All Posts (6434)
Sort by
Text "fan FreeHawaii" To FBOOK (32665) From Your Mobile Phone.You'll Be Added As A Fan Instantly.Standard Charges May Apply.
(This means compliance to the WASP society and values of the U.S.A. as perceived by them.)
******
******
******
******
******
******
WHEREAS to this day, Native Hawaiians remain subject to the final authority of the federal government; and
(It goes further than that; it's about nation TO nation which the U.S.should enter into a treaty situation and of honoring the one it alreadyratified recognizing the Hawaiian Kingdom as a peer to it and thus,relations are dealt by the Secretary of State. This subjugation is thecontinuance of the Manifest Destiny Doctrines as wards of the U.S.,which includes the Papal Bulls of Terra Nullius, Dum Diversas, RomanusPontifex, and Inter Caetera.)
*******
*******
WHEREAS on May 7, 2009, Hawaii’s congressional delegation introduced legislation that would clarify the legal and political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States; and
(This has already been determined in its treaties of friendship andcomity and its recognition of the Kingdom of Hawai'i as its peer;subject to its Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land. The AkakaBill doesn't address this but dictates how it will deal with Hawaiinationals that are native Hawaiians and dismissing those that don'thave the blood.)
******
WHEREAS the measure, otherwise known as the "Akaka Bill," aims toextend the federal policy of self-determination and self-governance toHawaii’s indigenous, native people – Native Hawaiians, therebyestablishing parity in federal policies towards Native Hawaiians,Alaska Natives and American Indians; and
(Here again they promote the myth and deception. The Federal Policy isexpressed in the so-called Peace Treaty of 1871 whereby the U.S Senatedeclares that Indian nations will no longer be recognized as independentpowers with whom treaties can be contracted and assigned Christianmissionaries the task of working with the tribes. This reduces thestatus of the Hawaii nationals to the ranks of a U.S. tribal peoplesubject to the plenary authority of the U.S. Congress and under theSecretary of the Interior and not relations with the Secretary ofState. The notion of a nation within a nation is actually defined as abelligerent occupation. Hawaiians are NOT indigenous tribal people butaboriginal nationals/subjects of the Kingdom of Hawai'i. The Doctrinesof Manifest Destiny prevail in this case.)
WHEREAS the Akaka Bill would:
(1) Authorize the Office of Native Hawaiian Relations in theDepartment of the Interior to serve as a liaison between NativeHawaiians and the federal government;
(It's like dealing with the British subjects but not its government;people of other countries and ignoring their government or nationalstatus.)
(2) Establish the Native Hawaiian Interagency Coordinating Group – aninteragency group to be composed of federal officials from agenciesthat administer Native Hawaiian programs and services; and
(This doesn't fulfill the definition of self-determination and self-governance.)
(3) Establish a process for the reorganization of the Native Hawaiian governing entity; and(It's like dealing with the British subjects but not its government;people of other countries and ignoring their government or nationalstatus.)
(2) Establish the Native Hawaiian Interagency Coordinating Group – aninteragency group to be composed of federal officials from agenciesthat administer Native Hawaiian programs and services; and
(This doesn't fulfill the definition of self-determination and self-governance.)
(This is a usurpation of the still existing, legitimate Kingdom of Hawai'i.)
WHEREAS while the United States Congress has traditionally treated Native Hawaiians in a manner parallel toAmerican Indians and Alaska Natives, the federal policy ofself-governance and self-determination has not been formally extendedto Native Hawaiians; and
(While this is true; it's a charade of hiding the facts of belligerentoccupation, the violations of Hawai'i's neutrality, the act ofethnocide and genocide of the native aboriginal Hawaiians, andprevention of our human rights.)
WHEREAS the Akaka Bill would remedythis discrepancy and extend to Native Hawaiians the policy ofself-governance and self-determination currently practiced by AmericanIndians and Alaska Natives; and
(The only remedy would be for the U.S. to de-occupy the Kingdom ofHawai'i, make restitution and reparations to restore it to its lawfulstatus and its people.)
WHEREAS the Akaka Bill establishes a process for the reorganization of the Native Hawaiian governing entity for the purposes of federal recognition; and
We already have ratified treaties that recognize our sovereignindependence and perpetual friendship by the U.S.A. which is anotherterm for federal recognition.)
WHEREAS the Akaka Bill itself does not extend federal recognition;rather, it simply authorizes the process for federal recognition; and
( More double-talk! Which is it if it doesn't extend federalrecognition but only authorizes a process for it? It would take anotherbill for federal recognition? Why have the Akaka Bill at all? This ismore myths; disinformation and being disingenuous to obfuscate facts.)
WHEREAS the federal government already treats Native Hawaiians as an indigenous population in many respects; and
(If this is true; then why have the Akaka Bill?)
WHEREAS the United States Congress has enacted over one hundred sixtylaws designed to address the conditions of native populations includingNative Hawaiians; and
WHEREAS these federal laws mandate the provision of health care,education, job training, the preservation of native languages, theprotection of Native American graves and the repatriation of NativeAmerican human remains; and
(We aleady see how effective these laws are as it is. Maybe we shouldadvise DLNR of these facts; evidently, they are ignorant and inept intheir ability or desire to carry these things out; of course, we can'texpect much from them as it is.)
******
WHEREAS the National Caucus of Native American State Legislatorsbelieve that the United States Congress and the President of the UnitedStates should favorably consider the Native Hawaiian GovernmentReorganization Act of 2009 to facilitate Native Hawaiians formalfederal recognition as indigenous people, self-governance, and redress;now
(This has nothing to do with proper and legal redress. It's a farcicalactions to do unlawfully what it cannot do lawfully; even by redefiningwho we are.)
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE NATIONAL CAUCUS OF NATIVE AMERICANSTATE LEGISLATORS that the inherent sovereignty of Tribes as recognizedthrough historical treaties and legal relationships that exist betweenTribal Nations and the United States of America is undeniable; and
(Everything that they present is false and contrary to our status; it's deniable that we fit under these definitions.)
**********
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, upon passage of the Native HawaiianGovernment Reorganization Act of 2009, the United States Congress andthe President of the United States are urged to expeditiouslyfacilitate Native Hawaiians formal federal recognition as indigenouspeople, self-governance, and redress.
(This defies sanity, intelligence, rational and reasoning powers. It iscomical if only that they are taking this seriously and morally correctas ultracrepidarian critics.)
Sponsored by: Sen. Brickwood Galuteria (HI), Rep. Pono Chong (HI), Rep.Mele Carroll (HI), Rep. Karen Awana (HI), Rep. Faye Hanohano (HI)
Approved date is: September 25, 2009
Certified by Caucus Chair: Rep. John McCoy (WA)
Ratified certified by: The NCNASL, September 25, 2009
(By signing this, they have joined the snollygoster club ofunscrupulous,unprincipled persons suffering from synesthesia and thefatal oneirataxia.)
Tane
Order Your UnKau Inoa Shirt HERE
Get Yours Today - UnKauInoa.orgOrder HERE
November 15, 2009
Hawaiians may have settled New Zealand
Study of Polynesian canoe designs indicates they made the 4,400-mile voyage south
By Christie Wilson
Advertiser Staff Writer
Study of Polynesian canoe designs indicates they made the 4,400-mile voyage south
By Christie Wilson
Advertiser Staff Writer
A new study of Polynesian canoe designs suggests that New Zealand may have been settled by sea-faring Hawaiians.
The idea that ancient Hawaiians could have made the 4,400-mile journey south shouldn't surprise anyone familiar with recent travels bymodern-day voyagers using traditional navigation methods, according tolead researcher Deborah Rogers of Stanford University's BiologyDepartment.
"These guys were incredible navigators and naturalists. They could tell when they were approaching a group of islands 100 miles out, maybe evenmore," she said.
In fact, members of the Polynesian Voyaging Society took the double-hulled sailing canoe Hokule'a from Hawai'i to New Zealand during a two-yearexpedition in the 1980s.
Crew member Ben Finney, who pioneered the reconstruction and sailing of Polynesian voyaging canoes, said that because of the long distancesinvolved, the trip was made with extraordinary planning and preparation.
"It's possible but not in one shot. We had to sail very carefully by different legs, and each leg had to be timed by season to get theappropriate winds," said Finney, an anthropology professor emeritus atthe University of Hawai'i.
New Zealand, or Aotearoa, was the last Polynesian island group to be settled, and it's not clear who got there first.
Various theories, including a direct Hawai'i link based on similarities in language, mythology and oral history and genealogies , have beenpromoted and dismissed over the past century. Most experts now believeNew Zealand was colonized from the Cook or Society Islands around 1000A.D.
Rogers said her study had two purposes, the first being to see if cultural data can be used to reconstruct population histories, just as genetic data isused in a similar manner. She said the approach could be successfulonly if using cultures, such as the Pacific island groups, that areisolated enough to maintain core traditions despite a certain degree ofcultural exchange with neighboring societies.
The second purpose of the study was to see if the cultural data — in this case, traditional canoe designs — could reveal a settlement sequencefor Polynesia.
Researchers gathered data on functional and symbolic canoe design characteristics for 11 island groups from the authoritative "Canoes of Oceania" by A.C.Haddon and James Hornell, which was published in three volumes from1936 to 1938.
A data matrix noting the presence or absence of nearly 140 design traits was created for each island group, Rogers said. The traits includedwhether vessels were adorned with geometric or human figure carvings,plants, feathers or shells; whether hull seams were caulked or joinedtogether by sennit; and whether the booms (" 'iako" in Hawaiian)attached directly to the float ("ama").
The researchers also developed new techniques to assess how much distances between the islands affected the likelihood of cultural exchanges, shesaid.
A series of analyses done without regard for existing knowledge of Polynesian migration produced results that, for the most part, were consistentwith current thinking on the subject, with a few surprises.
Fiji, at the western edge of Polynesia, is generally accepted as the jumping-off point for settlement of the islands to the east. (The firstpeople of Fiji were from Melanesia.)
According to Rogers, the new research suggested colonization spread from Fiji to the nearest islands — Tonga and Sämoa — followed by the Marquesas, theTuamotus and the Society Islands, which include Tahiti. The study alsoindicated that voyagers from both the Society Islands and the Tuamotusmay have sailed to Hawai'i. (The migration to Hawai'i is believed tohave occurred around 400 A.D.)
"It's well-accepted that Hawai'i was settled from the Societies but not so much from the Tuamotus," Rogers said.
She noted the low-lying Tuamotu atolls were populated by master mariners familiar with open-ocean voyaging, making it plausible they could havesailed north to Hawai'i. "They were really getting around and theircanoe designs were prized by other groups," Rogers said.
The study also found "a really strong connection" between Hawai'i and New Zealand, "but, of course, it doesn't prove it happened that way," shesaid.
Finney, an anthropologist, was hesitant to comment on the findings, since the study is based on highly technical methods familiar to biologists.
"Many people have tried to use canoe traits to trace migration and so far it has been a resounding failure," he said. "I have no idea whether thisis a better method. The main conclusion suggested, that ofHawai'i-to-Aotearoa settlement, seems odd in the light of otherevidence Either it tells us something we have not noticed, or themethod is inappropriate."
Rogers' research partners are Marcus Feldman and Paul Ehrlich. Their study, "Inferring population histories using cultural data," appears in theNov. 7 journal of Proceedings of the Royal Society B: BiologicalSciences.
