Hawaiians continue to be disrespected by former owner of the Honolulu Advertiser. In his latest piece the editor allows him to single out and target Hawaiians based on our race. If he targeted Jewish people the way he does this would NOT be tolerated. Anyway here it is:

ISLANDS' HISTORY

'IOLANI PALACE BELONGS TO ALL OF US IN HAWAI'I

'Iolani Palace belongs to all of us, Dave Shapiro to the contrary (Volcanic Ash, March 14).

It is a key part of the history of Hawai'i. That's why I strongly support taxpayers' money being used to keep it in good shape for the world to admire.

I don't support the Akaka bill, but I do make annual contributions to the palace as do people of many racial backgrounds. As a vital historic site it is a symbol of every step in our governmental history.

Racial division should have no part in how it's used. It played a central role in the days of the monarchy, then the overthrow, the republic, annexation and statehood. It's the only structure that ties our multi-racial history together. No part of the community was excluded from the palace in any of those time periods.

'Iolani Palace, Hawai'i's museum — a perfect place for marking Hawai'i's history.

Thurston Twigg-Smith
Honolulu

From http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070319/OPINION02/703190313/1104

The truth is that the palace "belongs" to the people of the "Nation of Hawai'i" which is not the same as the "State of Hawai'i."

See... it doesn't take more than two sentences to mention the truth yet what does he do?

He lies about Hawaiians who are Hawaiian by ethnicity and/or by nationality as citizens of the Nation of Hawaii

which is a sign of racism.

Anyway this should not be tolerated. Sadly the Honolulu Advertiser allows him and a few others to single out and target Hawaiians based on our national origin. Again... this would NOT be tolerated if they wrote about Jewish people based on their national origin like how they write about us. In fact his ass would be GRASS! I tell that to the editors too yet what do they do? Censor me! Sadly since we are Hawaiian they allow him and a few others to write their racism against Hawaiians for all to read and do not do a damn thing about it!

Courtesy of the Honolulu Advertiser which sometimes uses their paper as a tool to spread racism and/or misinformation about Hawaiians but they do some good.

For example this picture of a celebration of King Kalakaua's birthday on Nov. 18, 1885:




Also there are only about 401,062 Hawaiians left in this world. Wow! So few of us left....

Reporter Gordon Pang printed this stupid shit of a "poll" which they are trying to pass off as a scientific study. Read it here:

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060704/NEWS01/607040355


This is my response to him:

"Hi Gordon.

What is up with the posting of polls trying to be passed off as scientific studies here:

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060704/NEWS01/607040355

Come on. A sample of 602 Hawaii residents out of a possible 1,211,537 or so residents is not a reliable sample size.

In addition there is NO disclaimer that it is not a scientific study. Your poll being passed off as a study would not pass peer review. Why not stick to reporting instead of trying to promote the Honolulu Advertiser's vested interest in continuing to profit in the islands and since an independent Hawaiian Kingdom poses a threat to the Honolulu Advertiser they print that kind of crappy polls which does a disservice not only to Hawaiians but to ALL of your readers?

I expect better from the Honolulu Advertiser. Like you know... FAIR and BALANCED reporting.

Aloha,
The Hawaiian Girl with a Haole Name

Their stupidity and racism against Hawaiians are annoying the hell out of me. Therefore I bitch TO them then write it on the Internet so that people know how nasty they are. Seriously. This stupid shit poll would NOT pass peer review yet they try to sell it to us. I am not interested in what they are trying to sell us. Period!

It has a lot to do with the fact that I graduated from the University of Washington which is a first tier public school known for its research. What did they teach us? To have a critical eye when it comes to research and reporting. The Honolulu Advertiser is shitty when it comes to both but I still expect them to have fair and balanced reporting as well as print some accurate stuff especially when it comes to research. None of this stupid bullshit research stuff with no disclaimer.

Thanks to "Ronni" for posting this as I haven't had time to read the local news today. In it U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will rehear the case involving a non-Hawaiian student seeking to enroll at Kamehameha Schools. This means that the will of the Hawaiian children will be heard. I use "will" with double meaning:

1. Due to Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop and Princess Ruth Keelikolani... my alma mater the Kamehameha Schools has been in existence prior to statehood. It began with the Kamehameha School for Boys in 1887: http://www.ksbe.edu/about/facts.php

For those who don't know... Hawaii became a state in 1959 so the Kamehameha Schools existed PRIOR to statehood and is an entity that was created within the Kingdom of Hawaii. Hawaii is both a state in the United States as well as a nation in which Hawaiians (by nationality not just be ethnicity) are citizens.

In any case in Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop's will she directed trustees of her estate to basically ensure the survival of Hawaiian children. Anyway this is a PRIVATE school for Hawaiian children similar to schools that they have for native american children.

2. The will of the Hawaiian children is to survive. Each of us (whether we are Hawaiian or not) has the right to self-preservation. This is also one of the foundations of our great great country, the United States.


Anyway here is the news which I consider to be good news for all children not just for Hawaiian children because it shows how ALL children WILL be protected in our country (the United States.) In this case... Hawaiian children are being protected TOO which is pretty cool! Here is the breaking news courtesy of "Ronni:"

"Court to rehear Kamehameha admissions case

By Ken Kobayashi and Gordon Y.K. Pang
Advertiser Staff Writers

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will rehear the case involving a non-Hawaiian student seeking to enroll at Kamehameha Schools.
The ruling today is a blow to the hopes of the unnamed non-Hawaiian student seeking to gain entrance to the school whose policy is aimed at admitting only students with Hawaiian blood.

The decision essentially sets aside for now a 2-1 decision by a three-member panel of the court that ruled in favor of the non-Hawaiian student on Aug. 2. The majority opinion in that panel's ruling declared that the school admission policy violated federal civil rights law.

Lawyers for the student had argued the admission policy violates federal laws, while school supporters said the policy is necessary to address social, educational and economic disadvantages faced by Native Hawaiians.

In a brief order, the appeals court said the decision to rehear the case was based on a vote by a majority of the active 9th Circuit judges who did not disqualify themselves from the case.

The non-Hawaiian student, who has not been identified, is currently a senior attending another school. He wanted to enroll at Kamehameha before he graduates this year.

Because Kamehameha Schools challenged the ruling and asked for a rehearing, the enforcement of the 2-1 decision was stayed and the student was not permitted to enroll at Kamehameha.

By granting the rehearing request, a panel of 15 appeals judges will be rehearing the case, according to Kamehameha spokesman Kekoa Paulsen.

Today's order said the 2-1 decision cannot be cited as precedent pending the ruling by the larger panel.

It was not immediately clear when the larger panel will rehear the case or when it will issue a decision.

Kamehameha officials were pleased with the development.

Robert Kihune, chairman of the Kamehameha Board of Trustees, said the decision "signals that the appeals court agrees that this lawsuit raises unique issues of exceptional importance to Native Hawaiians."

Kihune added: "We are hopeful that when the case is reheard the court will reverse the panel decision and allow Kamehameha to continue to direct our resources to those children who are in need of our programs and are the intended beneficiaries of this trust."

Kamehameha chief executive officer Dee Jay Mailer said the preference policy is critical to fulfilling the school's educational mission as spelled out by its founder, Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, as it endeavors to extend its reach further into Hawaiian communities.

"Pauahi felt a kuleana (responsibility) to provide educational opportunities for the Hawaiian people," Mailer said. "She entrusted that kuleana to the leadership of Kamehameha Schools. We will not let her down."


Seen at http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/Feb/22/br/br01p.html"

Me... stating more of the obvious:

1. The United States is great too in that we can express ourselves. We can rant... and/or rave. In some other countries... we would get our head blown off! So I have ALOT of respect for those who have served/serve/plan to serve in the military because if wasn't for them... we wouldn't be able to rant, rave, bitch, and/or moan.

2. Yes... Hawaiian children... you DO matter. Hawaii pono i!

In today's paper a Hawaii delegate for the American Bar Association wrote some serious bullsh*t. We all know how much money members of the bar will be receiving on both sides of the Akaka Bill issue. Come on... no need to Bullsh*t us. It's all about the money to them. We Hawaiians are money to them. Anyway here is his letter that sent my Bullsh*t Detector off:

ABA BODY OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED THE AKAKA BILL

During its mid-year meetings in Chicago on Feb. 13, the policy-making body of the American Bar Association voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution to urge Congress to pass legislation to establish a process to provide federal recognition for a Native Hawaiian governing entity. Such legislation, S. 147, proposed by Sen. Daniel Akaka, is currently pending in Congress.

The Native Hawaiian resolution passed by a nearly unanimous vote among the 550 delegates representing 400,000 ABA members. The ABA is composed of lawyers from all practice areas and all political persuasions. This enthusiastic vote should serve to jumpstart passage of Sen. Akaka's legislation.

The ABA's mission is to be the national representative of the legal profession, serving the public and the profession by promoting justice, professional excellence and respect for the law.

By passing the resolution, the delegates said yes to the establishment by Congress of a process that would provide Native Hawaiians the same status afforded to America's other indigenous groups, American Indians and Native Alaskans.

The blessing by this country's largest and most prestigious legal organization would appear to put to rest the primary legal arguments advanced by this bill's opponents.

In 1993, Congress adopted the Apology Resolution. which acknowledged that the U.S.-sponsored overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom was illegal, and issued an apology to the Native Hawaiian people. Now Congress has the opportunity to provide meat to its previous resolution.

The ABA's passage of this resolution could not be more timely. There are over 165 federal laws that bring millions of dollars worth of federal programs to assist Native Hawaiians. Yet those programs are under attack in the courts. The Akaka bill would protect these programs.

The American Bar Association's support for Hawai'i's indigenous people sends a strong message that a process for Native Hawaiian recognition follows the rule of law and provides great impetus for Congress to take immediate action to pass the Akaka bill.

Alan Van Etten
Hawai'i state delegate, American Bar Association


From http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060221/OPINION02/602210323/1104

I do not want nor need the Akaka Bill. As expected members of the bar are not listening to Hawaiians. They didn't listen then nor are they listening now. They are full of sh*t. Tell me like it is. If you wanna make money off of us... just say so but I have a very low tolerance for Bullsh*t.

Say it like it is. Don't deceive and don't try to deceive. Seriously. The worse part is that they insult our intelligence as though we don't know it's all about the money *wink wink* because we do. We not stupid.

<br.

The Honolulu Advertiser annoys me once again with their editorial license to make Hawaiians look like money grubbing leeches. What they do not explain is that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs is state law Hawaii Revised State Chapter 10. Here is an excerpt of this state law:

"[§10-1] Declaration of purpose. (a) The people of the State of Hawaii and the United States of America as set forth and approved in the Admission Act, established a public trust which includes among other responsibilities, betterment of conditions for native Hawaiians. The people of the State of Hawaii reaffirmed their solemn trust obligation and responsibility to native Hawaiians and furthermore declared in the state constitution that there be an office of Hawaiian affairs to address the needs of the aboriginal class of people of Hawaii.

(b) It shall be the duty and responsibility of all state departments and instrumentalities of state government providing services and programs which affect native Hawaiians and Hawaiians to actively work toward the goals of this chapter and to cooperate with and assist wherever possible the office of Hawaiian affairs. [L 1979, c 196, pt of §2]


and



§10-3 Purpose of the office. The purposes of the office of Hawaiian affairs include:

(1) The betterment of conditions of native Hawaiians. A pro rata portion of all funds derived from the public land trust shall be funded in an amount to be determined by the legislature for this purpose, and shall be held and used solely as a public trust for the betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians. For the purpose of this chapter, the public land trust shall be all proceeds and income from the sale, lease, or other disposition of lands ceded to the United States by the Republic of Hawaii under the joint resolution of annexation, approved July 7, 1898 (30 Stat. 750), or acquired in exchange for lands so ceded, and conveyed to the State of Hawaii by virtue of section 5(b) of the Act of March 18, 1959 (73 Stat. 4, the Admissions Act), (excluding therefrom lands and all proceeds and income from the sale, lease, or disposition of lands defined as "available lands" by section 203 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended), and all proceeds and income from the sale, lease, or other disposition of lands retained by the United States under sections 5(c) and 5(d) of the Act of March 18, 1959, later conveyed to the State under section 5(e);

(2) The betterment of conditions of Hawaiians;

(3) Serving as the principal public agency in this State responsible for the performance, development, and coordination of programs and activities relating to native Hawaiians and Hawaiians; except that the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended, shall be administered by the Hawaiian homes commission;

(4) Assessing the policies and practices of other agencies impacting on native Hawaiians and Hawaiians, and conducting advocacy efforts for native Hawaiians and Hawaiians;

(5) Applying for, receiving, and disbursing, grants and donations from all sources for native Hawaiian and Hawaiian programs and services; and

(6) Serving as a receptacle for reparations. [L 1979, c 196, pt of §2; am L 1990, c 304, §§4, 16]


Seen at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol01_Ch0001-0042F/HRS0010/HRS_0010-.HTM

Unfortunately the state of Hawaii holds ceded lands (about 1.4 million acres of former crown and government lands — once part of the Hawaiian kingdom) in trust for the Hawaiian people. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs is due a share of the revenues derived from those lands under the Hawai'i Constitution. Of course AS USUAL the editors of the local papers use words that imply that Hawaiians are money hungry leeches when this is LAW.


That is why I have a problem with H. William Burgess as well. He is an attorney who took on oath to uphold the laws of the land. THIS is the law.


In any case... they should have labelled this article "State MUST PAY OHA AS MANDATED BY LAW $15 million a year." Instead they labelled it, "State OFFERS OHA $15 million a year." See the difference? And I KNOW that it's not Gordon Pang who did that and I will be writing to the editors to bitch about it. Anyway here is the article:

State offers OHA $15 million a year


By Gordon Y.K. Pang
Advertiser Staff Writer






The state would allocate $15 million a year to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and pay a one-time sum of $17.5 million, under a partial settlement of the issue of revenues from ceded lands.

The agreement between OHA and the Lingle administration was announced yesterday. It still must be approved by the OHA board of trustees, which is expected to vote on it Thursday, and the Legislature.

Ceded lands are 1.4 million acres of former crown and government lands — once part of the Hawaiian kingdom — held in trust by the state. OHA is due a share of the revenues derived from those lands under the Hawai'i Constitution.

OHA, in recent years, has been receiving about $10 million annually as its pro rata share of revenues derived from the public land trust. That amount would be increased to $15.1 million under the proposed partial settlement. Also, the agency would receive $17.5 million as back payment for the period from July 1, 2001, to June 30, 2005, reflecting additional receipts from the use of the lands.

Clyde Namu'o, OHA administrator, said the state currently collects about $50 million annually from the revenues derived from ceded lands, including harbor fees, leases from a portion of the land under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation, parking revenues from 'Iolani Palace and other ceded lands, and leases from a portion of land in Kaka'ako under the jurisdiction of the Hawai'i Community Development Authority.

The settlement does not include additional state revenues that OHA believes it is entitled to. A decision in a lawsuit over that revenue dispute is pending before the Hawai'i State Supreme Court. These so-called "disputed revenues" include payment for use of a portion of the land under Hilo Hospital and University of Hawai'i at Manoa, airport landing fees, concession fees, and the state's share of revenues from DFS Hawai'i, the state's duty-free store contractor.

The state and OHA are continuing discussions on the disputed revenues. And the Supreme Court has agreed to reconsider its decision last year to dismiss OHA's legal claim to the disputed revenues.

OHA has never received any revenues from the sources under dispute. The amount at stake ranges from $150 million to hundreds of millions of dollars, according to estimates by state and OHA lawyers.

The proposed partial settlement was reached following more than a year of discussions between OHA and administration officials.

PAYMENTS HALTED

All payments to OHA were stopped by former Gov. Ben Cayetano in 2001 but Gov. Linda Lingle resumed those payments in 2003, shortly after she entered office. Cayetano halted payments after a Hawai'i Supreme Court decision that threw out the formula used to calculate how much OHA should receive. Before that ruling, OHA received about 20 percent of revenues from "undisputed" ceded lands.

OHA returned to court in 2003 in another bid to collect money in connection with the disputed revenues.

OHA Chairwoman Haunani Apoliona, in a press release, said she was pleased with the proposed partial settlement and commended Lingle for her work.

"With the work of the OHA negotiating team and concurrence of the OHA board of trustees, we acknowledge that this is only the first phase of work to be completed relating to the ceded land revenues," Apoliona wrote.

Lingle, in the same release, praised OHA officials and said the agreement is "the right and fair thing to do."

BROAD SUPPORT

Leaders in both houses of the Legislature indicated they see support for the agreement.

"The Legislature needs to take this proposal very seriously because we have a constitutional obligation to make these payments," said Rep. Scott Saiki, D-22nd (McCully, Pawa'a), chairman of the House Hawaiian Affairs Committee.

"I would hope there will be an attempt in this legislative session to address the disputed amounts and attempt to find a resolution to that issue."

Senate Majority Leader Colleen Hanabusa, D-21st (Nanakuli, Makaha), said, "I don't see why it wouldn't go through." Hanabusa, who also serves as chairwoman of the Senate Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee, added, "This is something that we've tried to resolve in one way or another."

State Rep. Ezra Kanoho, D-15th (Lihu'e, Koloa), the chairman of the House Water, Land Use and Ocean Resources Committee, said he too was pleased.

"This is something that won't go away. This is an obligation," Kanoho said.

Seen at http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060127/NEWS23/601270351

And yes... I did write to the editors to ask them for more responsible, fair, and balanced journalism.

One of my friends showed this to me:


Person A: "I especially enjoyed how the editorial says how Hawaiians are kinda supposed to act. This is just a low blow because Hui Malama openly said that they didn't want to talk to Starbulletin because Star misled its readers before. This is just a little payback."





Person B: "So, how does one combat misleading coverage (This is a sincere question, surely there must be some way)?"



Person B asks a very important question because the Honolulu Starbulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser are somewhat biased in their news coverage. In this case they portrayed Eddie Ayau of Hui Malama as a criminal when he is not a criminal. That is one reason why I maintain this blog because I was getting sick and tired of reading what other people besides Hawaiians think about Hawaiians; reading people bash Hawaiians while they discuss our history; and because I was getting sick and tired of Hawaiians not being heard. So far my Livejournal pops up for many Hawaiian issues so I have had to be more careful with my words and not joke as much as I am used to. I have learned that I should not laugh because some people take my laughter to be an evil laughter *L*

Anyway the strange thing is that another Hawaiian accused me of being hewa since I created and maintain all of the websites that I do. Perhaps Person B's words are a sign from his kupuna that maybe just maybe websites created by Hawaiians do SOME good and/or combat some of the hewa-ness in the world that we live in and/or combat the way(s) that Hawaiians are inaccurately portrayed by non-Hawaiians.


Websites can protect the iwi. What a concept. Unfortunately some people mistakenly think that only weapons and/or people can protect the iwi but websites can too. The source is irrelevant. So is the location. In other words... protecting the iwi occurs and/or can occur online or offline.



Then again I cannot help but think how Adolf Hitler used the microphone as a tool to spread his word and to "protect" and "preserve" the German people. I state that VERY loosely but my focus is on his use of the microphone as a tool. We have tools too. The question is... will we use them? Will we prevent others from using them? Will we criticize those who use different tools than the one(s) that we would choose? More importantly... will we analyze and re-analyze which will result in Analysis Paralysis OR will we DO something about it?



Also Kamehameha did not follow protocol. I don't expect other Hawaiians too either. I even expect us to fight with each other... simply because the past is prologue. Kamehameha fought with other Hawaiians. Again... this is a part of who we are. Well it annoys me that this is being overlooked. Instead there are some people saying that we like to fight with each other. That's ALL they focus on when they forget to mention that Kamehameha fought with other Hawaiians but something amazing happened afterwards. He united the Hawaiian Islands.

Lie:

noun.

A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.




Today former owner of the Honolulu Advertiser, Thurston Twigg-Smith, who sold the Honolulu Advertiser in 1992 to the Gannett Corporation, the largest newspaper chain in the United States, for $250 million wrote some lies in a letter to the editor in the very newspaper that he used to own inccurately asserting that the United States didn't overthrow the Hawaiian monarchy. (The truth: Representatives of the U.S DID.) Here is his letter:


APOLOGY ERRED: UNITED STATES DIDN'T OVERTHROW MONARCHY

Rolf Nordahl in his Oct. 20 letter demonstrates a major problem in the Akaka bill debate: He apparently believes the apology law is an accurate record of Hawaiian history. Many others are in the same boat. But as Sen. Inouye, its sponsor, emphatically made clear during the brief debate on the measure (on which no congressional public hearings had been held so there was no way to correct the language of the resolution), the apology law is "a simple resolution of apology, nothing more."

Its first sentence, which Nordahl quotes, states that one of its purposes was "to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i," implying the U.S. conducted it. Any student of Hawaiian history knows the revolution was instigated and carried out by a group of subjects of the kingdom, not the United States.

President Cleveland made that clear in denouncing the revolution and ordering the revolutionists to return the kingdom to Queen Lili'uokalani. If it had been U.S. policy to take over Hawai'i, would he have done that? No way.

The U.S. Supreme Court further made that clear in its 7-2 ruling in favor of Rice over Cayetano, by finding the whereas clauses contained other errors of fact that the state could not rely on in its arguments.

Thirty years of revisionist history under the supervision of the UH Center for Hawaiian Studies have clouded the situation for young students in Hawai'i, but they ought at least to be clear on one thing: As Bob Gould correctly said in his Oct. 14 letter, "The U.S. did not overthrow the monarchy."

Thurston Twigg-Smith
Honolulu


Seen at http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051103/OPINION02/511030333/1108/LETTERS



The Truth:


1. He states, "Any student of Hawaiian history knows the revolution was instigated and carried out by a group of subjects of the kingdom, not the United States."


The Truth:

On January 16, 1893 a Citizens “Committee of Safety” composed of white American businessmen was organized.

On January 17, 1893 a provisional government began.

On February 1, 1893 a provisional protectorate proclaimed. U.S. flag raised on government buildings. Treaty of annexation written and signed by President Benjamin Harris. The new President, Grover Cleveland, had the treaty withdrawn and sent James Blount, investigator, to inquire into the circumstances of the revolution.

On December 18, 1893 Blount’s report to Cleveland is submitted to throne. Failed.

On July 4, 1894 The Republic was established. Sanford B. Dole was its first President.

On January 6, 1895 there was a counter-revolution to restore Queen Lili‘uokalani to her throne. Failed.

On January 16, 1895 Queen Liliuokalani was illegally arrested and imprisoned in Iolani Palace.

On January 24, 1895 Queen Liliuokalani signed statement of abdication (abdicating her throne) while soldiers WITH GUNS are outside of her room.

On February 8, 1895 The Queen was tried and convicted of treason. While sentenced to confinement in her room in ‘Iolani Palace, she composed “The Queen’s Prayer.”


In Fall 1896 Queen Lili‘uokalani was freed by the Government of the Republic.

Between 1897 and 1898, Hawaiians signed the Ku E Anti-Annexation/Anti-Statehood Petition: http://libweb.hawaii.edu/digicoll/annexation/petition.html
My great grandmother Rachel Lokinihama Among is listed on the first page, number 24: http://libweb.hawaii.edu/digicoll/annexation/petition/pet007.html

On July 8, 1898 American annexation secured.

On August 12, 1898 A U.S. flag was raised in Honolulu. Hawaiian flag lowered. Queen Lili‘uokalani remains secluded at Washington Place.


On August 21, 1959 Hawaii became the 50th State of the United States of America.



On November 23, 1993 then President Clinton signed UNITED STATES PUBLIC LAW 103-150, 103d Congress Joint Resolution 19, which explicitly states, "To acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the January 17, 1893 overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii."





2. He states, "Thirty years of revisionist history under the supervision of the UH Center for Hawaiian Studies have clouded the situation for young students in Hawai'i, but they ought at least to be clear on one thing: As Bob Gould correctly said in his Oct. 14 letter, "The U.S. did not overthrow the monarchy."


His assertion is inaccurate. His own grandfather took part in the illegal overthrow with the assistance of the US Marines.



Thurston Twigg-Smith describes himself on his personal racist website against Hawaiians here:


"His mother was the daughter of Lorrin A. Thurston." Seen here: http://www.hawaiimatters.com/bio.html


Thurston Twigg-Smith's grandfather, Lorrin Andrews Thurston, was an attorney and the former owner of the Honolulu Advertiser (he bought it in 1898 when it was known as the Pacific Commercial Advertiser). He was the son of missionaries in Hawaii. Favoring U.S. annexation of Hawaii, he was one of the leaders of the revolution (1893) that overthrew Queen Liliuokalani. He helped draft the constitution of the Hawaiian Republic, and after annexation retired to private life. As principal owner and editor of the Honolulu Advertiser, he was a promoter of the tourist and pineapple industries. Thus he profited off of the plight of Hawaiians.



That is, his own grandfather aided and abetted in the ILLEGAL overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy so I can understand why he's trying to deflect attention away from himself and/or away from the crime committed by his grandfather which is pending litigation and am confident that one day the U.S. court will rule that a portion of Thurston Twigg-Smith be awarded to Hawaiians as part of reparations. That doesn't include the properties that he owns in Hawaii of course but legally there is much to be decided and some Hawaiians are slowly but surely working their way there. Anyway his grandfather took part in this illegal overthrow so I can understand why he tries hard to rewrite our history because if he doesn't then the court(s) may take some of his billions of dollars away. That is probably why he spreads lies about our history.


However it will not work. People are not as dumb as this multimillionaire makes us out to be.




3. His inaccurate assertion that the U.S. did not overthrow the Kingdom of Hawaii can be easily disproved with a picture of U.S. Marines troops who arrived on the USS Boston to help Sanford B. Dole and Lorrin Andrews Thurston's Committee of Safety, a 13-member council of businessmen plotting to depose Queen Lili‘uokalani. At the gunpoint of American soldiers, Queen Liliuokalani was removed from Iolani Palace under arrest, tried by the American Judge Advocate General's Corps and then imprisoned in her own home.


This of course is similar to what the U.S. is doing to Iraq trying to overtake their government which they have done so already as a constitution was drafted there. Invading their country with the help of U.S. Marines.


A picture is worth a thousand words:







4. Also his budget is about 250 MILLION dollars which he earned after he sold the Honolulu Advertiser to the Gannett Corporation in 1992. Mine is $125. He is also the owner of the Persis Corporation which is in addition to the $250 million that he earned when he sold the Honolulu Advertiser to the Gannett Corporation. Note that his two main team members, Easton Manson and William Crowley, are graduates of Punahou School which is a school for descendant of missionaries. That is... for HAOLE people: http://www.persiscorp.com/_aboutPersis/index.html Note his philanthropy does not include children of Hawaiian descent: http://www.persiscorp.com/_Philanthropy/index.html More importantly, I DO NOT APPRECIATE HIS LIES. Since I'm Haole too I also do NOT appreciate how uncompassionate he is to those Hawaiians who are less fortunate as he is considering that Hawaiians continue to comprise approximately 38.7% of the homeless population in Hawai'i which outnumber other ethnic groups:


see page 24 at http://www.hcdch.state.hi.us/03homelessstudy.pdf


He even asks, "Do the facts matter?" on his website, http://www.hawaiimatters.com. Yes... the facts DO matter. Therefore STOP LYING ABOUT HAWAIIAN HISTORY. I will not tolerate his lies nor his racism against Hawaiians nor his attempts to rewrite Hawaiian History. Period.