As the Guardian reported earlier today:
The Dalai Lama told US diplomats last year that the international community should focus on climate change rather than politics in Tibet because environmental problems were more urgent, secret American cables [via WikiLeaks] reveal.
…Now, in a newer Guardian post, Isabel Hilton posits that “”the Dalai Lama is right to put climate change first,” due to the “irreversible impacts of dramatic environmental changes,” including in the Himalayan region. She writes:
This [news] will certainly dismay some of the more radical elements of [Tibet’s] independence movement. Many of the younger Tibetans in exile are already frustrated with their spiritual leader’s moderate and non-violent approach. For them, independence will always trump the environment. But if the concern is the survival of the nomadic peoples of the Tibetan plateau, the Dalai Lama is right.
See Hilton’s post in its entirety, here.
Why project and put words into other peoples' mouths?
Let "the more radical elements of [Tibet's] independence movement" speak for themselves!
Saying something like "For them, independence will always trump the environment" is, well, bologna. This kind of baiting is, however, very typical of what passes for journalism today.