Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-30-2015, 01:55 AM
 
Location: honolulu
1,729 posts, read 1,532,922 times
Reputation: 450

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
It's related to something called the Indigenous Peoples And Nations Coalition
Indigenous Peoples and Nations Coalition | INDIGENOUS JUSTICE ALLIANCE

Excerpt:

Right now, at this exact time, the title to Alaska still belongs to the Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut Peoples. Hopefully our warriors, be they men or women,will stand together, in a non-violent effort to protect what has always been ours from time before anyone’s memory. However, there are those who are always trying to minimize or eliminate our rights.
[MOD CUT/copyright violation].


They might be onto something. Alaska Natives never signed away their land via treaties, unlike the tribes in the Lower 48 (many of which signed at gunpoint, basically). I'd like to see proof of the underlined statement, though (underlining - mine). When the US bought the Louisiana Territory from France, they didn't assert that the tribes therein were completely sovereign and independent nations. The tribal lands, or the right to negotiate with the Native nations for their land, was included in the Purchase. The Alaska purchase in principle would have been the same. Except the US never negotiated with nor fought the Alaska Native nations. Instead, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was imposed on them in 1971, as a sort of belated afterthought, to clear the way for resource exploitation.
"What does it mean ? Pakistan’s intervention recognizes that the situations of Alaska and Hawaii are within the context of international law as opposed to US domestic law. This recognition by a State makes it possible for Alaska and Hawaii to access, at the international level, procedures and mechanisms like the Decolonization Committee, to exercise their right to self-determination."


ALASKA & HAWAII DELIGHTED WITH PAKISTAN
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-07-2015, 08:44 PM
 
Location: honolulu
1,729 posts, read 1,532,922 times
Reputation: 450
Quote:
On July 4, 1894, the Republic of Hawaii was declared, with Sanford B. Dole as president. The illegal overthrow of the independent nation of Hawaii was complete.

Yes, although your daily paper may want you to forget this, it is history that should not be ignored. There’s even a federal law confirming the truth of the history they refuse to print.

From the Apology Resolution, United States Public Law 103-150:
Disappeared News: Repost of repost: History that should not
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2015, 08:56 PM
 
48,505 posts, read 96,675,147 times
Reputation: 18304
I an sure they do OP but not likely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2015, 10:04 AM
 
Location: honolulu
1,729 posts, read 1,532,922 times
Reputation: 450
Quote:
In fact, as recently as a year ago, Interior admitted it had no such legal authority. On March 19, 2013, the head of Indian Affairs at Interior, Assistant Secretary Kevin K. Washburn, told the House Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs that the Interior Department did not “have the authority to recognize Native Hawaiians.” Washburn told Rep. Eni Faleomavaega (D–AS) that “we would need legislation to be able to proceed down that road.”[18] Yet, suddenly, the Interior Department is proceeding down the very road that it recently acknowledged it lacks the authority to travel.
According to former Hawaii Attorney General Michael Lilly, the Department of the Interior’s efforts are “unconstitutional because, under the Constitution, it is the Congress that has the plenary power to recognize tribes and ratify treaties. That power does not reside in the executive branch of the federal government or with the various states. So the current effort aimed at creating a tribe of Hawaiians has no legal basis.”[19] Lilly adds that there was never a Hawaiian tribe with whom the U.S. had a treaty relationship and that if “there was such a tribe, then all the multi-ethnic peoples who were citizens of the Hawaiian Monarchy would be members of that tribe” since the “U.S. Supreme Court has held that a ‘tribe’ is a political and not a racial entity.”[20]

The Obama Administrations Attempt to Balkanize Hawaii
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2015, 11:40 AM
 
13,899 posts, read 6,424,207 times
Reputation: 6960
Let Hawaii become their own country, it will be much cheaper to go there when they are off the US dollar and on some tribal penny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2015, 12:47 PM
 
Location: When you take flak it means you are on target
7,646 posts, read 9,918,985 times
Reputation: 16451
Better yet let's just relocate all those uppity Hawaiians to that one island, the one the computer guy bought. Then the japaneese and chineese can buy their houses cheap and we can expand Pearl Harbor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2015, 10:21 PM
 
2,003 posts, read 1,637,386 times
Reputation: 2819
I dont think hawaiian were ever happy with being part of the US. its culturaly very different that mainland US.
remember the US picked hawaii just for someplace to put a military base.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2015, 09:40 AM
 
Location: honolulu
1,729 posts, read 1,532,922 times
Reputation: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamies View Post
Better yet let's just relocate all those uppity Hawaiians to that one island, the one the computer guy bought. Then the japaneese and chineese can buy their houses cheap and we can expand Pearl Harbor.
Son, you need to educate yourself.....


Quote:
The Supreme Court also concluded, “The laws of no nation can justly extend beyond its own territories except so far as regards its own citizens. They can have no force to control the sovereignty or rights of any other nation within its own jurisdiction (The Apollon, 22 U.S. 362, 370 (1824).” Adhering to this principle, the U.S. Attorney General’s Office of Legal Counsel was befuddled by Congress’s annexation of the Hawaiian Islands by a joint resolution. In a 1988 legal opinion, the Office of Legal Counsel addressed the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands by joint resolution. Douglas Kmiec, Acting Assistant Attorney General, authored the memorandum for Abraham D. Sofaer, legal advisor to the U.S. State Department. After covering the limitation of Congressional authority and the objections made by members of the Congress, Kmiec concluded,

“Notwithstanding these constitutional objections, Congress approved the joint resolution and President McKinley signed the measure in 1898. Nevertheless, whether this action demonstrates the constitutional power of Congress to acquire territory is certainly questionable. … It is therefore unclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution. Accordingly, it is doubtful that the acquisition of Hawaii can serve as an appropriate precedent for a congressional assertion of sovereignty over an extended territorial sea (Douglas W. Kmiec, Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation To Extend the Territorial Sea, 12 Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel 238, 252 (1988).”

This 1988 opinion clearly undermines the claim of sovereignty over the Hawaiian Islands by the United States. If the Attorney General’s Office of Legal Counsel is “unclear” as to the authority of Congress to annex the Hawaiian Islands, it surely cannot be considered as a valid demonstration of legal title by the United States as the successor to the Hawaiian Kingdom under international law. If the United States is not the successor, then the presumption of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s existence as an independent state is maintained.
Hawai
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2015, 10:29 AM
 
3,843 posts, read 2,209,745 times
Reputation: 3126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawena View Post
I am familiar with what and why Hawaii wants the US out... there is no Treaty of annexation. anyone have anything first hand on Alaska?


?Native peoples' group seeks end to 'US occupation' of Alaska, Hawaii ? RT USA
Let them go...good riddance.

The door is wide open, you can leave. God speed!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2015, 11:12 AM
 
20,524 posts, read 15,865,638 times
Reputation: 5943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tritone View Post
Let them go...good riddance.

The door is wide open, you can leave. God speed!!
To be fair: Hawaii DOES make for a nice military base, if nothing else. Too; IF the US cut it loose, I'm 100 percent sure another country like China would grab it real quick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:35 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top