Clarence Moriwaki posts to "Bainbridge Conversation"
Recently Bainbridge outside agitator Clarence Moriwaki provided a post to the "Bainbridge Conversation" blog moderated by Rachel Pritchett and the Kitsap Sun. Moriwaki's comments, snide in tone, were rebutted by a few different sources.
Unfortunately, Pritchett's "Bainbridge Conversation" hasn't been much of a forum for "conversation".
Pritchett refused to post any rebuttal to Moriwaki thus letting him get the last word. In this instance "Bainbridge Converation" could be more appropriately named "Bainbridge Propaganda".
Unlike the Kitsap Sun, "Friends of Historical Accuracy" does not ban civil deabate.
Here is a link to Moriwaki's comments:
http://blogs.kitsapsun.com/kitsap/bainbridge/archive/2007/03/sixtyfive_years_ago_227_island.html#c1103985
Now let's engage in the debate Pritchett silenced on her own blog. That's a shame, Rachel.
Moriwaki: "To verify that 62 Bainbridge Island Japanese Americans actually served in WWII, Mr. Olsen didn’t have to plead to the Kitsap Sun to do his homework or fact checking. Mr. Olsen could have simply called me or others in the Bainbridge Island Japanese American community to ask us – or perhaps, more in character, demand from us – the proof and facts; however, that simple act of courtesy would in and of itself been an historic event."
Answer: Clarence, your record for providing the 100% truth is not great. This is akin to the fox guarding the hen house. We want verifiable resources. Why would Olsen call you for this information? You claim in the media to represent the "Bainbridge Island Japanese American Community". You represent your own little clique. That's it! Stop going around claiming to represent people you don't.
Moriwaki: "In all of these years of being a quixotic internment apologist, Mr. Olsen has never once spoken to me man to man. Instead, Mr. Olsen has preferred the refuge behind the prodigious use of his keyboard to hijack blogs and deluge newspaper editors."
Answer: In 2005, Jim Olsen wrote letters to BIJAC and IslandWood requesting an open public debate regarding this history to be held at IslandWood. BIJAC and IslandWood refused. Not only was Mr. Olsen willing to speak to you man-to-man Clarence, he was willing to do it in a public forum. I have all the letters. Shall we let the public read them, too?
Moriwaki: "While I understand that Mr. Olsen was an accountant for the Coast Guard, I do not know if he has had any formal training or academic background in demographics or statistical analysis. If so, he might want to brush up on his methods, since he concluded that it was mathematically impossible for 62 Bainbridge Island Japanese Americans to have honorably served our nation in WWII.
Well, Mr. Olsen, we poured over our numbers and we discovered that we were wrong.
There were not 62 Bainbridge Island Japanese Americans who served in World War II.
There were actually 68."
Answer: Well, Clarence, here are the questions we posed to "Bainbridge Conversation". Will you please provide more details to the public regarding this number?
Also, why did you get the numbers wrong in the first place?
1. Of this number how many served during hostilites?
2. How many were drafted in 1940?
3. How many served after hostilites, meaning the occupation?
4. How many volunteered from the Relocation Centers in 1942?
5. How many were drafted when the United States instituted the draft for Japanese Americans later in the war?
Break it out for us, Clarence Moriwaki.
I'm not denying 68 Japanese American Bainbridge Islanders wore the uniform. We just want verifciation and details.
You wouldn't expect any less from us, would you?
Moriwaki: "As you and your wife Mary Dombrowski profess to be “Bainbridge Historians” (I’ve scanned your website and noticed that both of you don’t list any academic accreditations) and as “Friends of Historical Accuracy,”
Answer: I am university educated in history with a lil' ol' BA from a state university. I haven't made a career out of this history, unlike Clarence. It's only a hobby.
Besides, is Clarence an accredited scholar in history? How about Frank Kitamoto? How about Tom Ikeda at Densho?
How about just one of the commission members that led to the Japanese Money Bill of 1988?
Of course not. They are all political activists and agitators.
One only need read the About Us section at Bainbridge Historians to realize I am neither Jim nor Mary. But it's nice to know Clarence has "scanned" my much neglected site and blog. I appreciate the plug.
Too bad, he can't debate the content.
Moriwaki: "The following list is of the 68 Bainbridge Island Japanese Americans who served in World War II, with the * indicating the 16 who served in the venerated 442 Regimental Combat Team:"
Answer: It's an impressive list which is why it needs to be verified. Let's look at the overall statistics for all relocation centers.
There were 800 JA volunteers who served in the U.S. armed forces. In addition, there were approx 3,200 draftees from the camps who also served. That would be a total of approx 4,000 from all of the relocation centers.
There were approx 19,000 males of military age in all the camps.
The 4,000 of them who served is 21% of the 19,000 total eligible for service.
Now if there were 191 U.S. citizens evacuated from Bainbridge and 68 of them served, that would be 36%. It seems doubtful that there were that many JA males of military age among the Bainbridge evacuees but even if there were, why would Bainbridge have provided 36% of their JAs to the army while the average for those from other locations in all the camps was 21%?
That would have JAs evacuated from Bainbridge Island providing almost twice as many of their number to the armed forces as JAs evacuated from other locations. That seems most unlikely.
Morawaki claims 16 served with the 100/442d. I have a roster of that outfit with some 8,500 names on it. So many names are the same and the list only partly alphabetized, that it would be an impossible job to try to find the 16 names from Bainbridge even if they were among the 8,500.
So how did Morawaki come up with the 16 names? From what official records, if any?
Aside from the 100/442d just about the only other outfit (with a few exceptions involving only a few people) they could have served in was the Military Intelligence Service in the Pacific. A total of about 3,500 served there.
If only 16 of the 68 served with the 100/442d, where did the other 52 serve? Did the other 52 all serve with the MIS? Very doubtful.
Pardon our skepticism Clarence, but your track record on historical accuracy is lacking and you have provided information that needs to be verified. Until you do so this information should be taken with a grain of salt.
The gate down at the post office, the Historical Society exhibit, the exhibit in the basement of Sakai School and certainly what is going to become the memorial in Eagledale to "educate" the public...it should all be taken with a grain of salt.
P.S. Where were all the enviromental activists on Bainbridge when the gully (or ravine as the newcomers call them) was ground down to make a parking lot for the "internment" memorial?
Not a word of outrage for the degredation of the island's enviroment. Certainly that gully in Eagledale is (was) much healthier than the gully in Winslow.
Why is that, Clarence?
posted by Friends of Historical Accuracy @ 8:20 AM
10 comments
10 Comments:
Special Monograph 10 published by the Selective Service System in 1953 about minority groups who served in the U.S. military says in one section that
"Over 25,500 REGISTRANTS of Japanese extraction WERE PROCESSED FOR INDUCTION...DURING WWII...
MORE THAN 21,000 OF THESE WERE INDUCTED."
(Note, 4,500 of the registrants were never inducted and hence did not serve.) [Emphasis mine]
But elsewhere in the same publication it says ALTOGETHER 33,300 NISEI, MORE THAN HALF FROM THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES, SERVED IN WORLD WAR II, ALMOST EQUALLY DIVIDED BETWEEN EUROPE AND THE PACIFIC." [Emphasis mine]
Do you believe that?
In both cases above, no time frame is given. Just the
statement "during World War II."
These figures aren't even close to the lesser numbers who were inducted, can be accounted for, and actually served during the period the U.S. was engaged in hostilities with the Empire of Japan, i.e., from Dec 7, 1941 to August 15, 1945.
And just to throw more numbers into the fan, the WRA issued a press release on March 28, 1945 which was carried in the San Francisco Chronicle, the New York Times, and the N.Y.Herald Tribune under such headings as:
"THE ARMY HAS INDUCTEED 17,600 Nisei TO DATE" giving the starting date as November 1, 1940
which was the effective date of the draft, not the beginning
of the war which was more than a year later.
According to Masayo Umazawa Duus in her book, "Unlikely Liberators," most of the Hawaiian National Guard were draftees. She wrote:
"In November (1940) just a year before the attack on Pearl
Harbor, the first number chosen in the selective service drawing belonged to a Japanese American.
Fifteen hundred of the three thousand Hawaiians drafted before the outbreak of war were Japanese Americans"
Several months later there was an invasion alert in Hawaii and it was decided to detach the Japanese-Americans from the National Guard because in the event of enemy landings the Japanese-American soldiers might have been confused with the enemy, and vice versa. For that reason, General Emmons urged that the detached JA guardsmen be sent to
the mainland.
(Presumably those contributors to this thread who are the most obsessed with "race," will consider General Emmons a "racist"
for recommending this pragmatic move).
Washington OK'd the Emmons recommendtion and the JAs were hastily organized into a new infantry battalion and shipped to San Francisco.
The group ultimately ended up in the 100/442d Regimental Combat Team in Europe and were included in the numbers of those JAs who actually served during the period we were at war. Had some of them been released for any reason before or shortly after the outbreak of war, those individuals would not have rightfully been eligible for inclusion in
the numbers of JAs serving in the U.S. armed forces during the war, unless at a later date having re-entered service while the country was still engaged in hostilities with the Axis powers..
Perhaps Clarence's snide tone can be attributed to his departure from the offices of Congressman Inslee.
What are the details of Moriwaki's departure? Now he is working under Josh Brown? Information Director?
It all sounds strange and scary.
Moriwaki had been preaching to the choir regarding this interment memorial over on Bainbridge.
It will be interesting to see how he is accepted in the rest of Kitsap County.
I don't recall going to school with Clarence Moriwaki in the '70s.
Is he from around here?
I recall a public meeting on Bainbridge in 2004 or 2005 attended by many area residents over a heaated subject of free speech and indoctrination of 6th graders. Clarence Moriwaki (the so-called Go-To-Guy) was present and read a statement he wrote but had his boss Congressman Inslee dutifully sign on his official stationary. The statement was on the terrible evil of President Franklin Roosevelt, the federal government in 1942 and now and so on.
There was another speaker at the school board meeting from Tracyton, a brave and smart veteran and intellectual. Needless to say this gentleman spoke elouquently and forcefully about the dangers of propaganda in our school curriculum (Leaving our Island controversial curriculum).
The next issue of the Review had Clarence Moriwaki quoted in the paper that this man's opinion didn't matter because he did not live on "Our Island." Of course the statement was pure Stalinism nonesense and most people thought Moriwaki odd and pretentious for being so xenophibic.
For me the richness of the event was Moriwaki migrated here from Moses Lake and feigns he is from "Our Island." Frankly anyone who attempts to exclude another person's right to free speech and analysis is not a real islander but a posseur and a special-interest self anointed spokesman for no one.
Kitsap Sun blog moderator Rachel Pritchett has refused me rebuttal to Clarence Moriwaki's curious Bainbridge Converation post. The following letter was submitted numerous times but Pritchett was too busy being AWOL from free speech to be fair. My answer is:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Speaking of the issue of Mr. Moriwaki's historical inaccuracies, my words published in the Kitsap Sun are on point: Kitsap Sun letter: "According to a press release from Japanese-American Bainbridge memorial publicist.
Clarence Moriwaki, a March 30 event at Pritchard Park Bainbridge (11 a.m./open to public) will be held to commemorate Bainbridge evacuees’ departure to what he calls “concentration camps.”
Predictably, the senior political luminaries will eagerly descend and speak at the event. Messrs. Locke, Lowry, Munro, Inslee and Gov. Gregoire and Mayor Kordonowy will represent the politics of history.
With the $5 million memorial again center stage, it is imperative veterans and citizens witness firsthand the dangerously flawed history being memorialized.
Recent high-visibility memorial events had special-interest sponsors repeatedly making specious links between WWII “anti-Japanese racism” and President Bush’s USA Patriot Act, War in Iraq , war on terrorism and treatment of Arabs.
Listen carefully for the irresponsible citations of “unconstitutional imprisonment,” “racism” and “concentration camps” as the memory of 274 Bainbridge evacuees (83 Japanese citizens and 191 U.S. born Japanese-Americans) is raised.
The clear and incontrovertible historical fact is that the Bainbridge Japanese-American Memorial ignores Second World War wartime realities and evades honest discussion of extensive West Coast espionage, sabotage and strong loyalties to the Divine Emperor of Japan.
Before the flawed and biased history is etched in stone, become knowledgeable."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Less than 8 percent of draft-age relocation male residents joined the US Military at time of in-processing to relocation camps although that number of total Japanese-American enlistment rises as the war outcome becomes clearer in 1945 with more Japanese-Americans joining the war effort. However the rates were very low compared to their counterparts in society at large for enlistment rates. So if 6% fought in early WWII, then 94% did not enlist as was their option.
14.5 million US veterans served in WWII. 10,000 die every month. To honor the few at the expense of the many is not my idea of honoring the valor of the Greatest Generation.
Viva the USA Patriot Act. Let “IT” Never Happen Again — “IT” being a complacent government unwilling to track down enemies of the state before we are bombed in events like World Trade Center, USS Cole, 9/11 or more attacks on our population with the now world epidemic suicide-bomber martyrs like the Kamikaze pilots of militaristic WWII Japan.
Clarence Moriwaki has a lamentable history with regard to his accurate use of facts regarding EO-9066, espionage, sabotage and the facts of Bainbridge. I am, however, impressed with the scholarship of Bainbridge Historians (www.Bainbridgehistorians.org), www.internmentarchives.com, War and MAGIC and the fine work of Mr. Lee Allen.
And Clarence, were these individuals who served during the war, in war-time factories, after the war or in occupied Japan? What branch did your list of members serve? What was the period of service? Was this pre-conflict, war-time or post-war occupation of Japan. What were the units they were in? Where is the verification I can turn to? We all can play with numbers.
Also, Clarence, how many BI residents were arrested on Feb 4, 1942 on Bainbridge in a FBI/US Attorney/Kitsap Sheriff raid and are any of those names familiar to you? (see Seattle Times and Seattle Post Intelligencer for the answer).
Watch War and MAGIC (www.internmentarchives.com or BITV-12) to fill in some of the gaps in your knowledge.
By the way, who anointed you the special-interest guru for a fine community on Bainbridge? You are self-anointed and don't forget that."
This is interesting. Maybe 21,000 were inducted during 1944 through 1950. When the JA's knew which side to fight for.
"The 4,000 of them who served is 21% of the 19,000 total eligible for service. " A very good acessment, but I believe the actual percentage is more like 8-9%. A poor showing.
Replacements to the 442nd after France shoudn't be counted. Or any inductee/replacement after October 1944 shouldn't be counted.
I'll bet that the percentage is higher, more like 22-23% percent of Nisei & Sansei that served with the Japanese forces during actual combat time in the war. I wish there was more information about this....
Clarence Moriwaki's attribution of the creation of the Bainbridgehistorians.org to me is the biggest ego boost I've received this year. It's second only to the time a few years ago when Frank Kitamoto stated that there were "only" 20 people on Bainbridge Island who agreed with us. Twenty! I know two. How can I meet them the other 18?!!!
No, I'm not the creator of this august site. However, if individuals are interested in my authentic work, they can dial up "internmentarchives.com" and find the link to the "War & MAGIC" interview films.
I found this interview with Frank Kitamoto on the internet.
http://wwiihistoryclass.com/civil-rights/transcripts/Kitamoto,%20Frank_217.pdf
In the interview Frank says about his dad:
"My Mom said she thought he was probably under suspicion because he commuted to Seattle everyday and when he commuted he would take things from the greenhouses on Rich Passage in the (inaudible) area on the island here and would deliver them for the greenhouses so he drove through that pass.. that passage where those navy ships go to the shipyard all the time. And besides that when he worked for Friedlanders he would take rings to Japanese ships and sell them to the Japanese seamen."
Is the "greenhouses" referred to by Frank the same property as the Japanese consulate summer home mentioned in the recent mailer? If so why doesn't Frank make the connection?
And if the greenhouses were in fact the same property as the Japanese consulate annex why was Frank's dad going there daily?
What was Frank's dad taking and delivering for the "greenhouses"?
Germane to this issue is a letter I sent to the editor (J Campbell, The Sun), that was not published in whole or in part ( sent Apr 8 by regular mail ,2 days earlier by email , so perhaps it just hasn't worked its way up the stack yet in all fairness). Text was as follows: Dear Sir: Thankyou for making the "Annual Bataan March Rememberance Is Saturday" a page one piece (Kitsap Sun Friday April6,2007). I feel compelled to point out that while it may be politically correct to write that American POW's "dropped from heat, hunger, thirst or exhaustion along the way", it would be more intellectually honest to also point out those American and Allied military POW's, as well as Filipino soldiers and civilians (including women and children) who were beheaded, deliberately ground to dust under tank treads and used for bayonet practice. Will representative J. Inslee (D- Bainbridge Island), who I know must be an honorable elected representative of ALL the people, support Marine Corps veteran Bob Medley's efforts to obtain funding for a memorial to the Bataan Death March and WWII Prisoners of War in the Far East (Kitsap Sun P. A6 Friday, 6April, 2007)? I hope so, lest he be accused of, for political advantage, being a mere shill for the victim compensation industry wherein every aggrived population wants in on the remunerative pain claim game, with its attendant unconscionable access to public funds and revisionist "historians" and "journalists" (who so readily repeat endlesly misrepresented facts and statistics and appear not to know the meaning of the term "primary source"). If you are really interested in the facts, carefully reread Lee Allen's pamphlet " BI Japanese American Memorial Ignores Wartime Realities". I challenge Ran Hennes ("Bainbridge Island Controversy on Internment Mailer's Timing", Kitsap Sun march 25, 2007 article by Andrew Binion) to factually refute even one thing that Allen said, though he (Hennes) blithely states that "many assertions in the pamphlet were not supported by evidence". While I'm on the subject, how about a memorial to all the West Coast based cryptographers and spycatchers( yes, there were wartime spies and saboteurs loyal to the Emperor) who played such an important role in keeping our home shores free from invasion while the rest of the globe was in flames and in the grip of fascist and racist fanatics. Were some innocent Americans of Japanese ancestry (and Italian and German ancesty) relocated? The historical record says yes. Was the relocation a legally mandated wartime necessity ( after which West Coast subversive activities essentially ceased)? Again, the record says yes. Shold we regret what happens to innocents in a time of war? Of course, if we call ouselves human. But let us (and all succeding generations) not forget that relocation center statistics can be measured in number of births, social club and sport team memberships, marriages and high school graduations, while the REAL wartime concentration camp statistics were measured in the numbers of starvations, beatings, mutilations, vivisections (look it up) and beheadings (so PLEASE stop calling the relocation centers "concentration camps"). Our focus, especially in this age of terrorism aimed at the soul of Western civilization, should not be on the sloganeering "Let it never happen again" crowd, but rather on what we, as a nation, must be courageous enough to do so that "it may never be necessary again". In conclusion, as a fiscal conservative, I am not opposed to historically accuraate and truthful wartime memorials; I simply do not believe that they should be taxpayer funded( whether it's my favorite cause or someone else's) unless an informed citizenry approves and so votes. Sincerely, Robert F. Goad, Bainbridge Island
ATTEMPT TO OPEN EO-9066 DIALOGUE IN LIEU OF ISLANDWOOD FORUM
Sent:Thu 4/19/07 8:44 PM
April 19. 2007
President, Bainbridge Island Japanese-American Community
Dr. Frank Kitamoto
1298 Grow Avenue
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
Subject: “BAINBRIDGE HISTORIAN” OPPORTUNITY FOR DIALOGUE
Dear Dr. Frank Kitamoto and BIJCAC Board:
There is a matter that I would like to bring to your attention and respectfully ask for your assistance with providing answers and dialogue. There is a forum for discussion of historical matters, www.bainbridgehistorians.org, where a number of questions and observations have been raised on matters dealing with BIJAC or some of its members. I believe you made a comment once about how you did not use computers as much as the next generation so you may not be aware of this opportunity and discussion.
I have attached a copy of an article from Bainbridge Historians and a number of comments and questions raised in response to the posted article by Bainbridge Historian.
I provide this as a way of opening dialogue, sharing information about what is being said and affording you an opportunity to use the site as a forum to give information and ask questions you may have on the matter.
I had previously contacted you by letter in June of 2005 about my proposal for a dialogue on some of these issues. You told me in your written response that you declined the offer. I now provide you this new forum as perhaps a way we could work toward setting up a future dialogue at IslandWood. I firmly believe full and open discussion of the facts and history will ultimately be of benefit to all parties in this matter and to the public and taxpayers.
Again, you will find the site at www.bainbridgehistorians.org. Go to the “Blog” section and you can find this information and any subsequent posted comments and articles.
Respectfully yours,
/S/
Encl: (1) Bainbridge Historian article “Clarence Moriwaki posts to Bainbridge Conversation, April 17, 2007 - 4 pages
(2) Bainbridge Historian posted comments -- 7 pages
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Post a Comment
<< Home