All Posts (6434)
Sort by
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=156b821a-de19-4007-8184-6eb5417e11d6)
aloha all,
Please join us for the kamehameha day celebration is coming up on saturday, june 12. the parade ends at iolani palace this year. the hawaiian independence action alliance is setting up the signs displaying our kupuna names from the ku`e petitions on the grounds of the palace. this will be our second time bringing them out to display in public. first time was at the mckinley statue on feb. 15, american president's day. we started with 600 names. i've attached a link to photos (see below)
we need help. we'd like to make 600 more name signs by june 12, but time is short. in the past we've asked people to contribute names, and they have. we need more names. but in addition, we need whatever information accompanies the names on the petitions: island, moku, ahupuaa, age, gender, etc. different names have different information. all of it is important. the easiest way for people today to find their own kupuna is to be able to see where they lived when they signed. we've created a database to hold the names.
how you can help:
+ join us at 8 am at iolani palace on june 12 to set up signs; this will take a couple of hours, depending on how many people show up to help. more is better!
+ help us table at the celebration to gather more names, hand out brochures, ask people to kokua for future displays
+ for those unable to help write names, send the information to me directly at palolo@hawaii.rr.com; some of you did send me names already. send them again, but this time add the other information as listed on the petitions, themselves
+ noenoe, this is for you, specifically: help us draft a one page tri-fold brochure to hand out to people who come to visit so they know what they're looking at and why our kupuna need to be remembered.
mahalo in advance to those who have the time and desire to help. email or call me if you have questions or concerns. feel free to forward this email to others.
lynette cruz
palolo@hawaii.rr.com
phone (808) 284-3460
Click HERE To Become A Fan
Defenders of the Mavri Mamarra & So Much More
by
Ken O’Keefe from Istanbul
I have for many years understood that we, people of conscience,
are the true holders of power in this world. Frustratingly
however we have largely relinquished that power and failed to
reach our full potential. Our potential to create a better world,
a just world. Nonetheless I have conspired with others of like
mind to reveal and exercise our true power. In 2002 I initiated
the TJP Human Shield Action to Iraq because I knew that the
invasion of Iraq had been planned well in advance, that it was
part of a ‘Global Spectrum Dominance’ agenda as laid out by the
Project For A New American Century. I knew that protests had no
chance of stopping the invasion, and that largely these protests
were just a way of making us feel better about the coming mass
murder; by being able to say I protested against it. With that
understanding I argued that the only viable way to stop the
invasion was to conduct a mass migration to Iraq. A migration in
which people from around the world, especially western citizens,
would position themselves at sites in Iraq that are supposed to be
protected by international law, but which are routinely bombed
when it is only Iraqi, Palestinian, generally non-white, western
lives who will be killed. I felt 10,000 such people could stop
the invasion, or at the very least, expose the invasion for what
it was from the start, an act of international aggression, a war
crime and a crime against humanity.
When our two double decker busses travelled from London to Baghdad
through Turkey, it was ever clear that the people of Turkey also
could sense the power of this act, and they were the biggest
participants in it. In the end we did not get the numbers
required to stop the war, with at least one million Iraqi’s dead
as a result, but I remain convinced that it was within our power
to prevent the invasion. A massive opportunity lost as far as I
am concerned.
In 2007 I joined the Free Gaza Movement with its plan to challenge
the blockade of Gaza by travelling to Gaza by sea. From the
moment I heard of the plan I knew it could succeed and ultimately
I served as a captain on the first attempt. The Israeli
government said throughout our preparation that we were no better
than pirates and they would treat us as such. They made clear we
would not reach Gaza. And still I knew we could succeed. And we
did. Two boats with 46 passengers from various countries managed
to sail into Gaza on August 23, 2010; this was the first time this
had been done in 41 years. The truth is the blockade of Gaza is
far more than three years old, and yet we, a small group of
conscientious people defied the Israeli machine and celebrated
with tens of thousands of Gazans when we arrived that day. We
proved that it could be done. We proved that an intelligent plan,
with skilled manipulation of the media, could render the full
might of the Israeli Navy useless. And I knew then that this was
only the tip of the iceberg.
So participating in the Freedom Flotilla is like a family reunion
to me. It is my long lost family whose conscience is their guide,
who have shed the fear, who act with humanity. But I was
especially proud to join IHH and the Turkish elements of the
flotilla. I deeply admire the strength and character of the
Turkish people, despite your history having stains of injustice,
like every nation, you are today from citizen to Prime Minister
among the leaders in the cause of humanity and justice.
I remember being asked durýng the TJP Human Shield Action to Iraq
if I was a pacifist, I responded with a quote from Gandhi by
saying I am not a passive anything. To the contrary I believe in
action, and I also believe in self-defence, 100%, without
reservation. I would be incapable of standing by while a tyrant
murders my family, and the attack on the Mavri Mamara was like an
attack on my Palestinian family. I am proud to have stood
shoulder to shoulder with those who refused to let a rogue Israeli
military exert their will without a fight. And yes, we fought.
When I was asked, in the event of an Israeli attack on the Mavri
Mamara, would I use the camera, or would I defend the ship? I
enthusiasticly committed to defence of the ship. Although I am
also a huge supporter of non-violence, in fact I believe
non-violence must always be the first option. Nonetheless I
joined the defence of the Mavri Mamarra understanding that
violence could be used against us and that we may very well be
compelled to use violence in self defence.
I said this straight to Israeli agents, probably of Mossad or Shin
Bet, and I say it again now, on the morning of the attack I was
directly involved in the disarming of two Israeli Commandos. This
was a forcible, non-negotiable, separation of weapons from
commandos who had already murdered two brothers that I had seen
that day. One brother with a bullet entering dead center in his
forehead, in what appeared to be an execution. I knew the
commandos were murdering when I removed a 9mm pistol from one of
them. I had that gun in my hands and as an ex-US Marine with
training in the use of guns it was completely within my power to
use that gun on the commando who may have been the murderer of one
of my brothers. But that is not what I, nor any other defender of
the ship did. I took that weapon away, removed the bullets,
proper lead bullets, separated them from the weapon and hid the
gun. I did this in the hopes that we would repel the attack and
submit this weapon as evidence in a criminal trial against Israeli
authorities for mass murder.
I also helped to physically separate one commando from his assault
rifle, which another brother apparently through into the sea. I
and hundreds of others know the truth that makes a mockery of the
brave and moral Israeli military. We had in our full possession,
three completely disarmed and helpless commandos. These boys were
at our mercy, they were out of reach of their fellow murderers,
inside the ship and surrounded by 100 or more men. I looked into
the eyes of all three of these boys and I can tell you they had
the fear of God in them. They looked at us as if we were them,
and I have no doubt they did not believe there was any way they
would survive that day. They looked like frightened children in
the face of an abusive father.
But they did not face an enemy as ruthless as they. Instead the
woman provided basic first aid, and ultimately they were released,
battered and bruised for sure, but alive. Able to live another
day. Able to feel the sun over head and the embrace of loved
ones. Unlike those they murdered. Despite mourning the loss of
our brothers, feeling rage towards these boys, we let them go.
The Israeli prostitutes of propaganda can spew all of their
disgusting bile all they wish, the commandos are the murders, we
are the defenders, and yet we fought. We fought not just for our
lives, not just for our cargo, not just for the people of
Palestine, we fought in the name of justice and humanity. We were
right to do so, in every way.
While in Israeli custody I, along with everyone else was subjected
to endless abuse and flagrant acts of disrespect. Women and
elderly were physically and mentally assaulted. Access to food
and water and toilets was denied. Dogs were used against us, we
ourselves were treated like dogs. We were exposed to direct sun
in stress positions while hand cuffed to the point of losing
circulation of blood in our hands. We were lied to incessantly,
in fact I am awed at the routineness and comfort in their ability
to lie, it is remarkable really. We were abused in just about
every way imaginable and I myself was beaten and choked to the
point of blacking out… and I was beaten again while in my cell.
In all this what I saw more than anything else were cowards… and
yet I also see my brothers. Because no matter how vile and wrong
the Israeli agents and government are, they are still my brothers
and sisters and for now I only have pity for them. Because they
are relinquishing the most precious thing a human being has, their
humanity.
In conclusion; I would like to challenge every endorser of Gandhi,
every person who thinks they understand him, who acknowledges him
as one of the great souls of our time (which is just about every
western leader), I challenge you in the form of a question.
Please explain how we, the defenders of the Mavri Mamarra, are not
the modern example of Gandhi’s essence? But first read the words
of Gandhi himself.
I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice
and violence, I would advise violence.... I would rather have
India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she
should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness
to her own dishonour. – Gandhi
And lastly I have one more challenge. I challenge any critic of
merit, publicly, to debate me on a large stage over our actions
that day. I would especially love to debate with any Israeli leader
who accuses us of wrongdoing, it would be my tremendous pleasure
to face off with you. All I saw in Israel was cowards with guns,
so I am ripe to see you in a new context. I want to debate with
you on the largest stage possible. Take that as an open challenge
and let us see just how brave Israeli leaders are.
I write to inform you about Ken O'Keefe, who was aboard the Mavi Marmara when it was stormed by the Israeli military in the earlyhours ofMonday 31st May, towed to Ashdod Port in Israel and all its passengersdetained.
Ken was transferred to Ben Gurion Airport on Wednesdayand wasdue to be deported by the Israeli authorities to Istanbul, and thenrepatriatedto Dublin by the Irish officials. He refused deportation and demandedthathe be sent to Gaza, or the Occupied Palestinian Territories, using hisPalestinian travel documents (he was awarded Palestinian citizenshipwhen hecaptained one of the two Free Gaza boats into Gaza in August 2008). TheIsraelis acknowledge that he is a Palestinian citizen, but refused hisdemand onthe basis that his passport was invalid since it had not beenregistered.
The general atmosphere in the airport on Wednesdaywas quitechaotic, and a scuffle broke out. Ken was bashed on the forehead andthenbadly beaten by the Israeli officials/police. He has a large bloodygashon his head, and some bruised ribs. When I spoke with him he had ahoarse,croaky voice. He had been put in a head lock until he nearly passedout. His aggressor released Ken at the last possible moment. Kenrefused medical attention because he was not allowed access to a lawyer,nor washe being allowed to make phone calls.
On Thursday Ken's case wentbeforea judge who ruled that he be detained pending deportation (Ken wanted tobereleased without charge).
Having already been complaining ofdizzinessfollowing his first beating by Israeli police, Ken was beaten again thatnightin his cell. Again, he has refused treatment for his injuries. Kenwas unable to eat for a few days as his throat was sore following beingheld ina head lock on Wednesday.
He wanted to appeal his deportation andgo toGaza, but his solicitor advised him that for his own safety he shouldleaveIsrael. The longer he stays, the greater the detriment to hishealth. On Friday morning he signed his Emergency Travel Documentsprovided to him by the Irish Consulate and was booked onto a flight toIstanbul.
Israeli officials asked him to clean himself up as hisface wasbloody and he was quite dishevelled. He refused, as he wanted the worldtosee what had happened to him. The officials threatened to keep him incustody unless he co-operates, but he called their bluff, and wasallowed toboard his flight to Istanbul as he was. He was met by Irish Embassystaffand a press conference. He also gave an interview with Turkishnewspaperthe Hurriyet, which was featured on the front page. Prior to the pressconference he had issued the following statement:
"I want todiscussmy role in defending the ship and disarming two Israeli commandos alongwithconditions and treatment while in Israeli custody, including twobeatings at thehands of Israeli agents."
Ken will depart Istanbul on Monday7th Junefor Dublin, where he will stay for two days before returning home to hiswifeand baby son on Wednesday 9th June.
Please find attached apersonalstatement written by Ken in Istanbul, along with photographs taken onhisarrival to Istanbul.
Press conferences are being arranged inDublin andLondon. Please contact me if you would like to interview Ken.
Bestwishes,
Fadwa Dajani
(Mrs O'Keefe)
by
Ken O’Keefe from Istanbul
I have for many years understood that we, people of conscience,
are the true holders of power in this world. Frustratingly
however we have largely relinquished that power and failed to
reach our full potential. Our potential to create a better world,
a just world. Nonetheless I have conspired with others of like
mind to reveal and exercise our true power. In 2002 I initiated
the TJP Human Shield Action to Iraq because I knew that the
invasion of Iraq had been planned well in advance, that it was
part of a ‘Global Spectrum Dominance’ agenda as laid out by the
Project For A New American Century. I knew that protests had no
chance of stopping the invasion, and that largely these protests
were just a way of making us feel better about the coming mass
murder; by being able to say I protested against it. With that
understanding I argued that the only viable way to stop the
invasion was to conduct a mass migration to Iraq. A migration in
which people from around the world, especially western citizens,
would position themselves at sites in Iraq that are supposed to be
protected by international law, but which are routinely bombed
when it is only Iraqi, Palestinian, generally non-white, western
lives who will be killed. I felt 10,000 such people could stop
the invasion, or at the very least, expose the invasion for what
it was from the start, an act of international aggression, a war
crime and a crime against humanity.
When our two double decker busses travelled from London to Baghdad
through Turkey, it was ever clear that the people of Turkey also
could sense the power of this act, and they were the biggest
participants in it. In the end we did not get the numbers
required to stop the war, with at least one million Iraqi’s dead
as a result, but I remain convinced that it was within our power
to prevent the invasion. A massive opportunity lost as far as I
am concerned.
In 2007 I joined the Free Gaza Movement with its plan to challenge
the blockade of Gaza by travelling to Gaza by sea. From the
moment I heard of the plan I knew it could succeed and ultimately
I served as a captain on the first attempt. The Israeli
government said throughout our preparation that we were no better
than pirates and they would treat us as such. They made clear we
would not reach Gaza. And still I knew we could succeed. And we
did. Two boats with 46 passengers from various countries managed
to sail into Gaza on August 23, 2010; this was the first time this
had been done in 41 years. The truth is the blockade of Gaza is
far more than three years old, and yet we, a small group of
conscientious people defied the Israeli machine and celebrated
with tens of thousands of Gazans when we arrived that day. We
proved that it could be done. We proved that an intelligent plan,
with skilled manipulation of the media, could render the full
might of the Israeli Navy useless. And I knew then that this was
only the tip of the iceberg.
So participating in the Freedom Flotilla is like a family reunion
to me. It is my long lost family whose conscience is their guide,
who have shed the fear, who act with humanity. But I was
especially proud to join IHH and the Turkish elements of the
flotilla. I deeply admire the strength and character of the
Turkish people, despite your history having stains of injustice,
like every nation, you are today from citizen to Prime Minister
among the leaders in the cause of humanity and justice.
I remember being asked durýng the TJP Human Shield Action to Iraq
if I was a pacifist, I responded with a quote from Gandhi by
saying I am not a passive anything. To the contrary I believe in
action, and I also believe in self-defence, 100%, without
reservation. I would be incapable of standing by while a tyrant
murders my family, and the attack on the Mavri Mamara was like an
attack on my Palestinian family. I am proud to have stood
shoulder to shoulder with those who refused to let a rogue Israeli
military exert their will without a fight. And yes, we fought.
When I was asked, in the event of an Israeli attack on the Mavri
Mamara, would I use the camera, or would I defend the ship? I
enthusiasticly committed to defence of the ship. Although I am
also a huge supporter of non-violence, in fact I believe
non-violence must always be the first option. Nonetheless I
joined the defence of the Mavri Mamarra understanding that
violence could be used against us and that we may very well be
compelled to use violence in self defence.
I said this straight to Israeli agents, probably of Mossad or Shin
Bet, and I say it again now, on the morning of the attack I was
directly involved in the disarming of two Israeli Commandos. This
was a forcible, non-negotiable, separation of weapons from
commandos who had already murdered two brothers that I had seen
that day. One brother with a bullet entering dead center in his
forehead, in what appeared to be an execution. I knew the
commandos were murdering when I removed a 9mm pistol from one of
them. I had that gun in my hands and as an ex-US Marine with
training in the use of guns it was completely within my power to
use that gun on the commando who may have been the murderer of one
of my brothers. But that is not what I, nor any other defender of
the ship did. I took that weapon away, removed the bullets,
proper lead bullets, separated them from the weapon and hid the
gun. I did this in the hopes that we would repel the attack and
submit this weapon as evidence in a criminal trial against Israeli
authorities for mass murder.
I also helped to physically separate one commando from his assault
rifle, which another brother apparently through into the sea. I
and hundreds of others know the truth that makes a mockery of the
brave and moral Israeli military. We had in our full possession,
three completely disarmed and helpless commandos. These boys were
at our mercy, they were out of reach of their fellow murderers,
inside the ship and surrounded by 100 or more men. I looked into
the eyes of all three of these boys and I can tell you they had
the fear of God in them. They looked at us as if we were them,
and I have no doubt they did not believe there was any way they
would survive that day. They looked like frightened children in
the face of an abusive father.
But they did not face an enemy as ruthless as they. Instead the
woman provided basic first aid, and ultimately they were released,
battered and bruised for sure, but alive. Able to live another
day. Able to feel the sun over head and the embrace of loved
ones. Unlike those they murdered. Despite mourning the loss of
our brothers, feeling rage towards these boys, we let them go.
The Israeli prostitutes of propaganda can spew all of their
disgusting bile all they wish, the commandos are the murders, we
are the defenders, and yet we fought. We fought not just for our
lives, not just for our cargo, not just for the people of
Palestine, we fought in the name of justice and humanity. We were
right to do so, in every way.
While in Israeli custody I, along with everyone else was subjected
to endless abuse and flagrant acts of disrespect. Women and
elderly were physically and mentally assaulted. Access to food
and water and toilets was denied. Dogs were used against us, we
ourselves were treated like dogs. We were exposed to direct sun
in stress positions while hand cuffed to the point of losing
circulation of blood in our hands. We were lied to incessantly,
in fact I am awed at the routineness and comfort in their ability
to lie, it is remarkable really. We were abused in just about
every way imaginable and I myself was beaten and choked to the
point of blacking out… and I was beaten again while in my cell.
In all this what I saw more than anything else were cowards… and
yet I also see my brothers. Because no matter how vile and wrong
the Israeli agents and government are, they are still my brothers
and sisters and for now I only have pity for them. Because they
are relinquishing the most precious thing a human being has, their
humanity.
In conclusion; I would like to challenge every endorser of Gandhi,
every person who thinks they understand him, who acknowledges him
as one of the great souls of our time (which is just about every
western leader), I challenge you in the form of a question.
Please explain how we, the defenders of the Mavri Mamarra, are not
the modern example of Gandhi’s essence? But first read the words
of Gandhi himself.
I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice
and violence, I would advise violence.... I would rather have
India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she
should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness
to her own dishonour. – Gandhi
And lastly I have one more challenge. I challenge any critic of
merit, publicly, to debate me on a large stage over our actions
that day. I would especially love to debate with any Israeli leader
who accuses us of wrongdoing, it would be my tremendous pleasure
to face off with you. All I saw in Israel was cowards with guns,
so I am ripe to see you in a new context. I want to debate with
you on the largest stage possible. Take that as an open challenge
and let us see just how brave Israeli leaders are.
I write to inform you about Ken O'Keefe, who was aboard the Mavi Marmara when it was stormed by the Israeli military in the earlyhours ofMonday 31st May, towed to Ashdod Port in Israel and all its passengersdetained.
Ken was transferred to Ben Gurion Airport on Wednesdayand wasdue to be deported by the Israeli authorities to Istanbul, and thenrepatriatedto Dublin by the Irish officials. He refused deportation and demandedthathe be sent to Gaza, or the Occupied Palestinian Territories, using hisPalestinian travel documents (he was awarded Palestinian citizenshipwhen hecaptained one of the two Free Gaza boats into Gaza in August 2008). TheIsraelis acknowledge that he is a Palestinian citizen, but refused hisdemand onthe basis that his passport was invalid since it had not beenregistered.
The general atmosphere in the airport on Wednesdaywas quitechaotic, and a scuffle broke out. Ken was bashed on the forehead andthenbadly beaten by the Israeli officials/police. He has a large bloodygashon his head, and some bruised ribs. When I spoke with him he had ahoarse,croaky voice. He had been put in a head lock until he nearly passedout. His aggressor released Ken at the last possible moment. Kenrefused medical attention because he was not allowed access to a lawyer,nor washe being allowed to make phone calls.
On Thursday Ken's case wentbeforea judge who ruled that he be detained pending deportation (Ken wanted tobereleased without charge).
Having already been complaining ofdizzinessfollowing his first beating by Israeli police, Ken was beaten again thatnightin his cell. Again, he has refused treatment for his injuries. Kenwas unable to eat for a few days as his throat was sore following beingheld ina head lock on Wednesday.
He wanted to appeal his deportation andgo toGaza, but his solicitor advised him that for his own safety he shouldleaveIsrael. The longer he stays, the greater the detriment to hishealth. On Friday morning he signed his Emergency Travel Documentsprovided to him by the Irish Consulate and was booked onto a flight toIstanbul.
Israeli officials asked him to clean himself up as hisface wasbloody and he was quite dishevelled. He refused, as he wanted the worldtosee what had happened to him. The officials threatened to keep him incustody unless he co-operates, but he called their bluff, and wasallowed toboard his flight to Istanbul as he was. He was met by Irish Embassystaffand a press conference. He also gave an interview with Turkishnewspaperthe Hurriyet, which was featured on the front page. Prior to the pressconference he had issued the following statement:
"I want todiscussmy role in defending the ship and disarming two Israeli commandos alongwithconditions and treatment while in Israeli custody, including twobeatings at thehands of Israeli agents."
Ken will depart Istanbul on Monday7th Junefor Dublin, where he will stay for two days before returning home to hiswifeand baby son on Wednesday 9th June.
Please find attached apersonalstatement written by Ken in Istanbul, along with photographs taken onhisarrival to Istanbul.
Press conferences are being arranged inDublin andLondon. Please contact me if you would like to interview Ken.
Bestwishes,
Fadwa Dajani
(Mrs O'Keefe)
Overgrown and completely hidden, Hawea heiau sat there for hundreds of years until developers came along with plans for condominiums on the site.
That’s when Kaleo Paik and others knew they had to spring into action.
And that’s also when Kaleo saw Pahua, another ancient heiau sitting at the end of a dead end street in a Hawai`i Kai neighborhood – but completely and beautifully restored.
Having the largest fishpond anywhere in Hawai`i and once anciently home to thousands, Hawea will sit silent no more.
Join us on our amazing adventure as Kaleo takes us to see both heiau - Hawea before restoration, and Pahua as an example of what can be all this week on Hawai`i’s award winning Voices Of Truth – One-On-One With Hawai`i’s Future.
MONDAY, June 7th At 6:30 PM – Maui – Akaku, Channel 53
MONDAY, June 7th At 7:00 PM & FRIDAY, June 11th At 5:30 PM – Hawai`i Island – Na Leo, Channel 53
THURSDAY, June 10th At 8:30 PM & FRIDAY, June 11th At 8:30 AM - Kaua`i – Ho`ike, Channel 52
SATURDAY, June 12th At 8:00 PM – O`ahu, `Olelo, Channel 53
"Moving Mountains – A Visit With Kaleo Paik"
“Listen to what the land has to say, because it will speak to you.” Those words kept coming back to Kaleo Paik as she contemplated the task of restoring Hawea heiau, one of Hawai`i’s ancient wahi pana, or sacred places. Kaleo shows us Pahua, a breathtaking heiau from 1400 AD completely restored today and reveals the surprising connection between the two. Don’t miss our amazing visit with Kaleo where you’ll get a real feel for what it was like to be in ancient Hawai`i - Watch It Here
Now you can become a fan of Voices Of Truth on Facebook by clicking Here and see behind the scenes photos of our shows and a whole lot more.
Voices Of Truth now airs in Cape Town, South Africa, Sweden and 23 cities across the US. Check your local listings.
If you support our issues on the Free Hawai`i Broadcasting Network, please email this to a friend to help us continue. A donation today helps further our work. Every single penny counts.
Donating is easy on our Voices Of Truth website via PayPal where you can watch Voices Of Truth anytime.
For news and issues that affect you, watch Free Hawai`i TV, a part of the Free Hawai`i Broadcasting Network.
Please share our Free Hawai`i Broadcasting Network videos with friends and colleagues. That's how we grow. Mahalo.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=369e78cc-6737-41f5-9b67-1bf1e0fb07e7)
Get Yours HERE
I have been busy with work. I have five pending deals. When they close I donate 10% of each to Aha Punana Leo. However unfortunately there was small kine dramaz on my good friend's birthday which was a hoailona. I don't know what they are teaching in schools these days but when I was a child talking back to any elder was never tolerated. Nowadays whoa boy. Some youth talk back. I was never allowed to talk back. I still am not. They give me mana cracks if I do. Irrelevant if I graduated from college. Irrelevant if I am wearing a blue suit. Irrelevant if I am ali'i LOL They give me mana cracks if I talk back. Some people these days though WOW.
I am very very disappointed because it reflects poorly on the makua. Very very poorly. I also find it odd how disrespecting Hawaiian women is very common so more worse... the makua.
One thing that I say is do not expect others to respect Hawaiians when you yourself do not respect other Hawaiians. For example with the Brescias of this world. Do not expect them to respect Hawaiians if YOU do not either.
Yet some people act all disappointed that Brescia "won." Is it surprising that he says "F*ck you" to us when some Hawaiians say "F*ck you" to other Hawaiians. It should not be at all surprising. I am also not surprised that a well-known and well-respected Hawaiian in the community who shall remain nameless said "F*ck you" to me and called me an asshole both which were uncalled for. While it is the first time another Hawaiian has ever said that to me (LOL) people should not be surprised because if we no respect EACH OTHER... no expect others to respect US den ack all surprised when they don't!
Oh and no worry about me. Kelea and Kanaloa going take kea of him. I leave it in their hands to haunt him in his dreams AND in the water LOL
My mom asks me why I bother donating to Hawaiian-based causes because she knows that some Hawaiians have been assholes to me. I still donate. I won't stop just because a few Hawaiians are jerks to me. Not all Hawaiians are jerks lidat das why so no this will NOT change me donating to Hawaiian-based causes that I value and that I believe in.
Anyway the media has been portraying Obama as though he is doing something. He hasn't done much. Eleven lives lost. Nothing was done about that. Oil already made it's way to Pensacola, Florida and is near my adopted town near Clearwater Beach.
A detailed computer modeling study released today indicates that oil from the massive spill in the Gulf of Mexico might soon extend along thousands of miles of the Atlantic coast and open ocean as early as this
summer. The modeling results are captured in a series of dramatic animations produced by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and collaborators. They predict it will hit Tampa/Clearwater/Clearwater Beach:
Wanna talk about kicking elemu, making heads roll, and kicking elemu.
You make them pay like how Governor Charlie Crist has already done.
$25 million http://www.flgov.com/pdfs/20100525_bptourism.pdf
and another $50 million http://miamiherald.typepad.com/files/2010.6.3-letter-to-bp-50m-preparation1.pdf
and another $50 million http://miamiherald.typepad.com/files/2010.6.3-letter-to-bp-50m-preparation1.pdf
THAT is called action.
Don't be fooled by Obama LOL
Pic of 2 of my 5 raised beds. This one has cucumbers, zucchini, and yellow squash on the far left. Tomatoes which are visible. Then in the foreground and far right which is not visible I have baby bok choy, beans, and Chinese cabbage.
The raised bed that my husband and I worked on last weekend. I have more cucumbers, more zucchini, bell peppers, eggplants, and more tomatoes:
Before
After
SustAINAbility. TRUE sustAINAbility LOL I'm not an expert but I only spend once or twice per week tending to my garden. It's so easy!
http://www.squarefootgardening.com
Hulo!
Hawai`i is not, and has never been in or a part of the United States.
So you cannot secede from something you've never been legally part of.
You cannot quit something you didn’t join. You cannot resign from something to which you don’t belong. You cannot divorce from someone to whom you were never married.
Hawai`i regaining its independent status is a matter of reinstatement; of putting something back into its rightful place.
Since Hawai`i was never lawfully made a part of the United States, its rightful place is still that of a sovereign, independent nation.
The current status of Hawai`i is that it’s people, lands and government are being held captive by the US.
The Hawai`i independence movement is not seeking to secede from a bad union, it is seeking freedom from captivity, and the freedom to resume Hawaii’s status as a sovereign and independent nation.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=1589d8ed-85e2-461b-843a-6eac8a8c8168)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=57ec9863-5afd-469d-b0a9-1321db00573d)
Hawaiian national sues President Obama in Federal Court in Washington, D.C.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Kane`ohe, Hawaiian Islands, June 1, 2010 - Dr. David Keanu Sai, a national of the Hawaiian Kingdom, today filed a complaint in Federal Court in Washington, D.C., against U.S. President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State Clinton, U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Pacific Command Commander Admiral Willard and Hawai`i Governor Lingle for violation of an 1893 Executive Agreement between the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom and is seeking punitive damages of $10 million dollars for malicious indictment, prosecution and conviction of a so-called felony. The Defendants have 60 days from date of service to file an answer to the complaint.
Additional Materials and Information
* Hawaiian Kingdom laws and history
Dr. Sai has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Hawai`i at Manoa specializing in international relations and public law, with particular emphasis on the legal and political history of the Hawaiian Kingdom. His doctoral dissertation is titled "The American Occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom: Beginning the Transition from Occupied to Restored State." Dr. Sai also served as lead agent in international arbitration proceedings (Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague, Netherlands (1999-2001); filed a Complaint with the United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001; and has numerous articles on the legal status of the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent State.
In the Federal complaint filed today, Dr. Sai alleges the violation of an executive agreement entered into between Queen Lili`uokalani of the Hawaiian Kingdom and President Grover Cleveland of the United States in 1893, whereby Hawaiian executive power was temporarily and conditionally assigned to the President to administer Hawaiian Kingdom law throughout the Hawaiian Islands. This executive agreement, known as the Lili`uokalani assignment (January 17, 1893), was assigned under threat of war, and binds President Cleveland's successors in office in the administration of Hawaiian Kingdom law until such time as the Hawaiian Kingdom government has been restored in accordance with a second executive agreement between the Queen and President, known as the Agreement of restoration (December 18, 1893), whereupon the executive power would be returned and the Hawaiian Kingdom would grant amnesty to those individuals who participated or supported the 1893 insurrection.
In U.S. v. Belmont (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that executive agreements entered into between the President and a sovereign nation does not require ratification from the U.S. Senate to have the force and effect of a treaty; and executive agreements bind successor Presidents for their faithful execution. Other landmark cases on executive agreements are U.S. v. Pink (1942) and American Insurance Association v. Garamendi (2003). In Garamendi, the Court stated, "Specifically, the President has authority to make 'executive agreements' with other countries, requiring no ratification by the Senate or approval by Congress." Dr. Sai alleges that President Barack Obama, being the successor in office to President Cleveland, is legally bound to administer the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom until the Hawaiian Kingdom government is restored in accordance with the Agreement of restoration.
The suit was filed under Title 28, United States Code, §1350, "Alien's action for tort," for maliciously prosecuting and convicting Dr. Sai for complying with Hawaiian Kingdom law, whereby the prosecution and conviction were violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment; the 1907 Hague Convention, IV; and the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV. §1350 provides that "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States."
In the complaint, it states that the Hawaiian Kingdom became a full member of the Universal Postal Union in 1882, and currently has treaties with Austria-Hungary (June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium (October 4, 1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark (Oct. 19, 1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany (March 25, 1879); Great Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain's New South Wales (March 10, 1874), now Australia; Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy (July 22, 1863); Japan (Aug. 19, 1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands (October 16, 1862); Portugal (May 5, 1882); Russia (June 19, 1869); Samoa (March 20, 1887); Spain (October 9, 1863); Sweden and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland (July 20, 1864); and the United States of America (December 20, 1849).
On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen and political organizations representing the people of Hawai`i that was filed with the U.S. State Department in the summer of 1897, and a 21,269 signature petition protesting annexation that was also filed with the U.S. Senate on December 9, 1897 by Senator George Hoar (R-MA). On August 12, 1898, the Hawaiian Kingdom was occupied during the Spanish-American War and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation under the guise of a U.S. territory. Presently, Hawai`i serves as headquarters for the largest U.S. Unified Combatant Command in the world, the U.S. Pacific Command, which controls 20.6% of lands (nearly 200,000 acres) throughout the islands under troop commands of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. The complaint alleges that the U.S. military's presence has been and continues to be a violation of the Hawaiian Kingdom's status as a Neutral State under international law and the laws of occupation.
According to the complaint, the United States misrepresented Hawai`i to be a part of the United States since the Spanish-American War by enacting Congressional laws claiming to have annexed the Hawaiian Islands in 1898; to have established the Territory of Hawaii in 1900; and to have transformed the Territory of Hawai`i into the State of Hawai`i in 1959. The complaint alleges that these actions by the Congress are in direct violation of the 1893 executive agreements, and that the Congress has no force and effect beyond U.S. territory.
In a 1988 U.S. Department of Justice legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel, acting Assistant Attorney General Douglas Kmiec stated, "It isŠunclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of Hawaii can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of sovereignty over an extended territorial sea." According to Dr. Sai, "The U.S. Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 by passing a joint resolution when it was at war with Spain, than it could annex Afghanistan today by passing a joint resolution while fighting the war on terrorism. U.S. laws do not have extraterritorial force and are limited and confined to U.S. territory. Only through a treaty of cession with the Hawaiian Kingdom could Hawai`i's territorial sovereignty be ceded or transferred to the United States, the 1893 executive agreements and other international treaties being superseded, and only thereafter could Congressional laws be legally enforced throughout the Hawaiian Islands without violating international law."
Among the alleged misrepresentations that the United States made to the international community:
· That the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands was lawfully ceded to the United States by a treaty of cession in 1898;
· That the international treaties between the Hawaiian Kingdom and other sovereign States were superseded by the United States' treaties with those States;
· That United States laws and not Hawaiian Kingdom laws governed the Hawaiian Islands to include taxation, tariffs and duties; and
· That the Hawaiian Islands is the territory of the United States through the State of Hawai`i and not the Hawaiian Kingdom, being a sovereign State, which has been under prolonged occupation since the Spanish-American War.
Dr. Sai's complaint alleges Obama, Clinton, Gates, Willard and Lingle with violating the Lili`uokalani assignment, the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV, and for allowing the State of Hawai`i to have maliciously indicted, prosecuted and convicted Dr. Sai of a manufactured felony count of attempted theft of real property on March 7, 2000 for adhering to Hawaiian Kingdom laws, which by definition constitutes a "war crime" under Title 18 U.S.C. §2441(c)(1). The complaint seeks a permanent injunction, including punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, to prevent and remedy any violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment and the international laws of occupation.
# # #
For more information about this law suit, contact:
Dr. Keanu Sai at: 808-383-6100 or email: keanu.sai@gmail.com
Aloha Kakou,
Thank you to everyone who provided comments specific to your individual areas of work and involvement with regards to collectively shaping the definition of an agricultural water consumer.
As a result of the continued dialogue, we were successful in bringing the bill back to the Council's Water Resources (WR) Committee for more discussion to ensure a fair and equitable definition for all ranges of agriculture activity in Maui County.
This is to update you that the WR Committee met yesterday on 06/01/10, and while nothing was passed out of committee, there appears to be a consensus to define the income portion of the definition from between $1,000 - $5,000.
Furthermore, a definition for community gardens has been added, but will most likely be amended to include more specifics. For example, the Water Director recommended a specific area of 22,000 sq. ft. or ½ acre and a specific number of ten participants be included in the definition. The Director, however, did not include a basis for this recommendation, so further justification will be needed in this area. The other entity recognized in the current draft is the non-profit entity.
One area that was raised in testimony by a federal agency is the inclusion of subsistence activity for food and fiber provided to Maui County. We will need to work this factor into the language of the bill - again to provide fair and equal access to all levels of agriculture.
As a side comment, the previous draft bill that included a minimum revenue amount of $10,000, was noted as being in conflict with a 1975 Federal definition of a farm, and the 2008 Farm Bill guidelines which supports farmers whose annual revenue is a minimum of $1,000.00.
If you would like to receive a copy of the new bill draft or the 2007 National Agriculture Statistics Survey for Maui County, please leave me a message with your email address and I will forward it to you as soon as possible.
Mahalo,
Sol P. Kaho`ohalahala
Thank you to everyone who provided comments specific to your individual areas of work and involvement with regards to collectively shaping the definition of an agricultural water consumer.
As a result of the continued dialogue, we were successful in bringing the bill back to the Council's Water Resources (WR) Committee for more discussion to ensure a fair and equitable definition for all ranges of agriculture activity in Maui County.
This is to update you that the WR Committee met yesterday on 06/01/10, and while nothing was passed out of committee, there appears to be a consensus to define the income portion of the definition from between $1,000 - $5,000.
Furthermore, a definition for community gardens has been added, but will most likely be amended to include more specifics. For example, the Water Director recommended a specific area of 22,000 sq. ft. or ½ acre and a specific number of ten participants be included in the definition. The Director, however, did not include a basis for this recommendation, so further justification will be needed in this area. The other entity recognized in the current draft is the non-profit entity.
One area that was raised in testimony by a federal agency is the inclusion of subsistence activity for food and fiber provided to Maui County. We will need to work this factor into the language of the bill - again to provide fair and equal access to all levels of agriculture.
As a side comment, the previous draft bill that included a minimum revenue amount of $10,000, was noted as being in conflict with a 1975 Federal definition of a farm, and the 2008 Farm Bill guidelines which supports farmers whose annual revenue is a minimum of $1,000.00.
If you would like to receive a copy of the new bill draft or the 2007 National Agriculture Statistics Survey for Maui County, please leave me a message with your email address and I will forward it to you as soon as possible.
Mahalo,
Sol P. Kaho`ohalahala
Hawaiian national sues President Obama in Federal Court in Washington, D.C.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Kane`ohe, Hawaiian Islands, June 1, 2010 — Dr. David Keanu Sai, a national of the Hawaiian Kingdom, today filed a complaint in Federal Court in Washington, D.C., against U.S. President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State Clinton, U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Pacific Command Commander Admiral Willard and Hawai`i Governor Lingle for violation of an 1893 Executive Agreement between the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom and is seeking punitive damages of $10 million dollars for malicious indictment, prosecution and conviction of a so-called felony. The Defendants have 60 days from date of service to file an answer to the complaint.
Additional Materials and Information
• Hawaiian Kingdom laws and history
Dr. Sai has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Hawai`i at Manoa specializing in international relations and public law, with particular emphasis on the legal and political history of the Hawaiian Kingdom. His doctoral dissertation is titled “The American Occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom: Beginning the Transition from Occupied to Restored State.” Dr. Sai also served as lead agent in international arbitration proceedings (Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague, Netherlands (1999-2001); filed a Complaint with the United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001; and has numerous articles on the legal status of the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent State.
In the Federal complaint filed today, Dr. Sai alleges the violation of an executive agreement entered into between Queen Lili`uokalani of the Hawaiian Kingdom and President Grover Cleveland of the United States in 1893, whereby Hawaiian executive power was temporarily and conditionally assigned to the President to administer Hawaiian Kingdom law throughout the Hawaiian Islands. This executive agreement, known as the Lili`uokalani assignment (January 17, 1893), was assigned under threat of war, and binds President Cleveland’s successors in office in the administration of Hawaiian Kingdom law until such time as the Hawaiian Kingdom government has been restored in accordance with a second executive agreement between the Queen and President, known as the Agreement of restoration (December 18, 1893), whereupon the executive power would be returned and the Hawaiian Kingdom would grant amnesty to those individuals who participated or supported the 1893 insurrection.
In U.S. v. Belmont (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that executive agreements entered into between the President and a sovereign nation does not require ratification from the U.S. Senate to have the force and effect of a treaty; and executive agreements bind successor Presidents for their faithful execution. Other landmark cases on executive agreements are U.S. v. Pink (1942) and American Insurance Association v. Garamendi (2003). In Garamendi, the Court stated, “Specifically, the President has authority to make ‘executive agreements’ with other countries, requiring no ratification by the Senate or approval by Congress.” Dr. Sai alleges that President Barack Obama, being the successor in office to President Cleveland, is legally bound to administer the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom until the Hawaiian Kingdom government is restored in accordance with the Agreement of restoration.
The suit was filed under Title 28, United States Code, §1350, “Alien’s action for tort,” for maliciously prosecuting and convicting Dr. Sai for complying with Hawaiian Kingdom law, whereby the prosecution and conviction were violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment; the 1907 Hague Convention, IV; and the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV. §1350 provides that “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.”
In the complaint, it states that the Hawaiian Kingdom became a full member of the Universal Postal Union in 1882, and currently has treaties with Austria-Hungary (June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium (October 4, 1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark (Oct. 19, 1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany (March 25, 1879); Great Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain’s New South Wales (March 10, 1874), now Australia; Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy (July 22, 1863); Japan (Aug. 19, 1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands (October 16, 1862); Portugal (May 5, 1882); Russia (June 19, 1869); Samoa (March 20, 1887); Spain (October 9, 1863); Sweden and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland (July 20, 1864); and the United States of America (December 20, 1849).
On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen and political organizations representing the people of Hawai`i that was filed with the U.S. State Department in the summer of 1897, and a 21,269 signature petition protesting annexation that was also filed with the U.S. Senate on December 9, 1897 by Senator George Hoar (R-MA). On August 12, 1898, the Hawaiian Kingdom was occupied during the Spanish-American War and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation under the guise of a U.S. territory. Presently, Hawai`i serves as headquarters for the largest U.S. Unified Combatant Command in the world, the U.S. Pacific Command, which controls 20.6% of lands (nearly 200,000 acres) throughout the islands under troop commands of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. The complaint alleges that the U.S. military’s presence has been and continues to be a violation of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s status as a Neutral State under international law and the laws of occupation.
According to the complaint, the United States misrepresented Hawai`i to be a part of the United States since the Spanish-American War by enacting Congressional laws claiming to have annexed the Hawaiian Islands in 1898; to have established the Territory of Hawaii in 1900; and to have transformed the Territory of Hawai`i into the State of Hawai`i in 1959. The complaint alleges that these actions by the Congress are in direct violation of the 1893 executive agreements, and that the Congress has no force and effect beyond U.S. territory.
In a 1988 U.S. Department of Justice legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel, acting Assistant Attorney General Douglas Kmiec stated, “It is…unclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of Hawaii can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of sovereignty over an extended territorial sea.” According to Dr. Sai, “The U.S. Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 by passing a joint resolution when it was at war with Spain, than it could annex Afghanistan today by passing a joint resolution while fighting the war on terrorism. U.S. laws do not have extraterritorial force and are limited and confined to U.S. territory. Only through a treaty of cession with the Hawaiian Kingdom could Hawai`i’s territorial sovereignty be ceded or transferred to the United States, the 1893 executive agreements and other international treaties being superseded, and only thereafter could Congressional laws be legally enforced throughout the Hawaiian Islands without violating international law.”
Among the alleged misrepresentations that the United States made to the international community:
- That the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands was lawfully ceded to the United States by a treaty of cession in 1898;
- That the international treaties between the Hawaiian Kingdom and other sovereign States were superseded by the United States’ treaties with those States;
- That United States laws and not Hawaiian Kingdom laws governed the Hawaiian Islands to include taxation, tariffs and duties; and
- That the Hawaiian Islands is the territory of the United States through the State of Hawai`i and not the Hawaiian Kingdom, being a sovereign State, which has been under prolonged occupation since the Spanish-American War.
Dr. Sai’s complaint alleges Obama, Clinton, Gates, Willard and Lingle with violating the Lili`uokalani assignment, the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV, and for allowing the State of Hawai`i to have maliciously indicted, prosecuted and convicted Dr. Sai of a manufactured felony count of attempted theft of real property on March 7, 2000 for adhering to Hawaiian Kingdom laws, which by definition constitutes a “war crime” under Title 18 U.S.C. §2441(c)(1). The complaint seeks a permanent injunction, including punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, to prevent and remedy any violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment and the international laws of occupation.
# # #
For more information about this law suit, contact:
Dr. Keanu Sai at: 808-383-6100 or email: keanu.sai@gmail.com
Hawaiian national sues President Obama in Federal Court in Washington,
D.C.
D.C.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Kane`ohe, Hawaiian Islands, June 1, 2010 - Dr. David Keanu Sai, a
national of the Hawaiian Kingdom, today filed a complaint in Federal
Court in
Washington, D.C., against U.S. President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State
Clinton,
U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Pacific Command Commander Admiral
Willard
and Hawai`i Governor Lingle for violation of an 1893 Executive Agreement
between
the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom and is seeking punitive
damages of
$10 million dollars for malicious indictment, prosecution and conviction
of a
so-called felony. The Defendants have 60 days from date of service to
file an
answer to the complaint.
national of the Hawaiian Kingdom, today filed a complaint in Federal
Court in
Washington, D.C., against U.S. President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State
Clinton,
U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Pacific Command Commander Admiral
Willard
and Hawai`i Governor Lingle for violation of an 1893 Executive Agreement
between
the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom and is seeking punitive
damages of
$10 million dollars for malicious indictment, prosecution and conviction
of a
so-called felony. The Defendants have 60 days from date of service to
file an
answer to the complaint.
Additional Materials and Information
Dr. Sai has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Hawai`i at
Manoa specializing in international relations and public law, with
particular
emphasis on the legal and political history of the Hawaiian Kingdom. His
doctoral
dissertation is titled "The American Occupation of the Hawaiian
Kingdom:
Beginning the Transition from Occupied to Restored State." Dr. Sai also
served
as lead agent in international arbitration proceedings (Larsen
v. Hawaiian
Kingdom) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague,
Netherlands
(1999-2001); filed a Complaint
with the
United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001; and has numerous articles
on the legal
status of the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent State.
Manoa specializing in international relations and public law, with
particular
emphasis on the legal and political history of the Hawaiian Kingdom. His
doctoral
dissertation is titled "The American Occupation of the Hawaiian
Kingdom:
Beginning the Transition from Occupied to Restored State." Dr. Sai also
served
as lead agent in international arbitration proceedings (Larsen
v. Hawaiian
Kingdom) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague,
Netherlands
(1999-2001); filed a Complaint
with the
United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001; and has numerous articles
on the legal
status of the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent State.
In the Federal complaint filed today, Dr. Sai alleges the violation of an
executive agreement entered into between Queen Lili`uokalani of the
Hawaiian
Kingdom and President Grover Cleveland of the United States in 1893,
whereby
Hawaiian executive power was temporarily and conditionally assigned to
the
President to administer Hawaiian Kingdom law throughout the Hawaiian
Islands.
This executive agreement, known as the Lili`uokalani
assignment (January 17, 1893), was assigned under threat of war,
and
binds President Cleveland's successors in office in the administration
of
Hawaiian Kingdom law until such time as the Hawaiian Kingdom government
has been
restored in accordance with a second executive agreement between the
Queen and
President, known as the Agreement of
restoration (December 18, 1893), whereupon the executive power
would be
returned and the Hawaiian Kingdom would grant amnesty to those
individuals who
participated or supported the 1893 insurrection.
executive agreement entered into between Queen Lili`uokalani of the
Hawaiian
Kingdom and President Grover Cleveland of the United States in 1893,
whereby
Hawaiian executive power was temporarily and conditionally assigned to
the
President to administer Hawaiian Kingdom law throughout the Hawaiian
Islands.
This executive agreement, known as the Lili`uokalani
assignment (January 17, 1893), was assigned under threat of war,
and
binds President Cleveland's successors in office in the administration
of
Hawaiian Kingdom law until such time as the Hawaiian Kingdom government
has been
restored in accordance with a second executive agreement between the
Queen and
President, known as the Agreement of
restoration (December 18, 1893), whereupon the executive power
would be
returned and the Hawaiian Kingdom would grant amnesty to those
individuals who
participated or supported the 1893 insurrection.
In U.S. v.
Belmont (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that executive
agreements entered into between the President and a sovereign nation
does not
require ratification from the U.S. Senate to have the force and effect
of a
treaty; and executive agreements bind successor Presidents for their
faithful
execution. Other landmark cases on executive agreements are U.S. v.
Pink (1942) and
American
Insurance
Association v. Garamendi (2003). In Garamendi, the Court
stated,
"Specifically, the President has authority to make 'executive
agreements' with
other countries, requiring no ratification by the Senate or approval by
Congress." Dr. Sai alleges that President Barack Obama, being the
successor in
office to President Cleveland, is legally bound to administer the laws
of the
Hawaiian Kingdom until the Hawaiian Kingdom government is restored in
accordance
with the Agreement of restoration.
Belmont (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that executive
agreements entered into between the President and a sovereign nation
does not
require ratification from the U.S. Senate to have the force and effect
of a
treaty; and executive agreements bind successor Presidents for their
faithful
execution. Other landmark cases on executive agreements are U.S. v.
Pink (1942) and
American
Insurance
Association v. Garamendi (2003). In Garamendi, the Court
stated,
"Specifically, the President has authority to make 'executive
agreements' with
other countries, requiring no ratification by the Senate or approval by
Congress." Dr. Sai alleges that President Barack Obama, being the
successor in
office to President Cleveland, is legally bound to administer the laws
of the
Hawaiian Kingdom until the Hawaiian Kingdom government is restored in
accordance
with the Agreement of restoration.
The suit was filed under Title 28, United States Code, §1350, "Alien's
action for tort," for maliciously prosecuting and convicting Dr. Sai for
complying with Hawaiian Kingdom law, whereby the prosecution and
conviction were
violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment; the 1907 Hague
Convention,
IV; and the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV. §1350 provides that "The
district courts
shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a
tort
only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the
United
States."
action for tort," for maliciously prosecuting and convicting Dr. Sai for
complying with Hawaiian Kingdom law, whereby the prosecution and
conviction were
violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment; the 1907 Hague
Convention,
IV; and the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV. §1350 provides that "The
district courts
shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a
tort
only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the
United
States."
In the complaint, it states that the Hawaiian Kingdom became a full member
of the Universal
Postal Union in 1882,
and currently has treaties with Austria-Hungary
(June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium
(October 4,
1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark
(Oct. 19,
1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany
(March 25,
1879); Great
Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain's New South Wales (March 10,
1874),
now Australia; Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy
(July 22, 1863);
Japan (Aug. 19,
1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands
(October 16, 1862); Portugal
(May 5,
1882); Russia (June
19, 1869); Samoa
(March 20, 1887); Spain
(October 9,
1863); Sweden
and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland
(July 20,
1864); and the United
States of America (December 20, 1849).
of the Universal
Postal Union in 1882,
and currently has treaties with Austria-Hungary
(June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium
(October 4,
1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark
(Oct. 19,
1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany
(March 25,
1879); Great
Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain's New South Wales (March 10,
1874),
now Australia; Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy
(July 22, 1863);
Japan (Aug. 19,
1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands
(October 16, 1862); Portugal
(May 5,
1882); Russia (June
19, 1869); Samoa
(March 20, 1887); Spain
(October 9,
1863); Sweden
and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland
(July 20,
1864); and the United
States of America (December 20, 1849).
On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian
Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint
resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen and political
organizations representing the people of Hawai`i that was filed with
the
U.S. State Department in the summer of 1897, and a 21,269 signature
petition protesting annexation that was also filed with the U.S.
Senate on
December 9, 1897 by Senator George Hoar (R-MA). On August 12, 1898, the
Hawaiian
Kingdom was occupied during the Spanish-American War and the Hawaiian
Kingdom
has since been under prolonged occupation under the guise of a U.S.
territory.
Presently, Hawai`i serves as headquarters for the largest U.S. Unified
Combatant
Command in the world, the U.S. Pacific
Command, which controls 20.6% of lands (nearly 200,000 acres)
throughout the
islands under troop commands of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and
Marines. The
complaint alleges that the U.S. military's presence has been and
continues to be
a violation of the Hawaiian Kingdom's status as a Neutral State under
international law and the laws of occupation.
Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint
resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen and political
organizations representing the people of Hawai`i that was filed with
the
U.S. State Department in the summer of 1897, and a 21,269 signature
petition protesting annexation that was also filed with the U.S.
Senate on
December 9, 1897 by Senator George Hoar (R-MA). On August 12, 1898, the
Hawaiian
Kingdom was occupied during the Spanish-American War and the Hawaiian
Kingdom
has since been under prolonged occupation under the guise of a U.S.
territory.
Presently, Hawai`i serves as headquarters for the largest U.S. Unified
Combatant
Command in the world, the U.S. Pacific
Command, which controls 20.6% of lands (nearly 200,000 acres)
throughout the
islands under troop commands of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and
Marines. The
complaint alleges that the U.S. military's presence has been and
continues to be
a violation of the Hawaiian Kingdom's status as a Neutral State under
international law and the laws of occupation.
According to the complaint, the United States misrepresented Hawai`i to be
a part of the United States since the Spanish-American War by enacting
Congressional laws claiming to have annexed the Hawaiian Islands in
1898; to
have established the Territory of
Hawaii in 1900; and to have transformed the Territory of Hawai`i
into the State of
Hawai`i in 1959. The complaint alleges that these actions by the
Congress
are in direct violation of the 1893 executive agreements, and that the
Congress
has no force and effect beyond U.S. territory.
a part of the United States since the Spanish-American War by enacting
Congressional laws claiming to have annexed the Hawaiian Islands in
1898; to
have established the Territory of
Hawaii in 1900; and to have transformed the Territory of Hawai`i
into the State of
Hawai`i in 1959. The complaint alleges that these actions by the
Congress
are in direct violation of the 1893 executive agreements, and that the
Congress
has no force and effect beyond U.S. territory.
In a 1988 U.S. Department of Justice legal opinion by the Office of Legal
Counsel, acting Assistant Attorney General Douglas Kmiec stated,
"It
isŠunclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it
acquired Hawaii
by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of
Hawaii
can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of
sovereignty over an extended territorial sea." According to Dr. Sai,
"The U.S.
Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 by passing a
joint
resolution when it was at war with Spain, than it could annex
Afghanistan today
by passing a joint resolution while fighting the war on terrorism. U.S.
laws do
not have extraterritorial force and are limited and confined to U.S.
territory.
Only through a treaty of cession with the Hawaiian Kingdom could
Hawai`i's
territorial sovereignty be ceded or transferred to the United States,
the 1893
executive agreements and other international treaties being superseded,
and only
thereafter could Congressional laws be legally enforced throughout the
Hawaiian
Islands without violating international law."
Counsel, acting Assistant Attorney General Douglas Kmiec stated,
"It
isŠunclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it
acquired Hawaii
by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of
Hawaii
can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of
sovereignty over an extended territorial sea." According to Dr. Sai,
"The U.S.
Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 by passing a
joint
resolution when it was at war with Spain, than it could annex
Afghanistan today
by passing a joint resolution while fighting the war on terrorism. U.S.
laws do
not have extraterritorial force and are limited and confined to U.S.
territory.
Only through a treaty of cession with the Hawaiian Kingdom could
Hawai`i's
territorial sovereignty be ceded or transferred to the United States,
the 1893
executive agreements and other international treaties being superseded,
and only
thereafter could Congressional laws be legally enforced throughout the
Hawaiian
Islands without violating international law."
Among the alleged misrepresentations that the United States made to the
international community:
international community:
· That the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands was lawfully ceded to the
United States by a treaty of cession in 1898;
United States by a treaty of cession in 1898;
· That the international treaties between the Hawaiian Kingdom and other
sovereign States were superseded by the United States' treaties with
those
States;
sovereign States were superseded by the United States' treaties with
those
States;
· That United States laws and not Hawaiian Kingdom laws governed the
Hawaiian Islands to include taxation, tariffs and duties; and
Hawaiian Islands to include taxation, tariffs and duties; and
· That the Hawaiian Islands is the territory of the United States through
the State of Hawai`i and not the Hawaiian Kingdom, being a sovereign
State,
which has been under prolonged occupation since the Spanish-American
War.
the State of Hawai`i and not the Hawaiian Kingdom, being a sovereign
State,
which has been under prolonged occupation since the Spanish-American
War.
Dr. Sai's complaint alleges Obama, Clinton, Gates, Willard and Lingle with
violating the Lili`uokalani
assignment, the 1907 Hague
Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva
Convention, IV, and for allowing the State of Hawai`i to have
maliciously
indicted, prosecuted and convicted Dr. Sai of a manufactured felony
count of
attempted theft of real property on March 7, 2000 for adhering to
Hawaiian
Kingdom laws, which by definition constitutes a "war crime" under Title
18 U.S.C. §2441(c)(1). The complaint seeks a permanent injunction,
including
punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, to prevent and remedy
any
violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment and the international
laws of
occupation.
violating the Lili`uokalani
assignment, the 1907 Hague
Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva
Convention, IV, and for allowing the State of Hawai`i to have
maliciously
indicted, prosecuted and convicted Dr. Sai of a manufactured felony
count of
attempted theft of real property on March 7, 2000 for adhering to
Hawaiian
Kingdom laws, which by definition constitutes a "war crime" under Title
18 U.S.C. §2441(c)(1). The complaint seeks a permanent injunction,
including
punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, to prevent and remedy
any
violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment and the international
laws of
occupation.
# # #
For more information about this law suit, contact:
Dr. Keanu Sai at: 808-383-6100 or email: keanu.sai@gmail.com
Brandeisnow - April, 2010
For the third time in the past decade, a Brandeis doctoral dissertation has been judged the best in the nation by The Society of American Historians.
Noelani Arista, an Irving and Rose Crown Fellow who will be awarded her PhD at the university’s commencement in May, has won the 50th annual Allan Nevins Prize for her interdisciplinary thesis, "Histories of Unequal Measure: Euro-American Encounters with Hawaiian Governance and Law, 1793-1827," which she defended in December.
Arista joins an illustrious cast of past winners, including such luminaries as William Freehling and Mary Beth Norton. She also joins two other Brandeis Crown Fellow winners: Jeff Wiltse, PhD'02, won in 2003, and Jessica Lepler, PhD'07, in 2008.
“I feel very honored to win this distinguished prize, especially because my goal was to be able to write a dissertation about Hawai`i and early encounters between Hawai`i and the US in a way that brought Hawaiian history to the attention of the main stream of American history,” Arista said. “That a dissertation that emphasizes Native (Hawaiian) history was awarded this prize I believe is significant.”
Arista, who currently teaches in the History Department at the University of Hawai`i at Manoa, says it was her academic background in Hawaiian culture and language that made her feel at home at Brandeis. “I felt that Brandeis with its own cultural and historical traditions would be a good fit for me in this stage of my development, and I have found it to be a culturally diverse and rich place of seeking after knowledge, a Hawaiian cultural value known as `Imi Loa," Arista said.
Arista was interested in illuminating this unequal history because she felt that American approaches to the study of Hawaiian history have always been written in English language sources and methodological assumptions. It was her goal to draw upon both English and Hawaiian sources to tell a different story about the transformation of Hawaiian government during this period.
“I argue that Hawaiians have their own conceptualization and reality when it comes to history and the interpretation of events, and also make the point that not only linguistic, but cultural literacy is central to telling this history well,” Arista said.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=05f1dc0a-f7f9-4bf5-902e-19a351d3683b)
