Where Is the Outrage When Black Conservative Tea Party Activists Are Called the N-Word?
by Tom RemingtonMarch 22, 2010
Washington, DC: Black conservatives opposed to government-run health care routinely are called the “n-word” and worse, says Deneen Borelli, full-time Fellow with the Project 21 black leadership network — by liberals.
To black lawmakers allegedly receiving the same treatment, Borelli said: “Welcome to my world! I’ve been called worse than the N-word by alleged enlightened liberals for the outrage of expressing my views on topics such as the threat of government overreach on things such as ObamaCare, climate change legislation, the Second Amendment and pro-growth economics.”
“It should go without saying that racial slurs are offensive and uncalled for,” added Borelli. “But progressives seem far more aggressive in hurling racist comments than Tea Party members. I find that all the time on my e-mail after I appear on television or radio.”
Responding to comments made by Representative Charlie Rangel (D-NY) about the racial aspects and alleged racial tone of Tea Party rallies opposed to a government takeover of America’s health care system, Borelli said: “In an attempt to inject race into the national debate about government running our nation’s health care system, Representative Charlie Rangel made false allegations about the Tea Parties when he said that ‘[y]ou don’t see any black folks in these groups. Ever, ever, ever, ever, ever.’ Considering he’s never invited me — or any of his conservative colleagues, for that matter — for insight on reworking one-sixth of our economy, he obviously must not realize I am black. He also failed to see the other black faces I’ve seen at the many tea party rallies I’ve attended and spoken at over the past few months.”
What is a “Black Agenda”?
by Tom RemingtonMarch 19, 2010
Washington, DC: Mychal Massie, chairman of the Project 21 black leadership network, is critical of the premise of talk show host Tavis Smiley’s upcoming March 20 conference that seeks to set a “black agenda” for America.
“What is a black agenda?” asks Project 21’s Massie. “Jobs, retirement income, education, cost of living, crime and so on are not black American issues. They are American issues. It’s not predicated on race and color. So why is Tavis Smiley seeking to divide us when Americans should be coming together?”
Tavis Smiley, a PBS host, is set to hold a conference at Chicago State University on March 20 to discuss the alleged need for an exclusive political agenda for black Americans. Smiley has been critical of Barack Obama for not paying special attention to the black community and has taken black leaders to task for not pushing Obama to maintain a race-specific agenda for black citizens. Panelists at the event are reported to include noted left-wing luminaries Cornel West, Michael Eric Dyson, Julianne Malveaux, Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan.
“Project 21, the group I head, exists because there are those who would deny there is a diversity of opinion within the black community,” noted Massie. “With panelists representing a political range from Jesse Jackson to Louis Farrakhan, it seems sadly obvious that Smiley’s gathering will perpetuate this myth.”
Talking to the Associated Press about his conference and black support for Obama during the election and the need for his March 20 conference, Smiley asked: “[N]ow that he’s elected, what are black people being asked to do to hold him accountable to our agenda?”
“Obama is the President of the United States of America, he is not the president of black America,” Project 21’s Massie countered. “He can no more be expected to show preferential treatment to blacks any more than Jimmy Carter was expected to have shown preferential treatment to white southerners. Smiley, who recently abandoned his ‘State of Black America,’ is apparently feeling left out. This seems to be just another way for him to promote Tavis Smiley’s race-mongering agenda.”
Massie added: “One need only look at the cast malevolent marplots Smiley assembled as a panel to understand exactly what is taking place. I can assure you this is about them heretofore not being able to capitalize to the extent they would like from Obama being in office.”
Confessions Of A Treatyphobe
by Tom RemingtonMarch 19, 2010
Editor’s Note: Reprinted with permission.
By Jim Beers
“My name is Jim Beers and I am a treatyphobe.”
I grew up in the period of wildlife abundance in the 1940’s and 50’s. From the first time I hunted with my Dad, the dream of spending my life managing and preserving the use and cultural heritage provided by US fish and wildlife was always in my mind.
When I studied wildlife management in college and when I worked for the Utah Fish and Game and then the US Fish and Wildlife Service after a stint in the Navy; fish and wildlife management and use, like American freedoms and the American way of life were still intact. Today, fish and wildlife management and use, like American government, American freedoms, American culture and traditions, and American society are in tatters and on the verge of disappearance.
I lay much of the blame for this decline on the sordid manipulation of the Treaty powers contained in the US Constitution by persons with hidden agendas. That is not to say that this power is wrongly described therein, it is to say that this power as it has evolved in the past century has eroded the strong foundation of Constitutional government and fish and wildlife use and management as we knew it.
I am “taking pen to paper” here because yesterday I wrote about the potential for the current Administration (Obama et al) and the current US Senate (Reid et al) to cynically craft and line up a few nations to sign a UN Treaty “On Small Arms and Ammunition” that, when signed by the President (of the US) and ratified by 2/3 of the Senators “present” whenever old Harry (Reid) deigns to ask for a vote, automatically becomes “the Law of the land” per the Constitution. I further speculated that it would mean the inevitable demise of our 2nd Amendment rights.
A lawyer that I respect essentially responded that such a scenario was unlikely because such a treaty would not and could not change the Constitution and therefore would be challenged and found to be unable to change our rights. I was crestfallen but I accept that lawyerly advice.
Therefore I have joined Treatyphobics Anonymous and as my first step in overcoming my phobia about Treaties will try to explain my formerly inexplicable fear of Treaties so that I might return to societal confidence in the Treaty-making authority of federal leaders.
When I went to work for the US Fish and Wildlife Service in the late 1960’s I unknowingly entered into an era of societal turbulence and change that was not only reflected in fish and wildlife programs but indeed hijacked those programs and the powers they contained. I can only say this now, because while I was immersed in it until fired in 1999, it was truly like the old saw of not being able “to see the forest for the trees”. Allow me to explain.
US fish and wildlife were unmanaged and freely used until the late 1800’s. In 1896, new state laws about wildlife were upheld by the Supreme Court in GEER v. Connecticut wherein it was held that states “owned” all the fish and wildlife within their borders. This was the cornerstone that began the increased management and sustainable use of fish and wildlife by accountable (to state resident voters) State, not federal, politicians and managers.
In 1917, the federal government ratified a TREATY with Canada to protect about 200 species of birds (nearly all migratory game birds and songbirds) that Migrated between these two nations. The authority for the federal government to subsequently claim ALL authority over all of these named birds was upheld by the Supreme Court in Holland v. Missouri in 1920. Ray Holland was one of my (as a young duck hunter) early heroes and to this day I have a photograph of him standing, cigar in hand, on the Mall in DC in the early 1920’s. Federal authority for years protected and increased those migratory birds for uses from hunting and bird watching to protection of agricultural crops and wetlands. Today I would argue that they no longer do that, if anyone would care to debate the point.
Let’s fast forward to my 32 years with the USFWS. As societal turbulence (anti-war, drugs, “free”-love, etc.) shook the land, federal fish and wildlife management and use was subverted and perverted into something 180 degrees out of synch with American traditions and cultures. Treaty manipulation became a hidden factor in this perversion.
Consider two federal laws that have changed our world dramatically, The Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
1. An Endangered Species Act passed Congress in 1969 but it was found to have “no teeth’. So a UN Convention was concocted and ratified on “International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora” (“Small Arms Treaty” anyone?) in 1973. That same year (wow, did they do that quickly) the federal government enacted the Endangered Species Act we all came to know and (only a few of us) love.
2. The Marine Mammal Protection Act was introduced in 1976 by an Arkansas Senator (funny how those guys and gals keep popping up in these scenarios about subverting US society) who joked that “the best thing about this law (he was fishing for “environmental” votes at the time) was that there wasn’t one of them Marine Mammals within 500 miles of Arkansas”. It followed:
1931/49 – Whaling Convention Act and amendments.
1957 – Fur Seal (Alaska) Act
1958 – Convention on “Living Resources of the High Seas”.
1970 – 8 Species of Whales declared “Endangered”.
1972 – A Treaty on Seals.
1973 – A Treaty on Polar Bears. (As I write this, the paper reports that the US introduced a ban on the international trade by Canadian natives of polar bear skins, teeth, and claws from their own robust and sustainably-managed and hunted polar bear populations. Fortunately, this political trashing of the rural and native people of our strongest ally and neighbor was defeated by a surprisingly erudite UN vote.)
Now remember that I am ignoring a whole bunch of simultaneously nefarious stuff involving other fish and wildlife things during these years. For instance:
- Manipulating a Migratory Bird Treaty with Mexico and new Treaties with Japan and Russia to quietly add new “federally protected” birds that had been specifically excluded like cormorants (that soon overran hatcheries and fish farms) and pelicans (that soon became “Endangered” and now overrun docks) and hawks and owls that, like protected wolves and grizzly bears, soon grew in numbers and destruction impacts on other birds and desired wildlife.
- Closing public lands to access and management (Wilderness Act of 1964).
- Wild Horse and Burro Act (1971) giving federal protection to such destructive and overpopulated animals.
- Gradual reorientation of federal lands into being lands OUTSIDE state and local authority and lands oriented to “Native Ecosystems” instead of the purposes for which they were purchased.
- Closure of public lands to uses (and management tools) like logging and grazing.
- Proliferating designations by Executive Orders and bureaucratic regulations to close public land from energy access and development to closing more access with Roadless Areas, the destruction of trails, nuisance regulations, draconian law enforcement, and entry fees.
Now remember, what I am about to say comes from someone that is not a lawyer. If I had a buck for every time I heard, in my federal career, that “we” had authority over private property and state governments because “we” (us federal guys, not you out there or any of those state “cowboy legislatures” or redneck farmers) had treaties and the laws implementing them on “our” side, well I would be fishing off New Zealand or bird shooting in Argentina (it is early fall there) right now. Government Solicitors and those bureaucrats that were promoted to ever-higher responsibilities (“responsive to management skills and abilities” types) were constantly maneuvering with New Age Lawyers and their environmental/animal rights clients and supporters to “interpret” the laws and treaties in supportive (of government expansion) ways. They also worked hard to identify and “suggest” new laws and regulations to “save” more and to “plug loopholes” that frustrated federal power growth. Writing suggested Treaty language and getting court findings to serve as precedents (the “right” court at the “right” time) and then writing regulations that served the original but mostly unnoticed federal/ “New Age” supporters agendas was what federal employees and their advisors were paid and rewarded to do in those days.
Those 2 federal laws (ESA & MMPA) created a federal and public mindset, and a whole trail and flow of increasingly un-American laws and regulations. This soon did two things:
1. Established the now-acceptable practice that the federal government could “Take” private property use and value from private owners for whatever reason it contrives, like “Critical Habitat”, WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT. This broke the back as far as federal advocates were concerned of that old, out-dated concept about “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation” that those old rich guys (Our Founding Fathers) wrote somewhere (the US Constitution, 5th Amendment). Who wouldn’t “take” all they could if there was no cost? Who could afford to “take” all the federal government has “taken” in the past 40 years if they had to pay for it?
2. Established the current belief that states no longer “owned” any fish or wildlife except what the feds have left alone thus far.
Once we accepted these two principles and their future place in our laws, our fate was and is sealed.
When federal bureaucrats and politicians saw that Treaties could give them absolute power over everything from private property to the authority and jurisdiction of states – THEIR FUTURE GROWTH AND MARCH TO ABSOLUTE POWER WAS ASSURED. No court would ever again uphold a citizen defending private property (be it dog, farm, chicken, or home.) No state would ever again be able to stop federal orders that closed public lands in a state or denied gun rights on federal lands in the state or stopped logging or farming or grazing on public and private lands within a state. The rest was academic:
- Federal lands, budgets, regulations, and power have grown dramatically over the past 40 years.
- State rights have all but disappeared.
- State employees have become mere extensions of federal policies, receivers of federal welfare (excuse me grants and assistance) and enemies of state residents.
- Federally protected overpopulations of Seals choke the mouth of the Pacific NW Rivers eating enormous amounts of salmon (thereby sustaining their overpopulation) while the same federal government protecting them tears down dams, shuts down irrigation districts, reduces human water supplies and power generation, and closes vast ocean areas to fishermen; all to “save salmon”.
- Federally protected and federally dispersed wolves spread disease, danger, and carnage in federally-designated states on both public and private property and thereby destroy rural culture, rural economies, and rural communities where federal lands and the destruction of animal (wild and domestic) husbandry and use is being federally driven to make way for ever-growing federal land enclaves.
- Marine Mammals that never leave state waters and were heretofore under state authority like manatee and sea otters are, like growing lists of other wild resident and therefore formerly state-controlled animals like sage grouse, pupfish, suckers, wolves, etc. placed under absolute and never-ending federal jurisdiction (every State move must be “approved by federal authorities” once such jurisdiction is proclaimed). This set the groundwork for the current cry for “federal laws” to “restore native ecosystems” and “eliminate invasive species” (what else is there given the nonsensical definitions of these “rubbery” concepts?)
A century of American Progressive challenges to the “ownership of the commons”, an ancient concept about whether “The King” or “The People” (now where have I heard that last term before?) owned “public” land and the fish and wildlife inhabiting it has become intertwined, like mating snakes with a century of “progressive” beliefs and actions about the “smart” few governing the “ignorant” (scientifically-challenged?) many.
Those 2 results of Treaties (ESA & MMPA) being (rightly or wrongly assumed by federal bureaucrats and their political bosses and an “evolving Supreme Court”) justification for laws demolishing the Constitution and leaving only the power of a majority vote (i.e. no “Rights” just power) have much to do with the state of America today.
As an old bureaucrat I may be way off base about how Treaties are supposed to work but I know what I saw and it is like a B-25 tail gunner walking through Dresden in1946: it ain’t pretty and you wonder how it all happened and how it ever went this far.
I’m sorry, but I don’t think I will come to any more of these meetings. All this baring your soul stuff is too stressful on an old-timer.
Jim Beers
Related Articles
It Doesn’t Take a Ph.D.
by Greg FarberFebruary 12, 2010
It Doesn’t Take a Ph.D. (Part 1 of 5)
It Doesn’t Take a Ph.D. (Part 2 of 5)
It Doesn’t Take a Ph.D. (Part 3 of 5)
It Doesn’t Take a Ph.D. (Part 4 of 5)
It Doesn’t Take a Ph.D. (Part 5 of 5)
Proposed Soda Taxes Fall Flat, Says Black Activist, Calls Demonization of Carbonated Beverages Yet Another Progressive Attack on Liberty
by Tom RemingtonFebruary 10, 2010
Washington, DC: Proposed soda taxes fall flat, according to Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the Project 21 black leadership network, who says the demonization of carbonated beverages is just another example of the progressive attack on liberty.
“After the Obama Administration tried to put itself between me and my doctor with its health care plan, the White House – along with Governor David Paterson and Mayor Gavin Newsom – now want to come between me and my can of soda,” said Borelli.
“Raising taxes during hard economic times is a horrible idea and it’s doomed to failure,” added Borelli. “Elected officials should be focused on lowering taxes to getting our economy growing in order to stimulate job growth. Instead you have Mayor Newsom in San Francisco and Governor Paterson in New York using the ‘obesity card’ to make up for their budget shortfalls. Punishing consumers, beverage companies, bottling companies and small business owners will only add to our economic troubles. These politicians need to put themselves on a spending diet and worry about their bloated budgets and let me worry about my waistline.”
Borelli continued: “And then you’ve got Michelle Obama and the Obama Administration leaning on schools and on the beverage and snack food industries to reform their wicked ways. In spreading their gospel against sugary treats, they will hurt the ability of Paterson and Newsom to reap their sin taxes. It’s clear the progressives can’t have it both ways despite their ambitions. The only one harmed in the end will be the American consumer.”
In New York, Governor David Paterson (D) has reintroduced a $1.28 per gallon tax on sugared sodas – a proposal he first proposed and later abandoned in 2009. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom (D) has announced his intention to introduce legislation to impose a undisclosed fee on retailers selling sugary beverages. By targeting retailers, Newsom bypasses the need to subject the tax to a voter referendum.
At the same time, First Lady Michelle Obama is the public face of the Obama Administration’s legislative drive to attack the presence of soda and snacks in schools. On February 9, she announced the “Let’s Move” campaign to allegedly “end the American plague of childhood obesity in a single generation.” While she asserted the role of the government would be “minor” in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America” program, her husband is creating a federal task force on the issue charged with formulating a “long-term action plan.” Additionally, Obama Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said on February 8 that he intends to ban candy and soda from schools. Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) is expected to introduce legislation codifying this ban as part of the reauthorization of school meal programs.
“Social engineering is at the heart of the progressive movement,” Borelli continued. “The Obama Administration sought a cap-and-trade emissions policy that would raise energy prices and thus force Americans to use less energy. Then it was government mandates on health issues. Now, it’s discriminatory taxes on food and beverages. It seems there is nothing the so-called progressives will not tax and no liberty they will not assault to support their worldview.”
Diocese Will Pay $9.8 million to Alaska Abuse Victims
by Al RemingtonJanuary 26, 2010
After laundering 200 million dollars, for herself, paying off the perverts should be a cake-walk. The world should nationalize a pope, priest and pervert month; every month , until they are all found.
“Under the plan for reorganization, $9.8 million will go into a fund for close to 300 victims. Another $2.5 million is going to lawyers, accountants and other professionals. Payments to individuals will be decided case-by-case by a mediator, depending on a variety of factors including the nature and severity of abuse, the age of the victim at the time it started, and whether the perpetrator was in a position of trust.
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Donald MacDonald approved the plan at a hearing Monday morning in Anchorage.
“I’ve never had a case like this in my nearly 20 years on the bench,” the judge told the lawyers and Catholic church leaders gathered in court. The sexual abuse claims made this bankruptcy especially challenging, he said.
The diocese filed for reorganization in March 2008 in the wake of more than 100 state-court lawsuits accusing priests and volunteers of sexual abuse. After the bankruptcy case was filed, the claims grew. Many arise from abuse decades ago.”
I think we can extend the range from decades ago, somewhat further; with a couple more zeros, anyway.
The real Avatar story
by Greg FarberJanuary 24, 2010
Did you ever wonder if there is more to the story in those movies, well there is, and always has been..
” Hollywood is the magician’s wand (holly-holy) which has been used to cast a spell on the unsuspecting public. Things or ideas which would otherwise be seen as bizarre, vulgar, undesirable or impossible are inserted into films in the realm of fantasy. When the viewer watches these films, his/her mind is left open to suggestion and the conditioning process begins. These same movies which are designed to program the average person, can give the discerning viewer a better understanding of the workings and the plan of the world agenda. “Be-aware”.
Predictive Programming – The power of suggestion using the media of fiction to create a desired outcome.”
~Alan Watt
Monkey see monkey do, it’s called cognitive modeling.. You’re supposed to be and adult, grow up.
Predictive programming is a subtle form of psychological conditioning provided by the media to acquaint the public with planned societal changes to be implemented by our leaders. If and when these changes are put through, the public will already be familiarized with them and will accept them as ‘natural progressions’, as Alan Watt calls it; thus lessening any possible public resistance and commotion.
So when they kill off people like me you’ll agree..
An Honest man will change his thoughts to match the truth — A dishonest man will change the truth to match his thoughts..
Avatar = Hindu Mythology. the descent of a deity to the earth in an incarnate form or some manifest shape; the incarnation of a god.
an embodiment or personification, as of a principle, attitude, or view of life.
Watch these previews to begin to understand better how Holly-Wood and Jesuit Breakspears plays with your minds..
Avatar, the best preview yet
Enter The World pt1 – A Review of the Preview for the Ignorant Profane Part 1.mp4
Enter The World Pt2 – A Review of The Trailer For The ‘Ignorant Profane’ – Pt. 2
Communism 101 and a worm’s rights
by Greg FarberJanuary 21, 2010
Below is an opinion of a man who if we called him a Marxist, or a Communist he would be angered. That would be considered and insult. But as you see he clearly does not respect the Declaration of Independence which protects Private Property Rights from abuses and intrusions. He also lives in private property, on lands that were once “habitat” for other people, and animals. I say we go bulldoze his house because the grass and flys and spiders that lived there before he did are in danger of losing their right of existence. This individual is stupid because in history governments have never returned powers granted them, or stolen by them via frauds or force, until force was used against them. They are discussing and “endangered” white worm. This person works for Jon Marvel, founder of the western watersheds project.
http://wolves.wordpress.com/2010/01/18/great-white-rare-worm-vs-farmers/#comment-99273
” the petition process is the process by which we determine whether there is a case to “disrupt” private land owners … that’s the point … you have to petition to get a 90-day finding, then status review, solicitation for public input/comment, etc …
that process – the listing process – is the protocol for determining the imperiled status of a species …
you have to push to list to get the information that you’re saying we should have before we push to list …
as far as “wild” lands versus private lands …
i think it’s an interesting question – and personally, i believe that when the habitat of a species in threat of extinction is impaired by human activities ~ even human activities which would assign a “private” land ownership designation ~ that there ought to be a process by which we can evaluate how to ensure protections for public values. we’ve passed laws which allow for condemnation of private property … we’ve passed laws which allow for the government to confiscate private property in the instance that it is used to manufacture drugs or illicit products … these represent laws ~ expressions of social will ~ that trump the almighty “private property” right ~ and they do so with good reasons … does the degradation of an imperiled species that’s on the brink of extinction critical habitat constitute a social value on par with those existing standards we use to impugn “private property” rights re: drugs or condemnation laws ? i’d argue yes …
we all lose when a species goes extinct … there is a social value associated with the preservation of biodiversity and habitat — some of those values the ESA recognizes might not even be realized yet … it will be future generations that come to better understand the natural world … they can’t understand or benefit via value given that new understanding from what we let perish for all time …
there are mechanisms by which we compensate those who are “put out” by the preservation of our shared value as represented by the ESA. But we shouldn’t use the fact that a few people are put out as an excuse not to act to preserve a species and protect a social value.” —-Brian Ertz “employee” of the Western Watersheds Project. January 21, 2010 at 2:21 p.m.
If you were to try and debate him on those beliefs your comments would be deleted, of course I ripped this off the Communist U.N. AMERICAN RALPH MAUGHAN BLOG SITE.
These people are complete and utter fools.
Individual Generosity in Haiti Earthquake Relief Efforts Praised by Black Conservatives
by Tom RemingtonJanuary 19, 2010
People Stepping Up Before the Government Could Act Sets Example for the World
Washington, DC: As people honor the values and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., members of the Project 21 black leadership network are also taking this time to commend the American people for their quick and generous acts of charity after last week’s devastating earthquake in Haiti.
Deneen Borelli (Project 21 Fellow): “As we remember Dr. King, it is heartwarming to see how the American people have come together to help those in need. As they always do, average Americans of all races, classes and backgrounds opened their wallets and asked what they could do to help long before even the government could respond. Faith-based organizations n which have always been a great help n are picking up the slack where established relief groups and the government are already overwhelmed. Without a political goal in mind, the American people joined as one to offer hope. That is something to be proud of on this holiday.”
Geoffrey Moore: “I want to commend the American people on their response to the earthquake in Haiti. As usual, Americans step up to the plate to help those most in need.”
Darryn ‘Dutch’ Martin: “The fact that the American government and its people are front and center in helping the people of Haiti after the devastating earthquake n and have been from the start n is not surprising. No other sovereign nation is doing more to provide immediate humanitarian and financial assistance to needy countries and peoples with the same passion and on the same scale as the United States of America. At the same time, other jealous, America-hating nations either badmouth us as they sit on their hands or simply ride our coattails. Do we get the credit from the rest of the world that we so richly deserve for this never-ending helping hand? Of course not, and our efforts in Haiti will probably be no exception. But that’s to be expected, and it will not deter American generosity.”
So, what’s in a Sabbath? The Promised Land
by Al RemingtonDecember 21, 2009
Holy is the number 7.
God rested on the 7th day. His prophetic Churches thru the ages number seven. There are six years to work the land and the 7th year of Jubilee when the land rests. Very similar to the “mannah” from heaven God fed to his people after their exodus from Egypt. Six days He fed them. The seventh day was a day of rest, sabbath; and God provided enough on the sixth day that they not gather (work) on the day of rest(sabbath).
On the sixth day before completion of His creation prior to Adam the same day, God created all sustenance (food) for man and beast. Then He created man and woman alike, in his own image and rested the seventh day and blessed it and sanctified it for a continual sign.
Continual sign or perpetual convenant is one of the Ten Commandments. “Remember the sabbath and keep it holy.”
Israel and her troubles thru the ages, as an example, has been her direct disregard of the sabbaths and why God commanded the sabbath be kept; as a rememberance and a perpetual covenant and it ties directly with the land in which they dwell.
Observance of the sabbath on the seventh day is when God is with his people.
An amazing spiritual model, the Sabbatical Year – the Shemita.








