OPPOSITION TO S. 2116
SUMMARY OF 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 acknowledgement 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 the 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 Woman.]

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.

(Footnotes begin on Page 7. Endnotes on Page 12)

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 HARBOR; and the recent United States government publication[2] 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 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 Internment of Civilians, discarded his words as irrelevant, and furthermore refused to include 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 issue 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 chosen 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 constitutionality 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 Information, 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 bogged 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 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 ant-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 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 "disloyal", 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 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 servicemen 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 two 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 labelled "racist", or "ethnic."

No American citizen among the evacuees was ever denied habeus 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, had 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 act. 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.[3]

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 pointed 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 Unites 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 Frankfurther of the Supreme Court stated, "actions taken during time of war shall not be stigmatized as lawless, because like action 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 testimony which will be made part of the historical records.

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.

Footnotes (continued)

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 (2:00 p.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 faction 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 the 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 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.

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 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 such propaganda from these reports.

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 Furitani 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 Japanese 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 travelling 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 reknown physicist, Hideki Yukawa, won the Nobel Prize for his development of a mesons-sub-atomic particle. (Source: "The Encyclopedia Brittanica'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 efforts to build 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 efforts to build an atomic 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 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.

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 reason: 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 it 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 machinists 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 placed 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 "disloyal" (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 the 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". 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 his 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., Dec. 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 abovereferenced 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 only those who could add to the un-documented 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 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 expatriation, 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 America 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 "coverup 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.

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 liveable 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 which 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 after the war was over; others had already commented that they wanted to wait until the "outcome", still holding hopes that Japan would win.

*The 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."

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 stout heart to live in any country these days.

"It takes 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, fact, 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 in 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!"