Some will read this account as a partial vindication of how the decision was made, and that this excuses the actions of the Canadian government. The decision was fraught with racism as previously shown, and that the decision may have been justified in the absence of racism is immaterial to the obligation of those involved to rectify this racism. If an employer fires an employee for both being incompetent and Japanese, the employee would still have a legitimate claim against the employer. As well, this account does not imply that the Canadian Japanese were 'up to something', or 'asked for it'. There has been no evidence to support this, and it has been shown that the recruiting actions of the Japanese Consulate were generally a failure(58). The goal was to look at the decision from the perspective it was made. The result is a condemnation of both 'received' versions of the internment decision. Historians in the past who have argued on the basis of pure racism, or pure military necessity, are guilty of selective interpretation. The decision to intern was both a military requirement, and an action of monumental intolerance, prejudice, and ignorance.