[The Nip]

I'm wondering what you folks think of these two possibilities.

I've been hearing folks speak of the need for internment camps again, only this time, it'll be the Arabs/Muslims we'd be locking up. As with the supposed Jap situation in 1941, we've likely got dozens, hundreds or even thousands of America-Hating terrorists living in our country, legally, and hoping to do us harm.

Unlike the Japs, however, these Muslims fanatics are obviously willing to blow-up innocent civilians (and actually prefer this), rather than just military bases and ships. And all of these people are whole-heartedly welcomed into the country by liberal politicians and democrats looking for votes.

As horrible as it may seem, if a semi-working executive order to lock-up 1st/2nd generation Arabs were to arise, would you support it??


Secondly, let's imagine that such an order passes, and 1st/2nd generation Arabs are locked in camps. How many do you think would volunteer (like the Japanese 442nd and 101st) to serve our country in a war against their (parent's) homelands?

Perhaps it's rather biased of me, but I can hardly imagine these individuals, being as they've proven themselves to be, to stand-up and participate in a war against their ethnic counterparts.

From what the news has been reporting, there seems to be a general sentiment among the Arab-"American" community that any war against Iraq would be a horrible violation of human rights, and they vehemently opposed our actions in Afghanistan (a former friend of mine, 2nd generation Pakistani, was outraged with our hunt for Bin Laden). A significant number of them actually sympathize with the 9-11 hijackers!

I'm wondering what you folks think on this very touchy subject. My friends and I are constantly debating on whether or not the camps are a good idea, and whether we can expect Arabs living in America to join our cause.


The Nip

[Jack19]

First, unless bombings start happening in the US, who knows, they might, I don't see internment camps happening.... and even then, I'd be VERY doubtful. We can't even control our borders, how are we going to find the Islamists?

No one called for internment camps when John Muhammad and Lee Malvo murdered, what? 10-12 people?

As far as volunteering, I'm still waiting for one Islamist.... just one...to repudiate 1400 years of the Koran's call to kill infidels. Of course, if one did, his life wouldn't be worth squat....just ask Salman Rushdie.

I grew up in Detroit and am familiar with the Dearborn area....I'm not holding my breath for either.

[Lone_Gunman]

Are you talking about citizens, or resident aliens?

You probably wont get much support for the idea of locking up citizens of the US right now... unless something terrible horrible happens.

As for people here on visas, or resident non-citizens, I think it would just be better, cheaper, and more humane just to make them leave and go back the whatever Islamic cess pool they came from.

[Marko Kloos]

Internment camps for American citizens are always unconstitutional tyranny, no matter what the ancestry of the detainees. Anyone who supports interning their neighbor is not my friend, and not a friend of freedom.

This country suffers from a pervasive amnesia when it comes to the mistakes of the past. Locking up the Nisei was one of the greatest injustices ever committed in the name of the Land of the Free, and it boggles my mind to hear that some people are seriously discussing whether a repetition of that injustice would be a good idea.

:barf:

As horrible as it may seem, if a semi-working executive order to lock-up 1st/2nd generation Arabs were to arise, would you support it??

Such an order would be illegal and unconstitutional, and I would treat anyone who supports or enforces it as an enemy of this country and a traitor to the Constitution.

[buzz_knox]

Internment camps for noncombatants have been held to be illegal by the Supreme Court, and are morally repugnant in any event. No, I wouldn't support them in any way.

[The Nip]

Lendringser, I apologize if I came off in an offensive manner. I'm not SUPPORTING camps outright, and if you're going to compare this to the "Nisei," then you might find this interesting:

I'm a 5th generation Jap-American. Yep...full Jap. And yes, I happily use the term "Jap" because it's a hell of a lot easier to type than the politically correct version.

My grandfather (Sansei, since you seem to know the terms) was in medical school when E.O 9066 came around, and was thrown into Manzanar for two years. He could speak the language, so he volunteered for Intelligence where he helped to break the "Jap Code."

Several others in my family volunteered and fought for the 442nd, which you military buffs have undoubtedly heard of.

My grandpa was on his way to becoming a doctor, but lost his scholarship when he was imprisoned. He couldn't afford to return to school, and never realized that dream.

BUT, you would never, ever hear him whining about being thrown in a camp, nor will you hear me, because we understand that SOMETIMES, certain actions must be taken under certain situations. Sure, they may be horrible in retrospect, but they resolve an immediate need which was desired by the MAJORITY of Americans. This is a democracy, after all.

Oh, does anyone remember how every survivor of the camps got payed off $10k? We didn't see a cent of that, and rightfully, since my grandps died before that bill passed (slave reparationists, take a hint).

According to the liberals, I supposedly have every right to run around screaming bloody murder, with both my hands out expecting a freebie...but you won't hear that from me, and you won't hear it from my family. Instead, I'm currently on my way to the Air Force.

Unlike many of these Arab "citizens" here, I'm an American and damned proud of it...and unlike these American-born Muslim terrorists, the only country I'm willing to die for is THE ONE I WAS BORN IN. I do appreciate Japan's culture, naturally, but you won't find me-- An American-- standing in line to fight for the Imperial Nippon Army (as you might our Arab counterparts).

I won't actively support internment camps....but if they come to be, I sure as hell won't oppose them.


NIP

[buzz_knox]

Many believe that the US and Japan will one day become opponents again. If that happens, will you object if we take all Japanese-Americans and put them in camps again?

[Baba Louie]

Lendringser,

Earl Warren was one of the main men responsible for that action back in '42. California's AG at the time, I believe.

And what did he go on to do? Anyone?

Remember Orwells pigs in Animal Farm...

Anything can (and probably will) happen. I work with a woman who is Hawaiian/Japanese. Her father spent the entire war in a camp on Oahu. He was Born and raised on the island... It wasn't even a state, just a territory.

Never say never.

Adios

[The Nip]

[Many believe that the US and Japan will one day become opponents again. If that happens, will you object if we take all Japanese-Americans and put them in camps again?[/

I'd not object to the internment of 1st and 2nd-generations Japanese IF (as with the Arab perpetrators) it was solidly proven that such individuals living within our country sought to harm us...for example, September 11th.

As for me...I highly doubt that with my family's record of service to this country, combined with my soon-to-be record, any logical person could consider myself a threat.

Like I said, I am NO fan of locking folks up, but if a short stay in a fenced hotel for CONFIRMED THREATS saves even one innocent life...then I'm going to give it the nod.

I've seen the 442nd, but I have yet to see an Arabic Muslim American come out to support our war on terrorism.


NIP

[Tamara]

This is a democracy, after all.

Actually, no; it's a constitutional republic.

The difference is that there are certain rights that are not subject to majority rule. No matter how many people vote to lock up innocent people, it is still immoral and repugnant to the Constitution.

[buzz_knox]

I've seen the 442nd, but I have yet to see an Arabic Muslim American come out to support our war on terrorism.

First, the 442nd was a segregated unit, which we don't have anymore. Do you think that there aren't "Arabic Muslim Americans" in the armed forces right now? Second, remember that terrorist cell captured in Buffalo? The local arabic community dropped the dime on them, just as they've been cooperating around the country. The fact is that most Arab-Americans see themselves as Americans when it counts. Their whole culture says to hash out their differences with the rest of us as much as they have to, but Allah help anyone who messes with the country as a whole.

[geekWithA.45]

Internment camps....morally repugnant, wrongheaded, and a sign of a frightened society that cannot discriminate the good guys from the bad guys.

And it is ALWAYS that fear, uncertainty and doubt that drives otherwise honest people into that dark place where the rights and perogatives of the few are held in contempt by the many, for the good of the country, the society, or the chiiiiiiiiiiildren.

America, and Americans can be such a paradox, noble, brave and compassionate, representing the very best of humanity, while at the same time....not.


The dark spector that whispers "round em up, put em in a camp" is the exact same dark spirit that says, "the People cannot be trusted with arms. Round em up, and melt em down, it's for their own good."

We are only as free as the least among us.

Remember that.

[Ebbtide]

I've been hearing folks speak of the need for internment camps again, only this time, it'll be the Arabs/Muslims we'd be locking up.

Nip, what folks are you hanging out with? This is a case of extreme paranoia gone bad and is a laughable idea.

I wonder if these "folks" understand that there are some 10 million (maybe more) first and second generation arabs, muslims, middle easterns living in our fine country.

If it came to internment camps I would not support them and make every attemp to free my fellow American from captivity!!

[The Nip]

Internment is, without a doubt, unconstitutional. It's a horrible consequence of the inevitable evils in the world.

If you look through those old pictures from Manzanar, Tule Lake, etc., and see how so many genuinely decent people had their lives ruined....pictures of mothers holding their children, all the while knowing that their oldest son might be dead, fighting for the same country which placed them in those camps....it's hard to look at.

Emotionally, morally, ethically...it's one of the worst things we can do.

Logically, however, there will always remain a bit of reason in confining possible enemies. Ethos and pathos have no place in warfare. That's all I'm trying to say. That's why I'm not supporting it, but won't oppose it.


NIP

[Baba Louie]

BUT...
Let's not forget ALL of our glorious history...
Waaaay back when, the Cherokee people tried to "Get Along" with the white man, emulate their/our culture, schools, language, money, farming, etc.
But the land they had was too good and the white man wanted it. I believe it was Andy Jackson in the Executive Mansion at the time...
Congress (w/ Jackson's backing) said they had to go. The Supreme Court said NO. Jackson basically told SCOTUS to go whizz up a rope as they had no army to back up their decree that relocation of said Cherokee nation was UN-CONSTITUTIONAL... thus the Trail of Tears and Cherokee (what remained) are now in Oklahoma.
Then there was Lincoln. Habeas Corpus you say? Suspended for the Duration.
I could go on but why bother?
Here's to hoping that the movie "The Seige" never really occurs, but it could be one of those Life initating Art imitating Life things.
...and it wouldn't surprise me a bit, what with The Patriot Act and its little brother pending, Hillary, Ted, Chuck and Diane with George's team not faring much better in regards to Civil and/or Constitutional considerations.

But I think if things go south over in the far east, we'd back Japan in regards to NK action... as long as it doesn't P.O. the big dragon too much.

Kinda looks like things could shape up into another major world war, don't it?

Adios

[Oleg Volk]

I'm still waiting for one Islamist.... just one...to repudiate 1400 years of the Koran's call to kill infidels.

Let's start with the gentleman who is currently making THR happen. The tech expertise and the resources didn't come from me. Somehow I doubt that he's into making his religion into the law of the state, or that he wants all the non-believers dead.

I won't actively support internment camps....but if they come to be, I sure as hell won't oppose them.


I will oppose them. Trust in the good will of anyone who wants to put another ethnic group into camps is misplaced...remember that obscure incident in Europe where about eight million people got misplaced up a smoke-stack?

In my humble opinion, the person(s) who initiated and authorized internment camps for the Nissei needed to hang after a trial on the charges of human rights violation. Next time, I hope, lots of decent Americans (including those of the un-affected ethnic or religious groups) would go hunting for whoever tries to repeat that shameful fragment of history.

[Ian]

The Japanese interment camps were created by Executive Order (#9066), and dismantled by the Supreme Court only on a technicality. Several other Court decisions upheld the camps and related discriminatory laws (Yasui vs US 1943, Hirabayashi vs US 1943, Korematsu vs US 1944). If we get hit by a particularly nasty and well-planned terrorist attack, I think there is definitely some potential for internment of Arabs. It would be fairly easy to pull off legally, if people didn't strenuously object. If the government argued national security, I think the Supreme Court would let them get away with it.

The Nip - The idea of imprisoning thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of people for their ancestry or religion is nauseating. How could you condone such an action and retain any respect whatosever for human rights? Rights are innate and inalienable - they do not ever become void because of the actions of another person or group of persons.

[The Nip]

The Nip - The idea of imprisoning thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of people for their ancestry or religion is nauseating. How could you condone such an action and retain any respect whatosever for human rights? Rights are innate and inalienable - they do not ever become void because of the actions of another person or group of persons.

I, in no way, shape or form, will ever CONDONE internment. Like I said, I had the opportunity to see how it can affect people, and it's not something I'd ever wish for.

However, when it comes to the innocent lives of Americans, I do believe (with utmost regret) that causing grief to a few, to SAVE INNOCENT LIVES, if a threat can be proven, is a justifiable measure.

I'd rather have some violated "citizens" than dead "victims." Again, the key words are "proven threat."


NIP

[Oleg Volk]

It is an ineffective way to prevent a threat. Let's see..."we" doubt the loyalty of an ethnic group..."we" imprison 95% of that ethnic group and try to catch the other 5%. Guess what -- some of the 5% and some of their friends and relatives of other ethnicities just got a strong, overwhelming urge to camp out someplace close to "us" with a scoped 30-06. Talk about creating a threat where none has existed before.

Himmler got his early on. Eichmann got more breathing time. Jaruzelski (http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0826016.html) is still stealing oxygen, though not for the lack of efforts to fix that. Violating human rights is not condusive to loyalty, nor does it eliminate genuine threats as well as it is purported to do...hmmm, could it have something to do with "I serve my King, and serve my grudge as well.", as De Guiche phrased it in Cyrano de Bergerac".

As for even being able to tell a Moslem from a "real American (TM)", here's a Moslem of Irish origins (http://www.olegvolk.net/newphotos/tn/eva2_s.jpg) for you. Would she be exept from internment? If no, how would anyone tell who she is? If yes, what do you think she'd do to avenge the mistreatment of her husband and children? Mistreatment of innocent people base don what they "might" do is a sure way to cause some hard feelings...and it is not only counter-productive, it is also entirely wrong. People being mistreated may well do what the interned Americans did during WW2 and try to show loyalty...and maybe do something else when no one is watching. My own request for polite language is hampering a more verbatim vocalization of what I think about the wizdom and the legality of such an idea.

[SodaPop]

The best thing Islamic extremists could do to this country is turn ethnic group against ethnic group. This country is far more racially diverse than it was back in the 40's. People in this country can't tell the difference between a Sikh, Muslem, Hindu or half the Asian or Middle-eastern people. Just about every guy that drives a Taxi in Philadelphia is a Sikh. There were several attacks in Phildelphia, against Sikhs, after 9/11.

How many people in this country think the people who run Dunkin Donuts are a Muslem? I've heard all the jokes but some people are just flat out stupid. Do Muslems have dots on their heads??? Should we lump Hindus in with Muslems? Whats that war between India and Pakastan over?? I get a magazine on India culture in America (the ones from India not American Indians). There are incedences all over college campuses where Indians have been attacked for being Bin Laden supporters.:confused:

The only thing I think that would be legitimate if there were an enormous number of terrorist attacks in this country would be for the INS to set up camps for Illegal immigrants from sensitive countries. If they aren't here legally we have a right to detain them.

[Blackhawk]

Bad idea then.

Bad idea now.

[JohnK]

However, when it comes to the innocent lives of Americans, I do believe (with utmost regret) that causing grief to a few, to SAVE INNOCENT LIVES, if a threat can be proven, is a justifiable measure.


That's the same argument the antis use to try and ban firearms. The thing is the Constitution spells out certain freedoms, we live with certain risks because of those freedoms.

[chaim]

Unlike the Japs, however, these Muslims fanatics are obviously willing to blow-up innocent civilians (and actually prefer this), rather than just military bases and ships. And all of these people are whole-heartedly welcomed into the country by liberal politicians and democrats looking for votes.Yes, some fanatics are terrorists. In WWII some Japanese (not Japanese-Americans however) were willing to fly planes into ships killing themselves.

You know what, when we put the Japanese Americans into camps, most other Americans thought they were a real fifth column threat as well. History proved them wrong. In Hawaii few, if any US citizens were locked up for being of Japanese ancestry. In the midwest and east no one was locked up. How many acts of sabotague were there? (Hint, less than one). How many were thwarted by intelligence or the police that otherwise would have happened? (Hint, again less than one).

Today, most Arab-Americans and most Muslim-Americans are not terrorists. They are no more threat to the US than Japanese-Americans in WWII, or you or me now.


The fact that some terrorists have blended into the community is not a reason to treat them all as criminals.


As horrible as it may seem, if a semi-working executive order to lock-up 1st/2nd generation Arabs were to arise, would you support it??

G-d no!

Do I have some problems with portions of the Arab-American community. Certainly. I dislike that a substantial portion approve of groups who are trying to destroy my people in Israel. I don't like that a large minority strongly support suicide bombings in Israel. I don't like that a large minority give directly to anti-Israel terrorist groups and even more give to groups that give to terrorist groups.

However, many are anti-Israel, but very few are anti-America. They serve in our military, in our police forces, in our fire departments. They teach our children, they run businesses. They felt the horror and sadness of 9/11 deep in their bones just like the rest of us. Whether you like it or not, Arab-Americans and Muslims are Americans! Most love this country. Most work towards making their lives and their families lives better (like all other Americans). Many work towards making this a better country. They are just like you and me.

If they can be interned now, then we can later if the powers that be see fit to do so. When will we learn from the mistakes of the past?



As to your constant implication that even non-terrorist Arabs and Muslims, including born Arab and Muslim Americans are disloyal and not willing to serve, I'd like to ask where you get your information. If you are basing it on proportion of society, well no middle class or above group serves in any large numbers (at least among the enlisted personnel). There are plenty of Arab-Americans and Muslims in the military. When I was in basic training there were as many Muslims (including a few who were quite religious) as there were practicing Catholics there with me.



As a side note, you really shouldn't be using the term "Jap". If, as you claim, you are Japanese-American you really should know better. That has never been used as anything but a derogatory term. While you're at it why not call me a "kike", my dad "half mick, half krout", a friend of mine a "nigg-r", another friend of mine a "wap", etc.? It was a common term in WWII, but we were fighting a war for survival w/ the Japanese. Not to mention that the other mentioned terms were also quite common (and unacceptable). Such language has no place in polite circles.

[Art Eatman]

A bit off-thread, but I note the fears which led to the internment of Japanese during WW II are the same sort of fears which have given us the Patriot Act and this Dept. of Homeland Insecurity.

The trouble with this sort of discussion is the "lumping", seems to me.

Odds are, Islamic-background citizens are a very low-risk group. Resident aliens are a bit of another matter, given the concept of "Sleeper Agents" of the cold War era. Resident aliens, seems to me, are worthy of some further background investigations.

And then there are those who just don't have the proper paperwork to be here. Doesn't matter if they're sneaking around after a student-visa has expired, or walked across the border with no papers at all. These, I want GONE. Another bone in my craw is the phoney "political asylum" BS that lets so many illegals walk the streets...

But full-bore internment camps ala WW II? I just don't see them as necessary, much less moral or Constitutional.

$0.02, Art

[chaim]

Odds are, Islamic-background citizens are a very low-risk group. Resident aliens are a bit of another matter, given the concept of "Sleeper Agents" of the cold War era. Resident aliens, seems to me, are worthy of some further background investigations.
Agreed.

And then there are those who just don't have the proper paperwork to be here. Doesn't matter if they're sneaking around after a student-visa has expired, or walked across the border with no papers at all. These, I want GONE. Another bone in my craw is the phoney "political asylum" BS that lets so many illegals walk the streets... I agree, but that applies to all nationalities and ethnicities.

[BamBam-31]

Define irony.

According to your definition of democracy, it'd be okay to gut an individual for his organs if they'd save the lives of five other people. I don't think this is the world we live in.

It was wrong back then; if we do it again, we haven't learned from our past mistakes. You don't need to throw people of another race, religion, or ethnicity into a camp to prove your loyalty to America.

Sorry, but I find even the suggestion to be offensive. You've been watching "The Siege," haven't you?

[wingman]

No matter how you spin it we let some very bad folks into this country, to me
the question is do you take the freedom
from all Americans as we seem to be doing to protect the rights of a small group.??? Like it or not if it continues as
is we all lose.

[Tamara]

As far as volunteering, I'm still waiting for one Islamist.... just one...to repudiate 1400 years of the Koran's call to kill infidels.

That's pretty damn funny, actually, considering that you're typing that on a board whose hardware and bandwidth are wholly supplied by a follower of Islam.

How's that fillet of sole taste? ;)

[Mute]

Like I said, I am NO fan of locking folks up, but if a short stay in a fenced hotel for CONFIRMED THREATS saves even one innocent life...then I'm going to give it the nod.

Impounding every American's car and controlling who gets to use them would undoubtedly save a great number of innocent lives as well. That is a very poor reason for justifying an atrocious act.

Either we are a land of freedom or we live in tyranny. You can try to find a middle ground, but history suggest that middle grounds generally turn out to be excuses to head in the wrong direction.

I will not now or ever support internment of any kind.

[T.Stahl]

I find the mere fact that Americans need to discuss whether or not internment camps for people of Muslim faith could be considered - and whether or not such orders should be opposed - very disturbing. :(

[Chris Rhines]

Forcible internment of anyone is a repulsive and disgusting idea, and I question the humanity of anyone who would fail to strenously oppose such a travesty. You should be ashamed of yourself.

- Chris

[ahadams]

Uh Folks,

The reason the internment camps existed was to isolate and monitor a group of people. They functioned, in part, because of the limits to the technology (communications, and others) available at the time.

I would submit that in this day and age, that sort of large scale isolation is virtually impossible to enforce for any length of time.

just my 2 cents' worth,

[cordex]

I'd not object to the internment of 1st and 2nd-generations Japanese IF (as with the Arab perpetrators) it was solidly proven that such individuals living within our country sought to harm us...for example, September 11th.
Proof can be rendered on a case-by-case basis ... but I fail to see how ethnicity falls in to question if it can be "solidly proven" that individuals are an immediate threat.
Or are you implying that "Some of 'em done it, so more of 'em 'll do it!"?

[Jim March]

NO. Hell no.

If we get to the point where individual attacks like that are happening across the US, we're far better off having the Feds mandate a good 50-state-plus-DC CCW system for national security the same way the Israelis have done versus mass internment camps :barf:.

[Oleg Volk]

I find the mere fact that Americans need to discuss whether or not internment camps for people of Muslim faith could be considered - and whether or not such orders should be opposed - very disturbing.
Danes once wore yellow stars to show solidarity with jews targeted by the Nazis. Americans, at least my friends, are far more likely to show solidarity by taking the fight to those who start it. Never again -- and that includes all innocents, not just politically correct varieties! Besides, I suspect that most people who came here wanted to get away from the nutcases running their countries of origin, not support them.

If we go to war with Russia, should I be interned? How about Skunkabilly and twoblink, should we tangle with China? Anyone with French ancestry here? Blame them for the current French policy, while at it...

Disgusting!

[DeltaElite]

NO, NO, NO.

[geekWithA.45]

Not in my America, and Not On My Watch.

I, the Person (of We the People fame) will neither tolerate nor accept the mass, indiscriminate roundup of anyone.

Period.

End of Story.


If need be, I have bolt cutters.

[buzz_knox]

Forcible internment of anyone is a repulsive and disgusting idea, and I question the humanity of anyone who would fail to strenously oppose such a travesty. You should be ashamed of yourself. There's a touch of irony here. You would question the humanity of this person, but wouldn't you agree that said person has absolutely no duty to oppose this matter? Isn't that what you argued in a recent thread, that we owe no duty to anyone beyond ourselves and, possibly, our loved ones? So what gives you the right to question someone else who chooses not to get involved?

[Tamara]

There's a difference between being disgusted at someone's apathy and feeling that one has the right to compel them (via force) to get involved... ;)

[buzz_knox]

There was never a question of compelling someone via force to get involved, so the distinction is invalid. But even assuming that was the issue and there was a difference, when one argues that we should not question a person's decison not to get involved or call that person a coward, that person gives up the right to rely upon the difference. Basically, sauce for the goose and whatnot. :)

[cordex]

Forcible internment of anyone is a repulsive and disgusting idea, and I question the humanity of anyone who would fail to strenously oppose such a travesty. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Yeah, but we get in trouble when we attempt to use the more appropriate summary executions for crimes that would otherwise require some sort of negative feedback.

[Frohickey]

I won't actively support internment camps....but if they come to be, I sure as hell won't oppose them.

The failure to condemn an activity is indeed, an offer of tacit approval.
All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke

[Frohickey]

If we go to war with Russia, should I be interned? How about Skunkabilly and twoblink, should we tangle with China? Anyone with French ancestry here? Blame them for the current French policy, while at it...

Skunky and twoblink are too tactical to get caught... wait... thats only Skunky. Twoblink is too practical and logistical. :D

If Skunky and twoblink were interned, I would bet that Skunky will be the perpetual escapee, while twoblink would be the person to go to if you needed something.

[Byron Quick]

As this is a constitutional republic, the concept of the majority of Americans supporting such a position is irrelevant. Internment would be unconstitutional if every American supported it. But what about a constitutional amendment? Sorry, that's not workable either: there are possible changes that are so diametrically opposed to the spirit and letter of the Constitution as to render the entire document null and void upon their inclusion as amendments. This concept is one such change. Repeal of any of the Bill of Rights is another. Furthermore, those Americans who supported internment would be my enemies in the same degree as the Islamist terrorists.

Also, the issue of "solid proof"...I do not believe such proof exists for the Americans of Japanese descent who were interned during WWII.

Just the other day, I was on the Congressional Medal of Honor web site. Going through the names for WWII, I was struck by the disproportionate number of Japanese names. So here's to the 442nd!

[cuchulainn]

Not much more for me to add, so I'll simply add my voice to the chorus:

NO!

[Jack19]

Let's start with the gentleman who is currently making THR happen. The tech expertise and the resources didn't come from me. Somehow I doubt that he's into making his religion into the law of the state, or that he wants all the non-believers dead.
That's pretty damn funny, actually, considering that you're typing that on a board whose hardware and bandwidth are wholly supplied by a follower of Islam.

Frankly, I thank him for some really fine work. I wish blessings upon him and his family.

But it doesn't change what the Koran says, or that the Islamic world had been all too silent in its condemnation of terror.

[JPM70535]

I would be adamently opposed to internment camps for U.S citizens of Arab extraction, or any other ethnic background . What I would not be opposed to would be the Questioning of every individual of those persuasions. And during the course of such questioning, if said individuals are found to be illegally, then detain them until they can be deported back to the cess pools from whence they came. Certainly the present policy of doing nothing to rid our country of possible potential terrorists can't continue.

I am not at all sure that I believe that the Founding Fathers had illegal immigrants who could pose a threat to our country in mind when they put forth the Bill of Rights. They are probably turning over in their graves at the present happenings.


KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE, AND YOUR ENEMIES CLOSER

[P12]

won't actively support internment camps....but if they come to be, I sure as hell won't oppose them. Human rights are "black or white"

There is no "grey" or "shades of grey"

Either you are against something or not.

Either you are for something or not.

When it comes to human rights obstaining is not an option.

PERIOD!:fire:

[Dave Markowitz]

HELL NO!

[T.Stahl]

Oleg, of course I find it disturbing that someone might even think about interning anyone.

[Moondancer]

Simply put, as I'm married to a Muslim, you can take my wife away when you pry my cold dead fingers off from her!

:fire:

[BamBam-31]

How about Skunkabilly and twoblink, should we tangle with China?

twoblink's not Chinese, he's Formosan. :D ;)

Oleg, don't axe this one (unless it gets ugly, of course). Leave it on a pike.

[The Nip]

I was reading some of the analogies here, where the constitutional issues regarding internment were compared to our 2nd Amendment rights, and I think...I was probably wrong in my train of thought. I never did think of things that way.

:confused:

What was that quote...about anyone willing to sacrifice a small bit of our rights for temporary safety deserves no rights at all? It's true that there can be no grey areas, so I'll admit that a passive approach to opposition would indeed be wrong. I would have to say now that I'd actively oppose the idea.

Oh well, I'd better stop staying up so late. Apparently my logic is lacking after 3am.


NIP

[Frohickey]

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security - Benjamin Franklin

And who said that people that play with electricity are wrong in the head. ;)

[Baba Louie]

When and if the bad stuff ever occurs in one or more of the larger cities and a mass exodus occurs, don't think for a minute that the government, in its infinite wisdom, would not institute a series of ..."Refugee Camps... replete with piped in water, some form of fencing (to protect the inhabitants) and a guard or two to "Keep an Eye" on things.

Martial Law CAN be declared, it WILL be declared if deemed necessary by the oligarchy and you can throw the Constitution out the window. We can call it anything we like but it
could happen for our own good.

Would we place one group of people based on race, creed, etc behind concertina wire? I don't think I would, but I'm not in charge and no one particular group is now causing trouble on a scale so large that such an act would be deemed necessary for the defense of der fadderland... yet.

Again I say, never say never.

Here's to hoping that this course of action is NEVER required or acted upon.

Adios

[P12]

:)

[DadOfThree]

Wrong then.. Wrong now :fire:

[Gray Peterson]

As horrible as it may seem, if a semi-working executive order to lock-up 1st/2nd generation Arabs were to arise, would you support it??

Not only would I not support it, if the people being interned are not anti-American (believe or not, there are some Arabs in this country who are citizens, and love this country dearly, and to the constitution for which it stands), I'd called for an armed revolt against the US government. Internment camps have no place in this country, and it may be the straw that breaks the camels back in terms of "long train of abuses and usurpations talked about in the Declaration of Independence.

[Gray Peterson]

Simply put, as I'm married to a Muslim, you can take my wife away when you pry my cold dead fingers off from her!

I think that's what it's going to have to amount to if that ever happens. My question to all of you who have a spouse who's Muslim....

Are you willing to die to protect their freedom? Are you willing to kill LEO or military personnel to make sure they aren't interned, even if your death occurs and they're still interned?

Better to die fighting then be led into the gas chambers...

[Don Gwinn]

Some lines are hard to cross, some are easy. We've all had the long draw-out debates over whether we would start shooting when confiscation begins, when a curfew is declared, etc. It's almost impossible to answer such questions now.

But my family is different. My wife is not a Muslim, but yes, if anyone tried to take her or my sons, I'd tell them to stop once and then start shooting.

Let me be clear: THR has a policy against advocating illegal actions. I do not believe it would be illegal to use force to stop my wife's kidnappers, even if they were sanctioned by the government. The government doesn't have the legal power to give that sanction, so all I'd be doing is preventing a felony kidnapping. Perhaps that's wrong, but that's my opinion.

[Bahadur]

No need to add anything more, but I do want to point out one especially special thing I read here.

Chaim wrote:Do I have some problems with portions of the Arab-American community. Certainly. I dislike that a substantial portion approve of groups who are trying to destroy my people in Israel. I don't like that a large minority strongly support suicide bombings in Israel. I don't like that a large minority give directly to anti-Israel terrorist groups and even more give to groups that give to terrorist groups.

However, many are anti-Israel, but very few are anti-America. They serve in our military, in our police forces, in our fire departments. They teach our children, they run businesses. They felt the horror and sadness of 9/11 deep in their bones just like the rest of us. Whether you like it or not, Arab-Americans and Muslims are Americans! Most love this country. Most work towards making their lives and their families lives better (like all other Americans). Many work towards making this a better country. They are just like you and me.
You, Sir, are a real gentleman and a patriot. Moreover, you are a thinking, rational person. I know full well that the Middle East can be a very emotional topic for many Americans of Jewish background. Yet, you are able to trascend this, this Old World squabble, to see your fellow Americans of other backgrounds (most notably Muslims) as who they are foremost - other Americans.

I salute you!

One more thing: it appears that some people use the term "Muslim" and "Arab" interchageably. The fact that the largest group of Americans of Arab descent is made up of Lebanense Christians ought to really clarify the popular image of an "Arab-American" as a "rag-wearing" Islamist.
Are you willing to die to protect their freedom? Are you willing to kill LEO or military personnel to make sure they aren't interned, even if your death occurs and they're still interned?

Better to die fighting then be led into the gas chambers...As for this, I would not "kill LEO or military personnel" under this scenario. I'd protest in public, as is my constitutional right, and challenge those carrying out these orders on moral grounds. I'd be the guy in front of a tank. Let it crush me. Let the rest of those who have been silent be shamed by my action and move them to force the government to release my wife. If it means winning my wife's freedom, I'd gladly be a martyr. That will make me feel better than killing a 21-year old cop or soldiers who is too young and confused to know better and disobey his superior's orders. :)

No, I am not a Muslim or an Arab. Neither is my wife, and I do the same even for those who are not my family members since, as we all know, if they come for one of us, they soon come for another...

[spartacus2002]

I've often thought of the current war on terrorism can be captured in a simple analogy: The US has built a fire, the US has stuck its feet into the fire, The US claims it is the fire's fault that the US is being burnt, and the US refuses to pull the feet from the fire because, why, that would be GIVING IN, and we don't want the fire to win.

Would internment camps do anything other than put a fence around part of the fire, and inspire matchbooks to start new fires?

Wrong then, wrong now, for reasons made up of both practicality and justice.

[OF]

I'm not following your analogy. Maybe you could clear up what it is you're getting at for those of us who are a little slow, like myself.

- Gabe

[CaesarI]

::scans through U.S. Constitution::
::scans through Amendments::

Don't seem to see anything in here granting the government the right to intern people. Though there's quite a bit in here about due process, rights to trial and so on.

That about settle it. Good idea, bad idea, doesn't matter. It's ILLEGAL.

On another note:
*************
Danes once wore yellow stars to show solidarity with jews targeted by the Nazis.
**************
This claim is in its details, false.
http://www.snopes.com/history/govern/denmark.htm

The Danes did do a lot to prevent Danish Jews from being sent to internment camps though, but they didn't wear stars.

-Morgan

[Bahadur]

spartacus2002:
I've often thought of the current war on terrorism can be captured in a simple analogy: The US has built a fire, the US has stuck its feet into the fire, The US claims it is the fire's fault that the US is being burnt, and the US refuses to pull the feet from the fire because, why, that would be GIVING IN, and we don't want the fire to win.And I suppose, using the same analogy, you'd say that the Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves by failing to adhere to the European Christian norms.

I don't think so. Terrorism is not a "fire." It is a consequence of actions by men with willpower. It is not a mindless inanimate object.

Terrorism is how a certain kind of weak fight the powerful, so to the extent that the US is the most powerful nation in the world, there is a certain pre-condition to terrorism as a means by our opponents. But, our opponents motivations are caused by jealousy, hatred and fear. It is the same kind of jealousy, hatred and fear that, for example, certain kind of poor feel toward the successful and the rich. Using your logic, I guess you'd say a rich person invited a mugging by being rich and that it's "irrational" for the rich person to claim that the mugging is the jealous poor assailant's fault.

[chaim]

Bahadur,

Thank you for your kind words.

One more thing: it appears that some people use the term "Muslim" and "Arab" interchageably You know I thought about saying something about that but my post was getting long enough already. I've known several Arab-Muslims, many good citizens. I also have had two friends who were Lebanense Christians. I have a friend who is Pakastani, Muslim, a proud American, who wanted to go kill Taliban and Al Queda after 9/11, who is pro-Israel, etc. I worked with a woman from Pakastan who wore the headcovering (though not the entire burka) and was very Muslim, and VERY American. For my second job I work for an Iranian Muslim who hates Arabs (Iranians are often Persians who historically have been in competition w/ Arabs and have fought several wars).

Not all Muslims are Arabs, and not all Arabs are Muslims. Some non-Arab Muslims will be quite insulted if you call them Arab in fact.

[buzz_knox]

The "fire" in this case was caused by Osama Bin Laden. OBL was formerly our ally, and welcomed our assistance when he was fighting the Soviet's in Afghanistan. During his time there, he became a complete fanatic. Later, he saw our troops in Saudi Arabia, birthplace of the prophet. It didn't matter that we were there at the invitation of the gov't; that we were protecting the country; that we were fighting to free Kuwait from an invasion. All that mattered is that Western infidels were on "sacred" soil. So, he decided to exterminate us. That led to his reign of terror against us. His comments about the Palestinian situation and American support of Israel came AFTER he began his campaign.

So suggesting that we are responsible for the acts of terrorism committed against us is not only false, it is patently dishonest.

[jmbg29]

If we are going to bring up ugly history on a subject, let's bring it all up.

I have what they used to call Krauts (Germans) by blood in my family tree. And what they used to call WOPs (WithOut Papers <immigration papers>) in my family tree through my grandfather - my mom's stepfather. My grandpa was wounded in the WWII while fighting the Japanese Imperial Navy, along with two of his brothers. So I think we know where his loyalty lies. Relatives on the German-American side fought just as hard for us.

Non-citizens suspected of a crime should be rounded up like any other suspect. And while they did round up people wholesale, without reasonable suspicion of any crime, in WWII, they aren't going to do it again.

Not while I'm around, and I reckon that goes for the majority of the people here.

Resident alien, naturalized citizen, or native that abides the law, not a problem. Resident alien that is suspected of breaking the law, round 'em up like we would any other suspect, alien, naturalized, or native.

Illegal alien? Deportation minimum.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Italian and Italian-American Internment: Italians seek apology for WWII uprooting
Stories from Contra Costa Times and West County Times (California). Story by Lisa Hayden, from Pittsburg, California (July 1-3, 1997), based on interview with Rose Scudero. Go to newspaper story
BACKGROUND: Upon formal declarations of war between the United States and Italy, those non-citizen Italians living in the United States become legally classified as enemy aliens. Rose Scudero was a minor, age twelve, living with her enemy alien mother, and when President Roosevelt's executive order barred aliens from military restricted areas on the U.S. West Coast, Rose was obligated to go with her mother. Scudero's father was a citizen. In the article, Lisa Hayden writes; "Italian-Americans don't want financial compensation". Instead; Rose Scudero told Hayden, "We...," (Italian-Americans) "...want a public apology from the White House"

In 1941, U.S. military authorities were concerned with the threat of fifth column (sabotage, espionage, subversion) operations that could be carried out by persons of Italian, German and Japanese ancestry.

Enemy aliens of Italian, German and Japanese ancestry as well as Italian-Americans, German-Americans and Japanese-Americans were placed in relocation camps, internment camps and detention centers.

Critics of U.S. decisions affecting people like Rose Scudero, including Rose Scudero herself, frequently describe the U.S. camps using the broad, sweeping term, "concentration camps". While this term which is arguably accurate, no effort is made to distinguish between the U.S. camps and those operated by Axis Powers, especially Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan. The images from the terrifying kinds of "concentration camps" operated by Nazi and Asian terrorists are firmly stamped in the public's mind. The result is, that some sort of equivalency is established between the U.S. camps and the harsh, brutal slave labor, medical experimentation and genocide camps operated by Japan and Germany. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Although persons of German, Italian and Japanese ancestry, especially non-citizens were placed in the camps, only the Japanese were compensated, with each one on a long list receiving $20,000, without tests of citizenship or loyalty. This legislation was so bad that in fact, U.S. law defined the internees as Japanese and only as Japanese, excluding persons of German and Italian ancestry.


Published on July 3, 1997
Italian-Americans want apology for WWII upheaval
BY LISA HAYDEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER

PITTSBURG -- Rose Scudero wants an apology.

More importantly, she wants the story of what happened to her mother and other Italian noncitizens in America during World War II put into history books.

She said she hopes a bill introduced in Congress last week will help educate Americans about a little-known episode in U.S. history.

Three New York congressmen have introduced the Wartime Violation of Italian American Civil Liberties Act. It calls for the Justice Department to give a full report of the treatment of Italian-Americans during the war.

The congressmen also want the president to formally acknowledge that the civil liberties of Italian-Americans were violated.

Republican Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, Democratic Rep. Eliot Engel, and Republican Rep. Rick Lazio introduced the legislation. Democratic Reps. George Miller of Martinez and Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco endorse the bill.

At age 12, Scudero, one of six children, went with her mother when she was ordered by the government to leave their Pittsburg home for nine months in 1942. America was at war with Italy, her mother was not a U.S. citizen, and she was living too close to an important military base, the Camp Stoneman in Pittsburg.

Scudero's father was a citizen, so he stayed behind to work. Her mother rented a house in Concord [nearby, in California].

President Roosevelt signed an executive order Feb. 19, 1942, authorizing the Army to bar "enemy aliens" from 86 restricted areas on the West Coast. About 1,000 Italians considered the most dangerous were shipped to a military camp in Missoula, Mont.

In Pittsburg, 1,500 to 2,000 Italians were told to move away. Some had cameras and radios confiscated.

When Scudero left her class at school, she gave her collection of pins to friends.

"I thought I was never coming back," she said.

Scudero said the Italians didn't suffer as much as the Japanese, who were sent to concentration camps and lost their property. But the experience was still humiliating, she said.

Italian-Americans don't want financial compensation.

"We want a public apology from the White House," Scudero said.

Several groups, including the Italian American Task Force, have lobbied for the legislation.

"Public sentiment has been growing over the past several years on this issue," said John Calvelli, public policy chairman for the National Italian American Foundation. "We felt it was time now to raise the issue in Congress."

A historical exhibition about the plight of Italian aliens during the war was displayed in Pittsburg in 1994. Organized by Lawrence DiStasi, a UC-Berkeley history instructor, it included the stories of many Pittsburg residents whose lives were disrupted.

Marti Aiello, curator of the Pittsburg Historical Society museum, said she thinks the 1996 unveiling of a plaque in Pittsburg to honor immigrants displaced during the war led to a sense of healing.

Her mother-in-law, Frances Aiello, was forced to leave in 1942. Many of the Italian aliens were older women who had never become citizens.

"Those 60- to 70-year-old women were going to go and blow up the camp? It's ridiculous," she said.

The relocation temporarily split up many families, she said.

"They also had quite a financial burden on them, because they had to maintain two households," Aiello said. "It was quite devastating both financially and psychologically."

The legislation calls for the Justice Department to reveal everything about the episode. Supporters say some information remains classified and the full story has not been told.

"The main thing here is we want it in the history books. We want it known," Scudero said.

Edition: West County Times, Section: A, Page: 6. Also published in Contra Costa Times, July 1, 1997, A5

© 1997 Contra Costa Newspapers Inc.

[spartacus2002]

By sticking feet in the fire, I am referring to the US' foreign policy adventures in the middle east.

If you read UBL's fatwa, he states two reasons why he is against the US: (1) support for Israel, and (2) US troops in Saudi Arabia. He does not "Hate us for our freedoms and our way of life." Or maybe he does -- but that his not his motivation.

So, while we are having a thread that discusses so heavily the lack of Constitutional authorization for mass internment camps, maybe we could avoid the issue by sticking to the same Founding Fathers' intent that we engage in peace, commerce, and friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none?

While I disagree with the terrorists' choice of means, I cannot help but think that US foreign policy has been part of the spark to the fire.

[Matt G]

Interment based on what?

Based on the fact that they MIGHT have the motive to oppose our government's war effort? MIGHT do something crimininal to oppose it?

Wow. Now who does that sound like?

Why, now I remember! It's the anti-gun lobby!!!! Their arguement is that we must all be disarmed, lest we have the capability to do harm.

I'm a police officer, and part of my job is to temporarily deprive certain people of their freedom. That select class of people whose freedom I take in the name of the state are called "criminals." And within hours of my making an arrest, it is reviewed by a magistrate to determine whether I had probable cause to do that. But I can't --and won't-- arrest someone without probable cause that they have committed a crime.

Internment of people based on their race, religion, or ethnic origin is putting people in jail just because they *might have a motive to do harm to our country.* That concept is so far against what the nation I love is about, that I frankly would seriously question my own affiliation with a nation that could take on such a policy. :cuss: :fire:

[Dennis]

Internment camps? Again?
No way. :fire:

You tell 'em, Matt! :cuss:

[ctdonath]

This thread is on-topic - considering the amount of firepower that would be brought to bear to liberate the occupants of any internment camp.

Remember Manzanar et al. NEVER AGAIN.

there will always remain a bit of reason in confining possible enemies. Ethos and pathos have no place in warfare. That's all I'm trying to say. That's why I'm not supporting it, but won't oppose it.

That's so infuriating I'd better shut up and go to bed right now. :fire:

[Bahadur]

spartacus2002:
If you read UBL's fatwa, he states two reasons why he is against the US: (1) support for Israel, and (2) US troops in Saudi Arabia. He does not "Hate us for our freedoms and our way of life." Or maybe he does -- but that his not his motivation.And if you read North Korea's Korean Central News Agency, we're all imperialist dogs who want to rule the world and enslave the millions. So what?

UBL went fanatic in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and began his fantasy of creating a regional, then a global Islamist state based on Shariah. His rantings about Israel and Saudi Arabia came AFTER that.

He may or may not hate our freedoms that we enjoy right here in the US, but he sure hates freedoms and secularism that flows from us through our integration with the global cultural exchange. Mind you, contrary to what the French claim, we don't "push" our culture - other people like it and want more of it. UBL would rather decide on behalf of these people not to accept it whether the people want it or not - because he thinks he knows better.

"Leaders" who think that they "know better" and think that they must, therefore, decide for the little people are called tyrants (or in UBL's case, a wannabe tyrant).

[Augustwest]

No way I would support internment camps. Ever.

[duck hunt]

Let them lay a finger on my daddy and see what happens.

:fire: :fire: :fire:
Duck Hunt
Patriot, daddy's girl and third-generation Lebanese-American

[4v50 Gary]

Illegal in '42, illegal in '03.

[atek3]

The commentary died down here but after michelle malkin's book:In Defense of Internment: The Case for ‘Racial Profiling’ in World War II and the War on Terror people are talking seriously again.

Michelle's book is nonsense, and concentration camps for minorities are still fascist.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory31.html

atek3

[morganm01]

My wife is 2nd gen japanese. If anyone tried to put her in a camp, they would be put full of lead I don't care if it is the USMC 2004 Marine of the Year with a medal of honor, that I have to shoot to stop it.

I think there are probably people out there with 2nd gen Arab wives or husbands who feel the same way.

Bad idea altogether. We are a free country not a safe country.

[morganm01]

BUT, you would never, ever hear him whining about being thrown in a camp, nor will you hear me, because we understand that SOMETIMES, certain actions must be taken under certain situations. Sure, they may be horrible in retrospect, but they resolve an immediate need which was desired by the MAJORITY of Americans. This is a democracy, after all.

Error. This is NOT a democracy. It is a Constitution backed Federal Republic. The reason for that is that there is a danger in the "tyranny of the majority" in a pure democracy.

[Old Fud]

Of all the things in our history, two make me ashamed;
-- The Sand Creek Massacre, and
-- Internment of the Japanese in WWII.
I believe this is one issue that would cause me to take up my gun.

This same thread has been on several forums recently. Most of them are either pro or mixed. This is the only one that has been overwhelmingly opposed. Another reason I like it here.

[2nd Amendment]

I've read page 1 and 4 of this thread, don't have time to read the middle two right now. So, has someone pointed out the "obvious"? Such camps today, if they come, wouldn't be likely to limit themselves to just Muslims. In this day and age of PC and "hate crimes" and, almost, thought "police" how long would it take for an administration that would create such abominations to decide they would be damn handy for controlling any and every other group, ethnic, religious or political, that seemed a bit..."unruly"?

For anyone who even thinks of supporting such things keep in mind, in this day and age you might find yourself there soon enough.

[Ryder]

I don't like the idea of camps either but if things get bad enough here in the states these people may well need some form of protective custody.

[Derek Zeanah]

But it doesn't change what the Koran says, or that the Islamic world had been all too silent in its condemnation of terror.You should read it some time. No, I don't mean the "Penguin Classics" edition either.

[RealGun]

Your gun is not evil until you draw it and point it in the wrong direction for the wrong reasons. Implementing supposed solutions on a class basis results in gun control.

There is no choice but to deal with threats on an individual basis. It would be naive to think that race or religion wouldn't provide a clue about who to watch within legal constraints.

Who wants to claim and defend that white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants provide the only valid baseline for American citizenship? Revisiting the status of naturalized citizens and legal immigrants might be wise, but someone born here is fully vested in all rights and equal treatment.

Subversive organization can be dealt with as a separate entity. but a sweeping prejudice should be considered unthinkable by intelligent people with a clue about what it means to be American.

[Drjones]

Since I'm one of the more vocal and opinionated members on this topic, I thought I should weigh in.


I've been hearing folks speak of the need for internment camps again, only this time, it'll be the Arabs/Muslims we'd be locking up. As with the supposed Jap situation in 1941, we've likely got dozens, hundreds or even thousands of America-Hating terrorists living in our country, legally, and hoping to do us harm.

Unlike the Japs, however, these Muslims fanatics are obviously willing to blow-up innocent civilians (and actually prefer this), rather than just military bases and ships. And all of these people are whole-heartedly welcomed into the country by liberal politicians and democrats looking for votes.

As horrible as it may seem, if a semi-working executive order to lock-up 1st/2nd generation Arabs were to arise, would you support it??


ABSOLUTELY NOT. NEVER, NO WAY, NO HOW.


I would NEVER support a measure to intern innocent, law-abiding American citizens simply because they are suspect for whatever reason.

HOWEVER, I WOULD support a measure to round up and deport (or perhaps detain) ILLEGAL arab immigrants.

While we're at it, (and while I'm dreaming) let's round up the illegal mexicans too....

I also DO very much support more stringent profiling and investigation of people of middle eastern decent, for painfully obvious reasons, but NOT internment.


Secondly, let's imagine that such an order passes, and 1st/2nd generation Arabs are locked in camps. How many do you think would volunteer (like the Japanese 442nd and 101st) to serve our country in a war against their (parent's) homelands?



I believe that, due in part to several factors, we would see practically NO support and willingness to fight among these people.

One of the factors is the general unwillingness to fight for ANYTHING among many Americans today, Americans of all nationalities and race.

[joab]

One of the factors is the general unwillingness to fight for ANYTHING among many Americans today, Americans of all nationalities and race. Yep The 40s was a whole nother world in almost every aspect.

[ctdonath]

Internment camps are sheer, total, unadulterated evil.

Let me get this straight:
Is someone here SERIOUSLY advocating DELIBERATELY JAILING INNOCENTS EN MASSE?

I'm flabbergasted that anyone, particularly any High Roaders, could conceivably view internment camps as a good thing. In a nation of immigrants, in a nation of varied races, in a nation guaranteeing freedom of religion, in a nation of "innocent until proven guilty", how can someone advocate jailing innocents based solely on race, faith, and/or origin?!?

Some argue that certain identifiable groups may facilitate terror. How about white, male, gun-owning, retro-patriots? Remember McVeigh et al? See what's written on some web boards lately by "militia types"? See "vote from the rooftops" and "molon labe" t-shirts?

Yes, a few radical militant Muslims are causing trouble in this world now. Yes, the Islamic community has been disturbingly lacking in criticizing some massive attacks. But out of a billion Muslims, the troublemakers are only in the millionths thereof.

I don't care what color, race, creed, nationality, origin, or dress someone is.
If that person has done nothing wrong, and you take away all they have and throw them in prison anyway, YOU are MY enemy. I WILL free them.

[owen]

OPPOSE INTERNMENT CAMPS...

BUY A HOMELAND DEFENSE RIFLE!!


:D

[lostone1413]

If things got bad i'd go along with sending them back. This has been done in are history. One thing most people forget is if a Muslim follows his faith and you are a non-muslin he has sworn to convert you or kill you. Guess I look at it if a Muslim looks at me as an infidel and if he can't convert me he will kill me he is the enemy. If he is a citizen or not if it is my life or my loved ones life on the line we do what we have to do. Their belief is so differen't then the ones that settled this country. People worry so much about being politically correct. Now if it is in Russia, France , Sudan , here or anyplace in the world they are now just called terrorist. They are MUSLIM TERRORIST. Anybody who believes because they live here they are any different better look into what their religion teaches them then read about the Crusades.

[lostone1413]

One more thing see one post says a few bad ones. After 9/11 or any other place the Muslims have attacked Americans. How many times have the Muslims in this country or out of this country demonstrated against what their brother Muslims have done to us???????????? I for one can't think of one time. Can any of you??????? Remember in school the teachers saying us being a melting pot is what has made this country great. I for one say it will be the downfall of our country and you are seeing it now.

[CentralTexas]

and feel the timing is perfect. My Prof gave me a 99 on it as I had a typo (since fixed), your opinion may differ...

Should non-citizens be afforded equal legal protections as citizens?


Should there be a difference in legal protections outlined in our Constitution for citizens and non-citizens? In a nation birthed by immigrants and based on the premise of equality the answer must be a resounding “NO”! Our forefathers realized that humanity has certain rights that apply to all, whether American citizens or not. Jefferson wrote to Hugh White on this subject where he said, "To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." --Thomas Jefferson to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258. . In writing to Madison he says "What is true of every member of the society, individually, is true of them all collectively; since the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789.
The founders were fleeing oppressive governments throughout Europe that didn’t feel their own citizens had the legal rights later declared in the American Bill of Rights. Our Constitution was an effort to correct these injustices in a new framework for America.

When it comes to non-citizens we must discern between to two types- “Legal” and “Illegal”.
Illegal aliens are those that simply have not followed the law when they entered the country. In general it is because they do not qualify under the rules for immigrating but do so anyway in hopes of improving their life.
A non-citizen here legally may be on a student visa, tourist visa or a work permit. In many cases they seek residency in hopes of becoming citizens.
There are many debates in today’s society as to illegal immigrants and what rights, benefits and privileges they are entitled to. Should they be able to get drivers licenses or vote?
Access to free college, medical care or other public services are another debate completely.

I think some insight of these issues can be made with some simple clarification.
Rights are what we have as humans and not granted by a government- life, liberty etc., whether granted by God or nature they are inalienable.
Privileges are not rights and therefore subject to being denied or regulated. Driving a car is a privilege whereas Freedom of Speech is not. I think in today’s society that many people confuse the two. Laws against illegal aliens having a driver’s license, employment and legal rights seem to get thrown together without separating rights and privileges. . Again privileges and rights become interchangeable to the public due to a lack of understanding of the concepts. Non-citizens should be accorded the same legal rights as citizens in a fair society. This is especially true in a society that honors the rule of law such as ours. It stands to reason that if charged under the laws of this nation they should be entitled to the legal rights and protections of that very same system regardless of their legal status.


Sadly, the present administration clouds the waters further with violating the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 14th Amendments protection of American citizens from Government abuse. This is done through their interpretation of the law by simply declaring them enemy combatants. As the cases finally appear in court their arguments don’t stand up well to scrutiny. Don’t take this as support for the individuals, but as support for our judicial system and Constitution working, albeit slowly.
Non-citizens who have been declared “enemy combatants” continue to languish year after year in camps around the world. This seems to hinge on their being outside the borders of the United States, and therefore not having the same legal protections as citizens would if incarcerated here.
A technicality not lost on those arguing for fair application of Constitutional protections for all.

Americans traveling outside the country face certain risks by virtue of nationality alone. If we don’t treat foreign citizens fairly in our country how can we hope for the same when we are traveling abroad? We must always take the highroad in such matters if we wish our country to be known for having a sense of justice and fairness. This can only be achieved by applying the same legal standards, access and recourse to citizens and non-citizens. Jefferson, in 1803 said in writing to the Earl of Buchanan "[It is my] belief that a just and friendly conduct on our part will procure justice and friendship from others."
-CentralTexas

[Chris Rhines]

If things got bad i'd go along with sending them back. Are we going to have to go through this again? :rolleyes:

It's something of a faux-pas to call for the forcibe deportation of Muslims on a bulliten board where the sysadmin is a practicing Muslim.

- Chris

[cordex]

How many times have the Muslims in this country or out of this country demonstrated against what their brother Muslims have done to us???????????? I for one can't think of one time. Can any of you???????
How many times have you demonstrated against what your brother gunowners have done to us????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Your brother gunowners have murdered innocent children, men and women without remorse. They've raped, robbed, dealt in poisonous drugs and sold people into sexual slavery.

How many times have you gone out on the street to protest these actions by your fellow gunowners? Maybe we should hold you in some part responsible for their actions since I don't see you publically condemning them on television.

[duck hunt]

And good answer, Cordex, wish I'd thought of that. I'm saving it for another time.
How many times have the Muslims in this country or out of this country demonstrated against what their brother Muslims have done to us???????????? I for one can't think of one time. Can any of you???????
Muslim responses to 9/11 (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/111/story_11121_1.html)
Let me know if you want more. I've got plenty.
Remember in school the teachers saying us being a melting pot is what has made this country great. I for one say it will be the downfall of our country and you are seeing it now.
Pehaps you're right. Let's get rid of all of the Arabs, of course, and the Asians, then you have those African people, them too, and of course, the Mexicans....now, let's see...as far as Europeans, are we letting the Irish stay? No, let's not....or the Scots for that matter....heck, the French obviously have to go.....

How far do you want to go with this? Do you wanna do it colonial style and keep the Anglo-Saxons, or just say heck with it and take it all the way back to Native Americans?
Anybody who believes because they live here they are any different better look into what their religion teaches them then read about the Crusades.
First of all, "what their religion teaches them." Here's an easy-to-read primer on what the Islamic Scriptures teach about violence. (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/87/story_8753_1.html) Be warned that if you start pulling verses out of the Qu'uran and quoting them out of context, I will do the same with the Bible. Book of Exodus, anyone? It goes both ways.

Ah, yes. Next you mention the Crusades. Let's review, shall we?

Taking the heads of slain enemies and impaling them upon pikes appears to have been a favorite pastime among crusaders. Chronicles record a story of a crusader-bishop who referred to the impaled heads of slain Muslims as a joyful spectacle for the people of God. When Muslim cities were captured by Christian crusaders, it was standard operating procedure for all inhabitants, no matter what their age, to be summarily killed. It is not an exaggeration to say that the streets ran red with blood as Christians reveled in church-sanctioned horrors.

St. Bernard announced before the Second Crusade that "The Christian glories in the death of a pagan, because thereby Christ himself is glorified."

What's that you were saying about the Crusades?

You're making me angry. :fire: You won't like me when I'm angry.

[schromf]

The articles of our constitution are NOT a "al carte" menu, to pick and choose which articles suit your taste.

I believe this is the second thread on this and something that came to mind is part of history. Do some reading on Tokyo Rose. She was captured and tried for treasonist acts against the United States. She was NOT denied due process. And this for acts during a declared war.

I actually did some searches to see if I could find any references to American Citizens who actually wore a German or Japanese uniform. To date I have only found exchange students, that served in the Japanese Army. If any have other resources please post details.

Internment of Japanese Americans was a dark chapter in our history. Many of these had been denied citizenship due to ethnic bias. Many Japanese had lived here several generations by then, do a little reading on the history of the Great Northern Railroad, they generally hired only Japanese track workers, yes circa 1880 ish. Decendends of these oriental pioneers, were then imprisoned by FDR during WWII.

Tyrants deny due process; Who is to say who gets whisked away in the dark, never to be tried, and never to face formal charges. Historical figures who support such acts were Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and Sudam Hussain, they all understood the benefits of denying due process.

[Sheslinger]

I was going to compare this idea with anti-gun rhetoric but since so many of you already said it so eloquently I will simply say this (and I am surprised that no one replied to this point yet).

As for people here on visas, or resident non-citizens, I think it would just be better, cheaper, and more humane just to make them leave and go back the whatever Islamic cess pool they came from.

This is just hateful and goes against everything that America is.

[dustind]

I bet there are fewer and fewer people every year who wonder how the Third Reich got started.

lostone1413: Your "they have not apologized" argument is flawed in two very sever ways. It is a lie, and people have zero duty to apologize for the action of others, even if they have one or two things in common. I will never apologize for what another white guy, or atheist, or gun owner does, and I do not expect anyone to apologize for me, my actions are my own.

[Sindawe]

Nope. Those attempting to enforce such obvious tyranny against my fellow Americans would find themselves rather well ventalated. Those attempting to destoy our civilization will meet a like fate.

[Cosmoline]

Internment of entire racial or religious groups is intolerable in a free society. I don't see how it can even be considered an option. If a man is guilty of a crime, put him on trial. Otherwise leave him alone. It's that simple. In this nation, a man is judged by his own actions, not on the prejudices of the majority.

I for one will never forget that just three generations back my people were gibbering squarehead Swedes and Germans. I'm glad they didn't get "sent back," though lord knows many wanted to do it to German immigrants during WWI.

If they bring the buses for them, it won't be long before they bring the buses for you and me.

[c_yeager]

Unlike the Japs, however, these Muslims fanatics are obviously willing to blow-up innocent civilians (and actually prefer this), rather than just military bases and ships. And all of these people are whole-heartedly welcomed into the country by liberal politicians and democrats looking for votes.

Ummm first of all i suggest you do just a LITTLE reading on the bahavior of the Japanese during their occupation of China. These "muslim fanatics" would be HARD PRESSED to even rise to a comparable level of inhuman brutality to the WWII era Japanese military...

Not to mention the fact that the Japanese military structure made NO distinction between enemy combatants and civilians (except that the latter group was more fun because they didnt shoot back).

And both groups also seem to have (had in the case of WWII era Japanese) a penchant for blowing themselves up for the greater good of their higher power. (Allah vs godking)

[rick_reno]

They'll never take me! I recently purchased a tin foil cap on EBay, the gun owners friendly auction site, that is guaranteed to make me invisible to jack booted thugs. It must be working, I haven't seen any chasing after me since I started wearing it. They were like files on a cow patty around here before I got my cap.

[The Real Hawkeye]

from the start, your facts have been grossly in error. You are an uncritical sponge in the milieu of leftist academia. You simply absorb propaganda with intellectual passivity, and then arrogantly come here to "enlighten" those of us who have long been in the habit of thinking critically and actually bothering to study facts and history.

I really feel sad for you. You have been duped, and you lack the basic thinking skills needed to even begin to understand the fundamentals of the argument. And yet you are so convicted. That's the really sad part. If this weren't so, it would be so simple to open your eyes. The proofs are so abundant, and yet we cannot persuade you merely to open your eyes and take them in. This is likely because you are, by long training and/or disposition, a statist. Your view of the world is literally turned up-side-down in relation to the Founders of this once great nation. You are probably a hopeless case, I'm sorry to say.

[rick_reno]

P.S. For a really relevant fictional parallel of what's happening in America regarding our transformation into a police state, and the proper reaction of the people thereto, read Chapter VIII The Scouring of the Shire, in J.R.R. Tolkien's Return of the King, which is book III of The Lord of the Rings. Very meaningful for our times.

Such a scathing attack preceded this bit of "wisdom" from on high - next I'm sure we'll be seeing Superman comics referenced.

[chaim]

One thing most people forget is if a Muslim follows his faith and you are a non-muslin he has sworn to convert you or kill you.
I suggest you re-read both the Koran and history. While there are many nasty passages in the Koran, there are in the Bible as well. However, Islam (like Judaism) doesn't only rely on one written text. Both religions have loads of written and oral traditions that take decades to get through. If you only read the written book without any other guidance (teachers, commentaries, etc), you haven't even scratched the surface. The history of Islam has been (in comparison to Christianity anyway) quite tolerant. Until quite recently, Christians and Jews were treated with some degree of religious and social freedom (ok, there was certainly much intolerance when compared to the US, but compared to Europe until recent times, Islam's treatment of minority religions is quite laudable).

Anybody who believes because they live here they are any different better look into what their religion teaches them then read about the Crusades.Again, you may want to re-read your history books because you have this assbackwards if you are suggesting that Islam was the aggressor and the bad guy in the Crusades. The Crusades were a series of wars in which Christian European kings and Catholic Popes sent their people to the Middle East to attack Muslim territories. On the way it was quite common for these Crusaders to stop off in Jewish areas of Europe and slaughter all the inhabitants (some cities saw tens of thousands killed in single incidents). The city of Constantinople was sacked for being the wrong kind of Christian (the Crusaders were Catholic and Constantinople was Eastern Orthodox). It was a very common practice of the Christian Crusaders to murder every Muslim and Jewish man, woman and child who remained in the cities they captured (when they were in a more "generous" mood they would spare those who would convert). There is a good reason that the Jewish and Muslim peoples consider "Crusade" a bad word.

[Sindawe]

None of the three major monotheistic religions have much to boast about when it comes to a lack of homocidal intolerance and aggresive expansion. All three have blood on their hands, and yes all three have had periods of relative tolerance and even acceptance.

But the issue is not really religion here, is it? It is fundimental Liberty and Human Rights. On the issue of interment camps, this peice of 'legislation' bears watching.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/patriot_act.html

Final Piece of Police State Puzzle Ready

_

By John Tiffany

_

The Bush administration?s allies in Congress, led by J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, the speaker of the House, have launched another assault on constitutionally protected civil liberties with a bill many are calling Patriot Act II (PA II). However, it is not to be confused with the 2003 version of Patriot Act II. But according to the Associated Press, in a draft of the House GOP legislation, many of the provisions are similar to the draft copy of the ?Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003? that leaked out of the Justice Department in January 2003.

Many Democrats and civil libertarians charge the new PA II authorizes heavy-handed infringements on civil liberties. House Democratic leaders and civil liberties advocates said on Sept. 22 that the Republican bill ostensibly responding to the findings of the 9-11 commission would go well beyond the panel?s recommendations. It would call for broad new powers for law enforcement agencies, they said, and would include new authority to conduct electronic surveillance in terrorism investigations.

Among the provisions, said AP, are measures on the deportation of aliens who are suspected of being linked to foreign revolutionary groups which have been labeled as terrorists, mandatory pretrial detention for terrorism suspects, warrants against non-citizens even when a target can?t be tied to a foreign power and enhanced penalties for threats or attempts to use chemical or nuclear weapons.

John Feehery is a spokesman for Hastert. Feehery told AP that criticism of the bill was unwarranted as of the evening of Sept. 22, because the legislation was still not in final form and was not ready for release to the public. A spokesman for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) agreed on Sept. 22 that House members were still working on a final version of the legislation.

But critics warn that the proposed law is aimed against the entire U.S. population, not a minority of Arab immigrants.

The proposal, they say, would grant the government the power to strip citizenship of native-born Americans and deport them without any evidence of wrongdoing, even though this would be contrary to the Constitution.

It would also allow for secret arrests, secret trials and secret torturing of ?suspects.? Habeas corpus, Americans? most sacred right, would be eliminated.

The law would also remove all restrictions on police spying on citizens.

Patriot Act II would create 15 new death penalties, one of which could be applied to acts of protest. Under the Hastert measure?s definitions, anti-war protesters could be deemed terrorists. In fact, any dissident could be spied on, harassed, and imprisoned indefinitely for exercising their legal and constitutionally protected rights.

This legislation would give the government the same power that Stalin and Julius Caesar gave themselves, said one detractor.

While terrorism certainly is a threat that must be addressed, curtailing the civil liberties of innocent Americans is by no means a way of doing so.

AFP readers will recall that the first so-called Patriot Act was passed without the members of Congress being allowed to view the draft of the bill. Those who wanted it to be read and debated were told to vote for it or they would be blamed for the next terrorist outrage. It passed overwhelmingly.

Many experts fear similar tactics will be used to pass PA II, keeping the public ignorant of the proposed law?s existence until it is too late.

-----

:fire: :cuss:

Any Legislator who votes in support of this DREN is in dire need of some new plumage and a ride on a small, flightless rallidae. :fire:

[RealGun]

There is also a bill to make permanent BATF database records of gun purchase background checks and to make them available to investigations on request. That would be the infamous "roundup list".

Stuff like this is all the more reason to own a rifle entirely on par with police and infantry weapons, including auto and burst fire modes, nothing second class and outgunned. 2A all the way!

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

I suggest you re-read both the Koran and history.

The history of Islam has been (in comparison to Christianity anyway) quite tolerant. Until quite recently, Christians and Jews were treated with some degree of religious and social freedom (ok, there was certainly much intolerance when compared to the US, but compared to Europe until recent times, Islam's treatment of minority religions is quite laudable).

Are you aware of the origin of the phrase "Hindu Kush" Translated to English it's "Hindu Slaughter" It's origins are found in the nearly 700 year long campaign of genocide carried out by Muslims against Hindus in Central Asia.

Some estimates I've seen put the numbers killed at an astonishing 60-100 million over nearly 700 years.

Islam compares very favorably with Soviet and Chinese communism in sheer numbers slaughtered, and has no equal in terms of the percentage of the human population of the planet killed.

As for the Crusades, they were in fact an attempt to retake areas captured by Muslims by force, i.e., an attempt to retake areas that were previously Christian.

It's not necessary to rewrite & whitewash the history of Islam in order to oppose American-style concentration camps.