Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 21, 1986)
Court should uphold internees' lost rights The Supreme Court, a! the request of the Reagan ad ministration. will review the validity of a 1983 lawsuit seek ing reparations for citizens who were interned during the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II. The question comes 42 years after the court condoned the government's program of placing 120.000 American citizens and aliens of Japanese ancestry in detention camps as a “military necessity." The case should be heard, and the government should defend itself in court. Of course, in this case the government is defenseless. A U.S. appeals court dismissed many of the claims in the case but ruled that the case could proceed. The Justice Department is seeking to disclaim any governmental liabili ty and stop the case. The court ruled that the grounds for the lawsuit were lacking until a 1982 congressional commission urged the United States to "redress the personal injustice" done to the internees. The Justice Department's appeal rests on technical issues of jurisdiction and statute of limitations. Thus, the government is using technicalities to obscure its respon sibility to its citizens and residents. A central issue the Supreme Court is sure to deal with is false evidence President Franklin Roosevelt's administra tion presented to the court to convince it of the “military necessity" of the detention program. A congressional commission released a report in 1983 saying that the program was motivated by "racial prejudice, war hysteria and failure of political leadership" and not by military considerations. Roosevelt's administration fraudulently withheld vital documents that showed the detention program was not needed, including reports from the FBI and members of naval intelligence that concluded careful watching of suspicious people was all that was needed to avert the threat of sabotage. The administration of that time also failed to refute the assertion that the attack on Pearl Harbor had been aided by sabotage and espionage by ethnic Japanese in Hawaii. It knew this assertion was false. The conviction of a japanese-American who refused to report for detention was overturned in 1983. largely on the basis of the false evidence provided by the government at the time. Thus, the enormity of the program was worsened by the fraud and hysteria used to support it. It is not so surprising that the public could be so swayed, but it is shocking that even the Supreme Court could support the internment program. The internment of lapanese-Americans during World War II is a blot on American representative democracy. The internment tamps disproved the old notion that "it can't happen here" — referring to the concentration camps of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union — not only can it hap pen here, but it can happen with the Supreme Court’s approval. President Gerald Ford proclaimed in 1976 that the War time detention had been wrong. However, such a proclama tion does not help those interned recover what they lost when they were taken from their homes during World War n. Though the gears of the justice machine move slowly, even 40 years is not too long for the government to be held accountable for violating the Constitution. Letters Illegal entry If there is any "anomaly" in a situation where it is illegal for aliens to enter the country, but not illegal for employers to hire them, the fault lies in the law that makes entry illegal (ODE editorial. Nov.17). After all. it is also not illegal to sell bread to an alien, or to buy a car from him. The right to exchange one's labor for money or other agreed upon compensation is a basic economic right of all human be ings. not just those who have papers issued by some govern ment agency. The government has no business forcing employers to police its arbitrary policy of discrimination against people on the basis of birth place and parentage. What principle gives John Q. Peasant from Vietnam or Mex ico any less right to try to make a living and support his family than John Q. Public from Eugene? And who are you or (kmgress to tell either of them what job they may apply for? The right way to resolve the “anomaly" is to open our borders to anyone who wants to work here. You prefer a plan where guest workers will work for American employers, but not as prospec tive citizens. They won't have Oregon Daily Emerald The Oregon Daily Emerald it published Monday through Friday e«cepl during eaam week and vacation* by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co. at the University of Oregon. Eugene. Oregon. #7403 The Emerald operate* independently ot the University with office* on the third floor of the Erb Memorial Union and i* a member of the Associated Press The Emerald is private property The unlawful removal or use of papers is prosecutable by law Owner a! Staff Advertising Director Production Managei Classified Advertising Assistant to the Publisher Susan Thelen Diana Fattier Alyson Simmons JeanOwnbey Advertising Sales: John Boiler / Sales Manager Teresa Acosta Paul Anderson Ann Cola. Brent Coffins. Beryl Israel. Janet la Heitmann Laura Goldstein. Peter taFleur. Catherine Ltl|a. Joseph Mental. Joan Wildermutn MASS It MS-3712 Sf| 1TTT ASSAM! ASA SS11 Editor Managing Editor News Editor Spectrum Editor Spectrum Assistant Editor Editorial Page Editor Editorial Page Assistant Editor Sports Editor Ptioto Editor Graphic Design Editor Night Editor Michelle Brence Lucinda Dillon Michael Rivers Curtis Condon Stephen Maher James Young Michael Drummond Capi Lynn Michael Wilhelm Lorraine Rath Michael Rivers Community Politics Higher Education / Administration University Affairs Student Government Student Activities General Assignment Jolayne Houlr Shawn Wirt* Chris Norred Stan Nelson Sarah Kitchen Tonnie Dakin Dennis Fernandes Reporters Sean A>maker Mary Courtis. Karen Creighton. Gary Henley. Carolyn Lambarson. John Me Barron Photographers Sherlyn Bforfcgren. Shu Siting Chen. Mans CorvaHis. Oerrei Hewitt. Bobbie Lo. James Marks. Dan Wheeler. Michael Wilhelm ProdMCttea: Michele Ross ‘ Ad Coordinator Kelly Aleiandre. Efuabeth Asher. Ronwin Nicole Ashton. Swidra Bevans. Janet Emery. Manuel Flores. Shannon Gaither. James Kenny. Donna Leslie. Curtis Lott. Ross Martin KeHi Mason. Mika McGrow Rob Miles. Angelina Munu. Kara Oberst Arm Pale. Juke Paul. Jennifer Peter son. Knsttn San burg Nits Tioimn. X Kang Xie the game status as other workers, because they will re main citizens of their homelands, to which they must return whenever the govern ment decrees they are no longer wanted. This is surely a practical com promise. with economic benefit for both worker and employer, but not very original. P.W. Botha would be proud. Joseph W. Dehn III Eugene Walk don't ride It is very sad to note that in one of the state's finest centers of higher education there are a number of students who still do not read. But the surprising coincidence that often goes un noticed is the fact that all these illiterate people ride bicycles! You have probably seen them careening down University sidewalks, oblivious to the bright yellow “Walk/Dis mount" signs painted on the ce ment beneath them. However. I am not suggesting that all cyclists pedal their machines over our walkways. Probably the majority of cyclists at the University obey the common-sense safety rule that one should not speed through crowds of pedestrians. These people are demonstrating their consideration and respect for others by their behavior. This cannot be said for the cyclist/marauder who speeds across campus dodging hapless foot-bound students. We are being oppressed by a minority. An arrogant, rude few are violating the rights of the many. They use their superior speed to force their way upon us. and they all seem to believe that they are the sole exception to the “no bikes" rule designed to protect everybody. Now that the rainy season is upon us. the danger of wet brakes failing to stop before im pact is a serious possibility. Campus security officers are outnumbered and have only been able to achieve small vic tories in this battle. The rule of law is being rid den upon. Do the University a favor; read this letter to any cycle-sidewalk riders you know. Randy MacDonald Student Senate President Intolerable Tolerance: Is it always a vir tuous attribute? It is often claimed to be by many who buy into the situational ethics of left-wing liberalism — where right and wrong ebb and flow with the tide of popular opi nion. It isn't if you believe there are certain permanent moral ab solutes in this universe that must be adhered to. Let's examine the consistency of this open-minded liberalism that lectures against the evils of "intolerance" and “discrimina tion" (a form of intolerance). We must ignore for a moment, however, that “consistency" is not a required component of situational ethics. What about tolerance? Are these open-minded left-wingers tolerant of capital punishment, abortion restrictions, laboratory animal testing, nuke power, snail darter depletion, creation science. Apartheid. intolerance? And how about discrimina tion? Does liberalism shun all discrimination against conser vative profit-motivated businessmen, abortion clinic picketers. strip miners, fun damentalist Christians, out-of the-closet monogamous "straights” (homophobics)? Check out the irony of the self-righteous left-winger hypocritically proclaiming. “If there's one thing 1 just can't stand, it's intolerance." I submit that there is nothing inherently wrong with in tolerance. In fact, it is an ap propriate natural counterpoint to any deeply held conviction. However, it is amusing to find those who claim munificent tolerance but who in reality are so intolerant that they can't tolerate intolerance in others. Jon Wollander Eugene
