Elon Musk is one of my heroes.  He has innovated so many industries that are close to my heart.  As a former robotics engineer, and someone who has been a space and alternative energy enthusiast all of my adult life, with many start-ups behind me, and job related experience as well in all of these industries, Elon is one of my personal heroes (though that word is probably too strong).   However, just like political leaders Elon and I do not agree on everything.  I admire him as an engineer, as an entrepreneur and as someone who has proven the merits of capitalism and how capitalism can be used for the good of the world.

However there is one thing that Elon and I do not see eye to eye on.   The concept of a “universal income” for everyone.  Elon has made the notion that as artificial intelligence and robotics improve and automate our world more and more, that more people will be displaced from jobs, and therefore the only way to sustain society is to give everyone a basic income.

I have studied many arguments from many scholars, business leaders, and politicians on the pros and cons of this.
I see valid points on both sides.  I even have a former acquaintance on social media who suggests that everyone should be given a free robot to do chores and work for them, so that people can pursue hobbies rather than work.

I see the compassion, empathy, and even a bit of logic in offering this.  However I don’t see the reality of it, yet.  Not to say that I can’t change my mind on this, it is possible that I will find this to be a plausible situation for human kind.

The thing that bothers me most, is that people like Elon, and others who have accomplished great things, only through the means of a capitalist system, would likely not be doing as great of things if capitalism did not exist.

Comparing the private space program to the government funded space programs, or alternative energy, or artificial intelligence both publicly funded and privately funded.  It is my opinion that the private market does a much better job.   People some times point out that the government had an intricate hand in development the internet, but my research shows me that the internet was well on its way, via private universities, and pretty much all of the technology that was used to link up the internet was developed in the private sector not the public sector.
I believe that all of the other human accomplishments would have happened with or without government as well.

Here is my major protest however.  I am currently in the UK and will be traveling through a bit of Europe and I read in the paper every day how single payer insurance is failing and other aspects of publicly funded programs are failing.   I will post some recent newspaper clippings below.   It is also obvious that the USA who is very generous with handouts is so far in the whole, that we are beyond bankruptcy at a current 20 TRILLION dollar national debt (if you listen to Ron Paul, he explains why the national debt is MUCH greater than 20 trillion also), but even at just 20 trillion, no other nation has sustained such a debt.   Greece is in another financial crisis and their debt to population ratio is MUCH less than the USA, and they are about to leave the EU over it.

If all of these public services are failing so tragically, how does Elon Musk or anyone else propose to solve the public sector and help it to become sustainable?

You can click on the photos of newspaper clippings from recent days and get a larger view.

I heard Joe Rogan talking about the approximate number that people should receive, and he was estimating it would need to be around $35,000.
Then you multiply that by 318 million, which is 11,130,000,000,000 (eleven trillion).

Our annual GDP is only 16.77 trillion

So 11.13 trillion for a basic income
Then $1,127 billion (1.127 trillion), including $646 billion for Medicaid, and $481 billion in other welfare.

That gives us only about 4 trillion left for running the country and defense, not to mention interest on current debt.

I can’t imagine any possible way for this to work. As of now

This quote from Ron Paul is my opinion and in fact a great solution to this problem.  Rather than employing government force, with employ voluntary donations.

References;

Basic income – Wikipedia

ELON MUSK SAYS GOVERNMENTS WILL BE FORCED TO GIVE PEOPLE A UNIVERSAL INCOME

https://futurism.com/elon-musk-automation-will-force-governments-to-introduce-universal-basic-income/

Another possibility, for humankind is for colonization of new planets, specifically as of now, Mars.
Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species

Mauna Kea Protesters Want to Keep Hawaiian Lands in Hawaiian Hands.

They say “Hawaii is a fake state” and that the USA stole Hawaii from the Monarchy in 1893.

Latest video What is at the heart of the Mauna Kea Protests?

The facts are far different than they present, and this transition started long before 1893 when Hawaiian subjects, Hawaiian citizens and genetic Hawaiians overthrew their government.

This process started when King Kamehameha I made European visitors Ail’i (chiefs) and gave them land and wives in exchange for weapons and ships so that King Kamehameha I could destroy his enemies in local islands, some were his cousins and other family, and he wanted those weapons so bad to destroy those people, that he started giving up parts of Hawaii to foreigners.

There are the different constitutions of Hawaii, which contrasted one from the other greatly, which gives a bit of a look into the conflicts in Hawaii from one regime to the next, long before Hawaii was annexed into the USA.

• Kingdom of Hawaii. Constitution of 1840 on October 8, 1840.
• The Constitution of 1852 came into effect under Kamehameha III signed it into law June 14, 1852.
• Republic of Hawaii. Constitution of 1894 on July 4, 1894.
• Territory of Hawaii. Organic Act of 1990 on June 14, 1900.
• State of Hawaii. Constitution of 1950 on August 21, 159 (statehood)

When Hawaiian sovereignty people say that Hawaii was stolen.
In fact it was mismanaged by war and greed, and then more greed and mismanagement, and even more mismanagement until the Hawaiian Kingdom dissolved slowly over 100 years time.

Here are some links to sources that are referenced in the video;

Dr. Ken Conklin’s documentation of this descent of Hawaii.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1e75xiUHLA

This is from Dr. Ken Conklin’s work;
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/overthrow.html

Dr. Ken Conklin’s website on Hawaiian Studies
http://historymystery.kenconklin.org

Going a bit further back, but not too far, is when Tahitians (modern day Hawaiian’s ancestors) conquered Hawaii and took it from the original inhabitants, which those first inhabitants came from South East Asia.

This is confirmed by many sciences.

First with Oral Tradition:

http://hawaii-guide.info/past.and.present/history/tahitian.takeover/

Then through DNA evidence

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0047881

And linguistic evidence.

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~yotsuka/course/PN_history.pdf

Hawaiians (Tahitians) were not the first inhabitants of Hawaii.

So if we are to give Hawaii back to the original inhabitants, then where are they? In Fiji and Taiwan? Because the people who are here now, are not the original inhabitants.

And beyond that, if the overthrow of Hawaii is null and void, and if we are in a “fake state”, then is the USA also a fake state?

What about all of the other countries who have had revolutions?

They always talk about “Codified law” and “the Geneva Convention” and the “Hague Convention”.

So is that the rules that are going by? Rules that didn’t exist until after the overthrow of Hawaii?

Then why did the Hague throw their case out?

Learn more about “Larsen vs. the Hawaiian Kingdom”

https://disruptarian.com/knowledge-base/category/treaties/

If for any reason the referenced linked above are not longer at the location linked to in the future, you can use:   www.archive.org  to view this page and others from how the looked in the  the past

What are your thoughts?

In the following video I gave a few different presentations related to the Thirty Meter Telescope project on Mauna Kea, and I also addressed the real issue underlying the protesters who are protesting the construction of the telescope.

The Hawaiian Sovereignty movement is very much behind the TMT telescope project.  They are making a stand against it, because the claim all of Hawaii belong exclusively to genetic Hawaiians.

So I addressed the origin of the so-called “Native Hawaiian” people, and the origin of the formation of the state of Hawaii, which they contest as “illegal occupation”.

This is a very important topic to address because of how deeply it relates to the resistance of this small group of Hawaiians that reject the Thirty Meter Telescope.

Modern day Hawaiians come from Tahiti not too long ago, and they conquered South East Asians to get these islands.  After that for 700 years the Hawaiian islands fought bitterly and brutally in conquest for each other’s land.

Then the cession of power in Hawaii was taken by Native Born Hawaiians, this is a subject that these sovereignty people don’t like to talk about.

King Kamehameha gave several foreigners titles as chiefs, land and wives. Their children born in Hawaii (aka Native Hawaiians), then overthrew their government and created the Republic of Hawaii.
The ex-Queen signed the Abdication Document ceeding her power and shortly thereafter she signed loyalty oath to the Republic. Then 20 countries including Switzerland and Netherlands and other countries in 4 continents and 11 languages recognizing the Republic of Hawaii as the legitimate government.

Hawaii and the Kapu System
http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&PageID=275

The Tahitian – Hawaii conquest.
http://hawaii-guide.info/past.and.present/history/tahitian.takeover/

More on the Tahitian – Hawaii takeover

https://www.alternative-hawaii.com/hacul/history.htm

More on the relationship between Hawaii and Tahiti
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuJk_a4iWj0

The Puna Hawaii County council debate / election July 20th 2019
https://www.bigislandvideonews.com/2018/07/20/video-2-of-these-4-candidates-will-represent-puna-on-county-council/

Hawaii News Now interview with the protesters on 7/19/2019

This is the map that I created showing the Hawaiian Home Lands and relationship with the protesters and the observatories.  Neither are on Hawaiian Homelands.

https://www.facebook.com/HawaiiNewsNow/videos/362170911091777/

“On the eve of a court ruling that could determine the fate of the Thirty Meter Telescope in Hawaii, public support for the stalled $1.4 billion project has never been stronger.”
According to the Star Advertiser in Honolulu.
More information about the poll here:  https://www.staradvertiser.com/staradvertiser-poll/support-work-thirty-meter-telescope-starting-monday/
Showing an overwhelming support for the Thirty Meter Telescope.
From another long standing Hawaiian publisher, shows the same data.
https://www.westhawaiitoday.com/2018/03/26/hawaii-news/poll-shows-strong-public-support-for-thirty-meter-telescope/

Ward poll shows 62% of Native Hawaiians support the TMT project.

https://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/news/2015/11/09/62-of-hawaii-residents-support-thirty-meter.html

Edit:  (adding this for context, based on a confusion that someone brought to my attention)

(name redacted for privacy)
You don’t have to listen to either of them (videos that I posted). If you want the facts just pay attention to the dates. The link themselves show the dates. You are referencing an article from 2015, but even that article showed a trend of increasing support for the TMT even in 2015. In 2019 there are two different polls from credible sources that show even more increase since 2015.

The article that I wrote documents this too.

I used the data from the old polls and the recent polls to show the increase in support, which is now 72% among Native Hawaiians.

If you use the old data, which you have, it still shows in 2015 62% support.

Which is not 50/50

However if you want to get to that 50/50 number (he claimed support for the TMT was divided 50/50), like I pointed out, go back to even before 2015. You’ll eventually get there if you go back far enough.

And in my 4 minute video I pointed that out and took a screen cast of the actual text you are referencing. If you would have just included the sentence before the one you cherry picked, it would show you are referencing old data. And if you would have included the paragraph after the one that you cherry picked, it would have shown the 2-1 ratio.

You clipped out old data from an old article that was simply pointing out how support has increased from 2010 to 2015. Now if you reference the two new polls from 2019, you will see it went from 62% in 2015 to 72% in 2019, among Native Hawaiians. And almost 90% support among Hawaiian residents as a whole

A recent survey by the 158 year old newspaper shows that 72% of Native Hawaiians support the Thirty Meter Telescope project.

 

The Thirty Meter Telescope means a lot of great things for Hawaii.  The opportunities that come with so much STEM investment in Hawaii means a lot of new high paying STEM jobs, for not just the telescope project, but also for supportive services involved with the STEM project.  Along with the TMT project, the Alaska Aerospace Project is also proposing a new facility in the Puna district and may build a rocket launching facility for small rocket launches  in the near future.   This is not only a huge benefit to Hawaii, but also for humanity as a whole.

I say that this is a huge benefit for humanity as a whole, because the Earth has went through 5 mass extinctions that scientists have identified.  The last one was with the dinosaurs dying off after a massive asteroid hit earth.   If the dinosaurs had a decent space program they could have used a rocket with a nuclear weapon to hit and deflect the asteroid that hit earth, and that destroyed almost all life on earth.   One problem that humans have right now, is detection of a space object that could potentially destroy earth.  With the Thirty Meter Telescope that could help with the detection of a species ending space object that could potentially hit earth.

This is an article from the Smithsonian about the asteroid that destroyed 99% of all life on earth.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/videos/category/history/how-a-single-asteroid-wiped-dinosaurs-off-th/

In celebration of the Thirty Meter Telescope, our family launched some model rockets on 7/13/2019 in Puna.

 

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvEjK8R3yis]

Also a meeting that happened on July 8th 2019 at the Hawaii County Council addressed this topic of the Thirty Meter Telescope, and took public comments.
There was a surprising amount of support for the TMT.  It was also made clear by the supporters, that there have been a lot of violent threats against supporters by the tiny group of opposition.

TMT Hawaiian County Council Meeting July 8th 2019 Thirty Meter Telescope

TMT Hawaiian County Council Meeting July 8th 2019 Thirty Meter Telescope on Mauna Kea. The testimony surrounding the clips that I included in this video were people protesting the telescope. I took these two clips which are supportive of the Thirty Meter Telescope AKA TMT by locals.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfyeff7fVog]

Disruptarian has started a growing facebook group to support the TMT

Support for the Thirty Meter Telescope TMT

The Project Veritas Google Anti-Trust Expose

https://dailymotion.com/video/x7cpbit

This video has been banned, and people have been shadow banned for sharing it, by Google and other social media networks.   However we are going to boost this on DailyMotion and other video sharing websites in hopes that other non-Google influenced search engines will pick it up.

See more at:  https://www.projectveritas.com/

 

Below I am going to list some commentary by various sources.  The sources range in bias, from pro-gamers on Youtube, to Representatives in Congress, and then my own commentary on this issue, before the Project Veritas video was release.

Breitbart’s 2018 story that exposed YouTube’s black list.

On June 26 2019, during a US Homeland Security Hearing, Texas Congressman Dan Crenshaw questioned Mr. Derek Slater, Google Global Director of Information Policy over revelations of a leaked email Project Veritas published yesterday. Said Rep. Crensaw:

“According to those emails, the emails say, given that Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson and Dennis Prager are Nazis, given that that’s a premise, what do we do about it?”

You can watch a video clip of the hearing here:

https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/26/rep-crenshaw-grills-google-executive-over-leaked-email-published-by-veritas/#fvp_Crenshaw,1s

A partial transcript of the hearing is available below:

Crenshaw:
From Texas for five minutes. Mr. Crenshaw. Thank you Mr Chairman and thank you for some of some of the thoughtful discussion on how you combat terrorism online and there’s where the debates to be had there. Um, and there’s, there’s good questions on whether some of this content provides education so that we know of the bad things out there or whether it’s radicalizing people. Those are hard. Those are hard discussions to have and I don’t know that we’re going to solve them today. But the problem is is that the testimony doesn’t stop there. The, the policies at your social media companies do not stop there. It doesn’t stop with the clear cut lines of terrorism and terrorist videos and terrorist propaganda. Unfortunately, that’s not exactly what we’re talking about. It goes much further than that. It goes down the slippery slope of what speech is appropriate for your platform and the vague standards that you employ in order to decide what is appropriate.

Crenshaw:
And this is especially concerning given the recent news and the recent leaked emails from Google, they show that labeling mainstream conservative media as Nazis is a premise upon which you operate. It’s not even a question. According to those emails, the emails say, given that Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson and Dennis Prager are Nazis, given that that’s a premise, what do we do about it? Two of three of these people are Jewish, very religious Jews. And yet you think there are Nazis. It begs the question, what kind of education people at Google have to, they think that religious Jews are Nazis. Three of three of these people had family members killed the Holocaust, Ben Shapiro’s is the number one target of the alt right. And yet you people operate off the premise that he’s a Nazi. It’s a pretty disturbing and it gets to the question, do you believe in hate speech? How do you define that or do you, can you give me a quick definition right now? Is it written down somewhere? Google, can you give me a definition of hate speech?

Google:
Yes. So hate speech again, as updated in our guidelines now extends to, uh, uh, superiority over protected groups to justify discrimination, violence, and so on based on, uh, a number of defining characteristics, whether that’s a race, sexual orientation, veterans.

Crenshaw:
Do you have an example of Ben Shapiro or Jordan Peterson, Dennis Prager engaging in hate speech. Give one example off the top of your head.

Google:
So, congressman, we evaluate individual piece of content based on that content rather than based on the speaker.

Crenshaw:
Okay, let’s, let’s get to the next question. Do you believe speech can be violence? All right, though there’s, there’s not, not can you incite violence that is very clearly not protected, but can speech just be violence. Do you believe that speech that isn’t specifically calling for violence can be labeled violence and therefore harmful to people? Is that possible?

Google:
Congressman, I’m not sure I fully understand the distinction you’re drawing. Certainly, again, incitement to violence or things that aren’t urgent, dangerous behavior. Those are things that would be against our policies.

Crenshaw:
Here’s, here’s, here’s the thing. When you call somebody a Nazi or you can make the argument that you’re inciting violence and here’s how, as a country, we all agree that Nazis are bad. We actually invaded an entire continent to defeat the Nazis. It’s normal to say Hashtag punch a Nazi because there’s this common thread among this in this country that they’re bad and that there yeah, evil and that they should be destroyed. So when you’re operating off of that premise and it’s frankly, it’s a, it’s a good premise to operate on. Well, what you’re implying then is that it’s okay to use violence against them when you label them, when one of the most powerful social media companies in the world labels people as Nazis, you could make the argument that’s inciting violence. What you’re doing is wholly irresponsible. It doesn’t stop there. Well, a couple of years ago it was also made clear that you fact check system is blatantly targeted conservative newspapers. Do you have any comments on that? Are you aware of the story? I’m talking, about?

Google:
I’m not familiar with necessarily the specific story, congressman. I am aware that from all political viewpoints, we sometimes get questions of this sore. I can say that our fact check labels generally are done algorithmically based on a mark up and follow up on our policies

Crenshaw:
for the, for the record, they specifically target conservative news media and often times they don’t even, they have a fact check on there that doesn’t even reference the actual article. But Google makes sure that it’s right next to it. So as to make people understand that that one is questionable even though when you actually read through and it has nothing to do with it. Um, you know, a few days ago and this goes to Miss Bikert, uh, one of my constituents posted photos on Facebook of Republican women, daring to say that there are women for Trump. Facebook took down that post right away with no explanation. Is there any explanation for that?

Bickert:
Without seeing it,It’s hard for me to apply and that doesn’t violate our policies, but I’m happy to follow up on this specific example with you.

Crenshaw:
Thank you. Listen here, here’s what it comes down to. If we don’t share the values of free speech, I’m not sure where we go from here. You know, this practice of silencing millions and millions of people, it will create wounds and divisions in this country that we can not heal from. This is extremely worrisome. You’ve created amazing and platforms. We can do amazing things with what, what these companies have created, but if we continue down this path, it’ll tear us apart. You do not have a constitutional obligation to enforce the First Amendment, but I would say that you absolutely have an obligation to enforce American values, and the first amendment is an underpinning of American values that we should be protecting until the day we die. Thank you, and thank you for indulging me, Mister chairman. Thank you.

 

Dave Rubin responds to the Google Censorship expose by Project Veritas

 

Before this investigation by Project Veritas was released, when I was in Osaka Japan on June 13th 2019, I released this video addressing this very same topic of censorship.

 

This event really separated the sheep from the goats.  As I watched this whole charade play out I knew the entire time what the outcome would be, so I wasn’t expecting some bombshell proof to come out and ruin Brett Kavanaugh.  I knew as did most people (even those on the left) that this whole circus was designed to delay the hearing and if nothing else, to attempt to ruin the credibility of Judge Kavanaugh.  Clearly the delayed release of the data, the involvement of the Washington Post, the lack of the reporting to the Maryland police, or the FBI, and the outrageous nature of the testimony from Christine Blassey Ford, with her ever-changing details and conflicting evidence.  There could be no doubt what the outcome of this would be.  The only difference now is that Brett Kavanaugh will forever look like some raging drunk rapist to those who somehow were able to believe the accuser.  However he is still an associate Supreme Court Judge, and the process of nominating and confirming future judges will forever be marred with this whole incidence.nnAs for Christine Ford, she says that she no longer wishes to pursue this case, either in politics, in the media, or in a legal procedure, and she rides happily into the sunset as a hero to the left, and with a HUGE gofundme payout of over 1.5 million dollars from at least 5 gofundme campaigns.  That is not to even consider the possibility of book-deals and other opportunities from this whole thing.nnShe clearly had no case to begin with based on the lack of evidence.  Some say that the reason that she won’t pursue this, is because the statute of limitations has expired on these crimes in Maryland.  However that is definitely not the case, I looked it up, and not only are the police in this district willing to open the case, but looking at Maryland law, there is no statute of limitations on these alleged crimes.n

n t
• Montgomery County police say that they are ready to open an investigation if Christine Ford wishes

n t

• More on the local law enforcement potential investigation

n t

• The statute of limitations regarding sexual assault in Maryland has no statute of limitations not now and not in 1982 regarding these crimes

n

nSince the option for a police investigation is still available and on the table, and since local police are willing to investigate, it is clear why she didn’t go to the police, and why instead she went to politicans and publishers about these allegations.nnIt is at least slightly possible that there is still more to this than “he said / she said”?  But, could there be more underlying reasons for such an emotional appointment to the Supreme Court?nnI will say that Trump is no politician, he is a wildcard and that’s without question.  However I do not believe he is dumb, and I do not think that he is operating independently in regards to policy making, or Judicial appointments.nThere have been two things that Trump has done regarding Second Amendment rights that have me nervous.  While he is clearly not as anti-gun as Obama, he has said a few things that make me think that he picked Kavanaugh knowing that Kavanaugh is weak on the Second and Fourth Amendments.  Color me surprised if I am wrong.nThe first thing that Trump said/did that got me nervous about gun rights, is when he said about potentially mentally ill people,n

Trump says take guns first and worry about ‘due process second’ in White House gun meeting

nTrump is quoted as saying:  “I like taking guns away early,” Trump said. “Take the guns first, go through due process second.”nnReference this from an opinion he gave on a 2010 case regarding DC waiting periods and bans on certain kinds of semi-automatic guns.    Heller vs District of Columbian

Although Kavanaugh indicated that he would have struck down the ban on semi-automatic rifles and the registration requirements, his discussion of the proper test to use to review gun laws suggests that he might be willing to uphold some gun laws, such as those requiring a license to carry a concealed weapon, as long as they are consistent with the history and tradition of regulating guns. He contended that a test that assesses “gun bans and regulations based on text, history, and tradition” will often give governments “more flexibility and power” than a balancing test, because “history and tradition show that a variety of gun regulations have co-existed with the Second Amendment right.

nSo there is good and bad here.   I disagree with him, regarding the interpretation of the second amendment in regards to carrying/concealed carry.n

The Second Amendment says:   “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

nThere are not many varying interpretations of this.  It is extremely self-explanatory.nn

---

nnThen with the fourth amendment and the massive data collection of the government without a search warrant, Kavanaugh wrote this.nnKavanaugh argues that even if the government’s collection of millions of Americans’ telephony metadata did constitute a search it would nonetheless not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment:n

Even if the bulk collection of telephony metadata constitutes a search,[…] the Fourth Amendment does not bar all searches and seizures. It bars only unreasonable searches and seizures. And the Government’s metadata collection program readily qualifies as reasonable under the Supreme Court’s case law. The Fourth Amendment allows governmental searches and seizures without individualized suspicion when the Government demonstrates a sufficient “special need” – that is, a need beyond the normal need for law enforcement – that outweighs the intrusion on individual liberty. Examples include drug testing of students, roadblocks to detect drunk drivers, border checkpoints, and security screening at airports. […] The Government’s program for bulk collection of telephony metadata serves a critically important special need – preventing terrorist attacks on the United States. See THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT (2004). In my view, that critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program. The Government’s program does not capture the content of communications, but rather the time and duration of calls, and the numbers called. In short, the Government’s program fits comfortably within the Supreme Court precedents applying the special needs doctrine.

nI believe strongly in the Fourth Amendment and I believe that this is very clear and hard to vary the interpretation;n

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

nnn

---

nnThose two things I highly disagree with both Trump and Kavanaugh.   I feel that the Second Amendment disagrees with both Trump and Kavanaugh in regards to the points that I made above.nnSo, in my opinion, there could have been far worse appointments, but my particular preference is for someone that is a strict constitutionalist.  I reference Judge Andrew Napolitano, and Judge Jeanine Pirro, which are both strict constitutionalists and reasonable and adept Judges that would be a great fit for the job.  However, there is also Amy Coney Barrett who is stronger than Judge Kavanaugh on the constitution and has been a top choice for awhile for SCOTUS.  I am just getting acquainted with Amy Coney Barrett, but what I have researched of her, I would have much rather preferred her than Judge Brett Kavanaugh.nnWith all of that said, I am sure that this could not have turned out better than it did in this period of time in our country, with issues like the #metoo movement that is bringing out the details of what is truly going on with both “rape culture” and “false accusations”.  For too long we have heard that “Only 2% of rape accusations turn out to be fake”, and that reference has no empirical data to back it at all, and when analyzing the data more, it is clear that the fake rape statistics are far more likely to be above 10%, and could be as high as 41% if we go by the actual peer-reviewed data on false rape accusations.nnAlso when we look at actual peer-reviewed data on actual rapes, the media and many government studies classify rape in prison separate from rape on the outside.   On “the outs” (outside of prison) rapes in the USA for 2017 were 99,856 total rapes reported.nIn prison, there were over 200,000 rapes.   The prison population is made up of 97.3% men.  It is also notable that men on “the outs” report sexual assault almost as much as women.   With these details, it is clear that rape of men happens at about twice the rate of that of women.nnRape in prison reportingnnRape out of prison reportingnnMy main reason for considering this a victory is that I believe now that two sitting SCOTUS judges have had fake rape allegations waged at them, that false reporting will be treated much more harshly in the future.nnThe Democrats, namely Nancy Pelosi ready and blatantly admit to using fake facts to smear someone, then leak it to the media, and then reference the media as a “source of facts”.  Nancy Pelosi calls it “The Wrap Up Smear”, see the video below to listen to how the Democrats use character assassination to destroy opponents.n

nnn

Brett Kavanaugh will judge for 40 years after being falsely accused

nn 

The protest and redress of grievance going on at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge has had a disruption when a large group of federal agents descended on a small convoy of the people involved with this protest and shot their car reportedly by an eye witness (Victoria Sharp) over 100 times, and that the car was “riddled with bullets”, and when Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum surrendered, and had his hands in the air, the agents shot him and killed him with three gun wounds, and then shot him at least 3 more times when he was on the ground.

I have been reporting on this at Clovis Star Media, I will post my reports on this and link to the sources from Clovis Star.

• Constitutional Militia Take Over Federal Building In Oregon  January 3, 2016
• Citizens for Constitutional Freedom News Conference Oregon 1/4/16
• Constitutional Attorney on the issue in Harney County Oregon January 6, 2016
• Tribe Member: ‘We Would Have Been Dead By Now’ If We Acted Like Oregon Militants   January 7, 2016
• Progressives piss me off, I lose my cool, funny shit January 11, 2016
• The Truth About The Oregon Rancher Standoff (republished) by Stefan Molyneux January 14, 2016
• Harney County Fire Chief quits amidst agent provocateur from FBI agents posing as militia January 15, 2016
• Mormon Ranchers at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge are much like the original Mormon pioneers  January 23, 2016
• Oregon standoff spokesman Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum killed, Bundys in custody after shooting near Burns January 26, 2016
• Sheriff of Harney County gives a speech and reassert that he won’t do his job    January 27, 2016
• “Americans grow some balls” from inside the Malher Wildlife reserve HQ in Harney County Oregon  January 27th, 2016
• Compilation of videos around 24 hours of the time that Robert LaVoy Finicum was murdered by authorities January 28th 2016
• Victoria Sharp’s testimony of the attack on these citizens and one who ended up dying.  January 27, 2016
• Tribute to Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum – by Jordan Page – Ballad of LaVoy Finicum (Cowboy’s Stand for Freedom)

***** QUEEN LILIUOKALANI’S LETTER OF ABDICATION

THE ABDICATION LETTER AND THE OATH OF LOYALTY, BOTH PERSONALLY SIGNED BY LILIUOKALANI, ARE AVAILABLE IN THE ARCHIVES OF THE STATE OF HAWAII. Photocopies are available in file folders available on request from the librarian, and the originals are kept in a safe accessible only with the permission and direct supervision of the head Archivist. PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ORIGINALS WERE TAKEN ON MARCH 25, 2008 AND CAN BE SEEN AT
http://historymystery.grassrootinstitute.org/2008/04/04/liliuokalanis-abdication-and-loyalty-oath/ 

ISLAND OF OAHU,
HONOLULU, Jan. 24, 1895. 
TO THE HON. SANFORD BALLARD DOLE, President of the Republic of Hawaii:

SIR: — After full and free consultation with my personal friends and with my legal advisors, both before and since my detention by military order in the Executive building, and acting in conformity with their advice, and also upon my own free volition, and in pursuance of my unalterable belief and understanding of my duty to the people of Hawaii, and to their highest and best interests, and also for the sake of those misguided Hawaiians and others who have recently engaged in rebellion against the Republic, and in an attempt to restore me to the position of queen, which I held prior to the 17th day of January, A. D. 1893, and without any claim that shall become entitled, by reason of anything that I may now say or do, to any other or different treatment or consideration at the hands of the Government than I otherwise could and might legally receive, I now desire to express and make known, and do hereby express and make known, to yourself, as the only lawful and recognized head of the Government, and to all the people of the Hawaiian Islands, whether or not they have yet become citizens of the Republic, or are or have been adherents of the late monarchy, and also to all diplomatic and other foreign representatives in the Hawaiian Islands, to all of whom I respectfully request you to cause this statement and action of mine to be made known as soon as may be, as follows, namely: 

First. In order to avoid any possibility of doubt or misunderstanding although I do not think that any doubt or misunderstanding is either proper or possible, I hereby do fully and unequivocally admit and declare that the Government of the Republic of Hawaii is the only lawful Government of the Hawaiian Islands, and that the late Hawaiian monarchy is finally and forever ended, and no longer of any legal or actual validity, force or effect whatsoever; and I do hereby forever absolve all persons whomsoever, whether in the Hawaiian Islands or elsewhere, from all and every manner of allegiance, or official obligation or duty, to me and my heirs and successors forever, and I hereby declare to all such persons in the Hawaiian Islands that I consider them as bound in duty and honor henceforth to support and sustain the Government of the Republic of Hawaii.

Second. For myself, my heirs and successors, I do hereby and without any mental reservation or modification, and fully, finally, unequivocally, irrevocably, and forever abdicate, renounce and release unto the Government of the Republic of Hawaii and the legitimate successors forever all claims or pretensions whatsoever to the late throne of Hawaii, or to the late monarchy of Hawaii, or to any past, or to the existing, or to any future Government of Hawaii, or under or by reason of any present or formerly existing constitution, statute, law, position, right or claim of any and every kind, name or nature whatsoever, and whether the same consist of pecuniary or property considerations, or of personal status, hereby forever renouncing, disowning and disclaiming all rights, claims, demands, privileges, honors, emoluments, titles and prerogatives whatsoever, under or by virtue of any former, or the existing Government, constitution, statute, law or custom of the Hawaiian Islands whatsoever, save and excepting only such rights and privileges as belong to me in common with all private citizens of, or residents in the Republic of Hawaii.

Third. I do hereby respectfully implore for such misguided Hawaiians and others as have been concerned in the late rebellion against the Republic of Hawaii, such degree of executive clemency as the Government may deem to be consistent with its duty to the community, and such as a due regard for its violated laws may permit.

Fourth. It is my sincere desire henceforth to live in absolute privacy and retirement from all publicity, or even appearance of being concerned in the public affairs of the Hawaiian Islands, further than to express, as I now do and shall always continue to do, my most sincere hope for the welfare and prosperity of its people, under and subject to the Government of the Republic of Hawaii.

Fifth. I hereby offer and present my duly certified oath of allegiance to the Republic of Hawaii.

Sixth. I have caused the foregoing statement to be prepared and drawn, and have signed the same without having received the slightest suggestion from the President of Hawaii, or from any member of the Government of Hawaii, concerning the same or any part thereof, or concerning any action or course of my own in the premises.

Relying upon the magnanimity of the Government of the Republic, and upon its protection.

I have the honor to be, Mr. President,

Very respectfully,

Your most obedient servant,

(Signed) LILIUOKALANI DOMINIS.

[** note by Ken Conklin: “Dominis” is her married name as a private citizen, and not a royal signature **]

—————-

** Note by Ken Conklin: As the “fifth” item listed in Lili’uokalani’s abdication says, she swore an oath of allegiance to the Republic of Hawaii, also dated January 24, 1895. Here is the text of her oath: 

***** LILI’UOKALANI’S OATH OF LOYALTY TO THE REPUBLIC OF HAWAII

Honolulu, Island of Oahu ss.
Hawaiian Islands.

I, Liliuokalani Dominis, do solemnly swear in the presence of Almighty God that I will support the Constitution, Laws and Government of the Republic of Hawaii, and will not, either directly or indirectly, encourage or assist in the restoration or establishment of a Monarchial form of Government in the Hawaiian Islands.

[signed] Liliuokalani Dominis

Subscribed and sworn to
this 24th day of January
A.D. 1895 before me, 

[signed] W L. Stanley
Notary Public [notary seal]

==============

Source of the abdication document:

William De Witt Alexander, “History of Later Years of the Hawaiian Monarchy and the Revolution of 1893 (Honolulu: Hawaiian Gazette Co., 1896). 

Hawaii State Library, call number “H 996.9 A”. The abdication statement is found on pp. 215-216, in the portion at the end of the book (pp. 203-232 were written by Wallace Rider Farrington). 

THE ABDICATION LETTER AND THE OATH OF LOYALTY, BOTH PERSONALLY SIGNED BY LILIUOKALANI, ARE AVAILABLE IN THE ARCHIVES OF THE STATE OF HAWAII. Photocopies are available in file folders available on request from the librarian, and the originals are kept in a safe accessible only with the permission and direct supervision of the head Archivist. PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ORIGINALS WERE TAKEN ON MARCH 25, 2008 AND CAN BE SEEN AT
http://historymystery.grassrootinstitute.org/2008/04/04/liliuokalanis-abdication-and-loyalty-oath/ 

===============

Introductory comment written in 1896 by Wallace Rider Farrington on page 215 immediately preceding the actual abdication statement: 

When it became apparent that all hopes of the restoration of ex-Queen Liliuokalani had been irretrevably blighted, it became generally rumored that the ex-Regent was prepared to make a formal abdication of her claims as the only lawful ruler of the people of Hawaii — a claim to which she had adhered most tenaciously from the day of the overthrow. During her detention in the Executive Building she was in constant touch with her friends and advisers, through her agent Charles B. Wilson, who was allowed free access to her apartments by the military authorities.

On the afternoon of January 24th, the members of the Cabinet were informed that the ex-Queen had an official document which it was desired should be presented to the Executive. They signified their willingness to listen to any communication which the now military prisoner might submit. During the latter part of the day a copy of the following correspondence was put in the hands of Attorney-General Smith. The letter was drawn by Judge A. S. Hartwell who had been consulted by Messrs. Wilson, Parker and Neumann regarding the matter, and acted as advising counsel for them. Judge Hartwell also attended the execution of the document:

================

Comment by Ken Conklin, website editor:

The formal abdication document makes it absolutely clear that Lili’uokalani not only renounced the crown but also offered and presented “my duly certified oath of allegiance to the Republic of Hawaii.” Liliuokalani instructed her followers “… the late Hawaiian monarchy is finally and forever ended, and no longer of any legal or actual validity, force or effect whatsoever; and I do hereby forever absolve all persons whomsoever, whether in the Hawaiian Islands or elsewhere, from all and every manner of allegiance, or official obligation or duty, to me and my heirs and successors forever, and I hereby declare to all such persons in the Hawaiian Islands that I consider them as bound in duty and honor henceforth to support and sustain the Government of the Republic of Hawaii.”

Today’s diehard deadender Hawaiian sovereignty royalists might assert the objection that Lili’uokalani wrote her statement under duress, because at the time she was a prisoner of the Republic of Hawaii being held in the Palace awaiting trial on charges of misprision of treason as a co-conspirator in the attempted counter-revolution a few days earlier by Robert Wilcox. (She had allowed guns and bombs to be hidden in the flower bed of her private residence nearby at Washington Place; and she had signed documents appointing cabinet ministers and department heads for her anticipated revived government in the days before the attempted counter-revolution). However, the preliminary comments by Wallace Farrington clearly describe that Liliuokalani had constant free contact with and advice from close friends and Kingdom government officials whom she had appointed and also her personal attorney Paul Neumann (a citizen of Germany who at her request had drafted her proposed new Constitution which precipitated the revolution of 1893). 

==================

Send comments or questions to:
[email protected]  

You may now

See the compilation of webpages about Historical Issues Related to Hawaiian Sovereignty — Revolution (Overthrow of monarchy), Annexation, Statehood, Indigenous Status, Hawaiian Language Ban, Ceded Lands, Etc. 

On January 24, 1895 ex-queen Liliuokalani signed a five-page letter of abdication and a one-page oath of loyalty to the Republic of Hawaii. Six witnesses including her personal attorney and her cabinet ministers signed a statement certifying that she had freely and voluntarily signed in their presence. Notary W.L. Stanley also notarized the documents. Knowing that at least 19 nations had already recognized the Republic of Hawaii, and that the attempted counter-revolution by Robert Wilcox had been crushed earlier in the month, Liliuokalani decisively ended any hope for the monarchy and pledged her loyalty to the Republic. Thus Liliuokalani herself formally recognized the Republic — her abdication and loyalty oath belong among the letters whereby heads of government around the world (including Liliuokalani for those who believed her position as head of state for the Kingdom of Hawaii was still viable) gave de jure recognition to the Republic as the rightful government of Hawaii.

Click on the photos to zoom in for more detail.
Abdication letter, pages 1 – 5:

All eight pages were the originals from 1895, stored in the safe of the Archives of the State of Hawaii. A packet containing all 8 pages was brought out from the safe by Archivist Luella H. Kurkjian and photographed by Sandra Puanani Burgess, assisted by Kenneth R. Conklin, on March 25, 2008.

Related materials:

Liliuokalani’s letter of abdication and her oath of loyalty to the Republic are available as digitized text (they can be copy/pasted and searched) at
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/LiliuAbdication.html

Full text of the Constitution of the Republic of Hawaii, to which Liliuokalani was swearing her oath of loyalty, can be found at
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/RepubHawConst1894.html

 

Spun Web Technology SMART SEO

Related Posts

• Bob Marley and Skinhead Reggae: The Unexpected Harmony That Bridged Cultures
• The Future of Broadcasting: How Streaming Radio is Shaping the Music Industry
• The Dan Bongino Show [TRUMP BREAKING NEWS] Liberal Meltdown Proves Their Guilt in This Scandal!
• Part 1: Men in the Modern West

• Delving into the Psychedelic Universe of Ariel Pink: An In-Depth Overview of His Musical Journey
• Reviving the sounds of original skinhead reggae: A look at its resurgence in popular culture
• What does AI mean for my future
• When Gun Rights Become Team Sports: The Hypocrisy Behind the Charlie Kirk Death

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

The times attached to the mini-blogs below at all Hawaiian Time -10 UTC

This is a very serious topic for me. I have lost many people in the area of Springville Utah in my generation who have taken their own lives, or have OD on drugs in a kamikaze pursuit to end their own lives.
Or at least replace what they once had with substances and other addictions.

I can count 15 people who took their own lives and 3 Overdoses from my class, and we are only 41, many of these deaths took place early on. I lived with an uncle and nephew who lived with their grandma, and were only a year or two a part. They both took their own lives early in life. So many others, I also spoke at my brothers funeral when he took his own life, and a few others over the years.

I have lived in a lot of places of the world, and I very much enjoy the world and humanity as a whole. But Utah is untolerable for me. I know a lot of what I can and would complain about are “first world problems”. I personally would love to live their again. We had a successful business on Main Street and bought our first home in Mapleton (the next town over).

I have told my wife many times how fond I am of Springville Utah and how I would love to go back to that town. But I can not subject my kids to it, so it may happen for me, but I will be much older by then.

I worry about my kiddos, it is just human nature and there are some very serious issues in Springville.

I spoke about it in a video that I made about 9 years ago.

The state of Utah are often #1 for teen suicide, and are current #5 for overall suicide and suicide is on the rise (drastically in Utah).

In fact the leading cause of death for kids 11 to 17 is suicide in Utah.

https://kutv.com/news/local/utah-youth-suicide-now-leading-cause-of-death-for-utah-kids-ages-11-17

Utah uses twice the national average of prescription drugs.

This is a reference that I used in my broadcast today, showing a warning label for an anti-depressant.

Ref: https://www.uspharmacist.com/article/antidepressants-and-suicide-in-children

My main topic for today’s show is to illustrate the absolute control that the LDS church has on Utah politics.

I wanted to offer a Bible lesson about the priestly anointing oil of Moses.

Reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_anointing_oil

And my point is not only is it a holy sacrament and ritual, but that cannabis is safe and effective for treating many medical conditions. There is no argument tere.
In regards to safety, no one has died from cannabis. But 10’s of thousands of people died from prescription drugs and their side effects.

We have a group where we offer this information, 6000 strong so far.

https://xcannabis.net/cannabiscause
Cannabis Cures Cancer @ Causes.com

I encourage the LDS church to stay out of politics, and let the will of the people stand, before they irreparably destroy our republic.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2018/12/03/utah-house-passes-medical/

The LDS church destroyed this to nearly nothing. Just like their “Zion Curtain” crap.