Whenit comes to Hawai`i Kingdom sovereignty issues, the courts are like a mule with blinders. They are only allowed to see as far as what is legal under the state and federal constitutions. What is blocked from view is the "lawfulness" of the state of Hawai`i and its constitution.
Anyactions (the Organic Act and Statehood Act) which are subsequent to an act of fraud (the Newlands Resolution) have no more lawful authority then the initial act of fraud.
For instance, if your car isstolen, the theft isn't made legal by altering the title and doing a paint job before selling it. The fact remains, the car is stolen.
Congressoverstepped its lawful authority when it attempted to annex the Hawaiian Kingdom against the will of its people and government through the Newlands Resolution.
The theft of the Hawaiian Kingdom and alteration of the title was violation of international law.
The Organic Act (a new paint job coloring the title) was as unlawful as the initial theft. The Statehood Act(selling the car with unlawful title to the "state" of Hawai`i) did not make the initial theft lawful. It was simply one act of fraud piled upon two others.
As the Akaka Billattempts to gain forgiveness for the previous piles of fraud, the pile from the mule just gets deeper. It doesn't change the nature of the pile.
How does one force the mule to remove the blinders and see that the emperor has no clothes?
Dan Taylor
Haiku, Maui
Comments
Dan Taylor,
I've had two cars stolen, I live in Waianae. My concern with all of the above from Maui, reconstructing history is just what it is. The populace will slice away a part of history and vote on their feelings.
A pile of do do from a sheep is an important piece of evidence when searching for military toxicity.
The mule carried Mary, a stubborn 2,000 year old history that's wrapped in swaddling blankets. Machiavellian--seems interesting when applied to ones assertion of naked savages.
A pile of do do from a sheep is an important piece of evidence when searching for military toxicity.