| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/8 |
| 2004/9/7 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/Japan, Reference/History/WW2/Japan] UID:33382 Activity:insanely high |
9/7 She has guts
Malkin to speak. Berkeley:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/09/07/BAGRA8KN0U1.DTL
\_ She probably won't be allowed to get past "Good Evening."
Especially in this case I think the protesters would be better
served letting her speak, since her ideas are mostly
ridiculous, but a lot of Berkeley people just can't seem to
help being obnoxious.
\_ Yep. Berkeley students don't have much respect for free speech.
If the Daily Cal mentions her visit, the entire day's edition
will probably be destroyed. If she brings books with her,
they'll most likely be burned.
\_ I don't see how anyone can take her seriously, I read her book
too. I like how the guy at the end of the above story
(who happens to be a crazed French immigrant, if that matters
at all) says he's not convinced interning the Japanese in
America in WW2 was such a bad thing. - danh
\_ serious question: in the 40s, what would you do to help
secure our safety? I'm open to hearing different views
\_ We should have imprisoned US residents originally from our
enemies' ethnic or national origins, given enormous amounts
of guns and financial aid to whoever was fighting them, ramped
up industrial production like crazy people, then murderously
battled them back inch by inch, island by island, hedgerow by
hedgerow, while flattening their cities into blackened rubble
and eventually turning whatever was left into glowing parking
lots. -John
\_ We should have pulled out of the Pacific area. The Japanese
only used the attack at Pearl Harbor as a last resort to
respond to our meddling in Asia. They would have left us
alone had we pulled out.
\_ I think I see your reasoning, but remember that Japan and
Germany were allies; if the enemy of my enemy is my friend,
then the friend of my enemy is my enemy.
\_ We have no compelling interest in the defense of Europe.
Neither Japan nor Germany wanted to invade the US. We
were the ones who drove Japan to war with us by our
discriminatory and crippling trade practices with them.
\_ Wow. Evil motd today. *golf clap* -- ilyas
\_ That's really a 'hindsight is 20-20' suggestion. At the time
we were interested in containing our aggressive rival. Any
suggestion to pull back would probably have been seen as
uncalled for and cowardly.
\_ Someone asked how we could have secured our safety. I
answered. Would pulling out not be better for our
security and vastly preferable to a two-front war in
Europe and Asia? The Axis powers were our enemy only
because we drove them to become our enemies. They would
have gladly left us alone had we the wisdom to leave them
alone in turn.
\_ It's easier to think about the WW1 situation. We clearly
didn't have any particular need to go fight Germany then.
With the help of German diplomatic mistakes it was easy to
get the public to go along and help fight a meaningless
political war that set the stage for WW2.
\_ it's impossible to pull out after Pearl Harbor. The Japs
were stupid to attack Pearl Harbor. If they had just kept
quiet in the Pacific then they'd have a much better chance
of dominating the Pacific.
\_ The Japanese also attacked America's colony
in the Far East and attacked and killed Americans
there.
\_ The Japanese should have won. Then the world would be much more
Asian friendly than it is now.
\_ Japanese penis so small.
\_ I think you're all missing the point, or at least my point,
that Michelle Malkin is totally nuts and doesn't have
a very deep understanding of history. If you take her
argument that there were several Japanese on the west coast
and they could have caused trouble, that makes little sense.
The people who managed the interning of the Japanese population
did not have access to and did not know about any secret
MAGIC Japanese military communications. The true naval
threat to the US, the germany navy, was very active off
of the east coast, in the Atlantic, I have read that several
German and Italian Americans lived on the east coast, why
weren't they forcefully uprooted and kept in the middle
of nowhere? The whole fake controversy sounds like a David
Horowitz brainstorm, does anyone really truly care today
about reperations paid to Japanese Americans? I never heard
of someone writing that the internment was misunderstood
until recently. Does anyone remember how David Horowitz
raised a shitstorm several years ago about reperations
to slaves? - danh
\_ ok i amend the above, a few italians and germans were
interned. not 120k of them - danh
\_ David Horowitz will never be able to get over the fact that he
was once a Black Panther associate and a self-styled left wing
"radical." He breathes the fire of the born again. He's a
bloviator for sure.
\_ That you haven't heard anything about it before means nothing.
A majority of those detained were either Japanese expatriates
or Japanese dual citizens. Some of these even
returned to Japan to fight against the US.
In other countries conquered by the Japanese the members
of the expatriate communities were quick to establish
Japanese surrogate governments.
The Pacific fleet was completely destroyed, invasion was
a very real possiblity. Any credible military commander
would have considered internment. It made sense at the time,
just as detaining German and Italian citizens did.
\_ Reagan was fooled into apologizing for internment by a stacked
pro-reparations commission!
\_ http://csua.org/u/8yf (wikipedia)
"Among academics, the broad historical consensus is that the
camps were indeed a product of wartime hysteria and racism
rather than arising from legitimate fears of sabotage."
-- When it occurred at a time I didn't live, and the area
has been researched this well, and I don't smell bias, and
historians who lived in this time came to this consensus, I
believe broad historical consensus, not a conservative
young-un born in 1970. |
| 7/8 |
|
| sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/09/07/BAGRA8KN0U1.DTL Chronicle Sections A political scorcher is forecast for UC Berkeley Wednesday night. Syndicated columnist and Fox News commentator Michelle Malkin, author of a provocative new book defending racial profiling and the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II, will bring her conservative crusade to what she views as the citadel of political correctness and sniveling, anti- American leftists. She wants to go "mano-a-mano" against critics of conservative speakers, she told talk-show host Rush Limbaugh on Aug. "It will be quite revealing to see how these acolytes in liberal education and liberal arts colleges treat me." Malkin seeks to undermine the prevailing view and collective guilt about the internment because she believes it has shackled today's fight against terrorism. He recalled a UC Berkeley speech in 1983 by Jeanne Kirkpatrick, President Reagan's ambassador to the United Nations, who was shouted down by protesters opposed to US policy in El Salvador. Malkin's 7 pm appearance in 145 Dwinelle Hall is sponsored by the California Patriot, a conservative student magazine on campus. One of her past columns referred to UC Berkeley as "Sodom & Gomorrah U," while another was titled "Berkeley vs. America," and another referred to "the Manhattan-Berkeley- Hollywood Axis of Snivel." Her newly released book, "In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror," was listed on the New York Times best-seller list last week and has provoked blasts of criticism. The ad hoc Historians' Committee for Fairness, which includes professors and researchers from Stanford, UCLA, Harvard and more than two dozen other universities and colleges, issued a statement last week saying the book "is contradicted by several decades of scholarly research, including works by the official historian of the United States Army and an official US government commission." The Japanese American Citizens League called the book "a desperate attempt to impugn the loyalty of Japanese Americans during World War II to justify harsher governmental policies today in the treatment of Arab and Muslim Americans." Malkin says historical records, particularly the so-called MAGIC Japanese cable messages, provide ample evidence of potential enemy collaboration within Japanese and Japanese American communities on the West Coast. She says President Roosevelt was justified in ordering the mass evacuation that sent about 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry to relocation camps. In 1988, President Reagan issued a formal apology for the evacuation and signed legislation providing reparations for survivors of the internment. Malkin said Reagan, a hero to conservative America, relied on the "biased conclusion" of the national Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians. That panel, which blamed racial discrimination, was stacked with pro-reparations commissioners and conducted "kangaroo hearings" where internment-defenders were berated and ridiculed, Malkin said. "The ill-founded conclusion that there was absolutely no military rationale for the West Coast evacuation/relocation is indeed affecting War on Terror policies today," she said in an e-mail response to The Chronicle. "My book gives example after example of current opponents of threat profiling invoking the 'internment card' as an excuse to do nothing to fight Islamic extremists in our midst." "I am not advocating rounding up all Arabs or Muslims and tossing them into camps," her book says, "but when we are under attack, 'racial profiling' -- or more precisely, threat profiling -- is justified. It is unfortunate that well-intentioned Arabs and Muslims might be burdened because of terrorists who share their race, nationality or religion. But any inconvenience, no matter how bothersome or offensive, is preferable to being incinerated at your office desk by a flaming hijacked plane." Among the book's targets is US Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, a former US congressman from San Jose who was interned at the Heart Mountain camp in Wyoming as a boy. Malkin complains that Mineta cited the relocations when he banned racial profiling in post-Sept. John Tateishi, executive director of the Japanese American Citizens League and a key leader of the 1980s reparations campaign, called Malkin's book "a fabrication of historical fact. I don't think any credible historian will take her seriously." Tateishi said Malkin, the daughter of immigrants from the Philippines, "has become the darling of the right because she fits a certain kind of image that they want to promote of an ethnic minority female who goes against ethnic community organizations that hold different points of view." The California Patriot invited Malkin "because she's a great speaker and has lots of interesting things to say," said the magazine's managing editor, Amaury Gallais, a junior. He said the group invited her last semester before they knew about her book but she declined because she was too busy. Later, her husband contacted the magazine to say she was doing a book tour this semester and would be happy to appear, Gallais said. Asked whether the relocation of Japanese Americans was justified, he said, "This event has clearly been misrepresented. It might have helped us win the war in many respects -- it's hard to say." |
| csua.org/u/8yf -> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_internment_in_the_United_States In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror, although she has faced heavy criticism alleging logical leaps and failure to consider some historical evidence. html) Among academics, the broad historical consensus is that the camps were indeed a product of wartime hysteria and racism rather than arising from legitimate fears of sabotage. Those who believe relocation is a more appropriate term argue that the official designation at the time was relocation center; and an estimated 30,000 to 50,000 camp residents did eventually settle outside the exclusion area. However, many others argue that the phrase relocation camp is a euphemism that does not adequately describe the true nature of the camps. And some assert that because the camps meet some dictionary definitions of concentration camp, this term is appropriate; Most historians use the now-standard term internment camp because it is perceived as relatively neutral. Whatever name is used, the perimeters of the camps were fenced, armed guards were posted, and all of the camps were in remote, desolate areas far from any population centers. There are documented instances of internees being shot for walking outside the fences. However, some camp administrations eventually allowed relatively free movement outside the marked boundaries of the camps. Nearly a quarter of the internees left the camps to live and work elsewhere in the United States, outside the exclusion zone. Eventually, some were authorized to return to their hometowns in the exclusion zone under supervision of a sponsoring white family or agency. Tule Lake, was in fact later turned into a prison camp, with watchtowers, fences, and guards. Tule Lake was reserved for those Japanese who were specifically suspected of espionage, treason, or other such disloyalty, and their families. Other families were held at Tule Lake because they requested to be "repatriated" to Japan. A number of pro-Japan demonstrations were held there throughout the war. Also, many other things besides both internment and relocation are involved, among them: individual and group exclusion from "military" zones, deportation, illegal detainment, de-naturalization, alien enemy registration requirements, curfews, travel restrictions, and property confiscation (including seizures, freezing, bond seizure, and restrictions) for those of foreign birth and/or of "enemy" ancestry. The individual exclusion zones were particularly onerous, as they were personally targeted, and very swift - allowing very little time to relocate. Government agents continued to follow the excludees they couldn't convict of crimes and warn potential new employers, police, and people of their new towns on how "dangerous" they were. For example in Korematsu's case the Japanese population had 5 days from May 3, 1942 until 12 noon, May 8 (or 9th) to leave their hometown according to General DeWitt's Civilian Exclusion Order No. FBI compiled the Custodial Detention index ("CDI") on citizens, enemy aliens and foreign nationals which might be dangerous. On June 28, 1940 the Alien Registration Act of 1940 (or Smith Act) is passed, Section 31 required the registration and fingerprinting of aliens above the age of 14, Section 35 required reports of change of address within 5 days. Within 4 months 4,741,971 registered at post offices around the country. Of the 11 million aliens above the age of 14 who would be classed as enemy aliens, 683,259 were males of which 56,332 were Japanese. Asia made their military machine seem to Americans frighteningly unstoppable. Civilian and military officials had concerns about the loyalty of the ethnic Japanese on the West Coast and considered them to be a security risk. MAGIC codes suggested to the military and political leaders at the time that there was a substantial spy network of Japanese Americans feeding information to the Japanese military. Lowman's claims have been controversial with others pointing out that much of the information that the Japanese officials obtained may have come from public sources such as newspapers, and that communications by Japanese consular officials stating an attempt to recruit Japanese-Americans did not necessarily mean that those attempts were successful. However, historical revisionists who rely on Lowman's claims point to his assertion that some of the intercepted messages specifically said that the information had come from Japanese-American spies. One captured Japanese officer who had graduated from UCLA, and spoke fluent English specifically reported attempting to cultivate contacts for such spying, as reported in a letter sent to Congressman Wallop of Wyoming by a serviceman. and 75% of the original immigrants were completely loyal to the United States." A 1941 report prepared on President Roosevelt's orders by Curtis B Munson, special representative of the State Department, concluded that most Japanese nationals and "90 to 98 percent" of Japanese American citizens were loyal. He wrote: "There is no Japanese problem' on the Coast ... There is far more danger from Communists and people of the Bridges type on the Coast than there is from Japanese." Historical revisionists state that approximately 20,000 Japanese-Americans in Japan at the start of the war joined the Japanese war effort, and hundreds joined the Japanese Army. Pacific coast not a single ship had sailed from our Pacific ports without being subsequently attacked". In addition to espionage, there was also concern that in the event of an invasion there could be sabotage of both military and civilian facilities inside the United States. In addition, the loyalty of some Japanese Americans to the United States decreased after the government removed them and their families from their homes and placed them in internment camps. Several pro-Japan groups formed inside the camps, and riots occurred for various reasons in many camps, which caused the WRA to move the "troublemaker" internees to Tule Lake (see below). When the government asked whether internees wished to renounce their US citizenship, 5,589 of them did so. Of those who renounced their citizenship, 1,327 were expatriated to Japan. American Civil Liberties Union successfully challenged most of these renunciations as invalid because of the conditions under which the government obtained them. When the government circulated a questionnaire seeking army volunteers from the camp population, 94% of military-aged men said they would not serve in the US Armed Forces. right On December 7, 1941 Presidential Proclamations 2525 (German), 2526 (Italian) and 2527 (Japanese) were signed. Many homes were raided using the CDI and other information, and hundreds of aliens were in custody by the end of the day, including Germans and Italians (although war was not declared on Germany or Italy until Dec 11). As of 11:00 AM, Dec 9th, 1,801 aliens were in custody, of which 1,221 were Japanese (376 of them in Hawaii) - the author of that memorandum "did not believe there would be very many more arrests of Japanese." Only 6,056 of the 16,811 foreigners arrested in security measures by the FBI between December 7, 1941 and June 30, 1945 were of non-European descent. Any change of address, employment or name had to be reported to the FBI/DOJ. Enemy aliens were not allowed to enter restricted areas. Violaters of regulations were subject to "arrest, detention and internment for the duration of the war." These exclusion zones, unlike internment, were applicable to both citizens and non-citizens. Eventually such areas would include both the East and West Coasts, and about 1/3 of the country, and were applied to all of those of Enemy Alien Ancestry (of which the Japanese were a minority). On March 2, 1942 General DeWitt issued Public Proclamation No. Subsequent proclamations expanded the coverage all of California, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Utah, and the southern portion of Arizona. March 11, 1942 Executive Order 9095 created the Office of the Alien Property Custodian giving it discretionary, plenary authority over all alien property interests. Many assets were frozen, creatin... |