Testimony of Mas Odoi on S. 2116
before the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee
on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services
SUMMARY
My testimony has two parts:
l. Oppose approval by the Senate of Personal Justice Denied, the report by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, that calls the World War II evacuation of Japanese Americans a "grave injustice" caused by "racial prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership."
Facts are presented to discredit unwarranted implications and conclusions which unfairly maligns America al1d the American people.
Instead of validating such a doctrinaire account by researchers who are totally unfamiliar with the complex circumstances of the chain of events, Senators are urged to read read two books, written from personal experience: 1. Nisei, the Quiet Americans, by Bill Hosokawa. who was evacuated from Seattle, Washington to Heart Mountain Relocation Center in Wyoming. 2. Uprooted Americans, by Dillon S. Myers, director of the War Relocation Authority.
2. Restatement of a community benefit redress plan, which provides as follows:
(1) All former evacuees receive credit for $10,000, to be paid in installments of $1,000 a year for ten years, which can be donated to any established charitable, religious. or public service organizations of their choice.
(2) A token monetary award be given to each evacuee, the amount to be determined by Congress.
An official poll of all Japanese American evacuees should be taken to obtain a consensus of what type of redress plan they favor.
Because of intimidation by pro-redress extremists against moderate Japanese American evacuees. I am a lone voice amid a sea of embittered witnesses, who graphically detail the worst aspects of this unfortunate occurrence. Please give due weight to the fact that my brief statements may typify the feelings of countless other "Quiet Americans."
Note that as a Purple Heart veteran of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, who enlisted from a relocation center, I have devoted tens of thousands of hours in the past 40 years working for a better America. Some of my opponents seem to put personal interest above the welfare of their own country!
[Signed]
Mas Odoi
_____
Torrance, CA 90501
_____
[Page 2]
Testimony of Mas Odoi on S. 2116
before the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee
on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services
Coercive tactics employed by a few extremists, demanding redress for the World War II mass removal of Japanese Americans from the Pacific coast, have been deplored by thousands of former evacuees. Yet, because their moderate voices were not heard. the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians issues a report that the evacuation was a "grave injustice" caused by "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure in political leadership." (Personal Justice Denied. p. 18)
Granted, we were innocent victims of a cataclysmic chain of events and suffered in countless ways, psychological as well as financial. But the United States government must be given due credit for trying to make the best of an unpleasant situation.
As part of my testimony, may I submit copies of three articles I have written on this subject.
1. Printed March 19. 1976 in the Pacific Citizen, my letter, titled "E.O. 9066 Rescinded," suggests a redress plan, which was adopted by the Japanese American Citizens League in its 1978 biennial convention in Salt Lake City. Because the award was changed from $1,000 to $25.000 per evacuee, I have opposed it.
2. The poll on a community benefit redress plan, printed February 1984 in the Gardena Valley News, received mixed response.
3. My article, printed July 15, 1983 in the United Methodist Reporter, tries to outline facts of the evacuation in its true perspective. The title is misleading, because it relates only to my opposition to William Hohri's lawsuit for $25 billion.
The purpose of my testimony is two-fold:
A. To point out intolerable distortions in the CWRIC report.
B. To present a simple community benefit redress plan, which is fair and capable of implementation Without undue administrative costs.
A. Critique of the CWRIC Report
Three major factors contributed to the one-sidedness of the CWRIC report:
1. None of the panel members had familiarity with the vast, far-reaching circumstances surrounding the evacuation, except Judge William M. Marutani, who was a small child at the time.
2. The commission was composed almost entirely of liberal intellectuals, who tend to favor ideals over the realities of a dog-eat-dog world.
3. Most importantly, views of moderate Japanese American evacuees were not heard! Ample proof of the intimidating tactics employed by redress extremists are the boos and catcalls to which everyone who opposed redress was subjected to in CWRIC hearings across the nation.
As a Purple Heart veteran of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, who has spoken out against unfair condemnations of our >country's actions, I have been the target of verbal abuse and
[Page 3]
painful recriminations for over twelve years. Many Japanese Americans, who have privately expressed support for me, admit they dare not state their views publicly.
As an exhaustive study of the details of the evacuation, Personal Justice Denied, the report by the GWRIG, has considerable merit. But its attempts to generalize fails abysmally. because the most vital elements are too broad and abstract to be reduced to factual statements.
The following will help to prove my point:
1. The well-intentioned conclusion that the evacuation was caused by "race prejudice" and "war hysteria" is almost comically false. It overlooks the most obvious fact that Japan launched a devastating surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, killing thousands of American soldiers and that it aroused a thunder storm of national outrage. It is a natural human reaction, unfair as it may seem, for anger to be directed against nationalities of countries that resort to such ruthless tactics, regardless of race!
2. The implication that the whole evacuation process was an unmitigated evil is patently untrue. Any group picture of people in relocation centers shows smiling, carefree faces.
A crucial unanswered question is: Would Japanese Americans on the whole have suffered less if they had remained in hotbeds of anti-Orientalism instead of being moved to the safety and relative comfort of the centers? As pointed out in my article in the UMR, living in a convivial atmosphere with other Japanese American had many advantages over existing in a bitterly hostile environment for the duration of the war.
3. Little credit is given to the extraordinary effort by untold thousands of Caucasians to help Japanese Americans throughout this trying period. Uprooted Americans, a story of the evacuation by Dillon S. Myers, director of the War Relocation Authority gives a truer picture of the Japanese American experience.
The question of monetary redress should be left to the good judgment of honorable members of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Undoubtedly, innocent evacuees had considerable financial losses and have suffered deeply from being branded "national security risks" and incarcerated in remote inland camps. Even a token payment. would assuage the terrible hurt, which lingers in the subconscious, even 40 years afterwards.
But, as a combat veteran, I oppose such awards at the price of defamation of my country. And I am sure that the large majority of Japanese Americans feel the same!
I urge this committee to categorize the CWRIC report as a liberal point of view of the evacuation, prepared by researchers from hearsay evidence. Its doctrinaire findings should be balanced by two more authoritative books by men who wrote from personal experience: 1. Nisei, the Quiet Americans, by Bill Hosokawa,
[Page 4]
who was evacuated to Heart Mountain Relocation Center from Seattle, Washington and 2. The aforementioned Uprooted American, by Dillon S. Myers, Director of the War Relocation Authority.
B. The Community Benefit Redress Plan
This redress plan, described in the enclosed letter to the Gardena Valley News, may be summarized as follows:
1. All former evacuees receive credit for $10,000, paid in installments of $1,000 a year for ten years, which can be donated to established charitable, religious, or public service organizations of their choice.
2. A token monetary award be given to each evacuee, the amount to be determined by Congress.
Most responsible Japanese Americans favor some type of community fund for redress. But it is almost impossible to fairly allocate the money to the hundreds of organizations around the country.
It is a simple matter to have evacuees determine where the money should go. The results can be computerized; and a single check can be sent to receiving institutions periodically.
It is only common sense that a mature group, like Japanese American evacuees, should be given an opportunity to help decide what kind of redress they should receive. It is doubtful if the statements of pro-redress leaders reflect the feelings of the majority. because they enjoy the most minimal support from the evacuees themselves!
l
It should not be difficult to send an official questionaire to every evacuee to find a consensus of opinions. The Japanese American communities can be asked to inform the people of the pros and cons of various redress plans.
From the response, Congress can develop equitable legislation that is satisfactory to all persons concerned, including the American people.
[Page 5]
CONCLUSION
It is difficult to disprove the mountain of misinformation regarding the complex issue of evacuation in a few pages. The bottom line is: How do the majority of Japanese Americans feel about the evacuation and redress?
A simple, unsigned questionaire, sent to all Japanese American evacuees would provide more valid answers than the millions of words, written and spoken, on this subject!
May I urgently request this committee to take such action; so that the issue which has sundered the Japanese American community can at long last be resolved!
Sincerely,
[Signed]
Mas Odoi
________
Torrance, CA 90501
Phone: _________