My Billings Gazette

I’ve had a life long interest in the Heart Mountain internment camp. I was in a first grade classroom in the Garfield School on Billings southside when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. As kids we were quite “color blind” back then and I had friends in grade school who were Mexican-Americans and Indians. I also had a little buddy named Tommy Sugimoto. That summer we splashed around on the shallow end of the South Park pool. None of us had really learned to swim, but Tommy could swim better underwater than any of the rest of us. When school started in September I looked for Tommy in both second grade classrooms, but he wasn’t there. I recall being quite sad at his absence. A couple of years later I understood what had probably happened to him and his family. Information about Heart Mtn. has suggested that the interns there had not come from MT or WY. I have always wondered if that was totally true. Since the internet has been available I have searched for a Tom Sugimoto, but had no luck. I found others of that surname, but no Tommy. I communicated with one, but she had no recollection of a Tom in her family.

My dad had worked as a guard on a train carrying interns to Heart Mtn. I still remember him borrowing a .38 revolver and pistol belt to wear. He said each passenger car had a US Border patrolman standing at one end and a hired guard, like himself at the other. Having four children he had a deferral from the draft based on family. Most other young men were already in the armed forces. There was a great deal of hysteria toward those of Japanese heritage in the US at that time.

There was also mistreatment of German and Italian American citizens. Some people had been very verbally abusive of an older German couple named Kaufman who lived near us. We had a German name as well and I asked my mother if people hated us, too. She said that dad’s family came from the German colonies in Russia and that made us German-Russian. The Russians were our allies against Nazi Germany so people would not bother us. That made me feel safer, but the Kaufman’s were Volga Germans as well and it didn‘t help them. It was especially a problem for those with who often talked in their Volga German language or when speaking in English had very strong German accents. (Does anyone remember the comic strip “Kats and Jammer Kids?” They were really fun to read and told that story quite well.) I understand there were some camps for Italian Americans, too, and I suppose some local Italians were abused as well. It all came back to me after 9-11 and the stories came out of ignorant Americans lashing out at anyone with dark skin and hair, from Hispanics and native Americans to those from India and elsewhere. Those known to be Muslim and especially those of Arabic heritage were often singled out. This was much like it was in the US during WWII for those of German, Italian or Japanese heritage.

There was a German POW (prisoner of war) camp on the southside about 5 blocks from my home during WWII. It was just south of State Avenue off Riverside near the Sugar Factory. As many Montana young men had enlisted or been drafted into the military, our local area farmers were short of field hands. Gasoline rationing kept Mexican labor away, too. As German troops surrendered in North Africa, Sicily, and Italy, and more after D-Day, some of these were shipped to US POW camps. We would regularly see farm trucks driving past our house picking up these POWs and taking them back in the evening after a days labor in the beet, corn, and bean irrigated fields around Billings. They always had one guard, probably armed with an M-1 carbine. They were fed lunch by the farm wives and seldom or never caused any trouble. Most were likely German farm kids who had been conscripted by Hitler into the German army and were very happy to be alive and working farms in Montana, often for farmers of German descent, some of who could converse with them in German. We would ride our bikes near the camp in the evenings. We could hear them singing songs in German and strangely kicking a ball around. Few Americans knew anything about soccer in the 1940’s. We were baseball, basketball, and American football fans and players back then.

I recall being with my grandfather in his car and seeing a POW hat on the street which had blown off in the wind. He stopped and let me run and pick it up. I still have a photo at his farm of me proudly wearing that trophy - a German prisoner of war hat. It was a big deal to me as none of my friends had one.

I have hoped that the roster of families from the Heart Mountain internment camp would be made available on-line. I would love to search it. My weekend plans have included driving to Worland for some good bluegrass music and BBQ this weekend. I will have to consider making it a 2-day trip to take in some of the Heart Mountain activities as well. I still wonder what ever happened to my little first grade buddy, Tommy Sugimoto and his family. I probably always will.

Phase Two: addressing Mr. Mellor’s letter. First of all America is NOT being destroyed in any fashion. Having said that I have to admit that I agree with portions of my old antagionist friend, Laughter and Vic Venom’s comments regarding castigating the “Greatest Generation.” I also take issue with John’s statement: “have often heard it said that mine is the “greatest generation.” I don’t know what the buzz is in the Broadus bars, but I have never heard that sort of braggadocio. The term came from Tom Brokaw’s book, which I have a copy of. Tom is not quite my contemporary as I was born five years before his birth on 2-6-40. That means he was only about 5 years old when WWII ended, so he had little direct memory of those years. Of course he heard much of it as he grew older and studied history in school. There is an article in today’s dead tree edition of the Gazette regarding one of the true heroes of WWII and his exploits which lead to the movie, “The Dirty Dozen.” In my mind these ordinary young Americans who shipped out to storm the beaches at Normandy and Anzio, who fought Rommel’s formidable tank divisions in North Africa and went ashore in the Pacific Islands were truly the greatest generation. They flew daylight missions with B-17s and B-24s over the flak filled skies of Germany and off carriers to destroy the Japanese fleet in the Pacific. So why is there so much antagonism over this group of American heroes? It may go back to the military history of America. We felt we “won” our American Revolution, although we really did not defeat the British. We became such a pain in the tail to the Brits that they largely decided it wasn’t worth the money and effort to keep their wayward colony in line, especially after the War of 1812. The Civil War was a terrible event and the federal government came out the “winner.” The Mexican and Spanish-American wars were largely travesties and were designed to acquire more territory in order to fulfill our “Manifest Destiny,” of inclusion of more of the North American continent. But we did "win" those wars. We had even beaten up on the native population in the “Indian Wars.“ Both WWI and WWII resulted in unconditional surrender by our enemies. We considered the U.S. to be the absolute good guys who always won. Then came the Korean “police action” followed by the gradual and increasing involvement of our military in Viet Nam. The whole situation resulted in a military debacle for the U.S. Suddenly we were no longer winners, but something else. Something we weren't used to, and many did not like whatever that was.

Both war protesters, and apparently some older vets, began dumping on our returning heroes from Nam. I suspect any vets doing this spent too much time at the Legion and VFW swilling beer and they probably were noncombat vets anyway. I believe the true members of the greatest generation appreciated our younger heroes who were doing their duty. Apparently this has a lot to do with later generations now returning the negativism on the older heroes of WWII. The greatest generation was NOT composed of the baby boomers who were birthed after their fathers came home from the war. Members of the greatest generation are all in their 80s or older today. Too many younger people seem to assume that all their elders were included in the "greatest generation." No so. I also agree that too many families began coddling their kids and bestowing too many gifts upon them, but they were not necessarily from that age group. Too many began spoiling their offspring. People of the greatest generation were happy to first buy a small cottage as a starter home and with enough prosperity gradually move into larger houses. Too many of today’s people have come to expect a “trophy” starter home with all the amenities their parents spent a lifetime in order to afford. Our biggest problem is that too many of us left the real world long ago and have tried to exist in a fantasy existence. The recent “Great Recession” has been good in some ways. At least it is jerking more Americans back into the world of reality which we all live in today. Tom Brokaw was correct in terming the heroes of WWII the “Greatest Generation.” :Mr. Mellor was wrong in denigrating the true heroes of WWII. I wonder how old Mr. Mellor is and if he was truly a member of the greatest generation.

President Obama promised to close the prison at Guantanamo if elected, however he is running into opposition from several sources as he seeks to deal with the men held there. Following are some thoughts regarding this serious matter. A matter which is different than any the U.S. has previously faced.

Why is Guantanamo necessary at all and who are the so-called “detainees” imprisoned there? Many of us simply assume they are “terrorists.” But who do you define as being a “terrorist?” We need to realize that men have been detained there for a wide range of reasons. Let us first think of the term domestic “criminals.” A criminal is one who has violated a law. Therefore, “criminals” could include everyone from petty shoplifters and traffic violators to serial killers. If we use the term “murderer” we know what that means, but the term “criminal” can cover a wide range of misdemeanors as well as felonies. The same could be said for the detainees at Guantanamo. Following is a statement in defense of the president, but it also defines four categories of detainees there and lists how they should be treated by our American system of jurisprudence and why.

According to David Cole of Georgetown University school of law:

“As to the vexing question of what to do with the detainees at Guantanamo, President Obama got it right. Try those who have violated U.S. criminal laws in civilian courts; try those who have violated the laws of war in military commissions, reformed to ensure that they are consistent with the demands of due process; release those who do not pose a threat; and preventively detain those we cannot try but who are still engaged in armed conflict with the United States.”

Who are these last listed and why can’t we try them? It is simply that information was obtained from them by illegal methods which would not stand up in court. However, they continue to pose a very serious threat to the U.S., and would most certainly continue to war against us if they were released. There has been precedent in detaining enemies during time of war, however other wars which America has experienced have not lasted as long as this war. Our domestic experience in detention camps was in the Alien and Sedition Acts of the WWI era and the detention of Japanese-Americans during WWII. Neither of these have been especially proud moments in our history.

When we consider the four different types of prisoners there it becomes more apparent why this is such a vexing problem for the Obama administration. We don’t know the numbers involved either. Provided the last and most dangerous category of permanently detained prisoners is not too great, it would seem our maximum security prisons should be capable of placing them there, especially if they are separated and sent to different prisons. At any rate this situation needs to be resolved. We simply cannot keep all of them at Guantanamo until they die of old age. Another problem will be what to do with new foreign “terrorists” who will undoubtedly be captured as the war on terror continues into the indeterminate future.

THE BOSTON TEA PART - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Most Americans have rather foggy memories of their days in history classes and our traditional histories are also replete with many myths and legends of questionable authenticity. These include the stories of Pocahontas and John Smith, the celebration of the first Thanksgiving, why the pilgrims came to America, and many aspects the eventual American revolution. Some of these may include the Boston Massacre, the Boston Tea Party, and the midnight ride of Paul Revere.

If the average American recalls learning of the Boston Tea Party, at all, they likely believe it was brought on by a very high tax on tea which was leveled by the British government - maybe by George III himself. It also was the source of the cry in the colonies of “No taxation without representation.“ That wasn’t exactly correct and to totally understand this event it is nearly necessary to have detailed knowledge of British history and that is beyond the ken of nearly all Americans and certainly more than can be detailed here. It is also important to recall that there was no central government here, but thirteen separate colonial governments, each unique unto itself. It all began with the oceanic explorers sailing from Europe to other lands around the globe. That quickly resulted in European countries claiming territories and colonies around the world. The British had made claim to the east coast of North American and had defeated the French in what we call the French and Indian War. They had little experience in colonialism when our colonies were established and transportation and communication were obviously rather primitive in the 1600-1700s.  It was the experience of the French and Indian War that showed the British what had been happening in the colonies. While today we easily understand the Spain wanted to find gold south of us, we may not realize that England sought wealth from her colonies as well. With little gold or silver to be found the Brits had to rely on trade and eventually parliament decided to get revenue from the colonies by taxing them. Why not? British troops were sent there to protect them by Grenville and that cost the Empire many pounds sterling. Should not the colonies pay their share? This was long before the income or property taxes and both tariffs and excise taxes were main sources of revenue. There were many examples of British taxation prior to the tax on tea. There had been many friends of America in England including Wm. Pitt and Edmund Burke. Parliament had been led for years by Pitt and followed by Grenville and then there was Townshend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer (think a more powerful Sec’y of the the Treasury). The many attempts to gain revenue from the colonies had often simply resulted in the colonies lack of compliance. There had been little authority to force them to pay so they simply didn’t. The various acts of parliament included the Molasses Act, Sugar Act, and the notorious Stamp Act, which had nothing to do with postage, but taxed newspapers and legal documents among other items. It was the Stamp Act that first brought out the cry of “no taxation without representation.” There was precedent in English law that those taxed should have representatives in parliament, normally the House of Commons rather than Lords. The justification and reality from the British side was that many subjects in Britain actually had no more representation than the colonists in America. None the less this made good fodder for perhaps the greatest propagandist for rebellion, Samuel Adams. Sam Adams may have been the main catalyst behind the American Revolution although the average citizen today may not appreciate his role. The Currency Act and the Stamp Act were opposed in principle by Benjamin Franklin and particularly in writing by James Otis. Eventually Grenville was removed from leadership and the Stamp Act was repealed, a victory for the colonies. Unfortunately Townshend came to power and was determined to obtain more revenue from the colonies and renewed the issue of taxation with the Townshend Acts. This resulted in acts of disobedience by boycotting British goods and it also provided more fodder for rebellion against the King and Parliament. Then came the decision to enact the Tea Act. This was actually designed to aid the East India Company of excessive quantities of tea which were highly taxed in England, but would be shipped to America with much smaller duty owed. Many Americans had been imbibing illegal Dutch tea and even though the English tea would be available cheaper, the old issue of taxation was revived. Other colonies prevented the tea from being brought ashore and at least one ship was burned. In Boston, of course, colonists thinly disguised as Indians went aboard and dumped the tea into the harbor. The tax on the tea was not at all excessive, being less than the English tea drinker paid, but was symbolic in the protest against no colonial representatives in Parliament. This is a bit different that what the recent “Tea Party” protestors claimed.

Was the Boston Tea Party widely acclaimed? Well known colonists including, Benjamin Franklin, were appalled at the Boston Tea Party and saw no value whatsoever and subsequent problems from it. You can draw your own conclusions as to how totally significant it was in the entire history of the movement toward independence. The above is quite sketchy and omits many details, but if you wish to read 100 pages or more you will easily find more information on this topic.

Other thoughts:

Many people are ranting about the Constitution today. Some thoughts on that topic include: There was a lot of politics involved in ratifying the Constitution as nearly half the colonists supported states rights as opposed to a strong federal government. Many tricks were involved in getting enough votes in the colonies to approve it. Not at all different than political issues today. Many of today’s conservative commenters rant about both the Constitution and about states rights. That is certainly most interesting in light of the original Constitution as opposed to the amendments made which we call the Bill of Rights.

Famous patriot, Patrick Henry, who may or may not have uttered, “If this be treason, make the most of it,” and “Give me liberty or give me death,” was an anti-Federalist and bitterly opposed to ratification of the Constitution. He wasn’t the only one of the founding fathers who opposed the Constitution. I question how many people today are aware of that as well. It may also be appropriate to point out that the founding fathers were not conservative, but flaming radical liberals. The conservatives in the colonies were the Tories who supported the Briitish government. Of course, Abraham Lincoln was also a liberal as evidenced by the Emancipation Proclamation, while the southern Democrats were the conservatives.  More food for thought.