1 Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, who chairs the Senate Republican Policy Committee, wrote a comprehensive analysis addressing his concerns over the creation of a race-based government for Native Hawaiians and the dangerous precedents that this bill would create. The paper is available at http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/Jun2205NatHawSD.pdf.

2 Most people in the world do not know all the facts about what happened to the "Kingdom of Hawaii". Senator Kyl and a few other Senators are missing the whole point of a true Hawaiian sovereignty. Just as the Israeli's are giving back the Gaza to the palestinians, the US should do the same. The Apology resolution along with the Akaka bill are a meager attempt to correct the wrongs commited by the US, against a friendly & peaceful Hawaiian nation. If a theif stole something from you, and had free use of it for the past 100+ years, would you let him decide when & how to return it. The best thing for both parties is to have a neutral third party decide restitution. But before you take sides on this issue at least do some research, and know what you're talking about. Come to Hawaii and spend time with our people, try to understand what it felt like, when our ancestors lost their sovereignty. When Iolani Palace became a prison for our beloved Queen Liliuokalani, walk the halls and feel the deep spirit of sadness that still lingers there. Thank you for liberating Iraq, now let talk about Hawaii.

3 Kona, The Israelis are abandoning their settlements in Gaza because they are too hard to defend against the Palestinians who would attack them. If they had the choice, they wouldn't have "given" it back to the Palenstinians. Gaza and the West Bank are on opposite sides of Israel. They knew they could only keep one bit of territory---not both. Hence they opted to stay behind the wall in the West Bank, and hung the settlers in Gaza out to dry. The Palestinians are getting that land by default, not because of any generosity on behalf of the Israelis. There's a bit of a difference, wouldn't you say? I'll admit I don't know much about this whole Hawaiian "Independence" movement business. I'll research it when I have some free time. While, I'd love to come to Hawaii, unfortunately, I can't afford it. It's too expensive a trip from where I live. As far as feeling the sadness of your ancestors during such a trip, well, I don't know about that. I doubt I'd feel the sadness of your ancestors about losing their sovereignty any more than I'd feel the sadness of my Polish ancestors for the incessant divvying up of the place between the Russians, the Germans or the Austro-Hungarians if I went and visited Poland. The past is the past. While I will admit what happened then affects the now, there are many of us who get tired of being held accountable for the actions of people who came before us. The sins of the fathers are forever and ever being dumped on us---who had nothing to do with it. We're tired of being asked to take it up the you-know-where to "make amends for past wrongs." Well, I didn't own slaves. None of my ancestors owned slaves. None of my ancestors had anything to do with the annexation of Hawaii, etc. I'm tired of being told by people who have benefitted greatly from the United States' expansion policy---a policy that hasn't been in effect in quite some time, I might add---that I owe them more. I live in the Midwest, Kona. I hear this stuff ALL THE TIME from the tribes around here. That I should feel guilty over the losses their ancestors suffered, hence I should give them what they want as far as legislative concession are concerned. That because of this guilt, I should allow a casino to go up here, or, in the case of the most recent session of the Minnesota legislature, that I shouldn't let an indian casino go up just down the road from another indian casino, because it would cut into the business of one fantastically wealthy tribe in favor of some tribes from up in Northern Minnesota that could use the money. It's politics via guilt trip and it's annoying as all get out because, again, I didn't create the problem and I resent being held responsible for it. If you want sovereignty, take it. The US will never give it to you, you're just going to have to take it by hook or crook. Arm yourselves and put a flag up on the top of the largest mountain and go to town. I'm pretty sure there will be a war, but if you really want a sovereign Hawaii, you're willing to fight for that, right? But, when all is said and done, don't expect us to defend your new country. Let's flip the historical coin, shall we? The only reason we annexed Hawaii in the first place was that we needed a strategically placed outpost in the Pacific. Given the way we're fighting wars nowadays, we really don't need Pearl Harbor anymore, particularly not when we have other protectorates out in the Pacific, like Saipan and Guam, or even perhaps American Somoa who would probably enjoy a new naval base being built on their islands. Planes also have a longer range nowadays, too, and can go right past Hawaii if needs be. If this is what you want, fine with me. But don't expect any of the benefits or rights or protection of the United States. If you really want to go that far, more power to you, but I have a sneaking suspicion that you want sovereignty, yet you want the US to defend you as well. I can tell you right now that most likely won't happen.