Akaka doesn't support independence; blogs talk secession

After Sen. Akaka's statement in the NPR interview that appeared to at least leave open the possibility of eventual independence, which was pounced on by Rush Limbaugh, Akaka apparently felt it necessary to clarify that statement in a release picked up by the AP via KPUA:

U-S Senator Daniel Akaka says he doesn't support independence or secession of the state of Hawaii from the United States.

And he says his Native Hawaiian recognition bill has nothing to do with independence or secession. He says the bill addresses the legal and political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States within federal law.

Here's Akaka's press release.

Again, though it is quite true that the Akaka bill actually has nothing directly to do with independence, the independence argument is inadvertently gaining much exposure because of it.

It seems pretty remarkable to me to consider the fact that a sitting U.S. senator says something on national radio that seems to be at least open to Hawaii's independence and then feels the need to publicly state that he doesn't support independence, while someone like Rush Limbaugh, even out of his ignorance and confusion, is discussing the possibility of independence seriously, giving it broad exposure even while fearfully ranting against it.

There's been a number of blog posts based on Akaka's NPR statement and the WSJ op-ed piece by Gorton and Brown. Here's a few samples:

Aloha?
Hawaiian Secession?
Senator Open to Secession for Hawaii
and then there were 49
Hawaii to succeed??? (sic)
The second attack on Pearl Harbor
If at first you don't secede . . .
Don't want equality move to Hawaii
Slade Gorton and Hank Brown on the Akaka Bill By...
Divided We Fall

For the record, Hawaii's independence is not secession. Hawaii's sovereignty or territory was never legally ceded to the United States, either through the purported annexation via mere joint resolution, or the fraudulent so-called plebiscite for statehood and the admissions act, both domestic legislations without extraterritorial force on the country of Hawaii, which continues to be under prolonged illegal occupation. No cession, no secession. What we are talking about is not secession, but ending the occupation of Hawaii.

Whether you agree with the above or not, it is important to at least understand that perspective, which is held by many.

Update: Kathy, author of "Aloha?" post above, responds to my last two paragraphs above. My response to her is in her comments.

Posted: Thu - August 18, 2005 at 03:48 PM

getBlogName(); > getCategoryName("C1126750129"); >

Akaka doesn't support independence; blogs talk secession

> >