Hawaiians Take Back Palace, Thanks Irene....

[GhostChild]

(CNN) -- A group of native Hawaiians occupied the grounds of the old
Hawaiian monarchy's royal residence Wednesday, vowing to stay and do
the business of the kingdom's government.

A member of the protest group Hawaiian Kingdom Government unlocks the
palace gate.

1 of 3 "It is through a greater realm than ours" that the group took
this action, said Mahealani Kahau, elected leader of the group,
called Hawaiian Kingdom Government. "Today and every day, we will be
here to assume our role."

Group members left the palace grounds Wednesday afternoon, but vowed
to return Thursday morning, The Honolulu Advertiser reported.

"We'll be here at 6 o'clock in the morning," Kahau told the newspaper.

The group is one of several in Hawaii that reject statehood and seek
to return to the constitutional monarchy that effectively ended in
1893 when a group of politicians, businessmen and sugar planters --
aided by the U.S. minister to Hawaii -- overthrew the kingdom's
government.

The monarchist groups say that the kingdom was overthrown and annexed
into the United States illegally.

Hawaii's office of the attorney general did not immediately return a
phone call seeking comment on Wednesday's action.

The staff of Iolani Palace, built in 1882 and now operated as a
museum, shut down the building to visitors. The 60 or so protesters
occupied the grounds, chaining the gates and stationing guards there
to explain to visitors the purpose of the action.

The group later reopened the gates, but remained on the grounds and
the building was kept closed.

"It saddens my heart to have to turn away visitors," said palace
staff member Cindy Ascencio, who added that although she, too, is a
native Hawaiian, she does not understand the actions of the group.
Ascencio also said that the group appeared peaceful and she was not
concerned about security.

Jose Carrion, a visitor to Hawaii from Puerto Rico, told Honolulu's
KHON-TV that he was "disappointed" he wouldn't be able to visit the
ornate palace and "learn about the culture of the Hawaiians."

"We wanted to come here precisely because we thought we'd learn
something about the history of Hawaii and the last queen and the
monarchy," said Carrion, who said he had reservations for the
visit. "But we're leaving tomorrow so we won't get to see the palace."

But Carrion also said he "kind of understood" the actions of the
group.

Puerto Rico and Hawaii, along with Guam and the Philippines, were
annexed into the United States in 1898 after the Spanish-American
War. Guam and Puerto Rico remain territories of the United States.
The Philippines gained independence after World War II, and Hawaii
became the 50th state in 1959.

Although the monarchy was not overthrown until 1893, its fate
effectively was sealed six years earlier when the same group that
forced the overthrow imposed a new constitution on King David
Kalakaua, who was forced to sign it under threat of arms.

The document dramatically reduced the authority of the monarchy and
instituted voter requirements that limited voting to wealthy
businessmen and Hawaiian landowners, barring 75 percent of the native
Hawaiian population and all Asians.

When Queen Lili'uokalani ascended the throne after the death of her
brother in 1891, she began work on a new constitution that would have
effectively reversed the 1887 document. With the help of John L.
Stevens, the U.S. minister to Hawaii, the elite group that had
changed the constitution in 1887 opposed the queen's actions.

Two years later, under threat of U.S. troops, she yielded her
authority, saying, "Until such time as the Government of the United
States shall ... undo the action of its representative and reinstate
me in the authority which I claim as the constitutional sovereign of
the Hawaiian Islands."

The queen was later imprisoned in Iolani Palace for eight months for
her participation in an attempted 1895 revolt, until she relinquished
her claim to the throne in return for her release. She died in 1917
at 79.

In 1993, the U.S. Congress approved, and President Clinton signed, an
apology to the people of the Hawaiian Islands. The
document "acknowledges that the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii
occurred with the active participation of agents and citizens of the
United States and further acknowledges that the Native Hawaiian
people never directly relinquished to the United States their claims
to their inherent sovereignty as a people over their national lands,
either through the Kingdom of Hawaii or through a plebiscite or
referendum."

Although it was used as a seat of government for decades after the
deposition of Lili'uokalani, the palace fell into disrepair. When the
last of the government office moved out and into new facilities
adjacent to the palace in 1969, restoration work began. It opened to
the public in 1978.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/01/hawaii.palace.takeover/?
iref=mpstoryview

[GhostChild]

It Is True: None Of The Lands Of Turtle Island Were Ever Lawfully Ceded....

Which Can Only Happen By The Informed Consent Of All Those Who Are And All Those Who Come From Those Who Are.....

The Laws Of EUROPE HAVE NO FORCE OR EFFECT OUTSIDE OF EUROPE....

Is That Clear Now?......The GhostChild.

[GhostChild]

Sovereign Hawaiians:

I Recognize Your Sovereign Rights, And As You Know Many Turtle Islander's Do Too, You Are Not Alone In The Wilderness, May I Suggest Something?

Take Your Sovereign Flag And Sew Red Tassels And Red Fringe Upon It: It Will Be The Lawful Way For You To Usurp The COLONIAL CHILDREN'S ADIRMALTY MARSHAL LAW FLAG OF COMMERCE.....

Usurp The "USURPERS":

Truly This Move Will Enable Your Rights To Peace And Friendship For The Trade And The Commerce: To Your Benefit: Which By Your Common Poverty: Shows There Is No Benefit Under THEIR GOLD TASSELED AND GOLD FRINGE FLAGS OF MARTIME MARSHAL LAW....And Expect To Hear Them Laugh At This Move: The Shrill Of THEIR LAUGHTER WILL ONLY COVER UP THEIR FEAR OF WHAT IT REALLY MEANS And I Think You Know What It Means Too?....The GhostChild.

[GhostChild]

The Events At The Palace On Friday: Has Our Complete Attention To This Matter.

We Are Writing A Letter Of Sovereign Recognition To The Affirmation Of The Royal Family's Supreme Common Law Jurisdiction...

Further MR CLINTON:

It Would Appear Your Presence In This Matter Is Demanded!...The GhostChild.

[GhostChild]

Dear Royal Majesty Akahinui And Her Royal Highness Wahaine Of The Sovereign Kingdom Of Hawaii.

Re: The “PROVOST MARSHAL”.

Please “WARRANT” The “PROVOST MARSHAL” To APPEAR At A Common Law Court Of Competent Jurisdictional Boundaries Upon The Allodial Land Of The Sovereign Kingdom Of Hawaii.: And Then Ask The Following Questions:

A. “PROVOST MARSHAL”: To Whom Do You Owe Your Employ? Queen Elizabeth II Alexandra Mary Windsor Heir And Successor’s?: Or “Her” INCORPORATED SHIP AMERICA UNDER THE GUISE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-CORPORATION-GOVERNMENT UNDER THE LAW OF COLORS? Or At The DISPOSAL OF THE STATE-CORPORATION OF HAWAII?

B. If You (PROVOST MARSHAL) Are Under The Employ Of Queen Elizabeth II Alexandra Mary Windsor, Heir And Successor’s: TO WHOM DO YOU HOLD YOUR OATH(S) AND BOND? Can You Produce Your OATHS AND BOND? (Or Why Not?)=(Jurisdictional Proving Of Authority To The Holding Of The Office As: “PROVOST MARSHAL”)

C. “PROVOST MARSHAL”: Are You Aware Of Your ONEROUS FEDUCIARY TRUSTEE DUTIES?: In Regard’s To The “Sovereign To Sovereign Relationship Between Queen Elizabeth II Alexandra Mary Windsor, Heir And Successor’s: And: Royal Majesty Akahinui And Her Royal Highness Wahaine Of The Sovereign Kingdom Of Hawaii?

D. By The STATE IMPOSED ADIRMALTY-COMMERCE-MARSHAL LAW FLAG: UNDER THE LAW OF COLORS: Which ALIEN JURISDICTION IS IN CHARGE? The STATE-CORPORATION-HAWAII OF THE U.S.A.-CORPORATION Or The UNION JACK? How Can These Two ALIEN JURISDICTIONS Come Over And Above The Supreme Common Law Jurisdiction Of Royal Majesty Akahinui And Her Royal Highness Wahaine Of The Sovereign Kingdom Of Hawaii? Is Not This The Proof Of A JURISDICTIONAL FRAUD? Are There Any “STAUTES OF LIMITATIONS FOR FRAUD?

E. If You Can Not Lawfully Correct The Error’s In This Sovereign To Sovereign Relationship Between Queen Elizabeth II Alexandra Mary Windsor, Heir And Successor’s: And Royal Majesty Akahinui And Her Royal Highness Wahaine Of The Sovereign Kingdom Of Hawaii: If You Can Not Bring Safety And Protection To The Sovereign Interest’s Of Royal Majesty Akahinui And Her Royal Highness Wahaine Of The Sovereign Kingdom Of Hawaii: Then Why Are You Trespassing? Are You Enabling A Jurisdictional Fraud?

Your Silence Is Consent To The Correction Of These Historical Error’s To Transgression To Sin: We Accept Your Offer.

[GhostChild]

Dear CNN-CORPORATION:

Truly Your "BYASS" In This Matter Is Not Surprising. Your Confounding Ignorance And Predjudice Is Clearly Evident And For All Our People To See Your DARK-CORPORATE HOARD-MEDIA POSITION Based In The ASSUMPTION AND PRESUMPTION JURISDICTION UNDER THE LAW OF COLORS....(GENOCIDE For Geocide?)

Now I Feel Better Blowing That Off My Chest!

Why Is It That The HOME OF THE BRAVE PERSONS: Is Not The Land Of The Free People?

Why Is The AMERICAN MEDIA So Threatened By The Freedom Of The Original Peoples Of This Allodial Land That Can Never Be: AMERICAN?

Thank You For The Proof: The COLONIAL PERSONS Are FREE TOO DO AS THEY PLEASE: And The Original People Of Turtle Island Are Only Free To Do As They Are TOLD?

Shame On The Lot Of You Who Enable Hate And Property Theft.....The GhostChild.

[GhostChild]

Thanks WorldReports.Org: Something To Think About Regarding Treaty's And Such....

LEGAL TUTORIAL: The Steps of Common Fraud:

Step 1: Fraud in the Inducement: “… is intended to and which does cause one to execute an instrument, or make an agreement… The misrepresentation involved does not mislead one as the paper he signs but rather misleads as to the true facts of a situation, and the false impression it causes is a basis of a decision to sign or render a judgment” Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.

Step 2: Fraud in Fact by Deceit (Obfuscation and Denial) and Theft:

• “ACTUAL FRAUD. Deceit. Concealing something or making a false representation with an evil intent [scanter] when it causes injury to another…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.

• “THE TORT OF FRAUDULENT DECEIT… The elements of actionable deceit are: A false representation of a material fact made with knowledge of its falsity, or recklessly, or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth, and with intent to induce reliance thereon, on which plaintiff justifiably relies on his injury…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Deceit’.

Step 3: Theft by Deception and Fraudulent Conveyance:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT… The hiding or suppression of a material fact or circumstance which the party is legally or morally bound to disclose…”.

• “The test of whether failure to disclose material facts constitutes fraud is the existence of a duty, legal or equitable, arising from the relation of the parties: failure to disclose a material fact with intent to mislead or defraud under such circumstances being equivalent to an actual ‘fraudulent concealment’…”.

• To suspend running of limitations, it means the employment of artifice, planned to prevent inquiry or escape investigation and mislead or hinder acquirement of information disclosing a right of action, and acts relied on must be of an affirmative character and fraudulent…”.

Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., 'Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Concealment’.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE:

• ‘FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE… A conveyance or transfer of property, the object of which is to defraud a creditor, or hinder or delay him, or to put such property beyond his reach…”.

• “Conveyance made with intent to avoid some duty or debt due by or incumbent or person (entity) making transfer…”.

Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary', Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Conveyance’.