My recent message showing how NFL have been less than truthful in "writing"
their book  has been cross-posted to the "Raw" list.  They posted a reply
and going through the copy that has been forwarded to me, I came across
several misrepresentations that I thought should be set straight.

NFL starts off by claiming that the author of "Raw Eating", Arshavir Ter
Hovessianan, is the great uncle of two of the co-authors (or rather
co-plagiarists) of "Nature's First Law." If this is true it only thickens
the plot as defrauding a member of one's own kind as they did by passing
themselves off as their great uncle, shamelessly plagiarizing his work and
vainly taking credit for it, hardly meet the high moral standards one would
expect such self-professed truth seekers to possess - especially not when
they are doing their outmost to also profit from it. NFL should praise
their good fortune that not many Iranians are into eating raw foods because
I understand that many cultures in that part of the world can be quite
vengeful concerning such family matters. ;-)

They go on by claiming to have "acknowledged his memory at the beginning of
our book":  What they are referring to is page v of the first edition of
"Nature's First Law":

                                "Acknowledgement"

"This book is dedicated to the memory of Aterhov.  For without his vast
knowledge and inspiration, this work would not have been possible."

Is that an understatement. :-)  Were they really so naive to think that
these hollow words of flatter would cover up the theft and protect them
when the whole thing eventually would blow up on them, or are they like the
criminal compulsively returning to the scene of the crime intentionally
covering up their tracks half-heartedly to make sure they will be caught
and found guilty in the end? ;-) How many of those who read the dedication
realized who Aterhov was?  Aterhov happens to be Arshavir Ter Hovessianan's
nick name consisting of the first syllable of each part of his name,
however, only those who knew him personally and the few who had read his
book are likely to have known this. (His nick name is mentioned in the book
which was printed in Tehran in a small number only.)  If he is their great
uncle why is this not mentioned in the dedication?  One would think that it
would be quite a coup for these newly hatched, young, raw "authors" to be
able to drop a name such as Arshavir Ter Hovessianan who has been a legend
in the raw food community for so long; especially as these ambitious, young
men never leave any stone un-turned to promote themselves.

Secondly, "Nature's First Law" is referred to as "a work" - a depiction
that I doubt would hold up in any court of law. In my estimation the book
is nothing more than an up-dated version of "Raw Eating" with a few added
slogans and catch phrases such as "Cooked food is poison" and a colorful
cover with three naked plagiarists sitting in an avocado tree fantasying
about getting their raw bodies on one of the daytime side shows.
Surprisingly, they have not made it on the Jerry Springer Show, yet. ;-)

Thirdly, the dedication does not recognize that "Natures First Law" is
truly the work of Arshavir Ter Hovessianan whose writings allegedly were
based on his years of experience with raw foods.  Instead, it gives the
distinct impression that while burning the midnight oil, these three,
industrious young men at the sweat of their brow wrote the book all by
themselves basing it on their own extensive research & experience. ;-)

And finally, if they truly wanted to honor Arshavir Ter Hovessianan and
give him whatever credit they felt he deserved, they should have reprinted
"Raw Eating" in his name or at least not concealed that "Nature's First
Law" is nothing but a modernized version of Arshavir Ter Hovessianan's book.

Furthermore, in their response on "Raw" NFL do admit that "some of the
ideas" from their book did come from Arshavir Ter Hovessainan's writings.
This is like three carpenters reprinting the Bible with a glossy, color
cover showing Adam & Eve in the Garden of Eden and claiming to be the
authors of it while admitting only to have been "inspired" by it. ;-)  In
both cases we are not talking about just "some ideas" being borrowed but a
whole book shamelessly being copied virtually from cover to cover. Another
reason why they might not be happy to admit the extent of their plagiarism
is that "Raw Eating" was written almost 40 years ago in Tehran, Iran -
clearly not on the cutting edge of modern nutritional research.

Then NFL get into it not being a big deal how the book was written as long
it is spreading the good word and complain that Arshavir Ter Hovessianan's
message about raw foods only reached a few people and not the world at
large. If NFL feel so strongly about spreading the word on raw foods why do
they not write a book based on their own experiences & ideas?  I know it
can be done ;-) providing, of course, they have some actual knowledge or
relevant experience to share and not just as we have witnessed using the
"raw cause" as a vehicle for other dubious motives.  Unless, feeling very
reckless, I do not advise anybody to follow the nutritional recommendations
of any of these three self-professed "diet pioneers" who have yet to
produce one original thought on the topic of human health. ;-)

They further justify their plagiarism by explaining that their book is only
a small part of "bringing raw-foodism to the world" in a "massive
bombardament of every media outlet possible" and that if they are to "step
on the toes or egos of some people, so be it".
This sounds more like the rantings of a madman planning his take-over of
the world,  Charlie Chaplin playing Hitler comes to mind :-), than the
authors of a book on nutrition trying to find ways of reaching a larger
audience. I interpret this exhibition of megalomania as meaning the ends
will justify the means no matter what, including plagiarizing, lying and
stepping on people.  The kind of associations that such fundamentalist &
militant attitudes bring to mind are likely to drive the most dedicated raw
food eater away from eating any foods un-cooked - in fact, just to assert
my dis-association with NFL, I will go out and prepare myself some
over-cooked vegetables right now. ;-)

Luckily, NFL are not the masters of marketing they like to see themselves
as.  Limited by juvenile, middle class fantasies of being outlaws they seem
almost proud when exposed as plagiarists - intoxicated by youthful
sentiments of invincibility they forget that a man's or woman's word and
credibility are some of the few values in life that are truly worth
treasuring & nurturing and that if lost, they are often lost for a life
time and impossible to regain.

To those who still are not convinced because they see NFL as fighting the
"right cause", what if eating raw or vegan are not as important as NFL
claim?  Then do the ends  justify the means?  What if the cure is worse
than the disease?  Then would it not be right to further the "raw cause" by
exposing and isolating the likes of NFL?  Fanaticism and absolutism, seeing
the world in black and white have very little to do with the issues at hand
and more to do with the psychological make-up and frame of mind of the
people involved.  A fundamentalist-type conditioning is rooted in a
person's inner reality; the immature attitude of somebody who never grew
up.  To view the world from  extremes makes a lot of sense in the case of a
neglected or traumatized child, who living in a world that seems without
mercy, has no choice.  But if these sentiments are carried on into
adulthood, they can become dangerous and remain an obstacle for any healing
or growth especially if kept in denial and not dealt with.  We need only
turn to the "Army of God's" present campaign against abortion clinics.
Judging by the similarity in rhetoric I would not be surprised if we one
day will hear about "NFL's Army of Raw" targeting restaurants that serve
"demon" cooked foods that are "turning our children into cooked mutants".
;-) When they come face to face with the sobering fact that their "world
campaign" to save humanity from the shackles of cooked foods never will
amount to anything, and they realize that their 15 minutes of fame have run
out, they will be confronted with the harsh reality of being no more than
just another curiosity item on the lunatic fringe, this might not seem such
an unlikely scenario. ;-)

They end their reply on "Raw" addressing those who criticize them for their
plagiarism by stating that ""Water seeks its own level" indeed remains an
eternal law of Nature".

I find this is quite of a mouthful for somebody who have just been caught
with their pants down, red-handed with their hands in the cookie jar. ;-)
Seriously though, after this latest revelation of just how far NFL are
prepared to go in their use of scrupulous & deceitful tactics to promote
their "cause", anybody outside the inner circle of hardcore NFL followers
must realize that any association or involvement with an entity so deeply
crooked & corrupt in its nature as NFL - truly a disgrace and "enfant
terrible" to the whole raw food community - will raise serious questions
about such a persons's integrity and good judgment.  The exception is as
mentioned the devoted NFL follower who in her/his perverted attempt to feel
special will wear any marginalization as a badge of honor in the war
against the cooked, carnivore masses and against "traitors" as yours truly.
;-)

Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]

PS.  I hear that NFL might have another book out soon called "Raw Courage."
 If this is the correct title, one cannot help but speculate which text
they have chosen to plagiarize this time or if the title is reflecting the
courage it must take to launch yet another book based on fraud, deceit &
lies. And all this has, naturally, been without commenting on the "content"
of their "writings.";-)