While it is true the State of Hawaii does not own the “ceded lands” neither do the so-called “native Hawaiians.”

By citing “native Hawaiians” as the default claimants to the “ceded lands” the State Supreme Court perpetuates a critical error, ignoring the historical and lawful fact that the lands in question belong to the Hawaiian Kingdom, not the “native Hawaiians.”

This mis-direction is employed to avoid addressing the actual crime — the theft of the national autonomy and the national lands of the Hawaiian Kingdom. It also avoids the rightful remedy — the return of the national autonomy and national lands to the Hawaiian Kingdom.

The rightful owners of the land are the parties from whom they were stolen: the crown (ruling monarch) and the government of the Hawaiian Kingdom. The monarch and the national government hold these lands in trust to benefit the people of Hawaii.

HAIKU - The state Commission on Water Resource Management voted unanimously Thursday on a precedent-setting ruling to restore at least 12.21 million gallons a day of water into eight East Maui streams that are often reduced to trickles.

For more than 125 years, plantations on Maui have diverted water from the streams using a series of ditches and diversions to irrigate fields of sugar cane, pineapple and produce in Central Maui and in Kula.

In the process, stream flows were cut to lower elevations, affecting taro farmers as well as habitat for native stream flora and fauna. Water diverted by the East Maui Irrigation Co. flows to Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co., which averages 160 million gallons of water a day to cultivate about 30,000 acres on Maui.

The commissioners' vote is a historic effort to resolve a 2001 petition filed by the Native Hawaiian Legal Corp. on behalf of Na Moku Aupuni O Koolau Hui and taro farmers Beatrice Kekahuna, Marjorie Wallet and Elizabeth Lapenia demanding the state establish instream flow standards for the East Maui watershed.

"This is a monumental change," said water commission Chairwoman Laura Thielen, saying that Thursday's decision will have effects felt across the state.

Seven members of a Hawaiian kingdom restoration group refused to enter pleas at arraignment to charges stemming from the takeover of Iolani Palace two months ago, maintaining that the Circuit Court has not established jurisdiction over them.

The members of the Kingdom of Hawaii, Nation, also refused to sign an order barring them from re-entering Iolani Palace, a state property over which they claim ownership.

After two high-profile occupations of Iolani Palace grounds this year, the state has created new security rules specifically for the palace to discourage similar protests.

The rules for the Iolani Palace State Monument, unanimously approved yesterday by the Board of Land and Natural Resources, include prohibition of obstructing public access and unauthorized occupation of the grounds. The rules will take effect in a few weeks, officials said.

PROHIBITED AT THE PALACE
New security rules for Iolani Palace prohibit the following actions:

» Obstructing public access to the grounds, buildings or structures
» Unauthorized occupation of any structure on the grounds, including but not limited to, Iolani Palace, Coronation Pavilion, Kanaina Building, Iolani Barracks Building and the Kekauluohi (Archives) Building
» Entering or remaining on the grounds during the hours they are closed, provided that persons with parking permits issued by the state Department of Accounting and General Services may enter and exit during the hours the grounds are closed for the purposes of parking and removing their cars
» Engaging in any activity so as to obstruct or impede pedestrians or vehicles, or harass or intimidate visitors, volunteers or employees traversing or on the premises either verbally or with physical contact or barriers; including but not limited to hindering or interfering with the public's use of one or more of the entry gates to the premises or building entrances
» Displaying signs of a size greater than 12 square feet.

RUSH: This secession business is one of the lamest straws, the lamest little twigs that the left have out there to try to go after Sarah Palin on the basis that her husband Todd supported secession for Alaska. Now, two things. Look at me on this. Follow me. Two things. Now, I don't support secession, obviously, but I can damn-well understand why people in Alaska feel put out. Here you have a bunch of elite, city slicker liberals in New York and California and elsewhere. They don't like liberals in these rural areas. They don't like liberal politicians telling them when, how, and where they can explore for and drill for their own natural resources. They don't like having to hear Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi tell them when and where they can't do things.

They don't like hearing it from Obama. They don't like being told that they can't use their habitats and all of that. Now, I don't support secession for Alaska, but I understand why people get ticked off up there. But can we go back to the recent past? There was a piece by John Fund on June 12th of 2006 in the Wall Street Journal. Senator Akaka [from Hawaii] "undermined his own bill last year when he made statements to National Public Radio that the sovereignty granted Native Hawaiians in the [Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act] bill could eventually lead to secession. 'That could be,' he said. 'As far as what's going to happen at the other end, I'm leaving it up to my grandchildren and great-grandchildren.'" Obama and Biden both voted for Akaka's bill that opened the way for Hawaii to leave the union! And when this bill came up, we were all talking about how this is going to potentially lead to secession," and Obama and Biden both voted for it! Now, this is a clear example of a double standard.

Alaska hasn't done anything like this. They certainly haven't had a member of their congressional delegation propose it. But Daniel A-ka-ka (I love pronouncing that name) Daniel A-ka-ka from Hawaii not only proposed it, but it was debated and almost passed voted for by Obama and Biden. So what is this? The double standard just reigns extreme. But, see, we don't live in a monopoly anymore -- and the left cannot seem to get it through its head that we have researchers and that we have an archive of the stupid, contradictory, hypocritical things that they have and said how they've voted. The rope-a-dope again: "Okay, you want to go after Todd Palin for flirting with Alaskan secession? Fine! Obama and Biden voted for a bill that could lead to that very thing in Hawaii, by the sponsor's own admission, Daniel Akaka."

Hawaiian rights activist Dennis Pu'uhonua "Bumpy" Kanahele's planned constitutional convention for Native Hawaiians won't take place next month as some had envisioned.

Kanahele said he is still gathering support from Native Hawaiians for the effort, which would be separate from a Hawai'i state ballot issue in November asking voters whether they want a convention that would consider changes to the Hawai'i State Constitution. Kanahele believes a Native Hawaiian convention could work toward unifying the historically fractured Hawaiian independence movement.
[...]
Kanahele last week said [...] he is now focused on getting a minimum of 50,000 signatures supporting a constitutional convention before he wants to move forward.

He would not say how long he thinks that will take. He estimated that he has "over a few thousand right now." About 10,000 forms have been released and those have the potential of becoming 100,000 signatures, he said.

"We're just plugging away and getting more signatures," Kanahele said.

The signatures are considered important because they would form the basis for people who would vote in a constitutional convention and because the signatures would establish credibility with an international tribunal or independent entity.

The leader of the Independent and Sovereign Nation State of Hawaii (Nation of Hawaii), Kanahele has stressed that while he wants to take the lead organizing a gathering, his group's view will be only one of the views that would be presented for participants to consider.

Convention participants may ultimately decide they favor federal recognition for a Native Hawaiian entity through the Akaka bill as advocated by OHA instead of sovereignty, he said.

But that's not likely, given that most sovereignty groups don't think federal recognition will offer enough in compensation for the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian government and that a Hawaiian government entity should be negotiating with an international tribunal rather than the U.S. government.

Thomas Clark, a candidate for the Territorial senator from Maui, holds that it was an unconstitutional proceeding on the part of the United States to annex the Islands without a treaty, and that as a matter of fact, the Island (sic) are not annexed, and cannot be, and that if the democrats come into power they will show the thing up in its true light and demonstrate that that (sic) the Islands are de facto independent at the present time. Thomas, necessity knows no law, and it was absolutely necessary to access the Islands at the time it was done. And further, Thomas, if it becomes necessary to annex Cuba, it will be done quicker than a wink. It is but fair to give you credit for being honest in your views, Thomas, but you don't quite understand the American people just yet, hence you are very misleading.

It was a time of healing for Iolani Palace on Sunday morning, more than a week after Hawaii sovereignty activists briefly took over the palace.
[...]
Four royal societies marched in full regalia in a show of support for the palace and its place as an historic Hawaiian treasure.

"It served as the home of our aliis. It served as the government of our aliis. It served for the people of Hawaii," said Edward Akana of Alii Ai Moku.

The societies included the Royal Order of Kamehameha, Kaahumanu Society, Hale o Na Ali'i o Hawaii and Daughters and Sons of Hawaiian Warriors.

Privately, supporters of the bill believe they have the 60 votes necessary to break a Senate filibuster. The strategy is to get the bill through the Senate and then possibly attach it to other legislation to reduce the chances of a Bush veto. Even if Bush were to veto the bill, some supporters say, it would be in a stronger position if re-introduced in the next Congress because of having finally cleared the Senate after eight years.

Ikaika Hussey, an organizer with the Movement for Aloha No ka Aina, a group seeking independence, said the discussion should go back to the question of reconciliation raised by the 1993 apology resolution.

"I think even the people who support the Akaka bill recognize it doesn't really address the question of reconciliation. It's sort of a work-around," he said. "It's bad legislation, all the way around."

Hussey said reconciliation is not the same as an apology and he would urge Obama or McCain to look at the issue differently than how it is presented in the bill. He said it should not be about federal recognition, but how to return land and correct the effects of private development and military expansion.

Hussey would like something more akin to the Waitangi Tribunal in New Zealand, which reviews claims brought against the government by the indigenous Maori, or the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which heard accounts of government abuses under apartheid.

"I would tell them that we do need to arrive at a political agreement," he said. "But it needs to be based on the question of making right the wrongs of the past and making sure that, moving forward, we have an equitable solution."

ARTICLE 22.

The Crown is hereby permanently confirmed to His Majesty Kalakaua, and to the Heirs of His body lawfully begotten, and to their lawful Descendants in a direct line; failing whom, the Crown shall descend to Her Royal Highness the Princess Liliuokalani, and the heirs of her body, lawfully begotten, and their lawful descendants in direct a line. The Succession shall be to the senior male child, and to the heirs of his body; failing a male child, the succession, shall be to the senior female child, and to the heirs of her body. In case there is no heir as above provided, the successor shall be the person whom the Sovereign shall appoint with the consent of the Nobles, and publicly proclaim during the Sovereign's life; but should there be no such appointed and proclamation, and the Throne should become vacant, then the Cabinet, immediately after the occurring of such vacancy, shall cause a meeting of the Legislature, who shall elect by ballot some native Alii of the Kingdom as Successor to the Throne; and the Successor so elected shall become a new Stirps for the Royal Family; and the Succession from the Sovereign thus elected, shall be regulated by the same law as the present Royal Family of Hawaii.

The Department of Land and Natural Resources has scheduled a series of statewide hearings to gather input on proposed rule amendments for the use and protection of the 'Iolani Palace State Monument.
[...]
"The state is proposing to establish new administrative rules for 'Iolani Palace State Monument that will help protect and preserve the historic and cultural significance of this important piece of Hawai'i's history and heritage for future generations; and meet the monument's education mission to preserve the character of Hawai'i's monarchy era," said Laura H. Thielen, DLNR chairwoman.

"We invite all interested individuals to attend a public hearing to present relevant information and opinions for the DLNR to consider," Thielen said.

Meetings will begin at 6:30 p.m. except on Lana'i where the meeting begins at 5 p.m. The schedule is as follows:

Moloka'i – Aug. 12, Kaunakakai Elementary School cafeteria, 30 Ailoa St., Kaunakakai.
Lana'i – Aug. 12, 5 p.m., Lana'i High and Elementary School, room L16, 555 Fraser Ave. Lana'i City.
O'ahu – Aug. 13, DLNR Board room 132, 1151 Punchbowl St., Honolulu.
West Hawai'i – Aug. 13, Events Pavilion, Old Kona Airport County Park, 75-5480 Kuakini Highway, Kailua, Kona.
Maui – Aug. 13, Maui County Planning Department conference room, 1st floor, 250 South High St., Wailuku.
East Hawai'i – Aug. 14, State Office Building, 75 Aupuni St., conference rooms A, B and C, Hilo.
Kaua'i – Aug. 18, State Office Building, 2nd floor conference room, 3060 'Eiwa St., Room 209, Lihu'e.

Anyone unable to attend or wishing to present additional comments, may mail written testimony by Sept. 5 to Administrator, DLNR Division of State Parks, 1151 Punchbowl St., Room 310, Honolulu, HI 96813.

The proposed rules are posted at www.hawaiistateparks.org/administrative/index.cfm. A copy of the proposed rule changes will be mailed at no charge upon receipt of verbal or written request to: Administrator, DLNR Division of State Parks, 1151 Punchbowl St., Room 310, Honolulu, HI 96813. A copy may be also requested in person from the state parks offices on each island. For more information on the meetings, contact Steve Thompson at 587-0303.

A lawsuit filed today against Kamehameha Schools is once again challenging its admissions policy that favors Native Hawaiian children.

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of four children and their families “seeks an end to the ‘Native Hawaiians only’ admissions policy,” of the schools, a statement by lawyers for the children said.

Attorneys Eric Grant of California and David B. Rosen of Honolulu said the federal District Court lawsuit filed today “is essentially identical to the earlier lawsuit filed on behalf of ‘John Doe,’” which the schools settled last year.

From thousands of T-shirts to the establishment of a bureau office in Washington, D.C., the Office of Hawaiian Affairs has spent nearly $7.5 million in the past three years on three separate efforts designed to establish a Hawaiians-only government entity.

OHA spent an additional $2 million in the 2008 budget year that ended June 30 and has budgeted about $2 million for the current year, OHA administrator Clyde Namu'o said last week.

The spending is detailed in reports posted recently on OHA's Web site that represent the fullest public accounting yet on the agency's nation-building expenditures, an area of controversy for some Native Hawaiians.

To put things in perspective, the approximately $2 million that is to be spent on nation-building efforts both this year and next year represents about 5 percent of OHA's annual operating budget.

OHA has come under fire in some quarters for its aggressive efforts lobbying for passage of the Akaka bill, enrolling Hawaiians in the Kau Inoa voter registry, and establishing the Ho'oulu Lahui Aloha Hawaiian Governance Initiative.

Authority questioned

Some feel that OHA, as a state agency, is not the right party to be at the head of any effort that would lead to negotiating what reparations are due to Hawaiians as a result of the U.S. role in the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian government.

Native Hawaiian protesters on the beach clashed with construction workers yesterday after a tense day at a home site at Naue Point where at least 30 bodies are buried.

No one was arrested or injured, but both the protesters and the construction workers filed complaints with the police, who arrived at about 1 p.m.

The site, where a home is being constructed by California businessman Joseph Brescia, has been the subject of numerous legal battles over where to put the building, how far it should be set back from the ocean, and where the property line exists.

Hawaii’s Board of Land and Natural Resources is considering whether to approve a public hearing on proposed new rules for Iolani palace after on-site protests by native Hawaiians.
[...]
But International law professor at the University of Illinois, Francis Boyle, says the group is within their rights to possess what is essentially their land and under international law have an airtight case.

“I think its significant for the fact that they have actually now tried to reclaim the Iolani palace, that was the headquarters of the Queen where she lived until she was overthrown and imprisoned. So I think it has a great deal, certainly of symbolic, and political and legal significance.”

An indigenous Hawaiian senator says Ionai [sic] palace is a public space and native Hawaiians are entitled to use the property.
[...]
Senator Kalani English says many native Hawaiian groups are determined to protect and utilise what they say is rightfully their land.

“One of the things that always strikes me is that people always try to romanticise our culture and turn us into a museum piece. And that’s always very scary, because we’re still here, we’re still 20 percent of the population, quite a large segment of the population, and yet we still have real issues.”

Oh, honest Americans, as Christians hear me for my downtrodden people! Their form of government is as dear to them as yours is as precious to you. Quite warmly as you love your country, so they love theirs.

—Queen Lili'uokalani, Hawaii's Story by Hawaii's Queen, 1898

The state Office of Hawaiian Affairs has enlisted larger-than-life retired U.S. Sen. Ben Night-horse Campbell to help its efforts to push the Akaka bill through Congress.

Campbell, 75, is the son of a Northern Cheyenne Indian, and was the first American Indian to serve in the U.S. Senate when he represented Colorado from 1992 to 2004. For a time, he chaired the Indian Affairs Committee, the only American Indian to do so.

OHA administrator Clyde Namu'o said OHA's strategy is to try to get the Akaka bill out of Congress and into the hands of President Bush before the end of the year. Failure to do so would send the matter back to the drawing board.
[...]
Namu'o said Campbell is being retained under a subcontract with Patton Boggs, the Washington, D.C.-based lobbying firm that OHA has paid more than $2 million to help win support for the Akaka bill.

Namu'o noted that Campbell is a longtime Republican. "There were certain Republican senators who Patton Boggs felt former Sen. Campbell could be helpful in discussing the positive aspects of the Akaka bill," Namu'o said.
[...]
Namu'o said OHA is still aiming to get enough senators to pass a cloture petition on the Akaka bill, which would lead the way to a Senate floor vote on the issue before the end of the year.
[...]
The Bush administration has indicated opposition to the bill, and the president may veto it if it passes.
[...]
If the debate over the Akaka bill were to drag into next year, the dynamics of the discussion would change immensely with the changing landscape of Washington. Not only would there be a new Congress, there would be a new president. Democrat Barack Obama supports the bill, and Republican John McCain opposes it.

"The legal cause for the restoration of the kingdom is air-tight," said Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois, who has been advising Hawaiian independence groups since 1992.
[...]
"Native Hawaiians operate in accordance with the Aloha spirit, which is similar to Mahatma Gandhi's Satyagraha force, and I take the position that if Gandhi can throw the mighty British Empire out of India with Satyagraha, Native Hawaiians can throw the mighty American empire out of Hawaii with Aloha."

Hawaiian rights activist Dennis Pu'uhonua "Bumpy" Kanahele is gaining support for a proposed Native Hawaiian constitutional convention aimed at unifying the historically fractured Hawaiian independence movement.

A Native Hawaiian convention would be separate from a ballot issue in November asking voters whe-ther they want a convention to amend the state Constitution.

A Native Hawaiian concon was supported yesterday by several members of Native Hawaiian organizations, including the Kanaka Maoli Tribunal Komike, the Kaua'i-based Koani Foundation and Hui Pu, an umbrella organization of various independence organizations.

The Hawaiian Kingdom Government, which is occupying the mauka lawn of 'Iolani Palace and "conducting business" there as its first step toward reclaiming Hawai'i from the U.S., also supports the intent of a constitutional convention, said spokes-man Orrin Kupau.

Kanahele said a petition drive to gather supporters for a Native Hawaiian concon has drawn more than 20,000 signatures.

Kanahele, leader of the Independent and Sovereign Nation State of Hawaii (Nation of Hawaii), said the constitutional convention would create a "free, fair and impartial process" for sovereignty advocates to discuss how they can collectively move forward.