1993 Apology Disclaimer

[harry]

to all:

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?406f85c9-f309-4988-9e2d-259f43ea680f

1993 Hawaiian Apology Resolution 'Disclaimer' Negates Its Legal Power

By Frank Scott Jr., 3/2/2009 10:27:37 AM

The ruling by the Hawaii Supreme Court to prevent the sale of ceded lands by the State of Hawaii pending settlement of any indigenous claims lacks justification. Thus the state's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to counter this decision is crucial.

There are two main actions that the Hawaii Supreme Court either denies or misinterprets. First, the ceded (former Royalty lands) in question were transferred outright to the State of Hawaii at the time of statehood. This would indicate that the State of Hawaii should be able to make decisions on these lands, as is the case with other states as long as there is compliance with Federal mandates.

Secondly, any ruling by the court should be supported by officially recorded historical data rather than opinion. In this case, the indicated decision on ceded lands by the Hawaii Supreme Court is reportedly justified on the basis of the 1993 Apology Resolution, which accuses the U. S. of playing a significant role in the 1893 overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani.

But the Apology Resolution is not a statement of historical fact but simply a document based on the assumption that U. S. Government officials were involved in instigating the 1893 overthrow.

Since there was no organized review of the Apology Resolution either by the U. S. Congress or by the State of Hawaii there is no assurance of its validity. In fact, the 1894 Morgan Report by the U. S. Congress exonerates the U. S. from involvement in the overthrow.


This negates the earlier Blount Report ordered by President Cleveland, which relies primarily on the views of the deposed Queen but provides the input for the concept of U.S. participation in the overthrow.

Regardless of the validity of the Apology Resolution, it contains the following disclaimer, which invalidates its use as a supporting reference document. The statement in the document that "Nothing in this Joint Resolution is intended to serve a settlement of any claims against the United States" should be sufficient to deny its use as a legal finding by the Hawaii Supreme Court.


Frank Scott Jr. is a resident of Kailua, Hawaii

Comment: The most difficult task in dealing with the Drop Breed Hawaiian racists is exposing all their lies.

With Aloha,