This got me thinking:
Ask yourself “Are those being held in Fort Lewis and other Prisons or Briggs, being of prior Military or still Active Duty, there because of a Criminal Mind and Intent or are they Suffering from PTSD and Not Getting Treated Correctly! Is what Tom Scott found the norm for treatment behind the walls of these Prisons or Briggs, I believe it is for it’s no differant than what we’ve heard in the past. Nor is it any differant than what we know about how others, in our charge, have been and are treated in the present!
Actually, the entire diary and the comments did, so I started digging. Discovered the following:
Executive Order 9066 – Authorized the exclusion of Japanese from west coast and stated that “The Secretary of War is hereby authorized to provide for residents of any such area who are excluded therefrom, such transportation, food, shelter, and other accommodations as may be necessary, in the judgement of the Secretary of War or the said Military Commander, and until other arrangements are made, to accomplish the purpose of this order.
continued below
There was a court case, Korematsu v. US. In this case, it was written , by Hugo Black, that
the case of imprisonment of a citizen in a concentration camp solely because his ancestry, without evidence or inquiry concerning his loyalty and good disposition towards the United States. Our task would be simple, our duty clear, were this a case involving the imprisonment of a loyal citizen in a concentration camp because of racial prejudice. Regardless of the true nature of the assembly and relocation centers — and we deem it unjustifiable to call them concentration camps with all the ugly connotations that term implies — we are dealing specifically with nothing but an exclusion order. To cast this case into outlines of racial prejudice, without reference to the real military dangers which were presented, merely confuses the issue….He was excluded because we are at war with the Japanese Empire, because the properly constituted military authorities feared an invasion of our West Coast and felt constrained to take proper security measures, because they decided that the military urgency of the situation demanded that all citizens of Japanese ancestry be segregated from the West Coast temporarily, and finally, because Congress, reposing its confidence in this time of war in our military leaders — as inevitably it must — determined that they should have the power to do just this. There was evidence of disloyalty on the part of some, the military authorities considered that the need for action was great, and time was short. We cannot — by availing ourselves of the calm perspective of hindsight — now say that at that time these actions were unjustified.
Per Justice Murphy:
I dissent, therefore, from this legalization of racism. Racial discrimination in any form and in any degree has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life. It is unattractive in any setting but it is utterly revolting among a free people who have embraced the principles set forth in the Constitution of the United States. All residents of this nation are kin in some way by blood or culture to a foreign land. Yet they are primarily and necessarily a part of the new and distinct civilization of the United States. They must accordingly be treated at all times as the heirs of the American experiment and as entitled to all the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.
With all that is going currently happenning, seems to me that should be the world.
And, the chief prosecutor at the Nuremburg Trials, stated the
decision was a “loaded weapon” that could be used against minorities in wartime.
And, accoding to wikipedia
The U.S. Government officially apologized for the internment in the 1980s and paid reparations totaling $1.2 billion dollars, as well as an additional $400 million in benefits signed into law by George H. W. Bush in 1992. In January of 1998, President Bill Clinton named Fred Korematsu a winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. In 2004, Korematsu filed an amicus curiae brief in the case of Rasul v. Bush, in which Guantanamo detainees challenged their detention as enemy combatants by the Bush administration. In the brief, Korematsu argued, “The extreme nature of the government’s position in these cases is reminiscent of its positions in past episodes, in which the United States too quickly sacrificed civil liberties in the rush to accommodate overbroad claims of military necessity.”
Also the following concerns have been raised:
The War on Terror
A) “Voluntary” interviews of Arab men in the Fall of 2001 – religious beliefs, political beliefs
B) National Security Entry-Exit Registration System – Mandated yearly registration of young men from predominantly Islamic Countries:
C) Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Eritrea, Lebanon, Morocco, North Korea, Oman, Qatar, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Kuwait
D) Operation Liberty Shield – all asylum seekers from primarily Islamic Countries will be detained
E) Surveillance of mosques and Islamic centers
F) Indefinite detention of Islamic citizens and non-citizens under Patriot Act Provisions
Received conflicting info as to whether or not Korematu v. US actually was overturned. Are we sadly witnessing history repeat itself?