Nothing good was ever accomplished here...the history of this country is nothing but an endless bloody litany of white oppressions, white crimes, white sins and white atrocities committed by my fathers, that I and all my posterity, for the rest of all time, must spend atoning for.

Why glorify in song any of that?

And even if that wasn't the case, certainly we are not free nor brave in any sense of the words anymore.

Those lyrics are just a cruel mockery.

 

[Anti Federalist]

[MENTION=849]jmdrake[/MENTION]

I answered your question here in this thread a couple of days ago.

 

[jmdrake]

I'd be pissed and I'd be singing songs of rebellion and slaughter of my enemies and I would want to do so.

Own it.

I know a song of genocide when I hear one.

It is what it is...don't blame me for sounding the alarm.

If Julius Malema gains power next year in South Africa, every white person in the country will be in mortal danger.

https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1687538493696704513

You understand that just like not every hireling was black, not all white people, even in South Africa, were "Boers" or farmers right? It's odd that you are able to see nuance in one context and not see it in another context. Very odd. Oh, and for the record, the "Jewish" people who listed as funding the EFF are....drum roll please....white.

 

[jmdrake]

[MENTION=849]jmdrake[/MENTION]

I answered your question here in this thread a couple of days ago.

Yeah. I know you did. And I've used that answer against your argument in the other thread. Racism is racism. Threatening black slaves is just as racist as threatening white farmers. You can't have it both ways.

 

[acptulsa]

Threatening black slaves is just as racist as threatening white farmers. You can't have it both ways.

You can, if at the time the lyric was written, there were still Irish in indentured servitude.

Jesus. Wokism has us unable to sing a damned song unless we have a doctorate in history. Can't we all just chill out, bury the ugly days of our barbarous ancestors (as Jefferson described his own slave-owning self) and live?

"Can't we all just get along?"--Rodney King

 

[jmdrake]

You can, if at the time the lyric was written, there were still Irish in indentured servitude.

Jesus. Wokism has us unable to sing a damned song unless we have a doctorate in history. Can't we all just chill out, bury the ugly days of our barbarous ancestors (as Jefferson described his own slave-owning self) and live?

"Can't we all just get along?"--Rodney King

An indentured servant is not the same as a slave. Not even kind of. The children of indentured servants didn't automatically become indentured servants. The servitude ended once you worked off your contract. It wasn't that far removed from apprenticeships.

Edit: And this isn't about "wokism." It's about context. Everything has context. The South African "kill the Boer" song has context and the Star Spangled Banner has context. I'm 56. I think I was 50 before I even knew there was a second verse! I bet most black people don't even know about the second verse. Why sing it? Nobody has answered that question.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah. I know you did. And I've used that answer against your argument in the other thread. Racism is racism. Threatening black slaves is just as racist as threatening white farmers. You can't have it both ways.

The "slaves" that Key wrote about, and that you are referring to, were no longer agricultural slaves.

They had been conscripted into the British Army, carried arms and waged war against the soldiers and civilians of young America.

Key was a patriot and wished death and defeat on his country's enemies.

People used to think that way, you know.

 

[acptulsa]

An indentured servant is not the same as a slave. Not even kind of.

True. The ones who were conscripted were far more likely to die a gruesome death than any cotton picker. Plantation owners were more protective of their property than sergeants were of their indentured draftees.

And I don't know. I've always had a Jehovah's Witness kind of attitude toward pieces of colorful cloth, and hymns too. Can't sing anyway and I've been ready to shuck off Washington D.C. and their colorful flag too for years now. So I don't even sing the first verse.

 

[Anti Federalist]

You understand that just like not every hireling was black, not all white people, even in South Africa, were "Boers" or farmers right? It's odd that you are able to see nuance in one context and not see it in another context. Very odd.

I'm certain that did not or does not matter to either Key or Malema.

Oh, and for the record, the "Jewish" people who listed as funding the EFF are....drum roll please....white.

Yes they are, LOL...like this is news to me.

The Chosen Ones have been using blacks as their Bolshevik "muscle" for over half a century now.

If you watched all of Malema's speech, you'd hear him extol of the virtues of queeerness and pledge unlimited support for the alphabet freak show.

This is why I think a separation is in order. It's all upside for the black diaspora in America. No more flabby, tattooed white weirdosexuals grooming your kids into queeerdom, for starters.

 

[jmdrake]

The "slaves" that Key wrote about, and that you are referring to, were no longer agricultural slaves.

They had been conscripted into the British Army, carried arms and waged war against the soldiers and civilians of young America.

Simply not true. The "slaves" referred to people who might choose to join the British army in exchange for their freedom. They were "conscripted." They volunteered. About 20,000 did. Key didn't want them volunteering.

Key was a patriot and wished death and defeat on his country's enemies.

People used to think that way, you know.

And when the "kill the Boer" song was written, the Boer farmers, not all white people, were the enemies of "patriots" in South Africa. And the question that you refuse to address is why sing the 2nd verse of the Star Spangled Banner in 2023? And don't give the cop out answer you gave earlier. A real answer for black people who still waive the American flag and don't hate America. Why bring forward the second verse that most Americans don't even know exist? Like, what the hell?

 

[Anti Federalist]

And I don't know. I've always had a Jehovah's Witness kind of attitude toward pieces of colorful cloth, and hymns too. Can't sing anyway and I've been ready to shuck off Washington D.C. and their colorful flag too for years now. So I don't even sing the first verse.

See, there you go, exactly the point I was making.

Now that's a whole 'nother question.

Why would you sing any verses of the national anthem in 2023?

Nothing good was ever accomplished here...the history of this country is nothing but an endless bloody litany of white oppressions, white crimes, white sins and white atrocities committed by my fathers, that I and all my posterity, for the rest of all time, must spend atoning for.

Why glorify in song any of that?

And even if that wasn't the case, certainly we are not free nor brave in any sense of the words anymore.

Those lyrics are just a cruel mockery.

 

[jmdrake]

I'm certain that did not or does not matter to either Key or Malema.



Yes they are, LOL...like this is news to me.

The Chosen Ones have been using blacks as their Bolshevik "muscle" for over half a century now.

If you watched all of Malema's speech, you'd hear him extol of the virtues of queeerness and pledge unlimited support for the alphabet freak show.

This is why I think a separation is in order. It's all upside for the black diaspora in America. No more flabby, tattooed white weirdosexuals grooming your kids into queeerdom, for starters.

Okay. Send everybody back to their continent of origin. And quit exploiting OPCs (other people's continents). I'm sure there's a nice mountaintop in Scotland for ye. Of course...that's not going to happen. You're not even given Texas back to the Aztecs. (I think everybody's giving up on California anyway).