New York Times-Eavesdropping Worse Than Internment Camps

SactoDan Blog ^ | January 18, 2006 | SactoDan

[sactodan]

The New York Times most recent absurdity from the Op Ed page is that listening to phone calls into or out of the US to targeted overseas locations is a more graphic example of ''scrapped civil liberties'' than the internment of Japanese in America during WWII.

In times of extreme fear, American leaders have sometimes scrapped civil liberties in the name of civil protection. It's only later that the country can see that the choice was a false one and that citizens' rights were sacrificed to carry out extreme measures that were at best useless and at worst counterproductive. There are enough examples of this in American history - the Alien and Sedition Acts and the World War II internment camps both come to mind - that the lesson should be woven into the nation's fabric. But it's hard to think of a more graphic example than President Bush's secret program of spying on Americans.

While the Times is making this patently ridiculous comparison, they fail to point out that these temporary measures were carried out during extraordinary times, and that the Constitution of the United States remains quite intact. They also assert that there were no benefits to America from any of these measures, another debatable point.

In one respect I hope the Times is right, that in hindsight the paranoia induced by the destruction of the twin towers and murder of 3000 people was really worse than the threat we actually faced. But until we can enjoy that luxury, given a choice between the New York Times and President Bush, I think I'll stick with the President.

[muawiyah]

There really were no benefits to the US in incarcerating JAs in the 48.

Still, that doesn't mean there would be no reason to fail to incarcerate the New York Times for the duration.

[Fenris6]

"New York Times worse than Pravda."

[Doctor Raoul]

Intern the NYT staff at GITMO. Let them get to know their audience better.

[Petronski]

[Emmett McCarthy]

I would submit that we have no way of knowing whether the WWII internment camps were of any benefit to us. How would one know what someone might have done had they not been locked up?

[Caleb1411]

[muawiyah]

To start with, the greater number of Japanese Americans lived in Hawaii, and nothing happened there at all. Further, no one living East of the Mississippi river was locked up, and in those days that's where all the stuff was someone could "happen" with, eh!

I think the answer may be found in the forced tax sales where major Democratic party donors were allowed to cherry pick prime properties formerly owned by Japanese Americans held in the camps.