The Legitimate Government in Hawaii Series: Repost of Archives Files of Queen Liliuokalani
Reposted by Amelia Gora (2023)
IMPORTANT READ - Out of Queen Liliuokalani's Personal Files at the Archives, Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaiian Islands or the MORGAN/INTERNATIONAL BANKERS WERE THE ONES!
Views: 366
Replies to This Discussion
- Permalink Reply by on
Aloha kaua e Amelia.
A small point from your "New York Times" article of January 1893 (above), quote:
"The main item of expense is the removal of a coral reef which is dead and when once dredged out will not reappear."
This begs the question as to whom exactly decided the coral reef was "dead," ? there were powerful vested interests involved here thanks to Major General J.M. Schofield and Col. B.S. Alexander's Report to the U.S. War Dept. after their two month spying sojourn in Hawai'i.
In 1894 Lt. W. M. Wood of the U.S. Navy whose team worked at Puuloa for 51 days on this particular bar commencing April 30th of that year stated:
"I was informed that no attempt had ever been made to determine the character of the bar and that estimates as to the cost of cutting it had hitherto been made without definite knowledge of the formation of the bar."
Source: http://digicoll.manoa.hawaii.edu/savedmaps/PDF/53rdCongressExec42.pdf
This obstruction at the entrance to Puuloa (Pearl Harbor) was a mile offshore, in 1900 it was dredged down to 35 feet, following further U.S. financial input dredging continued and in 1911 the first truly large ship the USS California entered the Harbor. Thus one of the most pristine Harbor's on Earth was lost to militarism.... no Sierra Club or EIS back in those times. -Aloha.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Delete
hi Andrew,
Thank you for pointing out some of the issues.
Pearl Harbor was a beautiful, pristine area filled with pearl bearing oysters.......apparently the pearls were gathered for personal use and trading purposes into the 1930's or before World War II with the high contamination reduced the area into sludge, toxins, etc.
In doing archaeology research for the area, I found that there were natural fishing traps placed there by our people..........there were various fishing styles as well.
The claims by the U.S. over Pearl Harbor was made due to a FRAUD deed signed by King David Kalakaua in 1876. Kalakaua deeded the area to Grace Kamaikui and Mataio Kekuanaoa - both of our ancestors.
Problem about the deed is that Grace Kamaikui died in 1866 and Mataio Kekuanaoa died in 1868.
Grace Kamaikui was awarded the Halawa Ahupuaa in the Mahele of 1848..........so how could Kalakaua reconvey an already documented Mahele award again. Kekuanaoa had been awarded a section as well but did not have the entire Halawa Ahupuaa.
The Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates/Kamehameha Schools Bishop Estates figures in all of this, the move to PIRATE identities, genealogies, criminally assume what was not theirs and convey to the U.S., etc.
You've brought out some good points and the highlight is the criminal intrusion upon properties/ private properties of our Royal families.....reason being Grace Kamaikui was actually a cousin of Kauikeouli/ Kamehameha III because her grandfather was the brother of Kamehameha, father of Kauikeouli/ Kamehameha III. Kauikeouli/Kamehameha III did hanai her three children: Hueu, Kale, and Peke Davis.
Both Grace Kamaikui and Mataio Kekuanaoa have descendants/heirs, including our families.
Queen Liliuokalani's article which was preserved in her files over time is good evidence of the premeditation activities by the bankers who were the investors of the U.S., and England.
The U.S. Treaty would have expired in 1894..........there are numerous articles that shows that the U.S. had NO ownership to Pearl Harbor.....in other words, their claims are built on LIES, LIES, LIES documented.
During King Kalakaua's reign, it is documented that a U.S. Representative approached the House of Nobles for loans and wouldn't repay the full amount for thousands of years....only interest would be given.... The German Jews did give out loans and expected a 10% interest......what did they get? Many were killed due to Hitler into World War II..........the Jews are also directly connected in the International banks/Bank of England which funds both sides of WAR.......
The U.S. and England were bankrupt then and remain bankrupt now......CREEPS went after our Hawaiian monies..........which is on record......
the U.S., England were bankrupt due to the American Civil War costs and owed much to the International bankers.
It would be a cool combined effort by our kanaka maoli who are knowledgeable about the issues surrounding Pearl Harbor and do a book..........it would be a best seller and possibly a banned book too! lol........as i've found out that my books are banned by certain businesses dealing with the entity State of Hawaii.
aloha.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dOzAzLupoICecilio & Kapono - Sailin
Cecilio & Kapono at Aloha Tower Marketplace back in 2005. They held a 20 year reunion tour.
by whodaknew 4 years ago 69,864 views
- Permalink Reply by on
Aloha Amelia.
In 1997 there was a publication on marine diversity at Wai-Momi (Pu'uloa) which exhibited maps from 1824-25, 1902, and 1920. You will find them if you scroll down to pages 11, 12, & 13 respectively. In the case of the latter circa 1920 map some of the many loko kuapa are still visible in the Harbor.
Please see: http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/pdf/PHReport.pdf
Interesting query on HRH King David Kalakaua authorization there was an agreement pertaining to Pearl Harbor signed by the King on October 29th of 1887 which had been ratified by the Kingdom Senate ...... must check further on the details of that! -A hui hou.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Delete
Hi Andrew,
The konohiki assigned to Halawa was Grace Kamaikui and a smaller part assigned to Mataio Kekuanaoa.
The Rights of the Konohiki could not be usurped even by King Kalakaua who was not an heir of Grace Kamaikui or Mataio Kekuanaoa.
The Kamehameha Schools/Bernice Pauahi Bishop Trustees were the ones who transferred lands to the U.S. on record........see:
http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/rail-road-crossing-hits?com...
- Permalink Reply by on
- Delete
The Rights of the Konohiki:
konohiki rights WOT Safe Search [x]Search Results
- [DOC]
Project Description
nature.berkeley.edu/community_forestry/.../fermantez-proposal.docFile Format: Microsoft Word - Quick View
Now that Native Hawaiians are returning to the ¢aina, the time is ripe for the issue of konohiki rights to be revisited because if reinstated, konohiki could have the ... §187A-23 Konohiki rights. (a) The fishing grounds from the reefs ...
capitol.hawaii.gov/hrs2008/Vol03.../HRS_0187A-0023.htm- Cached§187A-23 Konohiki rights. (a) The fishing grounds from the reefs, and where there happens to be no reefs, from the distance of one geographical mile seaward ...Konohiki Days of Maunalua Bay by | Lawaia Magazine ...
www.lawaia.net/blogs/lawaia/2010/3/15/issue4-2010-konohikidays- CachedMar 15, 2010 – It was here that the ancient konohiki rights were still in effect until the time of Statehood. As late as the fifties and sixties, enormous working ...Konohiki Rights
csc-s-web-p.csc.noaa.gov/legislativeatlas/lawDetails.jsp?lawID=1051- CachedA Konohiki each year may set apart one given species or variety of aquatic life natural to the private fishery, by giving public notice by posting at least ...Konohiki Fishing Rights - Green Magazine Hawaii
greenmagazinehawaii.com/outdoor_v1-4.html- CachedKonohiki Fishing Rights. Solutions for conservation of Hawai'i's most precious natural resource. By Jack Kittinger. We live in a world of mare liberum, or freedom ...Traditional native approaches to ocean governance
archive.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu15oe/uu15oe0a.htm- CachedMurakami, Alan T. "Konohiki Fishing Rights and Marine Resources." In: Kapilialoha MacKenzie, Melody, ed. Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook, pp. 173-195 ...Water Rights Laws in the Nineteen Western States - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?isbn=1584774142...Wells A. Hutchins - 2004 - History - 3 pages
Ancient water rights.-{\) Ahupuaas and ilis kupono. A royal grant of an ahupuaa to a konohiki carried with it all natural resources thereon except what the ...Hāʻena: through the eyes of the ancestors - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?isbn=0824831195...Carlos Andrade - 2008 - Business & Economics - 158 pages
Land or fishing rights under the control of the konohiki are also sometimes called konohiki rights (Pukui and Elbert 1986). However, by breaking the word down ...Konohiki - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster ...
Definition of KONOHIKI. 1. : a headman of a Hawaiian land division who also controls fishing rights in adjacent waters. 2. : a Hawaiian land division with its ...
************************************************
This is part of a Legal Notice posted which includes info from Tane.........fyi....the treaty that you're talking about appears to be in here also:
A CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY "IN REM" CLAIMS SOME:
The following was posted by Tane on Maoliworld.com This is his take:
It's simpler to refer to the Constitution of 1864 which is still basically in effect. The reason being that the 1887 was
never ratified but implied; Legislation was out of session at the time; the Queen attempted to restore it; it was still a
Constitutional Monarchy whereas the Bayonet Constitution of 1887 was done under duress which makes it null and
void; 1887 stripped her powers which means her veto power was nil.
She proposed the new constitution to restore the rights of the citizens and redeem the powers of the monarch enjoyed
by Lot. Her muhe'e cabinet had double-crossed her once she intended to promugate the illicit constitution and told
her to hold off. When the people gathered, she told them to be patient as she could not promulgate the Bayonet
constitution and introduce the new one which she felt had to have the approval and support of her cabinet to go
through the proper protocols as was done in 1864.
4
As far as the Kawananakoas, they are collateral relations to Queen Kapiolani who was not head of state. Queen
Regnant Lili'uokalani had the Crown Princess Kaiulani confirmed by the legislature as as successor dictated by the
constitutions. Under the Constitutions, the criteria was established on succession and eligibility of successors. Today
there would be an election as the two previous Kings were elected to the throne.
There is a catch-22 we are faced with today. The marriages had to be approved by the Monarch; if not, the eligible
would be cut from the line of succession as if he/she were dead. One could not be an idiot; and it was important for the
candidate to be above reproach and groomed as well as educated through the proper process of schooling befit for a
monarch.
Kauikeaouli had set up the pool of eligibles. None had direct descendants except for Abigail Maheha whose
decendants are still living. Nonetheless, the pool would then be open to ALL colaterals of high birth; Hawaiian system
relied on who is the mother and who is the father which determined the rank of the offspring.
On top of that, illegitimate/bastard children under the Christian guidelines that influenced the "legitimacy" of
successors as written in the constitutions, would be cut from the line as if dead and become ineligible.
So, do we set a precedent?
To answer your initial question, we can refer to the treaties ratified by over 20-25 countries including the U.S.A. which
establishes within their Constitution that ratified treaties are the Supreme law of the land. The U.S. have admitted to their
complicity by invading and conspiring to unlawfully takeover the Kingdom of Hawai'i.
Under International law, such admittance deems the invasion, a belligerent occupation with a civilian arm to govern. The U.S.
continues to violate the laws of occupation and the laws of neutrality. International law experts have declared that the
Kingdom still exists.
The Queen's formal protest, the memorial along with the Ku'e Petitions of 1897 led to the treaty of annexation to be rejected
by the U.S. Congress. Within the Turpie Resolution of 1894, it allowed the people to determine and maintain their own
governance and political policy, hence the petitions that wasgiven to U.S. Congress in 1897.
The U.S. joint resolution, considered not binding but a declaration, is null and void in a foreign country since it is outside of
their jurisdiction and any other subsequent action within that foreign country has no standing according to international law
and the laws within the U.S.A.'s constitution.
While the U.S. government considered Hawaii as4a:U.S. territory, the world including U.S. Americans recognized us as a
foreign country and under NGO status. I knew I was a Hawaii national/citizen since I was about 8 years old.
The Constitutional Monarchy of the Kingdom of Hawai'i still exists but in rem.
Third Point ............
There are problematic cases affecting our Royal families:
* Estate of Kekauluohi (1876) - Flaws in genealogy(ies)/heirs, etc.
Reference: Volume 6 Hawaii Reports
* Thurston vs. Bishop (1888) Opinions of the Court on land, konohiki laws, etc.
Reference: Volume 7 Hawaii Reports
* Bishop vs. Gulick (1889) Bishop Estates trustees become heirs.
Reference: Volume 7 Hawaii Reports
* Estate of Brenig (1889) Samuel Maikai claimed heir and Estate of Bernice Pauahi
Bishop case used as precedence.
Ref: Volume 7 Hawaii Reports
5
* Hawaiian Government vs. Cartwright (1890) Government lien on private lands of Kamehameha IV, etc.
Reference: Volume 8 Hawaii Reports
* In Re Sheldon (1893) Discussion of changeover from provisional government to Republic because provisional governments
last only 2 years
Reference: Volume 9 Hawaii Reports
* Rooke v. Queen's Hospital (1899) Note: TCB Rooke's heir C Rooke, a nephew and his heirs forever
Reference: Volume 12 Hawaii Reports
* In the Matter of....Pa Pelekane (1912) Note: Territory as successor the Hawaiian Kingdom
Reference: Volume 21 Hawaii Reports
*also see the Corporation Documents for the Queen's Hospital which documents Kamehameha IV as the perpetual trustee
allowing free health care to our kanaka maoli, sailors, and others. Note: This is the reason(s).why a change was made
eliminating sailors and others - issued a null and void order previously as a descendant of Peke Davis, whose mother was
Grace Kamaikui and both were the hanai/adopted children of Kauikeaouli/Kamehameha 111.
Reference: Archives, Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii
*also note that the Bonds of the Hawaiian Kingdom is criminally utilized currently by the entity State of Hawaii to pay for the
Judges salaries, homes for many including foreigners discovered by some of the Sovereignty groups.
Additionally, kanaka maoli/aboriginal Hawaiians/Hawaiian nationals prisoners are released from prisons/jail if they sign an
interest over to the entity State of Hawaii in exchange for their release.
Reference: Credible sources.
Fourth Point ..........
Is it true that the Hawaiian Kingdom government lies in the Royal Order of Kamehameha?
I leave you with these questions:
Why did the military approach the Royal Order of Kamehameha for approval to use depleted uranium/DU? ......... . .. .. . and did
you know they accommodated and approved?
Why did Daniel Inouye/Senator Daniel Inouye, one armed bandit, invite all of the Royal Societies....the Royal Order of
Kamehameha, the Kaahumanu Society, the Sons and Daughter of Hawaii (a Missionary society), etc. to a meeting and asked
for their approval in claiming all of downtown Honolulu, Nuuanu, etc. as a Memorial? ..... and did you know they
accommodated and approved?
Well, this article documents oppositions to the U.S. Military, Daniel Inouye/Senator Daniel Inouye moves to gain approval
from the Royal Societies without the approval of the descendants and heirs of the lands.
Lastly, the entity State of Hawaii, City and County of Honolulu, Inouye, et. als. are not related to our families, and perpetuate
the frauds of those who conspired against our families, our people, and wrongfully/criminally assumed a neutral, non-violent,
friendly nation.
Eviction notices have been served to the U.S. military via U.S. President Obama, entity State of Hawaii Governor Lingle,
Attorney General, NRA/Nuclear Regulatory Agency, Jim Albertini, Isaac Harp, Luwella Leonardi, and to all whom it may
concern.
Oppositions to all the above discovered criminal activities are hereby documented. All wrongdoing must cease.
Fraud/deceit/criminal malfeasance, criminal moves/claims promoted and perpetuated by the U.S., Congress, military, entity
6
State of Hawaii, City and Counties (Honolulu, Maui, Molokai, Hawaii, Kauai, Niihau, etc.) current claims are without
jurisdiction/ legal jurisdiction. Continued claims by pirates, occupiers, belligerent occupiers are without jurisdiction/legal
jurisdiction, including further claims made by conspirators, treasonous persons since 1893 are null and void on this day,
March 5, 2010.
Sincerely,
Amelia Gora, a Royal person, Acting Liaison of
Foreign Affairs, Royal families House of Nobles,
Kingdom of Hawaii/Hawaiian Kingdom/ Hawaiian
Islands/Hawaiian archipelago/He Mokupuni Pae
Aina o Hawaii, a living human being
Revised LEGAL NOTICEReference off of google.com :2010/03/06-Limited Appearance Statement from Amelia Gora on LB ...
pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1006/ML100680514.pdfFile Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Mar 6, 2010 – from Acting Liaison of Foreign Affairs, Amelia Gora ... rights for our people as well which also limited the rights of the foreigners (including those .... Bishop (1888) Opinions of the Court on land, konohiki laws, etc. ...Find more Hawaiian Nation songs at Myspace Music
aloha.
- Permalink Reply by on
Aloha again Amelia.
Mahalo for sharing such a wealth of 'ike pili. In order for greater transparency we could rephrase the question and ask did His Excellency King Kalakaua have the vested authority to issue Royal Patent 6717 in the case of Halawa Ahupua'a in October of 1875?
This is of course a legal question requiring a legal response from those expertise in Hawaiian Kingdom Law. On reviewing the criteria I would as a viewpoint form the opinion that he in fact did, much as I agree with you that the intent was Halawa Ahupua'a was intended for Grace Kamaiku'i. From Dr. Sai's website on Land Awards it can be noted that in the instance of a Royal Patent being issued by name only without survey a second Palapala Sila Nui may be granted by metes & bounds. This of course is not applicable to Halawa Ahupua'a as three separate surveys were conducted, by Kamakau in 1869, Lyons in 1874, and Monsarrat in 1888.
At the time of the 1848 Mahele 'Aina only one map of Ahupua'a was available that of Kalama's (1838), just reviewing a few inferences by associate anthropologist Christiaan Keieger author of "Na Maka o Halawa" opinion (available online) outlined below and how it differs somewhat from your account, while King Kamehameha the Great awarded Halawa in 1795 to his Chiefs Issac Davis and John Young for services rendered lands which were not owned in fee simple this ultimately set in motion he hua ka pilikia in that long term a dispute arose between the Kekuanaoi'a 'ohana & Young 'ohana over traditional cultural land stewardship and Western fee-simple inheritance neither party (Young & Davis) ever lived in the Ahupu'a. Isaac Davis died in 1810 and was followed by John Young who died in 1835 and his lands were designated in the Great Mahele as 'Ina Ho'olilina (inherited).
In his written Will of June 26th 1834 John Young suggests to the King the disposition of land among his 'ohana with 3 portfolios of land alloted for the descendants of the late Isaac Davis this suggests the King was the ultimate Executor and arbitrator in terms of authorization. On March 27th of 1855 the Land Commission awarded the Halawa Ahupua'a to both Grace Kama'iku'i & O'ahu Governor Kekuanao'a.
Only 23 Halawa maka'ainana claimed lands at the time of the Mahele 'Aina and were allocated 24.21 acres (0.2% of the total) as opposed to 8,712 acres given to Kekuanao'a & Grace Kama'iku'i. HRH Queen Emma had a home in Halawa which stood near the taxiway on the Western side of the current Honolulu airport reef runway she was titled by the Privy Council on April 1865 as "Ali'i Wahine o Halawa." When HRH Queen Emma died in 1855 without heirs her lands passed to her Trust. Thereafter Queen Emma's Trust received the Southern half of Halawa (4,557 acres) and Bishop Estate the Northern sector of the Ahupua'a (4,223 acres).
Scholars generally regard agreements entered into in light of the spirit of the times, the 1875 reciprocity Treaty on Pu'uloa obviously had major spin-off benefits from the Kingdom agricultural perspective, in this respect HRH King David Kalakaua done what he deemed best for the Kingdom finances in that epoch and so the swindle began. -Aloha.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Delete
Hi Andrew,
In order to look at the transactions, everyone must first look at the Will of John Young.
Then, the next area to look at is the Mahele awards......which clearly shows that Grace Kamaikui was the recipient for the bulk of the ahupuaa.
Grace Kamaikui was the konohiki of the bulk of the ahupuaa.
There was only a strip of land awarded to Mataio Kekuanaoa, and he had the konohiki status for that strip.
Kekuanaoa & Grace Kamaikui's names were entered again onto the documents well past the already awarded lands of 1848.
No one had the authority to convey private properties, especially the Privy Council because the lands conveyed was over.
In Grace Kamaikui's will, she stated that the lands would belong to her family in the event Queen Emma did not have children. That is cut and dry.
The lands are "ano alodio".
Grace Kamaikui was the mother of Hueu Davis; Kale Davis; and Peke Davis.
The lands are secured into perpetuity due to the "inure" clause.
The issues of FRAUD remains because Grace Kamaikui died in 1866 and Mataio Kekuanaoa died in 1868. FRAUD is documented.................the claims of PEARL HARBOR by the U.S. is based on a FRAUD Deed..........
I documented FRAUD in the court case condemning lands to the U.S. The claimed owners was Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates Trustees........which is a FRAUD in itself.
The Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates Trustess ARE NOT RELATED TO US, the Privy Council of the period had no right to convey, the "Scholars" or Parrots of the Pacific ARE NOT RELATED TO US and don't have the sense to understand what "inure" means or what "ano alodio" means and that the lands of the Royal Families were secured in place by special clauses by Kauikeouli/Kamehameha III because not only did John Young adopt his three (3) grandchildren, so did Kauikeouli/ Kamehameha III.
Pirates on the High Seas under the illusion that they are the land owners is purely erroneous, a SCAM, a thieving ring of SCOUNDRELS who were conspirators/ treasonous persons and whose successors continue the evils of the past supported by Aggressive WARMONGERS, BANKRUPT, CORRUPT, CRIMINAL DEVIANTS who are on record as PIRATES OF THE PACIFIC and the WORLD.
see PIRATES OF THE PACIFIC: Charles Reed Bishop and Friends at http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037 and read about how Hawaii article by Stephen Kinzer OVERTHROW and posted at
http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/evidence-why-the-entity-sta...http://www.democracynow.org/2006/4/21/overthrow_americas_century_of...
Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq
Author Stephen Kinzer discusses his new book, "Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq." In it, he writes that the invasion of Iraq "was the culmination of a 110-year period during which Americans overthrew fourteen governments that displeased them for various ideological, political, and economic reasons." [includes rush transcript]
"The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was not an isolated episode. It was the culmination of a 110-year period during which Americans overthrew fourteen governments that displeased them for various ideological, political, and economic reasons."
So writes author Stephen Kinzer in his new book "Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq."
Kinzer writes that "The "regime change" in Iraq seemed for a time — a very short time — to have worked. It is now clear, however, that this operation has had terrible unintended consequences. So have most of the other coups, revolutions, and invasions that the United States has mounted to depose governments it feared or mistrusted."
- Stephen Kinzer, author of "Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq." He is a former New York Times foreign correspondent and author of several books, including "All the Shah’s Men" and "Bitter Fruit."
AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Kinzer joins us today in Chicago. He is a veteran New York Times foreign correspondent, author of several books, including All the Shah’s Men and Bitter Fruit. He has just recently left the New York Times. We welcome you to Democracy Now!
STEPHEN KINZER: It’s great to be with you, Amy.
AMY GOODMAN: It’s good to be in your city, Stephen.
STEPHEN KINZER: Love it!
AMY GOODMAN: Well, you are looking at 14 coups that the U.S. was involved with. What was the primary reason for the U.S. government’s involvement in overthrowing other countries’ governments?
STEPHEN KINZER: A lot of these coups have been studied individually, but what I’m trying to do in my book is see them not as a series of isolated incidents, but rather as one long continuum. And by looking at them that way, I am able to tease out certain patterns that recur over and over again. They don’t all fit the same pattern, but it’s amazing how many of them do.
You ask about the motivations, and that is one of the patterns that comes through when you look at these things all together. There’s really a three-stage motivation that I can see when I watch so many of the developments of these coups. The first thing that happens is that the regime in question starts bothering some American company. They start demanding that the company pay taxes or that it observe labor laws or environmental laws. Sometimes that company is nationalized or is somehow required to sell some of its land or its assets. So the first thing that happens is that an American or a foreign corporation is active in another country, and the government of that country starts to restrict it in some way or give it some trouble, restrict its ability to operate freely.
Then, the leaders of that company come to the political leadership of the United States to complain about the regime in that country. In the political process, in the White House, the motivation morphs a little bit. The U.S. government does not intervene directly to defend the rights of a company, but they transform the motivation from an economic one into a political or geo-strategic one. They make the assumption that any regime that would bother an American company or harass an American company must be anti-American, repressive, dictatorial, and probably the tool of some foreign power or interest that wants to undermine the United States. So the motivation transforms from an economic to a political one, although the actual basis for it never changes.
Then, it morphs one more time when the U.S. leaders have to explain the motivation for this operation to the American people. Then they do not use either the economic or the political motivation usually, but they portray these interventions as liberation operations, just a chance to free a poor oppressed nation from the brutality of a regime that we assume is a dictatorship, because what other kind of a regime would be bothering an American company?
AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Kinzer, I want to begin where you do in the book, and that is, with Hawaii.
STEPHEN KINZER: Many Americans I don’t think realize that Hawaii was an independent country before it was brought into the United States. In brief, this is the story. In the early part of the 19th century, several hundred American missionaries, most of them from New England, sailed off to what were then called the Sandwich Islands to devote their lives to, as they would have put it, raising up the heathen savages and teaching them the blessings of Christian civilization.
It wasn’t long before many of these missionaries and their sons began to realize that there was a lot of money to be made in Hawaii. The natives had been growing sugar for a long time, but they had never refined it and had never exported it. By dispossessing the natives of most of their land, a group that came from what was then called this missionary planter elite sort of left the path of God, went onto the path of Mammon and established a series of giant sugar plantations in Hawaii, and they became very rich from exporting sugar into the United States.
In the early 1890s, the U.S. passed a tariff that made it impossible for the Hawaiian sugar growers to sell their sugar in the U.S. So they were in a panic. They were about to lose their fortunes. And they asked themselves what they could do to somehow continue to sell their sugar in the U.S.
They came up with a perfect answer: We’ll get into the U.S. How will we do this? Well, the leader of the Hawaiian revolutionaries, if you want to call them that, who were mostly of American origin, actually went to Washington. He met with the Secretary of the Navy. He presented his case directly to the President of the United States, Benjamin Harrison. And he received assurances that the U.S. would support a rebellion against the Hawaiian monarchy.
So he went back to Hawaii and became part of a triumvirate, which essentially carried out the Hawaiian revolution. He was one part of the triumvirate. The second part was the American ambassador, who was himself an annexationist and had been instructed by the State Department to do whatever he could to aid this revolution. And the third figure was the commander of the U.S. naval vessel, which was conveniently anchored right off the shores of Honolulu.
This revolution was carried out with amazing ease. The leader of the Hawaiian revolutionaries, this missionary planter elite, simply announced at a meeting one day, "We have overthrown the government of Hawaii, and we are now the new government." And before the queen was able to respond, the U.S. ambassador had 250 Marines called to shore from the ship that was conveniently off the coast of Honolulu and announced that since there had been some instability and there seemed to be a change of government, the Marines were going to land to protect the new regime and the lives and property of all Hawaiians. So that meant that there was nothing the queen could do. The regime was immediately recognized by the United States, and with that simple process, the monarchy of Hawaii came to an end, and then ultimately Hawaii joined the U.S.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Delete
AMY GOODMAN: The queen called in ambassadors from other countries for help?
STEPHEN KINZER: The queen was a little bit shocked by all this, as were her cabinet ministers. In fact, they appealed to the United States and asked, "What instability is there? Who’s in danger? Tell us, and we’ll protect them." The queen had about 600 troops at her disposal. That was the whole Hawaiian military force. And her cabinet ministers actually called the ambassadors from foreign countries in Honolulu — there were about a dozen of them then — and said, "What should we do? Do you think we should fight the Marines?" And the ambassadors quite prudently told her that that would be foolish. "You should just accept it and then try to regain your throne by some other means." That never proved possible. But even then, it was clear to the ruler of this small, weak country that there was no hope in resisting U.S. military intervention.
AMY GOODMAN: It still took a few years before Hawaii was ultimately annexed.
STEPHEN KINZER: It’s a very interesting story. Immediately after the revolution, the revolutionaries went back to Washington and, sure enough, President Harrison, as he promised, submitted to the U.S. Congress a law to bring Hawaii into the U.S., but there was a great resistance to this when it was understood how the coup was organized and on whose behalf it was organized, so the Congress did not immediately approve the annexation of Hawaii.
And right at that time, the presidency changed. The Republican, Benjamin Harrison, was out of office, and the new president, a Democrat, Grover Cleveland, came in. He was against annexation. He was an anti-imperialist. He withdrew the treaty. And that meant that Hawaii had to become an independent country for a few years, until the next Republican president came into office, McKinley. And then, at the height of the Spanish-American War, when the U.S. was taking the Philippines, Hawaii was presented to the U.S. as a vital midway station between California and the Philippines. And it was at that time, five years after the revolution, that Hawaii was actually brought into the United States.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Stephen Kinzer. So, first came the missionaries, then came the Marines.
STEPHEN KINZER: Yeah, exactly. Sometimes we hear the phrase "Business follows the flag." But in my research, I found that it’s actually the opposite. First comes the business operations, then comes the flag. It’s the flag that follows business.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to take a break, and then we’re going to come back to this discussion about, well, the title of his book is Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We’re broadcasting from Chicago, where Stephen Kinzer is based, longtime foreign correspondent for the New York Times, author of a number of books, including All the Shah’s Men, about Iran, Bitter Fruit, about Guatemala. His latest is Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq. He just recently left the New York Times. You talk about 14 countries that the U.S. intervened in: Hawaii, Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Chile, Honduras, Iran, Guatemala, South Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama. Let’s talk about Cuba. What happened?
STEPHEN KINZER: The Cuban story is really a fascinating one, partly because it illustrates one of the main themes of my book, and that is how these interventions in the long run always produce reactions and ultimately lead to the emergence of regimes that are much more anti-American than the regimes we originally set out to overthrow. Here was the story in Cuba. Americans have had their eye on Cuba for a long time, ever since Thomas Jefferson was president. But it was in 1898 that this attachment to the cause of Cuba Libré really seized the hearts of many Americans.
Bear in mind that in 1898, the Cuban economy was totally dominated by Americans. It was a big sugar producer, and all the sugar plantations in Cuba were owned by Americans. Also, it was a very big market for American manufactured goods. About 85% of anything you could buy in Cuba had been made in the United States, so American business had very big interests there.
Now, Cuban patriots spent much of the late 19th century rebelling against Spanish colonial rule. In 1898 they seemed very close to succeeding. This was a little bit troubling to some of the American interests in Cuba, because the revolutionaries were also social reformers. They advocated land reform, which would have meant breaking up the big sugar plantations owned by Americans. They also supported a tariff wall around Cuba to allow the growth of domestic manufacturing, which would have made it more difficult for American companies to export their goods to Cuba.
AMY GOODMAN: And what year was this?
STEPHEN KINZER: These are in the late 1890s. So in 1898, the American press, in some ways excited by whisperings from American businessmen active in Cuba, began a campaign to portray Spanish colonial rule in Cuba as the most unspeakably brutal tyranny that could be imagined, and the American public was whipped up into a fervor about this. The fervor intensified when the U.S. battleship, Maine, was blown up in Havana harbor. "Our Warship Was Blown Up by an Enemy’s Infernal Machine." That was the headline in the New York Journal that I reproduce in my book. Actually, it wasn’t until 75 years later that the Navy convened a board of inquiry, which turned up the fact that the Maine was actually blown up by an internal explosion. The Spanish had nothing to do with it, but we didn’t know that then, and the press seized on this to intensify the anger in the U.S.
Now, the Americans then decided we would send troops to Cuba to help the patriots overthrow Spanish colonialism, but the Cuban revolutionaries were not so sure they liked this idea. They didn’t know if they wanted thousands of American troops on their soil, because what would happen after the victory was won? In response to this concern, the U.S. government, the Congress, passed a law, the Teller Amendment, which said very explicitly, "We promise Cuba that the moment independence is won, all American troops will be withdrawn, and Cuba will be allowed to become fully independent."
After that law was passed, the Cuban rebels agreed to accept American aid. American soldiers went to Cuba, including, famously, Teddy Roosevelt, who had his own uniform personally designed for him by Brooks Brothers in New York. In the space of essentially one day of fighting, the Spanish colonial rule was dealt its final death blow, Spain surrendered Cuba, and Cuba prepared for a huge celebration of its independence.
Just before that celebration was about to be held, the Americans announced that they changed their mind, that the Teller Amendment had been passed in a moment of irrational enthusiasm and that actually Cuban independence was not a very good idea, so the American troops were not withdrawn. We remained in Cuba for some decades, ruling it directly under U.S. military officers, and then, for a period after that, through local dictators.
Now, flash forward to 1959. That was when Fidel Castro’s revolution succeeded. Castro came down from the hills and made his very first speech as leader of the revolution in Santiago, and in that speech, which I quote in my book, he does not talk about what kind of a regime he’s going to impose, but he makes one promise. He says, "This time I promise you it will not be like 1898 again, when the Americans came in and made themselves masters of our country."
Now, any Americans who might have read a report of that speech, I’m sure, would have been very puzzled. In the first place, they would have had no memory of what happened in 1898, but secondly, they would wonder, "What could an event 60 years ago possibly have to do with this revolution in Cuba today?" What they had failed to realize is that resentment over these interventions burns in the hearts and souls of people in foreign countries and later explodes violently.
It’s quite reasonable to say today that had we not intervened in Cuba and prevented Cuba from becoming independent, had we carried out our explicit promise to the Cubans in 1898, we would never have had to face the entire phenomenon of Castro communism all these last 40 years. Now, of course, we would love to have back a moderate democratic regime like the one that was going to come to power in Cuba in 1898, but it’s too late for that, and it’s an example of how when we frustrate people’s legitimate nationalist aspirations, we wind up not only casting those countries into instability, but severely undermining our own national security.
AMY GOODMAN: Now, something we see today, for example, in Iraq, is the critical role, not only of the U.S. government perhaps protecting U.S. corporations, but the role of the media in all of this. Going back to Cuba, what was the role of the media?
STEPHEN KINZER: The press played a really shameful role in the run-up to the Spanish-American War. The Americans had never been particularly fond of the Spanish rule in Cuba, but it wasn’t until the press, actually in a circulation war, decided to seize on the brutality, as they called it, of Spanish colonial rule in the summer of 1898 that Americans really went crazy.
Now, there’s one very interesting aspect of the Cuban press campaign that I think we see repeated periodically throughout American history, and that is, we never like to attack simply a regime. We like to have one individual. Americans love to have a demon, a certain person who is the symbol of all the evil and tyranny in the regime that we want to attack. We’ve had this with Khomeini, with Castro, with Qaddafi, various other figures over history.
Now, in the case of the Spanish-American War, we first thought we’d like to demonize the king of Spain, but there was no king of Spain. There was a queen, who was actually an Austrian princess, so she wouldn’t work. The regent, her son, was actually just a 12-year-old kid, so he wouldn’t work, either. So then, we decided to focus on the Spanish general, who was the commander of Spanish troops in Cuba, General Weyler, and for a time, Weyler was thought of as the epitome of all the carnal brutality that we attributed to Spanish colonialism.
We see this pattern again coming right up to the modern age, when we’re always looking for some individual to point at. The idea behind this is that the natural state of all people in the world is to have U.S.-style democracy and to be friendly to the United States. If they’re not, it must mean that there’s only one person or one tiny clique that is preventing the people in this country from being the way they naturally would be, and if we could only just remove this one individual or this tiny clique, the people in that country would return to the normal state of all people, which is to wish to have the U.S. system of government and politics and economics and to embrace the United States.
AMY GOODMAN: William Randolph Hearst, was he a key figure then?
STEPHEN KINZER: Hearst was a crucial figure, who very cleverly realized that he could push the circulation of his newspaper dramatically higher if he hammered away on jingoistic issues by pointing at foreign nations as constantly seeking to undermine the United States. There’s an undercurrent, which we’re still seeing today, of seeing the world in this very Hobbesian way, that there are terrible dangers everywhere, and it’s very important for the U.S. to go out and attack here and attack there before those dangers come to shore. Clausewitz, who I read a lot while I was researching my book, had a great phrase for this. He called it, "suicide for fear of death." You are so afraid of what’s happening to you in the world or what might happen to you that you go out and launch operations, which actually produce the result that you were afraid might happen if you didn’t do these things.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about John Foster Dulles, who he was, his role in these interventions, Guatemala, and just before that, Iran?
STEPHEN KINZER: One of the things I do in my book that I haven’t done in my previous books is focus a lot on Dulles. I really believe that Dulles was one of the key figures in shaping the second half of the 20th century, and I devote some time to try to analyze him and figure out why he played this role. First of all, Dulles spent almost all of his adult life as America’s most successful and most highly paid corporate lawyer. He represented all of the giant multinational corporations in America, not just United Fruit, but International Nickel and all sorts of resource conglomerates all over the world. So the whole way he saw the world was economics. He thought that American policy in the world should be oriented towards protecting American corporations.
Dulles also came from a family of clergymen. He was a deep religious believer. His father was a preacher. His grandfather had been a missionary in India, and this gave him another strain, which is very important in the American regime-change era, and that is this sense of religious mission, this belief that since the United States has been blessed with prosperity and democracy, we have, not just the right, but perhaps even the God-given obligation to go to other countries and share the benefits of all we have with them, particularly to countries that may not even be advanced enough to realize how much they want our political system. So Dulles saw the world in a strictly black-and-white way.
He saw, at that time, a communist conspiracy all over the world as working relentlessly to undermine the United States. For example, he opposed all cultural exchanges with any communist country. He tried for years to keep U.S. reporters from visiting China. He was against summit meetings of all kinds. He didn’t want agreement with communist countries on any subject, because he thought any agreement would be just a trick to get America to lower its guard.
Now, when Iran nationalized its oil industry, when Guatemala tried to restrict the operations of United Fruit Company, Dulles did not see this as a reflection of a desire by people in a foreign country to control their own resources. He rather saw it as an anti-American move, undoubtedly manipulated from the Kremlin, which had a much more profound goal than simply bothering an American company. This was just the beginnings of an anti-American attack.
Now, one of the things I ask in my book is: Why did we so tragically misjudge nationalist movements in developing countries, like Iran and Guatemala and later Chile? Why did we interpret them as part of an international conspiracy, which, as documents later proved, they were not?
I think it was for this reason. American statesmen and diplomats who study the history of diplomacy are actually studying the history of European diplomacy. We’re very Eurocentric. Our diplomats and our statesmen are very well versed in European political traditions. They’re familiar with alliance politics and wars of conquest and big powers that use small powers secretly for their own means, but the desire of poor people in poor countries to control their own natural resources has never been a part of European history. It’s not a syndrome that Americans who study Europe are familiar with, and that, along with an instinctive desire to protect American companies, I think led them to misjudge nationalist movements and misinterpret them as part of a global conspiracy to undermine the United States.
AMY GOODMAN: Or perhaps not care, but care about U.S. companies, as in Guatemala, United Fruit being able to have free reign.
STEPHEN KINZER: I think it was very much a sense that the companies must know what’s best for the United States in those countries, but in addition, we managed to persuade ourselves that a government that was bothering American companies must also be harassing and oppressing its own people, and this is an argument that I think is very well tailored to the American soul. You know, we really are a very compassionate people, and Americans hate the idea that there are people suffering in some faraway country. American leaders who want to intervene in those countries for very ignoble reasons understand this, and they use that motive, they play on the American compassion to achieve support for their interventions.
AMY GOODMAN: So talk about what fuels Iran today, the feeling Iranians have for America, based on the coup the U.S. was involved with in 1953.
STEPHEN KINZER: It’s hard to believe today that we could even use the word "Iran" and "democracy" in the same sentence, but the fact is Iran was a functioning, thriving democracy in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Because Iran nationalized its oil industry, rather than allow it to continue being exploited by foreigners, Iran became a target for foreign intervention, and the U.S. did overthrow the democracy of Iran in the summer of 1953.
We placed on the throne the Shah. He ruled for 25 years with increasing repression. His repression produced the explosion of the late 1970s, the Islamic revolution. That revolution brought to power a fanatically anti-American clique of mullahs who began their regime by taking American diplomats as hostage, has then spent 25 years oppressing its own people and doing whatever it could, sometimes very violently, to undermine American interests in the world, and that is the regime with which we are now approaching a very serious world crisis regarding the nuclear issue.
Now, had we not intervened in 1953 and crushed Iranian democracy, we might have had a thriving democracy in the heart of the Muslim Middle East all these 50 years. I can hardly wrap my mind around how different the Middle East might be now. This regime that’s now in power in Iran would never have come to power, and the current nuclear crisis would never have emerged. This is a great example of how our intervention ultimately leads us to regimes much worse than the ones we originally set out to overthrow.
Now, how do you think that people in Iran react when Americans point a finger at them and say, "You’re a tyranny over there. You’re a brutal dictatorship. You should have a democracy. You should have a free regime"? Well, they say, "We had a democracy here, until you came in and overthrew it." Now, the United States today has some very legitimate complaints against the Iranian government, but we have to understand that Iranians also have some very legitimate complaints against us, and that should be a recognition that would lead us into negotiations with them at this point.
AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Kinzer, we’re going to have to leave it there for today, but next week, part two of this discussion on Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq, looking at 14 coups of the last more than a century that the U.S. was involved with.
**************************
http://libweb.hawaii.edu/digicoll/annexation/petition.htmlKue: The Hui Aloha Aina Anti-Annexation Petitions, 1897-1898
Reference: HARPER'S WEEKLY, Journal of Civilization, New York, Saturday, September 10, 1898, Vol XLII - No. 2177, Family Collection, weblinks cited above.
Amidst all the criminal activities around us.............the true bloodlines are here..............documenting criminals, documenting Oppositions against the wrongful dethronement of Queen Liliuokalani who was and remained under duress, stress, coercion, usurpation, genocide, along with her subjects/citizens, Royal families, et. als.; against Annexation; Against Occupation; Against Statehood; Against Pirates/Piracy(ies), Against the Akaka Bill - descendant of treasonous person Thomas Akaka who helped to plan the takeover/dethronement of Queen Liliuokalani from Washington, D.C. with Lorrin Thurston, Dr. Mott-Smith, S.B. 1520, Against Depleted Uranium, Against Nuclear Missiles, activities, Military, Agent Orange, GMO's/Genetic Modification Organisms, Contamination in the environment, in the Pacific Ocean, in the Air, Water, Experimentation, Pollution contributed by criminal deviants, criminal bankers, unwelcomed occupiers, Neil Abercrombie and Criminal deviants looking to kill off/terminate innocents/failures to protect the health, lives, safety of all, etc................many Nations are watching..........and we maintain a neutral, non violent nation....with much aloha to our families and friends..
- Permalink Reply by on
- Delete
- Kamehameha III's First Laws found at the Mission Houses Archives, behind Kawaiahao Church: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wZGIyMmNkNTMtZTczZ i0...
****************************** ***********
Premeditation to Assume Pearl Harbor Coaling Station/the Hawaiian Islands - a Standing Order by Congress Eight (8) days BEFORE DETHRONING QUEEN LILIUOKALANI in 1893:
Page 1: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wZmFmMWE3YjEtNTAwM y0...
Page 2: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wN2RlYzdiOWMtNWJkY S0...
****************************** ******PEARL HARBOR ARTICLE:President Cleveland Gave Hawaii Back to Queen Liliuokalani https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wN2JkZjMxMzEtMDIyN i0...
****************************** *****
Genealogies 1867 (first part) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wMzBiZGJhMjMtY2FmZ C0...
Genealogies 1867 (second part) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wZDBjMDAyNjktMWQ1M i0...
Genealogies 1867 (third and last part) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wOTRlZmNhMDEtNGFkM S0...
************************
Annexation Opposition by Queen Liliuokalani found by researcher Kiliwehi Kekumano: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wOGJmZjg4MmQtNWRjM S0...
Annexation Opposition (page 2) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wNWVlMTc0MjEtZWZiZ S0...
Annexation Opposition (page 3) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wY2RjYzZmNjQtMjUxY i0...
Annexation Opposition (page 4) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wNmY2Mzk3ZTctZDEyM y0...
***************************
The Hawaiian Disgrace http://query.nytimes.com/mem/ archive-free/pdf?res= F70A1FF7345D117...
Shameful Conspiracy https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wN2Y2YjAwOTItOTEwM C0...
******************************
Prince Kuhio Kalanianaole Treasonous Person introduced Statehood in 1920 https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wMzY0NzE3ZDUtZGE5M i0...
******************************Reasons Why Anyone Can Document/Press Charges/ Document Pirates http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/reasons-why-anyone-can****************************** *****Know About Pearl Harbor http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/know-about-pearl-harbor-more****************************** *****Updated Hawaiian History http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/important-keep-for-your****************************** *****Congress Premeditated Declared War upon a Neutral, Non Violent, Friendly Nation http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/only-congress-can-initiate-war****************************** *****Updated Royal Genealogies http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/updating-the-royal-families****************************** ******In Defense of Kanaka Maoli http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/in-defense-of-kanaka****************************** *******One World Order = The Monroe Doctrine Extended http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/one-world-order-the-monroe************************************Reviewing the Claimed Royal Societies http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/reviewing-the-claimed-royal************************************Pirates at Work with OHA in Tow http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/tom-lenchanko-pirates-at-wo...************************************Animosities in the Hawaiian Islands - Cartoons of Queen Liliuokalani depicted as a "Nigger" , etc. http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/animosities-in-the-hawaiian************************************Wiki Leaks: It Was All About Oil includes my article(s) http://maoliworld.ning.com/forum/topics/wikileaks-it-was-all-about*********************************************
The Attorney (now deceased) did say to me after the hearing in which I brought out issues of FRAUD:
"Ms. Gora, you are a good researcher."
So, Andrew btw who is your employer? The attempt to DEFRAUD, DISILLUSION, DISINFORM shows up in the comments that you've made.
It's truly SAD because CRIMINAL DAMAGES Upon Innocents have progressed over time and disinformation has been conducted by criminals over time.........I'll let our audience view all that you have mischievously presented............there's much damage that has occurred which affected many many innocents from our neutral Nation, and other Nations that did Treaty with the Hawaiian Kingdom in good faith.
The lands of Halawa has OWNERS and the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estates/ Kamehameha Schools; Queen Emma Trust, including the United States military, etc. ARE NOT THE OWNERS!
signing off as ONE OF THE TRUE OWNERS OF HALAWA AHUPUAA and in contact with many other descendants of John Young, Grace Kamaikui, et. als.
- Premeditation to Assume Pearl Harbor-1893 Premeditation to Assume Pearl Harbor Coaling Station/the Hawaiian Islands - a Standing Order by Congress Eight (8) days BEFORE DETHRONING QUEEN LILIUOKALANI in 1893:
Page 1: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wZmFmMWE3YjEtNTAwM y0...
Page 2: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wN2RlYzdiOWMtNWJkY S0...
****************************** ******PEARL HARBOR ARTICLE:President Cleveland Gave Hawaii Back to Queen Liliuokalani https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wN2JkZjMxMzEtMDIyN i0...- Evidence of breach of Treaty under International laws by U.S. Military-1893 read articles, pamphlets, books, the IOLANI-The Royal Hawk by Amelia Gora
1893 - Queen Liliuokalani destroyed the Constitution.
Note: Queen Liliuokalani knew that her family was the hanai/adopted descendants of a Kamehameha descendant, therefore, her rights of a Monarch/King or Queen gave her authority of moving from a Constitutional Monarchy government to a Monarchy government, etc. or as documented above:
Here we have a Monarchy based government, turned Constitutional government which could at any time revert to a Monarchy based government which was established by the King in 1810, placed on the records by Kauikeouli/Kamehameha III which gave "permanency of his Throne and Dynasty, but to the Government of his country according to fixed laws and civilized usage..".
Here we have "The Hawaiian Government was not established by the people; the Constitution did not emanate from them; they were not consulted in their aggregate capacity or in convention, and they had no direct voice in founding either the Government or the Constitution."
Originally, the Monarch alone was vested in absolute power. The Monarch whether it be a King or Queen could at any time change the government from a Monarchy to a Constitutional Monarchy, revert to a Monarchy, etc.
The Laws of 1852 included special groups who together enacted the Constitution: The King/Monarch, the House of Nobles, and the House of Representatives "vested that supreme, absolute power of legislation, which was originally vested in the Monarch alone."
-Opposition to Annexation - 1897 Annexation Opposition by Queen Liliuokalani found by researcher Kiliwehi Kekumano: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wOGJmZjg4MmQtNWRjM S0...
Annexation Opposition (page 2) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wNWVlMTc0MjEtZWZiZ S0...
Annexation Opposition (page 3) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wY2RjYzZmNjQtMjUxY i0...
Annexation Opposition (page 4) https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= 0B6Gs4av5Se1wNmY2Mzk3ZTctZDEyM y0...-Other Evidence - see articles, pamphlets, books, the IOLANI - The Royal Hawk news on the web by Amelia Gora
1893 - PIRATES, Treasonous persons continued to claim the Hawaiian government status utilizing the Laws of Ko Hawaii Pae Aina/Kingdom of Hawaii/Hawaiian Kingdom/Hawaiian Islands/Hawaiian archipelago and contrary to the Law of Nations continue to be supported by the U.S., England, and the bankers (Morgan and Bank of England) which departed from the Law of Nations, formed the League of Nations, then formed the CFR/Council on Foreign Relations and formed the United Nations with help from the CEO's/permanent Corporation Executive Officer Rockefellers who gave the lands for the United Nations in New York.
Oppositions by Queen Liliuokalani, subjects numbering 40,000+, families, friends over time have opposed all moves by the treasonous persons, conspirators, pirates: Charles Reed Bishop and Friends, Pirates on the High Seas, Pirates of the World, etc.
SUMMARY
The Entity State of Hawaii was a set up by treasonous persons, defended by the International Mafia nations U.S., England, and the Morgan bankers, Bank of England, the International bankers who are the ongoing PIRATES of the World affecting the Hawaiian government and all nations in the World beginning with those identified byStephen Kinzer: 14 countries that the U.S. intervened in: Hawaii, Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Chile, Honduras, Iran, Guatemala, South Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama. Let’s talk about Cuba.
Therefore, based on the facts/evidence, the entity State of Hawaii is NOT/not the Hawaiian government.
Oppositions to the entity State of Hawaii's moves over our Hawaiian people continue - includes the move towards the Akaka Bill with the intent to transfer all to the U.S., etc.
Rents, Leases are due for $500 Trillion dollars in gold coins per year retroactive to 1893, the return of our Hawaiian gold bullions, gold coins, buildings - Queen Liliuokalani's home, the Iolani Palace, lands, trusts, etc.
Long live Ko Hawaii Pae Aina/Kingdom of Hawaii/Hawaiian Kingdom/Hawaiian Islands/ Hawaiian archipelago!
Mahalo Ke Akua, kupuna kahiko, our wonderful researchers......
aloha.
aloha.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGKx2LNbF5MSudden Rush- Messenjah's (Feat.Amy Hanaialii Gilom)
Sudden Rush- Messenjah's (Feat.Amy Hanaialii Gilom)
by sablancpm 2 years ago 4,201 views
additional references:
articles, pamphlets written by Amelia Gora
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/4/21/overthrow_americas_century_of...
- Permalink Reply by on
Aloha Amelia.
John Young's written Will was obviously intent in clarifying Land inheritance for his 'ohana:
http://www.lanaichc.org/mahele-documents/lca-595-and-8519-b-pane.pdf
Grace Kamiku'i's Land Commission Award (LCA-8516-b) is also straightforward:
The opinion of P. Christiaan Klieger in "Na Maka o Halawa" (1995) pages 41-3 notes:
"Young's testament gives Halawa apparently in its entirety to his daughter Grace Kama'iku'i who with husband Rooke had most likely managing Young's affairs in Halawa for several years."
Also, "John Young's will is also noted in the Privy Council minutes whereupon the "King and Chiefs then agreed to divide the [total Young/Davis] lands equally between the heirs."
The role of O'ahu Governor Mataio Kekuanao's land claims and correspondence relating to same is referred to by Kleiger who additionally notes:
"The original Halawa award to Young and Davis may seem to have been a grant directly from the King to his Caucasian chiefs but it did not apparently operate outside the control of the King's successors."
As a matter of curiosity Amelia can you please furnish details as to exactly which Kingdom Legislation precluded HRH Kalakaua & the Privy Council from re-conveying private properties? Although granted their Land Konohiki were obliged to apply for Title via the Land Commission. This suggests His Excellency David Kalakaua as reigning Mo'i... remained Konohiki of the Konohiki!
- Permalink Reply by on
- Delete
Review the 1888 case of Charles Reed Bishop.........don't have the citation, but the konohiki were on their own and Kalakaua was NOT their konohiki.
Many of the Konohiki were Royal family members.
Thanks for the compiled data on John Young's family, many descendants exist...........Kale (w) had three daughters; Hueu (k) had 12+ children; and Peke (w) had two sons, and a daughter.
Guess you overlooked the fact that Kauikeouli accommodated for his children.
The opinion of P. Christiaan Klieger, a German? is merely that, an opinion.
And, you never did respond on the question........who's your employer....or your handlers?
Everyone -
The Halawa Ahupuaa is targetted for the Rail System to run through from Honouliuli and end in town........for your information, there are some problematic issues resulting from the SHPD - State of Hawaii Preservation Department having a hold up...........reasons being that
Cyprus National? married to a kanaka maoli was recently fired? His name being Analu/Andrew Kameeiamoku Josephides/ Analu Josephides ------google him and what the Josephides family has been up to, etc............talk about International intrigue.....
Now, this Cyprus National learned Hawaiian language, started up the Reverend Joel Hulu Mahoe Research Center, got thousands of dollars of free monies, then worked for Alu Like, worked with the Burial Council - Oahu, then went to work as a GENEALOGIST for SHPD on the Big Island.
Everyone - check the facts of those coming out of Cyprus because word is he's back there after being fired.
Complaints have been made about him.........what better way to criminally infiltrate a system and deny/defraud heirs/descendants of their rights, their inheritances, lands......and for what purposes?.......
The Rail System, a faulty project which is being countered by our families claims recently submitted showing we are the konohiki descendants of Kahope (k); Kekauonohi (w) her hanai /adopted daughter Abigail Maheha (w) - one of those attending the Royal Schools....etc.........that's for Honouliuli............
Then you have the Halawa Ahupuaa ----which has OWNERS who ARE NOT THE KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLS BISHOP ESTATES Trustees, but the John Young's descendants/heirs who were the hanai children of Kauikeouli/Kamehameha III; then the Rail moves into Kapalama Ahupuaa with konohiki's Kauikeouli/Kamehameha III; Nuuanu (k) - our ancestor - already documented years ago by SHPD genealogist in the past; and John Kapena (k) - our ancestor in multiples of lines.
Funny how the entity State of Hawaii is left with the true bloodlines claims and opt to accommodate the Rail!
Racketeering, Criminal conversions, FRAUD, DECEIT, INTERNATIONAL INTRIGUE, BANKERS, MAFIA, everything under the sun.....
Do your homework people..........because RACKETEERING, PIRACY(IES) continue in our contaminated environment----
Keeping you Up-to-date on WHAT IS IS! and............
Due to the Premeditation of assuming an already owned Pearl Harbor, the U.S. remain occupiers who have criminally PLUNDERED UPON INNOCENTS OVER TIME from Hawaii thru the Middle East.....documented.
And another thing, we are the heirs of King David Kalakaua and Queen Liliuokalani through genealogies and documented, researched evidence....and the Trustees of the Kamehameha Schools/Bernice Pauahi Bishop Trusts and other Trusts are NOT RELATED TO US.
Lastly, we descend from some of the Permanent members of the House of Nobles.
aloha.
Find more Hawaiian Nation songs at Myspace Music
P.S. Support us Hawaiians or those against the Rail, there's a meeting this Thursday at Alii Place/Rail Office at 10:00 A.M. You're invited!
- Permalink Reply by on
Hi again Amelia.
At the time of the 1848 Mahele 'Aina the reigning King (HRH Kamehameha III) claimed to be a Konohiki it is actually on the minutes of the Privy Council for December 11th of 1847 (87). Quote:
"The King now claims to be Konohiki (Chief) of a great portion of the lands. He therefore makes known to the other Konohikis that they are only holders of lands under him, but he will only take a part and leave them a part .... subject to the rights of the Tenants."
Yes, the Konohiki were often of Royal families more often they were of lower strata Ali'i. Kauieouli was not deliberately overlooked as the actual discussion context was do you happen to know of the specific Kingdom Legislation which would have prevented HRH Kalakaua in conjunction with the Privy Council from re-conveying a documented Mahele Award?
Klieger stated that specifically in the Report's outset it was an opinion, which we can agree Amelia is a belief of judgement that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. As to employer/handlers just a person off the street without handlers Jack of all trades & master of none ma ka hana ka 'ike.
A hui hou kaua. -Andrew.
http://archives1.dags.hawaii.gov/gsdl/cgi-bin/library see Mahele Book for the Konohiki (120 pages pdf)
The Konohiki were also given the fishing rights, etc.....Mountain to the Sea.
The land Commission was to exist for only 2 years.
Land Commission dissolved in 1853. They had handled 12,000 claims.
Time extended till dissolution on March 31, 1855.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Mahele
Land division (mahele) of 1848
Hoping to keep ownership of the land out of the hands of foreigners in the event of a political coup d'état, Kamehameha III and 245 chiefs met to divide the Hawaii lands among themselves.[3] The Mahele abolished the previous semi-feudal system. Under this, rule over an ahupuaʻa was given by the king to a chief, who received taxes and tribute from the people who worked the land collectively. Private land ownership did not exist, as a commoner could be expelled from his land by the chief, or the chief removed by the king.[6]
**************************************
The best descriptions would come out of the green books sitting on the shelves at the Archives, Honolulu, Oahu.
Intense research could be gotten from the Privy Council Files, etc.
aloha.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpTSA_25wGE
*********
No comments:
Post a Comment