N.C. Congressman Says Internment of Japanese-Americans During World War II Was Appropriate

HIGH POINT, N.C. (AP) - A congressman who heads a homeland security subcommittee said on a radio call-in program that he agreed with the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

A fellow congressman who was interned as a child criticized Coble for his comment on Wednesday, as did advocacy groups.

Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C., made the remark Tuesday on WKZL-FM when a caller suggested Arabs in the United States should be confined.

Coble, chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, said that he didn't agree with the caller but did agree with President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who established the internment camps.

"We were at war. They (Japanese-Americans) were an endangered species," Coble said. "For many of these Japanese-Americans, it wasn't safe for them to be on the street."

Like most Arab-Americans today, Coble said, most Japanese-Americans during World War II were not America's enemies.

"Some probably were intent on doing harm to us," he said, "just as some of these Arab-Americans are probably intent on doing harm to us."

U.S. Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., a Japanese-American who spent his early childhood with his family in an internment camp during World War II, said he spoke with Coble on Wednesday to learn more about his views.

"I'm disappointed that he really doesn't understand the impact of what he said," Honda said. "With his leadership position in Congress, that kind of lack of understanding can lead people down the wrong path."

The Japanese American Citizens League called Coble on Wednesday and asked him to issue an apology, while the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee demanded that Coble explain his remarks.

It is "a sad day in our country's tradition when an elected official ... openly agrees with an unconstitutional and racist policy long believed to be one of the darkest moments of America's history," the group said in a statement.

The MAGIC documents (results of the decryption of the encyphered Japanese messages) were much more highly classified than DeWitt's, and I take it you have not looked at them. A lot of them are published in appendices to Lowman's book. Japanese and Japanese-Americans were informing the Japanese of ship and supply movements from the West Coast. After the Japanese were interned and relocated, those messages stopped.

Through the war and the Cold War that followed it, the Anglo-American history of decryption was one of the most closely held secrets of government. Sanitized reasons (DeWitt's racism) had to be found for internment. Guilty Japanese could not be brought to trial when the evidence had to be kept secret.

k2...

Those that were around at the time have a different understanding than those that look at this affair from hindsight. It was not prejudice or bias, it was fear and hatred. The world was in a life or death struggle with the Axis.

The US was well aware of the Japanese behavior in Nanking shortly before. The US feared possible Japanese invasion of the west coast. After the Niihau affair on the very first day of the war, when the Japaanese-Americans turned on their adoptive country, FDR had every right to believe that should the Japanese invade the west, the result would be the same.

The Phillipines, East Indies, Singapore and others learned the hard way. Upon invasion the resident Japanese came out with armbands and supported their brothers. It was all arranged well in advance.

Accepting the only reason for internment as being "prejudice", plays well into the hands of those that wish to portray this country in the worst possible light. It is too simplistic, defies history and well suits the America haters.

re: stupid fat lazy Americans ... You portray Americans like this because of the unfair acts done onto the Japanese Americans during World War II?

No, of course not.

I think Americans who trivialize freedom (including the defenders of internment here on this thread) represent the stereotype. It's a very simple point, stupid fat lazy people think that freedom means being able to choose Bud or Miller Lite. They don't see a big problem with interning people protected by the U.S. constitution. They think that fighting in war is more important than freedom, when in point of fact, those who fought in WWII fought and died FOR FREEDOM.

Those that were around at the time have a different understanding than those that look at this affair from hindsight. It was not prejudice or bias, it was fear and hatred.

My use of the word “prejudice” was meant to be euphemistic. Prejudice is based on fear and hatred.

After the Niihau affair on the very first day of the war, when the Japanese-Americans turned on their adoptive country, FDR had every right to believe that should the Japanese invade the west, the result would be the same.

I agree “FDR had every right to believe” whatever he wished.

I still think the Niihau Incident was a pathetic “reason” to constitute the relocation of American citizens of Japanese ancestry on the US mainland.

In 1941, Niihau was still a Territory and was, interestingly enough, the only island to vote against statehood in 1959. The “Japanese-Americans” on Niihau in 1941 could not be considered American citizens in the sense that we think of the term today. Yet somehow I am to believe the actions of such a one (or a few) justifies generalization of all American citizens of Japanese ancestry on the west coast as potential turncoats.

Note that during WWII, the Territory of Hawaii was placed under martial law. The territorial governor declared over 151 “defense act rules,” over 100 "directives" were issued by the territorial director of civilian defense, and 181 "old series" general orders were issued by the military governor (for starters). In addition, “Enemy aliens and Americans of German, Italian, and Japanese ancestry were particularly regulated. These civilians were not allowed to travel without a military pass, buy or sell liquor, assemble in groups, or own firearms, cameras, radio receivers, and numerous other items.” Source Such action seems reasonable in Hawaii, being that the traitorous acts originated on Niihau.

The Phillipines, East Indies, Singapore and others learned the hard way. Upon invasion the resident Japanese came out with armbands and supported their brothers. It was all arranged well in advance.

While I understand the point you’re trying to make here, I think it’s irrelevant to the discussion at hand, that being: Was it right or wrong to forcibly relocate American citizens simply based on the assumption that their Japanese ancestry might cause them to become defectors?

Accepting the only reason for internment as being "prejudice", plays well into the hands of those that wish to portray this country in the worst possible light. It is too simplistic, defies history and well suits the America haters.

In my post #125 and in this post I’m referring solely to relocation, not internment.

I think it was acceptable to intern people who behaved seditiously, regardless of their race.

Dictionary.com defines “prejudice,” among other related things, as “Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.” It truly boggles that some would see relocation as something other than “prejudice in practice.”

The intent of my posts on this thread (and elsewhere on FR) has never been to portray the United States in the worst possible light, defy history (?), or suit the America-haters. On the contrary.

Since September 11, we have apprehended American traitors of Middle Eastern ancestry. Should we not begin the process of relocating Americans of Middle Eastern ancestry because their race indicates they may betray the rest of us?

"I think American's who trivialize freedom (including the defenders internment here on this thread) represent the stereotype."

I try to understand the thoughts of those back in World War II who forced the Japanese into these camps but that doesn't make me a racist. Japan had convinced the president that they in no way wanted a war with the United States and then December 7, 1941 came along. It was a sneak attack by the Japanese who were in one breath telling us no war, then the next breath they are bombing Pearl Harbor.

Was that the Japanese American's fault? Of course not, but people thought differently back then. I give no excuses for the way Japanese American's were treated back then and I can say that now because people's attitudes and tolerances are better and stronger today.....Taking a positive out of a negative is a sort of redemption.

I know I am rambling on and on and although you and I see this issue differently proves that talking about the good and bad in this country is a step in the right direction.

Hyperbole was recognized, I still stand by my reply.

Education is a wonderful thing, depending of course upon the accuracy of the material studied and the intentions and sincerity of the instructor. Having lived through the past seventy years of history and observed it's unfolding, I recognize the deliberate twisting of facts by many of todays educators, in order to paint reality to match their America despising mentality. You heard their fantasy of it, I witnessed the reality of it.

Age matters more than you can imagine and when you have accepted that fact, your wisdom will be the master of your education, rather than it's lackey.

THe people apologizing for the actions of our leaders in WWII and second guessing and condemning their every decision, are no more relevent than arm chair critics, the day after the big game. Our leaders led us to victory, some lost a few freedoms and were inconvenienced, our soldiers, more than anyone else-but all are freer than ever since. Had our leaders been butt kissing, politically correct motivated wimps-freedom would no longer exist for anyone.

Take that to bed and chew on it tonight.

As an American of asians descent, I thought I'd share some of my thoughts on the matter.

Although I believe the decision to internment Japanese Americans during WWII was wrong, I also think that it was a understandable decision.

Given the situation and urgency of the time, where the survival of the country was at stake, and the cost of hesistation or mistake too great to contemplate, it was entirely forgivable to have made the error that they did.

I would compare it to the complaint about the founding fathers of our country not abolishing slavery during the nations inception. It would have been the right thing to do, as slavery is contrary to everything they stood for, but given the time and situation, I understand why they did not do it.

In the end, America is not perfect as perfection is not possible, but America has always tried to do the right thing and when she has failed she has always learned from her mistakes. I think in this instance America has learned from that mistake. The reason why I do not expect all arab americans to be sent to some internment camp in the future is precisely that we have come to the recognition that what we did in WWII was incorrect and we have no wish to repeat that mistake.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.