Hey, Jo

You're a very patient trooper! OK, you're your own person, but my confusion
boils down to:

Jo:
>Leave out the
>dietary racism, plagarism, threats, etc. They would reach more people
>without all that crap. Dietary truths have far more merit than its
>messengers no matter how charismatic they may be.

So are you saying that their message is a dietary truth underneath the
crappy delivery? This completely baffles me. If the style is opposite the
content in a single person (or organization) how can there be any truth
unvolved? What truth does NFL act as messengers for? "Cooked food is
poison!"? It seems that everyone forgives them most anything because their
"message" is a "dietary truth". Their message seems a gross exaggeration to
me. Where is the truth? That cooked food causes wars and all disease and
politics? That anyone who eats cooked food or animal foods is inferior to
them? Oh, but they have so much "truth" foaming from their mouths! ;)

Please help me understand what "dietary truth" lurks underneath the NFL
absurdity. And maybe help me to understand what is at all valuable about
them "reaching" a single human being with their message of hate and
violence?

It just all sounds like the end justifies the mean. And in this case the
end is so overboard as to be untrue, and the means are simply ugly. What
don't I understand?

Cheers,
Kirt

Secola  /\  Nieft
[log in to unmask]