This reminds me of my Most Conflicted Bumper Ever sighting: On one side, Meat is Murder. On the other side, Pro Choice.
I’d expect them to have the tact and common sense not to argue about a donkey when the goal of the bomb was to kill people. They didn’t have to issue a statment solely about the Middle East- they could’ve said “we find the current situation in Israel and the Palestinian territories deplorable and using an innocent animal as a weapon only adds to the death toll”, or “we don’t like to see either people or animals die needlessly”, etc…
**
Yes, I know what animal rights means, and I know what PETA’s mandate is. But in this instance, PETA should have kept thier mouths shut. To use the analogy I used earlier, it’s as if the president of an aviation association sent a letter to Al Queda asking them to please not use planes but truck bombs next time they try to blow people up.
And thank you for your vote. 
Zev Steinhardt
I wholheartedly agree with the ludicrosity of the fax to Arafat, but I must point out that any organization that gets supermodels to get naked for their cause is okay with me.
Actually, one could look at the Arafat fax as one more PETA publicity stunt. Like many of the things PETA does, this one has succeeded in getting lots of folks (like us) talking about PETA and getting PETA’s name mentioned in the media.
I don’t buy into the “any publicity is good publicity” school of thought- There are lots of people talking about Enron and getting Enron’s name in the media, but I don’t think they’re getting any new business from it.