Friday, September 23, 2016

Vol VI No. 617 Part 1B

News Feed

RECENT ACTIVITY
Information
Hawaiian Historical Society
Hawaiian Historical Society Executive Director Jennifer Higa will be part of a panel at the Lāhui Hawaiʻi Research Centerʻs "Introduction to Libraries and Archives" seminar today at Hālau Pā in Mōʻiliʻili.
The Lāhui Hawaiʻi Research Center [LHRC] is a new initiative, funded by a Title III Federal Grant, to offer haumāna Kanaka Maoli [Native Hawaiian students] training and support in the fields of research, writing, and publishing. For more information on the LHRC email the Centerʻs director, Ronald Williams Jr., at lhrc@hawaii.edu
The event will be held at the newly-opened Kamehameha Schools educational collaboration space, Hālau Pā at 3pm today, 2438 Beretania Street, Mōʻiliʻili.
Like
Comment
Comments
Zeke Peke The state took down the dags website. Gotta go into the building to access and the information is limited. Some bs. Keeping us ignorant, i tell you.
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Unity Summit
651 Views
Camille Keawekane-Stafford was live.
PT. 0: 2nd Annual Unity Summit 2016, opening ceremony and pule with Unko Abel, PowerPoint Presentation by Unko Isaac Harp - Paka
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
💖💖💖👑👑👑💖💖💖👊🌺
Bishop Museum
Queen Lili'uokalani was born on this day, Sept 2, 1838, to the High Chiefess Analea Keohokālole and High Chief Caesar Kaluaiku Kapaʻakea. She was hānai, adopted at birth, by Abner Pākī and his wife Laura Kōnia the parents of Bernice Pauahi. #KēiaLāhttp://www.hawaiialive.org/viewer.php…
Like
Comment
Comments
Sam Koss Ah Loo Forever my  Queen  Hau'oli la Hanau#QueenLiliuokalani
Deldrene Herron As I gaze at the new moon I have hope that our koko will live on forever. As I see this video, I cry for our Queen and pledge that my life will not be in vain for I now know the truth and the truth shall someday, someway set us free from the illegal occupation by the United States of America.
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Professor Boyle, Nation of Hawaii speaking TRUTH!🌱🌺💦💗💧
265 Views
Kika Lomi Waialae at Iolani Palace.
This is filmed at Iolani Palace on the "fake" admission day crime scene. I went to return my gift from the USA given to me on 8/21/1959. There I discovered the gift was fake.
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
La Kū'oko'a
-2:33
720 Views
Kika Lomi Waialae
This video is about La Ku'oko'a 2015
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Not annexed! Myths
The Hawaiian Law Foundation
Just the Facts… Hawaii legally being annexed to the U.S. is a Myth.
October 4, 1988
MEMORANDUM OPNION FOR THE LEGAL ADVISER
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Prepared by
DOUGLAS W. KMIEC
Acting Assistant Attorney General
Office of Legal Counsel
‘The United States also annexed Hawaii by joint resolution in 1898. Joint Res. 55, 30 Stat. 750 (1898). Again, the Senate had already rejected an annexation treaty, this one negotiated by President McKinley with Hawaii. And again, Congress then considered a measure to annex the land by joint resolution. Indeed, Congress acted in explicit reliance on the procedure followed for the acquisition of Texas. As the Senate Foreign Relations Committee report pronounced, '[t]he joint resolution for the annexation of Hawaii to the United States . . brings that subject within reach of the legislative power of Congress under the precedent that was established in the annexation of Texas." S. Rep. No. 681, 55th Cong., 2d Sess. I (1898). This argument, however, neglected one significant nuance: Hawaii was not being acquired as a state. Because the joint resolution annexing Texas relied on Congress' power to admit new states, "the method of annexing Texas did not constitute a proper precedent for the annexation of a land and people to be retained as a possession or in a territorial condition. " Andrew C. McLaughlin, A Constitutional History of the United States 504 (1936). Opponents of the joint resolution stressed this distinction. See, e.g., 31 Cong. Rec. 5975 (1898) (statement of Rep. Ball).30 Moreover, as one constitutional scholar wrote:
The constitutionality of the annexation of Hawaii, by a simple legislative act, was strenuously contested at the time both in Congress and by the press. The right to annex by treaty was not denied, but it was denied that this might be done by a simple legislative act. . . . Only by means of treaties, it was asserted, can the relations between States be governed, for a legislative act is necessarily without extraterritorial force—confined in its operation to the territory of the State by whose legislature it is enacted.
I Westel Woodbury Willoughby, The Constitutional Law of the United States 239, at 427 (2d ed. 1929).
Notwithstanding these constitutional objections, Congress approved the joint resolution and President McKinley signed the measure in 1898. Nevertheless, whether this action demonstrates the constitutional power of Congress to acquire territory is certainly questionable. The stated justification for the joint resolulion—the previous acquisition of Texas—simply ignores the reliance the 1845 Congress placed on its power to admit new states. It is therefore 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. 3i
We believe that the only clear congressional power to acquire territory derives from the constitutional power of Congress to admit new states into the union. The admission of Texas is an example of the exercise of this power. Additionally, the Supreme Court in Louisiana recognized that this power includes "the power to establish state boundaries." 363 U.S. at 35. The Court explained, however, that it is not this power, but rather the President's constitutional status as the representative of the United States in foreign affairs, which authorizes the United States to claim territorial rights in the sea for the purpose of international law. The Court left open the question of whether Congress could establish a state boundary of more than three miles beyond its coast that would constitute an overriding claim on behalf of the United States under international law. [d. Indeed, elsewhere in its opinion the Court hints that congressional action cannot have such an effect. 'd. at 51.
In the time permitted for our review we are unable to resolve the matter definitively, but we believe that H.R. 5069 raises serious constitutional questions. We have been unable to identify a basis for the bill in any source of constitutional authority. Because of these concerns, we believe that, absent a treaty, the proposed proclamation represents the most defensible means of asserting sovereignty over the territorial sea. (Pages 251-252)
FOOTNOTES
30 Representative Ball argued:
Advocates of the annexation of Texas rested their case upon the express power conferred upon Congress In the Constitution to admit new States Opponents of the annexation of Texas contended that even that express power did not confer the right to admit States not carved from territory already belonging to the United States or some one of the States founding the Federal Union. Whether. therefore. we subscribe to the one or the other school of thought In that matter, we can find no precedent to sustain the method here proposed for admitting foreign territory.
31 Cong. Rec 5975 (1898). He thus characterized the effort to annex Hawaii by joint resolution after the defeat of the treaty as "a deliberate attempt to do unlawfully that which can not be lawfully done " Id
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Not annexed! Myths
The Hawaiian Law Foundation
Just the Facts… Hawaii legally being annexed to the U.S. is a Myth.
October 4, 1988
MEMORANDUM OPNION FOR THE LEGAL ADVISER
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Prepared by
DOUGLAS W. KMIEC
Acting Assistant Attorney General
Office of Legal Counsel
‘The United States also annexed Hawaii by joint resolution in 1898. Joint Res. 55, 30 Stat. 750 (1898). Again, the Senate had already rejected an annexation treaty, this one negotiated by President McKinley with Hawaii. And again, Congress then considered a measure to annex the land by joint resolution. Indeed, Congress acted in explicit reliance on the procedure followed for the acquisition of Texas. As the Senate Foreign Relations Committee report pronounced, '[t]he joint resolution for the annexation of Hawaii to the United States . . brings that subject within reach of the legislative power of Congress under the precedent that was established in the annexation of Texas." S. Rep. No. 681, 55th Cong., 2d Sess. I (1898). This argument, however, neglected one significant nuance: Hawaii was not being acquired as a state. Because the joint resolution annexing Texas relied on Congress' power to admit new states, "the method of annexing Texas did not constitute a proper precedent for the annexation of a land and people to be retained as a possession or in a territorial condition. " Andrew C. McLaughlin, A Constitutional History of the United States 504 (1936). Opponents of the joint resolution stressed this distinction. See, e.g., 31 Cong. Rec. 5975 (1898) (statement of Rep. Ball).30 Moreover, as one constitutional scholar wrote:
The constitutionality of the annexation of Hawaii, by a simple legislative act, was strenuously contested at the time both in Congress and by the press. The right to annex by treaty was not denied, but it was denied that this might be done by a simple legislative act. . . . Only by means of treaties, it was asserted, can the relations between States be governed, for a legislative act is necessarily without extraterritorial force—confined in its operation to the territory of the State by whose legislature it is enacted.
I Westel Woodbury Willoughby, The Constitutional Law of the United States 239, at 427 (2d ed. 1929).
Notwithstanding these constitutional objections, Congress approved the joint resolution and President McKinley signed the measure in 1898. Nevertheless, whether this action demonstrates the constitutional power of Congress to acquire territory is certainly questionable. The stated justification for the joint resolulion—the previous acquisition of Texas—simply ignores the reliance the 1845 Congress placed on its power to admit new states. It is therefore 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. 3i
We believe that the only clear congressional power to acquire territory derives from the constitutional power of Congress to admit new states into the union. The admission of Texas is an example of the exercise of this power. Additionally, the Supreme Court in Louisiana recognized that this power includes "the power to establish state boundaries." 363 U.S. at 35. The Court explained, however, that it is not this power, but rather the President's constitutional status as the representative of the United States in foreign affairs, which authorizes the United States to claim territorial rights in the sea for the purpose of international law. The Court left open the question of whether Congress could establish a state boundary of more than three miles beyond its coast that would constitute an overriding claim on behalf of the United States under international law. [d. Indeed, elsewhere in its opinion the Court hints that congressional action cannot have such an effect. 'd. at 51.
In the time permitted for our review we are unable to resolve the matter definitively, but we believe that H.R. 5069 raises serious constitutional questions. We have been unable to identify a basis for the bill in any source of constitutional authority. Because of these concerns, we believe that, absent a treaty, the proposed proclamation represents the most defensible means of asserting sovereignty over the territorial sea. (Pages 251-252)
FOOTNOTES
30 Representative Ball argued:
Advocates of the annexation of Texas rested their case upon the express power conferred upon Congress In the Constitution to admit new States Opponents of the annexation of Texas contended that even that express power did not confer the right to admit States not carved from territory already belonging to the United States or some one of the States founding the Federal Union. Whether. therefore. we subscribe to the one or the other school of thought In that matter, we can find no precedent to sustain the method here proposed for admitting foreign territory.
31 Cong. Rec 5975 (1898). He thus characterized the effort to annex Hawaii by joint resolution after the defeat of the treaty as "a deliberate attempt to do unlawfully that which can not be lawfully done " Id
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Aloha e Nā Ali'i,
Please contact Keli Akina for info!
Attachment Unavailable
This attachment may have been removed or the person who shared it may not have permission to share it with you.
Like
Comment
Comments
Lori Halemano Keli, Bumpy Kanahele and others are going to occupy the Palace on that day.
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Kauwila Kaylene Sheldon updated the description.
This site is not to claim a singular sovereign-but to share geneology with the trust that we are only sharing to look for a connection with one another, to jump in the canoe and paddle together. We support any Ali'i with respect, the lāhui needs leaders and guidance, this is suppose to be a safe place to learn however most people added to these site are very much aware, informed and educated. No harassing, bullying, insulting or fraudulent/character assassination. Please inbox me for any questions and inquiries. The administration has real life action things to do and does not teach a 107 class or a geneology class, you may sign up for those classes at Kamakakuokalani & UH community colleges, new minded people want a whole course about geneology and Hawaiian history. Mahalo piha! Kauwila
Like
Comment
Kauwila Kaylene Sheldon updated the description.
This site is not to claim a singular sovereign-but to share geneology with the trust that we are only sharing to look for a connection with one another, to jump in the canoe and paddle together. We support any Ali'i with respect, the lāhui needs leaders and guidance, this is suppose to be a safe place to learn however most people added to these site are very much aware, informed and educated. No harassing, bullying, insulting or fraudulent/character assassination. Please inbox me for any questions and inquiries.
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Hawaiian Patriotic League
***Attention all Hawaiians / Kanaka Maoli / Kingdom Nationals / Kingdom Supporters / Aloha Aina / Believers of Truth ***
The Hawaiian Patriotic League (HPL) wi...
See More
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Keli Akina🏰👑
Attachment Unavailable
This attachment may have been removed or the person who shared it may not have permission to share it with you.
Like
Comment
Comments
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
I know how to Holo Holo (fishing) but my uncle really knows how to Holo Holo the ancient way where he was taught the old way, no talk, watch Tutu, listen to Nature, respect the ocean, no eat everything, let babies grow and eat the old Papa fish so next time you know where to comeback at this spot during the right time of the season, Everytime going get fish, guarantee, so shut up or I going slap your head , watch me cause I only going tell you one time, so pay attention, and do what I do, and thank KeAkua for the blessings of providing food for us and the village.
Now, that's how we learn to fish.
The United States of America has no jurisdiction whatsoever on Hawaiian Kingdom soil and ocean floor which our people have being applying conservation methods to secure these oceans with the wildlife for generations to come.
Show me the treaty of annexation by our Hawaiian Kingdom that your country the United States of America Claims to have since 1893 of the illegal overthrow of my country the Hawaiian Kingdom that still exist today.
There is No Treaty of Annexation period!!!
It is the greatest lie and theft of a nation by the United States of America who have deceived the global community and our people to believe that we are the 50th state of the United States of America.
We are not Americans.
We are Hawaiian Nationals.
It is time for America to leave our country the Hawaiian Kingdom and go back to your country where you belong to.
We can have a treaty of mutual understanding and agreements between two countries even though what America has done to our country the Hawaiian Kingdom currently and in the past, we are Hawaiians who believe in KeAkua and the great Aloha spirit for Humanity.
Stop the lies America and let's move on together with the Aloha spirit in our hearts.
Aloha Malama Pono
Robert Ebanez
Keliikanakaole
Great, Great, Great, Grandson of
King Kamehameha I and
Queen Kahakuha'akoi Wahinepio of the
Royal House of King Kekaulike, died 1736 on Maui.
It could be the largest swath of protected ocean on the planet -- in the stunning waters off Hawai'i -- but only if we all stand up to a powerful fishing lobby...
AVAAZ.ORG
Like
Comment
Comments
Deldrene Herron PAPAHANAUMOKUAKEA. NO HOLO HOLO. NO TAKE. PERIOD.
Amelia Gora
Write a comment...
Kilikina comes hard on issues, puts "Mass Destruction" as high priority and states FACTS, she knows who to insult first and that is the U.S government and land thieves not other Hawaiians in their different beliefs but the Mass Destruction.She is organized, effective and people listen to her! Please find supporters like Kilikina if want to be sovereigns....
0:00
Keli Akina
Kilikina at tonight's BOEM meeting.
The attendees overwhelmingly said No Wind turbines. But here is what Kilikina said to everyone.
Like
Comment

No comments:

Post a Comment