KPD Blue: Truth puts on its shoes

I have read Tony's book and while his framing of events in racist terms, in my opinion misses the mark, and there are some minor factual errors it is on the whole more accurate than say typical reporting in most dailies. The real issue is insular corruption by the power structure. Many insular communities, like the rural southern community I grew up in, can and do display this level of corruption, and the power structures racial makeup is entirely different (which is to say white). The race of the power structure is historical artifact, and not the driver of corruption.

As to why Tony wrote it -- that should be self evident. Tony was ridden out of town on a rail for basically doing his job. As a consequence of a reporter becoming (an unwilling) part of the story, charges of "vendetta" can dismiss the truth of the tale being told. Corruption is still in full bloom today, but largely dismissed as understandable as evidenced by this quote from Joan Conrow's blog "...not because the cops were necessarily crooked or bad, but hesitant to bust anyone who was a relative or a friend." Excuse me! Isn't that the definition of corruption: differential treatment under the law based upon affiliation?

Tony had to rely primarily on Court records, because of County of Kauai secrecy that is still a HUGE problem as we speak, and many individual bad actors then, are in positions of power NOW. These problems are still with us manifesting themselves in a variety of ways and will not begin to be addressed by putting these events in the past tense creating the illusion that it is old news and filing it under again quoting Joan's blog, "dredging up the stinky muck one more time for those who perhaps never knew the details or, like me, prefer to have forgotten."

"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it" while perhaps a trite shopworn phrase is still salient in the lives of Kauai citizens. There are years of executive session minutes still not released by the COK who is frightening tooth and nail to keep it that way. Both the Board of Ethics and Police Commission remain dysfunctional (and that's putting it kindly). KOC has and continues to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring outside attorneys to lose cases defending bad county actors.

Last election the COK council displayed an unbelievable abuse of political power by manufacturing a "tampering with a government document" conspiracy to attack a political opponent running for County Council (former police chief K.C. Lum) using what everyone knew was a sheet-feed error. Lum's house was raided right before the election. Think that played an role in his loss? Duh! After a six month investigation -- guess what? It was a sheet feed error. When the council hatched the conspiracy theory they demanded an apology from "members of the community that were trying to make the county look bad," but not a word of apology from the council members that concocted their lunatic conspiracy for their self-serving political gain. Talk about vendetta!

COK is more secretive today than ever and relies on Mark Twain's astute observation, "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." KPD Blue put shoes on the truth which now must fight for relevancy amid the propaganda spin of "why dredge up ancient history", "lets put it behind us" and, "its much better now." Such propaganda is blowing smoke to obscure the ongoing corruption occurring in real-time before our very eyes.

Assimilate This!

The whole problem of assimilation into the status quo is structural in nature and is imposed by the elite special interests who are supported by the legal system that enforces the structural integrity of the prevailing system which increasingly serve an ever shrinking number of super elite.

Take a square frame and pour equally sized marbles into that frame. The result will always be a pyramid. The un-assimilated marbles will be bounced out of the system. Using different marbles or different sized marbles, or a different number of marbles (well you need at least 5) or a different sized square frame will not alter the final result.

Until the shape of the frame itself is changed the result will always be the same, a pyramid.

Changing the frame is a radical (change from the root) and fundamental one, and apparently the only solution. To radically change the shape of the frame the system itself must become increasingly unstable with a lot of marbles bounced out of the system.

The increasing number of bounced marbles has created the recent resurgence of anarchism whose successes are in large part to technological innovation (internet,cell phones, etc) which allows people in different geographical locations to communicate and coordinate disruptive activities.

System instability is accelerating beyond the capacity of traditional power elites to handle, as more and more marbles are bounced out of the system. The result is fourth generation asymmetric warfare.

Welcome to Anarchism Triumphant!

Kauai Council members promote self-serving scam?

Andy Parx may have uncovered a nationally franchised self-promotion scam (See: another-round-of-imaginary-kibble) to help local politicians be viewed more favorably by voters. It appears no money is involved beyond the waste of time on the part of the perps and their dupes (i.e. the politicians involved and the citizen marks that fall for the time-wasting scam). If the facts check out it appears to be a very sophisticated scam cooked up by the trade group for local politicians NACO , or the National Association of Counties and franchised around the country by NACO members. No one really gets hurt and it's a great way for councilmembers to boost their positive image in the community.

Barack reality check: Who are you calling a dictator Obama?

In a speech Barack Obama gave in Flint, MI, called "Renewing American Competitiveness" on Jun 16th, 2008 he said;

Oil money pays for the bombs going off from Baghdad to Beirut, and the bombast of dictators from Caracas to Tehran.

Clearly Barack Obama agreeing with President Bush is calling President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela a dictator. Historical facts indicate otherwise. Chávez won the 1998 presidential election on December 6, 1998 with 56% of the votes (the largest margin in 40 years). In 2000 Chávez was reelected by 59.76% of the popular votes. Chávez survived a failed coup attempt in 2002 that tried to install the Chamber of Commerce president Pedro Carmona and in 2006 Chávez again won the OAS and Carter Center certification of the national election on December 3, 2006 with 63 percent of the popular vote.

Compare this to the United States 2004 election of George H.W. Bush by only 50.73% percent of the popular vote in a highly controversial election. The only international organization allowed to monitor the election, The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) Election Observation Mission Final Report said this;

In keeping with its OSCE commitments, the United States invited the OSCE/ODIHR to observe these elections. OSCE observers were granted access to polling stations in a number of states, although sometimes only in specific counties. However, in other states, access was not possible or was limited. This was a result of state law, either because international observers were not included in the statutory categories of persons permitted to be in polling places, or because the lack of reference to international observers in state law was deemed to constitute an obstacle to their presence in polling places. Lack of observer access to the election process, both international and domestic, including at polling station level, is contrary to OSCE commitments, and limited the possibility of the OSCE EOM to comment more fully on the election process.

Instead of pandering to popular ignorance of world affairs and U.S. propaganda by the current administration perhaps Barack Obama should look a bit closer to home if he wants to call someone a dictator.

Keep citizens ignorant and blame them for their ignorance

I would like to respond to the quotations attributed to council member Yukimura in the article, "Government watchdogs on the prowl". Yukimura begins by stating that engaged citizens are a “very valuable resource,” and “Democracy only works well when we have actively participating citizens.” Yukimura is absolutely correct, but from that point on council member Yukimura begins a litany of "buts" and launches into thinly veiled left-handed attack critical of citizen involvement.

Yukimura advises, “When you get a soapbox to speak from, it’s really important to have your facts accurate and really listen carefully to what’s happening — not make assumptions, not jump to quick conclusions.” This advice in this context has the subtext that citizens may not have accurate facts, and may not listen carefully. Citizens may make assumptions and jumping to quick conclusions.

Yukimura continues, “You really have to become an expert in the subject so you can perform to the highest ideal. You can lead people in the wrong place.” The subtext: citizens may not be experts, may not perform to the highest ideals, and may lead people to the wrong place.

Yukimura concludes with an accurate description of the divide that exists today between county government and engaged citizens. “It can get to an attitude where, if you don’t agree with me, you’re wrong and stupid,” she said. “That’s more destructive than helpful.”

There is, however, an underlying fact not acknowledged by Yukimura when she gives advice that engaged citizens should have accurate facts, and become experts. To have accurate facts and becoming an expert is only possible if government allows engaged citizens access to information. If government boards, councils, and commissions refuse to disclose such information claiming "attorney-client privileged" then Yukimura's criticism is disingenuous.

It is the county government boards, councils, and commissions that refuse to release the facts and refuse to answer questions citizens ask so the citizen can get their facts straight and become experts.

Yukimura is critical of engaged citizens lacking the facts, not being experts, and not listening carefully while the count council does everything in its power to hide those facts under the cloak of attorney-client privilege.

Yukimura is a member of a county council that is responsible for keeping citizens ignorant, but rather than casting a critical eye on the actions of her colleagues (and perhaps herself) for refusing to waive attorney-client privilege she implies the fault lies with the engaged citizens, victims of government secrecy, for not having the facts, not being experts, and leading people to the wrong place.

Engaged citizens are not trying to lead people anywhere, but rather hold government officials accountable for their actions. Mahalo to council member Yukimura for at least speaking to this issue, and she can rest assured that engaged citizens are reading carefully, even between the lines.

Dirty deeds done dirt cheap

State Rep. Hermina Morita, D-14th (Hanalei, Anahola, Kapa'a), said the House was emasculating the courts and the rule of law. She said it was appropriate that the vote was taken on Halloween. The bill, she said, "dressed in the facade of the toothless conditions, is still one ugly bill that reeks the horrors of political favors gone awry and should be haunting this Legislature on how cheap we sold the credibility and respectability of this institution and our moral compass." http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071101/NEWS01/711010371

Unchained passion begins at home

"When tyranny is law revolution is order" popped into my head as I witnessed the Hawaii State legislature shamelessly betray themselves, the people, and the environment to corporate/military power. Such a sycophantic rush to bad judgment by the Governor and the legislative majority to put the Superferry above the law makes moot the Hawaii Supreme Court's ruling and shreds any lingering delusions that we live under a rule of law.

The saying "when tyranny is law revolution is order" can be traced back to the the 1897 "Handbook of American Constitutional Law" by Campbell Black author of Black's Law Dictionary often cited by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Here is what Black wrote about the right of revolution in his "Handbook of American Constitutional Law."

RIGHT OF REVOLUTION.

8. The right of revolution is the inherent right of a people to cast out their rulers, change their polity, or effect radical reforms in their system of government or institutions, by force or a general uprising, when the legal and constitutional methods of making such changes have proved inadequate, or are so obstructed as to be unavailable.

This right is a fundamental, natural right of the whole people, not existing in virtue of the constitution, but in spite of it. It belongs to the people as a necessary inference from the freedom and independence of the nation. But revolution is entirely outside the pale of law. "Inter armes silent leges." Circumstances alone can justify a resort to the extreme measure of a revolution. In general, this right may be said to exist when tyranny or a corrupt and vicious government is intrenched in power, so that it cannot be dislodged by legal means; or when the system of government has become intolerable for other causes, and the [Page 11] evils to be expected from a revolutionary rising are not so great as those which must be endured under the existing order of things; when the attempt is reasonably certain to succeed; and when the new order proposed to be introduced will be more satisfactory to the people in general than that which is to be displaced. "Revolution is either a forcible breach of the established constitution or a violation of its principles. Thus, as a rule, revolutions are not matters of right, although they are mighty natural phenomena, which alter public law. Where the powers which are passionately stirred in the people are unchained, and produce a revolutionary eruption, the regular operation of constitutional law is disturbed. In the presence of revolution, law is impotent. It is, indeed, a great task of practical politics to bring back revolutionary movements as soon as possible into the regular channels of constitutional reform. There can be no right of revolution, unless exceptionally; it can only be justified by that necessity which compels a nation to save its existence or to secure its growth where the ways of reform are closed. The constitution is only the external organization of the people, and if, by means of it, the state itself is in danger of perishing, or if vital interests of the public weal are threatened, necessity knows no law."[7]

The Constitution Black points out is not the origin of our freedom but the consequence of our power.

A constitution "is not the beginning of a community, nor the origin of private rights; it is not the fountain of law, nor the incipient state of government; it is not the cause, but the consequence, of personal and political freedom; it grants no rights to the people, but, is the creature of their power, -- the instrument of their convenience.

Aloha is a two way street. Invited guests are more than welcome, but when we are threatened by a home invasion "necessity knows no law."

How Public Access TV controls public speech

The original mission of Public Access TV was to provide "first-come nondiscriminatory (FCND) access to the medium of television". This was the mission because it was believed that FCND would guarantee uncensored free speech which the pioneers of public access television believed was essential for the wide dissemination of a diversity of ideas throughout society. This widespread diversity of ideas, it was also believed, was essential for a viable democracy.

That pipedream of course was before corruption and mission creep subverted public access into a tool of the government to control public speech through a more subtle form of structural discrimination to prevent the widespread diversity of ideas.

Sure anyone can go down to their local public access station (mine is Ho`ike on the island of Kauai Hawaii) and "put something on TV and say anything you want." After this bold declaration and some other pompous blather about "promoting free speech" the institutionalized structural discrimination kicks in.

One soon learns onerous "operating procedures" have been put in place. For starters one learns about the two week delay between the time a program is submitted and the time it will be broadcast. Say goodbye to anything that needs to be said in a timely manner.

Next you learn that the program will be broadcast no more than four times in one year. This falls short of the well known advertising truism that a message must be received at least six times before it sticks. The public access gatekeepers can of course make exceptions or what they call "an executive decision on a case-by-case basis', i.e. standard less discretion, i.e. discrimination. If the gatekeepers like you or your message they will play the program until the cows come home. If they don't like you or your message expect to see a two week delay, four plays a year, and the door.

That in a nutshell is a sample of a just a few of the many institutionalized tools of discrimination used by public access at the behest of government to control what ideas are (and are not) spread diversely throughout the community.

To compare and highlight the inequitable treatment the public receives it is worth noting that government access gets their programs (county council meetings for instance) captioned for the hard of hearing, broadcast within 24 hours and repeated seven times in a week. These Kauai County Council meeting programs typically run four to six hours long.

The bottom line is that this public access structural discrimination and special facilitation of government entities robs the public speaker of resources, drowns the public voice, and limits the diversity of ideas to those ideas the government and their public access gatekeepers find acceptable.

Hypocrisy gone wild!

"Lingle calls Superferry special session" blurted todays front page above-the-fold headline in Kaua`i's The Garden Island Newspaper. This headline proved to be totally misleading if one is to believe Governor Lingle's own guest viewpoint, "Special session won't be all Superferry" on page A8 of the same paper.

According to Lingle the special session will deal with 103 items who's importance "goes far beyond resolving the current Superferry situation." That was the Governor's only mention of the Superferry in her entire viewpoint! This would lead one to conclude that the Governor really called the special session because she believes there are 103 items whose importance goes far beyond the Superferry.

The Governor's belief is either the height of hypocrisy, or a sign of delusional thought processes that fails to hear the overwhelming opinions of the thousands of citizens who cared enough to exercise their franchise and speak in opposition to the Superferry operating prior to and environmental assessment at public informational meetings held on Kaua`i, Maui, and Hawai`i. Citizens with opposing views do not hold those viewpoints strongly enough to exercise their franchise and express themselves in a public forum.

The media reports the Governor called the special session because of the Superferry issue. The people believe the Governor called the special session because of the Superferry issue, but the Governor believes she is calling a special session because there are 103 more important issues that "goes far beyond" resolving the Superferry issue. Can you say "out of touch with reality?"

Pardon my analysis but I don't believe Governor Lingle. I have not heard any public outcry on any of these other 103 issues, nor have I seen any comparable coverage in any of the mass media outlets on these 103 vital issues.

Even the most causal observer would correctly conclude the Governor is a hypocrite, delusional or both.