mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:

> Eric Takabayashi <etakajp@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
> > mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:
>
> >> > Basically, it is granting law enforcement the power and authority as well
> >> > as the hardware, to "know", instead of simply relying on what legal
> >>
> >> Cool; we can return to the days of (eg) the Jim Crow South, when cops
> >> "knew" that some "nigrahs" committed such and such an act.
> >>
> >> Or do you prefer the days of early WW II US, when west coast officials
> >> "knew" Japanese-Americans were disloyal?
>
> > Those who practiced discrimination did not have the means to know the truth.
>
> Actually, they did; the FBI kept good lists of potential trouble-makers.

Did they actually know what the people were doing and what they were saying, in
order to tell them that the vast majority of JAs had no loyalty issues, and were
not spies or even potential spies?

Were they watching individual black people to be able to know whether or not they
actually were the ones who committed the crimes they were accused of, or was
there a system of surveillance as simple as ATM cameras or cameras at cash
registers, or home video security systems, to offer even a clue of who actually
committed said crime?

No, the people who had it in for JAs or blacks did not know the truth.

> Seemed to think it was OK on the East coast with the German/Italian
> Americans...

--
 "I'm on top of the world right now, because everyone's going to know that I can
shove more than three burgers in my mouth!"