09-26-2018, 12:06 PM
I didn't watch the entire video so I don't know if my understanding of the information covered at the meeting would be substantially different if I had, but this is my impression after viewing about 10-15 minutes at the beginning, and 10-15 minutes in the question and answer period at the end.
Beginning of the meeting -
Jen is young, and she has made a new discovery that captivates her. Her fascination reminds me of my college days, when I was young, and I watched people around me join with groups of Jesus Freaks, Hare Krishnas, Moonies, student radicals, and more, more, more. Once they joined those groups their leaders and followers could do no wrong. I think that's great, but her enthusiasm shouldn't interfere with her job. If it does, she might want to quit her day job and study International Law full time.
End -
Jen says she's in her office every day and will still respond to basic questions about road repairs, etc. Hawaiian Kingdom laws are online and as she understands it, they are "very progressive laws."
Dr. Sai says the laws might look out of date, because there was no Hawaiian Kingdom legislature since 1893. Of course, according to Dr. Sai that doesn't mean the Hawaiian Kingdom was not in existence since that time. (Seems like a conflict in reality, but it's not the only one.)
My sense is that there is a LOT of cherry picking going on here. Dr. Sai appears knowledgeable, but every answer to every question lands squarely in his favor. I saw a movie recently about an English Holocaust denier (title: Denial, with Rachel Weisz). All of the arguments made by the person denying that the Holocaust ever took place, when the known facts could have either reasonably proven his point, or sometimes disproved his point, always fell in his favor:
My lord, during this trial, we have heard from Professor Evans and others of at least 25 major falsifications of history. Well, says Mr. Irving, "all historians make mistakes." But there is a difference between negligence, which is random in its effect, and a deliberateness, which is far more one-sided. All Mr. Irving's little fictions, all his tweaks of the evidence all tend in the same direction: the exculpation of Adolf Hitler. He is, to use an analogy, like the waiter who always gives the wrong change. If he is honest, we may expect sometimes his mistakes to favor the customers, sometimes himself. But Mr. Irving is the dishonest waiter. All his mistakes work in his favor.
Dr. Sai seems to have discovered that every law, national and international all fall in favor of his theory. That's a positive attribute for a courtroom attorney. Not a quality you want when studying the history of a subject, which I believe is one of the claims he makes. It will/would be interesting to see if any court sees things as he does.
On Tuesday night, 9/18/2018 Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono had another message for the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee “Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing.” She added in another related comment, “Bull$hit.”
Beginning of the meeting -
Jen is young, and she has made a new discovery that captivates her. Her fascination reminds me of my college days, when I was young, and I watched people around me join with groups of Jesus Freaks, Hare Krishnas, Moonies, student radicals, and more, more, more. Once they joined those groups their leaders and followers could do no wrong. I think that's great, but her enthusiasm shouldn't interfere with her job. If it does, she might want to quit her day job and study International Law full time.
End -
Jen says she's in her office every day and will still respond to basic questions about road repairs, etc. Hawaiian Kingdom laws are online and as she understands it, they are "very progressive laws."
Dr. Sai says the laws might look out of date, because there was no Hawaiian Kingdom legislature since 1893. Of course, according to Dr. Sai that doesn't mean the Hawaiian Kingdom was not in existence since that time. (Seems like a conflict in reality, but it's not the only one.)
My sense is that there is a LOT of cherry picking going on here. Dr. Sai appears knowledgeable, but every answer to every question lands squarely in his favor. I saw a movie recently about an English Holocaust denier (title: Denial, with Rachel Weisz). All of the arguments made by the person denying that the Holocaust ever took place, when the known facts could have either reasonably proven his point, or sometimes disproved his point, always fell in his favor:
My lord, during this trial, we have heard from Professor Evans and others of at least 25 major falsifications of history. Well, says Mr. Irving, "all historians make mistakes." But there is a difference between negligence, which is random in its effect, and a deliberateness, which is far more one-sided. All Mr. Irving's little fictions, all his tweaks of the evidence all tend in the same direction: the exculpation of Adolf Hitler. He is, to use an analogy, like the waiter who always gives the wrong change. If he is honest, we may expect sometimes his mistakes to favor the customers, sometimes himself. But Mr. Irving is the dishonest waiter. All his mistakes work in his favor.
Dr. Sai seems to have discovered that every law, national and international all fall in favor of his theory. That's a positive attribute for a courtroom attorney. Not a quality you want when studying the history of a subject, which I believe is one of the claims he makes. It will/would be interesting to see if any court sees things as he does.
On Tuesday night, 9/18/2018 Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono had another message for the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee “Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing.” She added in another related comment, “Bull$hit.”
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves