PeTA misrepresents the Dalai Lama:
NEW DELHI - The office of the Dalai Lama said Friday that an animal rights group misrepresented the nature of a request by the spiritual leader that fast-food chain KFC not open an outlet in his homeland, Tibet.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, released a document Thursday from the Dalai Lama asking that the Louisville, Ky.-based restaurant chain "abandon its plan to open restaurants in Tibet."
But the Dalai Lama's heading on the document, "APPEAL," was changed to "Dear Mr. Novak" - a reference to David Novak, chief executive of KFC's parent company, Yum! Brands Inc. PETA then issued a statement saying the Dalai Lama had "dispatched a letter" to the company.
[ . . . ]
"We strongly object to your changing the nature of the appeal without seeking our approval," the Dalai Lama's secretary, Tenzin Geyche Tethong, said in a letter faxed Friday to Ingrid Newkirk of PETA in Norfolk, Va.
Tethong said in the letter, made available to The Associated Press, that the Dalai Lama's office had "intentionally sent ... a general appeal," and had rejected a PETA request that a letter be addressed to Novak.
"It was always PETA's understanding that the Dalai Lama intended PETA to address his letter to the appropriate executive at KFC," PETA spokesman Michael McGraw said Friday in e-mail to the AP. "In addition, PETA has a long and very good relationship with the Dalai Lama." [ . . . ]
Good grief! Has PeTA no shame at all? (That's a rhetorical question - don't answer it ...)
If it's true that the Dalai Lama and PeTA had a "long and very good relationship," I'll bet this little communications "oops - goof" will cause His Eminence to rethink things a bit.
Still, for those of us who know how the PeTA people operate - which is to say how opportunistic and deceitful they are - how surprising is this? When dealing with PeTA, it's hard to be too cynical.
I suspect that His Eminence is reflecting upon the age-old question: With friends like PeTA, who needs enemies?