From: zam@athena.mit.edu (Nor Aazizam Mohd Aasif)
Subject: Re: To all you weenies....
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 19:43:29 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.225752.4575@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> chuah@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (DanC) writes:
>In article <1992Apr6.203940.7622@athena.mit.edu> zam@athena.mit.edu (Nor Aazizam Mohd Aasif) writes:
>
>>	My advice to these people: go to a library and get yourself a
>>book, and read!  The largest contributors of CO2 are the developed
>>nations.  Try to see whether they are doing everything they can to
>>reduce their own CO2 emissions.  Easiest case: the US.  Is Bush doing
>>anything in his power to curb this problem?  Then, ask yourself
>>whether the ocean or the jungle is the primary oxygen-resupplier.
>
>This is the same ignorance as that exhibited by the PM in his speech.
>The main topic seems to be global warming due to CO2 etc.  However,
>the real issue here is the loss of the rain forrest.

	You have shown your naiveness by the above statement.  Why
should the world be concerned with *our* rain-forests?  Why?  There
must be a reason to it.  Yes, because according to these people,
rain-forests are an excellent medium to fighting global warming.
These countries always relate global warming to our rain-forests, but
forget that the best solution to it is by curbing CO2 emissions.  You,
on the other hand, has alleged that these countries are concerned
about our rain-forests because they hate losing them, and not having
them in this world.  If this is the case, why not they replant the
rain-forests somewhere and treat it like an endangered species?

	You can include yourself as another totally clueless guy who
jumps on the bandwagon without knowing the issue at hand.

>Global warming
>is only one consequence of losing our rain forest.  FYI (and the
>library can tell you more), every loging operation always results in
>the loss of plant and animal species from the rain forest.  Sometimes,
>the species got extinct even before science had a chance to discover it.
>This is a GREAT loss to mankind.

	Who is more important: animals or humans?  Logging is the
third biggest money-earner for our country.  If that means we should
lose a couple of animal species, I don't think there is anything wrong
with it.  Unless you are one of those people who values animals more
than you value humans...

>It is a proven fact that there are
>many plants in the rain forest that have medicinal value.  If we lose
>one species, we lose the chance to study it for its medicinal value.
>Who knows, it might even be able to cure AIDS.  So take your own 
>advice.  Go to the library and read up about the rain forest before
>discussing anymore.

	Come on...  All these countries that ask us to stop logging do
not give a jackshit about all the excuses that you have spewed forth
so far.  What they are interested in, and have been campaigning all
this time is that rainforest is a good oxygen supplier, and therefore,
is a good system to fight global warming.  Open your eyes, and do go
to a library and check what their objection to our logging is.  It is
not because of the poor-animals and they are concerned with, it is
global warming...

>>	I am a better person now.  
>
>Self praise is no praise.

	Not when you are telling the truth....

>>I can see clearly how some people
>>are borned with "Anti-Government" gens and will bend over backwards to
>>criticize the Malaysian government no matter what!  
>
>There is nothing wrong with being anti-govt or criticising the govt.  
>If the govt is wrong, we have a right to criticise it.  If we don't
>like the policies of the govt, we have the right to be against it.

	Yes, but the government is not wrong on this logging issue.
We are within our rights to cut whatever trees we want because those
are our trees.  

===------ 
NorAazizam MohdAAsif	 
The white man made many promises to us but they never kept but one; they
promised to take our land and they took it.
                                                        Red Cloud