Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who the heck is "we". You didn't give up any lands. This living in the past, mostly by YouTube videos is kinda weird, it just is. You post like you are in some time warp over 20 years ago. You've officially moved to the extremist category. So few people except out of touch radicals agree with this monarchy position.
That person you quoted sounds very wise and honorable!
Although, I don't see where he brought up anything about Iraq, Syria etc...
Richard.... I was making the the facts that his perception of freedom and mine are soo way off. hawaii is a state by..... political reasons, not legal. Thus the illegal overthrow.....
Honorable..... lol I never believe everything I read on the internet.... now your going to tell me he is a french model....
"The legal status of Hawaii -- as opposed to its political status—is a subject of scholarly and legal debate. While Hawaii is broadly accepted as a state of the United States of America in mainstream understanding, there is critique regarding the international legality of this status. The viewpoint that Hawaii is an independent nation under U.S. occupation is circulated in academic circles, school curriculum;[1] the U.N. and other international forums,;[2][3] and in daily dialogue in Hawaii. The legality of control of Hawaii by the United States has also been brought up in cases in the U.S. Supreme Court,[4] in U.S. District Court,[5] and in international legal actions.[6] Outside of Hawaii, this legal debate is relatively unknown."
Who the heck is "we". You didn't give up any lands. This living in the past, mostly by YouTube videos is kinda weird, it just is. You post like you are in some time warp over 20 years ago. You've officially moved to the extremist category. So few people except out of touch radicals agree with this monarchy position.
Uhmm viper don't comment on stuff you don't know about ok. First my tribe and others owned land given to us by treaties with your government. But then taken back by the government when they discovered valuable minerals or oil ok. So ya twice we have givenup lands. My father owns small acreage on our rez. We is the natives on this tread!
Its funny how you label us as you do, but when you do it, its called patriotism.
And once again im more into just returning the lands to the Hawai'ian people then having a monarchy ok. I think if we are going to set right the wrongs we need to restore the kingdom to where we took it over, thus the monarchy.
First my tribe and others owned land given to us by treaties with your government. But then taken back by the government when they discovered valuable minerals or oil ok. So ya twice we have givenup lands. My father owns small acreage on our rez. We is the natives on this tread!
See, that is the thing - you have this notion of some absolute right of land via descendants or treaty. A treaty doesn't give you some permanent notion of land - it is at risk until the next treaty or law. Buy the land - you might have a case. But maybe not - I have no naïve notion I could lose my property to eminent domain or a N. Korea missile - or the Chinese.
Just because someone is their first doesn't mean they own it. People who rowed over to Hawaii and found it doesn't mean they own it or the descendants. It is who controls the land.
Who the heck is "we". You didn't give up any lands. This living in the past, mostly by YouTube videos is kinda weird, it just is. You post like you are in some time warp over 20 years ago. You've officially moved to the extremist category. So few people except out of touch radicals agree with this monarchy position.
In fact viper i know two natives right now who are talking on this thread. Your always complaining about how my youtube videos or threads have no real value in a moving forum. So whats got your panties in a knot? That you didn't think of it yourself?
Im going to make my point viper about radicalism and patriotism that i brought up in the last post, its a personal perception of bias and i will use you as an example ok? My threads are irrelivent and have no value in a moving forum, your opinion right? But i guess Zoe the Zebra, Larry Ellison buying Go!, What is this bug on my Lanai?, Wild Goats and Donkeys by Kona are relevant and have value on a moving forum? ur
See, that is the thing - you have this notion of some absolute right of land via descendants or treaty. A treaty doesn't give you some permanent notion of land - it is at risk until the next treaty or law. Buy the land - you might have a case. But maybe not - I have no naïve notion I could lose my property to eminent domain or a N. Korea missile - or the Chinese.
Just because someone is their first doesn't mean they own it. People who rowed over to Hawaii and found it doesn't mean they own it or the descendants. It is who controls the land.
First my tribe and others owned land given to us by treaties with your government. But then taken back by the government when they discovered valuable minerals or oil ok. So ya twice we have givenup lands. My father owns small acreage on our rez. We is the natives on this tread!
Hawaiian By Heart, in your profile under Ethnicity you say you are "White" & "Native American". So, it was really YOUR government that did this to YOUR people.
Hawaiian By Heart, my wife is Blackfoot Indian. When are you going to give her back the land that half of your ancestors stole from her ancestors?
I am mostly Italian and Irish with a whole lot of other bits and pieces thrown in. I wonder if I should be mad at my Italian side for the way they treated my Irish side when they came to New York or if I should by mad at my Irish side for the way they treated my Italian side when they came to Boston?
can ya show me receipt for the land the feds claim thats their... or for that matter the states... and tell me how they bought it........... PLEASE....
See, that is the thing - you have this notion of some absolute right of land via descendants or treaty. A treaty doesn't give you some permanent notion of land - it is at risk until the next treaty or law. Buy the land - you might have a case. But maybe not - I have no naïve notion I could lose my property to eminent domain or a N. Korea missile - or the Chinese.
Just because someone is their first doesn't mean they own it. People who rowed over to Hawaii and found it doesn't mean they own it or the descendants. It is who controls the land.
So your not afraid of the US or any of their subsidiaries, taking your land? because you have something called a treaty? some document that says you.......lease, rent... own? the land? so in your so called treaty you agree that you own your land and that the other party, sold it to you?
now this document treaty, deed what have you. if the other party says..... it now mine!!! mine mine all mine
" But I had a treaty with you... I mean a deed......" whats the difference.... it an agreement with all parties involved.
is it then theirs.... cause... they said so....
"Just because someone is their first doesn't mean they own it. People who rowed over to Hawaii and found it doesn't mean they own it or the descendants. It is who controls the land"
if they have an agreement.... I beg to differ. what you talking here is IMPERIALISM at its finest.
and do the right thing is to restore the natural order of the Hawai'ian kingdom and give it back to the ruling bloodline. Then let the people of the Kingdom of Hawai'i use there right of self determination to decide which direction to go. You assume that it will be a monarchy and you will lose all your property etc. Just because on group says that doesn't mean we all feel that way.
The problem with restoring the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi to the "ruling bloodline" is that it no longer exists. According to Article 22 of the 1887 "Bayonet Constitution"...
Quote:
ARTICLE 22.
The Crown is hereby permanently confirmed to His Majesty Kalakaua, and to the Heirs of His body lawfully begotten, and to their lawful Descendants in a direct line; failing whom, the Crown shall descend to Her Royal Highness the Princess Liliuokalani, and the heirs of her body, lawfully begotten, and their lawful descendants in direct a line. The Succession shall be to the senior male child, and to the heirs of his body; failing a male child, the succession, shall be to the senior female child, and to the heirs of her body. In case there is no heir as above provided, the successor shall be the person whom the Sovereign shall appoint with the consent of the Nobles, and publicly proclaim during the Sovereign's life; but should there be no such appointed and proclamation, and the Throne should become vacant, then the Cabinet, immediately after the occurring of such vacancy, shall cause a meeting of the Legislature, who shall elect by ballot some native Alii of the Kingdom as Successor to the Throne; and the Successor so elected shall become a new Stirps for the Royal Family; and the Succession from the Sovereign thus elected, shall be regulated by the same law as the present Royal Family of Hawaii.
Lili'uokalani passed away in 1917 without giving birth to any children. Before her overthrow in 1893, she appointed and publicly proclaimed two successors to the Kingdom of Hawai'i -- her niece Kaʻiulani (who passed away in 1899) and her sister-in-law's nephew David Kawānanakoa (who passed away in 1908). Both Kaʻiulani and Kawānanakoa predeceased Liliʻuokalani and she was technically unable to officially appoint and publicly proclaim a new successor. Although some Hawaiians believe that the heirs of David Kawānanakoa have a valid claim to the defunct "Kingdom of Hawaiʻi", they have no exclusive right to it. So if the "Kingdom of Hawaiʻi" were restored, there would have to be an election for the position of "Sovereign." Since there are plenty of aliʻi descendants running around today, it would probably be a "royal mess."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
