Dont give us rubbish Mr. McCormick. How on earth can the US assist Samoa or the Pacific alone in challenging climate change when it doesnt minimise its own selfish use of more than a third of the world's fuel? Why dont the US try to make small cars like Europe as a start of its climate change campaign? When the US people are enjoying their SUVs, the people in the Pacific suffer from the consequences. We are only happy here in the Pacific and thank God that we dont have oil or gas, or we would end up like the Middle East.

but the responsibility of what happens in the south pacific is strictly the south pacific's
the nations around the world say a lot of things to make everyone feel good
but, I got to tell you, if we do not take the steps to change the format and issue of climate change, we are no different and are part of the great hoax and hyprocrisy

I am seeking justice in the way this environmental campaign is treating people. We cannot compare the pollution caused by the US, China and India to the ones caused by the small Pacific islands. So it is hypocrisy of those campaigning for environmental issues in the Pacific when the Pacific people are pushed to bear the same responsibilites in saving the planet as the US or Chinese citizens. Lets be realistic. I feel that this whole dialogue on saving the planet is a neocolonial ideology when it is taken to the least innocent while the Americans are continuing to live luxurious lifestyles, and the Japanese continue to fish in large quantities from the Pacific ocean. The majority of the Pacific people live the lifestyle of a medieval European. So the US involvement in any project around the world today although for good intentions, it is also too good to be truly philantrophic and humanistic because of its hegemonic foreign policies. The point is, we are tired of other people dictating how the world should live their lives.

you mean the whole entire south pacific, no one imported an SUV?
south pacific needs to clean up their damn acts as well.
how about the cheap cars with low mileages in Samoa?

You are right. All nations bear responsibility. But, you know as a kid growing up in my village setting.
Our neighbors dog was barking all night long for 5 days straight. My grandpa had enough on the sixth night, loaded his shotgun and shot the poor barking dog.

Few days later, we found the dead carcass of the neighbors dog at the beach. Alongside the dead dog was our beloved dog. We discovered that the dogs we're in heat 5 nights straight and we're having great sex when grandpa shot them. I love my dog, who always seem to pee on itself when out stealing from others.

The Neighbor was responsible, My grandpa was responsible, My Fofosunia was responsible and so was the SEX of it all.

Moral of the story-- Watch your dog carefully, each and every night. When the sob is in heat, make sure to curve the dogs when you catch the mangie runt. Like climate control. Turn the crap off when not in use. Renewables for the NOW, the Then and the Future. Samoa is colonial to itself. it has re-established its hate for things it loves. The nature of man is such that we cannot do without. Kepping up with the Jones is in the genome of mankind. Don't fight it, regulate it.

Tofa

I am not convinced that a dead dog [which is good for the regeneration of the soil] in a small island and a few used cars [which the Samoans use for more than 30 years before dumping] could be compared to the big guns in pollution like the US and the others. We are talking about the pollution caused by continents in comparison to the small islands. Look at the statistical figures and the geopolitical scope of the globe's economical developments. As I have indicated, the way that this campaign treat all people to bear the same amount of environmental responsibility is not fair and does not do justice to other people. All I am saying is that the environmental campaign is doing justice to the environment, but not to the people of the Pacific islands. Why would a small population in Samoa [which is like a small village in India] be made responsible by the rhetoric of the campaign, while India, China and the US continue to build bombs and factories to maintain military and economic supremacy? Is that fair? A pollution caused by only four factories in the US or India is equivalent to the pollution by the whole of Samoa. Now, the campaign should be in the USA to sign the Kyoto protocol and reduce its carbon emissions. The Pacific people dont need to be told of how to save the planet because the majority of the population still live in the traditional way of life. Why will they be made guilty of other people's mess? The campaign should focus on the American, Euroipean, Chinese, and Indian authorities to be realistic and reduce their economic developments to save the planet. And by the way, lets take this dialogue in a very matured and broad perspective. If it hurts, please dont get angry but do a short prayer. This is just another perspective.

Come on folks. The man has a point. There is a difference between saving the planet and saving the people's rights by the way we treat them making them responsible for a mess that Western capitalism and industrialisation created in the first place. We are barking at the wrong tree on this environmental issue. Lets bark at the US and Chinese policies on their economical and arms development that pose the greatest threat. If you cannot handle the argument, then ask your dog to have a pee on your feet so you can feel the warmth of being considerate. Maybe your grandpa needs to check how dogs mate rather than using his gun.
Have a nice day

I agree with Mosese for the most part, however it's only fair to say that the US pales as far as pollution goes when compared with the emissions that China and India now produce. Every polluter, no matter how large or small, should be looking forward and taking steps to reduce green house gases. And if the "small" polluters can show the "big" polluters the way to go, then why not start now? Reducing pollution should be a state of mind, not a pissing contest to determine who does the most. Or who is most the blame. If clean energy is the goal, and the goal is met, then maybe down the road oil producing countries will become less important and we can all breathe easier (no pun intented - well maybe a little one).............................If the US, China, India, and the Arab worlds won't take the first step, then decrease the demand and they'll have to pay attention.

look at it this way-- no need to be excited about what others believe
we need to watch our own backyard is the idea

be passive, agree with the nations, but by all means do not shoot your own dog at the end of the day
if we we're to follow what they intend, we will not survive as an economy
footprint this carbon this-- where does it end- its just dogs in heat, no matter

the hottest days of the globe was in the mid-1800's- how can that be if the largest polluters of the world were not around-- is this environment thing, a myth and money opp. for the greens, a hoax or a carefully crafted opp. to make a pile of monies

I say all of the above friend. The motives of all involved is suspect.

The Kyoto Protocol signed today by America for Americans will cease all industries in America. It will cease the economy on the count that it cannot comply and to costly. On the other hand, do we ask India,Eurpore, China, Japan, Australia and the Middle East to shut down all motorized combustion engines? I don't thinks so.

America has a self interest to delay Kyoto. Look at it this way. My grandpa, should have never shot the neighbors dog. It ended the howling for one night, but my weeping was for a lifetime for my dog Fofosunia was dead. And that my friend is what I remember about the story of my dog. We shot the problem, but killed something we love to have had for just a little while longer, which was my dog Fofosunia the thieving dog that it was, the creeping looking mangie dog of my youth.

Why get angry. It is a wasted emotion. Now getting your point across is a better emotional uplift. You think!

Be Blessed

Thanks guys, the Samoan saying goes, "O le tele o sulu e maua ai figota lelei." The more torches we have to lighten up this dialogue, the big the catch of ideas we have for our environmental safe journey. Of course we all desire to have a safe planet. No hard feelings.
God bless

I am blessed, not angry -I didn't shoot the dog - and wasn't around in the mid-1880's to be able to tell you how hot it was. And you can't change what's already happened (unless you believe in "time travel" and H.G. Wells), you can only try to improve the future. Being "passive" at this point isn't going to help. However, "Turn the crap off when not in use. " is a good begining and passing this along to whomever will listen can't hurt either........... But placing blame on what's already happened will not win any hearts over and only serves to "turn off" the ears of those you wish "to get your point across to".....

As an island nation, Samoa should have had the fortitude years ago to plan for the inevitable energy shortage and fluctuation. The uncertain energy problem is global and if all predictions indicate, it will raise energy levels at higher, not lower prices. As a commodity energy has to be used not stored. With this in mind, nature has the abundance of energy required i.e sun, wind, water, ocean, moon, fire, ocean smokestacks-- it is endless. The technolgy is available. WE can and should derive 100% of Samoa's energy from renewables, thus becoming the first nation to derive 100% of its energy from mother nature. Now, if that were to happen, my God, the world will stand at attention and say, if that little Samoa can do it, why not us?

Our policy makers have not been good stewards of the search and that is unfortunate. Now, here is the problem. We chastise the United States and other nations for liberal hippocritical attitudes, yet do not lead ourselves. Are we not all adults? Are we not grown-ups in the family of nations?

Why finger point, when the future is in our own hands? Do we not have knowldege of technology to affect the cost of energy in Samoa? Why sit and wait until someone gets the idea again, that oooppss we may need to subsidize energy for eveyone. Where will the money come from? Do we tax more to flush it down the throats of the end providers. Do we send more money to the people of Singapore for the liquid gold they send our way? What is the problem of our leaders to not have an energy policy? Why wait for the inevitable?
Do our children bear the cost of our non-commital towards a secure future of energy in Samoa.

Hard question, but the facts remain the facts. Where is the Leadership in Samoa and American Samoa to secure the energy future of the islands?

Ask the question, you might get an answer. It may not be the answer you like, but at least you will know what the Leaders feel to this most important policy.

There is no security in any industry in Samoa and Amercan Samoa without an Energy Policy that is reasonable and long term.

My grandpa would have been proud to have Samoa mo Samoa solutions. I always think, if had to shoot another dog again, would he have been so quick to anger or would he tried to fix the problem with the howling. The anlogy is simple-- We are having problems with energy with both Samoa's currently. Thus the howling from the public with the price of petro. The tourist will stop coming if they do not have bargain prices for hotel rooms, gas to travel in rental cars, etc. The Yamzaki plant will have to adjust down on workers at some point thus less spending and less workers-- creating a hole in the tax base of the economy. With other cut backs by small and large stores because spending of consumers are less, we see small steps to lower tax collected. Its all not good news.

But with an energy policy that is secured, at least we know for sure the lights will not be turned off when I get home.

Grandma's and Grandpa's across Samoa do not have to come home to a dark faleo'o because the price to stay lighted went up 50%, 6 hours ago like the 50% hike in affect by Power Corporation a few weeks ago.