The following are evidence found showing Pirates, et. als. conspiring against the Royal Families, Kanaka Maoli, Subjects in a neutral, friendly, non violent nation:
1893 - January 8. U.S. Congress and the U.S. President Benjamin Harrison gave a standing order to take over the Hawaii Islands........see the headlines below.....read the last paragraph where it says "not to mention troops".....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/ abstract.html?res= F00617FD345B1A738D...*PEARL HARBOR COALING STATION.; IMPERATIVE NECESSITY THAT THE UNITED STATES TAKE POSSESSION.
[ DISPLAYING ABSTRACT ]
WASHINGTON, Jan. 8. -- The United States, through the inactivity of the Navy Department and the indifference of the State Department, is likely to lose the only coaling station of which it stands in real need. Nothing has been done since 1884, when the Pearl Harbor site in the Hawaiian Islands became available, beyond a number of surveys which have abundantly demonstrated the excellence of this harbor as a site for a naval station.
Note: This article will open in PDF format. Get Adobe Acrobat Reader or Learn More » ***************************
PREMEDITATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS:
****************************** *********
1893 - January 15. American Minister Stevens and men left the steamship -of-war BOSTON "to protect American lives and property," with their "three companies of bluejackets, one of artillery, one of marines, 154 mean and 10 officers; with 14,000 cartridges for rifles and the Gatling gun, 1,300 revolver cartridges, and 174 explosive shells for the revolving cannon.
ADMISSION OF CRIMES
The USS Boston 's landing force on duty at the Arlington Hotel, Honolulu, at the time of the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, January 1893. Lieutenant Lucien Young, USN, commanded the detachment, and is presumably the officer at right.[1] picture from :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Kingdom_of_Hawaii
These forces were landed, on foreign soil, not at the request of the lawful Government - the Governor of Oahu promptly sent a formal note of protest to Minister Stevens - representing 88,000 of the population, but at the request of a committee of rebels representing 2,000 American residents."
"One company was left at the legation where the "American life and property" were to be found, while the rest of the force was marched to
Arlon Hall, a structure close to the palace and just across the street from the Government Building, where, of course, the rebels would necessarily make their attack."
1893. January 16. The Rear Admiral reported that "Arlon Hall was ill=chosen for the professed purpose for which the troops were landed. "Naturally," he adds, "if they were landed with a view to supporting the Provisional Government troops than occupying the Government Building, it was a wise choice."
1893 - January 17. The American "conspirators signed their proclamation announcing that the Hawaiian monarchy had been "abrogated" and a Provisional Government established, with Sanford B. Dole as Chairman of the Executive Council."
"They took this to the Government Building and there read it, within seventy-five yards of the point where the United States forces were stationed with their Gatling gun and small cannon."
"With only the Government Building in their hands, the Queen being at the palace and her troops in possession of the police station, and but for the overawing force of United States troops in possession also of the city, the rebels posted off to the American Legation with a request for recognition. They got it with extraordinary promptness. The Provisional Government was proclaimed between 2 and 3 o'clock. Two hours later the new Government had received the following document, which, to our shame, will live in history:
United States Legation.
Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, Jan. 17, 1893.
A Provisional Government having been duly constituted in place of the recent Government of Queen Liliuokalani, and said Provisional Government being in full possession of the Government buildings, the archives, and the Treasury, and in control of the capital of the Hawaiian Islands. I hereby recognize said Provisional Government as the de facto Government of the Hawaiian Islands.
JOHN L. STEVENS
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States.
Noted by author of the NEW YORK TIMES article, "The Story of a Crime":
"The Dole conspirators were not "in full possession of the Government buildings." but of only one of them, which was occupied only by clerks and porters at the time of their raid..............it was still too early to apply the word "recent" to the Government of the Queen, for the rebels did not wait on the Queen with their treasonable proclamation until after Minister Stevens had recognized their Government."
"The Queen yielded, of course,. She could do nothing else against a rebellion that was so manifestly backed up by the superior armed forces and by the Minister of the United States. She signed, under protest, a paper renouncing her rights."
Queen Liliuokalani in 1895 was forced to sign an abdication by conspirators, treasonous persons, pirates, Sanford B. Dole, et. als.
Note:
Queen Liliuokalani returned the government to a Monarchy government when she destroyed the Constitution affecting King Kalakaua's Bayonnet Constitution which was signed at gun point, and a Constitution that she had put together which did not appeal to the Americans in the Hawaiian Islands.
Queen Liliuokalani utilized her Sovereign authority based on the following:
1. Hanai/adopted relationship to the Kamehameha line, a leader who formed the monarchy government.
2. Attending the Royal School - a School for Hawaiian leaders - based on genealogies for a monarchy government.
3. Hanai/adopted daughter of a Kamehameha descendant, part of a monarchy government.
and another reason taken as an excerpt from above:
he American "conspirators signed their proclamation announcing that the Hawaiian monarchy had been "abrogated" and a Provisional Government established, with Sanford B. Dole as Chairman of the Executive Council."
4. The American's at the time of the wrongful dethronement did proclaim and announce that the Hawaiian monarchy was "abrogated".
In other words, the recognition of a monarchy form of government, not a Constitutional monarchy government was documented in 1893, and the fact that our Hawaiian Monarchy did go "underground", which means that our Hawaiian monarchy did not cease to exist!
Queen Liliuokalani was under duress, stress, coercion, usurpation, and it was a documented fact found that the U.S. aided, planned the criminal assumption of a neutral, friendly, non-violent nation, and did cause the duress, stress, coercion, usurpation, planned the criminal assumption of private properties with their helpers, the Americans, the treasonous persons known as the PIRATES OF THE PACIFIC: CHARLES REED BISHOP AND FRIENDS and did breach the Laws of Nations, killed, caused genocide and PLUNDERED UPON INNOCENTS since their presence from the time of the arrival of their mercenaries, the missionaries in 1820.
reference: NEW YORK TIMES articles (1) The Story of a Crime; and (2) Pearl Harbor Coaling Station - Imperative Necessity that the United States Take Possession; AFFAIRS IN ASIA, 1st Qtr 1897 - The Republic of Hawaii, an aged article purchased off the internet which came from GREECE! THE LIBERAL newspaper, January 28, 1893, genealogy, history researches, etc.
PUBLIC LAW 103-150 [S.J.Res. 19]; November 23, 1993
OVERTHROW OF HAWAII
Joint Resolution to acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the January 17, 1893 overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii.
Whereas prior to the arrival of the first Europeans in 1778, the Native Hawaiian people lived in a highly organized, self-sufficient, subsistent social system based on communal land tenure with a sophisticated language, culture, and religion;
Whereas a unified monarchical government of the Hawaiian Islands was established in 1810 under Kamehameha I, the first King of Hawaii;
Whereas, from 1826 until 1893, the United States recognized the recognized the independence of the Kingdom of Hawaii, extended full and complete diplomatic recognition to the Hawaiian Government, and entered into treaties and conventions with the Hawaiian monarchs to govern commerce and navigation in 1826, 1842, 1849, 1875, and 1887;
Whereas the Congregational Church (now known as the United Church of Christ), through its American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, sponsored and sent more than 100 missionaries to the Kingdom of Hawaii between 1820 and 1850;
Whereas, on January 14, 1893, John L. Stevens (hereafter referred to in this Resolution as the “United States Minister”), the United States Minister assigned to the sovereign and independent Kingdom of Hawaii conspired with a small group of non-Hawaiian residents of the Kingdom of Hawaii including citizens of the United States, to overthrow the indigenous and lawful Government of Hawaii;
Whereas, in pursuance of the conspiracy to overthrow the Government of Hawaii, the United States Minister and the naval representatives of the United States caused armed naval forces of the United States to invade the sovereign Hawaiian nation on January 16, 1893, and to position themselves near the Hawaiian Government buildings and the Iolani Palace to intimidate Queen Liliuokalani and her Government;
Whereas, on the afternoon of January 17, 1893, a Committee of Safety that represented the American and European sugar planters, descendants of missionaries, and financiers deposed the Hawaiian monarchy and proclaimed the establishment of a Provisional Government;
Whereas the United States Minister thereupon extended diplomatic recognition to the Provisional Government that was formed by the conspirators without the consent of the Native Hawaiian people or the lawful Government of Hawaii and in violation of treaties between the two nations and of international law;
107 Stat. 1510
Whereas, soon thereafter, when informed of the risk of bloodshed with resistance, Queen Liliuokalani issued the following statement yielding her authority to the United States Government rather than to the Provisional Government;
“I Liliuokalani, by the Grace of God and under the Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Queen. do hereby solemnly protest against any and all acts done against myself and the Constitutional Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom by certain persons claiming to have established a Provisional Government of and for this Kingdom. “That I yield to the superior force of the United States of America whose Minister Plenipotentiary, His Excellency John L. Stevens, has caused United States troops to be landed at Honolulu and declared that he would support the Provisional Government. “Now to avoid any collision of armed forces, and perhaps the loss of life, I do this under protest and impelled by said force yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representatives and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the Constitutional Sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands.”.
Done at Honolulu this 17th day of January, A.D. 1893.;
Whereas, without the active support and intervention by the United States diplomatic and military representatives, the insurrection against the Government of Queen Liliuokalani would have failed for lack of popular support and insufficient arms;Whereas, on February 1, 1893, the United States Minister raised the American flag and proclaimed Hawaii to be a protectorate of the United States;
Whereas the report of a Presidentially established investigation conducted by former Congressman James Blount into the events surrounding the insurrection and overthrow of January 17, 1893, concluded that the United States diplomatic and military representatives had abused their authority and were responsible for the change in government;
Whereas, as a result of this investigation, the United States Minister to Hawaii was recalled from his diplomatic post and the military commander of the United States armed forces stationed in Hawaii was disciplined and forced to resign his commission;
Whereas, in a message to Congress on December 18, 1893, President Grover Cleveland reported fully and accurately on the illegal acts of the conspirators, described such acts as an “act of war, committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress”, and acknowledged that by such acts the government' of a peaceful and friendly people was overthrown;
Whereas President Cleveland further concluded that a “substantial wrong has thus been done which a due regard for our national character as well as the rights of the injured people requires we should endeavor to repair” and called for the restoration of the Hawaiian monarchy;
Whereas the Provisional Government protested President Cleveland's call for the restoration of the monarchy and continued to hold state power and pursue annexation t6 the United States; Whereas the Provisional Government successfully lobbied the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate (hereafter referred to in this Resolution as the “Committee”) to conduct a new inves-
107 Stat. 1511
tigation into the events surrounding the overthrow of the monarchy;Whereas the Committee and its chairman, Senator John Morgan, conducted hearings in Washington, D.C., from December 27, 1893, through February 26, 1894, in which members of the Provisional Government justified and condoned the actions of the United States Minister and recommended annexation of Hawaii;
Whereas, although the Provisional Government was able to obscure the role of the United States in the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, it was unable to rally the support front two-thirds of the Senate needed to ratify a treaty of annexation;
Whereas, on July 4, 1894, the Provisional Government declared itself to be the Republic of Hawaii;
Whereas, on January 24, 1895, while imprisoned in lolani Palace, Queen Liliuokalani was forced by representatives of the Republic of Hawaii to officially abdicate her throne;
Whereas, in the 1896 United States Presidential election, William McKinley replaced Grover Cleveland;
Whereas, on July 7, 1898, as a consequence of the Spanish-American War, President McKinley signed the Newlands Joint Resolution that provided for the annexation of Hawaii;
Whereas, through the Newlands Resolution, the self-declared Republic of Hawaii ceded sovereignty over the Hawaiian Islands to the United States;
Whereas the Republic of Hawaii also ceded 1,800,000 acres of crown, government and public lands of the Kingdom of Hawaii, without the consent of or compensation to the Native Hawaiian people of Hawaii or their sovereign government;
Whereas the Congress, through the Newlands Resolution, ratified the cession, annexed Hawaii as part of the United States, and vested title to the lands in Hawaii in the United States;
Whereas the Newlands Resolution also specified that treaties existing between Hawaii and- foreign nations were to immediately cease and be replaced by United States treaties with such nations;
Whereas the Newlands Resolution effected the transaction between the Republic of Hawaii and the United States Government;
Whereas the indigenous Hawaiian people- never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum;
Whereas, on April 30, 1900, President McKinley signed the Organic Act that provided a government for the territory of Hawaii and defined the political structure and powers of the newly established Territorial Government and its relationship to the United States;
Whereas, on August 21, 1959, Hawaii became the 50th State of the United States;
Whereas the health and well-being of the Native Hawaiian people is intrinsically tied to their deep feelings and attachment to the land;
Whereas the long-range economic and social changes in Hawaii over the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries have been devastating to the population and to the health and well-being of the Hawaiian people;
Whereas the Native Hawaiian people are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territory, and their cultural identity in accordance with their own
107 stat. 1512
spiritual and traditional beliefs, customs, practices, language, and social institutions;Whereas, in order to promote racial harmony and cultural understanding, the legislature of the State of Hawaii has determined that the year 1993 should serve Hawaii as a year of special reflection on the rights and dignities of the Native Hawaiians in the Hawaiian and the American societies;
Whereas the Eighteenth General Synod of the United Church of Christ in recognition of the denomination’s historical complicity in the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893 directed the Office of the President of the United Church of Christ to offer a public apology to the Native Hawaiian people and to initiate the process of reconciliation between the United Church of Christ and the Native Hawaiians; and
Whereas it is proper and timely for the Congress on the occasion of the impending one hundredth anniversary of the event, to acknowledge the historic- significance of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, to express its deep regret to the Native Hawaiian people, and to support the reconciliation efforts of the State of Hawaii and the United Church of Christ with Native Hawaiians: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION I. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND APOLOGY,
The Congress— (1) on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893, acknowledges the historical significance of this event which resulted in the suppression of the inherent sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian people;
(2) recognizes and commends efforts of reconciliation initiated by the State of Hawaii and the United Church of Christ with Native Hawaiians;
(3) apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 with the participation of agents and citizens of the United States, and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination;
(4) expresses its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, in order to provide a proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people; and
(5) urges the President of the United States to also acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and to support reconciliation efforts between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Joint -Resolution, the term “Native Hawaiian” means any individual who is a descendent of the aboriginal people who, prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now constitutes the State of Hawaii.
107 stat. 1513
SEC. 3. DISCLAIMER.
Nothing in this Joint Resolution is intended to serve as a settlement of any claims against the United States.Approved November 23, 1993.
107 stat. 1514
Apology Resolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaUnited States Public Law 103-150, informally known as the Apology Resolution, is a Joint Resolution of the U.S. Congress adopted in 1993 that "acknowledges that the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii occurred with the active participation of agents and citizens of the United States and further acknowledges that the Native Hawaiian people never directly relinquished to the United States their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people over their national lands, either through the Kingdom of Hawaii or through a plebiscite or referendum" (U.S. Public Law 103-150 (107 Stat. 1510)). The resolution has been cited as a major impetus for the Hawaiian sovereignty movement, and has been the subject of intense debate.[1][2][3][4][5]
The legal effect of the Apology Resolution was addressed in the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court of March 31, 2009, which held that the 37 "whereas" clauses of the Apology Resolution have no binding legal effect, nor does it convey any rights or make any legal findings for native Hawaiian claims.[6] The Court concluded that the Resolution does not change or modify the "absolute" title to the public lands of the State of Hawai'i. The decision also affirmed that federal legislation cannot retroactively cloud title given as a part of statehood in general.
The Resolution was adopted by both houses of the United States Congress on November 23, 1993. A joint resolution, it was signed byPresident of the United States Bill Clinton on the same day.
The resolution was passed in the Senate by a vote of 65-34. Senator Sam Nunn did not vote. In the House, it was passed by a two-thirds voice vote. It was sponsored on January 21, 1993, as S.J.Res.19 by Daniel Akaka and co-sponsored by Daniel Inouye, bothDemocratic senators from Hawaii.
Contents
[hide][edit]Arguments for
Part of a series on Hawaii Hawaiian sovereignty
movementMain issues Governments Historical Conflicts Modern Events Parties & Organizations Documents & Ideas Books [edit]Historical evidence
The Apology resolution derives mainly from the Blount Report, which was compiled shortly after the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy (spring 1893). Blount found strongly in the favor of the queen and her supporters, and his report was an official criticism of the U.S. role in the overthrow. President Grover Cleveland was also strongly supportive of the Queen, and made official statements supporting the view held in the Blount Report. These official statements by the U.S. Government are seen as historical evidence for the claims made by the Apology Resolution.
[edit]Parallels between Native Hawaiians and Native Americans
Although the histories of Native Hawaiians and Native Americans are significantly different, there is still a widely-held perception that Native Hawaiians have received similar kinds of unfair treatment from the U.S. Government as Native Americans. The Apology Bill is thus seen as a means of acknowledging historical grievances that they believe are valid. Some also see it as a step towards identifying Native Hawaiians as an indigenous people to preserve for them specific legal rights based on ancestry; some also see it as the beginning of a process to provide compensation or reparation to native Hawaiians for alleged past injustices.
How this decision on the "nonsubstantive" nature of the Apology Resolution will affect the pursuit of the Akaka Bill, which has based itself on the Apology Resolution, is not yet clear.
In 2009, the U.S. Congress passed a similar resolution, S.J.Res. 14, "To acknowledge a long history of official depredations and ill-conceived policies by the Federal Government regarding Indian tribes and offer an apology to all Native Peoples on behalf of the United States."[7]
Wikisource has original text related to this article: [edit]Arguments against
[edit]Disputed historical basis
Although the Blount Report of July 17, 1893, upon which the Apology Resolution was based, was an official report of the U.S. government, it was followed by the Morgan Reporton February 26, 1894, which after public hearings and testimony under oath found the Blount Report to be mistaken on many of the facts reported. Some of the criticisms of the Blount Report included the fact that it was done in secrecy, with no opportunity for cross-examination of witnesses and no witnesses placed under oath. Opponents of the Apology Resolution point to this official repudiation of the Blount Report as sufficient reason to dismiss any conclusions based on it. Despite being staunchly in favor of reinstating the monarchy, President Grover Cleveland also reversed himself upon receipt of the Morgan Report, refusing requests from the queen for further aid in her restoration, and acknowledging both the Provisional Government and Republic of Hawaii as the legitimate successors to the Kingdom.
Washington-based constitutional lawyer and Grassroot Institute of Hawaii consultant Bruce Fein has outlined a number of counterarguments challenging the historical accuracy and completeness of the assertions made in the Apology Resolution.[1]
[edit]Allegations that the bill was rushed through
There has been criticism of the 1993 Apology Bill for its use in buttressing the Akaka Bill. The Apology Bill of '93 was passed with only one hour of debate on the Senate floor with only five senators participating, three opposed (Slade Gorton, Hank Brown, John C. Danforth) and two in favor (Akaka and Inouye). It passed the house on November 15 in less time with no debate and no objections. Senator Inouye, wrapping up the debate, said:
“ As to the matter of the status of Native Hawaiians, as my colleague from Washington knows, from the time of statehood we have been in this debate. Are Native Hawaiians Native Americans? This resolution has nothing to do with that. ” The reliance upon the text of the Apology Resolution as justification for the Akaka Bill has been seen by some as contradicting Inouye's statements on the matter in 1993.
In 1993, Senators Slade Gorton and Hank Brown did not take issue with the historical accuracy of the bill, although they voted against it. More recently they have described it as being a piece of historical revisionism. They wrote in the Wall Street Journal an article The Opposite Of Progress very critical of the historical veracity of the Apology Bill.
[edit]Advocates of Hawaiian independence
Some non-ancestry-based nationalist Hawaiian groups have criticized Senators Akaka and Inouye for acting as accomplices of the U.S. in a long-term anti-Hawaiian strategy. These groups see the language of the Apology Resolution as deceptively conflating the strong, universally accepted definition of sovereignty—which the Hawaiian Kingdom possessed as an internationally recognized nation-state—with an immeasurably weaker notion of the "inherent sovereignty" of an "indigenous" or "Native" people within, and subordinate to, the United States. They reason that citizenship in the Kingdom was not defined by ancestry; that an entire country was the victim of the conspirators' misdeeds, not merely certain individuals or groups; and that all loyal Hawaiian nationals were deprived of their right to self-determination, not just "Native" Hawaiians. They also point out that it was the U.S. Congress that introduced blood quota requirements in the first place, in the Hawaiian Homelands Commission Act of 1921, over the opposition of their ancestors. Accordingly, most of these groups also reject the Akaka Bill, saying that the proper arena for redress is at the international level.
[edit]Practical legal effect
In a response to the State of Hawai'i Appeal of the Arakaki Decision, the plaintiffs argued that the "whereas" clauses should not be given legal effect.
- Legislative statements in a preamble may help a court interpret the operative clauses of a particular statute by clarifying the legislative intent, but they do not legislate facts or confer rights. Singer, Sutherland on Statutory Construction, §20.03 (5th ed. 1993). The Apology Resolution has no legally operative provisions. Indeed, it expressly settles no claims. 107 Stat. 1510 §3. The committee report says that the Resolution has no regulatory impact and does not change any law. S. Rep. 123-126. Its sponsor assured the Senate that it is only “a simple resolution of apology” and that it “has nothing to do” with “the status of Native Hawaiians.” 139 Congressional Record S14477, S14482 (October 27, 1993), SER 14. The Supreme Court in Rice demonstrated how to deal with the Apology Resolution: the Court cited it but decided the case based on the facts in the record.
In testimony before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, April 17, 2002, Professor of Law Mr. Michael Glennon makes clear the fact that whereas clauses in general can have "no binding legal effect":
- Under traditional principles of statutory construction, these provisions have no binding legal effect. Only material that comes after the so-called “resolving clause”—“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled”—can have any operative effect. Material set out in a whereas clause is purely precatory. It may be relevant for the purpose of clarifying ambiguities in a statute’s legally operative terms, but in and of itself such a provision can confer no legal right or obligation.
The legal effect of the Apology Resolution was addressed in the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court of March 31, 2009, which held that the 37 "whereas" clauses of the Apology Resolution have no binding legal effect, nor does it convey any rights or make any legal findings for native Hawaiian claims.[6] The Court concluded that the Resolution does not change or modify the "absolute" title to the public lands of the State of Hawai'i. The decision also affirmed that federal legislation cannot retroactively cloud title given as a part of statehood in general.
Wikisource has original text related to this article: [edit]References
- ^ a b Fein, Bruce (June 6, 2005). "Hawaii Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand". Angelfire on Lycos. Waltham, MA, USA: Lycos. Archived from the original on February 5, 2007. Retrieved September 4, 2012.
- ^ The Opposite Of Progress, Slade Gorton and Hank Brown
- ^ No Freedom to Celebrate Statehood, Andrew Walden, FrontPageMagazine.com 8/29/2006
- ^ alohaquest.com, pro-sovereignty website
- ^ "The Rape of Paradise: The Second Century Hawai'ians Grope Toward Sovereignty As The U.S. President Apologizes", Perceptions Magazine, March/April 1996, p. 18-25
- ^ http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-1372.pdf
- ^ McKinnon, John D. (2009-12-22). "U.S. Offers An Official Apology to Native Americans". Blogs.wsj.com. Retrieved 2011-02-21.
AND
1820's - Arrival of Masons/Freemasons in the Hawaiian Islands according to the article below.
1843 - Masons/Freemasons recorded in the Hawaiian Islands according to the article below:
MASONIC TOURIST: CELEBRATING THE MASONIC LEGACY OF HAWAII’S LAST KING
By Mark Zane Mauikanehoalani Lovell, 32°
Photo: The Masonic exhibit, including a portrait of the King in full 33° regalia. The calabash bowls, towards the rear, are jubilee artifacts which were utilized in State celebrations, during Kalakaua’s reign. (Photograph by Mark Leo, 32°)
Amid the fading daylight of a March evening in Honolulu, on the sacred land of an area the Ancient Hawaiians once referred to as Pohukaina, a unique and auspicious procession somberly and reverently made its way across the grounds to the lower galleries of Hawaii’s most audacious and recognizable Royal residence—‘Iolani Palace. Ceremonially ushered by members of the Royal Order of Kamehameha the Great in accordance with protocols afforded to the high chiefs of old, esteemed representatives of Hawaii’s Grand Lodge, and Hawaii’s three oldest lodges—Lodge Le Progres de L’Oceanie, Hawaiian Lodge, and Honolulu Lodge—joined Hawaiian cultural practitioners, members of the University of Hawaii, and the Palace’s curatorial staff to browse a newly-created public exhibit highlighting the Masonic activity of King David Kalakaua, P.M., 33°
David Laʻamea Kamanakapuʻu Mahinulani Nalaiaehuokalani Lumialani Kalākaua reigned over the Hawaiian kingdom from 1874 till his death in 1883. He was the last of Hawaii’s kings, and was affectionately referred to as the “Merrie Monarch,” in light of his magnanimous personality, his good humor, and his love of culture and finery.
Hawaiian culture experienced its first resurgence under the Kalakaua Dynasty. Hula, surfing, and lua—the ancient Hawaiian martial art—were revived and rejuvenated after having been outlawed for several decades. Arguably, Hawaii experienced its most politically aggressive move towards international cosmopolitanism under Kalakaua’s influence, because the King’s ambitions were not relegated exclusively to the islands themselves. In 1881, Kalakaua left Hawaii to tour the world, in an effort to improve Hawaii’s foreign relations and to expand its economic influence. He became the first Hawaiian Monarch to successfully travel the globe, visiting heads of state in Japan, China, Siam, Burma, India, Europe, Great Britain, and Ireland along the way. He became the first Hawaiian to gain audience with Pope Leo XIII, he dined with Queen Victoria, and he discussed trade policy with President Chester A. Arthur.
While on his travels, Kalakaua grew fond of the royal residences in Europe and the United Kingdom. He began to envisage a Hawaiian Palace of equal prestige and grandeur. Progressively, the King acquired furniture and art from Europe, and commissioned the construction of ‘Iolani Palace for a then-unprecedented sum which exceeded $340,000. The result was a unique and distinct architecture known as American Florentine, which incorporated American, European, and Hawaiian design flourishes.
King David Kalakaua was also a Brother Mason who rose among the ranks of his Lodge’s administration at the same time he came into political prominence. Master of Lodge Le Progres de l’Oceanie in 1876, Kalakaua retains the extraordinary distinction of being one of the few Monarchs in history, outside of Europe, to preside over a sovereign country and a Masonic Lodge simultaneously. A Mason of unequaled passion, he was among the first 33° Masons in the Orient of Hawaii, but also actively delved into the mysteries of the York Rite and the Shrine. As well, his Masonic activities were no secret to those who kept company with him. Not only was the newly-completed Palace’s first formal dinner a Masonic event, but also portions of the Palace’s attic was converted into a Lodge meeting space and an impromptu Masonic Temple.
Creating an exhibit which prominently features the Masonic lifestyle of King Kalakaua was the result of a unique collaboration between Lodge Le Progres de l’Oceanie’s Archival & Conservation Committee and the curatorial staff of ‘Iolani Palace. By inviting members of Hawaii’s cultural, academic, and social communities to its opening reception and in virtue of its prominent place among all of the other galleries at the Palace, the display represents an important first step towards publicly sharing the topic of Freemasonry in a way that is culturally relevant to the people of Hawaii. Though Masonic artifacts of Hawaiian Kings and Chiefs have been included in prior temporary public displays (not only at the ‘Iolani Palace galleries, but as well at Honolulu’s Bishop Museum), never before has so much time, resources, or attention been devoted to educating the community at large about Hawaii’s colorful Masonic history by any independent research institution.
Included in the installation are the ceremonial trowels, level, plumb, and square, which in 1879 commemorated the laying of the Palace’s cornerstone. These delicate instruments rest adjacent to the King’s Past Master’s Jewel, and the Past Master’s Jewel of his trusted advisor John Dominis. The King’s Master Mason ring, ornate with precious stones, sits accompanied by his Templar sword, and his York Rite watch fob—all tarnished with age, but rich with significance. A Lodge roster which includes Kalakaua’s name, as well as that of Kamehameha IV, hangs near a photocopy of the King’s original application for membership. And, most prominently, a photograph of Kalakaua himself, proudly posing in full 33° regalia, watches over the exhibit in silent dignity.
Masons in Hawaii are the beneficiaries of a remarkable inheritance. They are stewards of a long and rich heritage—a heritage that does not merely extend to Masonic ritual and ceremony, but also to a unique cultural, ethnic, and historical pedigree. Though it may not be widely known, it is a fact that Freemasonry and Freemasons are interwoven into Hawaii’s identity as a State, and as a once-great sovereign nation. The earliest lodge in the islands was formed in 1843. However, brother Masons made frequent arrival to Hawaii as merchants, tradesmen, sailors, and missionaries, perhaps as early as the 1820s. From the mid-nineteenth century and onward, the appeal of the Craft soon caught the attention of the Royal House of Kamehameha. And, from the time of Kamehameha III, Freemasonry became a tradition among the Hawaiian Aristocracy. From the early-1800s until the abolishment of the monarchy in 1893, practically every Hawaiian monarch and statesman, as well as their closest advisors, was either a Freemason, or had a direct Masonic association. Shortly after the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, the establishment of a Hawaiian Republic was, as well, ushered in with the help of brother Masons.
Hawaii is steeped in Masonry. Whether they were native Hawaiians, or the sons of missionaries, settlers, and immigrants, Masons in Hawaii were men of principle, men of prominence, and men of passion. Like all brothers before them or since, they accumulated moral strength and purpose by obligating themselves to the mysteries of the Craft.
More than any mere historical exposition, the ‘Iolani Palace’s Masonic exhibit reaffirms the substantial link between Hawaiian culture, Hawaiian history, and Freemasonry. This link, until recently, had languished into relative obscurity. The opportunity to not merely reveal but revitalize the strong connection between Hawaiian history and Freemasonry has encouraged a new appreciation among the brethren across the state of Hawaii.
King David Kalakaua was a patriot, an icon, a brother, and an exemplar worthy of emulation. In large part, it was not his status as a monarch, but the quality of his intentions and his sincere love of his people and his country that elevated his reputation to the status and esteem with which he is regarded today. Such reflects the caliber of not just a good Mason, but a good man. King David Kalakaua was a man who lived his life in accordance to the guidance of his conscience and the precepts of the Craft and in so doing helped to define and to solidify the heritage of Hawaii and its people.
The Scottish Rite Journal (ISSN 1076-8572) is published bimonthly by the Supreme Council, 33°, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction, United States of America, 1733 Sixteenth St., NW, Washington, DC 20009-3103.
Reference: http://scottishrite.org/journal/july-august-2012/tourist-hawaiis-la...
1893 - The Scottish Rite Masons/Freemasons were given access to the Washington Memorial area for camping shortly after the Criminal dethronement of Queen Liliuokalani.
This information may be found in the Presidential Executive Orders of the period.
Reference: Federal Documents, Main Library, Honolulu, Oahu (note: the information on the web does not show the entries)
2013 - CURRENT INTEREST: THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY ANNOUNCED
The International Conference on the History of Freemasonry (ICHF) will return to its origins May 24–26, 2013, at the Grand Lodge of Scotland. The sessions will be held at the historic Freemasons’ Hall, 96 George Street, Edinburgh, Scotland. This biennial gathering brings together the world’s leading scholars on Freemasonry, attracting academic and Masonic researchers. Some of the finest, original research on Freemasonry will be presented at this three-day meeting. The deadline for submitting proposals for papers is July 31, 2012. Full details can be found at the conference web site,www.ichfonline.org.
The Scottish Rite Journal (ISSN 1076-8572) is published bimonthly by the Supreme Council, 33°, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction, United States of America, 1733 Sixteenth St., NW, Washington, DC 20009-3103.
reference: Article on PARASITES OF THE PACIFIChttp://maoliworld.com/forum/topics/parasites-in-paradise-info-to
Scottish Rite - Part 1
A brief history of the philosophical and esoteric side of the Scottish Rite given by Henry C. Clausen, who was the Sovereign ...
(Masonic) Scottish Rite House of the Temple
FREEMASONRY IS NOT A RELIGION, POLITICAL GROUP OR AN AGENDA SETTING ORGANIZATION DEALING WITH CONTROL OVER OTHER PEOPLE. It is ...
Scottish Rite Freemasonry
The Scottish Rite is a Masonic organization that continues a Master Mason's education of the first three degrees. The Scottish ...
- (1:41)
Scottish Rite - Part 2
A brief history of the philosophical and esoteric side of the Scottish Rite given by Henry C. Clausen, who was the Sovereign ...
Introduction to the Scottish Rite
Source: www.youtube.com Source Description: A brief tour of the House
References: Researches by many including Chris Roses, Amelia Gora, et. als.
Replies
Reminder of the 1849 Hawaiian Kingdom Treaty with the United States of America which Locks in the 1849 U.S. Constitution:
Thanks to the 1849 Hawaiian Treaty the 1849 U.S. Constitution LOCKS IN Freedoms for Americans
by Amelia Gora
(Honolulu, Hawaiian Kingdom)
Hawaiian Kingdom and U.S./United States/
United States of America
1849 "Perpetual" Treaty, etc.
Summary
by Amelia Gora (2012)
The Hawaiian Kingdom and the U.S./United States/United States of America's Perpetual Friendship Treaty, etc. continues, remains in effect, signed, approved by the parties involved which made up of the President, Secretary of State, approved by the Senate, House of Representatives or Congress and the Sovereign/Kauikeouli - Kamehameha III, His heirs and successors (of the blood/koko) through his Representative because the Hawaiian Kingdom is made up of three branches: 1) Sovereign - heirs and successors (one of the two Permanent branches); 2) House of Nobles - heirs and successors (second of the two Permanent branches) -descendants/heirs who were connected through genealogies with the Sovereign; and the voted in part 3) House of Representatives - this was a temporary group which conspired, were treasonous and moved to begin the Provisional Government, turned Republic of Hawaii, then annexed by the U.S., turned Territory of Hawaii, and State of Hawaii with documented Oppositions from the Sovereign, Queen Liliuokalani and her subjects of the Hawaiian Kingdom who formed a new House of Representatives.
The Treaty of 1849 locks in the U.S. Constitution which involves only the 30 States who existed at that time.
Today, the U.S. Constitution along with the Treaty of 1849 remains a Perpetual setup securing the majority of the States, 30 States, called the United States/U.S./U.S.A./United States of America remains in effect.
The 30 States locked into the Treaty, and the U.S. Constitution:
STATE
NAME
STATEHOOD
DATE/ORDER
PRE-STATEHOOD
NOTES
Delaware Dec. 7, 1787
1 st The first of the original 13 colonies.
Pennsylvania Dec. 12, 1787
2 nd The second of the original 13 colonies.
New Jersey Dec. 18, 1787
3 rd The third of the original 13 colonies.
Georgia Jan. 2, 1788
4 th The fourth of the original 13 colonies
Connecticut Jan. 9, 1788
5 th The fifth of the original 13 colonies.
Massachusetts Feb. 6, 1788
6 th The sixth of the original 13 colonies
Maryland April 28, 1788
7 th The seventh of the original 13 colonies.
South Carolina May 23, 1788
8 th The eighth of the original 13 colonies.
New Hampshire June 21, 1788
9 th The ninth of the original 13 colonies
Virginia June 25, 1788
10 th The 10th of the original 13 colonies.
New York July 26, 1788
11 th The 11th of the original 13 colonies.
North Carolina Nov. 21, 1789
12 th The 12th of the original 13 colonies.
Rhode Island May 29, 1790
13 th The 13th of the original 13 colonies.
Vermont March 4, 1791
14 th Until statehood, had been a region claimed by both New York and New Hampshire
Kentucky June 1, 1792
15 th Never a territory, it was part of Virginia until statehood.
Tennessee June 1, 1796
16 th Was Southwest Territory before statehood.
Ohio March 1, 1803
17 th Was part of the Northwest Territory until statehood.
Louisiana April 30, 1812
18 th With certain boundary changes, had been the Territory of Orleans.
Indiana Dec. 11, 1816
19 th There was a residue of Indiana Territory that continued to exist under that name until Dec. 3, 1818, when it was attached to Michigan Territory.
Mississippi Dec. 10, 1817
20 th Territory by Act of April 7, 1798, effective May 7, 1798.
Illinois Dec. 3, 1818
21 st .
Alabama Dec. 14, 1819
22 nd Territory by Act of March 3, 1817, effective Aug. 15, 1817.
Maine March 15, 1820
23 rd What is now the state of Maine was, before statehood, called the District of Maine and belonged to Massachusetts.
Missouri Aug. 10, 1821
24 th The state was much smaller than the territory. The area to the west and northwest of the state, which had been in the territory, was commonly known as the "Missouri Country" until May 30, 1854, and certain of the post offices in this area show a Missouri abbreviation in the postmark.
Arkansas June 15, 1836
25 th The territory was larger than the state. After statehood the leftover area to the west had post offices that continued for some years to use an Arkansas abbreviation in the postmarks, although they were really in the "Indian Country."
Michigan Jan. 26., 1837
26 th .
Florida March 3, 1845
27 th .
Texas Dec. 29, 1845
28 th Was an independent republic before statehood.
Iowa Dec. 28, 1846
29 th .
Wisconsin May 29, 1848
30 th The state is smaller than the territory and the leftover area continued to be called the Territory of Wisconsin until March 3, 1849.
Reference: http://www.50states.com/statehood.htm?sort_by_date#.UEjvEMFlSXs
The other additional/added 20 new States (including the Republic of Hawaii) were not part of the Treaty. Depending on what was written in their Constitution when their State was formed, they may or may not be included in the perpetual agreement.
In the case of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the Republic of Hawaii, both have different authorities, and one is a Nation vs. the other a set up, premeditated State supported by the U.S., England, Morgan bankers (includes Bank of England) based on the 1822 Secret Treaty of Verona pact, 1918 Congressional discussion with the States - 30 with the Perpetual Treaty and the newly added 18 States which remained a minority of States.
The Republic of Hawaii turned Territory of Hawaii then State of Hawaii with Oppositions every step of the way became the 50 th State by Presidential Executive Order behind of the 49th State of Alaska, both bodies of land being disconnected/disjointed/non-contiguous from the U.S. Nation and cannot normally be called United States/U.S./United States of America based on the failure to be identified as a contiguous land mass associated with States being United, a Nation recognized under the Law of Nations.
The added 18 States from 1850 through 1912 became the "Newstates" added to the U.S. Constitution. The 18 States were:
California Sept. 9, 1850
31 st Ceded by Mexico by the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, concluded Feb. 2, 1848, and proclaimed July 4, 1848. From then until statehood, California had a military government until Dec. 20, 1849, and then a local civil government. It never had a territorial form of government.
Minnesota May 11, 1858
32 nd .
Oregon Feb. 14, 1859
33 rd .
Kansas Jan. 29, 1861
34 th .
West Virginia June 20, 1863
35 th Was part of Virginia until statehood.
Nevada Oct. 31, 1864
36 th .
Nebraska March 1, 1867
37 th .
Colorado Aug. 1, 1876
38 th .
North Dakota Nov. 2, 1889
39 th or 40 th Was part of Dakota Territory before statehood. Admitted on same day as South Dakota
South Dakota Nov. 2, 1889
39 th or 40 th Was part of Dakota Territory before statehood. Admitted on same day as North Dakota
Montana Nov. 8, 1889
41 st .
Washington Nov. 11, 1889
42 nd .
Idaho July 3, 1890
43 rd .
Wyoming July 10, 1890
44 th .
Utah Jan. 4, 1896
45 th .
Oklahoma Nov. 16, 1907
46 th The state was formed from Oklahoma Territory and Indian Territory.
New Mexico Jan. 6, 1912
47th .
Arizona Feb. 14, 1912
48 th This region was sometimes called Arizona before 1863, although it was still in the Territory of New Mexico.
Reference: http://www.50states.com/statehood.htm?sort_by_date#.UEjvEMFlSXs
In 1916, Congressional Notes records that the issues of the 1822 Secret Treaty of Verona was discussed.
The momentum or the Plan since 1822 was a "One World Order", "New World Order".
see and view the youtube.com video:
1916 - Congress Record - Sen. Owen Treaty of Verona - YouTube
► 4:32► 4:32
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UBXHSFr4bw
Jan 16, 2009 - 5 min - Uploaded by ForgottenHistoryUSA
written in 1919 by Senator Owen, where he again warns of theSecret Treaty of Verona. Senator Robert L ...
More videos for secret treaty of verona »
Two More States Added:
Alaska Jan. 3, 1959
49 th A district from Oct. 18, 1867, until it became an organized territory Aug. 24, 1912.
Hawaii Aug. 21, 1959
50 th The territorial date Aug. 12, 1898 is that of the formal transfer to the United States, with Sanford B. Dole as first Governor.
Source: Scott Stamp Monthly (April 1998)
Reference: http://www.50states.com/statehood.htm?sort_by_date#.UEjvEMFlSXs
States Under Duress, Stress, Coercion, Usurpation
Due to the Financial duress that all 50 States bear for Wars, Plundering Upon Innocents, with the goals of One World Order through the 1822 Secret Treaty of Verona, an additional Constitution approved in 1980 by all 50 States Senators and House of Representatives, this Second Constitution is called the “Constitution For the Newstates Of The United States.”
see: http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037 and see Legal Research by John Nelson
Nevertheless, Kenyan born Obama puts out the "tradition based" Executive Orders from Washington, D.C., an area that is not even part of the United States and upholds the Financial "Constitution For the Newstates Of The United States" while the 1849 Perpetual Treaty with the Hawaiian Kingdom and the U.S. Constitution exists with the majority of the States remains in place to this day.
The Hawaiian Kingdom exists today because the Sovereigns heirs, descendants of Successors, House of Nobles descendants, heirs of the Permanent branches exists today, which also means that the Crown Lands are owned by the Sovereign, House of Nobles, Heirs/descendants/ Successors whose ancestor Kamehameha did form the Hawaiian Kingdom, and these lands are not the "ceded lands", etc.
Additionally, the alodio/ano alodio system remains, which means all kanaka maoli have the true titles to the lands, etc.
aloha.
reference: http://www.bigisland-bigisland.com/thanks-to-the-1849-hawaiian-trea... and http://www.opednews.com/Diary/Why-the-U-S-Constitution-by-Amelia-Go... and http://maoliworld.com/forum/topics/the-1849-perpetual-treaty-ies-an...
THE 1849 PERPETUAL TREATY(IES) AND THE 1849 U.S. CONSTITUTION PROVES THE ILLEGALITY OF THE State of Hawaii's Public Land Development Corp. (PLDC) LAND GRAB
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3fztn2roaw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl4C55Lf9NY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFM1CF9bqho
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAexZ3M-b-s
**********************
Note: The U.S. Needs to Take Back Their PIRATES................aargh, aargh, aargh.......a Tribute to the PIRATES....
credits: kukuna o ka la picture (2011)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/58872131/SB1555-CD1- SB1555 is here..........link from Facebook
*********************
We will feature Kamuela Vance's critically acclaimed new film "KALO CULTURE"; Kanaka Maoli and Hawaiian National guest speakers; Hawaiian Art; Hawaiian Music; ono food; and opening ceremony by our Turtle Island ohana.
4p: Opening Ceremony with Tu
Corrina Gould (Ohlone) and Ras K'dee (Pomo)
5p: Hawaiian Mele and Hula
6p: Kamuela Vance's film "Kalo Culture"
730p: Guest Speakers discuss movement for Hawaiian Sovereignty and Re-Independence:
Laulani Teale (Kanaka Maoli activist, musician, and mother)
Sliding scale $5-15. No one will be refused at the door for lack of funds.
In Solidarity with FREE HAWAI'I: <www.FreeHawaii.org>
Mana Ai: http://www.manaai.com/
East Bay Media Center: <http://www.eastbaymediacenter.com/>
Posts
Posts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IH4c-CZx...!
sent to Akaka's website:
Kamehameha’s descendants/heirs exists….Premeditation of taking over the Hawaiian Islands have been admitted by the U.S. – Public Law 103-150 as well as the Masons/Freemasons admission Reference: http://scottishrite.org/journa…… The Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates Trustees, other Alii Trustees have NO TITLE because the owners exists….we’re surrounded by Pirates who needs to be taken back by their government, the U.S. Kanaka Maoli are under stress, duress, usurpation, and coercion… read the legal notice posted a few days ago at http://maoliworld.com/forum/to… Evidence has been found and shared to all…Abercrombie is currently the lead Pirate……with Aila in second place, etc. etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiXjbI3kRus
facebook:
Mahalo
To the People of Hawaii,
The end of my final term in the United States Senate is quickly approaching. As I begin the difficult task of closing my offices, I want to take this time to thank you for allowing me the honor and privilege to serve you for 36 years. My dream was to work in a job in which I could help people, and you gave me the opportunity to fulfill my dream. Throughout my career in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, my priority has always been to do what’s best for Hawaii and its people. I am proud of my accomplishments on behalf of our federal workers, consumers, veterans and all the people of Hawaii. You have always been my first and foremost priority.
I will always be grateful to the people of Hawaii and will cherish the time I spent representing you in Washington, D.C. Although I will no longer be able to respond to your letters, please be assured that your views are very important to me. If you are encountering problems with a federal agency or need assistance in resolving a problem, I highly recommend that you contact the other Members of the Hawaii Delegation.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to serve you and for your trust and confidence in me.
With much love and aloha,
DANIEL K. AKAKA
United States Senator
Problematic Issues Affecting Private Properties of our Royal Families, Kanaka Maoli, International Laws, etc. The following came off of the "Kamehameha Schools" forums here on Maoliworld:
Aloha kakou,
As many of you know, since 2005, the Native Hawaiian lawaia and mahiai, as well as many other resource practitioners of different disciplines have endeavored to halt the dwindling course of our natural resources both on land and in the ocean through the restoration of the ancient and proven Aha Kiole, a system of ahupua’a / moku working together to malama their own ‘aina. This is a system of traditional resource management that dates back to the 9th century prior to the arrival of Paao; that is site-specific; employs the ahupua’a practices and gives the people of the ahupua’a community the voice and power to advise the governor, the legislature and the Department of Land and Natural Resources on resource issues and management of their lands and oceans.
In 2007, the people, through the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs, took this issue to the legislature who voted unanimously to “ initiate the process to create a system of best practices that is based upon the indigenous resource management practices of moku (regional) boundaries, which acknowledges the natural contours of land, the specific resources located within those areas, and the methodology necessary to sustain resources and the community.” Governor Lingle signed the process into law through Act 212. Since then, through the efforts of kupuna and resource practitioners throughout the state, and with no support from the DLNR, the “process” has been integrated through the Aha Moku System, and these efforts to formally recognize this system was unanimously passed and supported by the 2011 Legislature as S.B. 23. In spite of all efforts and widespread support from Hawaiian organizations, the legislature, government agencies and the general public, Governor Abercrombie has indicated his intent to veto this bill. He has not listened to the appeals of the Hawaiians who have been involved in this endeavor. But one non-Hawaiian, Mr. Keith Robinson who owns Niihau Island, has effectively and courageously stated to the governor what we all feel. With his permission, I would like to share his communication with the governor with you. It is attached, and for those of you who cannot open attachments, I have pasted it below. I encourage everyone to share this message. I apologize for any duplicate postings.
Mahalo.
(Email to Governor Neil Abercrombie, State of Hawaii dated July 1, 2011)
Dear Governor Abercrombie
May I respectfully request that you take a few moments to consider a matter which I believe might possibly be potentially serious?
This e-mail is a follow-up to a telephone call I made to your office a few days ago, urging you to sign Senate Bill 23 (which I am told was unanimously passed by both houses of the Hawaii State Legislature).
As I understand it, SB23 was intended merely to establish a Hawaiian advisory council, which would enable the native Hawaiian people to give their advice and opinions to the state government, whenever it is necessary or desirable to seek their counsel or input in matters of state government.
Several background facts about this matter should be carefully noted.
First, the Hawaiian people were the original inhabitants and possessors of these islands; they created a legitimate independent nation which was recognized by the rest of the world; but that Hawaiian nation was destroyed in a revolutionary overthrow in which Americans, most regrettably, played a very dubious role.
Second, Senate Bill 23 was created to give those descendants of the Hawaiian Kingdom an advisory input into the workings of the present day state of Hawaii. I believe that this is a very modest and reasonable request. Those Hawaiians are not even asking for any legislative or executive powers in the state government. Instead, they are merely asking politely to be allowed to give their advice and opinions to this government which has forcibly replaced their own nation in these islands.
Third, these Hawaiians are not a bunch of nuts who want to secede and re-create a stone age banana republic. Instead, they are ordinary citizens who are merely asking to be allowed to work within the present system of state government, by giving it advice and information.
Fourth, if and when you veto Senate Bill 23 (which I understand is your intention) you will in effect further disenfranchise the native Hawaiians: this will inevitably reinforce the feelings of many Hawaiians, that they are unwelcome in the state government, and are being deliberately excluded from any kind of participation in it, even on a relatively minor advisory level.
This may considerably increase the feelings of anger and alienation now felt by many native Hawaiians throughout Hawaii.
Fifth, your veto won’t look good racially. Regardless of whether or not such perceptions are merited, a widespread feeling does exist, that you first came here as a radical mainland haole hippie or semi-hippie, during the 1960s.
And your rhetoric and hair length since then have done little to dispel this impression: on the contrary, you seem to relish and enjoy creating and maintaining a radical, iconoclastic public image.
But consider how this may look to many native Hawaiians throughout Hawaii: a radical, mainland haole hippie or semi-hippie comes to Hawaii, eventually becomes Hawaii’s governor, and then vetoes a bill passed by a legislature full of “local” people – a legislature which clearly intended to give the native Hawaiians the courtesy of having an advisory input into Hawaii’s present government.
Actions speak louder than any words. I am already hearing it bitterly said among some Hawaiians, that a radical, mainland haole hippie in the governor’s office, has thwarted the will of the legislature, and has single-handedly prevented the Hawaiian people from having even a minor advisory input into the present government of a land their ancestors possessed and ruled.
And there is also starting to be talk of a statewide meeting of representatives of the Hawaiians, to discuss the best way to deal with this slap in the face.
In view of all these facts, including the different views held by the various parties to this situation, may I very humbly and politely ask you to carefully re-consider this matter, and (if possible) to sign Senate Bill 23, instead of vetoing it?
I honestly believe that doing so might help to defuse a situation which (in my opinion, at least) could otherwise result in a lot of grief and trouble and frustration and anger and alienation.
There is in my opinion absolutely no point in either deliberately or accidentally giving Hawaii’s native Hawaiians any further reason, to believe that they are being shut out of Hawaii’s state government, and prevented from having even a minor advisory input into it.
And very last of all, may I thank you for taking the time to read and consider this e-mail. There is no need to respond to it – I understand full well that you were already extremely busy, even before receiving it.
Very respectfully submitted,
Keith Robinson
Owner, Ni’ihau Island
Privatization & Development Of Public Lands To Ignore Zoning & Land Use Laws
ilind.net - June 22, 2011
DBEDT director Richard Lim’s recent speech at a meeting of the Hawaii Economic Association spelled out his view that public lands represent a significant resource and opportunity for private development.
Now a bill signed into law by Governor Abercrombie provides muscle to move Lim’s vision towards reality.
Here’s what Lim had to say about development of public land.
"The State has vast land resources which currently represent a drain on the State’s coffers due to heavy maintenance costs. We cannot afford to pay for adequate upkeep so facilities are in disrepair and, consequently, become underutilized. Most residents don’t use them which often results in them attracting undesirable elements.
By engaging in public-private partnerships, we hope to turn this situation around. We will find private sector partners who are willing to make the requisite investments to renovate and revitalize our underutilized lands.
There are a number projects that can improve our infrastructure and provide improved facilities for the enjoyment of locals and tourists. And, partnering with the private sector minimizes the need for State funding or additional personnel.
Of course, there will always be the vocal minority that will object. Think of theSuperferry. And, there have been other projects that have been derailed by well heeled NIMBY’s and special interests.
While I am all for protecting the environment, we need to strike a balance. We can do responsible and sustainable development."
SB1555 CD1, quietly signed into law by the governor on May 20 as Act 55, will create a potentially very powerful Public Land Development Corporation to implement Lim’s strategy for privatizing public resources.
Lim will sit on the 5-member board along with the director of Finance and the Land Board chairman.
Two additional members will be appointed by the House Speaker and Senate President, and those members must have “sufficient knowledge, experience, and proven expertise in small and large businesses within the development or recreation industries, banking, real estate, finance, promotion, marketing, or management.”
Conservation? Environment? Public interests? No seat at the table.
The new PLDC is charged with selecting land from the state inventory and promoting private development for projects that but are not “limited to office space; vehicular parking; commercial uses; hotel, residential, and timeshare uses; fueling facilities; storage and repair facilities; and seawater air conditioning plants.”
The PLDC is broadly empowered to guarantee loans for developers, issue bonds to finance projects, and take other steps to push for development. It looks like a piggy bank for private investors and developers.
As I know under International Law, ONLY Natives from there mother land can vote and no other ethnicity CANNOT participate in that particular election. How America gotten there votes is HEWA because they was not to participate in that election with the Kanaka Maoli people. ONLY the Kanaka Maoli PEOPLE was suppose to vote for Statehood, that's why the petition was made, that was to warn the rest of the kanaka's along with the world on telling them that America did an illegal act against Hawaii. Did the world comply with that, no they didn't but to perpetuate the fraud that America committed against Hawaii. So Kanaka's, open your Maka's and your pepe au's cause this will happen again if we no watch out and not participate in the up coming elections on November 5, 2011. So please watch for the signs and register to vote cause this will make a difference with Hawaii, nationals, and the rest of the people. Remember if the cook islands are taking that responsibility to govern them selves, then why can't we. So I erg you to register and vote, our keiki's are depending on it.
Aloha,
Representative: Bronson Duke Keali'i Kalipi
District 1
Moku Puni O Molokai
************************************
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXapbOq1uo0
Greetings Everyone,
The following is a brief history which affects all lands in the Hawaiian archipelago/Hawaiian Islands/Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii/Ko Hawaii Pae Aina:
1) The Royal Families exists, which means the true land owners are here, have been here because Kamehameha's descendants/heirs existed in 1819 living mostly on the Big Island, and Maui.
Kamehameha died in 1819. He was one of the descendants/heirs of leaders who ruled the Hawaiian Islands for more than 3,000 - 5,000 years.
2) Kekaulike of Maui's descendants assisted in supporting the young King Liholiho/Kamehameha II, and future King Kauikeouli/Kamehameha III.
The Kahu/caretaker/Kuhina Nui's were Kalanimoku and his cousin, one of the widows of Kamehameha named Kaahumanu.
Kalanimoku's descendants/heirs including his brothers descendants/heirs existed then and their descendants exists today. Kaahumanu's siblings descendants/heirs existed then and exists today.
Kamehameha had formed a Pacific Empire which included Aetearoa and the Samoan Islands.
2) In 1820 - The Missionaries /American Missionaries arrived. They were actually Mercenaries/Parasites hired by the U.S. for purposes of assuming Paradise in the Pacific.
3) 3) The Missionaries/American Missionaries were also accompanied by Masons/Freemasons who gathered with the intent to take over lands of a Monarchy Government.
4) In 1822, a Secret Treaty of Verona was signed by Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, the U.S., England, and the Vatican. The purpose was to break down Monarchy Governments worldwide and to move towards One World Order/New World Order. This Treaty was also in support of the Papal Bulls of 1492 - Columbus period.
5) Animosity, Greed, Jealousy, Conspiracy, Treasonous activities have been documented over time.
6) Lies, deceit, criminal activities have been documented which involved the white/ Americans setting themselves in being assistants to the Royal Families, and soon defrauding the descendants/heirs/people/kanaka maoli.
7) The assistants were the descendants of the missionaries/mercenaries/Parasites/Pirates with the Masons/Freemasons who also had a goal of usurping the Royal Families, and who were supported by their mother countries - U.S., England, etc.
8) In 1849, a Perpetual Treaty of Friendship was made with the King/Kauikeouli/ Kamehameha III which included his heirs and successors and the U.S. President Tyler, his Secretary of State and Congress. As a result of this Treaty, the U.S. Constitution of 1849 which included only 30 States was locked in place. No President after Tyler could break the Perpetual Treaty which remains based on Kamehameha III and his heirs/families and successors who were also to be his families alone.
See HAWAIIAN REPORTS, Volume 2 Rex vs. Booth Case - which explains that the Hawaiian Government was a three part set up, two permanent parts: Sovereign and House of Nobles, the third part being the House of Representatives.
7) In 1876, a Fraud deed was signed by King David Kalakaua, a Mason/Freemason who usurped the rights of Queen Emma who was designated to be Queen by King Lunalilo. The Deed was involving Pearl Harbor. The King signed a deed conveying lands of Halawa to Mataio Kekuanaoa and Grace Kamaikui. The King had actually signed deeds over to two ancestors of our families, both having died 7 - 9 years previously.
Note: I did point out the Frauds in the Pearl Harbor Court Case. See the hundreds of postings made about the criminal transaction, conveyances, frauds perpetuated by the State of Hawaii, Trustees of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates/Kamehameha Schools, and the U.S. Government.
8) In 1884, The Justices of the Court soon became documented treasonous persons because they claimed that 'they made the rules, and their rules became the law'. This admission of crimes was made after Bernice Pauahi Bishop died.
Bernice Pauahi Bishop was married prior to being married to Mason/Freemason banker, attorney, Charles Reed Bishop and had a hanai/adopted son name Opunui, one of my ancestors.
Bernice Pauahi Bishop's first cousin was named as next of kin in her Probate. She was an ancestor of ours named Kalola who was buried in Kawaiahao Church graveyard. She was the widow of Kaaha, the Konohiki of Kawaiahao. She also married Kalaniopuu's descendant.
Bernice Pauahi Bishop was actually half white, which means her father was NOT Hawaiian. Pierce was documented as her father. Oral history also documents that she was hapa- haole, half white.
9) Known Americans were party to the conspiracies, treasonous activities which led to the criminal dethronement of Queen Liliuokalani representing a neutral, friendly, non-violent nation.
10) Premeditation to take over Pearl Harbor was made by the U.S. President Harrison who was in collusion with Americans conspiring against the Queen, her subjects, and friends in the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Reference: NEW YORK TIMES article
PEARL HARBOR COALING STATION.; IMPERATIVE NECESSITY ...
reference additional - https://picasaweb.google.com/114813087457898033782/ImportantHawaiia...
Amelia Gora-Kanaka Maoli/Aboriginal Hawaiian Truth: Queen ...
OpEdNews - Diary: WARS AGAINST THE WORLD..................Since ...
Paradise 808
EXPOSING the PLEBISCITE PUSHERS, the PREMEDITATION ...
Animosity(ies), Jealousy, Pearl Harbor Evidence, Crimes, Genocide ...
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next