WWII internment of Japanese Americans, racial profiling


PDA






onerifle
August 6, 2004, 04:51 PM
Haven't posted in awhile; thought this might make up for it. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer2/index.asp?ploc=b&refer=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/books/185162_vcenter06.html


'...In a time of war, the survival of the nation comes first," she wrote. "Civil liberties are not sacrosanct."'


I'm usually a fan of hers, but...

-Uhhh...Michelle? Yeah, they are!!!!


Book defends WWII internment of Japanese Americans, racial profiling

Friday, August 6, 2004

By JOHN IWASAKI
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

James Arima, a local officer of the Japanese American Citizens League, intended to be at Green Lake tonight for the annual peace ceremony honoring those killed by the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

He changed his plans after hearing that author Michelle Malkin would be in town to discuss her new book, which defends another controversial episode of World War II: the relocation and detention of more than 110,000 people of Japanese ancestry on the West Coast.

Malkin's book -- "In Defense of Internment: The Case for 'Racial Profiling' in World War II and the War on Terror" -- has created an uproar in the local Japanese American community.

"She's looking forward to discussion and controversy," said Arima, president of the Lake Washington chapter of the citizens league. "We don't want to help her sell books."

Malkin purports to debunk the common historical view that the internment was largely driven by wartime hysteria and racism. She maintains that historians and federal panels have played down information showing that Japan had established an extensive espionage network on the West Coast.

Using the internment to criticize today's counterterrorism measures, including profiling, only jeopardizes homeland security, Malkin says.

"I start from a politically incorrect premise: In a time of war, the survival of the nation comes first," she wrote. "Civil liberties are not sacrosanct."

Malkin writes that the so-called MAGIC messages -- Japan's diplomatic communications that were intercepted and deciphered before and during the war -- revealed Japan's espionage intentions. Among the messages are brief reports from the Japanese Consulate in Seattle about warships anchored in Bremerton.

The existence of the top-secret messages was known to only about a dozen people before and during the war, including President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The information was declassified in 1977 and written about by David Lowman, a former national security officer and Washington state native.

"Virtually every popular account of the ethnic Japanese experience during World War II has ignored MAGIC and its vital importance in shaping FDR's national security policies abroad and at home," Malkin wrote.

She cited Tetsuden Kashima, a University of Washington professor of American ethnic studies, several times in her book, noting that he gave scant mention to MAGIC in his own book on the internment.

Kashima declined to comment until he had read Malkin's book, which is generating an online buzz.

Lowman's work has been "refuted and discredited" and Malkin's book offers "nothing new" about MAGIC, wrote Greg Robinson, a history professor at the University of Quebec at Montreal, who has written a book about FDR and the internment.

Robinson's comments appeared in a blog run by Eric Muller, a University of North Carolina law professor cited in Malkin's book. Muller said Malkin does nothing to counter criticisms that "the actions taken against Japanese Americans were absurdly disproportionate to the scope of any security risks of which the government was even arguably aware."

While Robinson and Muller have read Malkin's book, which includes more than 100 pages of photocopied documents, local Japanese Americans are reacting to a recent column Malkin wrote outlining the book's premise.

"Malkin claims to set the record straight when in reality she is distorting selected facts to fit her political position," said Tom Ikeda, executive director of Densho, a Seattle organization that preserves the histories of Japanese American internees.

Steve Sumida, chairman of the Department of American Ethnic Studies at the UW, said Malkin's argument is "based on the assumption that Japanese Americans are the Japanese enemy. ... We are not the enemy."

Malkin, 33, whose parents emigrated from the Philippines, is undaunted by her critics.

"This is exactly what we I want. We haven't had a debate," she said in a phone interview yesterday from her home in Maryland. "We can't win the war on terror until we understand our past history."

Malkin grew up in New Jersey and was an editorial writer and columnist for The Seattle Times in the late 1990s. Her syndicated column appears in nearly 200 newspapers.

Her views on the internment represent a reversal from 2000, when she wrote that "what happened to Japanese American internees was abhorrent and wrong." She heard from veterans who urged her to take a closer look at the historical record.

After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Malkin said, the internment has "become sort of a trump card to argue against any and all of President Bush's security measures, from the most innocuous -- inviting Muslims to come in for voluntary interviews with the FBI -- to the most extreme -- (holding suspects) at Guantanamo Bay. ...

"If you have a serious debate on civil liberties versus national security, you have to get the history lessons right."

Malkin said that debunking the "myth" about the internment doesn't mean she ignores the disruption in the lives of the internees.

"Anyone who reads my book will see that I'm very sensitive to the sacrifices that were made by many ethnic Japanese, both issei (first generation) and nisei (second generation)," she said. "I am not arguing that they didn't suffer or weren't terribly inconvenienced."

Today's security measures also pose burdens.

"But any inconvenience, no matter how bothersome or offensive," Malkin wrote, "is preferable to being incinerated at your office desk by a flaming hijacked plane."

If you enjoyed reading about "WWII internment of Japanese Americans, racial profiling" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
CWatson
August 7, 2004, 03:33 PM
Racial profiling? More like common sense.

Investigating Mosques and their clerics and what they preach also common sense.

CW

Cosmoline
August 7, 2004, 03:49 PM
Did we have a right to imprison German, Italian and Japanese foreign nationals? You bet. That is standard operating procedure during ANY war. Typically each side will put all enemy nationals in prison, then perhaps work an exchange at a later date. But if you're a foreign national from a nation which declares war on the US and you are on US soil when it happens, prepare to be taken in.

The internment of US citizens is another matter. That cannot be justified. It was a terrible violation of the right to due process. If a citizen is found to be spying, try them for treason. But otherwise leave them alone. Thems the rules, and any government that violates those rules is dangerously close to becoming a government that itself has no right to exist.

onerifle
August 7, 2004, 04:41 PM
I am absolutely ok with "profiling"- what concerns me is if (when?) we have another terrorist attack at home- the same rationale could exist for internment of Arab citizens (because of the fear of "sleepers"), or people that attend a particluar house of worship- whatever that faith may be.

My issue was primarily with Malkin's "civil liberties are not sacrosanct" comment.

I assume by her comment the B.O.R. becomes the Bill of "usually, just not right this second, because...".... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Leatherneck
August 8, 2004, 09:31 AM
So you all are OK with, essentially, imprisoning American citizens because of where their parents were born? Without any evidence of disloyal or treasonous actions on their part? Have I got that right? :scrutiny:

TC
TFL Survivor

Chris Rhines
August 8, 2004, 09:52 AM
I start from a politically incorrect premise: In a time of war, the survival of the nation comes first," she wrote. "Civil liberties are not sacrosanct. Start from an incorrect premise, and you get incorrect results. I can't believe that I used to respect Malkin as an original thinker - she's just another panicked neo-Trotskyite.

- Chris

Harve Curry
August 8, 2004, 09:56 AM
Italians property during WWII.

My grandfather came from Sicily in 1913, got sent back because he was only 15 years old, eleven months later when he was 18 years old he was accepted at Ellis Island. By 1917 he was "inducted into the National Army" and was back in Europe to fight the Germans in the trenches of WWI.

By 1942 his cousins had their grape vineyard takenover to expand an airfield in El Cajon for a training pilots during WWII. They never got it back or paid. But I never heard any complaints from them,they loved this country and still prospered despite the setback. But today they would could have been rich.

I think that so-called racial profiling is needed, but it has to be closley monitered or the authorities will abuse citizens and enjoy it. Just the same or worse as they do everyday citizens now.

Leatherneck
August 8, 2004, 10:06 AM
My grandfather came from Sicily in 1913, got sent back because he was only 15 years old, eleven months later when he was 18 years old I truly, truly hope you intended to put it that wryly. :D

TC
TFL Survivor

CWatson
August 8, 2004, 02:38 PM
Leatherneck,

Most of the citizens we are talking about now are "naturalized" adults with conflicting loyalties with being American and their homeland who are not raising their kids as Americans.

As far as putting in camps during wartime people who have more loyalties to their homeland,nothing wrong with it,you cant investigate them all immediatley.I do not believe their personal property should be siezed while interned.

Find a cleric in a Mosque preaching the rightiousness of Osama,take his green card or revoke his naturalized citizenship and drop him of near Mecca and you will start seeing more cooperation from the Islamic community.


CW

wingman
August 8, 2004, 04:51 PM
Most of the citizens we are talking about now are "naturalized" adults with conflicting loyalties with being American and their homeland who are not raising their kids as Americans.

True, however I believe they know where there loyalties are.:mad:

Atticus
August 8, 2004, 04:53 PM
I always thought it ironic that a General named Eisenhower was leading the US army, while those of Japanese ancestry were being put in camps. I understand the sentiment ...but it certainly does smack of racism. It was a different era though. Regardless, Malkin is an odd one.

Hawkmoon
August 8, 2004, 05:25 PM
"But any inconvenience, no matter how bothersome or offensive," Malkin wrote, "is preferable to being incinerated at your office desk by a flaming hijacked plane."
I think they misquoted her. What she probably said is "Any inconvenience for you, no matter how drastically it destroys your life and family, is preferable to me being incinerated at my desk by people you never heard of and have no knowledge of."

ThreadKiller
August 8, 2004, 05:44 PM
Just had a conversation last night with my Dad about this very topic. His contention is that the internment of Japanese people in the US saved their lives. America was in a very ugly mood after Dec 7, 1941.

Something to think about anyway.

Tim

CWatson
August 8, 2004, 05:45 PM
If they know were their loyalties are they should voice them and let people know what side of the fence they are on.You do not see many Muslims on the tube dumping on the actions of terrorist.


I like Milken,she could be my wife's twin.

CW

JPL
August 8, 2004, 07:04 PM
Not only Eisenhower, but Nimitz, too.

He grew up in Fredericksburg, Texas, a town founded by German immigrants, and where German was still spoken routinely until World War I.

Very curious that part of my family apparently perished in the camps in Germany because they were German Jews, and someone actually hatched a plan here to put American Germans (including Jews), into camps, as well.

Harve Curry
August 9, 2004, 10:56 AM
Leather Neck,
"11 months later when he was 18", is my dry sence of humor. Good thing they didn't have computorized record keeping then or he'd a never got in.


The Italian is on my Mom's side immigrating in the late 19th century. My Grandma was born in 1906, died in 2000 at 94. She was always proud to tell this story:

Her parents couldn't speak english and they made their children speak english by not allowing them to speak Italian. They had to get by in America and that was english speaking. Greatgrandpa moved his family to a German neighborhood so the kids wouldn't be speaking Italian with other Italians. He purposley got out of the N.Y. Italian neighborhoods around 1900.
In the german neighborhood was a street named after the Kaiser Wilhelm Blvd., because of WWI they dropoped his name to something else. Grandma was 14 years old at the end of WWI she had won a $25 US War Bond for good grades. $25 was a whole lot of money then.
Well to celebrate the end of WWI the school said they were going to have a "bond-fire party". Yes she burned her bond to help Uncle Sam. During this same time her future husband was over fighting in France and getting shot up in the Argonne Offensive.

Grandma never really learned Italian. In the late 1960's she had to study it so she could go visit relatives and converse. Her Mom went with her who hadn't been there since the 1890's. Grandpa could have gone back but declined, only thing he left there was poverty and hard work. He'd had a short visit there on leave at the end of WWI.

The point is with these immigrants America came first.
Now we have schools and gov't forms in spanish. We should go back to the days of the english language being the one and only langauge.

dave3006
August 9, 2004, 11:02 AM
If it is okay to imprision U.S. citizens of Japanese decent for what they MIGHT do, then it must be okay to imprision gunowners for people they MIGHT shoot.

Don't be a Nazi.

JPL
August 9, 2004, 11:09 AM
Good point, Dave.

After all, given that we're now engaged in wars on Crime, Drugs, and various other things, perhaps everyone in the nation should be imprisoned.

You MIGHT rob a store.

Off to the pokey with you.

I MIGHT attempt to purchase some illegal drugs.

Off to the pokey with me.

Harve Curry
August 9, 2004, 11:14 AM
Dave and JPL ,
Italians, Germans, and Japs were interned, but I never agreed with any of that. But I'll bet they did catch alot of enemies within in the USA that way. Just to big of a net that hurt alot of people.

JPL
August 9, 2004, 01:28 PM
Virtually ever individual of Japanese descent was interned during WW II.

Roughly 11,000 Germans/German-Americans were interned. As a percentage, it was, I believe, well under 1% of those with German heritage.

Roughly 1,000 Italians were interned, although others had property confiscated (especially fishing vessles) and were forced to move from the coasts.

As far as I can tell, 1,000 internees was also well under 1% of the population with Italian heritage.

The Japanese population, though?

A lot closer to 100% (in the 90s, IIRC), for a total of over 120,000.

Upwards 90,000 of those individuals were citizens, either naturalized or born here.

The operative difference?

You could tell that someone was a "devious slant" just by looking at him.

Rounding up all the Germans and Italians would have been a lot harder, and as it was it drew a LOT more criticism.

Why?

Obviously because they were white.

Organized discrimination against orientals (particularly the Chinese) was pretty much government policy in the early part of the century and there's good indication that some of the supporters of internment were less interested in stopping Japanese agents and a lot more interested in getting the asians out of their areas.

R.H. Lee
August 9, 2004, 01:38 PM
What *may* have been acceptable within the context of the times 60+ years ago would not fly today. And remember the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor caused a lot of resentment toward Japan and its people. Who knows what retaliation would have occured against the Japanese, even if they were citizens?

Today, the pendulum has swung the other way. Even no-citizens are protected from "racial profiling", a pc term that otherwise would just be a part of good investigative policing.

JPL
August 9, 2004, 01:50 PM
"Who knows what retaliation would have occured against the Japanese, even if they were citizens?"

So, the best way to protect them is to strip their Constitutional rights as citizens, deprive them of their property, imprison them without charge, and then, at the end of the war, give them a bus ticket back to their old community (and $50, let's not forget the magnamimity of the victorious nation), and let them try to figure out where they're going to live, how they're going to feed themselves and their families, etc.

It should be noted that some of the people who most vigorously pushed for removal of the Japanese from their homes and communities make killings in the post war years in the California real estate boom.

A number of them bought up many of properties that Japanese owners had to abandon...

As for potential violence, you only need to look to actual events to figure out exactly what happened.

Roosevelt signed the internment order in February, actual internments didn't start until April, and took many months to complete.

During that time, there were scattered acts of violence against Japanese Americans, but no large uprising.

It largely mirrored what was seen in the days following September 11.

Resentment against orientals was running high long before Pearl Harbor; it had been running high for literally years.

Lone_Gunman
August 9, 2004, 01:54 PM
Rounding up all the Germans and Italians would have been a lot harder, and as it was it drew a LOT more criticism.

Its not just because they were white.

The Japanese attacked us, the Germans didn't. Additionally, Pearl Harbor was a sneak attack, which served to infuriate Americans even more.

We also had a greater understanding of German and Italian culture, and less of Japanese culture. There is a natural tendency to fear the unknown.



You could tell that someone was a "devious slant" just by looking at him.

I am sure that prejudice played a roll, but also, if someone thought the Japanese were devious before Pearl Harbor, certainly a sneak attack a Pearl Harbor did nothing but reinforce that.

c_yeager
August 9, 2004, 02:01 PM
No has pointed out yet that the driving force behind the internment of Japanese Americans were several California polititions who's constituency had cast a greedy eye upon the farmlands belonging to the aforementioned Japanese. The internment of these people had a LOT more to do with an underhanded land grab than it did with the safety of America.

Case in point BOTH my grandfathers were of German descent and no one ever even suggested that they or their families be interred. Why is this, you ask, because my granfathers didnt have anything worth stealing...

R.H. Lee
August 9, 2004, 02:04 PM
So, the best way to protect them is to strip their Constitutional rights as citizens, deprive them of their property, imprison them without charge, and then, at the end of the war, give them a bus ticket back to their old community (and $50, let's not forget the magnamimity of the victorious nation), and let them try to figure out where they're going to live, how they're going to feed themselves and their families, etc

No, I'm not supporting the internment of the Japanese during WWII, only pointing out that you need to view it within the context of the times.

Harve Curry
August 9, 2004, 02:22 PM
And out of WWII came the American/japanese war hero and anti civil rights Sen.Inouye (or however you spell his name) from Hawiaii.
You'd think he'd know better.

JPL
August 9, 2004, 02:22 PM
"No has pointed out yet that the driving force behind the internment of Japanese Americans were several California polititions who's constituency had cast a greedy eye upon the farmlands belonging to the aforementioned Japanese."

Yes, yes I did.

Several messages before yours.



"The Japanese attacked us..."

Poor argument then, poor argument now.

The Japanese of JAPAN attacked the United States; no attack ever came from within the United States, and no Japanese-American was ever found to have been a spy for the Empire of Japan.

As noted before, most of the Japanese who were in the United States were citizens, not subjects of the Emperor.

Large numbers of them were born in the United States, and had never even visited Japan, yet they were still interned.



"You need to view it in the context of the times."

I'm perfectly capable of viewing it in the context of the times.

I also viewed your statement that internment was a good way to ensure the safety of the Japanese population in the United States.

What worries the hell out of me is that the case is being made that interning Arab-Americans for an indefinite period of time is just fine because they MAY do something inspecific at some ill-defined point in the future.

I see a lot of screaming about how absolute the Constitution is on this board, especially in regards to firearms.

Apparently the Constitution is a lot less absolute when it comes to protecting the rights of individuals who may be standing in the middle of a tidal wave of "we gotta do this because we gotta do it!"ism.

A correlary to the famous Animal Farm quote is in order...

"Everyone has Constitutional Rights. Some just have more Constitutional Rights than others."

dave3006
August 9, 2004, 04:18 PM
The arguement that we were protecting the Japanese Americans from the illegal activities of white Americans is the same logic Hitler used to round up the Jews. It was for their own protection.

Don't be an American Nazi.

CWatson
August 9, 2004, 04:51 PM
I still agree to disagree.I do not think interning the Japanese were wrong,siezing their private property however is another matter.Most Japanese immigrants still felt the emperor was god and his word alone is all it would take to cause trouble.

As far as the current situation with Arabs go we are not doing enough profiling in my opinion.The Islamic community is not doing enough,most hold the loyalties to their homelands.

Any country that is allowing terrorism to foster in their borders and not activey crushing it with military means will simply have no Visas issued to their citizens and their citizens not be allowed into or country,that inclueds Saudi Arabia.All student visas and working permits issued for their citizens by our country should be cancelled/revoked.The recruitment and ideoligy of the terrorist is spread through mosques.Their clerics should be investigated and if they are preaching Osama's tune their citizenship should be revoked and send them back to Mecca.

Citizenship used to mean that,you were a citizen of this country not just here for economic benefit.Their should be no duel citizenship allowed,you are American or not.


CW

JPL
August 10, 2004, 12:06 AM
"Most Japanese immigrants still felt the emperor was god and his word alone is all it would take to cause trouble."

Still bad logic/example, then.

The German-American Bund had between 5,000 and 10,000 active members in the United States.

There were similar Italian-American fascist organizations.

Virtually none of those individuals, whose ties to fascisism were proven by membership, were interned.

CWatson
August 10, 2004, 12:18 AM
Sorry JPL,good logic!

Italian facist and NeoNazis running around during wartime,now that was bad logic!

CW

JPL
August 10, 2004, 12:40 AM
So then I suppose it is good logic, as I've pointed out, that guns be taken out of the hands of otherwise law abiding citizens (or the citizens simply be locked up) because they MAY commit a crime.

It doesn't matter that there's no evidence that these people will commit crimes.

It only matters that these individuals have espoused reverence for their own particular God-form, the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

The disequal treatment of Japanese-Americans of no proven threat while allowing thousands of Italians and Germas of know, hostile association to run free shows in stark detail the racisism that was at work during this time.

Having surfed a few of the threads in the archives regarding the Civil War, I really have to wonder how people view Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeus corpus during the Civil War.

I get a funny feeling that it would largely break down into No HC for whites = bad, no HC for Arabs, Orientals, anyone who doens't look like "us," = good.

CWatson
August 10, 2004, 02:51 AM
JPL,

The big "R" word? That maybe used as a excuse but it not the reason.In already wrote I believe those who followed the the Nazi or Facist line should have been encamped themselves.


As for your HC compairison about non-whites,we were at war with the Japanese during WWII we are at war with Arabs NOW!

Look like us?

Who said I was White?

I am White with American Indian and Latino blood my wife is Asian,so or daughter is even less "white".

Racist no,culturist yes!

We are at war with a large part of the muslim "culture",the part who is not at war with us need to get their heads out of the sand and be counted or sent back to their much loved "homelands".

CW

wingman
August 10, 2004, 08:42 AM
We are at war with a large part of the muslim "culture",the part who is not at war with us need to get their heads out of the sand and be counted or sent back to their much loved "homelands".

I fully agree however after 40 years of PC training now what we will do
is restrict the freedoms of all Americans rather then a few, while I am not
suggestion we go "back" to all old ideas we most acknowledge that there
is a problem with some cultures and religions. We cannot accept all things
as good and expect to survive. Be kind, but carry a big stick.!!!

JPL
August 10, 2004, 10:35 AM
"Look like us?

Who said I was White?

I am White with American Indian and Latino blood my wife is Asian,so or daughter is even less "white"."

I couldn't even begin to care what you are.

I'm sorry that my use of the collective national "us," in which this nation is viewed (less today than 60 years ago) as White Anglo Saxon Protestant didn't come through.

Yes, we're at war.

We're not, however, at war with every single Arab everywhere around the world at the same time, nor are we at war with Islam, or even a large part of Islamic culture.

We're at war with the equivilent of the American ulta religious right (don't read anything into that, it's just an example).

A small, but active and vocal group that in no way represents the Christian religion as a whole.

To adopt that mentality that we are at war with Islam itself, instead of individuals who pervert the teachings of Islam, and to act on that, is to descend into the kind of darkness that took Germany in the 1930s and 1940s.

That is a far larger and more pervasive threat to the American way of life than small groups of Muslims carrying out terrorist attacks.

wingman
August 10, 2004, 11:28 AM
We're not, however, at war with every single Arab everywhere around the world at the same time, nor are we at war with Islam, or even a large part of Islamic culture.

While I would like to believe what you state, I have not seen this "culture"
come forward and say we are Americans and we will fight to preserve the
America way of life. One thing I believe is that the average American has
been so "brainwashed" by public schools and the media he cannot believe
that anyone thinks different then we, that is to say it is hard for us to understand how anyone puts religion first over his life, country, family,
friends, fact is I accept anyone if they will stand with me to fight for
freedom, but the the question is still there, at least for me.:confused:

c_yeager
August 10, 2004, 11:50 AM
I still agree to disagree.I do not think interning the Japanese were wrong,siezing their private property however is another matter.Most Japanese immigrants still felt the emperor was god and his word alone is all it would take to cause trouble.

Source?!

I've met several Japanese Americans from that era (incidentaly one of them is the only honest to god bona fide war hero i have ever met). And not a one of them fit into the mould you just cast. A lot of people left Japan for a reason in the first place.

DnPRK
August 10, 2004, 03:30 PM
I heard a story that the US code breakers and FBI had determined that there were in excess of 900 Japanese agents living on the West coast in 1941 and many more in Hawaii. Those agents were reporting status and movements of US troops, ships and planes to Tokyo. This was one of the reasons US planes & ships were neatly bunched together on Dec 7 - to protect from sabotage.

It seems only those Japanese who refused to move inland, away from the Pacific coast (California, Oregon & Washington) were interred. The reason they were interred was to get rid of the 900+ Japanese agents without tipping Tokyo that their codes were broken. Lots of American lives were saved during the war due to broken codes. The US victory at Midway and shoot down of the Japanese military genius Admiral Yamamoto were due to broken codes.

doger5
August 10, 2004, 04:06 PM
900 enemy agents. Right. Just like my grandfather who happened to be at the beach with his kids on December 7th 1941. If we were all the enemy, then why would my uncle be in the M.I.S. during the war, translating and interrogating Japanese prisoners. He ended up interrogating a cousin in the Phillipines.

My wife is Irish-German. She had family flee Germany with the help of one of Hitler's right hand man before the war. I presume it was Hess, but I don't know. Our daughter has alot of history in her from both sides of her family.

I was outside the DMV, in Torrance, California. A white male in his 50's called me a god damn jap. Those words still sting every time I think about it. I did nothing to this man. :fire:

Now think about this, if you continue the use of the word jap. And the next generation of children learn to use it. Are you not just continuing hate?

The attack on Pearl Harbor was over 60 years ago. The witnessess are dying every day. Then why does this one word continue?

Roger Yamamoto

Art Eatman
August 10, 2004, 06:17 PM
Fear and ignorance lead to Bad Things. The internment was wrong. It was wicked. It should not have happened.

The sad thing about the US/Japanese conflict is that it was foreseen in the late 1920s. Even so, the US Government did little in either the Congress, the White House, the Department of State or the War Department to consider the "What if?" of various potential problems--including how to deal (if at all) with citizens of Japanese descent.

As far as the Japanese governement and its army, well, I had cousins in the Philippines during the Occupation; I lived in Manila in 1949/1950 and went to school with others who had been interned. I knew such Filipinos as Yay and Marking who were guerillas against the Japanese, and a couple of Americans who survived "in the boonies" and fought the Japanese. Lotsa "war stories".

I ain't fergot that part of "the Jap deal", either. But it has nothing to do with how we mistreated and stole from our own loyal citizens of Japanese descent...

Art

rock jock
August 10, 2004, 06:59 PM
Very curious that part of my family apparently perished in the camps in Germany because they were German Jews, and someone actually hatched a plan here to put American Germans (including Jews), into camps, as well.
If it is okay to imprision U.S. citizens of Japanese decent for what they MIGHT do, then it must be okay to imprision gunowners for people they MIGHT shoot.

Don't be a Nazi.
The Japanese internment camps were clean and healthy. Those interned were well cared for with plenty to eat, a place to sleep, could live as families, were not subjected to forced labor, were not tortured, and finally, were released alive and well. You can question whether or not the camps were a good idea, but to compare them to the horrors of the concentration camps is disgusting.

Oh, and Dave, don't be a knee-jerk liberal who calls everyone they disagree with a Nazi. It displays a level of intellectual shallowness best reserved for the Diane Feinsteins of the world.

CWatson
August 10, 2004, 10:17 PM
JPL,

Of course you could not care less,since I am not what you assumed.

You are wrong on several of your examples.The vocal group may be a minority,but the fact is the majority back them but as most Arab states try the individuals try to seem "innocent".

My sources other than media?My wife and several of here brothers worked in Iraq,her brothers in Saudi Arabia,her sister and brother in law are in Abu Dabi right now.Before her family immigrated here they lived a large portion of their lives in the Middle East.Their first hand accounts of the Middle Eastern mindset,culture and views about the west are not the PC crap the media puts out no matter how you reword it and pass it on.

A large part of them hate us,that is a simple fact.This wishy washy BS is why this war will go on for decades.You know what they and those who support them hold in value,destroy it.Overseas,if they seek refuge in a historical mosque level it and the blocks around it.They will find less support the next block over .Find them in our borders helping terrorist groups,deport them,if citizen ,revoke it and ship them back to Mecca.

I am no fan of the extreme right but your own example will prove my point about the Islamic culture.If some right wing zeolots crashed a plane into a building you would not find a large part of rest of the Christian world dancing in the streets,even if it was a abortion clinic.Remember to them it is OK to kill those who do not agree with them,example "Infidels"

The "perversed" form of Islam is the very norm now.

Quit the panzy BS,there can only be one winner in a war.A large part of Islam and the Arab world is waging war against us accept it or help them win.

The round and round racism charge is a old excuse too.Seems like the ones always throwing that around are the most racist groups themselves.


CW

goosegunner
August 11, 2004, 06:56 AM
...there can only be one winner in a war...

but if you are not careful, you can end opp with a lot more than one looser.

Leatherneck
August 11, 2004, 07:36 AM
Those words still sting every time I think about it. I did nothing to this man. I'm sorry.

Man, that frosts my butt! If it is any help, let me assure you that every time I remember what happened to you, I will feel a little sadness on your behalf. Some people's kids...:rolleyes:

I have a friend--a U.S. Army Colonel of the MD variety--who was born in an internment camp in Texas in the middle of WW II. He was here with us in the Pentagon at 9:35 AM on September 11th. Instead of evacuating with the rest of us, he went next door, into the rubble and heat to give what aid he could to the burned and injured survivors, defying security to do so. He never left for over 36 hours, rendering what aid he could, until the triage and evac process was well established. He's a pretty damned good soldier for this country who forced his citizen parents into prison for simply being of Japanese descent. Think about that.

TC
TFL Survivor

dave3006
August 11, 2004, 08:16 AM
Rock jock, you are funny. I am no liberal. The Nazi's imprissoned people for "their own protection". A previous poster claimed we did the same. The analogy applies. You can't deprived an American citizen their freedom without cause. Just because you are afraid doesn't cut it.

Sistema1927
August 11, 2004, 09:47 AM
What amazes me most about the experience of Japanese-Americans during WWII is the fact that many young men from those internment camps enlisted in the Armed Forces, and then went on to distinguish themselves in combat in the ETO.

They fought for freedom when their families were not free, much the same way that black troops served in the era of "Jim Crow".


I don't know if I would have done the same if I was in their position, but I believe that they had a dream for a better America, one that would not deny equality and opportunity due to race. We may not be there yet, but I pray that we are closer to this ideal.

c_yeager
August 11, 2004, 10:59 AM
The Japanese internment camps were clean and healthy. Those interned were well cared for with plenty to eat, a place to sleep, could live as families, were not subjected to forced labor, were not tortured, and finally, were released alive and well. You can question whether or not the camps were a good idea, but to compare them to the horrors of the concentration camps is disgusting.

Ever been to Manzanar? I visited it on my way to DEATH VALLEY cause thats where it is. They placed these camps in the most God Forsaken places they possibly could.

Incidentaly one of my Grandmothers good friends miscarred and developed a chronic lung infection during her internment (by interesting coincidence this is the wife of the war hero that i had previously mentioned).

I do however agree that the camps do not compare to Germanies concentration camps in conditions. Howver i do believe that they compare in terms of motivation. They were both established to "concentrate" an undesireable class/ethnicity of people. And this was done with the consent of the civilian populace. In those terms they most definatly compare with Germany's camps. And i think that comparisson is quite important.

rock jock
August 11, 2004, 11:19 AM
They were both established to "concentrate" an undesireable class/ethnicity of people.
The Nazi concentration camps were designed specifically with the goal of extermination. The Japanese camps were designed for internment.

BTW, your grandmother's friend's miscarriage was not unique among the general populace. Average health care was positively primitive compare to today, and that was the case for 90% of all Americans.

I have read stories and seen footage of the camps. I never claimed that they were a vacation at Club Med. But, I stand by my claim that the interned Japanese were not mistreated and cared for in accordance with the standard of living that existed at that time.

rock jock
August 11, 2004, 11:24 AM
The Nazi's imprissoned people for "their own protection".
Hey Dave, I'm glad you find me funny. You should read some of my older posts for comic relief. In the meantime, you should brush up on your history. The Nazis never intended the Concentrations Camps to protect anybody. They were designed specifically for extermination of the Jews, not to hold them in one place until hostilities ceased. Your analogy also falls apart on the assertion that the Japanese internment camps were meant to protect the Japanese. They were meant to isolate the Japanese as a possible security threat.

c_yeager
August 11, 2004, 12:58 PM
BTW, your grandmother's friend's miscarriage was not unique among the general populace. Average health care was positively primitive compare to today, and that was the case for 90% of all Americans.

And how many of the average Americans who miscarried at that time did so while being imprisoned in a ramshackle building in 50 degree temperatures without access to health care despite premature contractions and uterine bleeding? her son was delivered dead, into her husbands hands in a pool of blood. Incidentally she had successfully given birth on two prior occassions.

rock jock
August 11, 2004, 01:26 PM
c,

I'm not going to argue with the specifics of this particular case, because I am not familiar with them. I will say that the incidence of infant mortality at that time was VERY high compared to today. One factor that contributed to that problem was the lack of available medical resources for MOST of the American populace.

If you enjoyed reading about "WWII internment of Japanese Americans, racial profiling" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!