Posts: 10,212
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
quote:
Originally posted by Kaimana
quote:
Originally posted by TomK
Kaimana wrote:
"This is a prime example of why Hawaiians are so angry."
Would it be fair to say that you don't speak for all Hawaiians? Therefore, why make the claim Hawaiians are angry? Knowing many Hawaiians who support the observatories and support the TMT, I think "frustrated" would be a better word to describe their attitude. That includes the frustration of having people speak on their behalf just like you did.
Hypocritical much? So now you speak for Hawaiians?
Kaimana - with respect, please re-read what I actually said before squeezing the trigger.
I'm reluctantly resorting to using the quote feature on PW. I suggest you re-read what you posted and what I did. I mentioned some Hawaiians, you inplied it was all of them. My question to you was:
"
Would it be fair to say that you don't speak for all Hawaiians?"
You tried to turn the argument around, but as everyone can now see, you will twist and turn and blame. Unless you are incredibly stupid, I did not speak for all Hawaiians. However, you did or at least tried to make it look as though you did. This is why it is almost impossible to negotiate with the hardcore TMT and astronomy opponents. They will continuously make things up, and be outraged if someone, even if they're Hawaiian, disagree with them.
Posts: 363
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 10,212
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
quote:
Originally posted by Kaimana
Did I say ALL Hawaiians?
You accused me of doing exactly that even though it was untrue. I was very specific in saying "some Hawaiians". And yes, you wrote:
"
This is a prime example of why Hawaiians are so angry."
Please, I don't want to argue with you but just look back at what you have posted and try and understand you don't speak for everyone and how offensive your posts are becoming again. I thought you learned your lesson a week or two ago.
Posts: 363
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2015
It seems like whenever my posts aren't in line with your views, you find them offensive. I can only think of the access question you asked, that you might have taken as offensive. You asked a question, I gave my honest opinion, and then I explained why I felt that way. Other than that I've only been going back and forth with ironyak about the joint resolution. I'm pretty sure he'd agree that was a very respectful discussion.
If I were to have wrote "This is a prime example of why people are so angry" would you have taken that to mean all people?
If anyone should be offended it should be me, with the condescension in your last post about me "learning my lesson".
Posts: 1,975
Threads: 47
Joined: Jul 2012
Language matters.
Tom actually speaks the language and uses the words that means what he thinks they mean. (Not that Tom needs me to defend him, but it’s something i’ve noticed of late - and not just with Tom).
There are two sides to this sword.
The other side uses language that doesn’t mean what they think it means, or overlooks discrepancies and then gets angry if they are pointed out thinking it’s an attack on their person.
This happens all the time in Hawaii and i’ve seen very few instances where the roles of ‘explainer’ played by non-local and ‘explainee’ played by local have ended well.
Posts: 1,123
Threads: 68
Joined: Mar 2015
All u do is argue. I guess thats what the forum is for?
HPP
HPP
Posts: 11,012
Threads: 750
Joined: Sep 2012
whenever my posts aren't in line with your view
Kaimana,
TomK is directly affected by this protest, both his life’s work and livelihood. And why? Because some protestors say things that are either untrue or give a sweeping generalized impression of the situation that exaggerates a few elements of truth.
For instance:
* Mauna Kea is sacred. Some of the mountain, yes. But it’s quite clear all of Mauna Kea is not considered sacred as houses and businesses are built all over and around the mauna.
* Mauna Kea is a burial ground. Again, not all, not the summit, but in some areas yes. Protest leaders want people to believe the TMT will be built on a burial site, which it’s not, because it garners them more support. I would be against the TMT if it was being built on a Hawaiian burial ground, but it’s not.
When the protestors use a wide brush to paint over details, it gives the false perception that their group is much larger and more influential than they actually are. The leaders encourage and need this appearance of representing the whole or a large part of it so they can receive continued support.
If I couldn’t get to work because a group decided to block Hwy 130 I’d want a proper, truthful account of the situation as well. See the thread “Shower Drive Cluster” as an example.
"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
Posts: 3,212
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2009
Kaimana - I think you missed where they said a land swap would be the compensation, but there was no land swap.
My understanding, and I could be wrong, was that Act 14 in 1995 provided $600 million dollars to DHHL for previously uncompensated uses of DHHL lands, including improvements such as the Mauna Kea Access Road. I agree there was no land swap, but no land was taken from this parcel, just an improvement added to it. I'm sure we'll hear more about this soon.
This is a prime example of why Hawaiians are so angry. They keep gaslighting us saying follow the laws all while they aren't and then they'll rewrite the laws to make them fit their needs.
Not to jump on the grammar police bandwagon, but this did have me wondering who
they are (DHHL? the Fake State? Power hungry Nisei? Evil haoles maniacally twirling their mustaches in Washington?) and what
laws needing to be followed (DHHL beneficiary laws? Constitutional law? Any laws? certainly not right-of-way laws on a public road
Other than that I've only been going back and forth with ironyak about the joint resolution. I'm pretty sure he'd agree that was a very respectful discussion.
Yep, t'was rather civil and learned something in the process (as I'm sure 2/3rds of readers would agree - but not rainyjim
Posts: 997
Threads: 50
Joined: Aug 2012
Could you post a link to the $600 million you referenced? Just curious...
Posts: 3,212
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2009
Um, Google is your friend, but here's a DHHL summary from 2014 that outlines the $30 million per year, paid for 20 years to DHHL, along with the other finances and expenditures at that time.
https://dhhl.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploa...140212.pdf
ETA: Star-Advertiser has a slightly clearer summary in which the Attorney General has said that the transfer of the road to DoT already occurred, although the land-swap possibly required may never have been finalized.
Fire up the court system, time for the state to sue itself again.
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/08/1...-kea-road/
