![[Kanaka Maoli flag]](https://ci4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/VG8LumiPa1B7nmNuAbcZfxzClpom39RTCjk1MhYjPvPtGcdjdFntIk0zxQZcGGP6uJ7xIGe1AGw2agRFfljHi6J7yarRpIg=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel=nofollow%20href=)
To All Neutral Nations: Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii, Switzerland, Austria, Costa Rico, Finland, Liechstenstein, Malta, Panama, San Marino, Sweden, Turkmenistan, Vatican City, Ghana, Maldova, Mexico, Serbia
Other Friendly Nations: Kuala Lumpur, Japan, Portugal, etc.
Kingdom of Hawaii Legal Notice No. 2017 0426 Correcting the Wrongs by the Identity Thieves in the Hawaiian Islands Supported by the United States and American Empire from Amelia Gora, Acting Liaison of Foreign Affairs, House of Nobles, Judicial Tribunal Member/Judge, Konohiki, Representative of the Hawaiian Genealogical Society, True Trustee/ Beneficiary of Queen Liliuokalani Trust, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates/Kamehameha Schools/KSBE etc.
19 hrs ·
important .-a keeper
Williamson Chang
20 hrs ·
Aloha--some corrections:
In the article: Occupation Denial and Cognitive Dissonance of Al Jazeera America, of November 9, 2015, that article states:
“The only claim that the United States has ever made to Hawaiian sovereignty is through the joint resolution of 1898. In a secret debate of the U.S. Senate in 1898, which was kept secret until 1969 (71 years), only two of the 90 senators claimed that annexation by joint resolution was constitutional. The rest stated that it was unlawful, unconstitutional, and logically impossible.”
Some small correction of facts:
Debates on the Treaty of Annexation of June 16, 1897 are regularly held in secret, executive session. There were no votes held in the winter of 1897-1898 on the Treaty of Annexation since it was clear the administration could not garner the two-thirds majority needed to achieve ratification.
When it came to the Joint Resolution Providing for the Annexing of the Hawaiian Islands to the United States [the Newlands Resolution] which was introduced in the Spring of 1898, after the beginning of the Spanish American War, and was NOT a treaty, but a bill, it was debated in public in both the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States.
The complete records of those debates are available publicly, including at Hamilton Library, and in my collection.
It is correct that only two Senators, Senators Foraker and Stewart made an attempt to explain how a joint resolution could acquire Hawaii. Other Senators did speak in favor of the Joint Resolution but did not attempt to explain how it could acquire Hawaii---they spoke to the military advantages of acquiring Hawaii and such topics.
One should not assume that all the rest of the Senators went on record as opposed to the Joint Resolution, particularly on the ground that it lacked the capacity to acquire Hawaii---the large majority were simply silent--and supported the President's joint resolution simply because it would help the war effort in the Philippines.
Senator Foraker and Senator Stewarts' attempted explanation of how the joint resolution could acquire Hawaii were ridiculed and Senator Foraker eventually admitted that a joint resolution could not acquire the Hawaiian Islands, see 31 Congressional Record at 6369 [Senator Stewart] and 31 Congressional Record 6336 [Senator Foraker's admission of defeat]
So what is called the "legislative history" of the Joint Resolution shows no evidence of support for the proposition that the Joint Resolution acquired Hawaii.
Indeed, the title of the Joint Resolution indicates what is was believed to do: it is titled the "Joint Resolution Providing for the Annexing of the Hawaiian Islands"---that is, the Joint Resolution was merely to pave the way, or provide for the "later” annexation of Hawaii---which was supposedly by the 1900 Organic Act creating a Government for the Territory of Hawaii.
But that bill could not acquire Hawaii as, it too, was merely a bill or act of Congress. Nonetheless, a second ceremony of annexation was held in Honolulu after the Organic Act passed on June 14, 1900. Of course, the Organic Act did not acquire the Hawaiian Islands because its description of what it acquired ---in Section Two of that act --- was "the islands acquired by the Joint Resolution".
Since the joint resolution of 1898 1) did not have the capacity to acquire Hawaii and 2) was not intended by Congress to acquire Hawaii means that no islands or waters were acquired by the Organic Act either--meaning the United States never acquired the Hawaiian Islands or the Crown and Government Lands.
Neither the Treaty of 1897, The Joint Resolution of 1898, the Organic Act of 1900, or the Act of Admission as a State in 1959 acquired the Hawaiian Islands as territory of the United States.
The United States does not have territorial jurisdiction over the Hawaiian Islands. The Crown and Government lands never passed or were conveyed to the Territory, State or United States.
Some small correction of facts:
Debates on the Treaty of Annexation of June 16, 1897 are regularly held in secret, executive session. There were no votes held in the winter of 1897-1898 on the Treaty of Annexation since it was clear the administration could not garner the two-thirds majority needed to achieve ratification.
When it came to the Joint Resolution Providing for the Annexing of the Hawaiian Islands to the United States [the Newlands Resolution] which was introduced in the Spring of 1898, after the beginning of the Spanish American War, and was NOT a treaty, but a bill, it was debated in public in both the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States.
The complete records of those debates are available publicly, including at Hamilton Library, and in my collection.
It is correct that only two Senators, Senators Foraker and Stewart made an attempt to explain how a joint resolution could acquire Hawaii. Other Senators did speak in favor of the Joint Resolution but did not attempt to explain how it could acquire Hawaii---they spoke to the military advantages of acquiring Hawaii and such topics.
One should not assume that all the rest of the Senators went on record as opposed to the Joint Resolution, particularly on the ground that it lacked the capacity to acquire Hawaii---the large majority were simply silent--and supported the President's joint resolution simply because it would help the war effort in the Philippines.
Senator Foraker and Senator Stewarts' attempted explanation of how the joint resolution could acquire Hawaii were ridiculed and Senator Foraker eventually admitted that a joint resolution could not acquire the Hawaiian Islands, see 31 Congressional Record at 6369 [Senator Stewart] and 31 Congressional Record 6336 [Senator Foraker's admission of defeat]
So what is called the "legislative history" of the Joint Resolution shows no evidence of support for the proposition that the Joint Resolution acquired Hawaii.
Indeed, the title of the Joint Resolution indicates what is was believed to do: it is titled the "Joint Resolution Providing for the Annexing of the Hawaiian Islands"---that is, the Joint Resolution was merely to pave the way, or provide for the "later” annexation of Hawaii---which was supposedly by the 1900 Organic Act creating a Government for the Territory of Hawaii.
But that bill could not acquire Hawaii as, it too, was merely a bill or act of Congress. Nonetheless, a second ceremony of annexation was held in Honolulu after the Organic Act passed on June 14, 1900. Of course, the Organic Act did not acquire the Hawaiian Islands because its description of what it acquired ---in Section Two of that act --- was "the islands acquired by the Joint Resolution".
Since the joint resolution of 1898 1) did not have the capacity to acquire Hawaii and 2) was not intended by Congress to acquire Hawaii means that no islands or waters were acquired by the Organic Act either--meaning the United States never acquired the Hawaiian Islands or the Crown and Government Lands.
Neither the Treaty of 1897, The Joint Resolution of 1898, the Organic Act of 1900, or the Act of Admission as a State in 1959 acquired the Hawaiian Islands as territory of the United States.
The United States does not have territorial jurisdiction over the Hawaiian Islands. The Crown and Government lands never passed or conveyed to the Territory, State or United States of America
Mahalo
Professor Williamson B.C. Chang
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Speaking in his own capacity Note from A.Gora: The U.S. is an illegal alien nation not welcomed in the Hawaiian Islands due to issues....athe 1850 Treaty continues on based a permanent treaty from a neutral friendly non violent nation whose Royal Families exists even today...aloha.
Recent Background -
ONCE UPON A BAR - Includes KAREN HUDES or The Kingdom of Hawaii Supports the Constitution of the United States of America and Exposing Those Who Do Not Such As the Bar (includes Karen Hudes, et.als.) Members, etc.
Once Upon a Bar http://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/2017/04/once-upon-bar-includes-karen-hudes-or.html
Once Upon a Bar - Part 2 http://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/2017/04/part-2-once-upon-bar-includes-karen.html
The United States of America later changed to the United States and the American Empire in 1899
Reference: Peacock vs. Republic of Hawaii (1899), First Circuit Court, Supreme Court Law Library/Archives/Main Library
Reviewing the 1849/1850 Treaty see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_Hawaii
and the U.S. Constitution
http://maoliworld.com/forum/topics/the-1849-1850-treaty-of-the-hawa...
and the Trusts of Queen Liliuokalani, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates/KSBE, etc.
---Notices sent to the above and both Failed to respond, which means they defaulted.
Add Identity Theft
The Fraud Trusts/fraudulent setups of Queen Liliuokalani's/Liliuokalani Trust, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates/KSBE etc. and the United States President McKinley for directing the development of the Territory of the United States by the Army, Navy, and Federal Officials and then Proclaiming the Territory which was claimed to be the "successor of the Kingdom of Hawaii" by the Attorney General in the PA PELEKANE case (1899) HAWAIIAN REPORTS, Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii.
Note: Three events of Identity Theft recorded, all which benefited the usurpers, conspirators, aliens, treasonous persons, pirates, pillagers, racketeers documented and supported by the United States and the American Empire.
IDENTITY THEFT
https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/identity-theft/identity-theft-and-identity-fraud
What's the Department of Justice Doing About Identity Theft and Fraud?
The Department of Justice prosecutes cases of identity theft and fraud under a variety of federal statutes. In the fall of 1998, for example, Congress passed the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act. This legislation created a new offense of identity theft, which prohibits "knowingly transfer[ring] or us[ing], without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable State or local law." 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7). This offense, in most circumstances, carries a maximum term of 15 years' imprisonment, a fine, and criminal forfeiture of any personal property used or intended to be used to commit the offense.
Schemes to commit identity theft or fraud may also involve violations of other statutes such as identification fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1028), credit card fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1029), computer fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1030), mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341), wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343), or financial institution fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1344). Each of these federal offenses are felonies that carry substantial penalties –¬ in some cases, as high as 30 years' imprisonment, fines, and criminal forfeiture.
Federal prosecutors work with federal investigative agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States Secret Service, and the United States Postal Inspection Service to prosecute identity theft and fraud cases.
Request for Assistance in Arresting the Trustees of the Identity Thieves/Pirates/Pillagers, etc. in alignment with Article XIV of the 1849/1850 Treaty of the Kingdom of Hawaii and the United States of America. Note: The United States of America became the United States and the American Empire in 1899.
Your assistance will be greatly appreciated.
Costs/financing can be discussed with our House of Nobles made up of Kamehameha's descendants/heirs, Queen Liliuokalani's Family, Princess Poomaikelani's Families, et. als.
Please contact me at hawaiianhistory@gmail or P.O. Box 861781, Wahiawa, Oahu, Hawaii
96786
Mahalo/Thank you,
Amelia Gora
Replies
facebook and twitter:
Important for all to know ---- Queen Liliuokalani's Families, Patriots, Families, Friends