| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Peter Medeiros
`Olu`olu
546 Posts |
 Posted - 08/28/2008 : 3:43:51 PM
|
| Eh, I reading dis and I'm tinking mobetta you guys go play music its mo fun den dis. You guyz at da end of da day you just spinning yo wheels and getting all gusagusa. No sense turning tings into personal attacks eda coz dats da way it looks like this thing is going. Just agree to disagree and move on. There's more to life and we ain't getting any younger. |
 |
|
|
Baritone
Lokahi
USA
136 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2008 : 5:57:08 PM
|
You've the fervor of one warrior times 7, Chris. By the way, I met your Hanai father through my mom, oh so long, long ago. I only recognize the surname. Today, I couldn't ho'o honi him. If only you had been around at your age today when Helm, Trask, Aluli, Rickard et al were in their prime and planning their renaissance/revolution in the 70-80's! You would have fit in, especially with your ike o kalo and water use from the ranch on top of Waipio and surrounding plantations. Today, imagine if the ohana of pre-Kamehameha chiefs gained back their ahupua'a, ei nei!?! We're now 200 hundred years later and facing self-governance issues. I'm makule, wise, but must depend on those you've trained or passed your mana'o. Me? Since I'm now in Washington at this era, I pass my mana'o on to the Suquamish Tribe in their efforts for cultural resurgence, until I can afford to be buried in Hawaii.
Thanks to Noeau, Menpachi Man, and Thumbstruck for your mana'o. In 1980 Emmett Aluli, a person with Hawaiian blood, and several others stood upon Hawaiian Homes land in Hilo. From there, they stepped onto the air terminal area of Hilo Airport. This was not clandestine; they announced that they were going to claim the turf, upon which they stood, for themselves, actually for the people of Hawaii. The federal, state, and county security forces were there to stop them. Upon stepping onto the air terminal area, aluli loudly announced he was taking the turf upon which he stood. Because Aluli did not turn back he was arrested and set for trial before Judge Kimura. Aluli was charged with trespass but Aluli argued he was exercising the procedure of "adverse possession". Cooly, Kimura said Aluli was guilty but that Kimura was not going to penalize Aluli because Kimura was not going to use his court to make Aluli a martyr; Kimura dismissed the case.
If you look at the peacefulness of this, there was no damage to property nor person. What's also significant is that Aluli is a relative of Nawahi ohana. Nawahi ohana was a lady in waiting to Liliuokalani. Nawahi ohana was a representative to Congress. Nawahi ohana also owned and operated a Hawaiian newspaper. And, that day, here was a Nawahi ohana taking back a token piece of what was once crown lands. Signigicant to me is that a descendant to Liliuokalani's lady in waiting was HERE trying to get Liliuokalani back. Back to storytelling: crown lands were to be used for the good of the people. Ah, but what and who are the "people"? When Hawaii was taken by America the crown lands came under jurisdiction of the feds. The feds pass the oversight to the state (territory, then). The territory let the Navy put up an air base. Eventually, the air base became an airport. But, to Aluli the State (we're now in 1980 timetable) did not use the lands "for the good of the Hawaii people". Ha! Whose definition? So, when Aluli said he'd like to take that land he was exercising "adverse possession". Now, why is Kimura important? Because Kimura of 1980 is Hawaiian and from the M. Kimura clan, of Parker Ranch; he goes back to 1898. When was the Liliuokalani dethroned? Parker Ranch, back then, used a lot of water, and so did the subsequently surrounding sugar plantations, that SHOULD have been flowing into Waipio Valley. To many old timers, this was a clash of class, i.e. established families steeped in Hawaii traditions and kapu system, American law (Aluli's attorney was Mililani Trask); international law (taking of land for one's country) and the history of Hawaii. Kinda like politice in Hilo in the 1920's.
This is an example of Menpachi's points. And, the tightly locked up Iolani Palace was following the "adverse possession" paradigm except the players were not as high makamaka. In 1980 the security forces were charged with fervor; today, there is no rush because the adverse possessor is going to packout before the statute of limitations espires. And, who/where is the martyr? If there were killing???? Who knows........ Main thing, though, is that this is getting monotonous in today's era.
Aloha, Herb
Reflect on this a bit. I am of the Nawahi ohana and Aluli ohana.
|
|
|
|
braddah jay
Lokahi
235 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2008 : 8:28:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peter Medeiros
Eh, I reading dis and I'm tinking mobetta you guys go play music its mo fun den dis. You guyz at da end of da day you just spinning yo wheels and getting all gusagusa. No sense turning tings into personal attacks eda coz dats da way it looks like this thing is going. Just agree to disagree and move on. There's more to life and we ain't getting any younger.
Howzit peter,oh but we do play music,but even that needs a break.And what better way than through discussion.I'm sorry but I don't see this headed towards personal attack.Like any discussion not everyone goin agree,but like music you can listen to it,and if it's not for you move on.I invited anyone to jump in on this topic because I felt it was worthy of it,there were those that have the knowledge and to not share was a waste.We had some misinformed,some misunderstood,and some that misjudged,but in everyone of those they were corrected in a good way.I know you mean well.When one of us gets out of line,there are planny who can bring us back on track.So I see nothing but good coming out of this,so long as we as aunty wanda would say "as long as we pono"Thanks for the concern uncle peter.Aloha braddah jay |
Edited by - braddah jay on 08/28/2008 11:12:43 PM |
|
|
|
Baritone
Lokahi
USA
136 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2008 : 03:55:21 AM
|
Thank you, thank you, thank you and Mahalo, Braddah Jay. In Dec on 77 I was flown to Maui to meet up with the movement. I was offered to build/manage a data base for the upcoming movement. I declined because I was chicken. What followed were several expressions of cultural resurgence, so to speak without pinpointing the haps. I tell you, YPOChris would have fit in with the team! Subsequently, came Kahoolawe and Hilo Airport. The General and his troops laid down their lives: remember Helm? Today, these feisty leaders are mellow kupuna-class J.Does. Hopefully, the Kau Inoa list (exactly what I was to create and manage) will be available for cultural renaissance reasons, and not a Schindler's List. I did kau inoa, course I makule and what else they goin do to me. Look: Aluli got one hospital built on Molokai!!! Imua, aina paka!
Aloha, Herb |
|
|
|
noeau
Ha`aha`a
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2008 : 12:55:21 PM
|
| Peterʻs input for me is well received. He has a long background in movement stuff. I first met the man during the Waiahole-Waikāne dispute. Something that in our own way we were involved. I also knew people from Kalama valley days. The struggle continues but some of us have grown up and got educated. Personal attacks do not contribute to forward movement. So I can say now E we go jam liʻdat. Nuff said for now. Mostly us descendants of the aboriginal peoples get kuleana in this. So now we holomus and find our way home. |
No'eau, eia au he mea pa'ani wale nō. |
Edited by - noeau on 08/29/2008 12:58:56 PM |
|
|
|
kealiiblaisdell
Akahai
USA
52 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2008 : 3:48:50 PM
|
Aloha Gang! Very awesome topic here...as some of you may not know, I fight for Hawaiian Rights and kuleana Land Rights along with Joclynn Costa and Kamaunu Kahaialii (Wilie K' brother)and have just recently been victorious in stopping development in Ukumehame, Maui and have now moved on to Hana. Anywho, history, or rather what's written in the history books have became cloudy, just like all titles or deed here in Hawaii. Annexation never happened, despite what is writen in the books. Now Cessation happend... you see according to international law, annexation can only take place when BOTH heads of State sign the treaty of annexation, which never happend because Lili'uokalani never signed anything. Now, what was ceded over to the United States was the Republic of Hawaii, not the Hawaiian Kingdom. You see, the Republic was a United States run Government because it was run by Uniteds States citizens, ergo the republic just handed thenselves back over to the U.S. Now think about it, if what im saying isnt true, than Public Law 103-150 would have never transpired and passed into law by both houses.
What Akahi Nui did is ridiculous..I know him personally and he is NO KING. Contrary what kanaka's think about having koko (royal blood) makes them a king or queen is ridiculous. I am a descendant of Kanipahu, 4th ali'i 'aimoku, but I dont go around proclaiming to be king. Anywho, the last 3 monarchs were elected by the people which limited the monarch with power. Remember, Lili'uokalani tried to ratify the Constitution so that the monarch could have the last say in decision making (power), but 1893 happened, so the Constitution remained unchanged even until today. So, even if there was a Monarch he or she would be a figure head, just like the Queen of England. Now, annexation never happened, we cleared that up, but what happened? Well, on April 20, 1898, the U.S. goes to war with Spain necause of Spain's occupation in Cuba and a US Naval warship explodes and sinks in the Phillipines and the Spanish-American War nreaks out , so the Republic got worried because Hawaii had no protection or defenses if you will, so the republic lobbied to annex Hawaii over to the United States. Now, what I mentioned above is true, annexation couldnt happen, so the United States schemed another plan...The Newlands Resolution. On May 4, 1898, Representative Frances Newlands introduces joint resolution of annexation in House of Representatives. The resolution says in part:
Whereas, the Government of the Republic of Hawaii having, in due form, signified its consent, in the manner provided by its constitution, to cede absolutely and without reserve to the United States of America, all rights of sovereignty of whatsoever kind in and over the Hawaiian Islands and their dependencies, and also to cede and transfer to the United States, the absolute fee and ownership of all public, Government, or Crown lands, public buildings or edifices, ports, harbors, military equipment, and all other public property of every kind and description belonging to the Government of the Hawaiian Islands, together with every right and appurtenance thereunto appertaining: Therefore, Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That said cession is accepted, ratified, and confirmed, and that the said Hawaiian Islands and their dependencies be, and they are hereby, annexed as a part of the territory of the United States and are subject to the sovereign dominion thereof, and that all and singular the property and rights hereinbefore mentioned are vested in the United States of America ...
However on July 6,1898 A filibuster is attempted by the opponents to annexation but the country is caught in a fervor of war. The Senate passes the joint resolution by mere majority, 42 for, 21 against, 6 others present but not voting. Even at these numbers, the U.S. Constitution is violated for it calls for two/thirds of the Senators present...So explain to me by violating the United States constituion, can or IS Hawaii legally a State of the Union??? Absolutely not!!! You see the United States does have a legal right to ne present here in accordance to the peace treaties signed by both the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom. The United States are here only as a PROTECTORATE of the Hawaiian Kingdom (This is especially mentioned under the terms of the 1959 Statehood),therefore did cession and or annexation ever happen or even legally passed? Well, for that answer you have to take a good look at Iraq and Afghanistan...see whats going on there and you make the call. All the US Government wanted was a centralized United States Military base in the middle of the Pacific and they were going to get it no matter who and what they hurt.
Now on to Kau Inoa...Kau Inoa is another attempt by the United States to secure Hawaii by luring the majority...sure Kau Inoa sounds all that great in commericials but they dont tell you the fine lines and later affect it wil have here in Hawaii. Now, I personally have gotten 347 people out and off Kau Inoa's list. Now if you read the Akaka Bill thoroughly, you will see where it says tat the Native Hawaians will no longer be Native Hawaiians, but Native Americans...Ok, first off, we are not Native to America. In accordance to the Dept. of Interior, you can only be subject to Tribal Status if you are within the boundaries of the CONTINENTAL AMERICAS, so explain why or how Hawaiians qualify for tribal status??? You cant, there is no explanation. So, is the US breaking their own federal law and international law? OF COURSE THEY ARE! Also, if you sign your name to Kau Inoa, and read the Akaka Bill you will also find that on the Bill, there is a explanation of who and what will govern you...basically whoever signs with Kau Inoa, all your kuleana Lands your kids and their childrens children ow belongs to the United States Department of Interior, dont believe me....take a good look at the Oglala tribe in South Dakota, check out their living comditions....land of the free huh? I dont think so.
So all you kanaka's out there, ask yourself one question...are you ready to be called a NATIVE AMERICAN and lose your Kanaka Maoli Status and Rights, or did you already do what the commercials tell you...Place your name...he he you see, upon research, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs have received a 9 milliom dollar grant from the United States Dept. of Interior for SPECIFICALLY creating Kau Inoa...hmmmm....yup, like I said, land of the free huh...in the words of Smeigal from the Lord of the Rings...
TRIXES and LIES....
Just my opinion...oh, and I not one king just one maka`ainana
K:)
|
Edited by - kealiiblaisdell on 08/29/2008 4:24:45 PM |
|
|
|
Baritone
Lokahi
USA
136 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2008 : 5:28:02 PM
|
Thank you Blaisdell. Never thought I see you in writing!
Herb |
|
|
|
kaniala5
Akahai
USA
65 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2008 : 8:20:09 PM
|
I haven't heard such focused commentary on sovereingty in a while. It is nice to see it hear on the patch.
I got educated about the land and water rights from Eric Enos and the 'ohana reclaming the lo'i in Wai'anae Valley on Mauna Ka'ala. One of the couples I hung with and worked with up there are farmers in Waipi'o now.
I pray that this issue will be solved as the Queen believed it would, by a country that would act "honorably." |
Look for reasons to be happy rather than excuses to be miserable. |
|
|
|
wcerto
Ahonui
USA
5052 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2008 : 12:15:59 AM
|
From the language in the Clinton "Apology to Hawai`i", (Public Law 103-150I do not understand why something has not yet been done. It speaks of the ceding of Hawaiian lands to the U.S. by the "Republic of Hawai`i", which was the name given to the government after the illegal overthrow. Moreover, I do not understand why when President Grover Cleveland spoke to the issue of the illegality of what happened, no action was taken, other than to permit the usurpers to protest that they were the right and true government, and to prove it, here U.S., you can have all this land.
It is such an absolute travesty that I cannot understand how it was permitted to happen and why the U.S. would make the apology which accomplishes nothing. Oh, and swell, they applaud the fact the the Church of God and the Hawaiian people are trying to seek "reconciliation".
The missionaries came to do good, and they did very well. For themselves.
Look back in history. Look at all the atrocities that have been perpetrated in the name of "religion".
|
Me ke aloha
Malama pono,
Wanda |
|
|
|
Retro
Ahonui
USA
2368 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2008 : 06:51:18 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by wcerto
I do not understand why when President Grover Cleveland spoke to the issue of the illegality of what happened, no action was taken, other than to permit the usurpers to protest that they were the right and true government, and to prove it, here U.S., you can have all this land.
Because government action is slow, Cleveland was soon out of office, McKinley was in, and he favored annexation. |
|
|
|
alika207
Ha`aha`a
USA
1260 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2008 : 3:28:53 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by wcerto
I believe it would be normal to think there would be some kind of protests on the anniversary of the day Hawai`i became a state. Here is one of the latest stories from the Star Bulletin. There are also several other related stories. I'd appreciate hearing any comments that you may want to share on the topic. My take on it is that a terrible wrong was done against Hawai`i and its people by the U.S. government. It is normal for Hawaiians to be PO'd by that. It is normal for Hawaiians to have strong feelings regarding sovereignty. There is no cohesion among various sovereignty groups and widely divergent views on who is/should be a leader of the nation.
Now I know you guys are going to say, welll duh when I say that nothing can be done about sovereignty until the Hawaiians speak of one mind and are organized and get rid of infighting. That is the big battle that Hawai`i has to fight right now. How to come together as one and speak with one voice as a nation of people united to accomplish a common goal. There is probably no doubt that there are quite a few people who may have some claim to royalty. From what I have read and from what I can see, isn't the purpose of Kau Inoa to get the people to register their names and then eventually determine the methodology on the mechanics of re-establishing the Hawaiian nation?
Is it possible for Hawai`i to act as one unified body?
------------
By Rob Shikina
rshikina @ starbulletin.com
Many Native Hawaiian sovereignty leaders support the idea of groups protesting at Iolani Palace, especially on Statehood Day.
But entering the palace and trying to sit on the throne is more controversial.
"That's atrocious, for him trying to sit on the throne at Iolani Palace," said Charles Kauluwehi Maxwell Sr., a Hawaiian priest and a Hawaiian activist for about 40 years. "James Akahi is not the king of Hawaii."
Iolani Palace, the former home of Hawaiian royalty, has been the scene of many protests over the years, some peaceful and others leading to arrests.
Friday's attempt by a group calling itself the Kingdom of Hawaii, Nation to seal off the palace to the public and attempt to chain the group's king, James Akahi, to the throne are the latest actions by various sovereignty groups on palace grounds.
Maxwell, former president of the Hawaiian-rights group ALOHA Association, said, "The problem is we as Hawaiians cannot get together as one.
"You have all these factions or groups that profess to represent the Hawaiian people and they don't.
"We're in modern times. There's got to be a different approach."
Lilikala Kameeleihiwa, a historian and University of Hawaii professor at the Kamakakuokalani Center for Hawaiian Studies, said many people could claim to be of royal lineage. It's more important whether the people support that person, she said.
In ancient Hawaii, people would kill political leaders they didn't support, she said.
"He's not my king," she said.
"Just as a Hawaiian, I'm really glad that somebody marked the day by saying that I don't agree with admissions day," she said. "I'm glad he did it. We want this country back."
She said Hawaii became a state illegally in 1959.
However, she doesn't support physical violence for Hawaiian sovereignty.
"Until we have another constitutional convention, all of these political actions are good because politics are still continuing. The discussion is still ongoing. Not all Hawaiians are happy (with statehood)," Kameeleihiwa said.
Henry Noa, the prime minister of a group that calls itself the Reinstated Hawaiian Government, said his government is "able to fulfill obligations under international law to represent our former nation."
Noa rebuked Akahi's claim to the throne as a descendant to Kamehameha.
"Kamehameha I had 21 known wives," Noa said. "He had a lot of children."
He said the action taken by Akahi's group was a "costly exercise," given the number of arrests.
"He's got kanaka blood so he has a right to walk into palace grounds," he said. But when asked if he could enter the palace, he said, "That's a touchy issue."
Jon Osorio, a native Hawaiian and professor at the Hawaiian Studies Center at UH Manoa, said he believes Akahi's group is a mimicking the actions of the group that locked the palace gates in late April.
The lockdown on Friday shows a growing impatience by some Hawaiian groups toward correcting injustices, he said.
It's "partly the result of real frustration with the fact that the state is still operating, there hasn't been a real reconciliation between the U.S. and the state and the Hawaiian people," he said. "We're seeing the beginning of this and I suspect that it will probably continue to grow."
"There may be some frustration that older sovereignty groups and activists haven't been able to get the U.S. to the bargaining table," he said.
He hopes that if the groups are taken to court, they will raise the issue of the state's legitimacy.
Osorio also worried that the recent protests could cause the state to close off the palace to Hawaiians.
"That would be a terrible thing," he said.
I don't know how I feel about this. I don't like the fact that much of Hawai'i Nei is Americanized, but I wouldn't want to come to Hawai'i just to find that no one would let me in because I don't have any Hawaiian blood in me. Would they do this? I'm a Hawaiian culture supporter and love taking part in all kinds of cultural events when I'm there. |
He kehau ho'oma'ema'e ke aloha.
'Alika / Polinahe |
|
|
|
alika207
Ha`aha`a
USA
1260 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2008 : 12:47:29 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Menpachi Man
Alika:
Your statement "Would they do this?" is a form of generalization. Some people may do that to you, some will not. What percent of each, I do not know. But I can tell you this much, if you seek the good in people no matter where you are, you will find them because they are there. You then have nothing to regret for any negative that you encounter when you remember the beauty of those who embraced you.
Good point. Mahalo nui loa ia 'oe. |
He kehau ho'oma'ema'e ke aloha.
'Alika / Polinahe |
|
|
|
wcerto
Ahonui
USA
5052 Posts |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
