Nini'ane
Nini'ane
All Posts (6512)
Sort by
Nini'ane
Press Release: New Research Reveals Widespread GMO Contamination and Threatsto Local Agriculture From the World's First Commercially Planted GeneticallyEngineered TreeNews Release: Embargo 00:01 September 9 2004Contact: Melanie Bondera, Hawaii GEAN +1 808 640-1643 or Noli Hoye,GMO-Free Kauai +1 808 651-9603New Research Reveals Widespread GMO Contamination and Threats toLocal Agriculture From the World's First Commercially PlantedGenetically Engineered TreeOutraged Farmers, Consumers and Backyard Papaya Growers ReturnContaminated Papayas to the University of Hawaii in Crop DumpHilo, Hawaii -- Independent laboratory testing results released todayreveal widespread contamination from the world's first commerciallyplanted genetically engineered tree, the papaya, on Oahu, the BigIsland, and Kauai. Contamination was also found in the stock ofnon-genetically engineered seeds being sold commercially by theUniversity of Hawaii.Farmers, health professionals, concerned citizens, and University ofHawaii scientists joined GMO-Free Hawaii in announcing the shockingresults of their research at the University of Hawaii, which createdand released the GMO papaya. Dozens of outraged farmers, consumersand backyard growers brought their contaminated papayas back to theuniversity to underscore their demand that UH provide a plan forcleaning up papaya contamination. The campaign also called forliability protection for local growers and the prevention of GMOcontamination of other Hawaiian commodity crops.All samples were tested by Genetic ID, one of the world's leadingscientific laboratories for genetic contamination testing. Compositesamples from the Big Island and Oahu both revealed GMO contamination.Nearly 20,000 papaya seeds from across the Big Island, 80% of whichcame from organic farms and the rest from backyard gardens or wildtrees, showed a contamination level of 50%. Oahu's composite ofpapayas, primarily from organic farms, showed contamination of over5%, and trace levels of contamination were found on an organic farmon Kauai. One package of seed of the Solo Waimanalo papaya, anon-genetically engineered variety purchased directly from theUniversity of Hawaii, also tested positive for GMO contamination."It is an outrage that UH is selling contaminated papaya seeds toour local farmers and growers," said Toi Lahti, an organic farmer andpapaya grower from the Big Island. "Not only could organic farmerslose their certification by growing genetically engineered papayas,GMO papaya seeds are also patented by Monsanto among others. Thisopens farmers to lawsuits for growing GMOs without paying patent feesfirst, even if they planted them without their knowledge.""These tests indicate that UH's non-GMO seed stock is contaminated,and so there can be no doubt that the University must take immediateaction to protect farmers, con sumers and the environment," said MarkQuery of GMO-Free Hawaii. "Papaya contamination is a case study inthe threat that GMO contamination presents to local agriculture. Itis now obvious that coexistence of traditional and GMO crops isimpossible."Farmers raised concerns about the impact the contamination crisiscould have on export markets, particularly to countries like Japanthat have stringent regulations about importing geneticallyengineered crops. "The Big Island is home to most of the commercialGMO papaya fields in the state," said Melanie Bondera, a farmer fromKona and member of the Hawaii Genetic Engineering Action Network."The continued planting of GMO crops risk giving Hawaiian agriculturean undeservedly bad reputation in major export markets around theworld."Dr. Lorrin Pang, MD, MPH, a public health specialist, discussedpotential human health threats posed by the GMO papaya and other GMOfoods, inc luding increased antibiotic resistance and unexpectedallergenic reactions. "All of these concerns are troubling inthemselves, but they would be less worrisome if the GMO mutations didnot spread beyond our intentions. Today's report shows that theydo," Dr. Pang said. "If a health problem arises that is attributableto GMO foods, it will be impossible to recall such a live, dangerousmutation once it has been released into the environment."Dr. Hector Valenzuela, a scientist specializing in tropical cropsfrom UH Manoa's Department of Tropical Plant and Soil Sciences,asserted that the University's focus on promoting genetic engineeringis steering Hawaiian agriculture in the wrong direction. "Instead ofsupporting untested technologies like genetic engineering, theUniversity of Hawaii should redirect their resources to focus onresearching and promoting workable, non-GMO solutions to localagricultural problems. Hawaii farmers need agricultural advancesthat can protect their farms and our state's agricultural economyover the long run."Bondera outlined the campaign being launched by GMO-Free Hawaii basedon these contamination results. "Despite the problems local growershave had with the GMO papaya, the University is now geneticallyengineering taro, pineapple, banana, sugarcane, and other commoditycrops," said Bondera. "The problems with GMO papaya contaminationshow us that there are too many unanswered questions aboutagricultural biotech to be releasing new experimental geneticallyengineered organisms into our environment. Hawaiian farmers want tosee an immediate moratorium on the release of other geneticallyengineered commodity crops, and a commitment from the University tofund research into local, sustainable agriculture."
Joseph Gerson, Foreign Policy In Focus, March 20, 2008www. fpif. orgVictories are within sight for people in a growing number of nations where communities that host U.S. foreign military bases have long fought to get rid of them.Ecuador’s decision not to renew the U.S. lease for the forward operating base at Manta (see Yankees Head Home) is the culmination of just one of many long-term and recently initiated community-based and national struggles to remove these military installations that are often sources of crime and demeaning human rights violations. A growing alliance among anti-bases movements in countries around the world, including the United States, is preventing the creation of new foreign military bases, restricting the expansion of others, and in some cases may win the withdrawal of the military bases, installations and troops that are essential to U.S. wars of intervention and its preparations for first-strike nuclear attacks.The ChallengeOf course, there is still plenty of bad news. The Bush Administration is currently negotiating what is, in essence, a security treaty with the Maliki puppet government in Baghdad to secure one of the principle Bush-Cheney war aims: permanent military bases for tens of thousands of U.S. troops. The goal is to transform Iraq into an U.S. unsinkable aircraft carrier in the heart of the oil-rich Middle East. Unfortunately, the plan for Iraq is only one part of the vast and expanding U.S. infrastructure of nearly 1,000 military bases and installations strategically scattered around the world.Across Asia, in Japan, another Marine has raped an Okinawan school girl, traumatizing yet another life and temporarily shaking the foundations of the U.S.-Japan military alliance. Under the guise of a “Visiting Force Agreement,” U.S. troops have returned to the Philippines where they are deployed from “temporary” and unconstitutional military bases. In the Indian Ocean, Chagossian people were removed from Diego Garcia to make way for massive U.S. military bases; they have won all of their legal appeals but still can’t return home. In Central Europe, the Bush Administration is pressing deployment of first strike-related “missile defense” bases in the Czech Republic and Poland. Russia has countered by threatening to target the bases with nuclear weapons, and opposition to “missile defense.” In response to this renewed Cold War, opposition to “missile defense” weaponry is building in public squares and in parliaments throughout the region. And, as he recently traveled across Africa, President George W. Bush was met with near universal opposition to his plans for further military colonization of the continent in the form of moving the Pentagon’s Africa Command headquarters from Europe to the oil and resource-rich continent.The Bush Administration and Pentagon are “reconfiguring” the U.S. global network of more than 750 foreign military bases to impose what Vice President Dick Cheney termed in a New Yorker interview as “the arrangement for the 21st century.” This imperial “arrangement” is increasingly being met with opposition in “host” nations and the United States alike, and victories by allied movements are within reach.How We Got HereFor more than a century, the United States has been building an unrivaled global structure of nearly foreign fortresses. Located on every continent and at sea, these military bases and installations provide an infrastructure from which invasions and nuclear wars can be launched. They enforce an unjust and often violent status quo, influence the politics and diplomacy of “host” nations, secure privileged access to oil and other natural resources, encircle enemies, “show the flag,” and more recently have served as prisons operating outside the restrictions of U.S. and international law.These bases violate democratic values in other ways. When the United States was founded, the Declaration of Independence decried the “abuses and usurpations” caused by King George having “kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies.” Since then, “abuses and usurpations” inherent in the presence of foreign “Standing Armies” have become far more dangerous. Their demeaning and disruptive impacts include:* Undermining the sovereignty of “host” nations* Militarizing and colonizing the “host” nation’s culture* Assaulting democracy and human rights* Seizing people’s private property and damaging their homes* Violently abusing and dehumanizing women and girls* Causing life-endangering military accidents and crimes that are rarely punished* Terrorizing low-altitude training flights and night-landing exercises* Polluting with military toxicsSince the Cold War ended, U.S. presidents and the Pentagon have worked to “reconfigure” the architecture of this military infrastructure to address changing geopolitical realities, technological “advances,” and growing resistance to the presence of foreign bases. With agility, flexibility and speed being given priority in U.S. military operations, bases are being transformed into hubs, forward operating bases, and “lily pads” for invasions and foreign military interventions.The other axis of reconfiguration is geographic. As U.S. forces have been forced out of Saudi Arabia, and with U.S. geostrategic priorities turning away from Europe and toward China, Washington has concentrated its military build up elsewhere in the Persian Gulf nations, Asia and the Pacific.Tipping PointsIn a number of countries, the reconfiguration has not proceeded as smoothly as anticipated:IraqAs Major General Robert Pollman explained in 2004, “It ma[de] a lot of sense” to “swap” U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia for new ones in Iraq. U.S. command and air bases located near the holy cities of Mecca and Medina incensed many Muslims and were among Osama Bin Laden’s professed reasons for the 9-11 attacks. In the lead up to the 2003 invasion, many of the functions of these bases were moved to Qatar and Kuwait, and after the conquest, 110 bases were established across Iraq. To limit their political and military vulnerability, the Pentagon has been spending more than a $1 billion a year to consolidate them into 14 “enduring” and massive Air Force, Army and Marine bases in Baghdad and other strategic locations, In addition to helping secure U.S. control over Iraq, these bases contribute to encircling Iran, and they can be used for attacks across the Persian Gulf region and into oil-rich Central Asia.The Bush administration’s plans to saddle its successor with these bases and the continuing occupation by negotiating an agreement with the Maliki government hit unexpected road block. In addition to popular Iraqi opposition, U.S. peace movement organizations joined Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-MA) to prevent the unconstitutional imposition of what is essentially a treaty. The Delahunt hearings about the proposed commitment to defend the Baghdad government from internal and external enemies, the bases which are permanent in all but name, and privileged access to investment opportunities (read oil) for U.S. corporations forced Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to rhetorically back away from the open-ended security commitment to Baghdad. But his promises that the bases are “not permanent” are less credible.Nothing is officially “permanent,” of course. Not even the bases in Japan and Korea, which have been there for more than six decades, and not the Great Wall of China, or the pyramids of Egypt, which are slowly decaying.With opposition to the treaty and the permanent military bases now a defining issue between Democrats and Republicans, the U.S. peace movement has an important opening to press its demands for the immediate and total withdrawal from Iraq.AFRICOMU.S. planners anticipate that by 2015 Africa will provide the U.S. with 25% of its imported oil. With Islamist political forces operating across northern Africa, the continent is also seen as an important front in the misconceived “war on terrorism.” So, to “promote peace and stability on the continent” the Bush Administration and the Pentagon want to augment the U.S. military presence in Africa, beginning with the transfer of the Africa Command, AFRICOM, from remote Germany to an accommodating African nation. As President Bush learned during his recent ill-fated African tour, the continent’s leaders are understandably reluctant to accept renewed military colonization. Ghana’s President John Kufuour put it bluntly when he met with Bush, saying, “You’re not going to build any bases in Ghana.”Africa is not free of bases. France and Britain still have bases scattered there. The U.S. has bases in Djibouti and Algeria, access agreements with Morocco and Egypt, and is in the process of creating a “family” of military bases in sub-Saharan Africa (Cameroon, Guinea, Mali, Sao Tome, Senegal and Uganda.) And, although Bush responded to African fears about AFRICOM’s possible relocation by saying that such rumors were “baloney” and “bull,” he also conceded that: “We haven’t made our minds up.”With a growing No AFRICOM movement in the United States that’s that is allied with anti-colonialist forces in Africa, this is one U.S. threat that can be contained.Diego GarciaIn the mid-1960s, in a quintessential act of European colonialism, all of Diego Garcia’s 2,000 inhabitants were forcefully removed from their homeland by British authorities to make way for massive U.S. air and naval bases. In an act of legal fiction, the island was separated from Mauritius on the eve of that island nation’s independence.Located in the Indian Ocean, Diego Garcia’s two-mile long runways have since been used to launch B-1 and B-52 attacks against Iraq and Afghanistan. Its stealth bomber hangars have recently been upgraded for possible strikes against Iran, and its submarine base is being refitted to serve Ohio-class submarines that can be used for both missile attacks and to secretly deploy Navy SEALS in Iran and other Persian Gulf nations.The Chagos people of Diego Garcia want to return home, ending their exile in Mauritius’ slums, where up to 90% are unemployed and live desperate lives. The base rests on colonial constructions. With the help of allies in London and around the world they attempted to return, but have been halted on the high seas. But their plight and struggle has wide and sympathetic media attention, especially as they have won one challenge after another in the British courts. The British House of Lords is to make a “final ruling,” but an end run in which Diego Garcia would be returned to Mauritius’ authority and the “rented” to Washington remains possible. Education about the plight and struggle of the people of Diego Garcia, beginning with the spring speaking tour of Chagos leader Olivier Bancoult, is the best way to prepare for the next round of this compelling struggle.OkinawaSince its 1945 bloody conquest in 1945, Okinawa has served as the principle bastion of U.S. military power in East Asia – even after its 1972 reversion to Japan. Sixty years after the end of World War II, nearly 45,000 U.S. troops, civilian staff, and their families are based on Air Force, Navy, Marine and Army bases that occupy 27% of the island prefecture. Okinawans have suffered nearly every imaginable military abuse: One quarter of its people were killed during the 1945 battle, many by Japanese soldiers. U.S. nuclear weapons have fallen off ships and into coastal fishing grounds. Shells and bullets from live fire exercises have slammed into people’s homes. Children, their grandmothers, base and service workers have suffered rapes that are too numerous to count. Land has been seized, and military accidents – including helicopters and their parts falling into students’ schools – are not uncommon.To pacify the nationwide outrage that followed the 1995 kidnapping and rape of a 12-year-old Okinawan school girl in 1995, Washington and Tokyo agreed to reduce, not remove, the size of the U.S. footprint on Okinawa. With the U.S.-Japan alliance hanging in the balance, the Status of Forces Agreement was revised to accord the Japanese courts greater authority over crimes by G.I.s, and a plan was developed to move half of the 16,000 Marines – the greatest source of G.I. crime – to Guam largely at Japan’s expense. Several bases were consolidated and Washington agreed to move the Futemna Air Base, in Ginowan’s city center, to a more remote part of the island. This leaves the massive Air Force, Naval and Marine bases still occupying a quarter of the prefecture.Inspired by respected elders, the people of Henoko, the coastal site to which Futnema’s functions were to be transferred, have put up a stiff resistance. To prevent the militarization of their community and the destruction of the reef on which the new air base is to be built, they have built alliances with peace activists and environmentalists around the world. Their focus has been to prevent destruction feeding grounds for dugongs (large, gentle sea mammals similar to manatees) that became the symbol of their movement. They have also conducted months-long sit-ins and taken their case to court. A California appeal court recently confirmed their environmental claims, and the relocation process stalled.Within weeks of this court victory, Marines raped a 14-year-old Okinawan school girl and a Filipina woman sparking renewed outrage across Okinawa and Japan. In the “Message from the Women of Okinawa” that followed, the U.S. military and the world were notified that the days when “so many rape victims…told no one and wept silently in their beds…are now over.” Their message is clear, “Go back to America. Now.”With Washington and Tokyo focused on “containing” China, it will be years before the last G.I. returns from Okinawa. In the meantime, we can provide critical support to women and men who are courageously and nonviolently campaigning to defend their lives, their families, their communities, and nature itself. The base at Henoko must not be built. The base in Futenma must be closed. It is past time to bring all the Marines home.GuamGuam is not home. Located in the South Pacific and conquered by the United States from Spain in 1898, it has long served as a U.S. stepping stone to Asia. Nominally it is not a U.S. colony, but an “unincorporated territory” with a nonvoting delegate in Congress. Throughout the Cold War, U.S. air and naval bases occupied the island’s best agricultural lands, water sources and fishing grounds. Now the abuses and usurpations are becoming much worse.Since the nonviolent 1995 Okinawan uprising, the Pentagon has been preparing for the day when it is finally forced to withdraw from Okinawa and Japan. Thus Guam is being transformed in to a military “hub.” Already large enough to accommodate B-52 and stealth bombers, Andersen Air Force Base is being expanded to serve as “the most significant U.S. Air Force base in the Pacific region for this century.” More submarines are being homeported in its harbor, and the Navy is considering homeporting an aircraft carrier strike force there is well. Then, there are those Marines from Okinawa. Understandably, Guam’s tiny Chamorro population feels besieged. In the traditions of U.S., Israeli and South African settler colonialism, it is “cowboys and Indians all over again.” We have a responsibility to prevent this cultural genocide.EuropeThe Cold War never really ended in Europe. An estimated 380 U.S. nuclear weapons are still based in seven European nations, and most of the 100,000 troops deployed across Western Europe remain there. But Pentagon campaigns to deploy misnamed “missile defenses” in the Czech Republic and Poland and to expand the Aviano Air Base in Italy are leading hundreds of thousands of Europeans into the streets.The missile defense system is ostensibly modest. A missile tracking radar is to be installed in the Czech Republic, and ten interceptor missiles are to be sited in Poland, reportedly to defend Europe from Iranian missiles that have not been deployed. In fact, this is the tip of the iceberg. Russia properly fears that, once deployed, the missile defense system will be greatly expanded with the goal of neutralizing Moscow’s missile forces, leaving Russia vulnerable to U.S. first strike attacks. In response, President Vladimir Putin has menacingly threatened to target nuclear weapons against the Czechs and Poles.Opinion polls indicate that most Czechs oppose the missile defense deployments and want to hold a referendum to block them. Many NATO leaders are angry that the U.S. circumvented the European Union’s decision-making process, and protests spearheaded by the U.S. Campaign for Peace and Democracy greeted Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek when he recently visited the United States. With many leading congressional Democrats also opposed to these dangerous deployments, missile defenses can be stopped.Finally, there is Italy where, unexpectedly, hundreds of thousands of citizens turned out to protest the expansion of the U.S. Air Base at Aviano (which also hosts U.S. nuclear weapons.) Dissent over the base expansion nearly toppled the Prodi government in 2007, and it will remain the focus of European and U.S. anti-bases campaigns.ResistanceIn response to popularly based movements to win the withdrawal of unwanted U.S. foreign military bases, an incipient U.S. anti-bases movement is emerging. It includes organizations as diverse as the American Friends Service Committee, and the Southwest Workers Union, the United for Peace and Justice coalition, and scholars who are moving from studying military bases to working for their withdrawal.Four increasingly integrated U.S. anti-bases networks have developed in recent years, spurred in part by the development of the global “No Military Bases Network” in World Social Forums and the global Network’s formal inauguration in Quito, Ecuador at a conference last year that brought together four hundred activists from forty nations. The U.S. networks are currently organizing April speaking tours featuring Olivier Bancoult from Diego Garcia, Terri Keko’olani from Hawaii, Jan Tamas and the Czech Republic, and Andreas Licata from Italy. And a national U.S. “No Foreign Military Bases” conference is in its early planning stages.Joseph Gerson, a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus (www. fpif. org), is director of programs of the American Friends Service Committee in New England. His books include The Sun Never Sets…Confronting the Network of U.S. Foreign Military Bases, (South End Press, 1991) and Empire and the Bomb: How the U.S. Uses Nuclear Weapons to Dominate the World (Pluto Press, 2007).
When you go back on your Word & Break Treaties in World Court, Imprison a Queen on Trumped up Charges,Auction the Palaces contents & Riches over a ten year span. and then to have the Gaul to Lable the "ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED and in SLAVED " as " BARBARIANS " and CONTINUE TO ILLEGALLY OCCUPY & FORCIBLE RULE, WITH A TRUMPED UP RACIST PUPPET GOVERNMENT, THAT CONTINUES TO PRACTICE ITS SICKENING RACIST GENOCIDAL COLONIAL PROGRAM ON OTHER NATIONS & COUNTRIES THROUGH OUT OUR WORLD ???MAKES YOU PROUD TO BE AMERICAN IN GOOD OLE USA , THE OTHER ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED ONCE GREAT NATION , "AMERIKA" !
Princess Ka'iulani film outrages some Hawaiianshttp://www. honoluluadvertiser. com/A movie about Princess Ka'iulani currently filming on O'ahu has angered a small group of Hawaiians who say filmmakers are distorting the story of a beloved ali'i.High on their list of complaints was the movie's proposed title — "Barbarian Princess" — which was changed last weekend in an effort to ease tensions. The $9 million film now is titled "The Last Princess."But Hawai'i entertainer Palani Vaughan, who has complained about the film's script since he read it in February, said he is not convinced that English director Marc Forby will accurately portray the life and times of Ka'iulani."A non-Hawaiian is trying to interpret in an un-Hawaiian way what he is supposing has happened," Vaughan said. "Forby is coming and coloring it in a way that he would like to see it."Vaughan has organized several Hawaiians who plan to voice their concerns tomorrow outside 'Iolani Palace, where the film will be shot next week. The group is also concerned that filming inside the palace could damage irreplaceable artifacts.Ka'iulani, who died at age 23, witnessed the overthrow of the monarchy in 1893 and tried to restore Hawaiian self-rule. The filmmakers say the movie about her short life "is a breathtaking romance about an unlikely heroine and her unwavering fight to defend the independence of her people."Former Hawai'i resident Q'orianka Kilcher was cast as Ka'iulani. Kilcher portrayed Pocahontas in the 2005 film "The New World."The film is being made by Matador Pictures and Island Film Group.Vaughan, who turned down the part of King Kalakaua, said filmmakers sprinkled the script with behavior unbefitting a princess and those around her, including one scene in which she tells the king she hates him and another in which her father, a non-Hawaiian, strikes her.Vaughan strongly objected to a lovemaking scene and was told it would be removed."I have no personal agenda," Vaughan said. "We just want this film to represent Hawaiian people both past and present in a true and accurate light. It is for the good of our people and the future."Hawaiian activist Henry Noa said he is worried about the interior of the palace."They will have all these people coming in and out of the palace that we revere," he said. "That is a part of who we are. It is the pride and care we are concerned about. If it is damaged, who will be held accountable for that?"Leilani Forby, an executive producer and the wife of the director, said everyone involved with the film has worked with cultural advisers, University of Hawai'i scholars and Hawaiian language experts for the past four years to foster accuracy."We have the utmost respect for Hawaiians," said Forby, who grew up in Kailua. "That is what is driving the story. We want the world to know what happened."But the movie is a drama, she said."This is not and never has been intended to be a documentary," Forby said. "I wouldn't say things have been twisted. We have had to take several historical events and compress time just to get the important events on film."Forby said the film does not contain a love scene or any sexual reference."There is a love interest and there are tender scenes of this love blooming, but this is not going to be an R-rated film," she said.Protecting the palace is a top priority, Forby said. Everyone involved will wear soft booties to preserve the floor varnish as well as gloves. Replica furniture is also being made for interior use."We are going to have an inside crew and an outside crew and never the twain shall meet," Forby said. "Once you are in, you are in and if you go out, you are out."The filmmakers have worked with palace caretakers to ensure that lighting does not overheat the interior and have hired an equipment manager from England who is familiar with filming inside national treasures, she said.Kippen de Alba Chu, executive director at the palace, said it would be protected. Palace staff will always be on hand to escort the film crew, inside and outside."They will not harm anything," he said. "We will make sure of that."Reach Mike Gordon at mgordon@honoluluadvertiser.com.Nini'ane
Nini'ane
Less than 24 hours after a stunning defeat for the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs before the Legislature, supporters of the proposed $200 million ceded lands settlement, including OHA officials themselves, held out hope that the agreement could be salvaged during the remaining month-and-a-half of the legislative session.
Meanwhile, opponents of the proposal said yesterday that OHA officials need to spend more time talking to the agency's beneficiaries after the legislative session to get the agency's priorities right.
After five hours of testimony, three major committees of the state Senate voted Monday night to shelve the plan, which would have had the state transfer three parcels valued at $187 million, $13 million in cash and at least $15 million annually, to OHA as its share of revenues derived from ceded lands.
In exchange, OHA and other Hawaiians would no longer be able to make further claims to those revenues.
Those opposed to House Bill 266 said Monday that the measure was giving up too much for too little and that it would have additional ramifications.
Two of three committee chairmen, Jill Tokuda, D-24th (Kailua, Kane'ohe), and Clayton Hee, D-23rd (Kane'ohe, Kahuku), said they wanted to OHA to go back to the drawing board after session.
But OHA Administrator Clyde Namu'o said agency officials want to talk to Senate President Colleen Hanabusa and House Speaker Calvin Say to see if there's still any chance of the settlement passing this session.
"When and if that is exhausted and there is no relief, the trustees will determine, based on counsel's recommendation, what the next course of action might be," Namu'o said. Asked if that might include a lawsuit, Namu'o replied: "Whether or not there is a cause of action that OHA might assert, that is what the attorneys need to determine and recommend accordingly."
He added: "Honestly, we would prefer not to go there. We really would prefer a legislative solution, and we don't think it's too late."
House Majority Leader Kirk Caldwell, D-24th (Manoa), said House Democratic leaders have also not given up on an amended bill that they helped craft.
"There are 26 days left in the legislative session, that's a little less than half," Caldwell said. "Many things can happen." House leaders have yet to discuss whether to hold hearings on Senate Bill 2733, the Senate's version of the agreement which crossed over from that chamber earlier this month, he said.
Procedurally, the House could change the language of the Senate bill to reflect House Bill 266. If that happens, House and Senate members could try to hammer out an agreement in conference committee at the end of session. But that could only be done if the Senate leadership assigned conferees to discuss the matter, and it would not be required to do so.
Almost as stunning as the committees' abrupt decision Monday was the tone of the meeting. At a House hearing on the same bill also held in the Capitol auditorium on Feb. 23, hardly anyone spoke in opposition. Before the Senate on Monday, a majority of the speakers testified against it.
Kamaki Kanahele, chairman of the Sovereign Councils of the Hawaiian Homesteaders Assembly, said what drew scores of homesteaders to the hearing was OHA's refusal to acknowledge that they, as beneficiaries of the ceded lands, should have been consulted more thoroughly and early on.
"They refused to recognize us, associate with us, to work with us," Kanahele said.
Namu'o said that in response to a request from lawmakers, OHA is holding more than 50 meetings statewide to discuss the issue with beneficiaries and the public.
"I would say that anecdotally, many of the people who attended the meetings did not have any solutions to improve the legislation," Namu'o said.
Tamar deFries, vice president of the Merchant Street Hawaiian Civic Club who helped rally opponents by passing out copies of the bills in Native Hawaiian communities in recent weeks, said beneficiary consultation "involves a two-way flow of information and opinion exchange that can lead to several levels of participation, including the involvement of drafting policy and legislation."
That has not been done, deFries said.
The interim will allow stakeholders to "begin a process of truth that includes: a full and complete inventory of the ceded lands, an audit of all gross revenues generated by the ceded lands, and beneficiary consultation with stakeholders," she said.
Reach Gordon Y.K. Pang at gpang@honoluluadvertiser.com.
Aloha Pono!
![[Ho'okupu: Kalo leaves used in an offering at a heiau on Oahu]](http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2699/images/b.limahana.detroye.oahu.bryna.storch.jpg)
What an outpouring of support for Haloa we have experienced! This morning testimony from over 6,000 people was submitted to Hawaii's House of Representatives in support of protecting taro from genetic modification and patenting by research institutes and bio-tech firms. Testimony came from all across the islands: kupuna & keiki, farmers & scientists, cultural practitioners & environmentalists, non-profit organizations, local governments, poi-lovers ... everyone! Mahalo for your inspiring expressions of love for Hawaii's most sacred plant & ancestor, Haloa, the taro plant.
Thanks to YOUR powerful expressions of this support SB958 - calling for a 10 Year Moratorium on Genetic Modification of Taro - was finally granted this committee hearing. It is the final hearing this bill needs on its way to becoming a law. Thanks to your dedication, we now have a real chance to plant a permanent change. Now is our chance to express our support from protecting Hawaii's 'aina and ancestors. Now is our chance to look our legislators in the eye, to hold our politicians accountable for their decisions. Now is our chance to bear witness and ensure Haloa is protected. Now is our chance...
Attend the Final Public Hearing for SB958
10 Year Moratorium on Genetic Modification of Kalo/Taro
Tomorrow - Wednesday
10 Year Moratorium on Genetic Modification of Kalo/Taro
Tomorrow - Wednesday
9:00 am - State Capitol Auditorium
Join local farmers and communities who support sustaining and perpetuating proven traditional methods of taro farming and the restoration of native ecosystems. Come early to sign up to speak. We will be in the lobby of the basement at the State Capitol, pounding poi and enjoying time with friends, as we watch the testimony delivered to the Committee on Agriculture just inside the auditorium. In respect for those testifying, we will work to make sure the auditorium itself is quiet and calm.
Also join the festivities of Hawaiian Caucus Day at the State Capitol - where there will be important informational tables, entertainment, food, and more!
To learn more about SB 958, visit our website by clicking here.
If you are submitting late testimony, please bring 15 copies.
Be sure to sign up at the Registration Table to speak at the hearing.
Bring a sweater - the auditorium is cold.
Bring chairs to sit comfortably in the lobby.
Bring the kids so they can learn about this law-making process.
Need ideas for parking? Call us (toll-free) 1-888-528-6288.
The hearing will be broadcast live on Olelo cable channel 53!
Compañero PinkoFYI. The "snakes" or "serpents" that "St." Patrick chased out of Ireland were the pagans that refused to convert to Christianity and were thus slaughtered or exiled. He accomplished what other empires, IE the Romans could not. For the Irish to celebrate "St." Patrick's day is the equivalent of Indigenous, Native Americas to celebrate Columbus day.SAY NO TO G.M.O.
<</body>
Superferry Storm Carries On
Tuesday 3-18-08
Kauai’s Koohan Paik is writing a book about the Hawaii Superferry, hoping to expose what she calls a conspiracy between the government and the military. The young writer is following Superferry meetings across the state. She believes the ferry will end up being heavily utilized by the military
Department of Transit starts Environmental Impact Assessment.
By Léo Azambuja
The Superferry controversy has generated a lot of turmoil in Hawaii. After months sailing against a sea of legal and technical problems, the vessel remains dry-docked since Feb. 13, with plans to return to operations April 22.
The Alakai, which translates to potbellied or leader, depending on where the okina is placed, is a controversy in itself. After spending $40 million in harbor repairs and $180 million on loan guarantees to the Superferry, the State Government does not have much to show for it.
Adding to tax-payers’ losses, the Department of Transit (DOT) recently announced a new Harbors Modernization Plan. The DOT’s plan will cover six harbors statewide, will last six years, and is budgeted at $842 million, which will come from the Harbors Special Fund. Four of those harbors will go through special renovations to accommodate the Superferry.
A special Legislature session in late 2007 decided the State has to conduct an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which will add yet another $1 million in tax payers’ expenses.
Opponents of the Herculean twin-hulled ferry have organized several protests against the company, and have even put themselves on harm’s way, by blocking the boat from entering Nawiliwili Harbor on its second voyage to Kauai.
Superferry opponents on Maui and on Kauai fear that the boat’s operations will bring irreversible environmental damages and traffic chaos to their islands.
As much as environmental and social impacts lurk beneath the surface, such as humpback whale collisions, drug trafficking, invasive species propagation, and traffic jams, Oahu’s large population gives the Superferry a positive outcome in statewide surveys. Neighbor Islands’ surveys have yet to be conducted, but large groups of residents there have showed strong opposition to the Superferry.
Just about eight months ago, Governor Linda Lingle appointed Michael Formby as the DOT Deputy Director, overseeing the harbors’ division. Formby inherited probably the biggest controversy the DOT had to face in recent years.
Just days before the Superferry’s maiden voyage, the Hawaii Supreme Court halted the ferry’s operations by mandating an Environmental Assessment (EA) to be conducted.
The DOT hired Belt Collins Hawaii, Ltd. to prepare an EIS. Lesley Matsumoto, director of environmental consulting at Belt Collins, said the normal course of action would have required an EA before an EIS. But the DOT is now obliged to conduct an EIS because lawmakers decided it during the special Legislature session in late 2007.
Matsumoto explained an EA evaluates general impacts on the environment. If the government decides there are significant impacts, “then the next level is the EIS.”
Matsumoto said the Superferry will continue to operate while the EIS is being prepared. The after-the-fact EIS will evaluate the environmental consequences of the Superferry operations and its secondary impacts. She said the findings will not stop the ferry; instead, the EIS may include additional restrictions on the company’s operations.
When the Supreme Court decision temporarily halted the ferry’s operation last year, Senator Kalani English said he supported the decision. "The EIS was required under the law," he said. "It's been my position all along."
Formby does not agree. According to him, no law had been broken when former DOT Deputy Director Barry Fukunaga gave the Superferry an EA waiver.
“That’s the way business was done,” Formby said, explaining that the Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) used to put certain items on a list of approved exemptions. The Superferry, an alternative inter-island transportation sought by the Cayetano and Lingle administrations, was on that list.
“If you put yourself in Barry Fukunaga’s place, the OEQC’s place, at the time they made those decisions, they’ll tell you they made the right decision,” Formby said.
However, times have changed. “Obviously the Supreme Court doesn’t think it was a good decision,” Formby said.
“Any time you get a landmark decision at the Supreme Court, it changes the way things are done,” Formby said. “The way we do things now is different than the way we did things before the Superferry.”
Even insisting Fukunaga’s actions were lawful, Formby agreed that the company should not have been exempted from an EA.
“For the community it’s for the better,” Formby said. “Now we’re looking at long term effects, secondary impacts.”
Formby wasn’t too sympathetic to Kauai’s Superferry opponents. In 2005, the company hosted informational meetings on Kauai. “Maybe 20 people showed up,” Formby said.
Formby, who says he has not seen any Kauai poll showing majority opposition to the ferry, called opponents a “vocal minority.” Despite saying they have good arguments, Formby believes the community has “to balance the pros and the cons.”
“If there was a terrorist incident at the Kauai Airport, people all of a sudden would fall in love with the Superferry,” Formby said. However, after Hurricane Iniki, in 1992, there was no Superferry, and the community did just fine.
Many places on Kauai lost access for days and electricity for weeks. The community helped out each other, and received overwhelming support from government agencies and the military.
Formby blamed Norwegian Cruise Lines (NCL) for overcrowding Kauai’s roads with as much as 400 rental cars every time it docked at Nawiliwili Harbor.
“I think for the people of Kauai it will be very interesting to see what happens now that NCL has pulled one vessel out and is pulling a second vessel out,” Formby said. The impact of 100-150 cars the Superferry will transport daily to Kauai is a “very small piece of the puzzle” if compared with the business formerly generated by NCL, Formby said.
If NCL decides to put back its ships on Hawaiian waters, it would have to re-flag the ships, re-fit them, and ask for Congress approval. The chances of it happening are slim, according to Formby.
The Superferry may not come to Molokai, but its impact here cannot be underestimated.
“It can potentially have impacts on the island and on the residents of the island because it’s transiting the coastal waters,” Formby said. If necessary, the boat can go through the Penguin Banks “if goes at the right speed, in the right time of the season.”
Despite rumors of a proposed dredging in the harbor at Kaunakakai Wharf, Formby assured that the DOT has no plans to do so.
“I’m not aware of any maintenance schedule for Kaunakakai, and we definitely don’t have any new dredging plans for Kaunakakai,” Formby said.
A dredging would only be approved after several environmental studies, a design phase, and finally a lengthy construction phase. “There are definitely no plans for larger vessels to come in,” he said. “If we started today, it would be about 15 years before we finished it, that’s how long it takes; it’s a very long process.”
EIS public meetings
The DOT initiated a series of statewide meetings to gather community input on the EIS currently being prepared by Belt Collins Hawaii Ltd. The island of Molokai was the DOT’s first stopover.
About 30 community members showed up last week Tuesday at Kaunakakai Elementary School to tell Matsumoto and the DOT staff some of the impacts the ferry may have on the Molokai.
Most testifiers were concerned about how the EIS would protect whales and seals from colliding with the vessel. Humpback whales and Hawaiian monk seals are protected by strict federal laws, and some residents do not believe the Superferry is able to avoid hitting them.
Resident Ruth Manu said Young Brothers, in order to accommodate the Superferry schedule in Kahului Harbor, Maui, has changed its scheduled trips to Molokai. The cargo shipper now comes to Molokai two days in a row every week, instead of spacing the trips. As a result, fresh produce availability on Molokai’s grocery store shelves has been compromised.
A series of posters showed potential impacts the Superferry may have in Hawaii. Resident Cheryl Richards wanted to know why the social-economics poster was empty. “If I’m paying the bill, I want to know why the money isn’t coming to our schools,” she said. “I’m paying the taxes and I want to know what the business plan is.”
Richards said she felt the EIS was a “cart-and-pony show.”
The meeting was organized solely to hear comments from the community. DOT officials and Belt Collins associates were not allowed to answer community concerns, which frustrated many testifiers.
“Next time you come, you give us our answers, that’s pono, that’s Hawaiian style,” Manu said.
A recorder kept track of community input, which will be included in the preparation of the EIS.
On March 14 the DOT held two meetings at Farrington High School, on Oahu, drawing only 12 people.
On March 17 the DOT carried two meetings on Maui, and on March 19 it carried two meetings on Kauai. At the time of press, there was no information on those meetings
