In reply to Nasim and Khalaf I must say I’m flattered someone called me “cool” even if that was a bad cool, all my life I’ve been the nerd who makes you laugh for all the wrong reasons.
I didn’t know my signature was so important that it might lengthen the unemployment of Jarash’s residents. But here’s what I know:
I know that I signed because I’m against the distruction of forests, against killing a tree so that an investment project could be built. I know that investments in this country will continue to make the rich richer and the poor if possible poorer. I know that we should start creating things instead of destroying things, I’m no way an elitist but I don’t believe in investment projects that will eventually leave Jordan a dry, lifeless country. Only the rich is richer, and the poor is poorer.
I know that some people need to calm down and when they present us with “facts” they should also present us with their source of information. Until they do so, I stand by the trees.
Now what I don’t know is how wanting to prevent the death of a forest is wrong because over the past 15 years it has lost a lot of its trees? makes no sense to me. If anything, thats more reason to move now, and had I known about it before I would’ve at least signed something. You can not judge me because I’ve never been to Dibbin, as a matter of fact I spent 13 years away from Jordan, does that mean I should never talk about Jordan? Would it have been acceptable if I started a petition in support of the project even though I’ve never been to Jarash or Dibbin?
I dont’ know.
Related in the blogosphere:
- The Dibbin Campaign Explained
- Dibbin…Again
- How to the forest for the trees
Popularity: 12% [?]
The point is that so many people don’t even know what they’re standing by! They don’t even know what they’re supporting. And therefore might be committing things that might be against what matters to them and they believe in! And apparently, you fell for that!
Some forests are endangered because of lack of investments. Consider this, if some company develops an area (a forest in this case) then then have made a substantial investments (70million was it?) And I doubt people are going to go to the forest to “not see” trees. Therefore it’s in the company’s best interest to maintain the ecological ecosystem. They have an investment to protect.
As it stands right now, it’s deserted and neglected with many issues and problems facing it, development in that area might be what the doctor ordered to *really* save it!
Shaden I am an environmentalist but could never have put a better description of your argument better. You have used very clear and direct words with no jargon. The petition and the campaign are part of a movement to exert pressure on decision makers to change the location of the project. One of the targets of this campaign is the Royal Palace. It is important to play the advocacy game now and not after a decision is made. Differences in details can be deferred as we share a common purpose of “greener investments” that take environmental concerns into consideration. In addition, it is important to send a message to all other rich boys who are waiting like vultures to destroy the remaining forests that the case will not be easy.
Hi! You have the wrong link to my post.
My problem is that you really don’t know what you signed. I agree with your intentions, but this is not the issue. The problem is that there is no way to verify Batir’s claim that the purpose is to change the location of the project. Moreover, will the forest be “protected” if it is left in its current state? The answer is a sorry no.
My message is simple. If you want to do something, do it right. If you have a petition, then publish it. I have said before that I suspect that this petition does not really exist. I will say it again, that if this is the case, then I will be happy to write a draft for this purpose.
ITS NASIM NOT NAIM BY THE WAY!
Shaden, I’m “against killing a tree so that an investment project could be built” too ….
But I’m the irony of the facts is that the trees are being much more killed now! and continuously even!
as a person who loves debbin my self, i know that this project can be a hope to protect what remained, in addition to change the status of 100s of people around it!
I was part of a campaign for selling forests to individuals, and such a movement helped changing the low… but this project is a hope, for me personally, to help debbin forest from the massive public destruction of the forest, which cannot be controlled any more by authorities!
Qwaider, you’re making assumptions when you say it’s in the company’s best interest to keep the trees. We don’t know for sure that the trees are actually saved.
Batir, I agree with you and if we can do something more than just sign a petition I’m all for it!
Khalaf, hi, sorry I was at work and I wrote that quickly. Yes,you can not see what you really signed for and there’s no guarantee that what’s on this Website is the real deal, but hello this is the Internet! so I understand your point, but I think we need to see the big picture. I surely want to do more than just signing something online if that is possible, and nobody said we should just stop the project from being built but people including me saw a chance to say no and they did, that doesn’t mean they’re saying yes to the current state of the forest. We can always organize our own campaign do save Dibbin, I think Nas was trying to do just that. So yea why not, lets have a petition online, and even offline and if you have more information about the project and/or Dibbin I’ll be really glad if you can share with me before we do anything.
Nasim, lol I know it’s Nasim, sorry that was a typo. How the trees will be “less killed” when the project is being carried out? Can you please elaborate on how this project will change the status of 100 people?
Why don’t you share with all of us your source of information on all of this?
Shaden, You’re a marketing major. How can these be assumptions?
Ask yourself, what’s the company’s ultimate goal? I think it is to “Make more money”.
If they’re making money by developing an area to make it more lucrative because it’s a forest. Wouldn’t deforestation cause them to lose this attraction? Wouldn’t losing this attraction cause them to lose their business and therefore their investment?
I might have made assumptions here, but in retrospect, didn’t everyone “thinking” that they’re saving the forest do exactly the very same thing?