Quantcast

Thursday, July 31, 2014         

KAUAKŪKALAHALE


 Print   Email   Comment | View 40 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

E Mau Ana Ka Mo'olelo

By Kekaha Solis

POSTED:



Synopsis: The 2014 World Indigenous Peoples Conference on Education was successful.

———

Welina e nā makamaka mai ka lā hiki i Ha 'eha 'e a i kona welo 'ana i ka moku kā 'ili lā 'o Lehua, a pēlā pū me nā Kānaka 'Ōiwi o nā 'āina like 'ole o ka honua nei. Ua pōmaika 'i ko Hawai 'i i ka hiki 'ana mai o nā lāhui like 'ole o ka honua nei i ka 'Aha Kūkā Ho 'ona 'auao o nā Kānaka 'Ōiwi o ka Honua nei o kēia makahiki nei. I ke Kulanui Kaiāulu 'o Kapi 'iolani i mālama 'ia ai ua 'aha kūkā nei.

'O kahi mea nani loa, 'o ka hapanui o nā ha 'i 'ōlelo ho 'oulu, he mau 'ohana Hawai 'i. A he kūpono nō 'oiai, 'o ka 'ohana, he mea nui ia i ka Hawai 'i, ka lāhui nāna e ho 'okipa nei i nā hoa 'ōiwi a 'o ka lāhui ho 'i nāna e mālama nei i ka 'aha kūkā o kēia makahiki. A 'o kēia mau 'ohana e kū ana a e ho 'oulu ana i nā Kānaka 'Ōiwi, he mau 'ohana aloha nui 'ia a mahalo nui 'ia e ko Hawai 'i. Eia mai nā ha 'i 'ōlelo ho 'oulu: 'o Kekuhi Keali 'ikanaka 'oleohaililani lāua 'o Kauka Taupōuri Tangarō a me kā lāua mau keiki; 'o ka 'Ohana Holt; 'o ka 'Ohana Hoe; 'o ka 'Ohana Osorio a me ka 'Ohana Robinson. (Inā ma ka Pō 'aono, lā 24 o Mei, e heluhelu 'ia ana kēia kolamu nei 'o Kauakūkalahale, e naue aku i ke Kulanui Kaiāulu 'o Kapi 'olani no ka ha 'i 'ōlelo 'ana o ka 'Ohana Robinson. E ho 'omaka ana i ka hola 4:00 o ka 'auinalā.)

Ua nui loa nā ha 'i 'ōlelo like 'ole i ulu ai ka hoi ma ka Pō 'alua a me ka Pō 'ahā. 'O ka Pō 'akolu nei, he lā huaka 'i ia, ma 'ō a ma 'ō o O 'ahu nei, mai uka a i kai. A i nehinei i mālama 'ia ai ka 'Aha Kāne a me ka 'Aha Wahine Kuhinapapa. Mahalo i nā luna nāna i ho 'olālā i ka 'Aha Kūkā Ho 'ona 'auao o kēia makahiki nei, 'oiai, ua ho 'oka 'awale 'ia aku kahi lā e mālama 'ia ai nei mau 'aha. He mea nui nō ia no ka Hawai 'i a me nā lāhui a pau.

'O kekahi mea maika 'i, i loko nō o ka hiki 'ana o ua 'aha kūkā nei i ka panina, e ho 'omau 'ia ana nā pilina hou ma waena o nā hoa aloha hou, a 'o kekahi, e ho 'omau 'ia ana kekahi mau hō 'ike 'ike 'elua. He mau hō 'ike 'ike hana no 'eau ia i ho 'omaka i ka lā 19 o Mei a e ho 'omau 'ia ana nō a i ka pule 'elua o Iune.

'O ka mua o ia mau hō 'ike 'ike hana no 'eau, ua kapa 'ia 'o “salt wada” a he mau loea nō ma ka hana no 'eau, ua loa 'a iā lākou a pau ke Kekelē Lae O 'o Hana No 'eau (MFA). Eia mai lākou, 'o Kauka de Silva, 'o April A.H. Drexel, 'o Maile Andrade, 'o Kapulani Landgraf, 'o Chuck Kawai 'olu Souza, 'o Herman Pi 'ikea Clark, 'o Kaili Chun, 'o Abigail Romanchak a me Maika 'i Tubbs. Aia 'o “salt wada” ma ka Hale Hō 'ike 'ike 'o Koa (Koa Gallery) ma ke Kulanui Kaiāulu 'o Kapi 'olani. E hemo ana mai ka Pō 'alua a i ka Pō 'aono, mai ka hola 10:00 a i ka hola 3:00 o ka 'auinalā, a i ka lā 14 o Iune.

A 'o ka lua o ka hō 'ike 'ike, aia ma ka Hale Waihona Puke 'o Lama, a ua kapa 'ia 'o “3Rs: Respect, Responsibilities & Re-righting.” Ua nui loa nā mea hana no 'eau, a no laila, 'a 'ole e hō 'ike 'ia ko lākou mau inoa. Aia ana ma laila, a hiki i ka lā 10 o Iune. E hemo ana ka Hale Waihona Puke 'o Lama mai ka hola 8:00 a i ka hola 5:00 mai ka Pō 'akahi a ka Pō 'ahā. A i ka Pō 'alima, pani 'ia i ka hola 4:00. Na April Drexel i mālama i nā hō 'ike 'ike 'elua.

Mahalo a nui i nā luna i ho 'okele i ka hana, nā kānaka a pau nāna i kōkua a kāko 'o i ka 'Aha Kūkā a me nā hoa 'ōiwi i hele mai.


This column is coordinated by Kawaihuelani Center for Hawaiian Language at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa.






 Print   Email   Comment | View 40 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(40)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
Ken_Conklin wrote:
Hawaii, like Las Vegas, is a tourist destination where groups with thousands of members sometimes hold their annual conventions (the American Dental Association, for example). So these wealthy "indigenous people" from around the world were very welcome to jump on airplanes to Hawaii and stimulate our economy by spending their wealth here. I wonder what happened at the airport when they tried to take their spears and sharkstooth throatslashers on the airplane.

But what in the world were ethnic Hawaiians doing at a meeting of indigenous people? Of course they could be working as hotel maids or gardeners, but should they be actual participants, masquerading as indigenous?

Dr. Jocelyn Linnekin, a student of famed ethnohistorian Marshall Sahlins, spent a year (ending in 1975) living among ethnic Hawaiians on the isolated Keanae peninsula in windward Maui, along the picturesque road to Hana. She focused on the persistence of tradition. She studied whether traditional Hawaiian practices were still followed, including "exchange-in-kind" and mutual networks of informal obligation as the economic model. She notes that even in 1975, in this isolated community where almost every resident is ethnic Hawaiian and living on land passed down for generations, ancient rituals and cultural practices do not survive in ancient forms. In other words, even 40 years ago, they are no longer an "indigenous people."


on May 24,2014 | 08:21AM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
First you say that Hawaii has no indigenous people with your "We are all from somewhere else" mantra, but now you say that Hawaiians were indigenous (but not anymore)... So which is it? Either they never were or they were. They cannot be both. So pick a story and stick with it. You come across as disingenuous because you cannot keep your story straight.
on May 27,2014 | 08:50PM
puhi wrote:
Aloha, Mai pane I kēlā kāne. ʻAʻohe ona aloha iki I ka poʻe Hawaiʻi. A ma kahi o kona hoʻi ʻana I ʻAmelika, mamake ʻo ia nei e ʻōlelo ʻino mau e pili ana I ka poʻe Hawaiʻi. Inā ʻōlelo kēlā I kekahi mea me ka hoʻolohe ʻole ʻia ʻana, ua ʻōlelo maoli anei kēlā I kekahi mea? ʻAʻole au I heluhelu iki I kāna mea, ua ʻike nō naʻe I ka makemake o kekahi e pane iā ia. Mai pane iā ia. Ke aloha nō.
on May 29,2014 | 10:33PM
Ken_Conklin wrote:
Some of the "cultural" performances at WIPCE 1999 were more political than cultural. Hundreds of people were trained at small meetings throughout the islands to memorize some chants that would be used on the beach to greet canoes full of delegates from other nations -- delegates who had already flown in but now went out in canoes to stage a traditional-looking arrival. The whole thing was as fake as a TV soap opera. I attended one of those training sessions in Kane'ohe. Program coordinators provided written copies of the lyrics. The chant described stringing a lei with flowers. The training session I attended made clear the chant would be sung twice -- the first time softly and lovingly, the second time loudly and harshly. The first time was a loving welcome for the guests; the second time (identical words) was a warning that unwelcome invaders [like people of American ancestry, for example?] would be pierced with spears (as a needle pierces the flowers being strung on a lei) and their dead bodies lined up alongside each other would constitute a "lei" of resistance. Nice double-entendre greeting! Maybe they got the idea from the New Zealand Maori chant we've all enjoyed, where the performers with fierce-looking tattoos wave their spears, stick out their tongues, and shout a greeting "Tu mate" [Your death]. Today's ethnic Hawaiians adore and imitate the New Zealand Maori because the Maori have a vibrant, living indigenous culture, and special political and land-holding rights.
on May 24,2014 | 08:23AM
Ken_Conklin wrote:
Numerous training sessions were held on several islands with printed instructions, prayers, and chants to be memorized. In traditional indigenous culture, these things would already be known to the participants from childhood and would be passed down through oral tradition and apprenticeship. The participants later got on airplanes and flew to Hilo, stayed in motels, drove by car to the beach, and performed their "indigenous" welcoming ceremony. Anyone would be able to do this sort of thing, regardless whether they have native blood, even without having cultural experiences of that sort in ordinary daily life. In that sense, most modern "Native Hawaiians" are only "wannabe" indigenous, just the same as the American hippies who sometimes come to Hawaii and try to adopt an "indigenous" lifestyle. This is not to disrespect ethnic Hawaiians or their ancient or modern reinvented culture -- it is only to recognize a cultural discontinuity that would not be present if the people were truly indigenous.
on May 24,2014 | 08:27AM
kamau wrote:
with all that said, what is your point?
on May 24,2014 | 10:28AM
8082062424 wrote:
that he is a hater. and love to hear his own self go on and on. his buddy DD is missing im sure it will turn up too
on May 24,2014 | 10:37AM
hanalei395 wrote:
DD, who is an American Indian, (and for some reason after coming here) is an extreme HATER of Hawaiians like Conklin. In fact, it even HATES the term "Hawaiian", and instead, uses "Polynesian", an unnecessary redundancy. But necessary for DD to cool down its hatred.
on May 24,2014 | 11:34AM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on May 24,2014 | 03:06PM
DiverDave wrote:
That would be false Terri_Kelli, Diverdave is part Chickasaw, an real "Indigenous" people. You are slandering Dr. Conklin and myself and will be reported to the editor for disciplinary action. I didn't even comment first before you started your slander.
on May 27,2014 | 08:30AM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
No you are NOT part Chicasaw. That is a lie. You are 100% KennyKKonklín.
on May 27,2014 | 08:29PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
DD did not exist until I pointed out to KKKonklin that he is only making himself look bad in public with his childish insults to others. So he divided his posts into the most incendiary and immature posts as DD so as not to lose face in public, and it gives a false sense of support to his KKKonklin posts to have his alterego post support.
on May 27,2014 | 09:06PM
DiverDave wrote:
Poor hanalei395, what have I said that you would call be names like "extreme hater". I think everyone can see that you are the personal attack "hater".
on May 27,2014 | 08:25AM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
Ae, hanalei. KKK/DD uses Polynesian for Hawaiians to imply that Hawaiians are not indigenous to Hawaii, and so he calls them Polynesians. Well he fails to realize that Hawaii is part of Polynesia and thus since they are both the first humans AND the first Polynesians to settle the Hawaiian islands, then that makes them indigenous Polynesians AND indigenous Hawaiians. It just renders his point moot based on the cultural and ethnic overlap. Hey, they are Polynesians on Polynesian islands and so that makes them....... indigenous! *headslap*
on May 27,2014 | 08:56PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on May 24,2014 | 03:21PM
jomama wrote:
Rather, All roads of racial preference lead to the same place.
on May 24,2014 | 05:35PM
Ken_Conklin wrote:
Teri keeps bringing up the topic of Soli Niheu's funeral. I remind you that it was the Kauakukalahale column which made a public announcement about the funeral, to take place in public at the Palace. Since it was therefore a matter of public discussion, I discussed it. And since Soli Niheu was a well-known "cultural traditional practitioner", I asked questions about whether his body would be baked in an imu in the traditional cultural way, and whether the bones would then be wrapped in a ka'ai and buried secretly in a cave. If some guy is gonna claim to be a traditional practitioner, and if his funeral is then announced publicly and to be held as a political event in a public park (the Palace grounds), then it is perfectly acceptable to discuss all that. Now Teri, if you think the funeral should not have been publicized, then your quarrel is with Solis. And if you feel so terribly offended, then you should not keep bringing it up. As you yourself have so often said, if you can't stand the heat, don't start the fire. You complain about "Childish insults"? And then you use childish insults like spelling my name with all those Ks, and calling someone "Diaper Dave"? Who are you calling childish?
on May 24,2014 | 10:27PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
I am calling YOU childish. KKK/DD referred to holokanaka as holokukae in the comments under the columns in the months of May and June 2013. Over and over. That is childish. When DD/KKK referred to me and others as ídíot, móròn, ignorant, red diapér doopér baby, etc, they practiced a prolonged and systematic bullying effort replete. Then KKK/DD turn around and blame the victim for defending himself. Then you attack a dead man Soli Niheu and his family in the comments under the article Ua hala i ke ao polohiwa a Kane on January 5, 2013. If you really wanted to know the wnswers to those questions, then you would have gone to the funeral, but you didn't go. You chose to put the family on blast in a public forum instead. That is bullying on your part. You are an internet bully. Thus, YOU are childish. You referred to me as a rédneck crackér under a column from Nov 2011, and when I called you out on it in the comments under the march 29 2014 column, what did you say? You said that you never said that. "It doesn't exist" Well you lied and I proved you wrong - because the screen shots are still sitting on the Star-Advertiser's facebook page after all these weeks. So you are a hypocrite and still childish. Oh and a bully. I will NOT be bullied. You can bully Prof Kehaulani Watson with your entire website about her, replete with your dirty old man comments about her looks, but you are not going to bully me. period. So if you cannot take the heat, old man, then do not start the fire.
on May 27,2014 | 09:30PM
holokanaka wrote:
So what is your point Konki? Are you saying that because the Hawaiians are not following old cultural practices that many may have forgotten/encouraged to forget and therefore are not entitled to call themselves Hawaiian and therefore not entitled to attend this meeting? And that because of that they are inferior morally to the white race? or maybe you are trying to somehow justify the stealing of these Islands. And don't respond with "your" legal version of the annexation of these Islands unless you can show the legal superiority of your version then the u.s. Department of justice legal division's version. So again Konki what is your point?
on May 24,2014 | 01:50PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
What he is really saying is that he forgot that he said that Hawaiians were never indigenous in the first place and now he slips up by saying that Hawaiians WERE indigenous at one point but not anymore. So what he is really saying is that he cannot keep his story straight.
on May 28,2014 | 06:14AM
DiverDave wrote:
Terii_Kelii is obviously wrong and so he mixes what I have said with what Dr. Conklin has stated in order to attack Dr. Conklin and say "he cannot keep his story straight." Well it is soooo true that everything and everybody on these Hawaii Islands came from somewhere else, even the Polynesians. They were only here for 500 years at the time of contact with Capt. Cook, the same amount of time the Europeans have been in North America now. Does that now make the Europeans "indigenous" to North America Terii_Kelii (David Rogers)? After all if 500 years is long enough for the Polynesians to claim they are "indigenous" to Hawaii, then Europeans should be able to claim the same, right? It is obvious that the sovereignty fringe is playing semantic games in order to keep their "free" stuff.
on May 28,2014 | 07:05AM
DiverDave wrote:
What Dr. Conklin I believe is trying to say is that after being only one of many races in a Kingdom for 100 years, and then being one of many, many races in a Democracy for another 116 years, to now claim that they are somehow deserved of extra legal rights over all other races, that they have surely melded and assimilated with genetically and culturally is simply ridiculous. There is not one Polynesian that I know that does not celebrate the Christmas holiday for instance. No one is stopping anyone from practicing any part of their past and present forms of their culture, however. The latest canoe sailing venture is a prime example. Almost no part of the "canoe" other than the shape, is the same as they would have sailed back in the day. The hull is fiberglass, it has ropes made of the best materials of today, it has the latest high tech electronics, radios, epirbs, etc. Yes, the Polynesians are just one of many races, all of which have melded together genetically, exchanged many cultural pieces between them, and have become a part of the melting pot we all call Hawaii.
on May 28,2014 | 07:21AM
holokanaka wrote:
here he goes again with his "They (Polynesians) were only here for 500 tears at the time of contact with capt cook" rubbish. as I have pointed out to the joker on several occasions that there is solid evidence (remnants of Koa planked canoe in a Santa Monica Museum carbon dated to 1000 AD. Koa grows only in Hawaii). That would prove the Polynesians were here at only 700 to 800 years before contact. That is assuming the Polynesians got here cut down the Koa tree cured it, planked the wood, sewed the planks together etc in maybe 2 weeks??? but of course I am again wasting my time commenting here because as the joker has admitted, he doesn't care what anyone else thinks...
on May 28,2014 | 07:45AM
DiverDave wrote:
There were folks here before the Polynesians. How do you think they got here? Did they swim? Did they not have many sorts of the same technics? I think I'll stay with the University of Hawaii Decorated Anthropologist, Terry Hunt's research. Not holokanaka's speculations. (search "East Polyensia colonized faster and more recently than previously thought")
on May 28,2014 | 08:16AM
holokanaka wrote:
Who and where from were these folks that were "here" before the Polynesians??
on May 28,2014 | 09:08AM
DiverDave wrote:
Most certainly the Menehune. The Menehune were superb craftspeople. The Menehune built temples (heiau), fishponds, roads, canoes, and houses. Some of these structures still exist, and the craftsmanship is evident. They lived in Hawaiʻi before settlers arrived from Polynesia many centuries ago. The works attributed to the Menehune are of advanced design, including dressed stone, and apparent antiquity, predating known peoples; no alternate explanation has been accepted for their construction. But, of course with the age of these island many millions of years old it would be silly to think that many peoples visited and lived in these island long before any eastern movement of the Polynesians which at best inhabited these islands hundreds of years before Cook appeared.
on May 28,2014 | 12:41PM
holokanaka wrote:
so again joker, where these people from. obviously you are saying these people are DEFINITELY NOT Polynesians. how can you be so sure that these people are NOT Polynesians if you don't even know where they are from. remember joker Polynesia is a big area with many different peoples who are defined as Polynesians.
on May 28,2014 | 01:15PM
DiverDave wrote:
Who is to know? But, you apparently agree that they existed. As such, the wave of Polynesians that arrived 500 years before contact with Cook were not the first. Period.
on May 28,2014 | 01:55PM
holokanaka wrote:
There you go again joker, not responding to my question so I will try again. Your response to my post is "who is to know?" When I suggested the menehune may be "Polynesians". Your earlier post seems to suggest that these people were "Definitely not Polynesians". How can you honestly imply they were definitely not Polynesians?????
on May 28,2014 | 04:41PM
DiverDave wrote:
They could have been Indians from South America. How do you know where they came from? Did you send someone back in a time machine? Your just a real kick you are! LOL!
on May 28,2014 | 09:00PM
holokanaka wrote:
so finally you admit you do not know where "these people" are from and therefore agree that they could be Polynesians. that is wonderful joker.......
on May 28,2014 | 09:07PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
"Who is to know?" I do. People from Nuku Hiva mā were the first settlers and then people from Tahiti mā. Anthropologists and Archaeologists have established that already. Well, considering the menehune are a legendary people who have the ability to complete extraordinary feats of work in unnatural time spans, who are invisible, who have the ability to turn people to stone, etc etc etc in stories, then discussing them as real people who settled in the islands first, second, or last is a colossal waste of time. So let's see who brought up the ridiculous notion of menehune as the original settlers of the islands to see who is wasting everyone's time. oh of course. Umm KKK/DD and just a preemptive "NO" for you there - the leprechauns are not real either. So stop chasing rainbows. You're welcome.
on May 28,2014 | 09:28PM
DiverDave wrote:
They could also be Chinese. You must have the burden of proof when you make an exact claim like the Menehune were definitely Polynesian, when their stature and appearance were completely different.
on May 28,2014 | 09:31PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
Yao Ming called. He said he is insulted by your racist stereotyping. Just fyi, Chinese are not that short. Maybe you have not noticed, but they are not all 3 feet tall like menehune. So anyway, that said, the study you continue to hold up only indicates a faster and more recent migration of the islands of Polynesia. So I do not even know why you keep bringing it up. 800AD or 1100AD... that does not matter because they were indeed first. In fact, where above you try to imply that this study is of some use to establish that people other than Polynesians settled the Hawaiian islands, the study clearly indicates an exclusive Polynesian settlement of the entire Eastern Polynesian area, including Hawaii. The fact that you hold it up as proof that Hawaiians were a late arrival to Hawaii and your risible claim that others were there before them is contradicted by this very study that insists that ..... one ..... more .... time "East Polynesia colonized faster and more recently than previously thought" By whom? By peoples from other Polynesian island. To draw a picture for "you know who", Terry Hunt explicitly asserts that archaeological evidence points to a lack of human presence before 1100AD, NOT a lack of HAWAIIAN or POLYNESIAN presence- again, a lack of HUMAN presence. So holding it up as proof that other people arrived before those from Nuku Hiva mā and Tahiti mā is sophomorically inept. It is yet another colossal waste of time. really??? really. There is not an anthropologist, archaeologist, or historian who disagrees with the fact that the settlers of the Hawaiian islands were from Nuku Hiva mā and Tahiti mā. smh. Pā mai ka makani ma o nā pepeiao.
on May 28,2014 | 10:00PM
DiverDave wrote:
There is not an anthropologist, archaeologist, or historian who can say who came upon these shores over the last 4 million years. And that's a fact Jack!
on May 28,2014 | 10:10PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
They have a diploma. You don't, They completed intensive field work on the subject. You didn't. They published books and journal articles with detailed empirical evidence supporting their theories. You didn't. They, therefore, can say definitively that Hawaiians as Polynesian settlers were first. You, meanwhile, cannot.
on May 28,2014 | 10:25PM
DiverDave wrote:
Are they also time travelers? There is not an anthropologist, archaeologist, or historian who can say who came upon these shores over the last 4 million years. And that's a fact Jack!
on May 28,2014 | 10:35PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
Wait a minute. YOU are the one who brought up the anthropologist/archaeologist Terry Hunt in the first place, holding his body of work up as proof of Polynesian migration, and now you say that no anthropologist, archaeologist, or historian "can know who came upon these shores over the last 4 million years". So you contradict yourself. These scientists know or they do not know. You use a work you clearly did not read in full as your "proof" and now you say it is worthless because the scientists as whole cannot prove anything. Umm yes they can- examples: LUCY, human migration from Asia to North America, hominid settlements in Europe and Africa, etc. Humans leave behind their bones and evidence of human settlement. That is how we know who lived where and with a rough time frame of when. I learned that in 7th grade. Sad to see you missed that. So with that said, there is no evidence of human settlement of the islands before Polynesian settlement. period. We DO know that because there are no bones and no evidence of tools and charcoal and such that would indicate that. That is exactly what YOU proved with Terry Hunt's article that YOU have mentioned multiple times. If you do not believe his work then stop bringing it up. period.
on May 29,2014 | 06:51AM
DiverDave wrote:
Not at all Terry Hunt's work has to do with the Polynesian settling of these islands. Not the peoples that came before them.
on May 29,2014 | 12:40PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
You SAY that Hunt has other reports but there are 3 problems with that - 1) You already dismissed the entire field of anthropology above 2) You ONLY ever refer to that one article and nothing else 3) if he or anyone else has published one single solitary piece of work stating, even implying, that other peoples settled Hawaii before those of Tahiti mā and Nuku Hiva mā, it would be front page news and prominently known in history books and books of anthropology. What you say exists does not in reality exist. You make up nonsense out of thin air because you cannot admit you are wrong. This is but 1 way how I know you and KKKonklin are one and the same. You cannot admit you are wrong. You are simply too far gone as a narcissist to even consider such an act.
on May 29,2014 | 09:23PM
DiverDave wrote:
Your problem is you cannot ever admit I am right. At least holokanaka admits the Menehune were here before the Polynesian settlers. He was just wrong in asserting that they must have been also Polynesians. That no one may ever know. It's a big ocean out there.
on May 29,2014 | 09:45PM
holokanaka wrote:
for the record, I DO NOT agree with dum dum joker that Menhune were real or ever on these Islands... my line of questioning was to show that the joker does not know what he is talking about and that he will latch on to any opportunity to put a negative spin on any thing that has to do with Hawaiians
on May 30,2014 | 03:09PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Latest News/Updates
Blogs
The Green Leaf
Marine debris art

Political Radar
`Toss up’

Political Radar
Super

Political Radar
Hilton; Plaza Club

Political Radar
Direct mail

Political Radar
Direct mail