[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 184 (Thursday, December 17, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8788-S8789]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REJECTING HATEFUL RHETORIC
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, for more than 235 years, the United States
has served as a beacon of hope and opportunity for millions coming to
our shores seeking a better life. Ours is a nation founded upon the
ideal of freedom, and throughout our history, there have been moments
when this most fundamental ideal has been challenged. The complicated
history of our Nation is not without its dark moments, but at every
turn, we have sought to recommit ourselves to our basic ideals and
principles, always moving to be a more inclusive society.
Today, as some continue to espouse hate-filled views that demonize
those of a certain faith, we need thoughtful voices to speak out and
remind us all of what we stand for as Americans. In his column this
weekend in the Rutland Herald, veteran journalist Barrie Dunsmore did
just that. He reminded us that in the wake of the attacks on Pearl
Harbor, our own government rushed to judge Japanese Americans and
imprisoned them in internment camps out of fear they sought to do us
harm. This was a deplorable response to a national tragedy that remains
a stain on our history. Mr. Dunsmore reflected on how this fear was
perpetuated by news media professionals who enabled these scare tactics
through their reporting and the response by some elected leaders who
also promulgated this fear through their own actions.
Fear is what drove the racist and unconstitutional response to
Japanese Americans in the wake of the attacks on Pearl Harbor in 1941.
And fear is what is encouraging some to recklessly hurl suspicion on
Muslim Americans today in the wake of a terrorist attack in San
Bernardino, CA, and unrest around the world. As Americans, we must
categorically reject the divisive and corrosive rhetoric of fear that
only serves to undermine us as a nation.
Americans cannot let themselves be coerced by the politics of fear
today. If we do, then the terrorists and extremists will have won.
Terrorists want us to be afraid, and they want us to be a nation
divided. Groups like ISIS actively promote the narrative that Muslims
are not welcome in the United States, and the xenophobic, hateful
rhetoric espoused by some today plays into our enemies' hands. It also
demeans us as a democratic nation founded on the principles of freedom,
equality, and liberty. We should not let our country be defined by
irresponsible fear-mongering. We are better than that.
Columns like the one written this weekend by Barrie Dunsmore are
important reminders of just how far we have come as a nation. We cannot
turn back now, and we cannot turn against our fellow Americans now.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of Barrie
Dunsmore's column from Sunday, December 13, 2015, be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Rutland Herald, Dec. 13, 2015]
Fear in the Driver's Seat
(By Barrie Dunsmore)
``Nothing in modern politics equates with the rhetoric from
candidate Trump.'' So wrote Dan Balz this past week in The
Washington Post.
Balz is the Post's veteran and scrupulously nonpartisan
senior political correspondent. He also wrote: ``Trump's call
for a ban on Muslims entering the United States marked a
sudden and sizable escalation--and in this case one that sent
shock waves around the world--in the inflammatory and
sometimes demagogic rhetoric of the candidate who continues
to lead virtually every national and state poll testing whom
Republicans favor for their presidential candidate.''
Evidence of Trump's support can be seen in polls since the
Muslim ban idea was proposed, in which a substantial majority
evidently agrees with him.
In offering a defense for his latest scheme, Trump cited
President Franklin Roosevelt's decision to intern thousands
of Japanese-Americans shortly after the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor in 1941. News reports this past week have
mentioned this comparison--which was probably news to many
Americans. When I was teaching a semester at Middlebury
College, a senior who was an A student, told me he had never
heard of the Japanese internment. That inspired me to give
the subject extra attention in class, and to recall that
period of history in this newspaper nearly a decade ago. What
follows are elements of that column.
On Dec. 7, 1941, Japanese forces attacked Pearl Harbor,
killing more than 2,000 people and destroying much of the
U.S. Pacific fleet. On Feb. 19, 1942, President Roosevelt
signed executive order No. 9066.
Over the next eight months, 120,000 individuals of Japanese
descent were ordered to leave their homes in California,
Washington, Oregon and Arizona. Two-thirds were American
citizens representing almost 90 percent of all Japanese-
Americans. No charges were brought against these individuals;
there were no judicial hearings.
After being temporarily held in detention camps set up in
converted race tracks and fairgrounds, the internees were
transported to concentration camps in the deserts and
swamplands of the Southwest. There, they were kept in
overcrowded rooms with no furniture other than cots,
surrounded by barbed wire and military police. There they
remained for three years.
Why did this happen? In a word: fear. But it was a fear
that was incited, encouraged and exploited by political
players of many stripes. In the weeks that followed the
attack on Pearl Harbor, California was teeming with rumors of
sabotage and espionage. The mayor of Los Angeles, Fletcher
Bowron, spread the story that Japanese fishermen and farmers
had been seen mysteriously waving lights along the state's
shoreline. The top American military commander for the
region, General John DeWitt, reported as true rumors that
enemy planes had passed over California--and claimed that
20,000 Japanese were about to stage an uprising in San
Francisco. All of these stories were false.
The news media also did its share of rumor-mongering. The
Hearst columnist Damon Runyon erroneously reported that a
radio transmitter had been discovered in a rooming house that
catered to Japanese residents. Even the respected national
columnist Walter Lippmann warned of a likely major act of
sabotage by ethnic Japanese.
It would not be long before virtually all West Coast
newspapers, the American Legion, the L.A. Chamber of
Commerce, a host of other business and fraternal
organizations--not to mention the area's top political and
military leaders--were demanding that all persons of Japanese
ancestry be removed from the West Coast. Many of these
demands were overtly racist, such as that of the attorney
general of Idaho, who proclaimed all Japanese should ``be put
into concentration camps for the remainder of the war . . .
We want to keep this a white man's country.''
Professor Geoffrey Stone points out in his book, ``Perilous
Times: Free Speech In Wartime,'' ``There was not a single
documented act of espionage, sabotage or treasonable activity
committed by an American citizen of Japanese descent or by a
Japanese national residing on the West Coast.''
President Roosevelt was not being pushed by his own
advisers to sign the order for the internment. Attorney
General Francis Biddle opposed it. So did FBI Director J.
Edgar Hoover who described the demands for mass evacuations
as ``public hysteria.'' Secretary of War Henry Stimson
thought internment was a ``tragedy'' and almost certainly
unconstitutional.
Professor Stone concludes, ``Although Roosevelt explained
the order in terms of military necessity, there is little
doubt that domestic politics played a role in his thinking,
particularly since 1942 was an election year.'' And, of
course, the U.S. had been attacked and was now involved in
another world war.
Those civil libertarians who opposed interment and thought
that the Supreme Court would ultimately reverse Roosevelt's
order would be disappointed. Two related cases eventually
reached the court, and in both, the convictions were upheld.
Years later some of those directly involved would publicly
express regret for their decisions in these cases. The
famously liberal Justice William O. Douglas later confessed,
``I have always regretted that I bowed to my elders.'' The
also noted liberal Chief Justice Earl Warren, who as attorney
general of California played a pivotal role in the process,
wrote in his memoirs in 1974 that internment ``was not in
keeping with our American concept of freedom and the rights
of citizens.''
On Feb. 19, 1976, as part of the national bicentennial,
President Gerald Ford issued a proclamation noting that the
anniversary of
[[Page S8789]]
Roosevelt's internment order was ``a sad day in American
history'' because it was ``wrong.'' Ford concluded by calling
upon the American people ``to affirm with me this promise:
that we have learned from the tragedy of that long ago
experience'' and ``resolve that this kind of action shall
never again be repeated.''
But fast forward four decades: another war, another
election. And many Americans seem perfectly willing to repeat
what was resolved never again to be repeated. Once again,
fear--dare I say--threatens to trump this country's better
instincts.
____________________