Hope I haven’t run you off.

I don’t generally base my opinions on reviews of books, movies, videos, etc. I’ve found that some of the the best get panned by reviewers (like Terry Gilliam’s excellent movie “Brazil.”)

I don’t claim to be a “scholar” and I prefer to read about history, rather than historical novels. I also have not read Michelle Malkin’s book, although I’ve read her columns and heard her on radio. Since then I began paying attention to her website several years ago on an on-and-off basis. With those caveats, let me continue.

By the time I first heard Malkin on talk radio I was already familiar with her newpaper columns that appeared occasionally, and liked her straight talk. She was hawking the book you refer to, and I thought it was a very interesting take on a touchy subject that most of the media had ignored. I was impressed that she didn’t sugar coat the facts.

The year of 1941 was similar in many ways to the aftermath of 11 September 2001. The American public was outraged. Something had to be done. I’m not going to prattle on about history, but there were genuine instances of Japanese sabotage as well as German spying on our mainland that required that Roosevelt do something, and internment was something he did.

Note that a lot of American citizens of German ancestry were incarcerated as well. I’m not saying that the decision was a good one, but it quelled the fears of an alarmed public. There would not have been any internment of U.S. citizens had Imperial Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor. You can’t dispute that fact.

Historical fact is not Michelle Malkin’s fault.

Three must-read non-political books that are related to this discussion are: “The CodeBreakers” by David Kahn and “Double-Edged Secrets” by W.J. Holmes. I guarantee either one will give you a very different perspective on this country’s current situation.

The third book is more recent, and I couldn’t put it down: “Lone Survivor” by Marcus Luttrell. Excellent stuff.

Thanks for letting me vent a tad.

–Bunk

After I read Eric Muller’s preliminary critique of her book a couple of years ago (read here for a later summary of that critique), I borrowed a copy of her work and read it in comparison to what I’d read in grad school – Prange, Spector and various other articles, monogrpahs and documents on Magic (the Japanese diplomatic code) and Pearl Harbor.

In the end, I came to the conclusion that Malkin is a cheap pseudoconservative whore who disregards available historical evidence while looking for any quick justification of Bush administration efforts to violate the Geneva accords of 1948, long-standing laws of war governing captives of various categories, and the habeas corpus provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

Pat Buchanan – often cited as a contemporary of Malkin – has far, far often shown a better grasp of history and a better capacity to draw logical, rational conclusions from history than Malkin has demonstrated in “In Defense of Internment”.

Malkin would do well to look at the jouranlism and scholarship of Georgie Anne Geyer – another so-called conservative – who has also demonstrated again and again the intelelctual capacity and agility to look at modern events in a historical context and avoid the simplistic.

Malkin’s depth of historical understanding and context is, at best, shallow.

Nothing against you at all, Bunk, but if Malkin is entitled to her opinions, then so am I.