An ally of Ken Conklin, Anti-Hawaiian Thurston Twigg-Smith

Thurston Twigg-Smith is a descendant of the leader of the 1893 illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, Lorrin A. Thurston. He is also the former owner of The Honolulu Advertiser and these days the Honolulu Advertiser has allowed his statements to be printed which specifically target Hawaiians. By the way it's a hate crime to target a specific group of people and that's exactly what Thurston Twigg-Smith is doing:




Lili'uokalani wasn't thinking of her people

Vicki Viotti's article on Jan. 17 quoted Mel Kalahiki as relating Queen Lili'uokalani's actions to those of Martin Luther King Jr.: " ... they both labored peacefully for the rights of their people."

There are apparently no bounds to rewriting history.

Even Queen Lil would have been embarrassed to have someone claim that she was working for the rights of her people as she went to the Supreme Court; for example, to gain personal title to the ceded lands or when she was proposing a new constitution that would have taken the vote for members of the upper house away from her people. She wanted the right to appoint that body.

Under Hawaiian monarchs, the good people of Hawai'i had few rights and little say in self-determination.

And by the way, the man who gave the queen her motto (mentioned by Kalahiki), "Onipa'a" ("steadfast"), was John Kaulukou, her longtime friend and publicly elected speaker of the House during the days of the republic. He was an outspoken advocate for annexation: " ... the best thing that could happen for Hawai'i, both for the native and foreign population ... I rejoice heartily that it has come," he said, not too long before the Hawaiian-dominated Legislature voted unanimously for statehood.

Thurston Twigg-Smith
Honolulu




Seen at http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/current/op/letters


He is an ally of Ken Conklin.

The Epitome of Evil: Kenneth R. Conklin of Kaneohe, Hawai'i

In April 2004, Ken Conklin of Kaneohe, Hawai'i wrote an editorial in the Honolulu Advertiser which the editor allowed to print. In it, he pays homage to a man who was partly responsible for the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i. In it, he pays homage to a man who aided and abetted crimes against the Hawaiian people. He is the epitome of Evil:



Honoring Dole on his 160th birthday


By Ken Conklin

Sanford B. Dole was native-born at Punahou School, April 23, 1844. He spent 11 of his most formative years (ages 11 to 22) growing up Hawaiian-style, at Koloa, Kaua'i.

After attending Williams College in Massachusetts, he became a lawyer and included plantation laborers among his pro bono clients. He adopted a native girl (perhaps his biological child), whose descendants are Hawaiian community leaders today. His ties to Koloa remained strong, and he was elected to the kingdom Legislature, 1884-86, from Koloa. In 1887, he led the protest group that forced King Kalakaua to sign a new constitution. Later Kalakaua appointed him to the kingdom's Supreme Court.

In 1893, he resigned his judgeship before the revolution, and then led the provisional government afterward. U.S. President Grover Cleveland "ordered" him to undo the revolution and reinstate the queen. Hawai'i President Dole wrote a lengthy letter of refusal, confirming that Hawai'i desired annexation but was not a puppet regime.

Dole then helped create the Republic of Hawai'i and was its only president through four more years as an independent nation, recognized by all the nations who had previously recognized the kingdom.

When U.S. President William McKinley came into office, President Dole led the negotiations for annexation. Dole drove a hard bargain. The United States paid off the accumulated national debt of the kingdom and republic (paying more than the market value of the ceded lands at that time). Dole also required the United States to hold the ceded lands not as U.S. property but as a public trust for the benefit of all the residents of Hawai'i.

In 1900, he became Hawai'i's first territorial governor. In 1903 he was appointed judge of the U.S. District Court (Honolulu). Following many years of charitable works, he died in 1926.

Sanford B. Dole was Hawai'i's longest-ruling chief executive at 'Iolani Palace (1893 to 1903), where his firm hand guided Hawai'i through a decade of extraordinarily turbulent times. His spirit remains there, and his statue belongs there. He was the last head of an independent nation of Hawai'i. Happy birthday, Mr. President!



Seen at http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/Apr/22/op/op05a.html/?print=on

Picture of Ken Conklin of Kaneohe, Hawai'i

In a editorial column which the editor of the Honolulu Advertiser allowed to have printed, he pays homage to Dole who was partly responsible for an illegal act committed against the Kingdom of Hawai'i. Ken Conklin is an evil man!



Honoring Dole on his 160th birthday

By Ken Conklin

Sanford B. Dole was native-born at Punahou School, April 23, 1844. He spent 11 of his most formative years (ages 11 to 22) growing up Hawaiian-style, at Koloa, Kaua'i.

After attending Williams College in Massachusetts, he became a lawyer and included plantation laborers among his pro bono clients. He adopted a native girl (perhaps his biological child), whose descendants are Hawaiian community leaders today. His ties to Koloa remained strong, and he was elected to the kingdom Legislature, 1884-86, from Koloa. In 1887, he led the protest group that forced King Kalakaua to sign a new constitution. Later Kalakaua appointed him to the kingdom's Supreme Court.

In 1893, he resigned his judgeship before the revolution, and then led the provisional government afterward. U.S. President Grover Cleveland "ordered" him to undo the revolution and reinstate the queen. Hawai'i President Dole wrote a lengthy letter of refusal, confirming that Hawai'i desired annexation but was not a puppet regime.

Dole then helped create the Republic of Hawai'i and was its only president through four more years as an independent nation, recognized by all the nations who had previously recognized the kingdom.

When U.S. President William McKinley came into office, President Dole led the negotiations for annexation. Dole drove a hard bargain. The United States paid off the accumulated national debt of the kingdom and republic (paying more than the market value of the ceded lands at that time). Dole also required the United States to hold the ceded lands not as U.S. property but as a public trust for the benefit of all the residents of Hawai'i.

In 1900, he became Hawai'i's first territorial governor. In 1903 he was appointed judge of the U.S. District Court (Honolulu). Following many years of charitable works, he died in 1926.

Sanford B. Dole was Hawai'i's longest-ruling chief executive at 'Iolani Palace (1893 to 1903), where his firm hand guided Hawai'i through a decade of extraordinarily turbulent times. His spirit remains there, and his statue belongs there. He was the last head of an independent nation of Hawai'i. Happy birthday, Mr. President!

Seen at http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/Apr/22/op/op05a.html/?print=on

Deciding for oneself about Ken Conklin

In this letter to the editor in September 2004, Ken Conklin once again wrote to attack and target Hawaiians which is a hate crime. You decide if he is criticizing only Hawaiians... or not:

March promotes racial separatism

In Waikiki on Monday, red-shirt marchers once again stomped all over our rainbow society's commitment to unity and equality ("Hawaiian march floods Waikiki" Star-Bulletin, Sept. 7). Red was chosen to symbolize the blood shared by ethnic Hawaiians exclusively. Thousands marched to protect and expand racial separatism.

Is it impolite to say we're disgusted? Well, how impolite is it for a mob to march through our streets defending racial privilege? How righteous is it to march against the courts' authority to decide what's legal?

The red-shirts defend segregation at America's most wealthy, powerful school. They defend state agencies serving only one racial group, sucking up hundreds of millions of government money and hoarding it in the stock market.

With children in tow, the marchers lull us into apathy. They smile pretty, but their causes are ugly. Thank goodness most people of Hawaiian ancestry do not support creating a racial-separatist "nation." Perhaps someday the silent majority will speak up and sponsor a real unity rally. Did anyone notice that among dozens of flags not one was American?


Ken Conklin
Kaneohe

Seen at http://starbulletin.com/2004/09/10/editorial/letters.html

Ken Conklin at it again.

On November 30, 2004 Ken Conklin was at it again in a letter to the editor of the Washington Times:

Playing racial politics in Hawaii

"Three attorneys for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs have defended a bill to give federal recognition to ethnic Hawaiians, comparing them to an Indian tribe ("Hawaii bill in line with U.S. political tradition," Forum, Sunday).

This dangerous bill would badly damage not only Hawaii, but the entire United States. It will be introduced again in 2005. This bill is based on a new theory of the Constitution, that the Indian Commerce Clause empowers Congress to arbitrarily select any group of "indigenous people" and create a "tribe" for them out of thin air, regardless of the group's history and lack of continuity as a political entity.

This theory would, for example, allow Congress to recognize a "Nation of Aztlan" comprised of all people having any Mexican/Aztec ancestry who live in California, Texas, Arizona, etc. It would also encourage hundreds, perhaps thousands, of additional phony "tribes" to seek recognition.

Census 2000 says there are more than 400,000 "native Hawaiians," including 240,000 in Hawaii, 60,000 in California, and 100,000 in the other 48 states. This phony new "tribe" would be larger than any genuine tribe. "Native Hawaiians" make up 20 percent of Hawaii's population — no other tribe has such a large percentage of a state's population.

The Hawaiian recognition bill is, in effect, apartheid legislation that would carve Hawaii into separate racial jurisdictions. Twenty percent is a huge voting block when push comes to shove in disputes between a tribe and a state (tribal members also vote as citizens of a state).

Ethnic Hawaiians are highly intermarried and widely dispersed throughout all neighborhoods of Hawaii. Their "tribal lands" would be similarly scattered, creating jurisdictional nightmares.

The history of native Hawaiians is completely different from the history of American Indian tribes. There was never a unified political entity or nation whose members were exclusively native Hawaiian. Europeans and Americans helped create the kingdom of Hawaii. Because of decisions made by the sovereign kings of Hawaii exercising self-determination on behalf of their people, thousands of native-born and naturalized whites had voting rights and property rights as full-fledged citizens of the kingdom.

Most cabinet officers, and many elected members of the legislature, were white. By the time the monarchy was overthrown, 60 percent of the population was white or Asian. Yet the Hawaiian recognition bill ignores that history and proposes to give political recognition exclusively to the 20 percent of Hawaii's people who have at least one native ancestor.

The real purpose of this bill is to protect more than 160 racially exclusionary government programs that benefit ethnic Hawaiians. Of course, such race-based government programs are unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment equal protection clause; and they are now under attack in the courts. Large, wealthy ethnic Hawaiian institutions are spending millions to lobby for the Hawaiian bill so they can stay in business.

The Hawaiian recognition bill is unconstitutional. It would lay a foundation for further ethnic balkanization of America. It would give encouragement to racial identity politics, racial entitlement programs, racial separatism, racial reparations for historical grievances, etc.

KENNETH R. CONKLIN
Kane'ohe, Hawaii"


Seen at www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20041129-095028-6916r.htm


He seems to be the one who is mentioning race. The irony is that Ken Conklin only targets Hawaiians.

In His Words

In July 2000, Ken Conklin joined a descendant of the leader of the 1893 illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, Lorrin A. Thurston, in a lawsuit that targeted Hawaiians. This descendant is Thurston Twigg-Smith, former owner of The Honolulu Advertiser.


In the Honolulu Advertiser, Conklin was quoted as saying,

"[he] has "great respect" for Hawaiians but believes that OHA should be disbanded. He said he wants to be a trustee to oversee how OHA spends its money.

I’m the anti-OHA candidate," he said. "However, I am not the anti-Hawaiian candidate."

See http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/2000/Jul/26/localnews13.html

However at his website at
www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/ohacandidacy.html he contradicts himself making statements that are anti-Hawaiian in nature:


"OHA's whole reason for existing is to provide benefits to so-called Native Hawaiians -- people who have at least one drop of the blood of someone who lived in Hawai'i before Captain Cook arrived in 1778. Some of OHA's programs are further restricted to beneficiaries with at least 50% native blood quantum. But such racial restrictions are not constitutionally permitted for a branch of the government. OHA will be ruled unconstitutional sooner or later. In the meantime it is important to find ways to spend OHA's money on programs that focus on Hawaiian people and their culture but are not racially exclusionary.

Over 160 federal and state programs provide racially exclusionary benefits to ethnic Hawaiians. Advocates of such programs routinely make the same arguments about why the programs are legitimate. That's why it is helpful to take one such program and analyze all of the reasons given for supporting it. Such an analysis has been done regarding a piece of healthcare legislation: s1929. There were 29 false and twisted historical, legal, and moral arguments offered in defense of that bill, and all are analyzed and refuted."


On December 2, 2004, he was at it again in a letter to the editor of the Honolulu Advertiser:

"OHA is wrong in its defense of Akaka bill Cliff Slater cited Thomas Sowell that race-based programs are bad for everyone. "Far worse, the politicizing of ethnic group disparities exacerbates interracial dissension," Slater wrote Nov. 22.

Clyde Namu'o responded with Office of Hawaiian Affairs propaganda.

Namu'o stressed that the Akaka bill would establish a political relationship, not a racial one. But the political entity "Hawaiian kingdom" gave fully equal citizenship to all persons born or naturalized here. The Akaka bill clearly says "Hawaiians only."

Namu'o says "we are the only indigenous group in the United States without federal recognition." Nonsense! The New York Times reported March 29 that there are "291 groups seeking federal recognition as tribes." Most Indians are neither tribal members nor eligible to join. The United States does not recognize "indigenous people" nor the racial group of all Indians, but only tribal governments that have exercised substantial authority continuously from original European contact until now.

One thing Namu'o got right: "The future of our state is very much at stake." Shall we carve it up into racially separate governments?

Pleadingly, Namu'o ends with: "What would Hawai'i be without Native Hawaiians?" Rest assured, Native Hawaiians have multiplied tenfold during the first century of American sovereignty here: fewer than 40,000 in 1900; more than 400,000 in 2000.

Ken Conklin
Kane'ohe"

See http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/Dec/02/op/op10pletters.html

Thus, while claiming that he is not anti-Hawaiian his other words speak for themselves. He actions are anti-Hawaiian and he ONLY targets Hawaiians. Unfortunately, his ally with the former owner of the Honolulu Advertiser who in turn may have a close relationship with the present owner of the Honolulu Advertiser may allow a vehicle for him to carry out his hate crime against Hawaiians. We need to stop them. We need to stop him.