Post #93994 by lanikai on Tue, Jun 1, 2004 8:54 PM

racial rhetoric: "the art of speaking or writing effectively upon the subject of race":

ok you want to avoid this.

dunno why.
It is fact.
The sugar barons overthrew the monarchy.
they were white men.

its not "degenerating" into racial rhetoric. it is elucidation into fact.

"... in questions of rights and ownership what qualifies as a native Hawaiian, and are their subgroups? Before the islands were "unified" under Kamehameha, there were distinct groups on the different islands. So, if an artifact is associated with one of these distinct groups, should the right of ownership go only to native Hawaiians with lineage that traces to that group, or should it go to the broader melting pot of native Hawaiians that resulted from Kamehameha's unification, whether descended from the conquerors or the conquered? Wouldn't the latter be unfair if the artifact dates from a time before Kamehameha? -Randy"

this is the the characteristic split hair "rhetoric" used by the anti Hawaiian-sovereignty people that they use to try to divide and conquer.