Note that the Delusional One conspicuously left out: "No more corruption. No more nepotism. No more racism. No more elitist privilege and double standards. Etc., etc., etc."

of course, none of that is going to occur, since everyone will "live pono"

aka "DA KAHUNA GOIN' TAKE CARE US"

No more Bill of Rights, no more Constitution, and no more federal government to right the ship against corruption.  Sounds like a blast.

Yeah, I see all that "pono" in the workings of OHA (it's prolly just the haoles/non-"hawaiians" that are corrupt there...).

Sounds a bit barbaric.  Checkout the Instagram link.

"Any Native Hawaiian supporter of TMT that has posted online can regale you with stories of being called a traitor, not Hawaiian, a fake Hawaiian, or had their very Native Hawaiian identity challenged. In a recent five-hour text conversation I had with one protector, TMT was barely discussed but there was extensive discussion about whether or not I was a real Native Hawaiian. Kalepa Baybayan, one of the original Native Hawaiian Hokulea navigators, was called a traitor in the comments to one recent interview. There are also threats of physical violence, such as kidnapping or having one’s throat slit. This is the language of bullies.

Need more examples? There is an entire Instagram feed dedicated to it."

https://www.westhawaiitoday.com/2019/08/13/opinion/my-turn-threats-effective-at-silencing-pro-tmt-hawaiians/

Note that the Delusional One conspicuously left out: "No more corruption. No more nepotism. No more racism. No more elitist privilege and double standards. Etc., etc., etc."

It would be a blast.  Hawaii had a constitution very similar to the US Constitution during the kingdom and short-lived republic era.

What makes you think it would be no different after occupation?

OHA WAS NOT CREATED BY HAWAIIANS!

It was created by the so-called state of Hawaii and brought with it all of the corruption of that so-called state.

That entity is used to subjugate and control Hawaiians using blood money from US taxpayers.

OHA should be defunded and disbanded.

IMUA!

You know you are describing the current situation in America, don't you?

It would be a blast.  Hawaii had a constitution very similar to the US Constitution during the kingdom and short-lived republic era.

What makes you think it would be no different after occupation?

What is there to think about?

No more direct threat of foreign missile attack, no more Jones Act, no more republican and democratic party nonsense, no more US gun restriction, no more sanctuary cities, etc...

Wow, how much better Hawaii can be!

Every radical/Liberal/Socialist who yells for "CHANGE!!" always believes that change will be effected in ways that conform to their vision and ideologies.

This state is a Democrat stronghold for a reason.  It'll take more than a name change and removal of a flag to alter that mindset.

People like Ige, Caldwell, and Espero are in office for a reason, and it's NOT because they are US loyalists.

Under what authority is that presumption made? There are so many factions that claim sovereignty. How much weight does that assumption carry?

Most of those factions are not basing their position on the authority of US Constitutional (i.e., the basis of the illegal occupation), Hawaiian Kingdom (i.e., how the government will be reestablished after occupation), and International Law (i.e., how will non-nationals living in Hawaii will be treated after deoccupation).  Many of those groups were born during a time when such legal and historical knowledge was not yet fully understood by Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian historical and legal scholars today; and yet they still base their claims on purely moral, religious, or racial foundations.

Times have changed.


On another note, why must you bold all your posts?

I only use bold to differentiate between the original post and my own.  No other meaning than that.

Do you intentionally avoid responding to the obvious point of posts, or are you really that stupid that you can't see the obvious point of the posts?

Never said anything about who created it or what happened with it re certain races blah blah blah. Just answer the question: were/are any of the corrupt OHA members "hawaiian"?

We all know the reason you wont' answer such questions. I'm just posing it rhetorically while you conflate and deflect from the reality you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge.

Funny, I don't remember seeing this sort of thing in the U.S. Constitution:

ARTICLE 3. All men may freely speak, write, and publish their sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right, and no law shall be enacted to restrain the liberty of speech, or of the press, except such laws as may be necessary for the protection of His Majesty the King and the Royal Family.

ARTICLE 4. All men shall have the right, in an orderly and peaceable manner, to assemble, without arms, to consult upon the common good, and to petition the King or Legislative Assembly for redress of grievances.

ARTICLE 5. The privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus belongs to all men, and shall not be suspended, unless by the King, when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety shall require its suspension.

That's from the 1864 constitution of your fabulous Kamehameha V.

I don't see the "right to keep and bear arms" in there anywhere at all. Funny that.

I DO see lots and lots of crap about the special privileges of the king and the royals. I guess I missed those parts of the U.S. Constitution... where are they, exactly?

Oh, you'll no doubt say "Well, that was the kingdom [which you already said above counted since it may be "restored"], but the republic constitution... blah blah blah". Okay, quote me the part of the republic constitution that protects the right to keep and bear arms. Go ahead. I see the "no quartering soldiers in homes" section, but the protection for the right to keep and bear arms seems conspicuously absent. Or are you claiming they'll just honor that even though it's not in any lawful document... out of the pono of their hearts?

Every radical/Liberal/Socialist who yells for "CHANGE!!" always believes that change will be effected in ways that conform to their vision and ideologies.

This state is a Democrat stronghold for a reason.  It'll take more than a name change and removal of a flag to alter that mindset.

People like Ige, Caldwell, and Espero are in office for a reason, and it's NOT because they are US loyalists.

In a deoccupied Hawaii, you need to remember that only nationals will have the right to vote.  Many democratic voting loyalists would not have voting rights, unless they adopt Hawaiian citizenship when that process becomes available.  There are many Hawaiians that may tend to be democratic leaning, but in a new political landscape, nothing is for certain as to political ideologies.

Realistically, the political party that can bring in the most money to the nation will probably be the most dominant in the short-term in a deoccupied Hawaii.

Good luck with that "nothing is for certain as to political ideologies".  There's a reason there has only been 1 Republican elected governor since Hawaii became a state.

Plantation mentality still exists.

The Hawaiian Constitution of 1864 does not specifically mention the right to bear arms as does the US Constitution.  The right to bear arms is in the Bill of Rights, which no such document existed in Hawaii.  However, there is no evidence in the Hawaiian Constitution that forbade the ownership of firearms.