<Begin Segment 8>

FC: At the convention, what was the atmosphere like just before the resisters' panel?

RS: I think there was a lot of tension in the air because of the resisters' panel, because we knew that they had thought they addressed this issue in San Diego at a prior convention, and didn't really face it and come to grips with it. And so here we come again in Salt Lake, and this time they're gonna, you're gonna speak individually about their experience.

FC: Had the, had resisters ever spoken to a JACL convention before?

RS: Now, I don't know the complete history of the, the prior conventions, so I don't know if they spoke at a national convention. I know that districts hosted these kinds of forums, but I don't know if at the national level, if that had ever had happened.

FC: Why don't you just say it? [Laughs] That at the district levels, these meetings had been going on, but this was the first time at a national level.

RS: Yeah, okay. At the district level, JACL did address this issue with the resisters. They have had forums and panels and workshops, but at the national level, we've never had that debate, or that issue discussed on the national floor of a convention.

FC: Say again that the resisters had never appeared, had never spoken to a national convention.

RS: Yeah, the resisters actually had never appeared in person and spoke on the floor of a national convention to all the delegates, that was the first time. And also we had the same-sex marriage issue coming up. I tell you, it was a very, we all were holding our breaths, because this was a big one. We're in Salt Lake City, which is known to be a relatively conservative area, we knew that the resisters were going to be there putting on a panel, we knew that there was going to be a panel on gay and lesbian issues, and we knew that these were sore spots within the organization. But are things that we strongly felt the organization has to address in order to move on in a healthy way and deal with, with the future.

Male voice: If both of them had made great speeches, would it have made any difference?

RS: Both men? Oh, made great speeches? I thought they made, I thought they made very eloquent speeches. I guess somebody on the side of JACL was treating it more as a debate, or tried to. However, I felt that here was a chance for us to hear a human being talking about their very deepest most personal experiences behind this whole legacy of, for me, shame, that we had to go through as an organization, of not acknowledging them. So I don't know if the speeches would have made any difference. To me it did, because I got to hear how their lives were affected by their noble decision for what they believed in. I don't know if the rest of the membership allowed their hearts to be open enough to understand what it really meant, 'cause I do believe if they did listen with an open heart, they would have moved and made the right decisions.

FC: Did anything result from that panel? Was there any legislation, any votes, any action taken by the JACL convention in response to the, the speech?

RS: You know, I wish I could tell you with clarity whether I could answer that fully. I'm not sure. We were all pretty much in shock because we knew that there were some rumors about whether or not the, what the future for the national staff was going to be. There was already stuff going on in the organization, the "smoking gun" memo, which if you've heard about that, it's, the Pacific Citizen newspaper and its agenda to control, to control the articles in the paper prior to the convention, where a group did meet to discuss that privately, and did control the way the rest of the organization viewed the direction of the organization, 'cause the paper was the only vehicle to express it.

<End Segment 8> - Copyright © 1996, 2005 Frank Abe and Densho. All Rights Reserved.