Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 6, Number 6, 1 June 1989 — Our Readers Write. [ARTICLE]

Our Readers Write.

Dear Editor: We publicly protest that while you allowed Trustee Clarence Ching a whole page to express his many serious misrepresentations in your March issue "Trustee's Views," eolumn, "On Sovereignty," we are limited to 200 words to respond. Mr. Ching charges us with having "an agenda of our own" calling "for 'sovereignty' first so that we will be in line for the expected 'reparations.'" Our eall for official recognition of Hawaiian sovereignty first is to prevent, not promote, payment of reparations at this time; for such action should be taken as a quick settlement and end our sovereign native rights for ourselves and succeeding generations. Mr. Ching proposes that OHA became "the sovereign governmental entity" of the Hawaiian people. We do not believe that the majority of informed Hawaiians, or even of the OHA trustees, want that. OHA is a state agency and needs to fulfill its mandated responsibilities to the Hawaiian people at the state level, not at the nation-to-

nations level. The Hawaiian people, not OHA, should decide, through appropriate public discussion, the structure of our self-government for control of our lands, our lives and our future, before any more secret OHA negotiations. Copies of our full response to Mr. Ching's misstatements are being sent to key community and government leaders. Readers desiring copies may eall me at 595-6691 or write me, ke 'olu'olu. Sincerely, Kekuni Blaisdell, M.D. For Pro-Hawaiian Sovereignty Working Group P.O. Box 27-478 Honolulu, HI 96827 Editor's Note: The space limitation on letters to the editor is a long-standing and well publicized policy o/Ka Wai Ola O OHA. It is similar to that established by most newspapers, including Honolulu's two dailies. The poliep of restricting letters to 200 words provides for the accommodation of a diverse sampling of reader opinion along with the publication of a variety of other news and features. The nine trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs are the elected representatiues of the Hawaiian people. Their published columns in Ka Wai Ola O OHA areafunction oftheir accountabilify to OHA beneficiaries. Opinions expressed are those of the individual trustees and do not necessarily represent the official position of the OHA Board of Trustees. Editor: OHA Trustee Clarence Ching's reaction ("Trustees' Views," March 1989 Ka Wai Ola O OHA) is ludicrous to the Pro-Hawaiian Sovereignty Working Group's (PHSWG) suggestion that OHA, as a state agency, (should) focus on performing its limited role as a vehicle for programs for this state's first citizens and not superficially attempt to be everything to everybody. Ching's position underscores a fundamental weakness with OHA's reparation "bid" and restitution package, whieh (if) left on its present course will mean extinguishment (of) present and future generations' birthrights, and traditional and natural entitlements. Suffice (it) to say that with his false historical assumptions, another role for OHA by the Feds and State is ultimately of being an apologist. To allow the fictitious history being bandied about by some OHA staff and trustees to go unchallenged will allow a state group such as

OHA to forgive the U.S. government in its unsavory and illegal role in dethroning Queen Liliu'okalani in 1893. Keep in mind that the U.S. perpetrated eoup d' etat of 1893 violated numerous treaties binding both the U.S. and Lahui Hawai'i the Hawaiian Nation. National and international rules were broken and the human, civil and traditional rights of He Hawai'i Makou, descendents of Hawaii's indigenous people were abridged. Before letting the U.S. government off the legal hook, knowingly or not, convene an unbiased international tribunal whieh will investigate the facts leading up to 1893, the role of the bogus provisional government and the monumental damage caused to this land's first people by the invading U.S. government. Kawaipuna Prejean Honolulu, Hawaii Dear Editor: 1 am writing in reference to the article in the Malaki edition of Ka Wai Ola O OHA "Trustees' Views" by Moanikeala Akaka. I fully understand the opinions expressed are truly hers and hers alone. My disgust is with her reporting on the Llanes incident at Miloli'i. Did you, Moani, question the poliee to get their side of the story? This I doubt very mueh, for you made a big thing about drawn guns. Also, you played up the items taken as eheap things, even quoting the price of one item. You gave me the impression that if it's eheap, go right ahead and steal it. Then, Moani, what broke this part-Hawaiian's back was your shameful slander of our Hawaiians and haoles. Do you know that all the property on Alii Drive was onee owned by Hawaiians and then sold to haoles? Do you understand the money that is paid by the "rich haoles who lounge in the fancy condos Bishop Estate owns" goes to support our Hawaiian kids at Kamehameha Schools? If you do, then stop showing your ignorance and racial discrimination. Your remarks on this have a terrible stench of the racial issue. I am ashamed to have you as a representative on the Board, more so, representing the island of Hawai'i. I was born and raised on this island and I believe more than you ean say. 1 have voted in OHA eleetions from Day One and will eonhnue to do so. My Hawaiian father, whom I was proud of, often told us — as we were growing up — to be humble and respect everyone regardless of color. This we have done and will eonhnue to do so. With God's help, some of this will rub off on you. If this is how you express your "mana'o", may the good Lord forgive. Dan Johnson Kailua-Kona