Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 17, Number 2, 1 February 2000 — Burgess harangue [ARTICLE]

Burgess harangue

Opinions ean be divisive as in the sovereignty story in the Jan 23 Advertiser. For an anti-Hawaiian and racial approach we only need look at the Wilham Burgess harangue against the native people of Hawai'i and their claims. What does this harangue benefit? The entire community has been and is coexisting amicably. Further, there is scant room for argument when United States President, Grover Cleveland rendered his December 1893 report to the Congress on the wrongful nature of the U.S. involvement in the overthrow with the landing of armed troops. And in 1893 the U.S. House of Representatives also condemned the U.S. involvement and invasion of Hawai'i, citing in the McCreary Resolution the contravention of U.S. principles of justice and fairness. One hundred years later, the U.S. Congress, on behalf of 270 million U.S. citizens, apologized for the armed invasion and President Clinton signed the apology as Public Law 103-150. Burgess' opinion measured against the majority seeking reconciliation is unnecessary. The press has given too mueh coverage to his harangue. Whom does he represent? The silent and invisible supporters of the painful status quo of the past 100 years or just himself? Louis Agard Honolulu

* n ■-*' ' §y»r"