Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by vart, Oct 11, 2012.
Well put. We didn't exactly toss the Italian and German, Americans in internment camps.
To those who defend this... at which point, in your opinion, does a person become a "real" American citizen, protected by the Constitution ?
Is it someone who was born in the States ? Apparently not, they were persecuted.
Is it someone whose parents were born in the states ? No, they were forcibly "relocated" too.
Is it someone whose grandparents and parents were born US citizens ? Nope, they suffered the same fate.
If what we did in the '40s was right, then any citizen of a particular ethnic or religious background - even a partial background - can be denied their constitutional rights at any time whenever the Government decides to persecute them based on whatever real or perceived threat, not because of any of their actions, but solely on the basis of their origins.
Which is un-American, anti-constitutional, and criminal.
The number of people ready to defend this shameful act shows just how close we are to tyranny.
There were a lot of young American's who we did not let serve because they had Japanese parents or grand parents. Some did...and served with great honor...while those parents and grand parents were held in camps.
Would you feel that way if situation were reversed?
If I was in Japan after they started the war???
Not quite. I was asking if you would be ok if your government took away your rights as a citizen without due process?
I'm from Irish decent. My people were some of the baddest-ass terrorists on the planet until the Middle East become more interesting.
There are a lot of Catholic churches in this country.
Where do we draw the line that "my people" are not okay to be treated as the US citizens that we are? Can we be interned (oops, I mean "relocated") just to make sure we don't do anything against the War on Terror?
Keep in mind that I am quite vocal that the War on Terror is a farce, too.
If it was about race, they would have locked up all "Orientals" (common racial classification was different then; anybody remember being taught about Mongoloids, Caucasoids, and Negroids?). They did not, it was about national origin. Words have meaning, confusing them does not not help the conversation, it hurts it.
Are you one of those people that calls every white person that kills a "black" person a racist? Or is it a hate crime to you?
Everything does not have to be about race, and this wasn't. It was about national ancestory and questions of loyalty.
But it most certainly wasn't about recognizing citizenship and the Constitution.
Every damn one of us is from foreign national heritage. This country is a "melting pot" of culture. We used to be proud of it. Well, no, actually, we only used to pretend to be proud of it, but we gave up even that pretense a long time ago.
We arrested and imprisoned citizens because of who their parents were, plain and simple. If you can justify that, you are a different American than I am.
Nishikaichi then sought and received the assistance of three locals of Japanese descent in overcoming his captors, finding weapons, and taking several hostages. In the end Nishikaichi was killed by Niʻihauan Ben Kanahele, who was wounded in the process, and one of Nishikaichi's confederates, Yoshio Harada, committed suicide.
The incident and the actions of Nishikaichi's abettors contributed to a sense in the American military that every Japanese, even those who were American citizens or otherwise thought loyal to the United States, might aid Japan, and ultimately may have influenced the decision to intern Japanese Americans through World War II. The actions of the Niʻihauans were widely celebrated in the United States; Ben Kanahele was decorated for his part in stopping the incident.
I'm sure FDR just could have whoooped out his lap top and got some background investigations done and all of this would never have happened...?
They did what they had to.
In the same situation, yes.
Wars make countries do stupid things.
While I assume you are using the plural form of "you", let me be clear I have never said it is right or justified. Apparently the Supreme Court said it was legal. Also based on what I read, the children of the interned were no required to go to the camps, they were allowed to go. Likely there was no good alternative for them to go, and they probably did not want to be separated from their parents.
If this source is good, it appears that there was some due process.
The following statements are taken from a Department of Justice press release dated October 30, 1943. As of October 7, 2005 the complete press release may be read at pages 34 through 36 at Custodial Detention Part 2 of 3
http://vault.fbi.gov/Custodial Detention/Custodial Detention Part 2 of 3/view
"In all instances, aliens are taken before the Hearing Boards who make recommendations to the Attorney General in each case. He then determines whether the alien enemy is to be interred, paroled, or released".
I do not believe that the seizure and confiscation of anyone's property is appropriate without complete due process through the Judicial Branch; and that includes the IRS seizures that still occur without due process through the Judicial Branch.
It is possible that some aliens were protected be being in the camps. Not saying it makes it good. The US could easily just have deported all aliens under the law. The US citizens are an entirely different proposition. If suspect they should have been charged, and maybe held without bail. Then tried and let the chips fall where they may.
If there were uninvolved children citizens, allowing them to stay in the camps may have been a more humane solution than putting them in an orphanage until their parents got out.
You'd willingly give up your property and freedom to comply with the .gov doing to YOU and YOUR Family American citizens, what they did to Japanese American citizens?
There are provisions in the Patriot Act that allow the .gov to imprison Americans without due process indefinitely - It is after all for national security, you should be cool with that.
You're a vet, big sister considers you a potential threat, you remember that, right?
I enjoy the Constitution, I guess a lot of you don't.
Yes, "you" was not directed at you personally. I didn't make that as clear as I should have; sorry.
So aliens were given more due process than citizens?
They didn't look at other Orientals because these other Orientals didn't pose a (real or perceived) threat. The Chinese at that time were victims of Japanese aggression and American allies.
There were basically three large ethnic groups that originated in the countries we were at war with - Japanese, Germans and Italians. The Americans of Japanese origin were "relocated" while white Americans of German and Italian origins were left alone.
And it's not like their loyalty was guaranteed. There were pro-Nazi rallies held by German immigrants and German Americans in the Madison Square Garden just before the war, there were terrorist and spy cells on the East Coast, I think History channel mentioned some 2,000+ were helping Nazis one way or another. However, in this case, the German Americans were treated the right way - as Americans first, their loyalty was not questioned just because of their origins, and their rights weren't taken away unless they personally committed a crime.
There was a definite double standard, and it was definitely driven by racism.
But I think this is what I and others are arguing about. I don't question the legality of interring Japanese born aliens in the time of war. However, to strip the rights away from American citizens just on the basis of their ethnic origin, without them personally being involved in any crime, was dead wrong and illegal.