Hawaiians-Only Election Gets Court Approval

[dakine]

It appears Dakine is also a heavy smoker...

Nope clean as a whistle. Sheesh I even gave up caffeine, all of that stuff, years ago. It's been a long time. Though I am always entertained by those who, apparently from an insecurity in themselves (?), need to label others so as to suggest some version of their being less worthy, the labeler being superior. A great example of that is how ofter people here call others racist. Just amazing eh?

Btw.. I don't condone all their methods, but I am a avid supporter of Zionism. Not exclusively Zionism as it pertains to the the Jews but as it is for all of those that seek a return to their homeland. The return of a culture to it's roots is a movement that's going on all over the world, and is very special, important. In other words I think a multi-cultural, rather than a corporately homogenized (read: Walmartism), world is a much better way to go. Yeah, I know, if that's racist go ahead and call me it again. Paul?

The interesting thing about Zionism as it pertains to the discussion here is how people make statements as if they know the truth of something when by those statements it becomes clear that they are just repeating the popularly circulated myth. It never ceases to amaze me how little people know of the actual history of the Jewish effort to return to their homeland.

[Lodestone]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Punatic007

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lodestone

I'm waiting for the inevitable conclusion that the reason the quote cannot be found is that the internet is being controlled by the wily Israelis.

---

Instead of contributing anything constructive to the conversation, you randomly throw pot shots at me in different threads here. Where did I hit a nerve with you lodestone? Welfare? are you an entitled EBT+ recipient? Or a daily and habitual marijuana smoker? It appears Dakine is also a heavy smoker. You live in Puna long enough, you learn to identify pothead conversation which includes snide remarks from unprocessed emotions and feelings. Displaced anger seeps thru at the strangest times from daily pot smokers.

Any intelligent person who is pro-Israel can maintain a mature discussion about the fact that Zionists own almost all our media. We get our info filtered thru a Zionist lens, why not discuss that rationally? Or have I hit everyone of your buttons?

---

Nope, nope, nope, and nope. I'm pretty much the opposite of what you seem to imagine. But, thanks for asking... you have misjudged me; perhaps I have misjudged you. Let's chat.

As I touched on before, I find "Zionist" paranoia ludicrous and generally associated with hate-group-think. That's not just me, BTW; most people make that association. I wouldn't bring it up if you want to be taken seriously.

The myth that somehow Jews are somehow pulling the strings behind the scenes has been circulating for hundreds of years. Considering that no people have found themselves in harm's way more often than the Jews, if they ARE in charge, they are doing a HORRIBLE job of taking advantage of it. Consider the Inquisition, the Pogroms, the Holocaust, and their modern circumstance finds them being surrounded by powerful nations that wish them dead. (For much, much more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jews)
You couldn't have a worse run of calamities if you tried.

They now consist of about 0.2% of the world's population. They control a tiny patch of desert with minimal natural resources. How are they any sort of threat to anyone? Why are gentiles paranoid of them? They have plenty of reason to be paranoid of us! I don't doubt they actively try to manipulate public opinion. They know what happens when they don't.

Before I retired, I spent a fair amount of my career helping to address many, many, dangers to our nation. We didn't spend any time on Israel.

- Lodestone, who probably is not an agent of the Mossad, as far as you know.

[PaulW]

"Paul?"

Hello! Yep, you're still a racist. When you hear world leaders speaking out about the scourge of racism, that's right, they're talking about you.

I don't say this because of my many insecurities, I say this because you want to restrict voting based on skin color.

[dakine]

I say this because you want to restrict voting based on skin color

I don't want anything of the kind. I do stand strongly for the right of one group to handle their own affairs, to the exclusion of those who have no business with the matter, and the Hawaiian community is no different. Just as a community association's members vote on things and nobody votes on the issues other than the association's members. Should the people of Volcano have a vote in HPP matters? Well should they? I assume you will say that the matter of the Hawaiian's self determination is your business even though you are not a Hawaiian. Yes? Whereas I say it is none of your business unless you are Hawaiian. So I will ask you Paul, and here I am assuming you are not Hawaiian, what makes it your business? Why would you want it to be? For reals Paul, what's your point?

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Yeah, I would like to vote on HPP issues. What, I have to live in HPP? Outrageous, racist, conspiracy.

It would be an outrageous, racist, conspiracy if you lived in HPP, but you were told you couldn't vote. Because of your race, religion or other other "reason."

[PaulW]

"Should the people of Volcano have a vote in HPP matters?" No
"Well should they?" I said no, what are you deaf?

The people of Volcano don't get to decide the fate of HPP, we can agree on that. So why should a tiny minority decide on the fate of this whole State? Well, why?

By the way: So I will ask you dakine, and here I am assuming you are not Hawaiian, what makes it your business?

[VancouverIslander]

Who said this minority would decide the fate of the whole state? They will represent the people who are voting for them in negotiating a better deal. In the meantime, you can vote in county, State and Federal elections for those you feel would represent you best in these negotiations.

Just call me Mike

[PaulW]

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34680564

"Aloha to the US: Is Hawaii an occupied nation?"

[PaulW]

This minority wants to negotiate about sovereignty. One of the flavors there is separation from the US.
As someone who lives in Hawaii, I wouldn't mind casting my vote on that. Unfortunately, my great-great-grandfather didn't live here 120 years ago so my opinion doesn't count. Sound reasonable to you?

[VancouverIslander]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dakine

With the exception of the queen, what people actually had their land stolen? Most of the landowners from the Hawaiian Kingdom era seemed to have retained their land

Considering that a large percentage of land, at the time of the overthrow, belonged to the government, which was a separate entity than the royal family, and all that land was taken, as well as all the manipulative bs that took place behind the scenes by the likes of Charles Bishop and others, it's sort of hard to accept the premise that there wasn't any land stolen. Keep in mind that the make up of the government itself was in part that of the same individuals that perpetuated the overthrow, and they were deeply involved in treachery long before the overthrow finalized their hold on the islands and had transferred large tracts to themselves as well as trusts and other entities that they controlled.

When one considers the way in which haoles took over the Kingdom, having acquired positions of power within government and poisoned the process long before the actual overthrow, it becomes very clear that even the way the Mahele was handled was skewed and biased towards the westerners that influenced the changes that were taking place. To consider how much of the land was actually transferred to Hawaiians verses quick claimed by the likes of Bishop Museum and other dummy entities set up by manipulative haoles it's a wonder that any Hawaiians got possession of land at all. So to say that all the Hawaiians had land and kept it since the Mahele is silly.

Consider if you will that of all the Hawaiians that were originally granted Kuleana very few actually were able to stake their claims. At the time it was required that they pay a fee, in coin, cash, that then was very rare and hard to acquire, and if they did not do so in a timely manner there were haoles in Honolulu standing by to pay the fee and make a quick claim on their unclaimed deeds. In other words long before the overthrow the haoles were perverting the process and stealing everything they could from the people of Hawaii.

In other words Mtviewdude it is common to believe the popular myth of the history of land titles in Hawaii as so many do. That's ok, understandable. When we consider that so much of what people think they know is based on the popular myths that are perpetuated through their continual retelling verses an actual understanding of the history of the islands, what else would we expect? And then when we say it over and over as so many do we convince ourselves that whatever we say is right. Just like 007 and his story about the Dalai Lama, if he says it enough everyone else will believe it and tell it to others as the truth. That is the way we all got to the point of spreading the lie of the rights the USA claims to have to the islands.


Speaking of the perpetuation of lies. I found Williamson Chang's interview at the link opihikao posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3x_i4wxkF4I&feature=youtu.be

to be most enlightening on that one point. It's amazing what people believe without any review of the history themselves to insure that they actually know the truth.

• edited to correct the spell checker's "haloes" to the correct "haoles". I would usually leave such trivial changes alone, but with PaulW's (usual) drive by insults and the juxtaposition of haoles to haloes (cute eh?) I had to

---

It would appear to me that you are just as guilty of wishful thinking as anyone else in this thread:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M%C4%81hele

"Ownership of land was a previously unknown concept for ordinary Hawaiians. Many did not understand the need to make a claim for land where they already lived and/or worked. Communication depended upon word-of-mouth or the ability to read the written word. Making a claim required money to pay for a pre-claim land survey. The system required two witnesses to confirm that the claimant had worked the land.[13] About 18,000 plots of 3 acres each were successfully claimed.[14][15] The Kingdom's population at the time was some 82,000.[16] Members of higher classes and ali#699;i obtained title to most Hawaiian land. Due to the ongoing effect of western diseases and property taxes, many lost their property.[14][15]"

So it was the Ali'i who benefited the most from the lack of understanding of the common people at the time rather than this mythical group of "haoles in Honolulu standing by to pay the fee and make a quick claim on their unclaimed deeds" you are claiming.

Kent, N J (1993). Hawaii Islands Under the Influence. University of Hawaii Press. pp. 31–33. ISBN 978-0-8248-1552-3.

Norgren, Jill (2006). American Cultural Pluralism and Law. Praeger. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-275-98699-5.

Eventually, much of this land was sold off and ended up in the hands of those you label "haoles":

Van Dyke, Jon M (2007). Who Owns the Crown Lands of Hawai'i?. University of Hawaii Press. pp. 44–49. ISBN 978-0-8248-3211-7

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there shouldn't be some kind of ammendments made for kanaka maole. In my mind this should be similar to how mainland first nations groups have been forming their own 'nations' within the United States and would likely include the Hawaiian Homeland properties at least as a land settlement.

Just call me Mike