Blog

The United States claims it possesses the Hawaiian Islands. But the facts show that at no time did lawful title to the Hawaiian Islands actually transfer from the Hawaiian Kingdom to the US either directly or indirectly.

The thieves who stole the Hawaiian Kingdom “car” fenced it to the US, who has been driving it around as its own.

The takeover of the Hawaiian Kingdom violated the Hawaiian Constitution, the US Constitution and the Law of Nations.

According to the governing principles embodied in those documents, the only lawful means to peacefully change a government is by the consent of the people.

There was no consent of the people for the 1893 takeover, nor for the 1893 Provisional Government for Hawai`i, nor for the 1894 formation of the Republic of Hawai`i, nor for the 1898 Annexation to the US, which was not even legitimate according to US law.

And finally, the 1959 vote conferring “statehood” to Hawai`i was based upon the previous illegitimate acts and did not conform to the criteria or procedures required by international law under the United Nations Charter.

The “statehood” plebiscite constituted fraud and thus, “the state of Hawai`i” is an unlawful entity - a fake state.

Shades Of Things To Come For Hawaiians With Native Hawaiian Roll & Blood Quantum

Honolulu Star-Advertiser - December 13, 2011

COARSEGOLD, Calif - The six-page, single-spaced letter that Nancy Dondero and about 50 of her relatives received last month was generously salted with legal citations and footnotes. But its bottom line was brutally simple. "It is the decision by a majority of the Tribal Council," the letter said, "that you are hereby disenrolled."

And with that, Dondero's official membership in the Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians, the cultural identity card she had carried all her life, summarily ended.

"That's it," Dondero, 58, said. "We're tribeless."

Dondero and her clan have joined thousands of Indians in California who have been kicked out of their tribes in recent years for the crime of not being of the proper bloodline.

For centuries, American Indian tribes have banished people as punishment for serious offenses. But only in recent years, experts say, have they begun routinely disenrolling Indians deemed inauthentic members of a group. And California, with dozens of tiny tribes that were decimated, scattered and then reformed, often out of ethnically mixed Indians, is the national hotbed of the trend.

Clan rivalries and political squabbles are often triggers for disenrollment, but critics say one factor above all has driven the trend: casino gambling. The state has more than 60 Indian casinos that took in nearly $7 billion last year, the most of any state, according to the Indian Gaming Commission.

For Indians who lose membership in a tribe, the financial impact can be huge. Some small tribes with casinos pay members monthly checks of $15,000 or more out of gambling profits. Many provide housing allowances and college scholarships. Children who are disenrolled can lose access to tribal schools.

The money and the immense power it has conferred on tribes that had endured grinding poverty for decades has enticed many tribal governments to consolidate control over their gambling enterprises by trimming membership rolls, critics and independent analysts say.

"Sometimes it is political vendettas or family feuds that have gotten out of hand," said David Wilkins, a Lumbee Indian and professor of American Indian Studies at the University of Minnesota who has studied disenrollment across the country. "But in California, it seems more often than not that gaming revenue is the precipitating factor."

At least 2,500 Indians have been disenrolled by at least two dozen California tribes in the past decade, according to estimates by Indian advocates and academics. In almost all of those cases, tribal governments — exercising authority granted by the federal government — have determined that the ousted Indians did not have the proper ancestry.

Tribal governments universally deny that greed or power is motivating disenrollment, saying that they are simply upholding membership rules established in their constitutions. To that end, they often say they are removing people with little connection to their tribe, who joined mainly for services, scholarships and monthly checks financed by casino profits.

"You have people who want to be tribal members, where no one knows who they are or where they came from," said Reggie Lewis, chairman of the Chukchansi Tribal Council. "We are sworn to uphold the constitution. And basically that's what we try to do."

The tribe has disenrolled more than 400 members in the past five years, and scores more are facing disenrollment hearings. Some members estimate the tribe's membership is now below 1,000.

Sometimes, disenrolled Indians are forced to leave tribal land — though in California, many Indians do not live on the small reservations, which are also known as rancherias.

The Chukchansi tribe, whose 2,000-slot-machine casino is nestled in the Sierra Nevada foothills near Yosemite National Park, gives members a monthly stipend of less than $300 per person. But it also pays for utilities, food bills and tuition — and Nikah Dondero, Nancy Dondero's 32-year-old daughter, had to turn down a master's degree program after she was disenrolled last month, because she lost her scholarship.

"It's like I'm now a white girl with Okie kids," said Nancy Dondero, a mother of two.

Beyond benefits, critics of disenrollment say it can be psychologically devastating. "It destroys their connection to their ancestors, their cultural heritage, their tradition," said Laura Wass, the central California director for the American Indian Movement, an opponent of disenrollment. "You have to go to iron gates and beg for entrance to your own land."

The fights over enrollment have bred a cottage industry for ancestry research. Many tribal governments now retain lawyers or researchers who comb through government archives for evidence of an individual's tribal authenticity. Companies that test Indian DNA have sprouted up around the country. The Chukchansi hired a former Bureau of Indian Affairs official with expertise in federal records to review the bloodline of every member.

In the case of Nancy Dondero, the disenrollment of her extended family came down to a single ancestor: a great grandfather, Jack Roan, who died in 1942 at age 76. The tribe's enrollment committee, appointed by the seven-member Tribal Council, determined Roan was not Chukchansi based on a will and personal affidavits in which he declared himself to be a member of another tribe.

At a hearing in September, the Roan descendants were allowed to present their own evidence, which included census and land records listing Roan as a Chukchansi. But the council rejected their argument, saying their documents included incorrect information submitted by white people. Roan was removed, and so were his descendants.

Paradoxically, Roan's face has become an iconic image of the Chukchansi, thanks to a photograph taken by Edward S. Curtis, the renowned documenter of the American West, who listed him as Chukchansi in a photograph taken in the 1920s.

One of Roan's daughters, Ruby Cordero, is also considered a cultural pillar of the tribe because she is expert at basket weaving and among the last native speakers of the Chukchansi language. But at 87, she, too, has been disenrolled.

"She was born and raised on that property," said Nancy Dondero, Ruby's great niece.

Disenrollments are not appealable. But in early November, the Chukchansi held tribal elections, which could result in new council members. (The vote is still being tallied.) If so, a different council could reinstate the Roan descendant, though that is far from certain.

Some Indian advocates like Wass say it is time for Congress to empower the federal courts or the Bureau of Indian Affairs to provide legal recourse to Indians who feel they have been disenrolled improperly.

Tony Cohen, a lawyer in Northern California who has represented Indians and tribal officials for three decades, said Congress could, for instance, enact legislation allowing Indians to sue tribal governments in federal court if they thought their rights were violated. But there is no such legislation pending, and Congress has shown little appetite for interfering in tribal membership issues.

"I don't like seeing Congress interfere with Indian sovereignty," Cohen said. "But I also don't like seeing tribal governments allowed to be, in essence, dictators."

Citing a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision written by Justice Thurgood Marshall, the Bureau of Indian Affairs says that tribal governments have sole authority to determine membership — unless a tribal constitution allows intervention by the government. But such provisions are rare.

And some federal officials say that is exactly how it should be.

"The tribe has historically had the ability to remove people," said Kevin Bearquiver, the bureau's deputy director for the Pacific region. "Tolerance is a European thing brought to the country. We never tolerated things. We turned our back on people."

The United States claims it possesses the Hawaiian Islands.

But the facts show that at no time did lawful title to the Hawaiian Islands actually transfer from the Hawaiian Kingdom to the US either directly or indirectly.

The thieves who stole the Hawaiian Kingdom fenced it to the US, who has been claiming it as its own - the 50th US state.

The takeover of the Hawaiian Kingdom violated the Hawaiian Constitution, the US Constitution and the Law of Nations.

According to the governing principles embodied in those documents, the only lawful means to peacefully change a government is by the consent of the people.

There was no consent of the people for the 1893 takeover, nor for the 1893 Provisional Government for Hawai`i, nor for the 1894 formation of the Republic of Hawai`i, nor for the 1898 Annexation to the US, which was not even legitimate according to US law.

And finally, the 1959 vote conferring “statehood” to Hawai`i was based upon the previous illegitimate acts and did not conform to the criteria or procedures required by international law under the United Nations Charter.

The “statehood” plebiscite constituted fraud and thus, “the state of Hawai`i” is an unlawful entity - a fake state.

Federal Recognition for Native Hawaiians Could Come Via Interior Dept

Honolulu Civil Beat - January 9, 2012

Frustrated with a 10-year congressional fight to obtain federal recognition and form a nation-within-a-nation government, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs has decided to follow a path that has led several American Indian tribes to success.

OHA is not giving up on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, known as the Akaka bill.

But faced with the reality that U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka, for whom the bill is named, is retiring after this year and that the political environment in Washington, D.C., is as polarized as it has ever been, OHA and Hawaii's delegation having been exploring other routes.

One of those would bypass Congress altogether and seek recognition from the U.S. Department of the Interior, a process used by Native American tribes....

Read More HERE

Dear Editor Hawai`i Tribune-Herald,

Tuesday, January 17, marked another anniversary of the events that precipitated the overthrow of the government of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Queen Liliuokalani, under duress, and for the life of her people and country, provisionally abdicated her throne to the intelligence and integrity of the president of the United States, Grover Cleveland.

Fact-finding proved her claim to the honor of herself and her people. Sadly, as you know, righteousness and right reason did not prevail.

I cannot take the attitude of acceptance of today’s status quo, for I know that I am not alone in the way I interpret Hawai`i's true place in the world. Many people, now learning the facts of the Queen's case are energized, too, by the Queen's motto, "Onipa`a," "Stand Firm."

I feel that "Onipa`a" also means to use our NI, the native intelligence that we are endowed with as human beings, to act as thoughtful warriors. The Queen was not advising us to stay vigilant only.

With that in mind, I move forward, away from the prevailing illusion of ineffectiveness of the Hawaiian cause, by aligning the recent Golden Globe award to the film "Descendants” (about a fictitious family on Kaua`i) with Hawai`i's real right to carry on as a country.

IIlusion, no. Alllusion, yes.

“Would that facts mattered, and that the descendants of the subjects of the historical Hawaiian Kingdom would receive today the Golden Globe award for the legitimacy of their country.

On this anniversary of the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government, we must remember that a country once recognized on a par with the rest of the world’s member states, as was the Hawaiian Kingdom – can have its operative government removed without forfeiting its sovereignty.

Observe respectfully the Golden Globe of national integrity that belongs to Hawaii Nei, even today!"

Keahi Felix
Hilo, Hawai`i

Honolulu Civil Beat - November 8, 2011

The protests at `Iolani Palace on Monday may have been peaceful. But the demonstrators seemed to have more of an edge in the courtroom.

A Honolulu judge on Tuesday released 19 Hawaiian sovereignty protesters, but not before indignant exchanges with the prosecutor.

When their legal names were read aloud by the state attorney general, each one objected and asked to have the record reflect often just a Hawaiian first name prefaced with "his highness" or "her highness."

Each one stated they are not US citizens and are "living sovereigns" of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

The protesters have been charged with second-degree criminal trespassing, a petty misdemeanor, for refusing to leave the palace grounds despite a state order.

And while members of the group Aupuni O Ko Hawai`i Pae `Aina/Hawaiian Kingdom Government told media Monday night that they would go back to the palace after being released, it's unclear when they'll return.

After the arraignment, several declined to talk about next steps and said they planned to rest and celebrate with their families this evening....

Read More Here

There's no need to create a new government when a perfectly good and lawful one — the Hawaiian Kingdom — continues to exist.

Although it has been greatly impaired by unlawful suppression and layers of fraud, the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Kingdom was never lawfully extinguished.

Therefore, there is no justification to contrive a new government to replace the Hawaiian Kingdom unless the people, the lawful subjects/citizens, called Hawaiian Nationals, decide they want to alter or change their government.

No one other than Hawaiian Nationals can make that determination — not the US government or foreign US citizens residing in Hawai`i, or the fake State of Hawai`i, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, or the Akaka Bill’s proposed phony Native Hawaiian Governing Entity.

Because the Hawaiian Kingdom is in continuity, there is no lawful way to alter or replace that existing government except through the processes provided in the existing lawful constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Prior to the Hawaiian Kingdom being taken over by insurgents during the illegal US invasion in 1893, Hawai`i had already been functioning for decades as a nation-state under one of the best constitutions in the world.

The United States’ prolonged occupation does not change the fact that the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, the one in place from 1840 to 1893, is still the one and only lawful and indisputable government for the Hawaiian Islands.

The United States is a usurper, and has no lawful jurisdiction in Hawai`i.

Since the Hawaiian Kingdom was never extinguished, its constitution, laws, statutes and policies are still intact.

Maui News - December 4, 2011

KAHULUI - State Office of Hawaiian Affairs officials presented a proposed settlement to Native Hawaiians on Friday night in which the agency would receive $200 million in Honolulu real estate for revenue generated on Hawaiian monarchy lands.

But some of the approximately 50 people who attended the meeting at Maui Waena Intermediate School reacted with anger and distrust of OHA negotiating a deal with the state.

During a question-and-answer session, Foster Ampong said that having OHA, a state agency, negotiate with the state is like "a thief negotiating with itself."

"There's a perversion there," he said, maintaining that the state was trying to clear itself of liability over Hawaiian lands.

"It's really, really insulting to us here."

Ampong likened the proposed settlement to efforts to convince Hawaiians to support the Akaka Bill and its aim to have the federal government recognize Hawaiians as a native people.

He said both were being "shoved down our throat."

Ampong received a round of applause in support of his comments.

The Hawaiian Kingdom is a multi-ethnic country comprised of citizens not only of Hawaiians by blood but also many other races.

In 1993, the US admitted in US Public Law 103-150 that it violated its own Constitution, its treaties, international law by perpetrating an outrageous armed theft of the Kingdom of Hawai`i and the forced American citizenship of Hawaiian national citizens.

America recognized in 1894, and again in 1993, that the Kingdom of Hawai`i has a right to exist.

The phony Akaka bill recently passed by the fake state of Hawai`i is not the remedy but rather an insult.

Instead the Hawaiian Kingdom itself has a right and obligation to enact and dictate land laws which prevent the selling of its lands to foreign speculators at prices which deny native nationals from living on their own home islands at an affordable price.

The Hawaiian Kingdom has a right and obligation to protect and defend the quality of life, land, water, ocean and air.

The Hawaiian Kingdom has a right and obligation to its citizens to provide the best in education, health care and housing.

We Love Our Nation As You Love Yours.
Would You Like It If Your Land Was Stolen?

In the Kingdom of Hawai`i, November 28 was an official holiday called Lā Kū`oko`a, or Independence Day. This was the day in 1843 when England and France formally recognized Hawai`i's independence.

Faced with the problem of foreign encroachment of Hawaiian territory, His Majesty King Kamehameha III deemed it prudent and necessary to dispatch a Hawaiian delegation to the United States and then to Europe, with the power to negotiate treaties and to ultimately secure the recognition of Hawaiian Independence by the major powers of the world.

In accordance with this view, Timoteo Ha`alilio, William Richards and Sir George Simpson were commissioned as joint Ministers Plenipotentiary on April 8, 1842.

Sir George Simpson, shortly thereafter, left for England, via Alaska and Siberia, while Mr. Ha`alilio and Mr. Richards departed for the United States, via Mexico and the US on July 8, 1842.

The Hawaiian delegation, while in the United States of America, secured the assurance of US President Tyler on December 19, 1842 of its recognition of Hawaiian independence, and then proceeded to meet Sir George Simpson in Europe and secure formal recognition by Great Britain and France.

On March 17, 1843, King Louis-Phillipe of France recognized Hawaiian independence at the urging of King Leopold of Belgium, and on April 1, 1843, Lord Aberdeen on behalf of Her Britannic Majesty Queen Victoria, assured the Hawaiian delegation that:

"Her Majesty's Government was willing and had determined to recognize the independence of the Sandwich Islands under their present sovereign."

Formal Agreement of Recognition -

On November 28, 1843, at the Court of London, the British and French Governments entered into a formal agreement of the recognition of Hawaiian independence, with what is called the Anglo-Franco Proclamation.

To wit-

"Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and His Majesty the King of the French, taking into consideration the existence in the Sandwich Islands (Hawaiian Islands) of a government capable of providing for the regularity of its relations with foreign nations, have thought it right to engage, reciprocally, to consider the Sandwich Islands as an Independent State, and never to take possession, neither directly or under the title of Protectorate, or under any other form, of any part of the territory of which they are composed.

The undersigned, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State of Foreign Affairs, and the Ambassador Extraordinary of His Majesty the King of the French, at the Court of London, being furnished with the necessary powers, hereby declare, in consequence, that their said Majesties take reciprocally that engagement.

In witness whereof the undersigned have signed the present declaration, and have affixed thereto the seal of their arms.

Done in duplicate at London, the 28th day of November, in the year of our Lord, 1843.
[L.S.] Aberdeen [L.S.] St. Aulaire"

The Fake Revolution -

Fifty years later, in 1893, an illegal intervention by the U.S. military resulted in a "fake revolution" against the legitimate Hawaiian government, and a puppet oligarchy set itself up with its main purpose of annexing Hawai`i to the United States.

After a failed armed attempt by Hawaiians to retake their Kingdom in 1895, the usurpers announced that Lā Kū`oko`a would no longer be celebrated, and the American holiday Thanksgiving Day would be the official national holiday instead.

Removing a holiday like Hawai`i Independence Day was a way to cover up and try to destroy the history and identity of the Hawaiian Kingdom and its people.

At first Hawaiians protested and celebrated Lā Kū`oko`a anyway, telling the story of the national heroes who had traveled to Europe to secure Hawaii's recognition.

But over time, this history — knowledge of the holiday and how it was replaced — faded and was almost lost, until recently, when Hawaiian language scholars started translating Hawaiian language newspapers and rediscovered the story.

Today’s celebration of Lā Kū`oko`a asserts that Hawai`i is still an independent nation, even under prolonged illegal occupation.

Hawai`i is not a part of the United States.

The truth is the current government, the “state of Hawai`i,” is a corporate construct of the United States that resulted from a series of unlawful acts stemming from the 1893 unlawful takeover of the recognized, peaceful, civil government of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

The government of the United States has twice officially acknowledged (in 1893 and again in 1993) that its participation in the takeover of a friendly, neutral nation was an unprovoked unlawful act of aggression.

Suppose someone stole your car, forged documents and sold it to someone else. Does that new “owner” own the car? Suppose the new “owner” gave it to someone else. Does that new “owner” own the car?

Now suppose the original thief confesses to the crime of how he unlawfully obtained (stole) the car. Who owns the car now? Is it the person most recently in possession of the car, or you, the person from whom it was initially stolen?

Of course, according to common sense and common law, the answer is - you. Since you never gave your consent, the title of the car never lawfully changed hands to anyone else.

You are still the lawful owner.

What They Say About Their Country & The US -

"The most common sense thing is for total independence.

We were a progressive modern nation of our time and recognized as a friendly, neutral nation within the Family of Nations, the predecessor of the League of Nations and the United Nations.

We had a democratic form of government, a constitutional monarchy with a bicameral legislative assembly.

The works and legacies of our monarchs are legendary and noteworthy.

Today under the illegally occupied American system, we are concerned about our lands, culture, people and lifestyle which has been under attack for over a hundred years.

 The Kingdom of Hawai`i is not only Native Hawaiians but subjects of non-Hawaiian blood who were legitimate subjects of the Kingdom.

This racial argument is an American thing and not Hawaiian.

So our concerns are well within our scope to protect all subjects of the Kingdom.

We do expect reparations and restitution from the US for the injurious damages to our nation, land and people.

The US government is well aware of this and tried a piecemeal settlement through the Akaka bill.

If the tables were turned around; which would you do? I'm sure it wouldn't be a hard decision.

Remember, Hawaiians never hated America.

We were never afraid that another country would take us over; we had over twenty-four treaties with various countries but the US is the only country that broke their treaties with us."