David visits an internment camp in the Slocan Valley, British Columbia, Canada, Where at 6 years old, he and his family were interned by the Canadian government.
Canada has changed a lot from this thinking since back then obviously, but it's still hard to wrap my mind around how Canada actually interred it's Japanese citizens during the war years. It also happened to us Germans during the Great War years too to some degree. You wish it never happened, but it did happen.
@fegolem I should have added "under the law" to that.The most extreme situation is the Ticking Time Bomb Scenario.Read up on it
"Reasonable suspicion" is not grounds 4 removing rights.If they cant b charged (even on conspiracy) then u cant violate their rights
Ben Fs "Give up" applies 2 a nation cuz when we allow 1 group of ppl to have their rights taken away on "suspicion" then we accept that any1 of us could also b taken away.We have collectively given up our rights in the name of security
@fegolem Human rights r inalienable. Theres no "big picture" in which they can b removed. Read up on The Ticking Time Bomb Scenario & the banning of torture.
Innocence doesnt "depend on what is at risk." Everyone is innocent until proven guilty under the law. Child innocence is something completely different.
The Ben F quote is not out of context. The freedom of the Japanese was sacrificed in the name of security.
If the needs of the many r paramount then slavery is justified.
@fegolem You would think differently if you or your family were shipped off & tortured in Guantanamo with no charge or trail. It is never necessary to remove anyone's human rights. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial. The human rights abuses that we see done in the name of security will always be an embarrassment.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
@fegolem The same concerns exist today. The 911 attacks and subsequent attempts have awoken the same paranoia. This paranoia is healthy and necessary. "The threat of destruction from within its own populace was real. Infiltrators and sleeper agents could have easily done great damage." "You must realize, the safety of a prosperous nation was at risk. It was ugly but necessary."
It was difficult to trust people you don't know or understand the history, lineage, psychology, or intentions. These governments had little choice than to error on the side of caution. The threat of destruction from within its own populace was real. Infiltrators and sleeper agents could have easily done great damage. It was decided better safe than sorry. You must realize, the safety of a prosperous nation was at risk. It was ugly but necessary.
Excellent post I must say.
VideoGameCoupons 1 month ago
Canada has changed a lot from this thinking since back then obviously, but it's still hard to wrap my mind around how Canada actually interred it's Japanese citizens during the war years. It also happened to us Germans during the Great War years too to some degree. You wish it never happened, but it did happen.
pspboy7 1 year ago
@fegolem I should have added "under the law" to that.The most extreme situation is the Ticking Time Bomb Scenario.Read up on it
"Reasonable suspicion" is not grounds 4 removing rights.If they cant b charged (even on conspiracy) then u cant violate their rights
Ben Fs "Give up" applies 2 a nation cuz when we allow 1 group of ppl to have their rights taken away on "suspicion" then we accept that any1 of us could also b taken away.We have collectively given up our rights in the name of security
Inferno350 1 year ago
@Inferno350 "Theres no 'big picture' in which [Human rights] can b removed." There are extreme situations that would probably change your mind.
"Everyone is innocent until proven guilty under the law." Yes, under normal peace time circumstances. With reasonable suspicion, you can be detained.
Ben F said "give up" as in your own (first person) liberty. The Japanese had theirs taken away by others. It could apply but not precisely enough.
...needs of the many justifies slavery... No.
fegolem 1 year ago
@fegolem Human rights r inalienable. Theres no "big picture" in which they can b removed. Read up on The Ticking Time Bomb Scenario & the banning of torture.
Innocence doesnt "depend on what is at risk." Everyone is innocent until proven guilty under the law. Child innocence is something completely different.
The Ben F quote is not out of context. The freedom of the Japanese was sacrificed in the name of security.
If the needs of the many r paramount then slavery is justified.
Inferno350 1 year ago
David Suzuki will kick your ass!..(If you use Palmolive dish soap)
DAZEOFTHESTONED 1 year ago
@Inferno350 "You would think differently..." Perhaps. If they knew the big picture and what was at risk, perhaps you would too.
Innocent until proven guilty? Depends on what is at risk. You are only truly innocent when you are still a child.
"The human rights abuses that we see done in the name of security will always be an embarrassment." AGREED!
I've always liked that Ben Franklin quote. It's a little out of context here.
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."
fegolem 1 year ago
@fegolem You would think differently if you or your family were shipped off & tortured in Guantanamo with no charge or trail. It is never necessary to remove anyone's human rights. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial. The human rights abuses that we see done in the name of security will always be an embarrassment.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Inferno350 1 year ago
@fegolem The same concerns exist today. The 911 attacks and subsequent attempts have awoken the same paranoia. This paranoia is healthy and necessary. "The threat of destruction from within its own populace was real. Infiltrators and sleeper agents could have easily done great damage." "You must realize, the safety of a prosperous nation was at risk. It was ugly but necessary."
fegolem 1 year ago
It was a different era.
It was difficult to trust people you don't know or understand the history, lineage, psychology, or intentions. These governments had little choice than to error on the side of caution. The threat of destruction from within its own populace was real. Infiltrators and sleeper agents could have easily done great damage. It was decided better safe than sorry. You must realize, the safety of a prosperous nation was at risk. It was ugly but necessary.
fegolem 1 year ago