I am here in Hawai'i nei for my usual January trip, which usually coincides with the observance of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i.
Yesterday I was going "holoholo" around the island with my friend and we stopped by a gathering of Hawaiian sovereignty activists at Ka'u, Hawai'i island.
Though getting into a YouTube video was the last thing on my mind - for one thing, my hair was a mess and I was feeling less than glam! - I ended up on camera reading a portion of a new petition started by and for American citizens, to urge President Obama to restore the sovereignty of the occupied Kingdom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myTXN8Mqa_4
The people most worth listening too, however, are the Kanaka Maoli who were interviewed yesterday (at the same place) by the two young men who are posting the videos on this channel. Please go to this link for very moving accounts of what it's like to have your land stolen, over and over and over again:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Christopherpulsoni
(Sorry, I cannot get a second link into this blog post, for some reason!)
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Hawaiian Sexuality Columns
I've been writing a weekly column over at Carnal Nation (www.carnalnation.com) and the following comprise a series of columns on sexual traditions, particularly in the context of occupation and acculturation. Hope you read them!
http://carnalnation.com/content/58105/999/genital-chants-hawaii
http://carnalnation.com/content/58264/999/hawaiian-sacred-sex-part-i
http://carnalnation.com/content/58334/999/hawaiian-sacred-sex-part-2
http://carnalnation.com/content/45571/999/sky-dancers-lizard-women-mo-o-dakini
http://carnalnation.com/content/46046/999/hawai-i-yellow-page-blues
http://carnalnation.com/content/44973/999/lealea
http://carnalnation.com/content/58105/999/genital-chants-hawaii
http://carnalnation.com/content/58264/999/hawaiian-sacred-sex-part-i
http://carnalnation.com/content/58334/999/hawaiian-sacred-sex-part-2
http://carnalnation.com/content/45571/999/sky-dancers-lizard-women-mo-o-dakini
http://carnalnation.com/content/46046/999/hawai-i-yellow-page-blues
http://carnalnation.com/content/44973/999/lealea
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
I've neglected this blog
In the last couple of years I've done less writing and more re-posting of very important political and activist actions taken by other people. I'm glad to make this space for sharing, but I think that it may be time to come back to casting my own voice out into the wind again. Someone once told me that the voice (ka leo!) is always an appropriate offering...
To those who have taken the time to comment on some of these blogs, particularly the Mo'o piece, I am particularly grateful!
To those who have taken the time to comment on some of these blogs, particularly the Mo'o piece, I am particularly grateful!
HAWAIIAN NATIONAL SUES PRESIDENT OBAMA IN FEDERAL COURT
Hawaiian national sues President Obama in Federal Court in Washington, D.C.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
KANE`OHE, HAWAIIAN ISLANDS, June 1, 2010 — Dr. David Keanu Sai, a national of the Hawaiian Kingdom, today filed a complaint in Federal Court in Washington, D.C., against U.S. President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State Clinton, U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Pacific Command Commander Admiral Willard and Hawai`i Governor Lingle for violation of an 1893 Executive Agreement between the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom and is seeking punitive damages of $10 million dollars for malicious indictment, prosecution and conviction of a so-called felony. The Defendants have 60 days from date of service to file an answer to the complaint.
Additional Materials and Information
• Complaint
• Dr. Sai’s Website
• Hawaiian Kingdom laws and history
Dr. Sai has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Hawai`i at Manoa specializing in international relations and public law, with particular emphasis on the legal and political history of the Hawaiian Kingdom. His doctoral dissertation is titled “The American Occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom: Beginning the Transition from Occupied to Restored State.” Dr. Sai also served as lead agent in international arbitration proceedings (Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague, Netherlands (1999-2001); filed a Complaint with the United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001; and has numerous articles on the legal status of the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent State.
In the Federal complaint filed today, Dr. Sai alleges the violation of an executive agreement entered into between Queen Lili`uokalani of the Hawaiian Kingdom and President Grover Cleveland of the United States in 1893, whereby Hawaiian executive power was temporarily and conditionally assigned to the President to administer Hawaiian Kingdom law throughout the Hawaiian Islands. This executive agreement, known as the Lili`uokalani assignment (January 17, 1893), was assigned under threat of war, and binds President Cleveland’s successors in office in the administration of Hawaiian Kingdom law until such time as the Hawaiian Kingdom government has been restored in accordance with a second executive agreement between the Queen and President, known as the Agreement of restoration (December 18, 1893), whereupon the executive power would be returned and the Hawaiian Kingdom would grant amnesty to those individuals who participated or supported the 1893 insurrection.
In U.S. v. Belmont (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that executive agreements entered into between the President and a sovereign nation does not require ratification from the U.S. Senate to have the force and effect of a treaty; and executive agreements bind successor Presidents for their faithful execution. Other landmark cases on executive agreements are U.S. v. Pink (1942) and American Insurance Association v. Garamendi (2003). In Garamendi, the Court stated, “Specifically, the President has authority to make ‘executive agreements’ with other countries, requiring no ratification by the Senate or approval by Congress.” Dr. Sai alleges that President Barack Obama, being the successor in office to President Cleveland, is legally bound to administer the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom until the Hawaiian Kingdom government is restored in accordance with the Agreement of restoration.
The suit was filed under Title 28, United States Code, §1350, “Alien’s action for tort,” for maliciously prosecuting and convicting Dr. Sai for complying with Hawaiian Kingdom law, whereby the prosecution and conviction were violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment; the 1907 Hague Convention, IV; and the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV. §1350 provides that “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.”
In the complaint, it states that the Hawaiian Kingdom became a full member of the Universal Postal Union in 1882, and currently has treaties with Austria-Hungary (June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium (October 4, 1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark (Oct. 19, 1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany (March 25, 1879); Great Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain’s New South Wales (March 10, 1874), now Australia; Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy (July 22, 1863); Japan (Aug. 19, 1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands (October 16, 1862); Portugal (May 5, 1882); Russia (June 19, 1869); Samoa (March 20, 1887); Spain (October 9, 1863); Sweden and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland (July 20, 1864); and the United States of America (December 20, 1849).
On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen and political organizations representing the people of Hawai`i that was filed with the U.S. State Department in the summer of 1897, and a 21,269 signature petition protesting annexation that was also filed with the U.S. Senate on December 9, 1897 by Senator George Hoar (R-MA). On August 12, 1898, the Hawaiian Kingdom was occupied during the Spanish-American War and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation under the guise of a U.S. territory.
Presently, Hawai`i serves as headquarters for the largest U.S. Unified Combatant Command in the world, the U.S. Pacific Command, which controls 20.6% of lands (nearly 200,000 acres) throughout the islands under troop commands of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. The complaint alleges that the U.S. military’s presence has been and continues to be a violation of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s status as a Neutral State under international law and the laws of occupation.
According to the complaint, the United States misrepresented Hawai`i to be a part of the United States since the Spanish-American War by enacting Congressional laws claiming to have annexed the Hawaiian Islands in 1898; to have established the Territory of Hawaii in 1900; and to have transformed the Territory of Hawai`i into the State of Hawai`i in 1959.
The complaint alleges that these actions by the Congress are in direct violation of the 1893 executive agreements, and that the Congress has no force and effect beyond U.S. territory.
In a 1988 U.S. Department of Justice legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel, acting Assistant Attorney General Douglas Kmiec stated, “It is…unclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of Hawaii can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of sovereignty over an extended territorial sea.”
According to Dr. Sai, “The U.S. Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 by passing a joint resolution when it was at war with Spain, than it could annex Afghanistan today by passing a joint resolution while fighting the war on terrorism. U.S. laws do not have extraterritorial force and are limited and confined to U.S. territory.
Only through a treaty of cession with the Hawaiian Kingdom could Hawai`i’s territorial sovereignty be ceded or transferred to the United States, the 1893 executive agreements and other international treaties being superseded, and only thereafter could Congressional laws be legally enforced throughout the Hawaiian Islands without violating international law.”
Among the alleged misrepresentations that the United States made to the international community:
• That the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands was lawfully ceded to the United States by a treaty of cession in 1898;
• That the international treaties between the Hawaiian Kingdom and other sovereign States were superseded by the United States’ treaties with those States;
• That United States laws and not Hawaiian Kingdom laws governed the Hawaiian Islands to include taxation, tariffs and duties; and
• That the Hawaiian Islands is the territory of the United States through the State of Hawai`i and not the Hawaiian Kingdom, being a sovereign State, which has been under prolonged occupation since the Spanish-American War.
Dr. Sai’s complaint alleges Obama, Clinton, Gates, Willard and Lingle with violating the Lili`uokalani assignment, the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV, and for allowing the State of Hawai`i to have maliciously indicted, prosecuted and convicted Dr. Sai of a manufactured felony count of attempted theft of real property on March 7, 2000 for adhering to Hawaiian Kingdom laws, which by definition constitutes a “war crime” under Title 18 U.S.C. §2441(c)(1). The complaint seeks a permanent injunction, including punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, to prevent and remedy any violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment and the international laws of occupation.
# # #
For more information about this law suit, contact:
Dr. Keanu Sai at: 808-383-6100 or email: keanu.sai@gmail.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
KANE`OHE, HAWAIIAN ISLANDS, June 1, 2010 — Dr. David Keanu Sai, a national of the Hawaiian Kingdom, today filed a complaint in Federal Court in Washington, D.C., against U.S. President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State Clinton, U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, U.S. Pacific Command Commander Admiral Willard and Hawai`i Governor Lingle for violation of an 1893 Executive Agreement between the United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom and is seeking punitive damages of $10 million dollars for malicious indictment, prosecution and conviction of a so-called felony. The Defendants have 60 days from date of service to file an answer to the complaint.
Additional Materials and Information
• Complaint
• Dr. Sai’s Website
• Hawaiian Kingdom laws and history
Dr. Sai has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Hawai`i at Manoa specializing in international relations and public law, with particular emphasis on the legal and political history of the Hawaiian Kingdom. His doctoral dissertation is titled “The American Occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom: Beginning the Transition from Occupied to Restored State.” Dr. Sai also served as lead agent in international arbitration proceedings (Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague, Netherlands (1999-2001); filed a Complaint with the United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001; and has numerous articles on the legal status of the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent State.
In the Federal complaint filed today, Dr. Sai alleges the violation of an executive agreement entered into between Queen Lili`uokalani of the Hawaiian Kingdom and President Grover Cleveland of the United States in 1893, whereby Hawaiian executive power was temporarily and conditionally assigned to the President to administer Hawaiian Kingdom law throughout the Hawaiian Islands. This executive agreement, known as the Lili`uokalani assignment (January 17, 1893), was assigned under threat of war, and binds President Cleveland’s successors in office in the administration of Hawaiian Kingdom law until such time as the Hawaiian Kingdom government has been restored in accordance with a second executive agreement between the Queen and President, known as the Agreement of restoration (December 18, 1893), whereupon the executive power would be returned and the Hawaiian Kingdom would grant amnesty to those individuals who participated or supported the 1893 insurrection.
In U.S. v. Belmont (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that executive agreements entered into between the President and a sovereign nation does not require ratification from the U.S. Senate to have the force and effect of a treaty; and executive agreements bind successor Presidents for their faithful execution. Other landmark cases on executive agreements are U.S. v. Pink (1942) and American Insurance Association v. Garamendi (2003). In Garamendi, the Court stated, “Specifically, the President has authority to make ‘executive agreements’ with other countries, requiring no ratification by the Senate or approval by Congress.” Dr. Sai alleges that President Barack Obama, being the successor in office to President Cleveland, is legally bound to administer the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom until the Hawaiian Kingdom government is restored in accordance with the Agreement of restoration.
The suit was filed under Title 28, United States Code, §1350, “Alien’s action for tort,” for maliciously prosecuting and convicting Dr. Sai for complying with Hawaiian Kingdom law, whereby the prosecution and conviction were violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment; the 1907 Hague Convention, IV; and the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV. §1350 provides that “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.”
In the complaint, it states that the Hawaiian Kingdom became a full member of the Universal Postal Union in 1882, and currently has treaties with Austria-Hungary (June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium (October 4, 1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark (Oct. 19, 1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany (March 25, 1879); Great Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain’s New South Wales (March 10, 1874), now Australia; Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy (July 22, 1863); Japan (Aug. 19, 1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands (October 16, 1862); Portugal (May 5, 1882); Russia (June 19, 1869); Samoa (March 20, 1887); Spain (October 9, 1863); Sweden and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland (July 20, 1864); and the United States of America (December 20, 1849).
On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen and political organizations representing the people of Hawai`i that was filed with the U.S. State Department in the summer of 1897, and a 21,269 signature petition protesting annexation that was also filed with the U.S. Senate on December 9, 1897 by Senator George Hoar (R-MA). On August 12, 1898, the Hawaiian Kingdom was occupied during the Spanish-American War and the Hawaiian Kingdom has since been under prolonged occupation under the guise of a U.S. territory.
Presently, Hawai`i serves as headquarters for the largest U.S. Unified Combatant Command in the world, the U.S. Pacific Command, which controls 20.6% of lands (nearly 200,000 acres) throughout the islands under troop commands of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. The complaint alleges that the U.S. military’s presence has been and continues to be a violation of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s status as a Neutral State under international law and the laws of occupation.
According to the complaint, the United States misrepresented Hawai`i to be a part of the United States since the Spanish-American War by enacting Congressional laws claiming to have annexed the Hawaiian Islands in 1898; to have established the Territory of Hawaii in 1900; and to have transformed the Territory of Hawai`i into the State of Hawai`i in 1959.
The complaint alleges that these actions by the Congress are in direct violation of the 1893 executive agreements, and that the Congress has no force and effect beyond U.S. territory.
In a 1988 U.S. Department of Justice legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel, acting Assistant Attorney General Douglas Kmiec stated, “It is…unclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of Hawaii can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of sovereignty over an extended territorial sea.”
According to Dr. Sai, “The U.S. Congress could no more annex the Hawaiian Islands in 1898 by passing a joint resolution when it was at war with Spain, than it could annex Afghanistan today by passing a joint resolution while fighting the war on terrorism. U.S. laws do not have extraterritorial force and are limited and confined to U.S. territory.
Only through a treaty of cession with the Hawaiian Kingdom could Hawai`i’s territorial sovereignty be ceded or transferred to the United States, the 1893 executive agreements and other international treaties being superseded, and only thereafter could Congressional laws be legally enforced throughout the Hawaiian Islands without violating international law.”
Among the alleged misrepresentations that the United States made to the international community:
• That the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands was lawfully ceded to the United States by a treaty of cession in 1898;
• That the international treaties between the Hawaiian Kingdom and other sovereign States were superseded by the United States’ treaties with those States;
• That United States laws and not Hawaiian Kingdom laws governed the Hawaiian Islands to include taxation, tariffs and duties; and
• That the Hawaiian Islands is the territory of the United States through the State of Hawai`i and not the Hawaiian Kingdom, being a sovereign State, which has been under prolonged occupation since the Spanish-American War.
Dr. Sai’s complaint alleges Obama, Clinton, Gates, Willard and Lingle with violating the Lili`uokalani assignment, the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV, and for allowing the State of Hawai`i to have maliciously indicted, prosecuted and convicted Dr. Sai of a manufactured felony count of attempted theft of real property on March 7, 2000 for adhering to Hawaiian Kingdom laws, which by definition constitutes a “war crime” under Title 18 U.S.C. §2441(c)(1). The complaint seeks a permanent injunction, including punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, to prevent and remedy any violations of the Lili`uokalani assignment and the international laws of occupation.
# # #
For more information about this law suit, contact:
Dr. Keanu Sai at: 808-383-6100 or email: keanu.sai@gmail.com
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Opposing "Akaka Bill," H.R. 2314
The following letter was created using "boilerplate" provided by the Koani Foundation/Free Hawai'i folks. Then I made some changes. Please read on, and then send your own letter opposing this dangerous bill.
---------------------
June 24, 2009
The Honorable Nick J. Rahall II, Chairman
The Honorable Doc Hastings, Ranking Member
House Committee on Natural Resources
U.S. House of Representatives
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
RE - OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2314 - Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009
Dear Honorable Rahall, Honorable Hastings, and Members of the House Committee on Natural Resources,
I thank you for allowing me to submit this testimony in OPPOSITION to H.R. 2314, which seeks to express the policy of the United States regarding the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians and to provide a process of the recognition by the United States of the Native Hawaiian governing entity.
I OPPOSE H.R. 2314: Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009 because -
Lack of Community Comment and Testimony
No hearings have ever been held in Hawai`i on the current legislation before the 2009 Congress.
Native Hawaiian people have not been offered the ability to attend any hearings held in Hawai`i, either on O’ahu or the neighbor islands, that would allow the Hawaiian people to present testimony on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.
In 2000, only two (2) days of hearings were held on O`ahu Island. All other hearings were cancelled. This is hardly a democratic process! Even the corporate forces behind the currently contested “TMT” telescope proposals have been decent enough to organize forums for community testimony, on two islands! Why cannot the U.S. government do better than that?
The current and past bills addressing the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians to provide a process of the recognition by the United States of the Native Hawaiian governing entity were subsequently redrafted and amendments were added with no input or testimony from the Hawaiian people.
The Hawaiian people seek the right to a fair and democratic process that includes hearings on H.R. 2314 throughout the islands that comprise the state of Hawai`i.
For 9 years, Hawaiians have requested that the island wide hearings be rescheduled so that the hundreds of Hawaiians who want to testify can be included and their concerns heard.
H.R. 2314 disenfranchises Native Hawaiians
The effort being pursued in the US Congress violates the most fundamental principles of democracy and human rights.
H.R. 2314 disenfranchises the Hawaiian people by ensuring that persons residing on the US continent, many of whom have no contact or relationship with Hawaiian culture or Hawai`i, will control the electoral process.
By including a huge American continental population, the drafters of H.R. 2314 have guaranteed that Hawaiians of Molokai, Maui, Kaua`i, Hawai`i Island and Lana`i will be outvoted at their own Constitutional Convention.
Most importantly, the Hawai`i based native Hawaiians such as Hawaiian Homesteaders who are the sole beneficiaries of the Ceded Lands and Hawaiian Homelands trusts will be outvoted by a margin of 10 to 1.
H.R. 2314 disenfranchises descendents of Hawaiian Nationals
Native Hawaiians were not the only people harmed by the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai’i, the illegal annexation of Hawai’i through a U.S. domestic resolution (Newlands) instead of a nation to nation treaty as required by international law, and the illegally conducted “statehood” vote. Every version of H.R. 2314 has ignored the very real claims of the multi-ethnic descendents of citizens of the Kingdom of Hawai’i, who were also robbed of their country and citizenship, just like the Native Hawaiians.
Finally,
In the 9 years during which time the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act has evolved, the Hawai`i Federal Delegation made several concessions to previous federal and state administrations, the goal of which is to maintain the political status of the Hawaiian peoples as wards of the United States and state of Hawai`i, and to ensure that the vast land and fiscal resources of the Hawaiian people are utilized for US federal and state priorities.
The Administration of President Barrack Obama came to office promising open government dedicated to truth and justice for all peoples. I call upon the Obama Administration, and Democrats in the US Congress to live with the integrity of their own words.
I call for the Congressional Committee to hold hearings on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act in Hawai`i to provide the Hawaiian peoples their right to participate in the process and to seek amendments to the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.
Therefore, I strongly urge you to OPPOSE H.R. 2314 until Congressional hearings are scheduled and held in Hawai`i on all islands, and in all States on the US continent where a significant population of Hawaiians reside, in order to provide the Hawaiian peoples their right to a democratic fair, free, and impartial process of self-determination and to empower them with the ability to determine the culturally appropriate mechanism for their own self-governance.
In addition, I strongly urge the inclusion of descendents of Hawaiian nationals in any planning processes which affect the occupied Kingdom of Hawai’i, which is the true status of Hawai’i, as confirmed by the World Court at the Hague.
Mahalo nui loa,
Amy Marsh
---------------------
June 24, 2009
The Honorable Nick J. Rahall II, Chairman
The Honorable Doc Hastings, Ranking Member
House Committee on Natural Resources
U.S. House of Representatives
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
RE - OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2314 - Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009
Dear Honorable Rahall, Honorable Hastings, and Members of the House Committee on Natural Resources,
I thank you for allowing me to submit this testimony in OPPOSITION to H.R. 2314, which seeks to express the policy of the United States regarding the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians and to provide a process of the recognition by the United States of the Native Hawaiian governing entity.
I OPPOSE H.R. 2314: Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009 because -
Lack of Community Comment and Testimony
No hearings have ever been held in Hawai`i on the current legislation before the 2009 Congress.
Native Hawaiian people have not been offered the ability to attend any hearings held in Hawai`i, either on O’ahu or the neighbor islands, that would allow the Hawaiian people to present testimony on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.
In 2000, only two (2) days of hearings were held on O`ahu Island. All other hearings were cancelled. This is hardly a democratic process! Even the corporate forces behind the currently contested “TMT” telescope proposals have been decent enough to organize forums for community testimony, on two islands! Why cannot the U.S. government do better than that?
The current and past bills addressing the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians to provide a process of the recognition by the United States of the Native Hawaiian governing entity were subsequently redrafted and amendments were added with no input or testimony from the Hawaiian people.
The Hawaiian people seek the right to a fair and democratic process that includes hearings on H.R. 2314 throughout the islands that comprise the state of Hawai`i.
For 9 years, Hawaiians have requested that the island wide hearings be rescheduled so that the hundreds of Hawaiians who want to testify can be included and their concerns heard.
H.R. 2314 disenfranchises Native Hawaiians
The effort being pursued in the US Congress violates the most fundamental principles of democracy and human rights.
H.R. 2314 disenfranchises the Hawaiian people by ensuring that persons residing on the US continent, many of whom have no contact or relationship with Hawaiian culture or Hawai`i, will control the electoral process.
By including a huge American continental population, the drafters of H.R. 2314 have guaranteed that Hawaiians of Molokai, Maui, Kaua`i, Hawai`i Island and Lana`i will be outvoted at their own Constitutional Convention.
Most importantly, the Hawai`i based native Hawaiians such as Hawaiian Homesteaders who are the sole beneficiaries of the Ceded Lands and Hawaiian Homelands trusts will be outvoted by a margin of 10 to 1.
H.R. 2314 disenfranchises descendents of Hawaiian Nationals
Native Hawaiians were not the only people harmed by the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai’i, the illegal annexation of Hawai’i through a U.S. domestic resolution (Newlands) instead of a nation to nation treaty as required by international law, and the illegally conducted “statehood” vote. Every version of H.R. 2314 has ignored the very real claims of the multi-ethnic descendents of citizens of the Kingdom of Hawai’i, who were also robbed of their country and citizenship, just like the Native Hawaiians.
Finally,
In the 9 years during which time the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act has evolved, the Hawai`i Federal Delegation made several concessions to previous federal and state administrations, the goal of which is to maintain the political status of the Hawaiian peoples as wards of the United States and state of Hawai`i, and to ensure that the vast land and fiscal resources of the Hawaiian people are utilized for US federal and state priorities.
The Administration of President Barrack Obama came to office promising open government dedicated to truth and justice for all peoples. I call upon the Obama Administration, and Democrats in the US Congress to live with the integrity of their own words.
I call for the Congressional Committee to hold hearings on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act in Hawai`i to provide the Hawaiian peoples their right to participate in the process and to seek amendments to the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.
Therefore, I strongly urge you to OPPOSE H.R. 2314 until Congressional hearings are scheduled and held in Hawai`i on all islands, and in all States on the US continent where a significant population of Hawaiians reside, in order to provide the Hawaiian peoples their right to a democratic fair, free, and impartial process of self-determination and to empower them with the ability to determine the culturally appropriate mechanism for their own self-governance.
In addition, I strongly urge the inclusion of descendents of Hawaiian nationals in any planning processes which affect the occupied Kingdom of Hawai’i, which is the true status of Hawai’i, as confirmed by the World Court at the Hague.
Mahalo nui loa,
Amy Marsh
Friday, June 12, 2009
Pinky the Cat Stands Up for Hawai'i Nei
The Pinky Show is clever and informative website which features videos that are well researched and innocently entertaining, while always packing a wallop of home truths! Especially this episode below.
http://www.pinkyshow.org/archives/episodes/090611_hawaii03/
And I have to wonder, if Pinky can speak truth to power (while blinking innocently with that little kitty cat face), why don't the rest of us do it more often?
http://www.pinkyshow.org/archives/episodes/090611_hawaii03/
And I have to wonder, if Pinky can speak truth to power (while blinking innocently with that little kitty cat face), why don't the rest of us do it more often?
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
A'ole to the Akaka Bill! (Just say "No Way!")
Here is a letter written to oppose the Akaka bill, which is being heard, yet again, in one of its many pernicious forms, tomorrow, June 11, 2009. This letter is written by independence activist, Ku Ching. Please join all of us in opposing this terrible bill. It will not do Native Hawaiians, or descendents of Hawaiian Nationals, any good at all!
----------------
Honorable Nick J. Rahall (D-WV)
Chair
The House Natural Resources Committee
Re: Hearing on H.R. 2314
June 11, 2009
10:00 A.M.
Chairman Rahall and Members of the Committee,
I am a Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiian) and go on record to OPPOSE H.R. 2314.
According to historical fact, truth and rule of law, Native Hawaiians are not American Indians.
And I - along with many, many others - do not want that distinction.
If anything, we are Hawaiian, subjects of the Kingdom of Hawaii, whose government has been placed into some kind of limbo by the imperialistic forces of the u.s. - in 1893 - in conflict with the highest law of the (u.s.) land - its (the u.s.'s) treaties.
As international law states: One nation-state cannot (on its own) discontinue the existence of another nation-state.
The Kingdom of Hawaii was an "international" nation-state - recognized by all members of the "Family of Nations" - but its history was interrupted in a coups d'etat in which u.s. military troops were complicit and necessary (to pull off). In other words - the u.s. was a major player in an illegal coups d'etat.
The end of u.s. occuption of Hawai'i is overdue.
To enact H..R. 2314 would continue the abuse of the u.s. constitution - and support the unconscionable illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Moreso - the passage of H.R. 2314 would whitewash all of the mistakes of the u.s. in its most imperialistic period - as it pertains to Hawai'i.
Such a whitewash would tend to stifle Hawaiians' right to justice, a "real" reconciliation, and their right of self-determination (among other things, as promulgated in the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples).
Actually - the u.s. supreme court decided recently (March 31, 2009) - that "resolutions" are not the law of the land - in the case of OHA vs. State of Hawaii.
However, the supreme court did not go one step further - Which is to find that the "Resolution of Annexation" (of Hawai'i to the u.s.) is also NOT the law of the land.
Hawai'i IS NOT part of the u.s. It (Hawai'i) is merely being subject to belligerant occupation - of which international laws - aren't being complied with by the u.s.
In reference to the March 31, 2009, supreme court case, I wrote - as it pertains to the so-called "ceded lands" ---
Deeded? No way.
Ceded? By Whom? Tried to by the Republic of Hawaii. Where did it get its title? It didn't have any.
Annexation? It never happened. The myth continues, for instance, on the McKinley statue at McKinley H.S., which labels the document he holds as "Treaty!" There was NO treaty. A resolution is domestic and only has the force of law, if any, within the boundaries of the sponsoring nation. The "Resolution of Annexation" was powerless in Hawai'i.
While treaties are "the supreme law of the land" - the u.s. does not live by its treaties.
Never fear, the Supreme Court will find a way to continue the myth.
However, if the so-called "ceded lands trust" is found to be unconstitutional - Should the Statehood Act also be found unconstitutional?
Or can the Court - as in Pearl Harbor - support cancellation of the treaty - yet allow the u.s. to not only keep the "use" of it, but allow the u.s. to claim good title?
Manifest Destiny is alive!
Unfortunately, this appeal gives the u.s. supreme court the wherewithal to make legal what all the misrepresentation, deception and fraud wreaked upon the subjects of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the Kingdom - by the illegal Overthrow, the Annexation that never took place, and the cession, by an entity without interest or title, of the so-called "ceded" lands (the stolen Hawaiian Kingdom lands.
A possible outcome of this appeal, based on racial equality - for me - may cancel one of my major reasons for opposing the so-called "Akaka" Bill - to keep the stolen lands out of the hands of the u.s. and the so-called state of Hawai`i.
Again - Justice is elusive. But - I suppose - this is how dastardly folks can steal a Kingdom, its lands, and unconstitutionally make americans out of hawaiians.
But - holdouts like me - refuse to play this game. Onipa'a!!!!
______
Therefore, sir, I am violently opposed to H.R. 2314 - for the above reasons AND many more ... and I recommend that you and your committee reject the bill.
Clarence Kukauakahi Ching, Waimea, Hawai'i
----------------
Honorable Nick J. Rahall (D-WV)
Chair
The House Natural Resources Committee
Re: Hearing on H.R. 2314
June 11, 2009
10:00 A.M.
Chairman Rahall and Members of the Committee,
I am a Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiian) and go on record to OPPOSE H.R. 2314.
According to historical fact, truth and rule of law, Native Hawaiians are not American Indians.
And I - along with many, many others - do not want that distinction.
If anything, we are Hawaiian, subjects of the Kingdom of Hawaii, whose government has been placed into some kind of limbo by the imperialistic forces of the u.s. - in 1893 - in conflict with the highest law of the (u.s.) land - its (the u.s.'s) treaties.
As international law states: One nation-state cannot (on its own) discontinue the existence of another nation-state.
The Kingdom of Hawaii was an "international" nation-state - recognized by all members of the "Family of Nations" - but its history was interrupted in a coups d'etat in which u.s. military troops were complicit and necessary (to pull off). In other words - the u.s. was a major player in an illegal coups d'etat.
The end of u.s. occuption of Hawai'i is overdue.
To enact H..R. 2314 would continue the abuse of the u.s. constitution - and support the unconscionable illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Moreso - the passage of H.R. 2314 would whitewash all of the mistakes of the u.s. in its most imperialistic period - as it pertains to Hawai'i.
Such a whitewash would tend to stifle Hawaiians' right to justice, a "real" reconciliation, and their right of self-determination (among other things, as promulgated in the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples).
Actually - the u.s. supreme court decided recently (March 31, 2009) - that "resolutions" are not the law of the land - in the case of OHA vs. State of Hawaii.
However, the supreme court did not go one step further - Which is to find that the "Resolution of Annexation" (of Hawai'i to the u.s.) is also NOT the law of the land.
Hawai'i IS NOT part of the u.s. It (Hawai'i) is merely being subject to belligerant occupation - of which international laws - aren't being complied with by the u.s.
In reference to the March 31, 2009, supreme court case, I wrote - as it pertains to the so-called "ceded lands" ---
Deeded? No way.
Ceded? By Whom? Tried to by the Republic of Hawaii. Where did it get its title? It didn't have any.
Annexation? It never happened. The myth continues, for instance, on the McKinley statue at McKinley H.S., which labels the document he holds as "Treaty!" There was NO treaty. A resolution is domestic and only has the force of law, if any, within the boundaries of the sponsoring nation. The "Resolution of Annexation" was powerless in Hawai'i.
While treaties are "the supreme law of the land" - the u.s. does not live by its treaties.
Never fear, the Supreme Court will find a way to continue the myth.
However, if the so-called "ceded lands trust" is found to be unconstitutional - Should the Statehood Act also be found unconstitutional?
Or can the Court - as in Pearl Harbor - support cancellation of the treaty - yet allow the u.s. to not only keep the "use" of it, but allow the u.s. to claim good title?
Manifest Destiny is alive!
Unfortunately, this appeal gives the u.s. supreme court the wherewithal to make legal what all the misrepresentation, deception and fraud wreaked upon the subjects of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the Kingdom - by the illegal Overthrow, the Annexation that never took place, and the cession, by an entity without interest or title, of the so-called "ceded" lands (the stolen Hawaiian Kingdom lands.
A possible outcome of this appeal, based on racial equality - for me - may cancel one of my major reasons for opposing the so-called "Akaka" Bill - to keep the stolen lands out of the hands of the u.s. and the so-called state of Hawai`i.
Again - Justice is elusive. But - I suppose - this is how dastardly folks can steal a Kingdom, its lands, and unconstitutionally make americans out of hawaiians.
But - holdouts like me - refuse to play this game. Onipa'a!!!!
______
Therefore, sir, I am violently opposed to H.R. 2314 - for the above reasons AND many more ... and I recommend that you and your committee reject the bill.
Clarence Kukauakahi Ching, Waimea, Hawai'i
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa's Statement on 3/31/09 Supreme Court Ruling
Aloha kakou,
I copy and paste Dr. Kame'eleihiwa's statement here, to add to the widening circulation her words should have. As an ally of Hawaiian independence, I join with those who protest this ruling.
Here are her words, reprinted from the Honolulu Advertiser:
US Supreme Court Ruling on Sale of Stolen ('Ceded') Lands: Statement from Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, UH Center for Hawaiian Studies 3/31/09 (From the Honolulu Advertiser 3/31/09)
"Today we learn that the Supreme Court of Injustice of America, has ruled unanimously that the illegal State of Hawaii has the right to sell "ceded" lands. Why are we not surprised? If they had ruled otherwise every native nation whose lands have been taken by America would file suit for a return of their lands.
We, the Hawaiian people, who are born from the union of Papahanaumoku and Wakea, earth mother and sky father, and who have lived in these islands for over 100 generations, will always have the moral right to the lands of Hawaii now and forever, no matter what any court says.
The land of Hawaii is our ancestor. In order to survive culturally as the Hawaiian people we, must have land upon which to practice our culture. To deny us the right to our ancestral land, especially the so called "ceded" or stolen lands, is to perpetuate cultural genocide upon the Hawaiian people.
Therefore, we Reject the March 31, 2009 Supreme Court decision. We call upon all non Hawaiians everywhere, who support the survival of the Hawaiian people, and who support survival of the Hawaiian culture, to also support the moral right of the Hawaiian people to have jurisdiction over the "ceded" lands, and to join us in the Rejection of this immoral decision by the supreme court.
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL LEGAL RIGHTS
Under International Law, America has
• Illegally invaded our internationally recognized Hawaiian Nation in 1893 and held our country since then by "right" of military force,
• Illegally annexed the Hawaiian islands without an annexation treaty in 1900, (no other American territory has ever been taken by the legal fiction of joint resolution)
• Accepted the so called "ceded lands" from a puppet American government only held in place by the force of the American military,
• Illegally made Hawaii a U.S. state by faulty vote in 1959, as no option for independence was afforded on the ballot as is required by the United Nations,
• Through its agent the State of Hawaii, has abused and mismanaged Hawaiian lands since 1959, still not even having an accurate inventory of the "ceded" lands,
• Through its occupying military, has bombed, destroyed, and grossly polluted with toxic wastes the precious lands of Hawaii,
• And now, through the decision of its Supreme Court, will try to alienate all "ceded" lands by sale to private foreign developers.
Moreover, under International Law Indigenous Peoples have rights to their traditional lands. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, passed on September 13, 2007 by 144 nations of the world, enshrines Indigenous Rights to land in the following articles:
ARTICLE 25:
Indigenous Peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard.
ARTICLE 26:
1. Indigenous Peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.
2. Indigenous Peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.
3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the Indigenous Peoples concerned.
ARTICLE 27:
1. States shall establish and implement, in conjunction with Indigenous Peoples concerned, a fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process, giving due recognition to Indigenous Peoples' laws, traditions, customs and land tenure systems, to recognize and adjudicate the rights of Indigenous Peoples pertaining to their lands, territories and resources, including those which were traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used. Indigenous Peoples shall have the right to participate in this process.
2. Unless otherwise freely agreed upon by the Peoples concerned, compensation shall take the form of lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress.
ARTICLE 29:
1. Indigenous Peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States shall establish and implement assistance programs for Indigenous Peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of Indigenous Peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.
CONCLUSIONTherefore, we, the Hawaiian people, who are born from the Hawaiian land, and who have resided here for over 100 generations, reject forever the decision of the Supreme Court of American injustice!
That court only has the "right" to rule because its military is illegally occupying our country, it does not have the moral right!
Remember that was the court that once found slavery legal, and that was the court that eventually had to find that slavery was illegal. They did so because of the moral outrage of the American people. No doubt one day that same court will find that they have erred yet again, and that we as Hawaiians have a moral and legal right to deny sale of the "ceded" lands, as that land is our land.
Our sovereign rights to those lands were acknowledge and affirmed by the 1993 Apology Law, and were even acknowledged by the 1959 State of Hawaii constitution, that stated such lands were held in trust for two beneficiaries, the Native Hawaiians and the general public. When the State of Hawaii proposes to sell "ceded" lands, they are abusing that trust for both beneficiaries, as once land is sold (misprint in the newspaper; lines missing)
Over the course of time, history has taught us that wrongs commited against humanity in the name of law are wrongs forever, and eventually wrongs are righted by the overturning of bad law. Just as slavery and genocide have been overturned by human rights, so too will today's decision of the American Supreme Court of Injustice be overturned. We Hawaiians will always have the moral right to our lands, now and for the next 100 generations.
As for Linda Lingle, who has stabbed us in the heart with her abuse of our trust, she has now earned her place in history with other moo niho awa'awa such as John L. Stevens, Lorrin Thurston, and Sanford Dole. Too bad for her; she could have been remembered as our friend."
As found on the Honolulu Advertiser 3/31/09
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090331/BREAKING/90331041/1352
I copy and paste Dr. Kame'eleihiwa's statement here, to add to the widening circulation her words should have. As an ally of Hawaiian independence, I join with those who protest this ruling.
Here are her words, reprinted from the Honolulu Advertiser:
US Supreme Court Ruling on Sale of Stolen ('Ceded') Lands: Statement from Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, UH Center for Hawaiian Studies 3/31/09 (From the Honolulu Advertiser 3/31/09)
"Today we learn that the Supreme Court of Injustice of America, has ruled unanimously that the illegal State of Hawaii has the right to sell "ceded" lands. Why are we not surprised? If they had ruled otherwise every native nation whose lands have been taken by America would file suit for a return of their lands.
We, the Hawaiian people, who are born from the union of Papahanaumoku and Wakea, earth mother and sky father, and who have lived in these islands for over 100 generations, will always have the moral right to the lands of Hawaii now and forever, no matter what any court says.
The land of Hawaii is our ancestor. In order to survive culturally as the Hawaiian people we, must have land upon which to practice our culture. To deny us the right to our ancestral land, especially the so called "ceded" or stolen lands, is to perpetuate cultural genocide upon the Hawaiian people.
Therefore, we Reject the March 31, 2009 Supreme Court decision. We call upon all non Hawaiians everywhere, who support the survival of the Hawaiian people, and who support survival of the Hawaiian culture, to also support the moral right of the Hawaiian people to have jurisdiction over the "ceded" lands, and to join us in the Rejection of this immoral decision by the supreme court.
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL LEGAL RIGHTS
Under International Law, America has
• Illegally invaded our internationally recognized Hawaiian Nation in 1893 and held our country since then by "right" of military force,
• Illegally annexed the Hawaiian islands without an annexation treaty in 1900, (no other American territory has ever been taken by the legal fiction of joint resolution)
• Accepted the so called "ceded lands" from a puppet American government only held in place by the force of the American military,
• Illegally made Hawaii a U.S. state by faulty vote in 1959, as no option for independence was afforded on the ballot as is required by the United Nations,
• Through its agent the State of Hawaii, has abused and mismanaged Hawaiian lands since 1959, still not even having an accurate inventory of the "ceded" lands,
• Through its occupying military, has bombed, destroyed, and grossly polluted with toxic wastes the precious lands of Hawaii,
• And now, through the decision of its Supreme Court, will try to alienate all "ceded" lands by sale to private foreign developers.
Moreover, under International Law Indigenous Peoples have rights to their traditional lands. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, passed on September 13, 2007 by 144 nations of the world, enshrines Indigenous Rights to land in the following articles:
ARTICLE 25:
Indigenous Peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard.
ARTICLE 26:
1. Indigenous Peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.
2. Indigenous Peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.
3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the Indigenous Peoples concerned.
ARTICLE 27:
1. States shall establish and implement, in conjunction with Indigenous Peoples concerned, a fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process, giving due recognition to Indigenous Peoples' laws, traditions, customs and land tenure systems, to recognize and adjudicate the rights of Indigenous Peoples pertaining to their lands, territories and resources, including those which were traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used. Indigenous Peoples shall have the right to participate in this process.
2. Unless otherwise freely agreed upon by the Peoples concerned, compensation shall take the form of lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress.
ARTICLE 29:
1. Indigenous Peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States shall establish and implement assistance programs for Indigenous Peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of Indigenous Peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.
CONCLUSIONTherefore, we, the Hawaiian people, who are born from the Hawaiian land, and who have resided here for over 100 generations, reject forever the decision of the Supreme Court of American injustice!
That court only has the "right" to rule because its military is illegally occupying our country, it does not have the moral right!
Remember that was the court that once found slavery legal, and that was the court that eventually had to find that slavery was illegal. They did so because of the moral outrage of the American people. No doubt one day that same court will find that they have erred yet again, and that we as Hawaiians have a moral and legal right to deny sale of the "ceded" lands, as that land is our land.
Our sovereign rights to those lands were acknowledge and affirmed by the 1993 Apology Law, and were even acknowledged by the 1959 State of Hawaii constitution, that stated such lands were held in trust for two beneficiaries, the Native Hawaiians and the general public. When the State of Hawaii proposes to sell "ceded" lands, they are abusing that trust for both beneficiaries, as once land is sold (misprint in the newspaper; lines missing)
Over the course of time, history has taught us that wrongs commited against humanity in the name of law are wrongs forever, and eventually wrongs are righted by the overturning of bad law. Just as slavery and genocide have been overturned by human rights, so too will today's decision of the American Supreme Court of Injustice be overturned. We Hawaiians will always have the moral right to our lands, now and for the next 100 generations.
As for Linda Lingle, who has stabbed us in the heart with her abuse of our trust, she has now earned her place in history with other moo niho awa'awa such as John L. Stevens, Lorrin Thurston, and Sanford Dole. Too bad for her; she could have been remembered as our friend."
As found on the Honolulu Advertiser 3/31/09
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090331/BREAKING/90331041/1352
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
