Sting was directly asked by ROLLING STONE-PARIS, prior to their article going to press in December of 1989, to answer some questions.

Rather than directly answer the questions he and his cohorts, "The International Trustees of the Rainforest Foundation (Gil Friesen, Franca Sciuto, Sting, Trudie Styler) and Olimpio Serra, Chair of Fundacao Mata Virgen," answered the questions.

QUESTION A)- (Concerning his statements in the Rainforest Foundation TV appeal, to wit):

"'the faster the forest burns, the quicker the planet warms up. The Greenhouse Effect... Earthquakes... Hurricanes... Droughts... Famines...'
The Charge: Earthquakes? Earthquakes have absolutely no relationship to the Amazon rainforest. Droughts, famines and hurricanes have been going on throughout recorded history. Critics have charged that you are playing on people's fears to generate funds."

THEIR RESPONSE: "The television appeal was effective in galvanizing public interest in our effort... With regard to earthquakes the Trustees all agree with the perception that although scientists have not demonstrated the impact of global warming on geological systems, environmental problems are inter-connected. As Sting said, 'The Earth seems to be sending us very clear messages with increasing frequency and ferocity.'
We agree that the television appeal was alarming, but was an effective first step in raising public awareness about the problem. We are commited to responsible ways to capture the public's attention."

ANALYSIS OF THEIR RESPONSE: Couched in double-talk is the admission that there is no relationship between deforestation and earthquakes, droughts, or famines and that they intentionally lied about that fact to "capture the public's attention". Capturing the public's attention in this case means get "the money".

QUESTION B)- "You are asking people to donate money to various organizations worldwide to 'protect the rainforest for the indians' and 'help create vast Amazon national parks.'
The Charge: In fact, the organizations are autonomous and they can use the funds for purposes they desire. In some cases, only a small percentage of the funds will ever get to the Amazon indians in need. Furthermore the Amazon parks have already been decreed by the Brazilian Constitution and funds raised for 'demarcation' will actually end up going to the Brazilian government or other purposes."

THEIR RESPONSE: "The problems of collecting funds internationally are almost as complex as the problems of the rainforest. Each country has its own laws concerning the raising of money for charitable use... Advise and counsel from experts we consulted made a strong case for the fact that throwing large amounts of money directly at a problem can create even more problems... (L)ong term solutions are what we are looking for. And for that you need organization, salaried professionals, and experts."

ANALYSIS OF THEIR RESPONSE: Again, couched in double-talk is the admission that they lied to the public about what the money was going to be used for. Was the money going to 'protect the rainforest for the indians' and 'create vast Amazon national parks'?
No, it was going to pay for offices in Paris, New York, Tokyo, Brussels and London and pay salaries, which in some cases were salaries paid to family and friends (most certainly in Dutilluex's case as his father was the Belgian foundation chairman and his manager a foundation director- neither in any way experts on the Amazon). This was further pressed in the following question.

QUESTION C)- "The theme 'to protect the rainforest' is itself misleading, because the actual area the parent foundation is seeking to protect is mostly comprised of Xingu National Park, already a protected area."

THEIR RESPONSE: "The Xingu National Park which you describe as 'protected' suffers from land invasions and chronic lack of medical facilities... The Brazilian Government has been promising demarcation... The Brazilan Constitution has not decreed any National Park... it just establishes parameters and rules to do so. The Constitution also establishes to define and demarcate indigenous lands... The Foundation with guidance from the Brazilian Board is actively lobbying [the] government to honor its Constitutional obligations.

The Foundation, like many causes and organizations face a sad reality. Social issues get coverage by the press when a high-profile personality is involved. The hypocrisy of the press is further compounded by the fact that rock stars also sell newspapers that choose to attack their initiatives. This is a function of fame which Sting has long been aware of and yet chooses to put himself on the line. He could stay at home and avoid cross examination by the self-appointed kangaroo court of the press. He chooses to fight..."

ANALYSIS OF THEIR RESPONSE: Once again, couched in double-talk is the admission that they lied to the public. They admit that it is the Xingu National Park which they were claiming to protect. They also admit that the protection of the indigenous indian lands was an objective of the Brazilian Constitution which had been adopted in 1988, a year before they started The Rainforest Foundation. However, in a sheer act of audacity truly befitting unrepentent liars, they go on to attack "the self-appointed kangaroo court of the press" for its "hypocrisy" in pointing out the fact that they were outrageously lying to the public in order to solicit funds under false pretenses.