August 16, 1984 - CWIRC Hearings, Testimony of Lillian Baker

S. HRG. 98-1304

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON WARTIME INTERNMENT AND RELOCATION OF CITIZENS

HEARINGS

BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CIVIL SERVICE,
POST OFFICE, AND GENERAL SERVICES
OF THE

COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE

NINETY-EIGHTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON

S. 2116

TO ACCEPT THE FINDINGS AND TO IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON WARTIME INTERNMENT AND RELOCATION OF CITIZENS

AUGUST 16, 1984 -- LOS ANGELES, CA
AUGUST 29, 1984 -- ANCHORAGE, AK

Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1986

64-273 O

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402

64-273 O-86--1

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

WILLIAM V. ROTH, JR., Delaware, Chairman
CHARLES H. PERCY, Illinois		THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Missouri
TED STEVENS, Alaska		LAWTON CHILES, Florida
CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR., Maryland		SAM NUNN, Georgia
WILLIAM S. COHEN, Maine		JOHN GLENN, Ohio
DAVID DURENBERGER, Minnesota		JIM SASSER, Tennessee
WARREN B. RUDMAN, New Hampshire		CARL LEVIN, Michigan
JOHN C. DANFORTH, Missouri		JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi		DAVID PRYOR, Arkansas
WILLIAM L. ARMSTRONG, Colorado
JOHN M. DUNCAN, Staff Director
IRA S. SHAPIRO, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
TERRY JOLLY, Chief Clerk

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CIVIL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, AND GENERAL SERVICES
TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR., Maryland		JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
WILLIAM L. ARMSTRONG, Colorado		JIM SASSER, Tennessee
WAYNE A. SCHLEY, Staff Director
EDWIN S. JAYNE, Minority Staff Director
PAT PHILLIPS, Chief Clerk

NOTE: [Bracketed] text in original. This excerpt starts from page 412 of the record.

Senator STEVENS. Our next witness is Lillian Baker.

TESTIMONY OF LILLIAN BAKER

Ms. BAKER. My name is Lillian Baker.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present testimony, plus that which has been submitted earlier, for inclusion into the record of this hearing on S.2116, a bill to implement the findings and recommendations of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians.

Much has been stated here today, but very little has been questioned. A logical question has been brought up by Mr. Odoi, and I will ask it again. Why did the movement for redress and reparations wait until 40 years after the event?

Documentation shows that for 40 long years, a very carefully planned objective was orchestrated by a small group of dissidents to implant into the minds of the public and media the big lie. Repeated often enough, the big lie became a credo believed in by even the most patriotic citizens and many elected officials. It was accepted that the evacuation was the "most shameful episode" in American history, and a blot on our Nation's honor.

It was determined by those seeking redress and reparations that after 40 years those involved in the wartime decision to evacuate the west coast would either be dead or lacking the verve to contest the antics and the tactics of what Senator Hayakawa called a "wolfpack of young Japanese-American dissidents who weren't even born during World War II."

The timing is perfect, for to wait 50 years might mean a collision course with documentation that would then become public domain. Like the Kennedy papers, many of World War II's top secret documents have even yet not been declassified or reclassified. However, under the persistent prodding of our media, came the broadened 1977 Freedom of Information Act, and with it, a key to a Pandora's box filled with historical documents never before revealed. At last there came a shadow of doubt on the acceptance and highly propagandistic use of the term "concentration camp" which has even been used here today, when referring to the American Relocation Centers.

Even the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians recognized the historic inaccuracy of that term, and referred to the correct historical usage of relocation camp, or relocation center.

Yet as recently as last Sunday's Los Angeles Times, the term concentration camp was used in an article written for and paid for by the Japanese-American Citizens League, who have worked vehemently against the use of the term "Jap" -- and I agree with them. Jap is a demeaning term since World War II, because of its connotation which is demeaning to their race. "Concentration camp" is demeaning to every American, because it demeans their nationality.

Mrs. Bernstein, speaking on behalf of the Commission, quoted Ronald Reagan speaking in 1970 as the Governor of California. Yet 7 years after his 1970 statement, President Reagan wrote to me -- and I am quoting from his letter:

I must confess I have much more knowledge about the relocation camps now, thanks to you. There is no doubt in my mind it would be a great injustice to erect markers designating them as "concentration camps."

The Commission in its report, "Personal Justice Denied," does not ask that those historical markers at the War Relocation Centers be replaced -- that is not in their recommendation. These markers state that America had 10 concentration camps established out of racism, greed, economic, and political exploitation.

The markers were emplaced with the cooperation of the Japanese-American Citizens League, and were in fact the stepping stones upon which the concerted efforts for redress and reparations began in earnest.

The Commission claims that our Government made a decision to "exclude and detain Japanese-Americans." Nowhere in Executive Order 9066, of February 19, 1942, are the words "Japanese-Americans internment or detention."

The Executive order did nothing more than give the military the right to "exclude any and all persons from military designated areas."

In the testing of this order, our Supreme Court stated that in time of war, we must inevitably place our confidence in the military.

The Court clearly pointed out that there was evidence of disloyalty and that more than 5,000 Japanese-Americans refused to renounce the Emperor and give unqualified allegiance to the United States.

Yet the Commission claims there was not a single case of documented disloyalty. The Commission goes so far as to recommend Presidential pardons for "those convicted of violating exclusionary statutes."

One of those violators in Minoru Yasui, the Japanese-American Citizens League's director of Coalition of Redress and Repatriations, a man who was working in the Japanese Consulate's office in Chicago the day of Pearl Harbor and had previously registered as an agent for a foreign power -- Japan.

The Commission states, "A failure of political leadership was responsible for the evacuation, and for prolonging the closure of the relocation centers."

There is ample documentation which, sir, you do have, showing that the Japanese-American Citizens League, and the publications of the Japanese Chamber of Commerce in 1960, freely admit that when the United States tried to close down the relocation centers, a contingency of evacuees from the relocation centers went to Washington, DC, in early 1944, protesting the closure of the relocation centers for several reasons. Primarily, it was because their properties on the west coast were leased -- not lost -- for the duration of the war. This fact itself voids the argument that most properties were lost. Lands were leased and personal property stored at taxpayers' expense.

The evacuees protested the closures because they did not want to return to their communities until the war was over, and the documents even go on to show that some said "they would rather sit it out and see who will win the war."

According to the Commission's report, "Personal Justice Denied," and testimony before the congressional subcommittee, the Commission has based its findings on what it calls a "thorough review of a massive historical record."

This historical record consists of an extensive bibliography of books published prior to the broadened 1977 Freedom of Information Act, before any declassified information was available. The Commission uses only hearsay quotations which are taken out of context.

The Commission in its report boldly states that the Commission is beholden for assistance given them by proponents of reparation and activists working on behalf of the Japanese-American Citizens League.

The Commission had, in fact, prior to a single public hearing or even an hour's sincere scholarly research, gone on record in the various media as "working for redress and reparations."

The Commission stated that the exclusion of persons of Japanese descent from the west coast "is racist." Gordon Hirabayashi testified at the Washington, DC hearing in July 1981 -- which I attended -- that "America is a racist Nation and World War II was our excuse to practice it."

Hirabayashi was the test case for violation of wartime curfew which was upheld unanimously by our U.S. Supreme Court.

Hirabayashi spent 6 months in prison -- not for curfew violation -- but because he refused to register for the draft during World War II. He sat out the war in safety and subsequently went to Canada as a landed immigrant, and he is now asking for reparation.

He claims his civil rights were violated. If, in fact, the exclusion order or curfew was racist, why weren't all persons of Japanese descent throughout the United States affected? Why did it affect only those on the west coast?

The Commission wrongly states that there was no exclusion of Americans of German or Italian descent. In fact, the exclusion did affect German and Italian aliens. Joe DiMaggio's mother was one of those who had to vacate San Pedro.

However, Americans of German and Italian descent did not hold dual citizenship as was required by Japan of all compatriots born outside of Japan.

In addition, we were not expecting an invasion by either Germany or Italy on our west coast. The MAGIC papers prove conclusively that Japan was expecting the assistance of "first and second generation Japanese residing in the United States."

Because certain Japanese military conquests were not attempted does not prove that there were no such plans; because many documents are missing or have not yet been released does not mean that such military plans for invasion did not exist. That is why the Japanese-American dissidents do not want to wait 50 years, and why this movement has gone into effect 40 years after the fact.

The Commission's report and recommendations might be legitimate if this Commission made attempts to seek out documents that were available. After all, they were a Presidentially appointed Commission, and I am merely a historian and a reporter. Still, I had access to those archives. Instead, the Commission used carefully selected books, weary by oft repeated terms such as concentration camps, barbed wire, internees, watch towers, guard towers with rifles, et cetera, terms which became the battle cry for redress and reparations.

The Commission relied heavily on memoirs of those not privy to top secret documents, shared with only a few in the highest echelon of the oval office. Hearsay and conjecture are no more factual evidence than is personal opinion.

The Commission's so-called hearings were orchestrated, closed conference deliberations, limited to proponents for redress and reparations. The Commission solicited those who "could best testify before the media." The Commission worked diligently to prevent opposing viewpoints. In hearings before the Commission, there was no legitimate attempt to focus on historical records, but they preferred to use political rhetoric.

Opponents to redress and reparations should have been invited to challenge the emotional barnstorming, and the so-called oral history of these recruited evacuees. There is not a shred of documented evidence to support the findings and recommendations of this Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians.

What a tragic precedent, if our Congress were to accept the work of this politically appointed and motivated Commission, who so obviously has broken with everything expected of American legislative practice and procedures.

In vacating the Korematsu decision, even the Justice Department was willing to plea bargain with our country's honor. The Justice Department had the MAGIC papers and did not present it here in California, because, according to a letter I received, they didn't want to disturb the waters between the United States and Japan.

Any elected official who accepts the Commission's discourteous demands for a national apology makes a travesty of his oath of office in which he promised to uphold and defend our Constitution.

The U.S. Supreme Court, not the Commission on Wartime Relocation, makes the final, legal determinations of what is constitutionally correct, and our Supreme Court upheld the evacuation as nothing more than an exclusion order.

The court went to state "neither in fact nor by law" were evacuees required to go from an assembly center to a relocation center and many thousands did not.

In its 20-20 hindsight and revolting revision of historical events, the Commission has put itself above our highest tribunal. If an apology is due, it is this Commission who is obligated to apologize to the American people.

The proponents demands are based on the premise that "Our Nation should show a willingness to acknowledge imperfection."

Mr. Justice Felix Frankfurter, who added his comments to the 6 to 3 affirmative ruling in the Korematsu landmark case of Korematsu v. United States, addressed the premise taken by the Commission when he wrote "Those actions taken during time of war shall not be stigmatized as lawless, because like actions taken during time of peace would be lawless."

Senator Stevens, my 20 pages submitted to you prior to this hearing includes 16 additional exhibits of documentation over and above the 150 pages previously entered into the record of another hearing by a U.S. Senate subcommittee.

These documented facts and statistics entirely refute the report of the Commission, its findings and recommendations which were so clearly preordained and based on emotion, and not documentation.

Copies of my testimony and my documents have always been made available to the press, and I welcome any further inquiries or requests for documentation by your subcommittee to substantiate my presentation today.

I must commend you, sir, for the very civil manner in which I have been treated here. It is quite a change from the other hearings, and I want to compliment you on your fairness.

Thank you for inviting me.

Senator STEVENS. Thank you, Ms. Baker.

I do appreciate your testimony. We do have your prior statement and it will be made part of the record. Some of the documents have to be judged by our committee staff to determine whether they can be printed on to the record under the rules of the Senate, but we will do our best to print all that you have delivered to us.

Ms. BAKER. Senator Stevens, may I ask if there is anything in my statement or in my testimony today that you would like to question?

Senator STEVENS. No. It is not my purpose really to question today, but to get the information on the record so that we can analyze it to determine whether we will have further hearings in Washington on this legislation.

I thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Baker with attachments follows:]

OPPOSITION TO S.2116

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF LILLIAN BAKER
BEFORE THE SENATE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE
ON CIVIL SERVICE,
POST OFFICE, AND
GENERAL SERVICES ON S. 2116

AUGUST 16, 1984, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

The "findings and recommendations" of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, wholly fail in every respect in meeting the criteria expected of unbiased, accurate, investigative, ethical, scholarly, and traditional codes of American conduct in fulfilling its mandate as a "fact-finding" Commission. Because of these reasons, any legislation based on such "findings and recommendations," should be discounted and discarded.

The CWRIC placed stumbling blocks in the path of any concerned American willing to come forth on behalf of the United States, to testify and provide documented facts. In many instances, the CWRIC's efforts to place such impediments and snags, succeeded. When all else failed, the CWRIC acted in a most unprofessional and discourteous manner, i.e., it accorded the proponents of redress and reparations proper recognition and status, whereas in Baker's case, no such common courtesies were extended.

The CWRIC excluded vital written STATEMENTS from its PRESS PACK which was distributed to the media in Washington, D.C., during CWRIC's first hearing, July 16, 1981. Among these Statements and Testimony, that of John J. McCloy, former Asst. Secretary of War, during WWII; Karl R. Bendetsen, Col. AUS (Ret.), director of military operations during the evacuation to assembly centers on the Pacific West Coast; Dillon S. Myer, Dir., War Relocation Authority, (1942-1945); and Lillian Baker, published author/historian and investigative reporter, and spokeswoman for Americans for Historical Accuracy.

The CWRIC failed to include the full documented evidence provided by the above, in its report, PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED. It did not include the bulk of evidence provided by Baker which refuted statements and accusations made by the proponents of redress and reparations. This exclusion was aimed at discrediting Baker as a witness, author/historian, and investigative reporter. Baker was described as a "housewife," and "World War II widow," without acknowledgment of her professional status and background. In PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED, Baker's written statement and oral testimony is excluded, as is any reference to her appearances before the CWRIC in Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles (1981). Her research and publication was ignored, even though these attributes culminated in the 1983 Annual Award (scholastic category), by the Conference of California Historical Societies for "contributions to California history." Baker's book, THE CONCENTRATION CAMP CONSPIRACY: A SECOND PEARL HARBOR is not listed in CWRIC's report (bibliography); Baker's name is not indexed in this report; the book's title (mentioned in the Footnotes of PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED), is incorrect, as is the name and address of the publisher. As listed, it would be impossible for any interested party to locate this book for reference work. Furthermore, words and phrases were taken out of context and twisted so as to misrepresent Baker's views and posture regarding this issue. With over 350 pages of printed text and additional photographs, totaling more than 500,000 words, fewer than 100 were used in the most unethical fashion, with tactics reeking of distortion, dishonesty, and deliberate sophistry.

The CWRIC refused to delay its "findings and recommendations" until it could further study the legitimate causes of the evacuation. Such causes are carefully outlined in "The Magic Papers," (8 volumes of newly released information). The CWRIC refused to consider the documents provided by Baker which proved beyond doubt that it was the Japanese American Citizens League that was responsible for the postponement of the closing of the WRA centers in 1944 -- not political motivation. Baker's documents were rejected even though they provided ample evidence of documentation of disloyalty by Japanese-Americans. The CWRIC demand for an "apology" is audacious! Baker's documented evidence rules out any justification for monetary "compensation."

The U.S. Supreme Court, not the CWRIC, has decided what is constitutionally correct.

Lillian Baker
15237 Chanera Ave.
Gardena, CA. 90249

[1984 Fellow, International Biographical Association, Cambridge, England. Awardee, Freedoms Foundation at Valley Forge. Recipient, 1983 Annual Award, Scholastic Category, by the Conference of California Historical Societies, for "Contributions to California History." Listed: Who's Who of American Women.]

STATEMENT OF LILLIAN BAKER, Author/Historian
Testimony before the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services on S.2116, a bill to accept the findings and to implement the recommendations of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians.

Thank you, Senator Stevens and honorable members of the Subcommittee, for the opportunity to participate in the hearings on S.2116. This is greatly appreciated and I welcome further inquiry by way of questioning by any and all participants.

My book, THE CONCENTRATION CAMP CONSPIRACY: A SECOND PEARL HARBOR¹, and the recent United States government publication² about the Japanese-American redress issue, includes my oral and written testimony presented before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee of the Judiciary. I appeared before this Subcommittee at the Capitol, July 27, 1983, at my own expense, and presented more than 150 pages of additional documentation besides that which appears in my book. These declassified historical documents from the United States Archives, offer legal contradictions to the findings and recommendations of the Carter-appointed Commission, and are historically accurate rebuttals to the baseless premise upon which S.2116 was initiated.

These 150 pages of documents and my book, were previously submitted to the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, which chose to ignore the documented facts therein, as well as the contents of a book which represented more than a decade of intensive and scholarly research. The book's Introductory Remarks were written by the former War Relocation Authority Director, Dillon S. Myer; still, the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians discarded his words as irrelevant, and furthermore refused to included his written testimony into the permanent record of its report, PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED.

S.2116 asks for the implementation of the "findings and recommendations" of this Commission, under the guise of "civil rights violations." This bill, and all prior bills ("redress and reparations"), propose unjustifiable raids of billions of tax dollars from the United States Treasury; even more outrageous, S.2116 which would call for a "Congressional apology," is the assault against the honor of our Country and the integrity of its elected officials who were our highly respected and patriotic leaders during World War II.

President Reagan told me during a telephone conversation and in a letter, that I had educated him on the subject of the World War II evacuation, and the issues involved in the demand for monetary reparations and a government "apology."

Recently, a Federal Judge in Washington, D.C., dismissed the claims by the Japanese American Citizens League for monetary reparations, stating that the Statute of Limitations had run out; but even more important, the Judge stated emphatically that the documents presented by the JACL were "nothing new" and had been available for a long time. This was the same argument I presented to our Attorney General when I visited his office in Washington, D.C., and plopped about four inches of documentation on his desk, including the Public Law passed by the Congress,³ which paid all claims in 1948 and again in 1952. This Public Law also stated that filing of such claims had to be made within 18 months of this law and that payment constituted a settlement of all claims for all time in the future. In addition to this document, I placed on the Attorney General's desk, documentation released under the broadened 1977 Freedom of Information Act, hoping that these documents would assist our U.S. Department of Justice in vigorously defending our government's wartime action.

If my intensive research could educate a President, surely it is hoped that other elected officials in the honorable service of the United States could be enlightened as well and judiciously act under the Oath of Office each of them took on behalf of all Americans. However, several have chose the political path rather than that of Statesmen and inspired leadership.

Even after being confronted with documents and facts proving conclusively that our government's wartime action was upheld as constitutionally correct by our Supreme Court, the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians still refused to alter its political posture. Those who served on the Commission even published their personal political opinions before a single public hearing had been held.⁴ More than 1.5 million tax dollars were spent to "study any wrongs of our government action," while consistently and intentionally placing stumbling blocks in the paths of any individual who dared oppose the Commission's preordained conclusions.

The majority of those in the Senate who have either authored or co-sponsored S.2116, have actually been misled by the media and have been denied previously classified documents released under the broadened 1977 Freedom of Information Act. In turn, the media has been force-fed improper-ganda by the Commission on Wartime Relocation, which actually refused to accept or hear testimony from witnesses who might cry "foul" to the undemocratic practices and procedures of this Commission.

Books written prior to 1977, have been boggled down with historical inaccuracies and political rhetoric, no less personal philosophical leanings, opinions and assumptions. And these are the publications upon which this politically appointed Commission has based its "findings and recommendations." This writer has tossed out the gauntlet in the form of a challenge to debate this most misunderstood and propagandized action of WWII, but the proponents have not only refused the challenge but with the approval and even the cooperation of some members of the staff of the Commission, have succeeded in denying me my own civil rights of freedom of speech and access to the airways and other media.⁵

This writer has documented evidence which clearly discredits this Commission, which includes deliberate destruction of testimony, the refusal to accept testimony of pro-America witnesses, and the undemocratic pursuit of discriminating against opponents to redress and reparations demands, including character assassination. This can be reported from first-hand experience.

Surely no legislation based on the so-called "findings and recommendations" of such a Commission can be acceptable or valid.

Baker's position is this:

During World War II, millions of Americans were called upon to make wartime sacrifices, including the loss of homes, properties, businesses, loved ones, and educational opportunities. They also suffered mental and physical abuses, not only at the hands of our enemies, but because of the anti-German, anti-Italian, anti-Japanese feelings following the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the declaration of war against the United States by Germany and Italy. Many persons of German and Italian descent changed their names and in some cases transferred their children to schools outside their neighborhoods to avoid discrimination by thoughtless school children. Some families were separated when German and Italian aliens were deported or denaturalized; even Joe DiMaggio's mother was evacuated from San Pedro which was one of the vital areas of defense on the West Coast. In wartime, all citizens lose ordinary civil rights. Who truly retains "civil rights" in wartime? The draftees? Defense workers "frozen" in their jobs?

During World War II, the United States had the legal right under recognized international law, to intern all alien enemies (German, Italian, Japanese, and other nationalities giving "aid and comfort or sympathy" to our enemies). Nowhere in Executive Order 9066, Feb. 19, 1942, is the word "American" or "internment" used. The order was nothing but an exclusion order, not an order for internment.

The United States is the only nation at war that did not intern both innocent aliens with enemy aliens known to have proven charges against them. The only German, Italian, or Japanese aliens interned in the Department of Justice internment camps, were those proven to be a danger to our national security. No Presidential Warrant of arrest was issued without substantiated charges. Alien enemies were not descended upon, "en masse," unless there was a warrant. Our "civil rights" laws were still intact even as America was fighting for its very existence, ill-prepared for the war-horses of Japan, Germany, or Italy.

The United States, in its humanitarian effort toward aliens caught in a host nation in time of war, went one step further when in keeping with the Japanese tradition, families of Japanese enemy aliens were permitted to reside together in the "hard-core" internment camp at Crystal City, Texas. At Crystal City, resided the pro-Japan alien enemy father of the late Edison Uno, the founder and leader of the organization demanding compensation and a government apology. Edison Uno used to boast that he was the last one to leave Tule Lake Segregation Center for the "disloyals," and then joined his father at Crystal City for the duration of the war. JACL activists used Edison Uno as their spokesman in the debate, "Concentration Camp v. Relocation Center," during the hearings in California. Despite the fact that Lillian Baker was joined unanimously by the California Landmarks Commission in voting DOWN the use of the term "concentration camp," Uno and his "followers" succeeded in buying political clout. Thus, through political machinations which seemingly have continued, we have historical landmarks on American soil which state that America had "concentration camps" established out of "greed, economic and political exploitation, and racism." These markers are in defiance of our Supreme Court's edict which deemed it "unjustifiable to call (the relocation centers or the assembly centers) 'concentration camps' because of the ugly connotations that term implies."⁶

Those California landmarks of bronze and stone, became the stepping stones for the JACL's Coalition for Redress and Reparations, which ultimately led to the first of several bills calling for monetary reparations. These are the bills which Senator Hayakawa said would "fall on the weight of its own absurdity."

It is consistent and applicable to this testimony, that the writer report the "uncivilized behavior" of the audience in the Capitol and Los Angeles, during the first hearings held by the Commission on Wartime Relocation. I do not use that term loosely, for how else would one describe a portion of our American society who reacts so violently to any opposition to their demands, by shouting, hissing, using profanities, character assassination, and threats of physical harm? This writer was ordered out under guard by the Commission, and during one incident ill-reported and unfactually presented in the media and for the record, the police escorted me out of the hearing room for what I was told, "protective custody."

When I debated Roger Daniels,⁷ Professor of History (Cincinnati, Ohio), on a TV forum in Seattle, Washington, I was told to "keep off the streets of Seattle for my own safety"; while testifying in Washington, D.C., my husband received telephone threats against my life if I "dared appear in Gardena" during a meeting of the Coalition for Redress and Reparations. I did appear, with several other opponents, and when challenged by one of the panelists as to what gave me the right to speak against a member of the 442nd J-A unit, I stated that I was speaking on behalf of my first husband who died in WWII. This explanation brought hand-clapping and cheers, whereupon two other women left -- one stating to the audience that when they "applauded the death of Mrs. Baker's husband, you are applauding the death of my husband and every other serviceman who died in WWII." [In all fairness, an Issei came outside to apologize to Baker and the others for the discourtesy shown by the "younger generation."]

Yes, this Issei was correct when he stated that the younger generation of Japanese-Americans are the activists in an action they never experienced or were too young to understand its necessity.⁸

The most misunderstood issue concerning the evacuation, was the dual citizenship held by American-born Japanese . Americans of German and Italian descent were not required to have dual citizenship.

No American citizen of Japanese descent, despite dual citizenship, ever suffered "internment," which was strictly for alien enemies. And internment was for the duration of the war. Congressman Robert T. Matsui was only 9 months old at the time of the evacuation. His parents were American citizens, holding dual citizenship. As with thousands of other evacuees, they evacuated and within 9 months had left Tule Lake Relocation Center and resided for the duration of the war doing farm work in Idaho. From the son of a farmer, Matsui rose to achieve status as a Member of Congress. Why did the Matsui family choose to go from an assembly center to a relocation center? Shouldn't the Congressman more properly have asked the adult member of the household who made that decision, rather than 40 years later beg of the Congress, "Why?" Since Matsui's father worked at farm labor during WWII, without serving in the U.S. armed forces, wouldn't he consider himself rather fortunate in contrast to those who left their homes for the duration and returned as casualties?

Congressman Matsui's testimony before the House Subcommittee stated that there was "barbed wire" and "sentry dogs." Actually, there is no photographic evidence that there was either "sentry dogs," or "fixed bayonets," or "strings of barbed wire" -- the catch-words used to stir the emotions, but based on absolutely no documentation whatsoever. To the contrary, there are thousands of photographs in the archives which would make laughable such claims, if such propaganda wasn't so tragic for Americans super-sensitive to self-image. The proponents of these legislative measures, count on the goodwill and willingness to accept guilt if labeled "racist," or "ethnic."

No American citizen among the evacuees was ever denied habeas corpus. Indeed, three test cases went through our courts during the war, even while America was engaged in mortal combat with our enemies. Had the leader of the JACL Coalition for Redress and Reparations, Min Yasui, been under the 1952 law regarding American citizens serving under a foreign power, he would have been denied American citizenship. The day of Pearl Harbor, Min Yasui was working in the Japanese Consulate's office (Chicago), having previously registered as an agent for a foreign power (Japan). Still, his case went all the way to the Supreme Court and was decided unanimously against him. Yet Yasui claims he was denied "redress."

Redress was never denied an American citizen. Our landmark test cases for curfew and the exclusion order are verification of this fact. Curfew was upheld unanimously by our Supreme Court. In the Korematsu case, the testing of Executive Order 9066, Feb. 19, 1942, was affirmed 6-3 as constitutionally correct, and as "nothing more than an exclusion order." The Court stated that neither in fact nor by law were evacuees required to go from an assembly center to a relocation center, and many thousands did not but evacuated to the other 44 States unaffected by the exclusion order.⁹

The Congress of the United States took an oath of office to act lawfully and to uphold the Constitution of the United States. The United States Supreme Court, not a Presidentially appointed Commission, is the keeper of our Constitution and decides the constitutionality of actions taken by the President.

As for the relocation centers: the evacuees themselves held two testimonial dinners honoring the director and staff of the War Relocation Authority. At war's end, they honored them for "the humane treatment and understanding" of a wartime dilemma -- that dilemma being the problem of DUAL CITIZENSHIP.

Not a single charge of "inhumanity" was ever brought against the United States government, the administrators of the WRA and its staff, by any evacuee... until the movement for redress and reparations began in the early 1980's. A few well-rehearsed witnesses appeared before the Commission on Wartime Relocation, complaining about the lack of medical treatment and poor medical judgment. It was never appointed out that one of the leaders of this movement, Attorney Frank Chuman, was the Administrator of the Medical Hospital at Manzanar War Relocation Center. The doctors were the evacuees themselves, many of them giving up practices in the other 44 States and voluntarily coming into the relocation centers.

If there was so-called "malpractice," why should these evacuees 40 years after the fact, come to American taxpayers? They should seek redress from those who made the medical decisions. Ironically, while one evacuee testified about a birth defect, the documented statistics show that the highest live-birth rate and lowest incidence of disease anywhere in the U.S.A. during WWII was in the relocation centers.

Another evacuee tearfully testified how her father "died needlessly" after being transferred from Manzanar to Arizona -- another decision made by Japanese doctors and medical staff. Interestingly enough, this same evacuee testified that she had brothers residing in States unaffected by the evacuation. The question is: why didn't they accept their Issei father into their homes and under their care?

Unfortunately, the Commission accepted this testimony without a single shred of documented evidence to substantiate these emotion-laden claims. Everything the Commission applauded and used to base its "findings and recommendations" are hysterical outbursts tempered toward media viewing -- for it is a fact that those who were willing to give testimony actually attended classes and sessions which taught "how best to testify before the Commission, the public, and the media." The JACL nest-egg, begun by the 10% it charged for representing evacuees for claims under the Public Law in 1948, has financially backed and funded this disgraceful second-raid on the United States Treasury. That 10% was taken off the top of $38,000,000 (WWII monetary exchange) paid in monetary reparations.

The closing of the WRA centers, which was proposed in 1944, was PROTESTED by the evacuees themselves, because their properties were leased for the duration of the war, and the war did not end with Japan until 1945. Evacuees were not forced to labor; those who did work were paid the equivalent to men in uniform. Should they have been earning more? Would they have changed places with men in trenches or in bombed-out shelters -- or in the shelter of relocation centers where they sat out the war in safety?

The documentation previously submitted to the Subcommittee of the Judiciary on Administrative Practice and Procedure, U.S. Senate, is available to this Subcommittee, too.

The testimony presented to the Subcommittee and the position taken by me is historically accurate. As such, there is no justification for the actions taken by Legislators seeking implementation of the pre-ordained "findings and recommendations" of a Commission whose findings were forecast in the past, and under a cloud which casts a dark shadow of "cover-up," tainted by political bias and servitude.

My data refutes the Commission's "findings and recommendations," which are no more than the continuing propaganda that profits and benefits those who hope to postpone the truth. I look to the esteemed members of this Subcommittee, for leadership in exposing the unjust claims and accusations; to tame the wild recommendations of the Commission on Wartime Relocation by "magic." Let us make available "Magic Papers" and other documents so that we can at long last commit to posterity the truth of the proven need for the evacuation and exclusion of persons of Japanese descent from the West Coast.

The "darkest episode in American history" was neither the evacuation nor Hiroshima,¹⁰ but rather this current episode during which time some in Congress are willing to accept that Americans acted without honor or grace, even under the pressures of war. As our liberal jurist, Mr. Justice Felix Frankfurter of the Supreme Court stated, "actions taken during time of war shall not be stigmatized as lawless, because like actions taken during time of peace would be lawless."¹¹

My testimony is provided as a concerned American, historian, journalist, and World War II widow, and I consider this opportunity a duty and a privilege. Thank you again for allowing me to give a testimony which will be made part of the historical record.

FOOTNOTES

¹ 1981 publication, AFHA PUBLICATIONS, P.O. Box 372, Lawndale, CA 90260

² S.Hrg.98-485, July 27, 1983, Serial No. J-98-57, Government Printing Office, [Printed for use of the Committee on the Judiciary], Japanese American Evacuation Redress; HEARING before the Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure, United States Senate, Ninety-Eighth Congress, First Session on S.1520. The World War II Civil Liberties Violations Redress Act, and Reports of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians.

³ Public Law No. 886, (Evacuation Claims Statute), July 2, 1948, further amended in 1950-1952 to reimburse even for lost fishing pole.

⁴ John Tateishi, chairman of the JACL National Committee for Redress and Reparations, announced in the ethnic press and JACL's "PACIFIC CITIZEN," (December 1980), that his committee was planning "strategies for the hearings of the CWRIC." This group contacted JACL chapters across the country, obtaining names of suggested "witnesses" for the hearings. These witnesses were then carefully rehearsed as to how they could "best perform for the media" during televised hearings. Not a single Issei would testify against the United States, although the J-A's solicited some in the Japanese communities.

Joan Bernstein, CWRIC Chair, accepted the JACL Tri-District Conference invitation (March 27, 1981), to headline the redress panel discussion, Saturday, April 4th (Los Angeles Hilton Hotel). At the Hilton, Chair Bernstein made plain her bias and anti-U.S. stand regarding the evacuation and relocation. She stated then, prior to a single hearing being held, that she would "work FOR redress and reparations."

Paul Bannai, Executive Director of CWRIC, appeared at the final redress workshop, Sunday, July 19, 1981 (2:00p.m.), in the dining hall of Little Tokyo Towers. Bannai gave an updated report on the Washington, D.C. hearings. A "mock hearing" was held with Fred Okrand, LEGAL DIRECTOR OF THE ACLU, Rose Matsui Ochi, former U.S. Immigration Commissioner, and Attorney Richard Sherwood of the law offices of O'Melveny and Myers acting as the "commissioners." In the JACL's "PACIFIC CITIZEN," Friday, July 17, 1981, it was reported that the CWRIC "is vitally interested in hearing from witnesses what they would like to have the Commission recommend to the Congress that would be fair and just as redress for the wartime internment and relocation." Bannai answered questions from the audience and advice was given by the pro-redress factions as to how to best testify before the Commission when it came to Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Min Yasui, named JACL Redress Chair, March 1981, with Representative Norman Mineta appearing Saturday, May 16, 1981, as guest speaker at the testimonial banquet honoring John Tateishi. Congressman Mineta, co-authored the House Bill establishing the CWRIC.

On April 25, 1981, in preparation for the hearings by the CWRIC, the New York JACL orchestrated "mock hearings" at the Columbia School of Journalism, 116th St. and Broadway. This followed the theme first presented at the JACL National Convention in San Francisco, the summer of 1980.

On April 8, 1981, the RAFU SHIMPO, printed a photo of Joan Bernstein, CWRIC Chair, and a portion of her statement in which she "assured a group of some 150 Japanese Americans at the Los Angeles Hilton Hotel... that the World War II concentration camp experience of the Japanese in America will be set forth before the American people, and that the Japanese American community will have its day in court." Bernstein stated in her address before this group: "The Holocaust was my first and most emotional experience with tragedy. I would have hoped it would have been my last. Obviously it was not. That is why I cherish the opportunity to work with the Japanese American community and to commence this great inquiry into an event that does indeed stand as a blot upon the history of the United States." Bernstein held several meetings with attorneys from JABA (Japanese American Bar Association) as well as with members of the National Coalition for Redress and Reparations, and various JACL districts.

Friday, August 19, 1983, The RAFU SHIMPO reported that the JACL "has hired the public affairs counsel to the CWRIC, in a slot budgeted for a legal assistant with $3000 to go toward 60 days worth of promotional work, such as that which got New York's JACL President, Tom Kometani, on the MacNeil Lehrer Report, the day the Commission's recommendations were released."

⁵ The JACL and National Coalition for Redress and Reparations, used character assassination by describing Baker as a "Nazi," and the organization AMERICANS FOR HISTORICAL ACCURACY as the same racist Torrance-based organization with a similar name which lost its court battle in which it had claimed that the holocaust never happened. Baker's book, in fact, not only shows pictures of the holocaust but is the reason why she has fought against the use of the term "concentration camp" when describing the American war relocation centers. The JACL and the NCRR and its other branch organizations nationwide, have kept Baker off talk shows by refusing to accept invitations to debate. The policy of most stations is "equal time"; in many cases, Baker would not be allowed on the air unless a member of the opposition was represented at the same time. This "policy" did not apply "equally," since the JACL and proponents of redress and reparations bought air-time and "fairness" did not apply either, since Baker was never included in such programs. The FCC wrote in reply to Baker's letter that radio and TV stations now have the right to decide what issues are of "public importance"; what is "equal time," and exactly "who is a qualified representative" to rebute {refute} an issue. Those are the other tactics used to keep Baker off the air and out of the media. It would seem that if Baker's position didn't hold water, that her opposition would like to burst the bag in full public view; to the contrary, once debated (as in the case of Roger Daniels, Frank Chuman, and Peter Irons), they knew that documentation and facts provided by Baker would blow their own cover-up of these documents and facts and expose their purely emotional approach to the issues.

⁶ Mr. Justice Hugo Black's landmark opinion, KOREMATSU v. UNITED STATES, Oct. 1944 Term. [Full text of this 6-3 decision which upholds E.O. 9066, Feb. 1942, appears in Baker's book. It is the only history book which has the entire AFFIRMATIVE opinion. All other history texts report the dissenting view of Jackson and Roberts -- which does not constitute the legal decision of our Supreme Court. Why do history teachers and proponents of "r&r," and many legislators refer to the evacuation as "unconstitutional"? It was not.

Roger Daniels, author of CONCENTRATION CAMPS U.S.A., was co-editor of CWRIC's PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED. Daniels' notes rely heavily on his own publication written PRIOR TO 1977 RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.

⁷ JAPANESE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: A HISTORY OF 70 YEARS, published by Japanese Chamber of Commerce of Southern California (1960), takes up the question of DUAL CITIZENSHIP: "The Immigration policies of Japan at the time (WWII and prior) was to send immigrants out of Japan to earn a living."

"There were 35 prefectural overseas societies representing 33 prefects from which residents of Los Angeles and vicinity originally came from Nippon. The influence exerted by these kenjinkai groups is mute evidence of the strong adherence to their provinces of origin, the like of which is more pronounced among the Nipponese than any other nationalities. This is due to the importance placed on the family system in Japan where all the families are registered regardless of their residence elsewhere.

"The various attacks being made upon the loyalty of Japanese Americans to the United States by various groups in California and by some congressmen from the west coast brought up the problem of dual citizenship status for action. During October 1941, Secretary of War Stimson drafted proposed legislation to eliminate the complications of dual citizenship." [Dual citizenship was not a problem faced by Americans of German or Italian descent. It was a problem unique to the Americans of Japanese descent who were required to register in the prefecture of their parents' birthplace.]

Dec. 13, 1943, [Document 33 1.3 Guy W. Cook Nisei Collection, University of the Pacific], REPORT OF THE SPANISH CONSUL, Dept. of Justice CONFIDENTIAL classification, is relative to the uprising at Tule Lake Segregation Center. The problem of dual citizenship was evident when many Americans of Japanese descent asked for expatriation to Japan. The Tule Lake Segregation Center riots, participated in by so many American-born Japanese, gave comfort and aid to the enemy, Japan, who made much propaganda from these reports.

⁸ One fourth of all Americans of Japanese descent in the 10 WRA centers was only 15 years of age, and the rest were mostly youngsters. Among the latter group are those who have written the legislation 40 years later, asking for monetary reparations and an apology. Members of the Coalition for Redress and Reparations are either too young to remember WWII, or weren't even born. Representing this group are Mary Kochiyama and Pat Sumi, identified members of the Communist Party who went with Eldredge Cleaver to Hanoi broadcasting anti-American propaganda during the Vietnam War. Another activist is Warren Fujitani who had to be expelled from hearings in Sacramento and Sonoma because of his violent behavior and foul language.

⁹ Almost 3000 Japanese Americans spent the war years at colleges and universities throughout the United States, thus having a four year jump on returning G.I.'s. Ironically, almost 10,000 aliens and their American-born children asked to come into the relocation centers for the duration of the war. They were unaffected by E.O. 9066, Feb. 19, 1942, which applied to the West Coast War Zone only.

¹⁰ Bert Webber's "SILENT SIEGE: Japanese Attacks Against North America in World War II" (1984 release), gives documented details about Japan's frantic effort to build "the bomb," with Japanese submarines traveling to Europe for uranium; Webber tells what became of Japanese cyclotrons when American occupation forces in Japan discovered them at war's end.

Imperial Japan was working desperately on its own atom bomb, and our atomic scientists working on "The Manhattan Project" were well aware of the "race" to develop an atom bomb. Dr. Albert Einstein warned President Franklin D. Roosevelt that "we have to be first," because even one month prior to the successful American development of an atom bomb, Germany and Japan were still in that frantic race.

In 1949, Japan's renowned physicist, Hideki Yukawa, won the Nobel Prize for his development of a mesons-sub-atomic particle. (Source: "The Encyclopedia Britannica's listing of all Nobel Prize winners).

Lt. Leslie R. Groves, writing of The Manhattan Project in "Now It Can Be Told" (1962), reveals how close was the race for an atomic bomb.

The New York Times, (1945 edition), reports how the U.S. Army of Occupation in Japan, discovered the Japanese cyclotron -- one of only two in the world -- the other located at Berkeley, California. The Japanese scientists deplored the incident stating that this was one instance where "the military must never interfere with scientific research." (The "incident" was the destruction of the Japanese cyclotron and experiments with an atom bomb.) Dr. Nashima stated that to destroy the Japanese experiments with uranium was like sacking artworks in the Louvre Museum. the full and very detailed story of Japan's effort to build an atom bomb is told in Bert Webber's 1984 publication, "Silent Siege: Japanese Attacks Against North America in World War II" (Part A, SPECIAL PROJECTS: JAPANESE EFFORTS TOWARD BUILDING "THE BOMB").

The Rafu Shimpo, (Los Angeles' ethnic newspaper), reported that Japan was only 3 months away from its own atomic bomb when the U.S. dropped "the bomb" over Hiroshima. The atom bomb at Hiroshima did not come without warning. This site was chosen because it was the second largest military base away from the civilian masses on Japan's mainland. It was a military target.

The victims of the atomic bomb who are now seeking medical attention and "reparations" from the United States were not Japanese-Americans. Although they were born in the United States, these people with dual citizenship had renounced their U.S. citizenship and were actually working for Japan's war effort against the United States. In addition, their children were attending Japanese schools when the bomb hit. Had these Japanese-Americans renounced allegiance to the Emperor and given unqualified allegiance to the country of their birth (United States), they would probably have been executed or interned with other Allied civilians caught in the Pacific war theatre. Thus far, there's not a shred of evidence to show that any of these American-born Japanese protested Japan's war efforts against the U.S. On the contrary, Japanese-Americans in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki (the base for the largest Japanese fleet) willingly gave aid and comfort to our enemy, Japan. If these hapless victims want further "reparations," let them seek them from Japan to whom they pledged allegiance.

Today, Japan is one of the world's leaders in the use of atomic power -- surpassing the United States. Hiroshima and Nagasaki have leaped from the ruins, with United States aid, into a more flourishing city than prior to WWII.

August 6th should be celebrated as the day more than one million lives were saved on both sides. More persons died in the Allied bombings of Rotterdam than in both bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Americans have been gorged to the gills with anti-U.S. propaganda regarding the "first use" of atomic weapons. Americans and the world should be grateful that its first use was not in the hands of fascist regimes in Germany and Japan.

Remember, the U.S.A. gave warnings to our enemies who fully well knew what an atomic bomb meant. And even after the first bomb, Japan failed to heed another warning prior to Nagasaki bombing. Unlike the U.S.A., Japan's precedent at Pearl Harbor is sufficient to convince any historian that an American target would have been chosen without a forewarning from Japan. Let's set the historical record straight.

ENDNOTES

1) A copy of the BOOK REVIEW -- WORLD WAR II -- is attached to this Statement. The material in Bert Webber's book,^* SILENT SIEGE: Japanese Attacks Against North America in World War II, has passed the Book Selection Criteria for use in schools for upbuilding of curriculum in American history grades 8--up, and for general circulation in school and public libraries.

^* Bert Webber, Research Photojournalist, Post Office Box 11, Medford, Oregon 97501. Book distribution: PACIFIC NORTHWEST BOOKS CO., P.O. Box 314, Medford, Oregon 97501 U.S.A.

At long last, the documented truth about the dangers of invasion and actual enemy attack along our Pacific coast, are told in detail. The "second best kept secret of the war" was the success of one balloon-bomb (one of 30,000 sent across the ocean from Japan to set fire to our Pacific Northwest forests). Had the Japanese known of this success, which succeeded in killing a minister's wife and their five children, these tactics would have continued. (The "first best kept secret" was The Manhattan Project.) Journalists were instructed NOT TO PUBLISH the story of Japan's balloon attacks for two reasons: a) the military did not want Japan to believe the balloon attacks were successful; b) if the story got out in the newspapers, persons of Japanese descent would not be safe from the public anywhere in the United States. As it was, Japanese Americans and alien Japanese resided in the other 44 States which were unaffected by the exclusion order.

If Executive Order 9066, Feb. 19, 1942, and the subsequent military orders written under the "power to wage war successfully," was in any way "racist" -- why didn't these orders affect ALL PERSONS OF JAPANESE DESCENT throughout the United States? Persons of Japanese descent were not "rounded up en masse" and "put into concentration camps."

2) In PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED, (report of CWRIC), there is a footnote on the bottom of Page 27, to wit:

There is a continuing controversy over the contention that the camps were "concentration camps" and that any other term is a euphemism. The government documents of the time frequently use the term "concentration camps," but after World War II, with full realization of the atrocities committed by the Nazis in the death camps of Europe, that phrase came to have a very different meaning. The American relocation centers were bleak and bare, and life in them had many hardships, but they were not extermination camps, nor did the American government embrace a policy of torture or liquidation of the ethnic Japanese. To use the phrase "concentration camps" summons up images and ideas which are inaccurate and unfair. The Commission has used "relocation centers" and "relocation camps," the usual term used during the war, not to gloss over the hardships of the camps, but in an effort to find an historically fair and accurate phrase.

There is nothing in the recommendations of the CWRIC that the historical landmarks emplaced at the sites of the relocation centers across the United States be removed and replaced with historically accurate terminology. The same activists who have set about to dishonor America and are demanding unjustified monetary reparations used political clout and machinations to over-ride the decision of historians serving on commissions to rule on what is historically accurate for landmarks. In each case, those serving on such commissions clearly stated that "concentration camps" is inaccurate and politically motivated.

Yet we have markers at the sites of the WRA centers which state that America had "ten such concentration camps," and add insult to injury by further stating that the relocation centers were established "out of racism, greed, economic and political exploitation."

The site of the Tule Lake Segregation Center is marked with a bronze plaque stating that "women and children were place behind barbed wire." This is absolutely false! There was not a single string of barbed wire at Tule Lake when it was a relocation center. When it was transferred from the War Relocation Authority to the military, changing from a relocation center to a segregation center for the "disloyals" (those refusing to take unqualified allegiance to the United States, or waiting for expatriation or repatriation to Japan), there was barbed wire to keep control of anti-American persons within the confines of the segregation center.

Until that time, evacuees at the Tule Lake Relocation Center were not behind barbed wire, and there's ample photographic evidence that the evacuees enjoyed Sunday picnics on Castle Rock -- outside the limits of Tule Lake Relocation Center -- as well as sled-riding in the winters off those very same slopes.

Our United States Supreme Court admonished the ACLU in the case of Korematsu v. U.S., Oct. 1944 term, when the ACLU attorneys used the term "concentration camp" in its brief. The ACLU was admonished even when that term meant nothing more than "labor camp" or "a place for political prisoners." Our Supreme Court clearly recognized that the relocation centers and assembly centers were neither "labor camps" nor "places for political prisoners." Would the ACLU have used that term after 1945, when Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower marched into Dachau and discovered what Nazi concentration camps really were? Of course not. In Mr. Justice Hugo Black's opinion, written for the Court, he states that "regardless of the true nature of the assembly and relocation centers -- and we deem it unjustifiable to call them 'concentration camps' with all the ugly connotation that term implies -- we are dealing here specifically with an exclusion order."

Those historical landmarks MUST BE CHANGED to read historically accurate for now and posterity. Will the Congress and the members of the CWRIC take the lead in this endeavor? Will the JACL and the National Coalition for Redress and Reparations "implement" the "findings" of CWRIC's report PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED, by undoing their own work? In California, the sites of Manzanar and Tule Lake have landmarks emplaced by the Department of Parks and Recreation, "with the cooperation of the Japanese American Citizens League." Are historical landmarks to become chalkboards for political opinion? These two sites are the only ones NOT EMPLACED by the Commission responsible for the wording on markers. The Commission refused to state: "Emplaced by the California Historical Landmarks Commission." And for excellent reasons, as reported in my book.

3) In CWRIC's report, PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED, it states that "not a single documented act of espionage, sabotage or fifth column activity was committed by an American citizen of Japanese ancestry or by a resident Japanese alien on the West Coast."

The CWRIC makes this wholly inaccurate statement because it would not avail itself of the thousands of pages of vital statistics, evidence, and documentation proving the contrary to be true:

a) The day of Pearl Harbor, the FBI rounded up ALL JAPANESE ALIENS known to be a danger to the United States. These aliens were placed into an internment camp under the Department of Justice. According to the Department of Justice memorandum, Dec. 15, 1941, Re: Alien Enemy Program, at the outbreak of war, 2:30 P.M., Sunday, December 7, 1941, the Special Defense Unit from the F.B.I., from March 21, 1941 to 2:30 P.M., December 7, 1941 -- had over 4,779 dossiers (with 1,627 tentatively classified as native born citizens -- Japanese Americans).

The number of warrants prepared and issued by the Special Defense Unit between 2:30 P.M., December 7, 1941 and Dec. 14, 1941, totaled 3,101. (Japanese -- 1,121; Germans -- 1,757; Italians -- 223).

Those who were determined to be AMERICAN CITIZENS were not picked up by the FBI or any other agency. Criminal Division 81 memorandum, Civil Defense Section, had not yet determined "immediate prosecutive action." Quoting from the above-referenced memorandum, Dept. of Justice: "With respect to persons who have now been determined to be citizens, either naturalized or native born, but who were nevertheless found to be dangerous to our security..." Note that this information, plus "The Magic Papers" which showed that Japan was counting on the first and second generation Japanese (Issei and Nisei) in the United States to aid Japan in an impending invasion, is surely proof enough to discredit the CWRIC's "findings" regarding the "loyalty" of persons of Japanese descent.

b) At Tule Lake Segregation Center, although there were approximately six to seven thousand Americans of Japanese descent who were physically able to serve the United States in its armed forces, only TWO volunteered to do so. The remaining fell back on their dual citizenship, asking to be expatriated to Japan. Thus, they sat the duration of the war at Tule Lake, in safety, being fed, housed, given medical treatment and recreational facilities. The children of these expatriates were "innocent"; yet today, many of these children of the disloyals are activists in the movement to collect monetary reparations. Some of them returned to America with their once-disloyal parent(s), the latter having discovered that perhaps they had made a mistake after all. These are the people who were then allowed to file for claims and collected same in the extension of the Claims Act (1950-52). Shall taxpayers now be unjustifiably burdened by a second raid on the U.S. Treasury by those who refused to serve the U.S.A. during WWII?

4) The CWRIC's report, PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED, Page 1, has led the Congress and readers of this report into believing its statement: "In fulfilling this mandate, the Commission held 20 days of hearings in cities across the country, particularly on the West Coast, hearing testimony from more than 750 witnesses: evacuees, former government officials, public figures, interested citizens, and historians and other professionals who have studied the subject of Commission inquiry."

a) The 750 witnesses were HAND-PICKED and rehearsed by the JACL, the NCRR, the ACLU, and the staff of the CWRIC.

b) The CWRIC literally stacked the deck with officials they knew to be sympathetic to its preordained conclusions which had already been made public prior to a single hearing or testimony being heard.

c) The make-up of the Commission on Wartime Relocation was politically motivated, as was its establishment in the first place. Ironically, Baker was in favor of a Commission, hoping at long last that the documented truth would be told to counteract the 40 years of propaganda based on emotion and politics. Baker was invited to accept a Presidential appointment on the Commission, but turned it down. Although considered an honor, Baker felt that it would not be ethical for a member of this Commission to already have a viewpoint (whether based on documentation or not). Baker wanted to TESTIFY before an open-minded Commission willing to review the actual facts and circumstances as mandated by the Congress in its 1980 act which established the CWRIC. Congressman Dan Lungren, (R-CA), was then "drafted" to be a token of "non-partisanism." Any one studying the make-up of the Commission would know that the members were of one mind and political "heart," having gone on record years prior to the establishment of the Commission regarding the evacuation and exclusion orders. This was a stacked Commission from the start, and its staff was chosen strictly on the basis of prior commitment to redress and reparations success.

Not one single person named in "special thanks" from the Commission in its report PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED is known to have given any views or testimony to refute the Commission's preordained conclusions.

The Commission states in its INTRODUCTION that "a number of people in private life with particular knowledge or interest in the subject of the Commission's inquiry were especially helpful," and these people represent openly those who could add to the undocumented emotional findings of this Commission. Although the Commission was well aware of Baker's "particular knowledge or interest of the subject" -- (having written articles for more than a decade, debated the subject, contacted the Commission, etc.) -- the Commission did not seek "help" in obtaining evidence, documents, etc., available from Baker, and which were freely offered. These papers included the evacuee documents from the archives of the Stuart Library, University of the Pacific -- untouched by any of the people mentioned in CWRIC's PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED. The Commission obviously did not want to do its honest homework. It was only interested in the success of its political venture.

5) Documentation shows that although we had a force of fighting Americans of Japanese descent in the 442nd Combat Unit that went to Europe in 1944, these approximately 1,700 loyal Americans represent only 8 out of every 100 that could have served. It is clearly shown in documented statistics that 92% of Americans of Japanese descent held dual citizenship, and refused to to give unqualified allegiance to the United States and renounce the Emperor. The majority sat it out in safety at the relocation centers or were waiting expatriation at the Segregation Center at Tule Lake.

Surprisingly, over 16,000 requesting repatriation had never been to Japan! The 442nd Combat Unit came from the relocation centers in the latter part of 1943. None were made to fight in the Pacific arena whereas Americans of German and Italian descent were given no choice but to face an enemy which represented many of their own ancestors.

The 442nd Combat Unit, having been in the relocation centers from 1942 to the latter part of 1943, knew their alien parents and younger brothers and sisters were well cared for by Uncle Sam. Why else would they have come out of the relocation centers to fight for American and side by side with other Americans? Unfortunately, these loyal Americans should not be used to cover up the "collective guilt" of those who one member of the 442nd wrote to Baker, "have agonized for 40 years" about their disloyalty to the country of birth.

The CWRIC asks in S.2116 that we "review the less than honorable discharges" of Japanese-Americans. Among them are many prominent businessmen today who sat it out in safety at the relocation centers or who refused induction from those centers. On November 26, 1945, Salt Lake Nisei Jiro Sugihara was found guilty of draft violation having refused to report for army induction from Topaz Relocation Center. Sugihara recently made the news about his many successes in business. Obviously, the relocation center was preferable to service in the armed forces. There are more than 100 dishonorable discharges of those who were already in military uniform and refused to fight against Japan. Those 10 prominent businessmen who would like to "cover-up past indiscretions" have succeeded in doing so by using the privacy act to hide their names, dates, and places.

6) On December 6, 1942, violence erupted at Manzanar Relocation Center, prior to the issuance of the ill-famed "loyalty oath" questionnaire which produced the "yes-yes" and "no-no" evacuees. Those questionnaires weren't distributed until February 1943. Yet the CWRIC's report, and other books upon which this report is based, uses the argument that it was the questionnaire which caused the riots at Manzanar, Heart Mountain, and Tule Lake. The fact is that pro-Japan forces were at work at the assembly centers where they tried to disrupt the war work of loyal Japanese-Americans; where at Manzanar pro-Japan forces etched "down with U.S.A." on rocks and tried to run down by truck any one who volunteered to serve with the Japanese American Citizens League group who were called "dogs" by the pro-Japan forces within the centers.

On Oct. 7, 1981, a letter to the Editor addressed to the RAFU SHIMPO, written by Joe Kurihara, reads: "March 21, 1942,^* many of your friends and JACLers went into Manzanar voluntarily even before the camp was ready to occupy." The fact is, the JACL volunteers built Manzanar.

^* Mar. 21, 1942, E.O. 9102 established the War Relocation Authority.

7) In the AMERASIA JOURNAL (1974), James Oda was referred to in this way: "March 21, 1942, you and your friends together put the following article in THE MANZANAR FREE PRESS (the newspaper at Manzanar Relocation Center, written and printed by the evacuees themselves):

"The citizens of Manzanar wish to express in public their sincere appreciation to General John L. DeWitt, his Chief of Staff, Tom O. Clark, and Col. Karl Bendetsen, for the expedient way in which they handled the Manzanar situation. The evacuees now located at Manzanar are greatly satisfied with the excellent comfort that the General and his staff have provided for them (the evacuees). Can't be better, is the general feeling of Manzanar citizens. Thank you, General."

James Oda and his wife, Dr. Mary Oda, testified before the CWRIC in Los Angeles, about the terrible mistreatment. The Odas are now activists with the redress and reparations movement.

8) At the CWRIC hearings, San Francisco, Aug. 28, 1981, a proponent of redress and reparations confessed the following to the PACIFIC CITIZEN, as quoted in that JACL newspaper: "Elaine Black Yoneda, wife of retired longshoreman Karl Yoneda, described the fear that her family lived under during the reign of the marauding 'Manzanar Black Dragons,' the pro-Japan group who terrorized camp internees and beat up loyal Japanese American leaders.

On the issue of reparations, Yoneda urged monetary reparations which would not really be too much burden on the economy considering the Defense Department is spending a trillion and one half dollars."

Karl Yoneda is the only Japanese American to ever run on the Communist ticket for Secretary of State in California; his Caucasian wife and their one child were whisked out of Manzanar and sheltered from pro-Japan "Black Dragon" attacks at Death Valley, California, until it was safe to return to Manzanar. Yoneda was also one of the first volunteers to go to Manzanar to make conditions livable for evacuees.

9) CWRIC states that alien Japanese lost monies and property. Aliens could not own land during or prior to WWII. Properties were put in the names of American-born children who were automatically citizens by accident of birth. These properties were not sold, were leased for the duration of the war. On August 27, 1946, the U.S. Treasury Department freed practically all of the Issei bank accounts which were frozen (not confiscated) since Dec. 7th, 1941, by General Ruling 11A. The properties leased for the duration was one of the major reasons why a lobby composed of evacuees approached The Congress begging that the WRA centers NOT BE CLOSED in 1944,^* since the evacuees had no homes to return to until those leases expired. In addition, most did not want to return until after the war was over; others had already commented that they wanted to wait until the "outcome," still holding hopes that Japan would win.

^* CWRIC's report, PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED, states that FDR prevented the early closures of the War Relocation Centers in order to win the November 1944 election.

10) In PACIFIC CITIZEN, JACL's newspaper, Friday, August 28, 1981, there appears a story written by Sachi Seko, who worked on the Gila News Courier, (camp newspaper). The heading: "Camp Newspapers Coming Home." Seko wrote: "Long after we are gone, it will be the written word that bears our testimony. The camp papers are a record of daily events as they occurred. It is important to preserve this documentation." [These newspapers can be found at the Densho website.]

The CWRIC refused to use one sentence out of the treasury of evacuee newspapers available -- news items written AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED. These were made available to them by Baker. If these newspapers were used as the valid evidence they are, the CWRIC's "findings" would have to be completely reversed. For example:

THE DAILY TULEAN DISPATCH, EDITORIAL, Page 2, Thurs., July 8, 1943 Heading: RELOCATE NOW!^*

"Many colonists, both nisei and issei, have been debating for sometime whether or not to find work on the outside. They have, apparently, been weighing the advantages with the disadvantages of getting work on the outside.

"There are no disadvantages in relocating now. Everything is in the colonists' favor. You have your future to think of. The sooner you begin shaping this future, the better off you will be.

"The myth that people are hostile to Japanese-Americans has now been fairly well exploded by the colonists themselves who have gone to all parts of the Middle West and East and parts of the South. Japanese-Americans everywhere are received well, wherever they have gone, with few exceptions and some of these 'exceptions' were induced by the behavior of the colonists themselves.

"Nothing will be gained by crying over spilt milk. What is past is past. Because of evacuation, many colonists are inclined to be bitter and to be uncooperative now that the WRA is greatly facilitating colonists to relocate, and the Government is asking for manpower. To allow bitterness to cloud your decisions will hurt no one but you. The WRA is doing its utmost to get you to relocate now to almost any part of the country you may choose and paying your way. Floods of job offers are received daily from all relocation offices throughout the country. Opportunities unlike any offered heretofore are now available to you and only your willingness to accept them stands in the way of rehabilitation and assimilation into American life.

"Whatever deters you from making a wise choice now is a form of slavery -- slavery to your own fear, resentment, indecision. Throw off the shackles and accept the full freedom now offered you.

"It takes a stout heart to live in any country these days.

"It take a stout heart even to live. But the dividends are manifold for those who have courage."

Is it any wonder the CWRIC refused to accept this kind of evidence? Is it any wonder the CWRIC and others banned Baker's book filled with such documentation, facts, and evidence?

* The CWRIC's report, PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED, insists that the evacuees were "prisoners" and "internees" and that they could not relocate to other parts of the United States. The evacuees, (who called themselves "colonists"), were not only urged to leave, but assisted in doing so. Contrary to CWRIC's findings, there was little "racism" on the part of Americans accepting Japanese-Americans into their communities. When the JACL (Salt Lake City) was asked to accept Manzanar evacuees, the Japanese community of Salt Lake City said, "Don't send those radicals here!"

BOOK REVIEW -- WORLD WAR II

IMMEDIATE RELEASE 825 words

Bert Webber,

SILENT SIEGE: Japanese Attacks Against North America in World War II. YeGalleon, 1984. Two volumes bound in one cover. 7x10. 400 pages. 359 photos and drawings. 14 maps. Notes. Appendixes. Bibliography. Index. Hardback $22.95. (Shipping $2)
Distributed by Pacific Northwest Books Co.
P. O. Box 314 Medford, Oregon 97501, U.S.A.

Here is the authoritative account of hundreds of Japanese attacks against North America that newspapers did not print.

Bert Webber, former teacher, librarian and free-lance newspaper cameraman, is now one of those rare breeds termed a research photojournalist. He spent years gathering first-hand materials about this little-known phase of the war and he has done "an incredibly meticulous job digging up all the facts," wrote the Japan Times (Tokyo).

Webber's book is captivating, honest, comprehensive, minutely detailed, thoroughly documented and well illustrated with photographs, maps and drawings.

A talkshow host on KGO radio (San Francisco) defined the work as "incredible documentary journalism." From a segment of an NBC TODAY SHOW in which Webber appeared: "These matters have not heretofore come to light!"

When reading Silent Siege we meet men and women, military and civilian, who set up the complex system for watching and guarding the long Pacific coastline of the United States and Canada.

Webber puts his readers right into the scene worrying with Admiral "Fuzzy" Theobald; sloshing through a Pacific Northwest rain forest with the Coast Guard setting up a Beach Patrol Station at Lake Ozette, and later heaving gauze bandage rolls tied together to form a lifeline to survivors on a wrecked Soviet freighter. We visit sites where Japanese bombs exploded. We reflect apprehensively that few of the 30,000 bombs the Japanese sent across the ocean dangling from stratosphere-drifting gas balloons have been accounted for -- some as far east as Michigan -- and others plausibly remain a latent hazard in at least 26 states and provinces. (Most recent find: 1978!)

Bert Webber looked closely into the Japanese Navy's shelling of an oil field near Santa Barbara, and talked with some who were caught in the "rain" of anti-aircraft shell fragments that clinked int he streets and cluttered flower beds during the jittery night of the "Battle of Los Angeles." His account of the Imperial Navy's shelling of Fort Stevens, Oregon and Estevan Point lighthouse in British Columbia is revealing from both sides of the war and is complete with comic breaks.

Determined to learn how the Japanese carried out these attacks, Webber interviewed surviving members from three submarines that sank ships, shot up and threatened the "Pacific Sea Frontier" as the west coast was called by the U. S. Navy.

He was actively assisted by Japanese scientists who devised then launched the balloons. Together with some of these men, Webber visited a former launch site in Japan and secured a full account with a wealth of photos, diagrams and some parts of the deadly mechanisms the Japanese had secretly hidden for decades.

One of his collaborators was Fujita-san, the lone flier who piloted an Imperial Navy bomber over Oregon, dropped bombs and started a forest fire. [See book title here]

In no other work will one learn particulars Webber calls an "Aleutian Headache." Here he describes the bombings of Dutch Harbor followed by the intense search by American fliers to find the Japanese, and of P-40's rising from a secret American base to shoot down the attackers. Here also is chronicled the only ship-to-ship battle of the entire Pacific War, this occurring in the frigid ocean near the Soviet Komondorski Islands. Webber relates inter-service back-biting among American top commanders, some of whom were later fired! (The Japanese also fired an Admiral.)

Most Americans didn't know until now that the Japanese were working on a nuclear bomb, yet author Webber tells of submarine trips to Europe for uranium and what became of Japanese cyclotrons when American conquerors discovered them at war's end.

Bert Webber's handling of the still intensely debated relocation of Japanese-Americans makes a full chapter in itself. His thoroughly documented study caused him to conclude: "As to Concentration Camps in the United States, which numerous people claim to have existed, there were none!"

Silent Siege is an absorbing study, all the more so because it's all true and through its pictures the whole story comes to life before our eyes. It makes clear, as perhaps nothing else might, Japan's retaliatory answer to the Doolittle Raiders. The book is fascinating. It's hard to put down. It's invaluable to everyone interested in the subject. It is a poignant book that shows heroism on an individual basis on both sides of the war. In addition, Webber's obvious integrity as a scholar and his ability to look objectively at both sides, while at the same time telling a good story, makes this book unique. This is a "must read" book. It will be a great gift for all who remember the war or who want to know more about it.

# #

Silent Siege passes Book Selection Criteria for use in schools for upbuilding of curriculum in American history grades 8--up, and for general circulation in school and public libraries.

This review prepared by New Titles Publicity Department, Pacific Northwest Books Co.

Silent Siege is scheduled to appear in Japanese language in about one year.

LILLIAN BAKER
15237 Chanera Ave.
Gardena, California 90249
(213) 329-2619

Page 1 of 4 (Cover Letter)
plus 23 pages EXHIBITS, to
be included with Written
Statement of Testimony

Attn: Pat Phillips
Re: Aug. 16, 1984 HEARING S.2116
Los Angeles, CA.

August 9, 1984

Hon. Ted Stevens, Senator
United States Senate Subcommittee
Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services
SH-601
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator:

Enclosed are sixteen (16) EXHIBITS, five copies of each, which are to be included in the record of the above-referenced hearing. These Exhibits are documents and evidence to substantiate my written Statement of Testimony which is at your office.

The delay in sending these is due to the short notice of less than a week to prepare 125 copies of my written Statement and Summary and have them in Washington, D.C. by the 10th of August. The notification informing me that I would be a witness at this hearing was postmarked July 31, 1984, and did not reach my home in Gardena, California until late Saturday afternoon, August 4th, 1984. Nevertheless, by setting all else aside and working diligently, I have been able to comply with your request and am gratified to know that my work will be made available for researchers and future historians... and for your Subcommittee's work.

Please make the following part of my written testimony and record of hearing:

EXHIBIT 1: Revised Presidential Authorization of Hawaii Evacuation to Mainland, July 15, 1942, in which the document shows that Americans of Japanese descent were known to be a "source of danger" on the Islands. Because Americans could not be interned with aliens, it was necessary for the War Relocation Authority to arrange for resettlement of "up to fifteen thousand persons." This refutes the claim by CWRIC that there was no evacuation in Hawaii. The document also clearly states: "...through application for a writ of habeus(sic) corpus any United States citizen can obtain release from custody." [Habeas corpus was never denied Japanese Americans.]

EXHIBIT 2: The CWRIC states in its "findings" that President Roosevelt "postponed the closing of the War Relocation Authority centers" for political gain. On July 13, 1945, the WRA center at Topaz asked the WRA to rescind orders closing the WRA centers by Nov. 1, 1945. One of the main reasons against closure was the fact that evacuee properties were LEASED (not lost) for the duration of the war. (Also see EXHIBIT 9).

EXHIBIT 3: Several proponents for reparations have stated in the media that there were "rapes at bayonet point by American soldiers of Japanese women in the WRA centers"; "a number of people were shot while trying to escape the WRA centers"; "a small boy was shot crawling under barbed wire to retrieve a ball," etc. Exhibit 3 is a copy of the letter received from the former Director of the WRA centers, Dillon S. Myer. In this letter, Mr. Myer emphatically denies one of these claims, regarding "people who were shot in every camp while trying to escape." Mas Fukai, City Councilman (Gardena, Ca.), testified that Japanese women were raped at bayonet point by American soldiers and that he "will never forget the screams of the women." Mas Fukai was taken to task in the ethnic press for his perversion of the truth; yet Michi Weglyn, author of "Years of Infamy: The Untold Story of America's Concentration Camps," used Fukai's letter written to the Editor of the Gardena Valley News as her one example of "an atrocity."

EXHIBIT 4: New release of evidence of disloyalties by Japanese-Americans. The Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians reported in PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED and in written testimony that there was "not a single act of sabotage or disloyalty" on the part of Japanese-Americans or Japanese aliens during WWII. The CWRIC refused to study or consider documents to refute this. Exhibit 4 is just one of the hundreds of such documents available under the broadened Freedom of Information Act of 1977. The CWRIC preferred to fall back on books written prior to the release of this vital information; in addition, when informed that such vital data be studied with the excuse that there wasn't "sufficient time" because the CWRIC's "findings and recommendations" were already past due according to its mandate. If the CWRIC was intent on seeking the truth, it could have applied for an extension, as it had twice before with lesser priority and reason.

EXHIBIT 5: This document takes up the disloyalty question and the transfer of Tule Lake from a relocation center to a segregation center. This transfer meant that this center would no longer be under the WRA control (civilian), but under the military. Once Tule Lake became a segregation center wherein resided anti-American persons and "troublemakers," it was necessary to confine these radical forces by the installation of barbed wire fences. When Tule Lake was a relocation center under the WRA, there was not a single string of barbed wire, as was reported by the visiting press at the time. The photographs of Tule Lake Relocation Center and press reports appear in my book, THE CONCENTRATION CAMP CONSPIRACY: A SECOND PEARL HARBOR -- a book which the CWRIC refused to accept for consideration in its "findings and recommendations."

EXHIBIT 6: The CWRIC states that evacuees were "prisoners" and "internees" -- for the duration of the war. The CWRIC states that loss of educational opportunities is one of the factors in recommending monetary payment. This document shows that more than 3000 Japanese-Americans were assisted in leaving the centers to attend colleges and universities (over 500 throughout U.S.A.), and this is where these J-A "evacuees" spent the war years. Note that over 500 universities, church groups, etc., came to the assistance of J-A's (as well as alien Japanese), thus refuting the charge that America was "racist" toward Japanese race. Americans were outraged by Pearl Harbor and Imperial Japan, and justly so. Yet throughout the United States, J-A's remained on jobs, in homes, in colleges and other Americans were urged to be tolerant of those who "looked like the enemy." If, as CWRIC states, the evacuation and exclusion order was "racist," why weren't Japanese affected in the other 44 states?

EXHIBIT 7: One of hundreds of examples of newspapers printed by the evacuees themselves, in the WRA centers. The last page of this exhibit shows an attachment of the cover of the 1944 Souvenir Year Book (graduating class, Manzanar Relocation Center High School). In this on-the-spot drawing by an evacuee, one can clearly see that the "barbed wire" consisted of no more than 3 low-strung pieces of barbed wire (cattle guard) on posts of natural wood. The "barbed wire" was not "barbed wire fences," nor were there any "guard dogs" or "men in watchtowers with loaded machine guns." Note the reported activities of the evacuees. In my written testimony, Page 18, Endnotes -- Sachi Seko, who worked on the Gila News relocation center newspaper, rightly states that the camp papers "are a record of daily events as they occurred." The CWRIC refused to accept this kind of documentation.

EXHIBIT 8: One example (of thousands available) where declassified documents are clearly stamped 1977. Books written in the forties, fifties, and sixties are the basis of "findings and recommendations" of CWRIC. The CWRIC's hearings had reports of ill-treatment and "rounding up" of Japanese-Americans by "special agents swooping down without notice," etc., etc. Exhibit #8 is one of hundreds of examples where the "civil rights" of American citizens of Japanese descent were protected even when known alien enemies were residing in the same home.

EXHIBIT 9: From Chapter 24, "JAPANESE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA -- A HISTORY OF 70 YEARS" published by the Japanese Chamber of Commerce of Southern California (1960), there is the full story of this book about why the evacuees PROTESTED closing of the WRA centers. The CWRIC stated it was "politically motivated." This "finding" is without basis in fact. Further evidence is to be found in the 1943-45 Joint Fact Finding Committee of Un-American Activities relating to "the Japanese problem in California." These documents were made available to the CWRIC by Baker, but were ignored.

EXHIBIT 10: "On television, in testimony before the Congress, and in many newspaper stories I have read of wounded Japanese-Americans returning from the war to find their parents 'behind bars, unable to leave the concentration camps.' One wonders what was gained by such lies." This is an excerpt from letter from Milton S. Eisenhower, first Director of WRA. Eisenhower's statement to CWRIC is taken from the text of his book, THE PRESIDENT IS CALLING -- a book written prior to the release of vital evidence proving the evacuation was, indeed, necessary. Only those in the top command were aware of "The Magic Papers" and other top secret information regarding the potentially dangerous situation on the endangered West Coast. (Exhibit 10A and 10B are Eisenhower's letter.) Exhibit 10B shows that despite his personal feelings about the evacuation, Eisenhower believes the monetary demands are "unwarranted."

EXHIBIT 11: Feb. 17, 1942 (two days before E.O. 9066, Feb. 19, 1942), the City of Gardena was begging the Federal Government to take over the REFUGEE PROBLEM -- Japanese and Japanese-Americans coming to Gardena where there were not sufficient or adequate housing facilities to shelter them. This Resolution pertained to alien Japanese and their American-born children. In 1984, Mas Fukai, Councilman of Gardena and aide to County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn, instigated the move for $5000 "restitution" to those who were made to evacuate because of "racism." Fukai is the same evacuee at age 15, (now a Councilman), who claimed Japanese women were raped. He admits his parents were Japanese aliens who had come to this country to "make money and go back to Japan rich on American dollars." (Quote is from a L.A. TIMES interview.)

EXHIBIT 12: William Hohri of the National Council for Japanese American Redress, (Chicago), exposes the JACL in his review of the JACL "story" -- Bill Hosokawa's book, "JACL in Quest of Justice." Hosokawa was one of editors of CWRIC's report, PERSONAL JUSTICE DENIED. CWRIC never once sought out unbiased editors. On the reverse side of Exhibit 12 is a copy of the flyer mailed out regarding Baker's book, THE CONCENTRATION CAMP CONSPIRACY: A SECOND PEARL HARBOR. A copy of this book was mailed at Baker's expense to every elected Congressman and Senator, to every member and staff of the CWRIC, to the JACL National Headquarters, and hundreds of university libraries. Less than 25 acknowledged receipt of same; in Fukai's instance, the book was returned "refused" (after 3 months). The publication of this book was accomplished by Baker selling a large personal collection of valuable antiques. One publisher who was approached said that if his company published this book, it would make all other works on the subject published by his company "obsolete." Another publishing company would accept it if their own "historians" could check out the documents and statements in the manuscript. Considering that I spent over 10 years in doing this, one can well imagine the final book being published sometime in the next century! Because of the CWRIC's "mandate," it was necessary that this book be published AT ONCE, in the naive assumption that the CWRIC would use it in its final recommendations. But in fact, the CWRIC disregarded the value of Baker's work and subsequent publication, despite the fact that the Introduction was written by the former Director of the WRA, and has since been acclaimed and recognized as worthwhile by the Conference of California Historical Societies, Dr. Milton S. Eisenhower, and other archivists. All of the voluminous files of documentation accumulated by Baker for more than a decade, was offered at no taxpayer's expense to the CWRIC.

EXHIBIT 13: "HISTORY FALSIFIED TO WIN RELOCATION PAY" is the headline of Kiyoaki Murata's article, Aug. 18, 1983. Murata was an alien Japanese student prior to WWII. The day of Pearl Harbor, he reported to a relocation center; after 9 months, he left to conclude his education in U.S.A., EVEN WHILE WE WERE FIGHTING JAPAN. Murata, former editor of THE JAPAN TIMES (before his retirement, Tokyo), predicted the outcome of the Commission's distortion of facts in an earlier article, Aug. 21, 1981 "JAPAN TIMES," Tokyo. Once again, the statement of an evacuee refutes the CWRIC's "findings" that evacuees were not able to leave the WRA centers "for the duration."

EXHIBIT 14: One of many letters written to the CWRIC, protesting the undemocratic practices and procedures at the hearings. When Baker appeared in Washington, D.C., at the July 1981 hearing, the treatment accorded me was much like an "inquisition" rather than a "hearing." Whereas the proponents of redress and reparations were given TWO DAYS of hearings -- since they were the ones solicited by CWRIC -- I was not even given 30 minutes! My testimony was never completed, being interrupted by comments and challenges by former Justice Arthur Goldberg. No other statements or testimony were so challenged; in fact, during testimony, the proponents were greeted with cordial "prodding," urging them to introduce thoughts to strengthen their emotional presentations. None of their statements were challenged. When it came to the questioning of Baker -- there were no questions because any questions might lead to the introduction of evidence and documents to refute the former testimony. Baker's full testimony appears in her book, THE CONCENTRATION CAMP CONSPIRACY: A SECOND PEARL HARBOR, including Goldberg's comments.

EXHIBIT 15: THE AMERICAN LEGION adopted a resolution urging Congress to dismiss action that claims redress and reparations. On the reverse side of the letter from The American Legion, is one page of declassified information relative to the disloyalties of Japanese-Americans. AMERICAN-BORN JAPANESE APPLYING FOR EXPATRIATION TO JAPAN. These REPATRIATION PAPERS WERE FILED WITH THE WARTIME CIVIL CONTROL ADMINISTRATION, (prior to the WRA), and included further applications filed with the War Relocation Authority.^* Note that thousands of Americans of Japanese descent applied BEFORE the evacuation even took place! Yet the CWRIC "finds" there was not a single case of "disloyalty."
^* The "evacuation" has been held responsible for these "disloyalties."

EXHIBIT 16: NEWS RELEASE, National Headquarters, V.F.W. -- NEVER "REPARATIONS" FOR WEST COAST JAPANESE-AMERICANS, Washington, D.C. -- James R. Currieo, Nat'l Commander-in-Chief. This NEWS RELEASE did not appear in any newspaper other than the ethnic newspaper, whereupon it brought protests from the 442nd Unit's spokesman. Statistics show that for every 100 Japanese-American who could have served in the 442nd, only 8 volunteered to do so. [For further data, see written testimony.]

Please make this letter, my comments, and the Exhibits enclosed, part of my written testimony for the Hearings S.2116. Thank you.

Respectfully,

(signed)
Lillian Baker (Mrs.)
Encl: Exhibits 1-16 consisting of 23 pages

Exhibit #1

A TRUE COPY

Appendix 2

REVISED PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORIZATION OF
HAWAII EVACUATION TO MAINLAND

(Stamped SECRET originally -- Reclassified 9/27/58, Date 4-3-59, Signature Carl L. Spicer)

July 15, 1942

MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT:

Presidential approval was given on March 13th to a directive proposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff which would authorize the Commanding General, Hawaiian Department, to evacuate to the mainland of the United States for internment in concentration camps^* Japanese residents of the Hawaiian Islands, either United States citizens or aliens, who were considered by appropriate authorities in the Islands to constitute a source of danger.

It has been found that this procedure is not feasible, as through application for a writ of habeus (sic) corpus any United States citizen can obtain release from custody. Consequently, agreement was reached by the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy that family groups of Japanese ancestry should be evacuated to the mainland for resettlement, rather than internment.^** Tentative arrangements have been made with the War Relocation Authority for the resettlement of up to fifteen thousand persons.

^* Note date, July 15, 1942 -- before connotation of Nazi "death camps," 1945.
^** Internment camps were for enemy aliens only.

Baker's emphasis

Exhibit #2

PACIFIC CITIZEN / Friday, August 1-8, 1980

35 Years Ago
in The Pacific Citizen
AUGUST 4, 1945

July 10 -- Navy's 14th District (Hawaii) lifts commercial fishing restrictions against Issei and Nisei; certain ports still closed to all.

July 13 -- Topaz community council asks WRA to rescind orders closing camps by Nov. 1.

July 24 -- Pacific theater-bound U.S. troops being prepared by special Nisei teams at Fort Meade, demonstrating captured Japanese weapons, taught some military expressions.

July 25 -- Federal indictment sought against anti-Nisei terrorists (Watson brothers of Auburn, Calif.) for possession of dynamite in raid on Sumio Doi farm... One brother (James W.) acquitted by Placer County jury of all state charges (contributing to delinquency of minors by serving them liquor) in connection with Jan. 18-19 attempts to burn down packing shed on Doi farm.

July 26 -- First trainload of evacuees (427) leave Rohwer, Ark., to be returned to Sacramento, Stockton, Fresno and Los Angeles. (Train had one Pullman for the sick and nursing mothers, and 11 ancient gas-lit coaches. Because of war, most of the Pullman cars were being used as troop trains.)

July 26 -- New York's new anti-discrimination law protects Nisei seeking employment; state commissioner assures.

July 30 -- Western Defense commander (Gen. H C Pratt) clarifies Army has "sole responsibility" in return of evacuees to West Coast; offsets erroneous impression in newspapers and media that evacuees are being released from the camps "to commit possible sabotage on the West Coast."

Aug. 1 -- Articles stored with San Pedro JACL/US Marshal's Office being returned to evacuees; "undeliverables" routed to JACL Headquarters, Salt Lake City.

THE JAPANESE AMERICAN CITIZENS LEAGUE AND THE EVACUEES PROTESTED THE CLOSING OF THE WAR RELOCATION AUTHORITY CENTERS -- THE COMMISSION ON WARTIME RELOCATION & INTERNMENT OF CIVILIANS WRONGLY ACCUSED F.D.R.

JULY 13, 1945

"TOPAZ COMMUNITY COUNCIL ASK WRA TO RESCIND ORDERS CLOSING CAMPS BY NOVEMBER 1, 1945"

THE CWRIC STATES THAT FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT "POSTPONED" THE CLOSING OF THE WAR RELOCATION AUTHORITY CAMPS BECAUSE OF "POLITICALLY MOTIVATED" REASONS, THUS DELAYING FOR 18 MONTHS THE "RELEASE" OF EVACUEES.

THE RECORD SHOWS CLEARLY, THAT IT WAS THE ACTIONS OF THE DELEGATES FROM THE VARIOUS RELOCATION CENTERS THAT PREVENTED THE CLOSING OF THE CAMPS.

REASONS:

1) LEASES OF EVACUEE PROPERTY WERE FOR THE DURATION OF THE WAR WITH JAPAN.^*

2) EVACUEES WERE AFRAID TO RETURN TO COMMUNITIES UNTIL THE WAR WAS OVER.

3) HOUSING PROBLEMS.^**

^* Proof positive that evacuee properties were LEASED, by and large, and were not "lost." Those that were sold were done so by many evacuees who decided to remain on the East Coast or Midwest where they had relocated from the center

^** See 1960 publication, "JAPANESE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA -- First 70 Years"

Exhibit #3

TRUE COPY OF LETTER RECEIVED FROM DILLON S. MYER,
DIRECTOR WRA

A TRUE COPY

Feb. 10, 1981

Dear Lillian Baker: This note is in response to your memo of Feb. 2. [1981]

As regards to Phil Shigekuni statement that people were shot in every camp while trying to escape:

I know of NO instant[sic] where people were shot while trying to escape.

Because Manzanar and Tule Lake were located in California, people could not come and go as freely because of them being located in the evacuated area.

If anyone was shot I would have known about it. I have no memory of any such case.

The War Relocation Authority was established only after evacuee[s] who moved out on their own ran into trouble from the local population.

W.R.A. camps were established as temporary homes for evacuees until they could be relocated otherwise.

The W.R.A. established relocation officers to locate jobs for evacuees and to assist them in relocation from the camps.

Many of the older aliens refused to leave the camps because they felt more secure in the camps.

It's true that there were armed guards at each camp. These guards, in addition to other problems, they helped protect the people in the camp from misguided attacks from local citizens.

We were successful in finding jobs and in relocating several thousand outside the camps by the end of the war.

The W.R.A. did its very best to get people to leave the camps once jobs were available, and of course many thousands did leave.

I hope your husband has fully recovered from his operation.

In case I haven't answered fully let me know and I will be glad to do better.

Sincerely,

[signed] Dillon Myer

DILLON S. MYER WAS THE FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE WAR RELOCATION AUTHORITY. MR. MYER WAS HONORED BY THE JAPANESE AMERICAN CITIZENS LEAGUE (JACL) IN TWO TESTIMONIAL DINNER. JACL'S WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE, MIKE M. MASAOKA WROTE: "The testimonial represented the affection and esteem in which Mr. Myer was held by the evacuees whose lives he had supervised through their great travail" and that "more than two decades later [1966], that testimonial has continued to represent the sentiments of those evacuees."

Table of Contents -- Page 2

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON WARTIME INTERNMENT AND RELOCATION OF CITIZENS

HEARINGS

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE

S. 2116

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE