No Coco Palms for you!

[leilanidude]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chas

Well Tom, the Coco Palms case is about Hawaiian rights. The site I mentioned has a lot of documentation regarding the US involvement in Hawaii. Reading the documents you can form your own opinions about what was/is right and wrong about what happened, without someone else’s interpretation.

That good enough for you?

---

Isn't there some sort of statute of limitations for things like this? Shouldn't these issues have been brought up in court over 100 years ago?

[Kapoho Joe]

^ And if there is no statue of limitations, then I want a few hectares around Galloway back!

[Chas]

Wow. I simply pointed out a site that has a lot of original documentation. It was interesting to me reading the words written by the people who were there when it was happening. I thought others might find it interesting as well.

I never made a judgement or mentioned my opinion on Hawaiian sovereignty or the site itself, other than it being a convenient place to find this material.

Then Tom and his buddies go into their usual frenzy when they think someone doesn’t agree with them.

Nothing new here.

[PaulW]

What does that website have to do with Coco Palms?

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Wow

Chas,
There are many documents by US government officials recommending reinstatement of the monarchy. There are also plenty of documents that recommended territorial status and statehood. One does not exist in a vacuum without the other. The website you linked shows one side of the story and not the other. They promote the claims and documents that governments and courts have ruled against for over 100 years now.

Consider a marriage. It starts off with both parties promising 'till death do us part. Then, one partner or the other may have a change of heart. A divorce may be granted, and no matter how much a partner who clings to the past may point out the signed marriage certificate and the promises made, the reality is that it's over, despite everything that may have been said or done. In the eyes of the law, the marriage legally ended even without the arrival of death.

The Hawaiian Kingdom is over. The people who call for its return ignore all the documentation that doesn't support their arguments, or the vote for statehood, or a majority of legal decisions made over the last 100+ years. Their calls for reinstatement try to amplify the parts which agree with their claims and preferences, and ignore everything else.

[MarkP]

This from Wikipedia:

" In 1898 construction workers working on the Pali road discovered 800 skulls which were believed to be the remains of the warriors that fell to their deaths from the cliff above."

First, I guess not all Hawaiians rest in sacred graves. It seems that if they were killed by other Hawaiians they were conveniently forgotten. Second, if today's "protectors" are content to go with the flow and accept the outcome of Kamehameha's violent overthrow of Kalanikupule's sovereignty and all that flows from it (Hawaiian Monarchy that existed on January 16, 1893) why are they not similarly sanguine about the January 17, 1893 overthrow?

[TomK]

"Tom, the website from the comment that Chas is talking about is the same group that was sending the letters to the Kauai county people about the made up court of sovereignty (whatever they were calling it) that had a sex offender as their judge - that's my interpretation of how it relates."

Thanks, rainyjim. It's funny how asking a simple question ends up with frayed tempers.

[MarkD]

Chas, there is indeed a large faction on Punatalk critical of native Hawaiian objectives. Makes for very imbalanced discussions. Worse it has pretty well deterred any pro-Hawaiian posters. In recent times, Gypsy was the only person who would challenge the faction at length.

The critics, though, have raised the excellent point that Hawaiians ought to be challenging Hawaiian Homelands with the same vigor as their TMT and Coco Palms protests. Hawaiians' failure to do so seriously erodes the rightness of their other positions.

This said, comments suggesting that Hawaiian issues have had a fair dealing in courts the past 200 years are mostly nonsense. America courts (and courts in most nations) primarily serve the rich and powerful on land issues. Native peoples mostly have been screwed (excepting some Indian tribes and their casino rights).

2018 is late for native Hawaiians to be retrieving lands. They have the option to mount major protests against DHHL, including seizing land. They ought to do so.

[TomK]

I was hoping this thread might just be specific to the Coco Palms case. Oh well, I guess I shouldn't have expected anything different.

[MarkP]

I don't feel that I am critical of Native Hawaiian objectives. I am critical of Native-Hawaiian-ness being used as a get out of jail free card to avoid having to make sense.