In article <d01atj$1fqc$1@nwall1.odn.ne.jp>, anko@eater.com says...
> 
> "Vernon North" <verno@oyama.bc.ca> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1c8d8a57a112290c989dbd@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net...
> > In article <d00kdu$4mr$1@nwall1.odn.ne.jp>, anko@eater.com says...
> > >
> > > "Vernon North" <verno@oyama.bc.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:MPG.1c8d5ce731ad2091989dba@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net...
> > > > In article <1109631441.040499.208810@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> > >
> > > > Your original post was wrong.  You're trying to hide it by snipping
> your
> > > > mistakes and changing the subject.  The Japanese did NOT attack Pearl
> > > > Harbour because the US had imprisoned Japanese Americans, as you
> claimed
> > > > earlier.  There was no mass internment of Japanese Americans until
> > > > several months after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour.
> > > >
> > > > Verno
> > >
> > > Verno is wrong as usual. There were no Japanese Americans at that time.
> >
> > In that case, outland is wrong, too.
> >
> > > Those "japs" in California were rejected to be American citizens,
> >
> > Oh really?  Then how could some renounce their AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP to
> > protest their treatment?
> 
> http://brownvboard.org/brwnqurt/03-4/03-4a.htm
> Beginning in 1909 and continuing until after World War II, anti-Japanese
> bills were introduced into the California legislature every year. The issue
> of U.S. citizenship eventually was decided by the 1922 Supreme Court
> decision Takao Ozawa v. United States which declared that Japanese were
> ineligible for U.S. citizenship. ?gFree white persons?h had been made
> eligible for citizenship by Congress in 1790. Due to some ambiguity about
> the term ?gwhite,?h some 420 Japanese had been naturalized, but a ruling by
> a U.S. attorney general to stop issuing papers to Japanese ended the
> practice in 1906. The Supreme Court ruled that since Ozawa was neither a
> ?gfree white person?h nor an African by birth or descent, he did not have
> the right of naturalization as a Mongolian.

You didn't answer the question. Instead, you changed the subject.

You said:

"Those "japs" in California were rejected to be American citizens"

WRONG.  I pointed out that thousands had renounced their AMERICAN 
CITIZENSHIP to protest their treatment.  HOW COULD THEY RENOUNCE THEIR 
CITIZENSHIP IF THEY WERE DENIED CITIZENSHIP?


> 
> > > they were
> > > not allowed to own any land there,
> >
> > Really?  Then why did they protest losing their PROPERTY?
> 
> http://www.gasi.org/diversity/cohort/japanese_am_cohort.htm
> 1913 - California's "aliens ineligible for citizenship" prohibited from land
> ownership; only "free white persons" eligible for citizenship; 3 year limit
> on land leases; similar laws in 10 other states.

You changed the subject again.

Your claim was that "they were not allowed to own any land there".

WRONG.  HOW COULD THEY PROTEST THE LOSS OF THEIR PROPERTY IF THEY HAD 
NONE?

> <snipped off racist's rants and lies>
> 
You obviously can't read.  I have argued many times on soc.culture.japan 
that the treatment of Japanese leading up to and during WWII was 
shameful and illegal.  That doesn't stop me from correcting you when you 
post lies.  Loyalty to the truth is not racism, you moron.  

Verno