All Posts (6434)

Sort by

CHAIN REACTION!

CHAIN REACTION!
ENVIRONMENT
Chain reaction
Nuclear regulators hold hearings in the Islands after the Army’s depleted uranium problem is uncovered by chance.
EnvironmentThe Army doesn’t know how much depleted uranium it has lost in Hawai‘i.
After years of denying the existence of depleted uranium (DU) at its installations in Hawaii, the Army is now seeking a permit to possess tons of the radioactive material.
DU has been confirmed at Schofield Barracks and the Pohakuloa Training Area, and is suspected at the Makua Military Reservation and Kahoolawe. The toxic material was used to make M101 spotting rounds for the Davy Crockett recoilless gun, one of the smallest nuclear weapons ever built. Soldiers were trained on the weapon in Hawaii and at least eight other states throughout the 1960s.
“Enough depleted uranium remains on the sites to require an NRC possession license and environmental monitoring and physical security programs to ensure protection of the public and the environment,” according to a press release from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which this week is conducting hearings in Hawaii on the Army’s application.
The material is of concern because it has been found on active firing ranges, including the area where the Stryker Brigade plans to train at Schofield. When DU is burned or exploded, it creates tiny particles of depleted uranium oxide (DUO) that travel on the wind and can penetrate skin, respiratory masks and protective clothing, said Dr. Lorin Pang, a medical advisor to Hawaii County on the issue of DU.
“If it’s inhaled, then it’s in your lungs,” Pang said. “[It’s] insoluble and persists in the body for decades and becomes the most dangerous form of radiation of all, because it’s in the body.”
The Army is pursuing a single permit to possess and manage residual quantities of DU at all of its American installations. The Army’s disclosure responsibilities under the permit application are limited to the big Davy Crocket round, even though uranium munitions are used in more than 24 weapons systems. The Army’s application does not address DUO.
“It seems like the Army is trying to do the minimum possible on this,” said Cory Harden of the Sierra Club’s Moku Loa group. “Overall, this should be a wakeup call. If something like this was forgotten [from decades past] what else was forgotten?“
Some 29,318 M101 spotting rounds containing 12,232 pounds of DU remain unaccounted for, according to the Army’s permit application. The Army is seeking permission to possess a maximum of 17,600 pounds of DU.
It’s unclear how much DU is located in the Islands, or exactly where. Initial surveys were conducted at just three Hawaii installations, and the effort was severely limited by dense vegetation, rugged terrain and what the military characterized as “safety considerations” due to unexploded ordnance.
“This is exactly the problem,” said Kyle Kajihiro, executive director of the American Friends Service Committee. “If you don’t look, you don’t find and you don’t have to report and be accountable for it.”
Kajihiro said NRC officials advised him they likely will issue the permit because the material is already here. But the agency can impose conditions on how it is possessed and monitored.
The Hawaii County Council has asked the Army to conduct no live fire training in areas contaminated with DU in order to minimize the creation of DUO. But absent a public outcry, Kajihiro believes it’s unlikely the NRC will impose such restrictions, given the strong political support the military enjoys in Hawaii.
The existence of DU in the Islands came to light inadvertently through the ongoing litigation over live fire training at Makua. Kajihiro said the Army has stalled Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests he made in 2007 seeking more details about contamination at Schofield and Pohakuloa.
“There’s just been a sustained effort to keep the public in the dark and bury this,” Kajihiro said. “There needs to be some sort of call to account by the Army: why was this material here and why didn’t you know about it?”
Harden concurred. “The Army has appeared in rather controlled situations where it’s difficult to ask questions. We have repeatedly invited them to a public forum. They’ve been putting us off. Yet they make statements that there’s no risk to public health.”
Kajihiro said the discovery of DU underscores the ongoing environmental contamination issue at Hawaii’s military sites.
“It’s really the toxic cocktail of all the hazardous material out that there that we’re concerned about, with DU one of the more insidious ones,” Kajihiro said. “We need to be prepared to deal with this toxic legacy for a long time and just insist on the highest level of clean-up that’s possible. This stuff wasn’t here to begin with. We shouldn’t have to live with it. It’s a basic decency issue.”
Pang believes it’s “virtually impossible” to clean up the DU, which is why he’s urging the Army to “stop the activities that create DUO” and conduct meaningful air monitoring programs.
Comments on the permit will be accepted through Oct. 13. Submit to John J. Hayes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T8-F5, Washington, D.C., 20055-0001 or [email: John.Hayes].
To review the application and other documents, visit [www.nrc.gov], click on begin ADAMS search and enter ML090070095, ML091950280, ML090900423 and ML091170322.

Read more…

Health care and other issues

I MET WITH A LADY AT THE CAPITOL DURING THE PROTEST ON IRIS KAIAKANA, DURING THIS TIME WITH THE KALIHI DISTRICT NEIGHBOR HOOD LADY HAD SOME GOOD ISSUES ON HEALTH, I AM WITH REMMINGTON COLLEGE AND WE WILL BE DISCUSSING ISSUES ON THIS TOPIC FOR OUR SPEECH AND YES, I TOO WROTE AN EMAIL TO DANIEL INOUYE, SO PEOPLE PRAY IT PASSES THROUGH, PRESIDENT AND TED KENNEDY IS SOME OF THE GOOD KEY POINTS TO LOOK AT, MATCH UP THE VERDICT AND WHAT YOU GET AND OTHER KEY POINTS HAT DOES NOT CONTRADICT IT HELPS ON WHAT OUR INPUT AND OTHERS ARE FREE TO GO TO PRES. OBAMA HEALTH INSURANCE ON HEALTH REFORM i sent a email on this
Read more…
WE ALL HAVE A CHOICE ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO BE A WILLING PARTICIPANT IN A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. IT'S BETTER THAN NO HEALTH CARE AT ALL. OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE THIS AND IT WORKS FOR THEM AND NOT COSTLY FOR THEIR GOVERNMENT; IT'S MAKING SURE THE PLAYING LEVEL IS FAIR BETWEEN PHARMACEUTICALS, HEALTH INSTITUTIONS AND NOT OVER INFLATING THE MARKET WITH OVERPRICED HEALTH CARE AND NOT EVER WORRYING ABOUT BEING REJECTED FOR NO MEDICAL COVERAGE.OBAMA'S PUSH FOR THIS PROGRAM IS PEOPLE FIRST MONEY SECOND. WHO LOSES IS THE GAME PLAYERS WHO OVERPRICE HEALTH CARE WHICH INCLUDES LOBBYISTS WHO FILL THE POCKETS OF POLITICIANS WHO KEEP THE RICH AND POOR SEPARATED BY CLASSES.WORKING MIDDLE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS WILL NOT PAY FOR THIS OUT OF THEIR POCKETS - IT WILL BE TAXED BUT NOT BY THE MAJORITY OF WORKING FAMILIES WHO STRUGGLE TO PAY FOR HEALTHCARE.I SAY STOP PUTTING DOWN UNIVERSAL HEALTH COVERAGE AND OBAMA. IF YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN WITHOUT MEDICAL COVERAGE EVER AND NOT CARRIED BY ANY HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN THAN YOU HAVE NO SAY IN THIS. MAJORITY OF WORKING AMERICAN DO NOT FALL INTO THE 15% TAX BRACKETSO STOP WORRYING HOW IT WILL BE PAID. IF CORPORATE AMERICA CAN BE BAILED OUT IN LOANS FOR BAD CHOICES IN RUNNING A BUSINESS TO US AS CONSUMERS. WE CONSUMERS SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO BE A WIILING PARTICIPANT.YOU ARE NOT A WILLING PARTICIPANT UNLESS YOU SIGN UP FOR THIS SO STOP KNOCKING IT DOWN FOR OTHERS!
Read more…

E KOMO MAI EVERYBODY

Aloha Folks.Greeting from Kauai. My name is Derekirra originally I'm from Downunder, Western Australia.I am an aboriginal painter, my kuleana is to portray, reflect & document kanaka maoli sovereignty and culture.At the age of 10 I learnt my tutu's ohana had strong pohaku and bread fruit roots from Ka Ula and Ni'ihau Atooi.Did you know, Western Australia was once the furtherest 'aina in the ahupuaa of Atooi Wailua-nui- aho- ano?The "Dreaming" is "The Kumolipo" and the largest nation in the world is "Oceania Polynesia", includes the pacific and the southern hemi.The four great ancestors, Kanaloa, Kane, Lono and Pele Ula were all from the great south land of Nuholani.Ah Ha, bet you didn't know that, did you kanaka?Also betcha you've always had a secret love for the land Downunder to havent you?Nuholani, (Australia) was under the sovereignty of King Kaumualii, [everything] under Makali'i (The Milky way) was.I've spent 40 years researching my aboriginal art geneology and it has lead me to discover, "Hey I am not alone in my thinking.""MY MAOLIWORLD" is dicovering "YOUR MAOLIWORLD" and through my art I wish to express "OUR MAOLIWORD"I love live and breath Hawaiian, I am a servant of Her Majesty Queen Liliuokalani and kahu kuamo'o to Atooi Alii Nui Dayne Aipolani.E komo mai, kulia i ka nu'u mahalo for you manao - lets talkstory lets talk art and culture!Alaha Derekirra
Read more…
I have had the opportunity to have someone from over my Kohala Mountain here on Maoliworld bring up a "who's got koko" more by pointing out he comes from a pure blood hawaiian line. I guess he was trying to make a point that what I do for the North Kohala district means nothing to him or that I don't have any experience in protecting sacred sites. LOL.So what does being pure hawaiian prove but getting on a list of Hawaiian Homes? Does it prove anything else when you start conversation and say "well I got more koko than you and my words have more validity than you and you're a nobody?" Yet he doesn't provide "who he is" and feels he doesn't need to prove it. But he's from South Kohala, says his father from Molokai and mother from Kohala. So he doesn't believe who I am and what my family has done for Kohala so I have referrred him to Papa Akau in Kawaihae, former Ali'i 'Aimoku of Pu'u Kohola heiau in South Kohala. Papa is not feeling well right now but he is still on our board of directors seat for Maika'i Kamakani 'O Kohala. He knows my family and so I don't need to prove my koko.I gotta laugh at the belligerence and classism category, this person had made a comment of what is aloha yet he is disrespectful with a big pohaku on his shoulders. In my opinion, what matters is the heart and spirit behind the koko, not how much koko you have on paper...anyone else?
Read more…

Click here to watch the 15 minute documentary!: Return To Limuw

Limuw: A Story of PlaceCHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARKAccording to legend, Chumash who fell into the ocean while crossing the rainbow to the mainland were turned into dolphins.Hutash, the Earth Mother, created the first Chumash people on the island of Limuw, now known as Santa Cruz Island. They were made from the seeds of a Magic Plant.Hutash was married to the Alchupo’osh, Sky Snake, the Milky Way, who could make lightning bolts with his tongue. One day he decided to make a gift to the Chumash people. He sent down a bolt of lightning that started a fire. After this, people kept fires burning so that they could keep warm and cook their food.In those days, the Condor was a white bird. The Condor was very curious about the fire he saw burning in the Chumash village. He wanted to find out what it was. He flew very low over the fire to get a better look, but he flew too close; he got his feathers scorched, and they turned black. Now the Condor is a black bird, with just a little white left under the wings where they did not get burned.After Alchupo’osh gave them fire, the Chumash people lived more comfortably. More people were born each year and their villages got bigger and bigger. Limuw was getting crowded. And the noise people made was starting to annoy Hutash. It kept her awake at night. So, finally, she decided that some of the Chumash people had to move off the island. They would have to go to the mainland, where there weren’t any people living in those days.But how were the people going to get across the water to the mainland? Finally, Hutash had the idea of making a bridge out of a wishtoyo (rainbow). She made a very long, very high rainbow that stretched from the tallest mountain on Limuw all the way to Tzchimoos, the tall mountain near Mishopshno (Carpinteria).Hutash told the people to go across the rainbow bridge and to fill the whole world with people. So the Chumash people started to go across the bridge. Some of them got across safely, but some people made the mistake of looking down. It was a long way down to the water, and the fog was swirling around. They became so dizzy that some of them fell off the rainbow bridge, down through the fog, into the ocean. Hutash felt very badly about this because she told them to cross the bridge. She did not want them to drown. To save them, she turned them into dolphins. Now the Chumash call the dolphins their brothers and sisters.Excerpted from:The Chumash People: Materials for Teachers and Students. Santa Barbara, CA: Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, 1991.
Full Circle Chumash Cross Channel in Tomol to Santa Cruz Island By Roberta R. Cordero Member and co-founder of the Chumash Maritime AssociationPhotographs by Robert Schwemmer, Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary
The coastal portion of our indigenous homeland stretches from Morro Bay in the north to Malibu Point in the south, and encompasses the northern Channel Islands of Tuqan, Wi’ma, Limuw, and ‘Anyapakh (San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and Anacapa). This great, elongated bowl with its irregular rim of coastal mountain contains and nurtures a breathtaking array of maritime habitats. The ancestors of the autochthonous people of the region—we are now known as Chumash—were so well-integrated into and adapted to their habitats that they were able to thrive here continuously and sustainably for some thirteen thousand years before European contact.

As for many indigenous maritime cultures, the canoe is central to our understanding of who we are as a people on this specific place on the earth. Until the missionization of the Chumash people, our waters were filled with watercraft, especially the redwood plank canoe, the tomol, among the most advanced technological achievements of North America’s indigenous peoples. Used for both fishing and transportation, these elegant and versatile canoes wove together coastal and island communities in a complex system of trade, kinship and a resource stewardship that was sustained over thousands of years.The old Brotherhood of the Canoe governed the manufacture and use of the tomols until it was formally disbanded around 1834 because of the decimation of the people and the tomols. However, 142 years later, in 1976, Helek (Peregrine Falcon) was the first tomol to be built in modern times. Her design based on ethnographic and historic accounts as well as archeological data, she was paddled by a crew comprised of ten members of the modern Brotherhood of the Tomol from Tuqan to Wi’ma and then to Limuw in a grueling and much-celebrated journey.The tomol, ‘Elye’wun (Swordfish), was built by the Chumash community in 1996-97 under the leadership of the Chumash Maritime Association. On September 8, 2001, ‘Elye’wun made her first and historic crossing from the mainland to Limuw, completing the island circle begun by Helek. This crossing culminated in a cultural celebration with about 150 Chumash families and friends encamped on the island, marking the first time for almost all of us to make this return to an important origin place of our people.

On September 11, 2004, ‘Elye’wun again made the arduous journey from mainland to the village of Swaxil (at the present day location of Scorpion Valley) where some 200 Chumash and other Native people were gathered to discuss issues affecting Sacred Sites. The 2004 crossing was truly a milestone for the community in that the crew landing ‘Elye’wun were five Chumash youths aged 14 to 22, marking a significant passing on of knowledge and experience to our young people. These are part of the generation who are now accustomed to the awesome sight of a traditional canoe in our home waters, giving some of us older ones—who did not even know to hope for such a thing in our own youth!—a profound sense of accomplishment and satisfaction.

As with other coastal indigenous nations, Chumash people are restoring our heritage of intimacy with the sea for the dual purpose of protecting her and as a means of rediscovering our dignity and identity as a people sprung from this place. Against overwhelming odds, what we are seeing is a cultural spirit so compelling that the tree once considered dead has sent up strong, resilient shoots and branches. The resurgence of the canoe is but one example, but one that stands as an icon for what is happening in the hearts of many Chumash people as we strengthen the knowledge of our heritage.

The 2004 Crossing was jointly sponsored by Barbareño Chumash Council and Chumash Maritime Association with funding from Seventh Generation Fund and others. Special thanks are due to Jack Byer and support vessel Just Love; Bob Duncan and support vessel Jack Tar; Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary’s Chris Mobley and Bob Schwemmer for support vessel Xantu and camera; Ed Cassano, friend and skipper par excellence; Channel Islands National Park’s Ann Huston and especially staff at Scorpion Campground.‘Elye’wun’s 2004 crew: Perry Cabugos (Captain), Marcus Lopez (Captain), Michael Cordero, Roberta Cordero, Michael Cruz, Tom Lopez, Rick Mendez, Oscar Ortiz, Reggie Pagaling, Alan Salazar, Jacqueline Scheinert, Steve Villa, Mati Waiya. The Landing Crew: Marcus V. O. Lopez (Captain), Tano Cabugos, Diego Cordero, Jimmy Joe Navarro, Michael Sanchez

WATCH the documentary HERE!: Return To Limuw

BibliographyCordero, J.,“Like I’d Been There Before, The Tomol Brings HerPeople Back into Balance,” News from Native California, 1998,Vol 2, No. 3, pp. 7-12.Cordero, R., “Our Ancestors’ Gift Across Time, A Story of Indigenous Maritime Culture Resurgence,” News from NativeCalifornia, 1998, Vol 2, No. 3, pp. 4-6.Cordero, R. and G. Sanchez, “Full Circle, Chumash peoples gatheron Santa Cruz Island to celebrate a historic tomol crossing ofthe Santa Barbara Channel,” News from Native California, 2001,Vol 15, No. 2, pp. 10-15.Hudson, T., “At Sea with the Helek,” The Masterkey, 1977, pp.59-65.ed., Hudson, T., J. Timbrook and M. Rempe, Tomol: ChumashWatercraft as Described in the Ethnographic Notes of John P.Harrington, 1978, 190 pp.Wilkinson, C., Messages from Frank’s Landing: A Story ofSalmon, Treaties, and the Indian Way, 2000, 118 pp.
Read more…

URGENT! Hawaiian issues and programming are about to be severely compromised.


Aloha kakou,

The Oceanic Time Warner franchise is up for renewal and their application has requests and issues that profoundly impact us. Olelo Community Media is fighting for its viability and the existence of community access (PEG) right now. The Oceanic Time Warner franchise renewal application has requests and issues that profoundly impact us. You can help.

Hawaii is one of the most lucrative markets for Time Warner. They will be making billions of dollars over the next twenty years in exchange for using our Public Right of Way. Yet, currently Olelo gets less than 3% of only the Time Warner cable subscription portion of revenues. This does not include Oceanic’s other profit generating services.

Time Warner is not planning to use a penny of their enormous profits to upgrade our community access network and improve your services. We desperately need to do this. Yet, they are aggressively moving ahead with new technology to generate more money for themselves.

Check this out for more information:

http://www.hawaiianindependencealliance.org/olelo/

Call 721-3392 for more information.


You are receiving this important letter because we urgently need your help. Olelo local access television is fighting for its life right now.

The Oceanic Time Warner franchise is up for renewal and their application has requests and issues that profoundly impact us. Olelo is fighting for its viability and existence of community access (PEG) right now. The Oceanic Time Warner franchise renewal application has requests and issues that profoundly impact us. You can help.

Hawaii is one of the most lucrative markets for Time Warner. They will be making billion s of dollars over the next twenty years in exchange for using our Public Right of Way.

Yet, currently Olelo gets less than 3% of only the Time Warner cable subscription portion of revenues. This does not include Oceanic’s other profit generating services.

Here’s what’s about to change that will profoundly affect Olelo

The Hawaii Education Network Consortium (HENC) is asking for one-third of Olelo's funding. That means under the renewal agreement, Olelo’s funding would be radically reduced. If this were to occur, Olelo would have to close several CMC's.

Time Warner is not planning to use a penny of their enormous profits to upgrade Olelo equipment. Yet we desperately need to do this.

Here’s how you can help -

1. Please write a letter to the Department of Commerce & Consumer Affairs addressing some of the following points in your letter.

Consider addressing some of the following points in your letters -

Demand that the Department of Commerce & Consumer Affairs (DCCA) include provisions for a review of PEG access services every 5 years. This will insure our services keep pace with technology. Do not give Oceanic the 20-year contract they are requesting. They have not offered to provide additional funding for Olelo to upgrade its network and equipment and stay current with current technology. Funding <http://www.hawaiianindependencealliance.org/olelo/funding.html>

Keep PEG – Public, Education, Government together. Many consider Olelo on Oahu, the number one public access facility in the nation. A big reason for this ranking is because PEG is together and this protects the Public portion. The Hawaii Education Network Consortium (HENC) is asking for a one-third of Olelo's funding. They also want a separation from PEG. If this were to occur, Olelo would have to close several CMC's. Education <http://www.hawaiianindependencealliance.org/olelo/education.html>

Request an inter-island high capacity broadband network. This can create video conferencing between islands. Such access can eliminate the need for air travel for studio guest appearances, provides easy public access for legislative testimony, and open entry to needed meetings. Connectivity <http://www.hawaiianindependencealliance.org/olelo/connectivity.html>

Provide Community Media Centers like Palolo the capability to transmit live television. Live programming allows for current and alternative news with interactive call in shows. Services <http://www.hawaiianindependen cealliance.org/olelo/services.html>

Retain our current six channels allocated for Oahu community access and provide for at least two more channels that are common to all islands. Channel numbers provided for community access should as low as possible and adjacent to local broadcast channels. Many Olelo viewers are initially attracted to Olelo programming by channel surfing and therefore the channels need to be easily accessible. This would be perceived by viewers as the local broadcast series of channels. Channels <http://www.hawaiianindependencealliance.org/olelo/channels.html>

Please go to our Olelo website <http://www.olelo.org/> for more information and a brief overview of the Franchise Renewal Process <http://olelo.org/news_franchise_renewal.htm>

Deadline for letters is September 18th. Send it by email, fax or mail. DCCA <http://www.hawaiianindependencealliance.org/olelo/dcca.html>

2. Attend the DCCA hearing on September 15th, 5PM to 8PM at McKinley High School. Volunteers will be picketing with signs on King Street from 4PM to 6PM.

3. Write a short, concise letter to the editor

4. Ask for support from your friends and everyone in your network with this effort on all points.

This will be Hawaii's only opportunity to secure the funding to provide the technological improvements necessary to insure the continued success of community access in the coming years.

Please help us today.

Mahalo for your support,

Friends of Palolo CMC Committee - Lynette Cruz, Dee Texidor, Del Cloe, Donna Burns
Read more…

September 11th

For my family and friends who like KNOW:

Today is September 11th. It is a significant day. No... it has nothing to do with America *LOL* Even though I am a registered Republican who believes in the TOTAL independence of the Hawaiian Kingdom (which REALLY pisses off some Republicans... and I AM GLAD that it pisses them off LOL) bluntly... I am sick and tired of hearing and/or reading about America LOLSorry to disappoint but America is NOT the center of MY universe (LOL) The iwi, oiwi, my kupuna, my husband, my ohana, and my hoaaloha are my WORLD. Unfortunately some people extrapolate me being a "registered Republican" to mean things that THEY want them to mean. Of all the people whom I know --- I am the #1 extremist when it comes to the iwi thus of oiwi LOL Thus I wish I could see and/or hear more about the IWI and/or OIWI. I do NOT want to see and/or hear about America America America LOL Then again it shows me what someone's mana'o is focused on whether it be the U.S.... or the iwi.IMHO some people focus way too much on America instead of on the iwi. FOCUS ON THE IWI thus on the OIWI... that is what I feel like saying sometimes LOL.. because without the iwi there is no oiwi. Without the iwi there is no Hawaiian Kingdom. Stating the obvious though it would be nice to see more people celebrate the iwi and/or the survival of the iwi instead of focusing on the United States because hello... we are STILL alive despite all of the crap so why not CELEBRATE? LOLAnyway though I don't post much information about most of my kupunas' bones because ever since I was a little girl my kupuna told me NOT to expose their bones I CAN say that one of my many maternal grandmothers from apana o Kona kema signed the Ku'e Anti-Annexation Petition by proxy on this day in 1897!http://libweb.hawaii.edu/digicoll/annexation/petition/pet007.htmlShe is #24, Mrs. Lokini Among.She signed it by proxy when she was only 20! Of course family is very important to me. For me... you mess with MY family then *YOU* pau! LOL (When it comes time I know who to help and who *not* to help.)So today is a great day... but not because of what some people conflate to "September 11th."Instead it is one of the most important dates in Hawaiian history... especially for oiwi women who have been threatened and/or harassed by some non-oiwi men throughout our history to the present. That is why it was an honor and privilege to have planned to walk way way way in the back only to end up front and have two of my teenage nieces hold two flags... one of which was Lili'u's flag which is significant to me:


9334348671?profile=originalOf course stating the obvious as usual and without divulging some things from lurkers' prying eyes (LOL) and/or from software that mines for data about us (LOL) --- Ululani Ali'i o Hilo helped to make Naihe's AND Queen Lili'uokalani's births possible... so it is pretty cool LOLIronically my younger niece who attends a school for brainy kids also described it as a "parade" -- as in a celebration. That is exactly how I thought of it. As in a celebration of the iwi... thus of the oiwi LOL So those who know me know that to me the iwi is serious business. I may laugh a lot... but when it comes to the iwi... whoa boy... watch out *LOL*Latahs!

Read more…

THE THEFT OF HAWAI`I - IS IT EVER OK?

Maui News - September 9, 2009In regards to Richard Hillman's letter (Sept. 2), I find it amazing how people justify an illegal action with the mindset that if America didn't take Hawai`i then someone else would have.I know some people who really feel that way and that is why they think it's a good thing that the Hawaiian people's government was overthrown by the United States of America. This is how they justify stealing.If America hadn't taken Hawai`i, we may be under the control of Japan, France, England or Russia. But we are not. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, America sent in troops along with other countries to liberate Kuwait. Tell me what is the difference?The Hawaiian government at the time of its overthrow was recognized by the world as a sovereign nation. If we still had control of our kingdom in 1942, I'm certain that America and its allies would have sent in troops as they did in the rest of the Pacific to stop Japan from getting closer to North America.Yes, it's a fact that America stole Hawai`i and we are now a part of the United States. The part that Hawaiian people have a hard time understanding is if I steal from you, I will be prosecuted under the law, but if you stole from me it's OK because some other country would have done it. What a great concept.Boysie MaxwellWaiohuli, Maui
Read more…
MAHUKONA COURT 08/31/09 UPDATE: The judge was fascinating to watch in her questioning. In short, she asked for both sides to submit arguments (Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law) by September 21, 2009 outlining their take on :1). Standing (whether KAKO'O and Maika'i do or do not have standing;2). Jurisdiction (whether the Board of Appeals had the authority to rule as they did - they don't; they only have the authority to review and uphold or over turn Planning Director decisions); and3). the 45 day window the Planning Director has to act on preliminary subdivision applications.The judge disallowed the some of the most critical parts of the case because there was no previous record (no one from Maika'i or KAKO'O testified about the critical archeological, Hawaiian, or environmental issues). Now we all know that this sucks since KAKO'O and the community were told they should not testify but provide public comment in November... now why all the politics we want PONO?After the court hearing, KPCT rep aka: Kohala Surety wanted to "kukakuka" so our VP who is respected Kupuna Fred Cachola is meeting with him tomorrow in Kohala 09/11/09. We are open to discussion without the presence of attorneys and see what this is all about. We have a few options of proposals but it all depends on how the discussion and what this discussion is about as called for "alone".I would like to see a Conservation Sale on Mahukona: 5,10,15, 20 Million? What is reasonable for this unclear title land belonging to PrinCess Ruth?Makali'i and KHCC can do what is protocol we're concerned about the lay of the land and all the other archaeological sites which are not documented by KPCT aside from their illegal permits to build in that area without public input and disregarding old agreements from prior court cases from 30+ years ago up to now.KPCT is aka: Kohala Surety, which sold Kamehameha Birthplace and some strips of land along it to Kamehameha Schools (was it 8.75 or 15 or 18 million? I can't remember cleary from a meeting I attended here in Kohala brought to us by KS). What do you think they want in price for Mahukona? I can say 5, 10, 15, 20, 20M maybe doable, but that's my personal opinion from sources of funding we can put up to get this case over....OR WE GO FOR LONG ON THIS CASE...smileNOTE: Pule for MAHUKONA, what 'uhane wants to see happen and for the betterment of our people.Malama Pono, Stephanie from North Kohala Big Island
Read more…

Manifest Destiny

AKAKA BILL IS JUST THE CONTINUATION OF "MANIFEST DESTINYSHOW ME THE TREATY !Thieves2.jpg
Manifest Destiny


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny
Manifest Destiny is a term that was used in the 19th century to designate the belief that the United States was destined, even divinely ordained,[1] to expand across the North American continent, from the Atlantic seaboard to the Pacific Ocean. Sometimes Manifest Destiny was interpreted so broadly as to include the eventual absorption of all North America: Canada, Mexico, Cuba and Central America. Advocates of Manifest Destiny believed that expansion was not only ethical but that it was readily apparent ("manifest") and inexorable ("destiny"). Although initially used as a catch phrase to inspire the United States' expansion across the North American continent, the 19th century phrase eventually became a standard historical term.
The term, which first appeared in print in 1839, was used in 1845 by a New York journalist, John L. O'Sullivan, to urge for the annexation of Texas.[2] Thereafter, it was used to encourage American settlement of European colonial and Indian lands in the Great Plains and the west. It was revived in the 1890s, this time with Republican supporters, as a theoretical justification for U.S. expansion outside of North America. The term fell out of usage by U.S. policy makers early in the 20th century, but some commentators believe that aspects of Manifest Destiny, particularly the belief in an American "mission" to promote and defend democracy throughout the world, continues to have an influence on American political ideology.[3]
Context and interpretations

Manifest Destiny was always a general notion rather than a specific policy. The term combined a belief in expansionism with other popular ideas of the era, including American exceptionalism, Romantic nationalism, and a belief in the natural superiority of what was then called the "Anglo-Saxon race". While many writers focus primarily upon American expansionism when discussing Manifest Destiny, others see in the term a broader expression of a belief in America's "mission" in the world, which has meant different things to different people over the years. This variety of possible meanings was summed up by Ernest Lee Tuveson, who wrote:
A vast complex of ideas, policies, and actions is comprehended under the phrase 'Manifest Destiny'. They are not, as we should expect, all compatible, nor do they come from any one source.[4]
The concept of the Manifest Destiny has acquired a variety of meanings over the years, and its inherent ambiguity has been part of its power. In the generic political sense, however, it was usually used to refer to the idea that the American government was "destined" to establish uninterrupted political authority across the entire North American continent, from one ocean to the other.
Journalist John L. O'Sullivan, an influential advocate for the Democratic Party, wrote an article in 1839 which, while not using the term "Manifest Destiny", did predict a "divine destiny" for the United States based upon values such as equality, rights of conscience, and personal enfranchisement-- "to establish on earth the moral dignity and salvation of man". This destiny was not explicitly territorial, but O'Sullivan predicted that the United States would be one of a "Union of many Republics" sharing those values.[5]
Six years later O'Sullivan wrote another essay which first used the phrase Manifest Destiny. In 1845, he published a piece entitled Annexation in the Democratic Review,[6] in which he urged the United States to annex the Republic of Texas, not only because Texas desired this, but because it was "our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions".[7] Amid much controversy, Texas was annexed shortly thereafter, but O'Sullivan's first usage of the phrase "Manifest Destiny" attracted little attention.[8]
O'Sullivan's second use of the phrase became extremely influential. On December 27, 1845 in his newspaper the New York Morning News, O'Sullivan addressed the ongoing boundary dispute with Great Britain in the Oregon Country. O'Sullivan argued that the United States had the right to claim "the whole of Oregon":
And that claim is by the right of our manifest destiny to overspread and to possess the whole of the continent which Providence has given us for the development of the great experiment of liberty and federated self-government entrusted to us.[9]
That is, O'Sullivan believed that Providence had given the United States a mission to spread republican democracy ("the great experiment of liberty") throughout North America. Because Britain would not use Oregon for the purposes of spreading democracy, thought O'Sullivan, British claims to the territory should be overruled. O'Sullivan believed that Manifest Destiny was a moral ideal (a "higher law") that superseded other considerations.[10]
O'Sullivan's original conception of Manifest Destiny was not a call for territorial expansion by force. He believed that the expansion of the United States would happen without the direction of the U.S. government or the involvement of the military. After "Anglo-Saxons" emigrated to new regions, they would set up new democratic governments, and then seek admission to the United States, as Texas had done. In 1845, O'Sullivan predicted that California would follow this pattern next, and that Canada would eventually request annexation as well. He disapproved of the outbreak of the Mexican-American War in 1846, although he came to believe that the outcome would be beneficial to both countries.[11]
Ironically, O'Sullivan's term became popular only after it was criticized by Whig opponents of the Polk administration. On January 3, 1846, Representative Robert Winthrop ridiculed the concept in Congress, saying "I suppose the right of a manifest destiny to spread will not be admitted to exist in any nation except the universal Yankee nation." Winthrop was the first in a long line of critics who suggested that advocates of Manifest Destiny were citing "Divine Providence" for justification of actions that were motivated by chauvinism and self-interest. Despite this criticism, expansionists embraced the phrase, which caught on so quickly that its origin was soon forgotten. O'Sullivan died in obscurity in 1895, just as his phrase was being revived. In 1927, a historian determined that the phrase had originated with him.[12]
Themes and influences
Historian William E. Weeks has noted that three key themes were usually touched upon by advocates of Manifest Destiny:
the virtue of the American people and their institutions;
the mission to spread these institutions, thereby redeeming and remaking the world in the image of the U.S.; and
the destiny under God to accomplish this work.[13]
The origin of the first theme, later known as American Exceptionalism, was often traced to America's Puritan heritage, particularly John Winthrop's famous "City upon a Hill" sermon of 1630, in which he called for the establishment of a virtuous community that would be a shining example to the Old World. In his influential 1776 pamphlet Common Sense, Thomas Paine echoed this notion, arguing that the American Revolution provided an opportunity to create a new, better society:
We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand...
Many Americans agreed with Paine, and came to believe that the United States had embarked upon a special experiment in freedom and democracy—and a rejection of Old World monarchy in favor of republicanism—an innovation of world historical importance. President Abraham Lincoln's description, in his December 1, 1862 message to Congress, of the United States as "the last, best hope of Earth" is a well-known expression of this idea. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, in which he interpreted the Civil War as a struggle to determine if any nation with America's ideals could survive, has been called by historian Robert Johannsen "the most enduring statement of America's Manifest Destiny and mission".[14]
Not all Americans who believed that the United States was a divinely favored nation thought that it ought to expand. Whigs especially argued that the "mission" of the United States was only to serve as virtuous example to the rest of the world. If the United States was successful as a shining "city on a hill," people in other countries would seek to establish their own democratic republics. Thomas Jefferson initially did not believe it necessary that the United States should grow in size, since he predicted that other, similar republics would be founded in North America, forming what he called an "empire for liberty." However, with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, which doubled the size of the United States, Jefferson set the stage for the continental expansion of the United States. Many began to see this as the beginning of a new "mission"—what Andrew Jackson in 1843 famously described as "extending the area of freedom." As more territory was added to the United States in the following decades, whether or not "extending the area of freedom" also meant extending the institution of slavery became a central issue in a growing divide over the interpretation of America's "mission."
Effect on continental expansion
The phrase "Manifest Destiny" is most often associated with the territorial expansion of the United States from 1812 to 1860. This era, from the end of the War of 1812 to the beginning of the American Civil War, has been called the "Age of Manifest Destiny." During this time, the United States expanded to the Pacific Ocean—"from sea to shining sea"—largely defining the borders of the contiguous United States as they are today.[15]

Continentalism
The nineteenth century belief that the United States would eventually encompass all of North America is known as "continentalism".[16] An early proponent of this idea was John Quincy Adams, a leading figure in U.S. expansion between the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and the Polk administration in the 1840s. In 1811, Adams wrote to his father:
The whole continent of North America appears to be destined by Divine Providence to be peopled by one nation, speaking one language, professing one general system of religious and political principles, and accustomed to one general tenor of social usages and customs. For the common happiness of them all, for their peace and prosperity, I believe it is indispensable that they should be associated in one federal Union.[17]
Adams did much to further this idea. He orchestrated the Treaty of 1818, which established the United States-Canada border as far west as the Rocky Mountains, and provided for the joint occupation of the region known in American history as the Oregon Country and in British and Canadian history as the New Caledonia and Columbia Districts. He negotiated the Transcontinental Treaty in 1819, purchasing Florida from Spain and extending the U.S. border with Spanish Mexico all the way to the Pacific Ocean. And he formulated the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which warned Europe that the Western Hemisphere was no longer open for European colonization.
The Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny were closely related ideas: historian Walter McDougall calls Manifest Destiny a corollary of the Monroe Doctrine, because while the Monroe Doctrine did not specify expansion, expansion was necessary in order to enforce the Doctrine. Concerns in the United States that European powers (especially Great Britain) were seeking to acquire colonies or greater influence in North America led to calls for expansion in order to prevent this. In his influential 1935 study of Manifest Destiny, Albert Weinberg wrote that "the expansionism of the [1830s] arose as a defensive effort to forestall the encroachment of Europe in North America."[18]

British North America
Although Manifest Destiny was primarily directed at territory inhabited by Mexicans and American Indians, the concept played a role in U.S. relations with British North America (later Canada) to the north. From the time of the American Revolution, the United States had expressed an interest in expelling the British Empire from North America. Failing to do that in both the American Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, Americans came to accept the British presence on their northern border, but fears of possible British expansion elsewhere in North America were a recurrent theme of Manifest Destiny.

Before 1815
During the American Revolution and the early years of independence there were both peaceful and violent attempts to include Canada in the United States. The Revolutionaries hoped French Canadians would join the Thirteen Colonies in the effort to throw off the rule of the British Empire. Canada was invited to send representatives to the Continental Congress, and was pre-approved for joining the United States in the Articles of Confederation. In the Paris peace negotiations, Benjamin Franklin attempted to persuade Britain to cede Canada to the United States. Canada fought off invasion during the War of Independence, and again during the War of 1812. None of these measures proved successful in bringing Canada onto the side of the Thirteen Colonies.
These attempts to expel the British Empire from North America are sometimes cited as early examples of Manifest Destiny in action. Some scholars, however, including Canadian historian Reginald Stuart, argue that these events were different in character from those during the "Era of Manifest Destiny." Before 1815, writes Stuart, "what seemed like territorial expansionism actually arose from a defensive mentality, not from ambitions for conquest and annexation."[19] From this point of view, Manifest Destiny was not a factor in the outbreak of the War of 1812, but rather emerged as a popular belief in the years after the war.[19]

Filibustering in Canada
Americans became increasingly accepting of the presence of British colonies to the north after the War of 1812, although Anglophobia continued to be widespread in the United States. Many Americans, especially those along the border, were hopeful that the Rebellions of 1837 would bring an end to the British Empire in North America and the establishment of a republican government in Canada. Of those events John O'Sullivan wrote: "If freedom is the best of national blessings, if self-government is the first of national rights, ... then we are bound to sympathise with the cause of the Canadian rebellion."[20] Americans like O'Sullivan viewed the Rebellions as a reprise of the American Revolution, and—unlike most Canadians at the time—considered Canadians to be living under oppressive foreign rule.
Despite this sympathy with the cause of the rebels, belief in Manifest Destiny did not result in widespread American reaction to the Rebellions, in part because the Rebellions were over so quickly. O'Sullivan, for his part, advised against U.S. intervention. Some American "filibusters"—unauthorized volunteer soldiers often motivated by a belief in Manifest Destiny—went to Canada to lend aid to the rebels, but President Martin Van Buren sent General Winfield Scott to arrest the filibusters and keep peace on the border. Some filibusters persisted in secretive groups known as the Hunter Patriots, and tried to stir up war in order to "liberate" Canada—the so-called "Patriot War" was one such event—but American sentiment and official government policy were against these actions. The Fenian raids after the American Civil War shared some resemblances to the actions of the Hunters, but were otherwise unrelated to the idea of Manifest Destiny or any policy of American expansionism.[21]

"All Oregon"
Manifest Destiny played its most important role in, and was coined during the course of, the Oregon boundary dispute with Great Britain. The Anglo-American Convention of 1818 had provided for the joint occupation of the Oregon Country, and thousands of Americans migrated there in the 1840s over the Oregon Trail. The British rejected a proposal by President John Tyler to divide the region along 49th parallel, and instead proposed a boundary line further south along the Columbia River, which would have made what is now the state of Washington part of British North America. Advocates of Manifest Destiny protested and called for the annexation of the entire Oregon Country up to the Alaska line (54°40ʹ N). Presidential candidate James K. Polk used this popular outcry to his advantage, and the Democrats called for the annexation of "All Oregon" in the 1844 U.S. Presidential election.
As president, however, Polk renewed the earlier offer to divide the territory along the 49th parallel, to the dismay of the most ardent advocates of Manifest Destiny. When the British refused the offer, American expansionists responded with slogans such as "The Whole of Oregon or None!" and "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight!", referring to the northern border of the region. (The latter slogan is often mistakenly described as having been a part of the 1844 presidential campaign.) When Polk moved to terminate the joint occupation agreement, the British finally agreed to divide the region along the 49th parallel, and the dispute was settled by the Oregon Treaty of 1846.
Despite the earlier clamor for "All Oregon," the treaty was popular in the U.S. and was easily ratified by the Senate, particularly because the United States was by that time at war with Mexico. Many Americans believed that the Canadian provinces would eventually merge with the United States anyway, and that war was unnecessary—and counterproductive—in fulfilling that destiny. The most fervent advocates of Manifest Destiny had not prevailed along the northern border because, according to Reginald Stuart, "the compass of Manifest Destiny pointed west and southwest, not north, despite the use of the term 'continentalism'."[22]

Mexico and Texas
Manifest Destiny proved to be more consequential in U.S. relations with Mexico. In 1836, the Republic of Texas declared independence from Mexico and, after the Texas Revolution, sought to join the United States as a new state. This was an idealized process of expansion which had been advocated from Jefferson to O'Sullivan: newly democratic and independent states would request entry into the United States, rather than the United States extending its government over people who did not want it. The annexation of Texas was controversial as it would add another slave state to the Union. Presidents Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren declined Texas's offer to join the United States in part because the slavery issue threatened to divide the Democratic Party.
Before the election of 1844, Whig candidate Henry Clay and the presumed Democratic candidate, ex-President Van Buren, both declared themselves opposed to the annexation of Texas, each hoping to keep the troublesome topic from becoming a campaign issue. This unexpectedly led to Van Buren being dropped by the Democrats in favor of Polk, who favored annexation. Polk tied the Texas annexation question with the Oregon dispute, thus providing a sort of regional compromise on expansion. (Expansionists in the North were more inclined to promote the occupation of Oregon, while Southern expansionists focused primarily on the annexation of Texas.) Although elected by a very slim margin, Polk proceeded as if his victory had been a mandate for expansion.

"All Mexico"
After the election of Polk, but before he took office, Congress approved the annexation of Texas. Polk moved to occupy a portion of Texas which was also claimed by Mexico, paving the way for the outbreak of the Mexican-American War on April 24, 1846. With American successes on the battlefield, by the summer of 1847 there were calls for the annexation of "All Mexico," particularly among Eastern Democrats, who argued that bringing Mexico into the Union was the best way to ensure future peace in the region.[23]
This was a controversial proposition for two reasons. First, idealistic advocates of Manifest Destiny like John L. O'Sullivan had always maintained that the laws of the United States should not be imposed on people against their will. The annexation of "All Mexico" would be a violation of this principle. And secondly, the annexation of Mexico was controversial because it would mean extending U.S. citizenship to millions of Mexicans. Senator John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, who had approved of the annexation of Texas, was opposed to the annexation of Mexico, as well as the "mission" aspect of Manifest Destiny, for racial reasons. He made these views clear in a speech to Congress on January 4, 1848:
[W]e have never dreamt of incorporating into our Union any but the Caucasian race—the free white race. To incorporate Mexico, would be the very first instance of the kind, of incorporating an Indian race; for more than half of the Mexicans are Indians, and the other is composed chiefly of mixed tribes. I protest against such a union as that! Ours, sir, is the Government of a white race.... We are anxious to force free government on all; and I see that it has been urged ... that it is the mission of this country to spread civil and religious liberty over all the world, and especially over this continent. It is a great mistake.[24]
This debate brought to the forefront one of the contradictions of Manifest Destiny: on the one hand, while racist ideas inherent in Manifest Destiny suggested that Mexicans, as non-whites, were a lesser race and thus not qualified to become Americans, the "mission" component of Manifest Destiny suggested that Mexicans would be improved (or "regenerated," as it was then described) by bringing them into American democracy. Racism was used to promote Manifest Destiny, but, as in the case of Calhoun and the resistance to the "All Mexico" movement, racism was also used to oppose Manifest Destiny.[25]
The controversy was eventually ended by the Mexican Cession, which added the territories of Alta California and Nuevo México to the United States, both more sparsely populated than the rest of Mexico. Like the "All Oregon" movement, the "All Mexico" movement quickly abated. Historian Frederick Merk, in Manifest Destiny and Mission in American History: A Reinterpretation (1963), argued that the failure of the "All Oregon" and "All Mexico" movements indicates that Manifest Destiny had not been as popular as historians have traditionally portrayed it to have been. Merk wrote that, while belief in the beneficent "mission" of democracy was central to American history, aggressive "continentalism" were aberrations supported by only a very small (but influential) minority of Americans. Merk's interpretation is probably still a minority opinion; scholars generally see Manifest Destiny, at least in the 1840s, as a popular belief among Democrats and an unpopular one among Whigs.

Filibustering in the South
After the Mexican-American War ended in 1848, disagreements over the expansion of slavery made further territorial annexation too divisive to be official government policy. Many Northerners were increasingly opposed to what they believed to be efforts by Southern slave owners—and their friends in the North—to expand slavery at any cost. The proposal of the Wilmot Proviso during the war, and the emergence of various "Slave Power" conspiracy theories thereafter, indicated the degree to which Manifest Destiny had become controversial.
Without official government support, the most radical advocates of Manifest Destiny increasingly turned to military filibustering. While there had been some filibustering expeditions into Canada in the late 1830s, the primary target of Manifest Destiny’s filibusters was Latin America, particularly Mexico and Cuba. Though illegal, the filibustering operations in the late 1840s and early 1850s were romanticized in the U.S. press. Wealthy American expansionists financed dozens of expeditions, usually based out of New Orleans.
The United States had long been interested in acquiring Cuba from the declining Spanish Empire. As with Texas, Oregon, and California, American policy makers were concerned that Cuba would fall into British hands, which, according to the thinking of the Monroe Doctrine, would constitute a threat to the interests of the United States. Prompted by John L. O'Sullivan, in 1848 President Polk offered to buy Cuba from Spain for $100 million. Polk feared that filibustering would hurt his effort to buy the island, and so he informed the Spanish of an attempt by the Cuban filibuster Narciso López to seize Cuba by force and annex it to the U.S., and the plot was foiled. Nevertheless, Spain declined to sell the island, which ended Polk's efforts to acquire Cuba. O'Sullivan, on the other hand, continued to raise money for filibustering expeditions, eventually landing him in legal trouble.[26]
Filibustering continued to be a major concern for presidents after Polk. Whigs presidents Zachary Taylor and Millard Fillmore tried to suppress the expeditions. When the Democrats recaptured the White House in 1852 with the election of Franklin Pierce, a filibustering effort by John A. Quitman to acquire Cuba received the tentative support of the president. Pierce backed off, however, and instead renewed the offer to buy the island, this time for $130 million. When the public learned of the Ostend Manifesto in 1854, which argued that the United States could seize Cuba by force if Spain refused to sell, this effectively killed the effort to acquire the island. The public now linked expansion with slavery; if Manifest Destiny had once enjoyed widespread popular approval, this was no longer true.[27]
Filibusters like William Walker continued to garner headlines in the late 1850s, but with the outbreak of the American Civil War in 1860, the "Age of Manifest Destiny" came to an end. Expansionism was among the various issues that played a role in the coming of the war. With the divisive question of the expansion of slavery, Northerners and Southerners, in effect, were coming to define Manifest Destiny in different ways, undermining nationalism as a unifying force. According to Frederick Merk, "The doctrine of Manifest Destiny, which in the 1840s had seemed Heaven-sent, proved to have been a bomb wrapped up in idealism."[28]

Native Americans
Manifest Destiny had serious consequences for Native Americans, since continental expansion implicitly meant the occupation of Native American land. The United States continued the European practice of recognizing only limited land rights of indigenous peoples. In a policy formulated largely by Henry Knox, Secretary of War in the Washington Administration, the U.S. government sought to expand into the west through the legal purchase of Native American land in treaties. Indians were encouraged to sell their vast tribal lands and become "civilized", which meant (among other things) for Native American men to abandon hunting and become farmers, and for their society to reorganize around the family unit rather than the clan or tribe. The United States therefore acquired lands by treaty from Indian nations, often under circumstances which suggest a lack of voluntary and knowing consent by the native signers. Advocates of civilization programs believed that the process of settling native tribes would greatly reduce the amount of land needed by the Indians, making more land available for homesteading by white Americans. Thomas Jefferson believed that while American Indians were the intellectual equals of whites, they had to live like the whites or inevitably be pushed aside by them.[citation needed], Jefferson's belief, rooted in Enlightenment thinking, that whites and Native Americans would merge to create a single nation did not last his lifetime, and he began to believe that the natives should emigrate across the Mississippi River and maintain a separate society, an idea made possible by the Louisiana Purchase of 1803.
In the age of Manifest Destiny, this idea, which came to be known as "Indian Removal", gained ground. Although some humanitarian advocates of removal believed that American Indians would be better off moving away from whites, an increasing number of Americans regarded the natives as nothing more than savages who stood in the way of American expansion. As historian Reginald Horsman argued in his influential study Race and Manifest Destiny, racial rhetoric increased during the era of Manifest Destiny. Americans increasingly believed that Native Americans would fade away as the United States expanded. As an example, this idea was reflected in the work of one of America's first great historians, Francis Parkman, whose landmark book The Conspiracy of Pontiac was published in 1851. Parkman wrote that Indians were "destined to melt and vanish before the advancing waves of Anglo-American power, which now rolled westward unchecked and unopposed."[29]

Beyond North America
As the Civil War faded into history, the term Manifest Destiny experienced a brief revival. In the 1892 U.S. presidential election, the Republican Party platform proclaimed: "We reaffirm our approval of the Monroe doctrine and believe in the achievement of the manifest destiny of the Republic in its broadest sense." What was meant by "manifest destiny" in this context was not clearly defined, particularly since the Republicans lost the election. In the 1896 election, however, the Republicans recaptured the White House and held on to it for the next 16 years. During that time, Manifest Destiny was cited to promote overseas expansion. Whether or not this version of Manifest Destiny was consistent with the continental expansionism of the 1840s was debated at the time, and long afterwards.[30]
For example, when President William McKinley advocated annexation of the Territory of Hawaii in 1898, he said that "We need Hawaii as much and a good deal more than we did California. It is manifest destiny." On the other hand, former President Grover Cleveland, a Democrat who had blocked the annexation of Hawaii during his administration, wrote that McKinley's annexation of the territory was a "perversion of our national destiny." Historians continued that debate; some have interpreted the overseas expansion of the 1890s as an extension of Manifest Destiny across the Pacific Ocean; others have regarded it as the antithesis of Manifest Destiny.[31]

Spanish-American War and the Philippines
In 1898, after the sinking of the USS Maine in the harbor at Havana, Cuba, the United States intervened on the side of Cuban rebels who were fighting the Spanish Empire, beginning the Spanish-American War. Although advocates of Manifest Destiny in the 1840s had called for the annexation of Cuba, the Teller Amendment, passed unanimously by the U.S. Senate before the war, proclaimed Cuba "free and independent" and disclaimed any U.S. intention to annex the island. After the war, the Platt Amendment (1902) established Cuba as a virtual protectorate of the United States. If Manifest Destiny meant the outright annexation of territory, it no longer applied to Cuba, since Cuba was never annexed.
Unlike Cuba, the United States did annex Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines after the war with Spain. The acquisition of these islands marked a new chapter in U.S. history. Traditionally, territories were acquired by the United States for the purpose of becoming new states, on equal footing with already existing states. These islands, however, were acquired as colonies rather than prospective states, a process validated by the Insular Cases, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that full constitutional rights did not automatically extend to all areas under American control. In this sense, annexation was a violation of traditional Manifest Destiny. According to Frederick Merk, "Manifest Destiny had contained a principle so fundamental that a Calhoun and an O'Sullivan could agree on it—that a people not capable of rising to statehood should never be annexed. That was the principle thrown overboard by the imperialism of 1899."[32] (The Philippines was eventually given its independence in 1946; Guam and Puerto Rico have special status to this day, but all their people are full citizens of the United States.)
On the other hand, Manifest Destiny had also contained within it the idea that "uncivilized" peoples could be improved by exposure to the Christian, democratic values of the United States. In his decision to annex the Philippines, President McKinley has been quoted as echoed this theme: "There was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them...." (this quotation has been disputed[33]). Rudyard Kipling's poem "The White Man's Burden", which was subtitled "The United States and the Philippine Islands", was a famous expression of these sentiments,[34] which were common at the time. A nascent revolutionary government desirous of independence, however, resisted this effort to "uplift and civilize", resulting in the outbreak of the Philippine-American War in 1899. After the war began, William Jennings Bryan, an opponent of overseas expansion, wrote that "‘Destiny’ is not as manifest as it was a few weeks ago."[35]

Later usage
After the turn of the nineteenth century to the twentieth, the phrase Manifest Destiny declined in usage, as territorial expansion ceased to be promoted as being a part of America's "destiny." Under President Theodore Roosevelt, the role of the United States in the New World was defined, in the 1904 Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, as being an "international police power" to secure American interests in the Western Hemisphere. Roosevelt's corollary contained an explicit rejection of territorial expansion. In the past, Manifest Destiny had been seen as necessary to enforce the Monroe Doctrine in the Western Hemisphere, but now expansionism had been replaced by interventionism as a means of upholding the doctrine.
President Woodrow Wilson continued the policy of interventionism in the Americas, and attempted to redefine both Manifest Destiny and America's "mission" on a broader, worldwide scale. Wilson led the United States into World War I with the argument that "The world must be made safe for democracy." In his 1920 message to Congress after the war, Wilson stated:
...I think we all realize that the day has come when Democracy is being put upon its final test. The Old World is just now suffering from a wanton rejection of the principle of democracy and a substitution of the principle of autocracy as asserted in the name, but without the authority and sanction, of the multitude. This is the time of all others when Democracy should prove its purity and its spiritual power to prevail. It is surely the manifest destiny of the United States to lead in the attempt to make this spirit prevail.
This was the only time a president had used the phrase "Manifest Destiny" in his annual address. Wilson's version of Manifest Destiny was a rejection of expansionism and an endorsement (in principle) of self-determination, emphasizing that the United States had a mission to be a world leader for the cause of democracy. This U.S. vision of itself as the leader of the "free world" would grow stronger in the 20th century after World War II, although rarely would it be described as "Manifest Destiny", as Wilson had done.[36]
Today, in standard scholarly usage, Manifest Destiny describes a past era in American history, particularly the 1840s. However, the term is sometimes used by the political left and by critics of U.S. foreign policy to characterize interventions in the Middle East and elsewhere. In this usage, Manifest Destiny is interpreted as the underlying cause of what is perceived by some as "American imperialism".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny
nwoTools.jpgnwo.gifprice7.jpgPalace9-7-08264.jpg
Read more…
County of Kauai Planning Commission Chairperson and Committee : EO SAVE OUR KAPUNA IWI'S WAILUA BEACHSIGN THE PETITION ON THE YOUTUBE PAGE LINK:CLICK ON TO GET THEREseptember 09, 2009County of Kauai Planning Commission Chairperson and Committee;Agenda for Wed. 9/9/9:LEGAL DOCUMENT:C 2009-304 Communication(0811912009) from the Director of Parks & Recreation, transmitting for Council approvalsecuring of a shared-use path property adjustment agreement at Wailua Bay View and right-of-entry and license agreement at Kapa'a Sands to access for construction the Lydgate Park to Kapa'a Bike Pedestrian Path along Papaloa Road as follows:(a) Property Adjustment Agreement by and between the Association of Apartment Owners of Wailua Bay View Apartments, a Hawai'i Nonprofit Corporation, and the County of Kauai’s, portion of' Tax Map Key No. (4) 4-1-05:3, containing an area of approximately 1,080 square feet.(b) Right-of-Entry and License Agreement by and between the County of Kaua'i, and the Association of Apartment Owners of Kapa'a Sands, containing an area approximately 2,134 square feet and Construction Parcel C-I. Containing an area of approximately 13,437 square feet both identified as being portions of Tax Map Key No. (4) 4-3-02:02.As a Native Hawaiian living in the Puna district, Kingdom of Atooi, Kauai, Hawaii, I want to make known my objections to the permitting process of which the County of Kauai’s Planning Departments have engaged, are engaging and plan to engage in, in regards to areas related to; Wailuanuiaho’ano, the Great Sacred Wailua.The “inclusion of Tax Map Keys 4-3-2: 2 and 10, and 4-1-5: 6”, Wailua, Kauai. Hawaii Administrative rules (HAR) 11-200-26 provides in relevant part: “If there is a change in size, scope, intensity, use, location or timing, among other things which may have a significant effect, the original statement that was changed shall no longer be valid because an essentially different action would be under consideration and a supplemental statement shall be prepared and reviewed as provided by this chapter.”The modification requested would add three parcels to the permit. (1). A sidewalk on one parcel to be demolished and reinstalled. (2). Department of Public Works intends to obtain another parcel to provide a consistent road right of way alignment and construct the shared use path. (3). Department of Public Works plans to demolish an existing sidewalk on another parcel and move it approximately 3 feet mauka to abut the property line. While Department of Public Works claims these modifications do not alter or change the shared use path project or its concept in any way, they were not addressed in the EA and, since they may have a significant effect on the environment, the original EA is not valid because we may now have an essentially different action under consideration.This area is used for public parking and access to Papaloa (great reef) for fishing, swimming, and Kukui heiau. This development will have an impact on our access, protected under article XII section VII of the State of Hawaii Constitutions. This chapter indicates that as a native Hawaiian we have inherent birthrights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes, possessed by ahupua'a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778.Have there been considerations for alternative parking?Commissioners, the modification to the original SMA permit; dated September 11, 2007 contradicts the intent of Hawaii Administrative rules (HAR) 11-200-26. The law requires that when the project changes, to cover the potential effects of those additional changes, you are required to have a supplemental EA/EIS completed. Additionally, a Cultural Impact Assessment is called for."Pursuant to State EA law (Act 50). there was no cultural impact assessment. The County used the Kapa’a Relief Route CIA, citing it is in the same highway corridor. This action is flawed and indicates that the County of Kauai , disregards the spiritual and Cultural significance of the Wailuanuiahoano area. You cannot just “borrow studies” that are not precisely done for the specific project. This is not proper protocol for an area as Sacred as Wailua.Issues; including the fact that Federal Stimulus Funds are being used for something that would have a significant adverse effect to the Hawaiian culture, people, and historical and cultural properties, primary and secondary, socially and environmentally. Wailuanuiahoano It is a spiritual place of significance, a religious site that is also known as a pu’uhonua (place of refuge, place of peace). We need to retain the integrity of significant cultural and historical landscapes for now and the future, and this wahi kapu (sacred site) is one of the most important in Hawaiian culture and all of Polynesian history!Most important, we do not want the sacred areas of Wailua beach desecrated by a plastic boardwalk and see it become a high traffic transient corridor, that a 14 feet wide design invites!. This boardwalk is wider then the federal requirements for the width of Kuhio highway lanes! Wailua beach is inclusive of the entire bay, and area known as a National Landmark (Wailua River Park and Wailua Complex of Heiau) - it is known traditionally as an “one kapu” (kapu sands) and has a huge historical / mythology and oral history associated with Wailua beach (Alio beach is the traditional and proper name).For the record we have documents that we have been in objection to this alignment since 2004. Citizens of the Condos that fronts Wailua’s coastlines who were also affected by this process, had the financial means to hire an independent Marine biologist as well as legal representation, thus their concerns were addressed and met.Is it because we are considered by the county of Kauai as “under educated, and in capable of navigating the laws and the process that we indeed find “inconsistent”, that we are treated as second class citizens? I feel that it is very degrading to the Hawaiian people and our culture which do I have to remind you is the backbone of the tourist economy? It seems that the only way to get any recognition is by editorial in the local newspaper where the locals are telling the tourist, “Eh no foa get for go home!” or having to resort to protesting on the sides of the roads holding banners and signs! As native Hawaiians we DO NOT belong on the sides of the roads!We are still patiently awaiting Mayor Carvalho’s promise that he intends to hold a community meeting to address Native Hawaiians concerns prior to the commencement of construction of this multi use bike path in Wailua.I once again reiterate my objections, based on major discrepancies, inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the process and procedures implemented by the County of Kauai. I feel that there needs to be further investigation as to whether the County of Kauai has exhausted or even addressed Section 106 procedures and requirements. This process should have in fact actually included an Environmental Impact Statement considering the cumulative effects that this project will have on future of The native Hawaiians, our culture and the area of Wailuanuiahoano................................................................................................................................................................................Please show support!Dear County of Kauai, Mayor Bernard Carvalho,We would like to ask that the proposed route of the Ke Ala Hele Makalae (Multi use bike path), be altered to run mauka of Kuhio Highway either in front of or behind of the Coco Palms property. Further, by allowing the path to run west of the highway would result in better and safer access to the businesses along Wailua River and shops that are sure to materialize as the Coco Palms property is developed.This change will preserve the last beach on the east side with easy access for recreation activities and cultural practices. This will also preserve Wailua beach view plane and eliminate further distraction to vehicle operators who daily check the ocean conditions from Kuhio highway.Allowing this path to be built on the vegetation line that buffers and filters run off water to Wailua beach from Kuhio highway will allow petroleum and chemical contaminants from this high traffic corridor to enter the delicate marine environment of Wailua Bay during heavy rains. This increase in pollution will have a very negative impact on the fragile marine environment so vital to our tourist industry, and culture. This vegetation line is the home of many salt tolerant plants that is vital to Wailua accretion cycle and protects Wailua beach from erosion. Many of these plants are harvested and used for medicinal and cultural practices today.Most importantly, it would protect the last remaining area of what was once a very large and sacred burial site of the Kupuna Iwi O Wailua, who were possibly the first Alii's with origins to Tahiti. Portions of this burial site have been desecrated for the development of Kuhio Highway and the Coco Palms resort. We ask that this area be preserved and an Ahu be built in honor and respect.Wailua Beach was once the seat for native Hawaiian spirituality. Its rich historical significance and natural, untamed beauty, makes it one of the wonders of Kauai our visitors and residents alike can enjoy.We feel that these points merit consideration, and hope that you will re think the current route that the County of Kauai has proposed for Wailua Beach.Sincerely,Sophronia N. JosselinFriends of Wailua Beach
Read more…

Aloha to our dear Beloved Friend, James Nakapa’ahu .

Aloha to our dear Beloved Friend, James Nakapa’ahu .Aloha Kakou, James Nakapa’ahu has passed away on September 9, 2009. He was husband and support to Lynette Cruz, kanaka maoli champion and a genuinely good person. He joins our ancestors and our beloved Queen tonight to help and guide us from the other side. We send thoughts of peace and comfort to Lynette,Auwe no ho'i e! Aloha 'ino! _________Alas, what a pity!o 'oe e James Nakapa'ahu _________Of you James Nakapa'ahuKulu wai maka no 'oe e ho'i wale no. _________Tears flow for you that went alone.Eia mai ka pueo oia no ka 'elele ________The owl came who is the messengerKe ali'i ohi e! ___________The chief is taken!Maluna o ka 'eheu o ka 'io. _________Flying away on the wing of the Hawk.Ka ili 'ia mai na me aloha___ ________snatched from the loved ones___ua hele pu ke Akua. ________to place on your shouldersi ho'opulu ia e ka ua loku _________dampened by the down-pouring rain.Uwe makou ia 'oe. ___________We cry for you.'Ike pu kakou i ka luhi i na la i 'aui a'e. _______We know the burdens of days long past.He hana maika'i 'oe. Pau ka hana. ________You've done good works. Your work is done. pio ke ahi aka e ola 'oe i loko p ko makou pu'uwai. _____The fire is extinguished but you live within our hearts.Ke aloha is 'oe he mea poina 'ole. ________The love for you will never be forgotten.Ke Akua pu me 'oe. __________God be with you.Ua noa a ua noa... elieli noa. ________Freedom, complete freedom. It is done. Aloha e! Aloha nui loa ia 'oe! ________Farewell! Great love to you! Tane Evern WilliamsPono KealohaJames Nakapa’ahu has left this plane and moved on. He was a powerful spiritual person who touched many very deeply. I will miss him but know that his spirit is around. HenryOh my, kaumaha ho’i au, but yes, he joins the kini ‘aumakua to provide guidance and support to us who remain. Aloha and pule to Lynette and all the ‘ohana and hoaaloha that circled ua mea hala nei.Aloha ‘ino,‘OhuJamesNakapaahu.jpg
Read more…

My trip to kona

Aloha recently I went to kona to visit my sister and brother I have never been there and to my surprise what a beautiful place to visit Im glad I went I met many many Konaians and many beautiful people the sites were awesum I was fortunate to be with my brothers most gracious girlfriend BJ betty you know you the bomb!! she also had me to stay at her humble home oh boy never a dull moment!! I loved my stay there and hope to go back soon. aloha BJ you were the best hostess ever I love you..
Read more…

FREE HAWAI`I TV - "AWAKE TO A FAKE"

FREE HAWAI`I TVTHE FREE HAWAI`I BROADCASTING NETWORK "AWAKE TO A FAKE"You Won't Believe What Was Said At The 50th State Celebrations That Stopped Hawai`i's Fake State Governor Cold.You Also Won't Believe What A Former Hawai`i Governor Admitted On Live TV That Stopped Everyone Else Cold.What Are We Talking About? Watch & Find Out.Then Send This Video To One Other Person Today.
Read more…