Posted by Tane on June 11, 2009 at 6:10pm in Politics
It should be clear that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs does not represent (as amended or evolved) the native Hawaiians/Kanaka Maoli but serve in their interests. Like the Bureau of Indian Affairs, it's a government agency run by U.S. Americans. Unlike the Bureau, the general public votes for the Trustees who are also not required to be Kanaka Maoli; whereas, the Bureau is appointed by the U.S. Government and under the U.S. Secy of the Interior.
Both work within the U.S. government and ultimately serve with that interest to be compliant. The Akaka Bill will reorganize and rename OHA as a governing entity under the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. The status will relegate the Hawaiians from a national/international status to a dependent tribal entity of the U.S. as wards, a new recognition by the U.S. usurpers.
This means, Hawai'ians would become a dependent "tribal nation" rather than an independent nation which is still under belligerent occupation. It remains the U.S. Provisonal Government/Republic of Hawaii of 1893 and the entities that the U.S. fictitiously created.
The self-determination is a restricted/limited one that is compliant within the U.S. box designed for it. Semantics gives the illusion of consent. The U.S. is the steamroller that makes Hawai'i the alley lane compliant to its highway of expansion and U.S. hegemony based on the dogma of manifest destiny by which it thrives on.
The U.S. is a master of illusion, deceit and implied consent. The U.S. doesn't realize the "magic act" has been revealed for what it is; a sleight of hand exposed.
Tane
You need to be a member of maoliworld to add comments!
AlohaToni,
Thanks for all your posting, after 911 we had multi meetings at UH. I attended most of them because it was a way to lessen the pain of 911. Burning 'da' pain on my way to UH from Waiane helped. Not only was I on the dance floor with the New York Fire Commision, I had dinner with the New York Fire Chief in New Orleans two weeks before 911. Any how change the subject, the 'road map' for self goverment was circulated via Kinau from Arakaki. Beadie Dawson stood her grounds and Hawaiian Civic Club members supported the Akaka Bill through all it's changes, over and over and over at these meetings, so this should be interesting.
I believe when we excepted Federal Funds via Block grants for native Hawaiian programs in the late 70s and early 80s, it was cause to descend into an abyss of poverty. I can imagine the density of poverty should the Akaka Bill not desintegrate.
Also too, thanks for the April 1 2009 posting on Naue, the video ...what can I say. I'm sadden by the mere fact that I was not paying attention to this important problem.
I don't do drugs, so I'm pretty much stupid about it, the ice epidemic is so bad out here because of the poverty, and the need for artificial joy. What I want to say, I have been reading up on 'ice' and I'm pissed at what the hell I am reading. Senator Akaka and Pat Saiki was the center of the congressional hearings for 'ice' across America and Asia, we Hawaii being the stepping off plat form for the spread of this "Paradise hell of happines to the east and to the west"? What can I say! Why am I connecting this two unrelated situation Akaka Bill and the 'ice' epidemic.
I went to Pearlands to say hello to Pearl, and we talked about the days of protesting in the 70s, I told her about the Naue video from your web site, I was pleased to see Liko so I shared that with her. We also talked about seminars and training. She is now attending PSI, I don't know too much about PSI, all that I can say is more power to her, if anyone that can shed a light on drugs in Waianae, it would be Pearl. I was an esty back in the 70s and I carry the trainings into my classroom. Keep posting, it keeps me sane and I'm able to function during the day between work and 'activism.'
E Hawaii Au Kaohi (Orlando Auld-grandpa)
Jere Krishell is a buffoon. He doesn't mention whether his grandparents were naturalized Hawaiian Kingdom subjects. He fosters manifest destiny doctrines adhered to by his Western European/Anglo-American heritage. His arguments are vacuous and irrelevant to our situation. Western colonialism concepts are archaic and racist.
He truly misses the whole point altogether and expresses himself as a settler family from the U.S. who violates the laws of occupation. What he neglects to mention is the issue of 1893 when the U.S. invaded and conspired in the takeover thereby breaking their treaties with the Hawaiian Kingdom. Where were his grandparents in all this upheaval?
It is the U.S. and it's racist WASP policies that compound this situation that he promotes and stands behind. He defends his country's (U.S.A.) history of manifest destiny, expansionism, imperialism, and hegemony over all countries throughout the world. He contributes to the cover-up of 1893.
It would be different if he was a descendant of Hawai'i nationals and speaking up as one rather than as a U.S. American. What is his roots? A Hawaii national or a U.S. American? Is he trying to make a case as a U.S. American or a Hawai'i national or as an ethnic caucasian supporting the U.S. racist policies using reverse racism in a foreign country?
Just because one is born in a foreign country, it doesn't make one a national of that country or has loyalty to that country. As you can see, he moved back to his great-grandparents country and spouting of as a descendant of settlers who violated the laws of occupation. If his great-grandparents naturalized as Hawaiian subjects, then he has room to talk; if they were part of the treasonous acts, then he has no room to talk.
If they arrived before and participated in the takeover or after the seizure of the Hawaiian Kingdom, then they were in violation of the laws of occupation and were already U.S. citizens as he is and is where he should be, in California which is part of the U.S.A. on the North American Continent. This proves he is part of the ongoing conspiracy. The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii is made up of U.S. Americans; What more is there to say?
After reading this article, I couldn't help but "capture" it and put up for discussion. I found most of the statements throughout...so off base...I didn't know where to start. have at it...Donna
-------------------------
Native Hawaiian bill gets new airing
Thu Jun 11, 1:52 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Granting Native Hawaiians the chance to form their own government, like those established by many of the nation's 562 American Indian tribes and Alaska Natives, would break new ground and eventually be ruled unconstitutional, critics of the proposal said Thursday.
Hawaii's congressional delegation has fought for much of the past decade for a bill that would allow for the reorganization of a Native Hawaiian government and federal recognition of that government. Their prospects for success have never looked better with President Barack Obama saying he supports the measure, which a House panel reviewed Thursday morning.
Rep. Doc Hastings of Washington, the ranking Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee, said legal precedent "cast a larger shadow than ever before on the doubtful proposition that Congress can and should extend recognition to a governing entity for Native Hawaiians."
Also, Gail Heriot, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said that granting ethnic Hawaiians tribal status for purposes of forming their own government would be comparable to letting Chicanos in the Southwest or Cajuns in Louisiana gain that same recognition.
Supporters of the bill, including members of the state's Congressional delegation, argued that a long line of legal cases have granted indigenous populations a special recognition and relationship with the U.S. They said that Native Hawaiians are the only indigenous group of people in the country without their own governing entity.
"We've never viewed this as a race-based issue," said Rep. Mazie K. Hirono, D-Hawaii, stressing that lawmakers from both parties in Hawaii support the measure.
The legislation allowing for a Native Hawaiian government passed the House on two occasions, including most recently in October 2007, but it routinely has stumbled in the Senate. The Bush administration opposed the bill. Obama's support has changed the political dynamic, however, and some supporters say they believe the bill can be passed before the year's end.
The bill would not automatically establish a Native Hawaiian government. Rather, it would provide a roadmap for how Native Hawaiians could organize such a government. Once established, the new government would negotiate with the state and the federal government over which assets the new government would own. Currently, the state administers 1.2 million acres of former monarchy land, and some of that land could revert to the new Native Hawaiian government.
Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, said it would allow Native Hawaiians a chance to manage land and assets as they see fit.
"When the land wasn't worth anything and there was no money, nobody cared," Abercrombie said. "Now that the land is worth a considerable amount of money, now all of a sudden, everybody is interested."
In 2006, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recommended against passage of comparable legislation. The commission said it opposed any bill that would "discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and further subdivide the American people into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege."
But Michael Yaki, a member of that commission, said little work went into the recommendation and that Congress should ignore it.
He said a resolution apologizing for the U.S. government's role in the overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani in 1893 also were never part of the commission's review. In the end, he said that warnings of race-based government is spread simply to instill unwarranted fear and opposition to the bill.
Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.V., and the committee's chairman, called the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893 a dark chapter in U.S. history.
"I can assure you that the committee will continue to press forward with re-establishment of a government-to- government relationship with the Native Hawaiians," he said.
Kaleo Farias > Donna BurnsJune 12, 2009 at 12:39am
Aloha kaua e Donna,
Everytime i read or watch or listen to others, who make comments or who try to define us, as aboriginal kanaka's, i feel so, so ill and disgusted after. Mahalo for exposing, more of the indoctrination, that is going on all around the world.
Replies
Thanks for all your posting, after 911 we had multi meetings at UH. I attended most of them because it was a way to lessen the pain of 911. Burning 'da' pain on my way to UH from Waiane helped. Not only was I on the dance floor with the New York Fire Commision, I had dinner with the New York Fire Chief in New Orleans two weeks before 911. Any how change the subject, the 'road map' for self goverment was circulated via Kinau from Arakaki. Beadie Dawson stood her grounds and Hawaiian Civic Club members supported the Akaka Bill through all it's changes, over and over and over at these meetings, so this should be interesting.
I believe when we excepted Federal Funds via Block grants for native Hawaiian programs in the late 70s and early 80s, it was cause to descend into an abyss of poverty. I can imagine the density of poverty should the Akaka Bill not desintegrate.
Also too, thanks for the April 1 2009 posting on Naue, the video ...what can I say. I'm sadden by the mere fact that I was not paying attention to this important problem.
I don't do drugs, so I'm pretty much stupid about it, the ice epidemic is so bad out here because of the poverty, and the need for artificial joy. What I want to say, I have been reading up on 'ice' and I'm pissed at what the hell I am reading. Senator Akaka and Pat Saiki was the center of the congressional hearings for 'ice' across America and Asia, we Hawaii being the stepping off plat form for the spread of this "Paradise hell of happines to the east and to the west"? What can I say! Why am I connecting this two unrelated situation Akaka Bill and the 'ice' epidemic.
I went to Pearlands to say hello to Pearl, and we talked about the days of protesting in the 70s, I told her about the Naue video from your web site, I was pleased to see Liko so I shared that with her. We also talked about seminars and training. She is now attending PSI, I don't know too much about PSI, all that I can say is more power to her, if anyone that can shed a light on drugs in Waianae, it would be Pearl. I was an esty back in the 70s and I carry the trainings into my classroom. Keep posting, it keeps me sane and I'm able to function during the day between work and 'activism.'
E Hawaii Au Kaohi (Orlando Auld-grandpa)
He truly misses the whole point altogether and expresses himself as a settler family from the U.S. who violates the laws of occupation. What he neglects to mention is the issue of 1893 when the U.S. invaded and conspired in the takeover thereby breaking their treaties with the Hawaiian Kingdom. Where were his grandparents in all this upheaval?
It is the U.S. and it's racist WASP policies that compound this situation that he promotes and stands behind. He defends his country's (U.S.A.) history of manifest destiny, expansionism, imperialism, and hegemony over all countries throughout the world. He contributes to the cover-up of 1893.
It would be different if he was a descendant of Hawai'i nationals and speaking up as one rather than as a U.S. American. What is his roots? A Hawaii national or a U.S. American? Is he trying to make a case as a U.S. American or a Hawai'i national or as an ethnic caucasian supporting the U.S. racist policies using reverse racism in a foreign country?
Just because one is born in a foreign country, it doesn't make one a national of that country or has loyalty to that country. As you can see, he moved back to his great-grandparents country and spouting of as a descendant of settlers who violated the laws of occupation. If his great-grandparents naturalized as Hawaiian subjects, then he has room to talk; if they were part of the treasonous acts, then he has no room to talk.
If they arrived before and participated in the takeover or after the seizure of the Hawaiian Kingdom, then they were in violation of the laws of occupation and were already U.S. citizens as he is and is where he should be, in California which is part of the U.S.A. on the North American Continent. This proves he is part of the ongoing conspiracy. The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii is made up of U.S. Americans; What more is there to say?
-------------------------
Native Hawaiian bill gets new airing
Thu Jun 11, 1:52 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Granting Native Hawaiians the chance to form their own government, like those established by many of the nation's 562 American Indian tribes and Alaska Natives, would break new ground and eventually be ruled unconstitutional, critics of the proposal said Thursday.
Hawaii's congressional delegation has fought for much of the past decade for a bill that would allow for the reorganization of a Native Hawaiian government and federal recognition of that government. Their prospects for success have never looked better with President Barack Obama saying he supports the measure, which a House panel reviewed Thursday morning.
Rep. Doc Hastings of Washington, the ranking Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee, said legal precedent "cast a larger shadow than ever before on the doubtful proposition that Congress can and should extend recognition to a governing entity for Native Hawaiians."
Also, Gail Heriot, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said that granting ethnic Hawaiians tribal status for purposes of forming their own government would be comparable to letting Chicanos in the Southwest or Cajuns in Louisiana gain that same recognition.
Supporters of the bill, including members of the state's Congressional delegation, argued that a long line of legal cases have granted indigenous populations a special recognition and relationship with the U.S. They said that Native Hawaiians are the only indigenous group of people in the country without their own governing entity.
"We've never viewed this as a race-based issue," said Rep. Mazie K. Hirono, D-Hawaii, stressing that lawmakers from both parties in Hawaii support the measure.
The legislation allowing for a Native Hawaiian government passed the House on two occasions, including most recently in October 2007, but it routinely has stumbled in the Senate. The Bush administration opposed the bill. Obama's support has changed the political dynamic, however, and some supporters say they believe the bill can be passed before the year's end.
The bill would not automatically establish a Native Hawaiian government. Rather, it would provide a roadmap for how Native Hawaiians could organize such a government. Once established, the new government would negotiate with the state and the federal government over which assets the new government would own. Currently, the state administers 1.2 million acres of former monarchy land, and some of that land could revert to the new Native Hawaiian government.
Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, said it would allow Native Hawaiians a chance to manage land and assets as they see fit.
"When the land wasn't worth anything and there was no money, nobody cared," Abercrombie said. "Now that the land is worth a considerable amount of money, now all of a sudden, everybody is interested."
In 2006, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recommended against passage of comparable legislation. The commission said it opposed any bill that would "discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and further subdivide the American people into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege."
But Michael Yaki, a member of that commission, said little work went into the recommendation and that Congress should ignore it.
He said a resolution apologizing for the U.S. government's role in the overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani in 1893 also were never part of the commission's review. In the end, he said that warnings of race-based government is spread simply to instill unwarranted fear and opposition to the bill.
Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.V., and the committee's chairman, called the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893 a dark chapter in U.S. history.
"I can assure you that the committee will continue to press forward with re-establishment of a government-to- government relationship with the Native Hawaiians," he said.
Everytime i read or watch or listen to others, who make comments or who try to define us, as aboriginal kanaka's, i feel so, so ill and disgusted after. Mahalo for exposing, more of the indoctrination, that is going on all around the world.