Maoliworld
Ke Ao Maoli
Ceded lands
The Garden Island (Kaua`i's newspaper) published an article about the ceded (stolen) land issue in the January 24th issue. The entire appeal process is a disgrace, but what can we expect from Lingle.
http://www.kauaiworld.com/articles/2009/01/24/opinion/kauai/doc497a...
I just responded, and hopefully they will publish it:
History has its traps too
In the January 24th issue of TGI the editorial ”History helps to illuminate Hawaiian ceded land case” Mr. Walter Lewis gives a few historical facts in legalese that the average Hawaiian would have difficulty understanding. On the surface it may look fine as a historical overview, but if we scratch the surface we may unearth a few disturbing facts.
Mr. Lewis mentioned that ”Amicus curiae briefs were filed in support of the petition by the State by more than 30 states or state entities and by a number of private organizations.” Well, for the average reader amicus curiae brief means nothing, but if translated into everyday-English, it means a statement submitted in form of a letter to the court by an entity or individual as ”the friend of the court” in support of one of the parties involved in the case. My first reaction was that the State of Hawai`i must have felt that their case was quite weak if they went through the efforts of requesting (and probably paying) 30 some states or state entities to write those lengthy briefs in their support. Why in the world would get other states involved in the affairs of the State of Hawai`i, when they do have their own problems, unless they are the home of or connected to those mainland developers who can hardly wait to get their hands on parts of the ceded lands to ”develop” them, that is to convert them to their own taste? I decided to read a few of these briefs.
All of them concluded that the Apology resolution has no legal force or effect whatsoever, in other words, that it was only symbolic. But, pardon me, if it were so, why don’t they ask former U.S. president, Bill Clinton, to make a public statement saying that his apology to the Hawaiian nation was only symbolic. He should be the one who knows best what he meant. Afraid that he wouldn’t do it?
The 35-page amicus curiae brief No. 037-17232 (http://www.aloha4all.org/documents/81211_GRIH_SLF_AmicusBrfsupptPtn...) submitted jointly by the Grassroot Institute of Hawai`i and Southeastern Legal Foundation, Inc. of Atlanta, GA contains some troubling statements. For example in chapter 5. Victimhood claims unjustified. U.S. a success story for Hawaiians. Surprisingly this chapter does not list statistical figures of Hawaiians living in Hawai`i, but of those living in California. Perhaps the ”success story” here would be less convincing to the court. Furthermore, to tilt the emotional scale, on page 33 the brief states ”Over 1 million American citizens in Hawaii are under siege by what can fairly be called an evil empire dedicated to Native Hawaiian Supremacy.” Is it not interesting that we don’t read, hear or see complaints here about this evil empire?
To further stress their arguments and to confuse the public the supporters of the State in the brief describe the ”cruel” kapu system of Hawaiians even if there is no normal Hawaiian today who would be inclined to restore it or any of the outdated traditions. Isn’t it ironic to mention the old kapu system as a deterrent or condemnable fact, when in the USA between 1890 and 1960 nearly 5000 black Americans were lynched (out of those 458 in Georgia, the state of the co-authors of the brief), and American women were not allowed to vote till 1920? The use of these tactics must be a sign of utmost desperation to find faults in the other party’s actions.
Perhaps it is time to look at the case differently and sit down with the Hawaiians to discuss and settle the ceded land and other issues amicably to the benefit of all. Perhaps this would even be less financial burden on the Hawaiian taxpayers than the expected legal fees in the Supreme Court appeal case.
János (Keoni) Samu
http://www.kauaiworld.com/articles/2009/01/24/opinion/kauai/doc497a...
I just responded, and hopefully they will publish it:
History has its traps too
In the January 24th issue of TGI the editorial ”History helps to illuminate Hawaiian ceded land case” Mr. Walter Lewis gives a few historical facts in legalese that the average Hawaiian would have difficulty understanding. On the surface it may look fine as a historical overview, but if we scratch the surface we may unearth a few disturbing facts.
Mr. Lewis mentioned that ”Amicus curiae briefs were filed in support of the petition by the State by more than 30 states or state entities and by a number of private organizations.” Well, for the average reader amicus curiae brief means nothing, but if translated into everyday-English, it means a statement submitted in form of a letter to the court by an entity or individual as ”the friend of the court” in support of one of the parties involved in the case. My first reaction was that the State of Hawai`i must have felt that their case was quite weak if they went through the efforts of requesting (and probably paying) 30 some states or state entities to write those lengthy briefs in their support. Why in the world would get other states involved in the affairs of the State of Hawai`i, when they do have their own problems, unless they are the home of or connected to those mainland developers who can hardly wait to get their hands on parts of the ceded lands to ”develop” them, that is to convert them to their own taste? I decided to read a few of these briefs.
All of them concluded that the Apology resolution has no legal force or effect whatsoever, in other words, that it was only symbolic. But, pardon me, if it were so, why don’t they ask former U.S. president, Bill Clinton, to make a public statement saying that his apology to the Hawaiian nation was only symbolic. He should be the one who knows best what he meant. Afraid that he wouldn’t do it?
The 35-page amicus curiae brief No. 037-17232 (http://www.aloha4all.org/documents/81211_GRIH_SLF_AmicusBrfsupptPtn...) submitted jointly by the Grassroot Institute of Hawai`i and Southeastern Legal Foundation, Inc. of Atlanta, GA contains some troubling statements. For example in chapter 5. Victimhood claims unjustified. U.S. a success story for Hawaiians. Surprisingly this chapter does not list statistical figures of Hawaiians living in Hawai`i, but of those living in California. Perhaps the ”success story” here would be less convincing to the court. Furthermore, to tilt the emotional scale, on page 33 the brief states ”Over 1 million American citizens in Hawaii are under siege by what can fairly be called an evil empire dedicated to Native Hawaiian Supremacy.” Is it not interesting that we don’t read, hear or see complaints here about this evil empire?
To further stress their arguments and to confuse the public the supporters of the State in the brief describe the ”cruel” kapu system of Hawaiians even if there is no normal Hawaiian today who would be inclined to restore it or any of the outdated traditions. Isn’t it ironic to mention the old kapu system as a deterrent or condemnable fact, when in the USA between 1890 and 1960 nearly 5000 black Americans were lynched (out of those 458 in Georgia, the state of the co-authors of the brief), and American women were not allowed to vote till 1920? The use of these tactics must be a sign of utmost desperation to find faults in the other party’s actions.
Perhaps it is time to look at the case differently and sit down with the Hawaiians to discuss and settle the ceded land and other issues amicably to the benefit of all. Perhaps this would even be less financial burden on the Hawaiian taxpayers than the expected legal fees in the Supreme Court appeal case.
János (Keoni) Samu
Views: 20
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tane on
-
No. 07-1372
In the Supreme Court of the United States
STATE OF HAWAII, ET AL., PETITIONERS
v.
OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE SUPREME COURT OF HAWAII
QUESTION PRESENTED
Whether the Joint Resolution to Acknowledge the
100th Anniversary of the January 17, 1893, Overthrow of
the Kingdom of Hawaii strips the State of Hawaii of its
authority to sell lands ceded to it by the federal government
until it reaches a political settlement with Native
Hawaiians about the status of those lands.
This is the only question the court will address specifically. The argument I can see would be if the Newlands Resolution and the Statehood act was valid; but the question doesn't go far enough to address these issues. It's asking if the criminal can fence stolen property because it has the property in its possession.
What does the law say when stolen property is fenced or pawned the the real owners are asking for it back? It is a buyer beware when the buyer gets the stolen property or is it returned to the original owner that had it stolen from him? The owner has to show proof of ownership. With that done, is the property returned and what of the buyer? What is normally done in a court of law?
This has gone beyond Bennett and the State of Hawai'i. It appears it will further Bennett's career. The issue affects other state's if you look at it through their native American laws. The Aztlan Group is sending in their Amicus brief to protect their own ceded lands. There is no one in Hawai'i that seems to be sending one in on behalf of the Hawai'i nationals. The OHA lawyers are a waste of time because they are not taking it to the international level and discounting the Newlands Resolution and the Statehood Act. Both are irregular and null and void. It's not going far enough; only within the state autonomy to do as they choose with the so-called ceded lands that were never ceded in the first place. We need professors or international lawyers to file an amicus brief to discount those two illicit laws.
The wording of the Writ of Certiorari is written badly and gives disinformation which enforces the U.S. position. After the racist Morgan Report, the Turpie Resolution forced Cleveland to stop his pursuit of restoring the Queen and opened it up for the Newlands Resolution. The U.S. Supreme Court question where Congress derived its authority to annex a foreign country. There is a lot missing in presenting the arguments that would support Hawai'i's case of stopping the sale of Kingdom national land and raise the question as to when the U.S. would de-occupy the Hawaiian Kingdom. There is much proof being omitted in the arguments; but they don't want to go there. -
-
Permalink Reply by Janos (Keoni) Samu on
-
You are right. Even the beginning of the Akaka bill is a lie claiming that Hawaiians are an indigenous people of the United States. They have never been. They are the indigenous people of the Hawaiian Kingdom. This is what we have to stress to our brothers and sisters. Many of us are not citizens of the United States, but citizens of The Hawaiian Kingdom, and we have to say it proudly. The United States mainstream media works non-stop to uphold the image of Nazi holocaust, while there could be a chapter on American Holocaust. Perhaps from not so long ago too. Just read these two articles:
http://waronyou.com/forums/index.php?topic=954.0;wap2 and
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2007/04/15/bom... -
-
-
Several years ago, Ken Conklin, Wm. Burgess, Malia Zimmerman,Sen. Sloam and others declared publicly their war against the native Hawaiians and recruited businessmen to join in their efforts. It's a replay of the Bayonet Constitution incident; to quash the native Hawaiians into oblivion. This is what the Grassroot Institute of Hawai'i and Aloha4All is all about. They revise history and do spins to obfuscate the facts and use reverse-racism to stress their point. They refuse to take into account that the Hawaiian Kingdom had loyal non-kanaka maoli that were loyal to the Queen and who also signed the petitions in support of the Queen and against annexation. They made up 15.6% of the Hawaii nationals back in 1890.
They avoid the incidents from 1887 to 1898 like the plague and instead demonize us in periods before that time as barbarians. They forget their history during those days as well. In 1782, they were still writing their U.S. Constitution and trying to formalize their government. Prior to that, they were massacring all non-white people by burning them alive, butchering them, hanging them, scalping them, shooting them, ambushing them and putting a bounty on them (men, women, babies, children young and old). They had black slaves they regarded as personal property and possessions. Probably this is what this white racist ethnocentric group wishes to do since they speak about their evil empire with great zeal.
Where are the Hawaiian sovereignty groups (political parties) that they cannot send in their own amicus brief to disspell the Morgan Report, the Turpie Resolution, the Newlands Resolution, and the Statehood Act. They should be presenting these illicit issues in the amicus briefs and to set a resolution as only being U.S. de-occupation of our Hawaiian Kingdom Nation. We Hawai'i nationals have a right to our freedoms and the U.S. must de-occupy our territory completely.
We want our country back for our na Kupuna and our future children in generations to come as a free independent sovereign nation we were and will be again. -
-
-
Pēlā nō, e Tane!
The deception is ongoing. Meticulous plans supported by federal grants provide the financial and ideological backing for these organizations to demonize Hawaiians and to depict them as no good savages unless they adjust to the American lifestyle and accept the political goals of ‘Amelika Hui Pū ‘ia. It was not a coincidence that Hawaiians from California were used as an example for the success story of Hawaiians. The underlying statement was: see, you too can be successful if you leave your homeland and become players in our consumer-oriented society. Their goal is to make as many Hawaiians leave Hawai`i as possible because this reduces the possibility of resistance here and on the mainland they will never become a sizable force in any state. If they live comfortably,most of them are not likely to return to Hawai`i to help their brothers and sisters. This is also called peaceful displacement.
Don't you think that it is a coincidence that the only rewards presently offered in Hawai`i by businesses and organizations is a trip to Las Vegas? It is an attempt to seduce everyone with the smell of money. Even if the mainland has some important attractions, they are not the destination in contests, games and competitions. Culture will not be made attractive, because those exploring it may learn something, and who wants smart Hawaiians? They may cause trouble later.
This is one of the most important reasons to educate our brothers and sisters just as it was requested by a speaker at the Kū i ka Pono in Honolulu. -
-
Permalink Reply by Namaka'eha on
-
Hey, we don't cause trouble. Do we really? We seek clarification and immediate solutions with out passive excuses! Many of our own po'e relocated and we are often caught in the world of survival in the Western world. We are a burden on mainstream society, however they (U.S.) fail to admit they contributed to this mess!
-
-
-
Of course, we don't cause trouble. I was describing the arguments of the occupiers. Things however may change, because if they make the life of our brothers and sisters in Hawai`i more and more difficult, those may resort to making trouble for the occupiers. Many of our own po`e relocated because the oppressors created hopeless conditions for them her in Kō Hawai`i Pae `Āina.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Alika Simon Jr. on
-
Aloha everyone,
I just wanted to make a small statement as i usually dont say much at all.
My Name is Michael Alika Simon Jr. I am 36 years old, I was the first generation born off the islands. I was fortunate to be raised in our rich culture by my ohana, i respect my Kapuna, i open doors for them in public places, i ask if they need help, i was raised to be kind, loving, and respectful to all. But no matter how respectful i am, i am still a minority in the mainland. Why because my skin is brown? Or is it when people say what nationality are you i say Hawaiian, or ist it because i argue that Hawaii is not part of the U.S. NEVER WAS, NEVER WILL BE. Living here on the mainland is just a smack in the face, i feel i was robbed of my heritage and culture. I am a outcast in the place i was raised, i was always called names and picked on because of the color of my skin. After my grandmother passed away a few years back i started to crave the knowledge and understanding of what really happened in Hawaii, Then the more i read the more i cried, i still read every bit of information i can get my hands on and i still cry. I wish i was on Maui home of my Kapuna, So i can stand tall and strong to fight beside my brother's and sisters, aunties and uncles and the greater good for all Hawaiians. I am 12.5% hawaiian my bloodline is from Makaena I am Hawaiian misplaced yes, but still Hawaiian. just remember that some of us here in the mainland dont want to be here, cant afford to move home, but we believe and speak our minds as Hawaiians. i love each and everyone of you, I wish i was on the islands to show my love and loyalty to the Hawaiian Kingdom. but for now i must settle for setting people straight and telling the truth about Hawaii and what the U.S. does to my people, I know its not much but the saying goes ........ one small pebble makes a ripple through the whole pond. So maybe i can reach a few people here and educate them on the truth. I am so sorry for going on and on about things but i thought it was time for me to speak up. I hope i didnt offend anyone becuase that wasnt my intentions. I just want everyone to know that some of us Hawaiians want to be in Hawaii and not in the mainland, That some of us would do anything to come home....
Love,
from a misplaced Hawaiian wishing he was home.
Michael Alika Simon Jr. -
-
-
Aloha mai, e Michael,
Your lines are very sobering and moving, and we are very proud of you. You reminded me of two very important points: there is a discrimination against you because of your healthy, brown skin, which happens at too many places, even in Hawaii. The second one is that you cannot move back, because you cannot afford to buy or rent a home in your own one hānau. Inflating the real estate prices is one way to prevent our brothers and sisters living elsewehere from returning. And the oppressors managed to do it. Stand tall and be strong, laugh in the face of those who mock you, You are proud of your nation and you are not hiding it despite the humiliation for your most natural feeling of being proud of your roots, that's the most we can desire from you at this point. One day, we believe, you will be able to return.
If you give me permission, I will read your letter on the local television Ho`ike in the "Open mike" program, just I don't know if I can do it without sheding any tears. And if you have a place in your garden or by your house to fly a kanaka maoli flag, I will mail you a new one free. Just let me know your mailing address in a private e-mail to Janoss@aol.com.
You support your nation and your nation supports you.
Mahalo nui loa. -
-
-
Aloha Janos,
Mahalo for your words of encouragment, It is deeply felt in my heart and soul to actually know that someone understands my words and feelings. And yes you have my permission to read my letter on the open mike program. I want all of your listener's to know that their people on the mainland has not forgotten our brothers & sisters back home, I only speak for my ohana and myself, but im sure the rest of the misplaced Hawaiians feel the same way. And yes it would be a honor to recieve a Kanaka maoli flag, and rest assured that it will be flown with the utmost respect and honor one can give. And once again thank you so much for such a loving and understanding response.
Love Always,
Michael Alika Simon Jr. -
-
-
The above was printed in the January 27th, 2009 issue of The Garden Island.
-
-
-
It's not so much the Price of Paradise/ the cost of living as it is the earning power/slave wages. We have allowed the local government to get it out of our reach. By comparison of the 1950s, today's minimum wage should be about $35.00 an hour for a forty-hour week. That's how much the disparity has grown over the years, yet no one has put a stop to those insidious practices. The prices of EVERYTHING goes up at a whim but the salaries and wages remain sluggishly slow in rising in comparison. We've become as tourists in our own land, living in a perennial vacation in a resort-type environment and paying resort prices. That's where the problem lies. Think about it.
Another food for thought:
Page 2
7 SECTION 2. Section 171-18, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is
8 amended to read as follows:
9 "SS 171-18 Public land trust. (a) All funds derived from
10 the sale or lease or other disposition of public lands shall be
11 appropriated by the laws of the state; provided that all
12 proceeds and income from the sale, lease, or other disposition
13 of lands ceded to the United States by the Republic of Hawaii
14 under the joint resolution of annexation, apporved July 7, 1898
15 (30 Stat. 750), or acquired in exchange for lands so ceded, and
16 returned to the State of Hawaii by virtue of section 5(b) of the
17 Act of March 18, 1959, (73 Stat. 5) and all
18 proceeds and income from the sale, lease, or other disposition
19 of lands retained by the United States under sections 5 (c) and
20 5 (d) of the Act and later conveyed to the State under
21 section 5 (e) shall be held as a public trust for the support of
22 the public schools and orther public educational institutions,
Page 3
1 for the betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians as
2 defined in the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, *as amended,
3 for the development of farm and home ownership on as widespread
4 a basis as possible, for the making of public improvements, and
5 for the provision of lands for public use.
* Have we been misreading the law? Is it four conditions instead of five
because we are caught up with the number five: 5(c), 5(d) and 5(e)?
"as amended", could be interpreted to mean more clarity about the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920, in bettering the native Hawaiians by development of farm and home ownership on as widespread a basis as possible; as a change for the better. This could have been inserted because they knew the "Act" wasn't putting enough of the native Hawaiians back on the land fast enough.
Something to think about and question.
Tane -
-
-
I think it was 1893 and not 1983. On the other hand what do you expect from a group of settlers who came from overseas to take away the land of the American Indians and killed them by the hundreds of thousands then on Thanksgiving Day celebrating their victory and their new possessions, the stolen land every day. These traditions seem to be embedded in their genes. Look at the invasion of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and many more. The difference is that in the 20th century they wanted to repell just protest from the international community, therefore they had fabricated "evidence" of aggression or "grave threat to the United States" to justify their invasions. The motives have not changed, only the methods and the tools. Long Live the Hawaiian Kingdom!
-
© 2023 Created by Ikaika Hussey.
Powered by
