Arabs in U.S. could be held, official warns

[DinoDoc]

They approved it.

[Ned]

Here's the final paragraph in the Courts's opinion sustaining the camps.

"It is said that we are dealing here with 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. Korematsu was not excluded from the Military Area because of hostility to him or his race. 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. "

[Ned]

I take it that the Supreme Court are morons as well.

[KrazyHorse]

d

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ned


What you fail to take into consideration is that we are in a deflationary environment. If money is defined to inlude stocks, they we are in a wopping deflationary environment.

Interest rates are relative. If the money supply is deflating at -5% and you borrow money at -1%, your effective interest is 4%

Beep! Wrong, unless you plan on actually spending the money on something. If I borrow a trillion dollars then simply give it back the next day, how does deflation hurt me?

[KrazyHorse]

What you fail to take into consideration is that we are in a deflationary environment. If money is defined to inlude stocks, they we are in a wopping deflationary environment

You're beginning to spout absolute nonsense now. We are not deflationary; the current inflation rate in the US is 1.64%

[Ned]

Originally posted by Frogger

What you fail to take into consideration is that we are in a deflationary environment. If money is defined to inlude stocks, they we are in a wopping deflationary environment

You're beginning to spout absolute nonsense now. We are not deflationary; the current inflation rate in the US is 1.64%

The '29 crash caused a subsequent 20% deflation.

[KrazyHorse]

Your point? You used the current tense of the verb. You are also ignoring my earlier point. What is to stop someone from borrowing a trillion dollars and handing it back having gained millions in interest? There's no risk, immense gain.

Admit that you said something extremely stupid, then admit that your deflation argument was even stupider and we can all move on with our lives.

[Ned]

Banks will not loan you money on a basis that they will loose in the end. In order for there to be negative interest, they has to be deflation - and reliably so.

Today's long term home rates are still above 6%. This indicates that the banks think the long term inflation rate is around 3%.

Now, assume we actually had a long term deflation caused by a 50% drop in the capital value of our nation's companies. Well, 0% might look like the right interest rate.

I think the recent drop in the market is caused by interest rates still being too high.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ned
Banks will not loan you money on a basis that they will loose in the end. In order for there to be negative interest, they has to be deflation - and reliably so

This still doesn't make any sense, Ned. Say we posit a 50% deflation rate over the space of a year. I borrow 1000$ from a bank at -2% interest. I leave the money in a sock under my bed. At the end of the year, I give them the 980$ I owe them and keep the extra 20$ for myself. Where is the hole in this, please?

Claiming that deflation will hurt me will only work if you tell me I have to buy something with the money, and even then the bank loses value on the exchange. The bank will always lose money on negative interest rates, no matter how high deflation goes. This is so self-evident it feels like I'm talking to a child. Did you take any arithmetic classes in school, Ned?

[KrazyHorse]

If you're going to only be able to lend at a negative interest rate it would be better to stash the money in a vault. At least that way it's still all there when you come back for it in a year's time...

[orange]

Ned - quit while you're behind

The quote alone is bad enough, but then trying to justify it makes you look even worse.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Does that include the US government? Consider that there is the Contras, and paramilitary groups in Columbia.



Does that include the US government? At the very least, the CIA is as much a terrorist organisation as a lot of Muslim militant groups.



So would the same thing apply to US citizens in the Muslim world?

All of those things would apply to almost everyone who have ever existed if you interpret what NYE said so loosely as you did.

The fact is, when you or anybody feels cornered, you do whatever you feel is necessary to survive. That is why the arabs probably wont be detained on any scale even close to that as the Japanese were, because the US does not feel cornered.

Kman

[Kepler]

There won't be camps, but as attacks continue we'll see some severe abridgements of Arab-Americans' personal freedom and the same sort of blank check apologetics the USSC gave to the Japanese camps. When the pressure's on, we tend to sh1t the free society bed. No opinion either way whether it's justified -- it merely is what will inevitably happen in any society, and never mind the high-minded rhetoric.

I think what's likely is fairly sensible general guidelines by federal authorities, with stupid and occasionally racist execution of those guidelines by local law enforcement, resulting in abuses that are excused for the moment and apologized for years later.

[Faeelin]

Won't happen. Most Americans, by and large, tend to distrust the government. Similarly, most viewed the attacks on Muslims as pretty contemptible. Thus, if the government started rounding up muslim citizens, the question would arise: "So am I next?"

Especially as this fits in with a lot of right wing conspiracy theories.