Skip to content


Since public education has been sanitized of G-d and the Bible, Observant Jews involved in “outreach” are often approached by members of the gentile community and asked whether they are also obligated to keep the Commandments. Conventional teaching would appear to clarify that all Jews are obligated to fulfill the Commandments that are feasible in the diaspora, while Gentiles are obligated to observe the 7 Noahide Laws.

One has to be quite scholarly to distinguish between the Ten Commandments and the Seven Noahide Laws: On the one hand, there is considerable overlap. But there are also some vital differences.

The dichotomy that exists is based on the historical unfolding of the Written Law being given to the Jewish Nation by Moses, followed by the Judges, Prophets, Kings, 120 Rabbis who sat in the Sanhedrin during the times of the Temple; followed by the Oral Law authored by the leading Rabbis who codified the Mishnah, Talmud, and subsequent commentators culminating in the Code of Jewish Law.

The difference between the Ten Commandments from the rest of the Torah is that they were hewn into the Tablets of Stone when Moses ascended Mount Sinai, while the rest of the Commandments were written on Scroll.

In contrast, the Seven Noahide Laws were given in the form of an Oath to Original Man as a sacred obligation to maintain a moral order to prevent the world from falling victim to the darkest impulses of man. They were then reiterated to Noah following the Great Flood when mankind deviated from his original Oath.

But the dichotomy is not as rigid as it may seem: The Seven Noahide Laws apply to all mankind. But they are usually absorbed in the more comprehensive Laws of the Torah that apply equally to all Jews: The notion of “Reform” and “Conservative” Judaism are fabrications arising from the “Maskilim Movement”, a pseudo-theology developed largely by German Jews in the 18th – 19th Centuries who considered themselves as enlightened, and modernized the practice of Judaism to suite the times, while deviating from the principles of exegesis applied from the Oral Torah into the Code of Jewish Law.

In part-2 of the essay, I will distinguish the Ten Commandments from the Seven Noahide Laws.

The purpose of this essay is to explain how, when, and why the Torah applies to all mankind.

I will then clarify how the Seven Noahide Laws, are not specific Laws, but rather Categories of Law, that add up to about 166 Laws.

I will attempt to clarify the notion of the Jewish Nation being selected to focus all their leisure time on the study of Torah. In contrast, the gentiles were delegated to dedicate their intellectual creativity to the study of Math, Physics, science and poetry (as examples). This derived from Moses, and most (not all) of the prophets being Jewish, the Middle-East being the initial cradle of Civilization: (The reason why the Babylonian Talmud being written in Persian).

I will complete the essay by explaining how the First Commandments address the intellectual pursuit of “Knowing G-d”, and how “punishments”, such as “death by stoning” or “death by the sword”, are merely a measurement of the seriousness of an offence or requirement for compensation.  Such punishments were virtually never metered out literally. An exception, such as the  stoning of the “wood-chopper” following the Sabbath when Moses expounded the Laws of Sabbath, were self-inflicted in order to illustrate the importance of the sanctity of Sabbath.

I will conclude part-2 of the essay by explaining that the learning and teaching of Torah and the performance of all the available Mitzvoth during the protracted Jewish exile was imposed on the Jewish Nation through a complex process of choice that involved an existential imperative fraught with ambivalence and suffering. Throughout the ages, the Rabbis discouraged the choice by gentiles to convert. If the gentile can earn his place in the World to Come by keeping the far less stringent Noahide Laws, why chose a far-more morally stringent and constrictive lifestyle without any guarantee of earning the rewards reserved only for those committed to a life seeped in the diligent study of Torah and performance of Mitzvoth ?

This notion perhaps stands out above all others when comparing Judaism to other religions, who claim to exclusively offer the opportunity for Divine Forgiveness and Redemption.


As the field of developmental psychology evolved, an account of how a formless infant differentiates into a healthy, autonomous, self-regulating entity became crucial to developmental theorists (Greenacre, P. “Early Determinants in the Development of the Sense of Identity.” Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1958).

For an individual to achieve inner well-being, he or she needs a healthy supply of sharing and validation by caregivers. In this regard, the first bonding between parent and child begins in the womb.

A child who grows up in a warm, safe, and nurturing environment is going to carry into adulthood a feeling of security, worth, well-being, and optimism (Kohut, Heinz and Miriam Elson, ed. ”The Kohut Seminars on Self-Psychology.” New York: W.W. Norton, 1987).

For Kohut, the ideal situation is when a child is born into an empathic, responsive human milieu.

He regards these early caretaker relationships with others to be as essential for psychological survival as oxygen is for one’s physical survival

The mother’s continued devotion and empathic anticipation of her child’s needs will translate, developmentally, into a child who feels more confident and empowered as an adult and will be more effective in personal relationships, interactions at work, and in society in general.

When the mother is able to resonate with the child’s needs, the latter becomes attuned to his own physical and emotional functions.
For Margaret Mahler (another influential developmental theorist), the organizing principal of developmental success is also based on the successful internalization of the nurturing “good parent.”

Donald Winnicott, a developmental psychologist who popularized the concept of the “Good Enough Mother,” is in agreement with Kohut regarding this observation:

“Disorders of the Self are understood as environmental deficiency diseases” (“The Maturational Process and the Facilitating Environment.” New York: International University Press, 1956).

In order to facilitate this process, the parent has to walk through the developmental stages with the child in a sharing and empathic way, paying attention to the child’s bonding cues.

Mature object-relationships require the right balance between nurture and graded separation.

In order to accomplish this, the “good parent” remains only as far as the child can tolerate, and is predictably available for emotional “refueling” upon recall by the child.

This process of internalizing and then self-regulating, is what Masterson calls “secure attachment” where ego-functions constrain the frustrations of gradual separation.

How the infant internalizes his experience of the caretaker is what determines the final outcome of how the infant will experience himself.

Resolution of the rapprochement crisis is considered by Mahler as essential developmental requirement.

In trauma research, “foraging patterns” are used to study stress responses by replicating different attachment models.

A research team led by Leonard Rosenblum and Jeremy Coplan from the Primate Behavior Laboratory at the SUNY Health Sciences Center, Brooklyn, studied infant primates nursed by mothers randomly assigned to a variety of foraging conditions.

Using this research model, stress hormones were elevated in infants whose foraging pattern was totally unpredictable (“Nonhuman Primates Exposed to Unpredictable Early Rearing: Relevance to PTSD.” Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1997).

By manipulating foraging conditions, these researchers created a laboratory model that corresponds to a parent who is unavailable during the critical “rapprochement phase.”

Their findings support the notion that adverse early rearing experiences have longstanding effects on neurochemicals relevant to emotional regulation.

According to Masterson, this developmental stage is required for “mature attachment”.  Emotional-regulation allows the individual to maintain a constant sense of “self”, even in the temporary absence of significant others (“Introduction to Disorders of the Self”, Ralph Klein, The Masterson Approach. Edited by James Masterson and Ralph Klein, Brunner/ Mazel, New York, 1989).
Lapses in attentive, empathic caretaking can create the tension in children to transform to a higher level of distress-tolerance and autonomy.

But when the inattention borders on being neglectful or deprivational, this can lead to complex trauma or disorders of the self,  such as Cluster B Personality Disorders such as Borderline Personality, Sociopath, or Pathological Narcissism.

Extended caretaker failure to provide empathy may lead to deficits ranging from shyness and introversion to serious disorders of the self.

Cases of repeated abuse can lead to a search for surrogate caretaking, infantile dependence, and abandonment-depression-characteristics of the Borderline Personality. These survivors of parental failure may develop a deep self-loathing and direct their negative emotions into self-abuse (such as self-mutilation or even suicide).

The Borderline Patient responds to abandonment by engaging in the projective defenses of Idealization or demonization, and a failure to retrieve the good self-object leads to an abandonment depression.

This can lead to compulsive self-gratification via  impulsive behaviors such as binging, promiscuity or intoxication; or unmanageable anger can be turned inwards in various forms of self-affliction.

The Narcissist is unable to integrate the positive and negative elements of the parent. The child is left  with an inner void.

Rather than sustaining a sense of inner-object constancy; the unfulfilled element of unrealized good becomes projected as a “grandiose self”, and self-esteem is constantly under threat. In order to fight-off a sense of void, the narcissist requires constant validation, confirmation, and admiration.

This is required to hold in abeyance the mother`s empathic failures.

Having a parent who did not confirm or acknowledge is compensated by a grandiose self-object that conceals a sense of self that feels defective but presents outwardly as arrogant, quick to devaluate others.

What betrays the sense of devaluation and empathic failure is the narcissist’s reaction to criticism or disapproval: Unable to maintain a stable sense of self-esteem, the internal sense of humiliation cannot be subdued, and its negative component becomes “split-off” (externalized).

The unfortunate consequence is that this disavowed negative self-element becomes attached as a negative projection onto someone who can function as a reservoir for this attacking, split-off function of the self-structure.

The narcissist exploits others in order to prop-up a grandiose persona which conceals a vulnerable self-structure.

Beneath the façade of pride, success and entitlement, the narcissist is in constant pursuit of admiration. He will even feign a shallow sense of empathy for others, which is rarely genuine.

When challenged, or faced with even minor criticism, the false grandiose self crumbles, and is replaced with a pervasive sense of envy, rage, and impotence (“Psychotherapy of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder”, Richard Fischer, The Masterson Approach. Edited by James Masterson and Ralph Klein, Brunner/ Mazel, New York, 1989).

The negative self-object in the narcissist cannot be integrated into a whole self. Whoever triggers these feelings of worthlessness becomes persecutory.

Self-esteem can only be replenished through triumphant vanquish of this disowned element of self.

The Antisocial Personality manifests the most profound impairments in the capacity for empathic social attachment. Selma Fraiberg characterized sociopathy as “a disease of non-attachment”.

The narcissist lacks true empathy, in that “others” serve to maintain self-esteem by indulging the projected “good” part of the self with flattery and    Extended caretaker failure to provide empathy may lead to deficits ranging from shyness and introversion to serious disorders of the self.

In cases of repeated abuse leading to a state of learned helplessness experienced as a dreaded and unavoidable fate.

Survivors of childhood abuse may develop a deep self-loathing, directing their negative emotions into self-abuse in the form of self-mutilation or even suicide.

Extended caretaker failure to provide empathy may lead to deficits ranging from shyness and introversion to serious disorders of the self.

The recipient of the narcissist`s sham-empathy is the result of the “good object” successfully colluding with these projections through obedience, loyalty, and admiration.

However, the Antisocial Personality is almost unable to participate in a non-exploitative relationship.

The true Sociopath lacks the capacity to experience tenderness, self-reflection, or sorrow.

There is no recognition of the opinions, wishes, or needs of the other.

There is also an absence of true sharing, empathy, or intimacy.

On the contrary, the victim of the sociopath becomes an inanimate, dehumanized, need gratifier.

DSM-IV will therefore link Axis I Diagnoses such as “Sadism”, or Paraphilia (such as pedophilia) with an Axis II Diagnosis of Antisocial Personality, since the predator`s sexual arousal is non-consensual (such as in cases of “voyeurism” or “exhibitionism” which fall under the category of “Paraphilia).

More severe cases of Sociopathy involve “ownership” of others, infliction of pain or humiliation, or different forms of bondage.

In cases of Sadism, the sociopathic predator requires to subjugate and inflict suffering, to become sexually aroused.

Most of these cases will only enter treatment which is court mandated.

The Wealth Joseph gathered for the Jewish Nation in Exile

Hey Tevet Parsha’s V` Yigash   תשע’ב

There are several Kabalistic commentaries on the wealth that Joseph accumulated for Pharaoh during the seven-year famine in Egypt.

The original source material is found in the Talmud (Pesachim, page 119 a).

“Gimmel Matmonius hitmin Yosef” (Joseph took the silver and hid it for posterity after dividing it into three portions).

The Talmud then relates that Korach (who led the rebellion against Moses) took the first portion; and Anteninos the Emperor of Rome seized the second portion when he ransacked the Second Temple.

But the Talmud says that the third and final portion remains concealed as a reward, concealed for the righteous.

Both the Alter Rebbe (Torah Ohr, V’Yigash) and the Mitteler Rebbe (Torah`s Chaim), discuss the “Matminim” (Treasure) through a metaphysical prism.

Kabbalists like the Megaleh Amukos (Rabbi Nassan Shapira, Rosh-Yeshiva in Krakow from 1617-1633), and the Ben Ish Chai, (Rabbi Yosef Chaim of Baghdad, 1834-1909) emphasize that Joseph`s “treasure” was not only his material assets but his “Chein” (spelled in Hebrew as    חן (, which is numerically 58. (Noah,  נח which is numerically 58); in whom G-d found favor. When Joseph was sold, and even imprisoned, he continued to find favor in his Master`s eyes).

When “Matminim” is replaced with “Chein”, the resulting Gematria is 58 x 3 = 174.

That is the same Gematria as “Kessef” (silver, =160) plus “Zahav” (gold=14) =174.

To the Ben Ish Chai, when the letters are re-arranged, they form the words “Kiseh` B` Paz”, כסא בפזa formula for wealth.

To the Megaleh Amukos, silver “Kessef” was the currency that Joseph used as a levy to sustain the financial and social stability of Egypt during the famine.

Since Egypt then became tyrannical and the first Super-Power to oppress and persecute the Jewish people, there had to be a subsequent atonement for the suffering it inflicted.

According to the Megaleh Amukos, the Gematria of Kessef is “Eitz” (tree=עצ =160), and the “atonement” was when Joseph`s great-grandson Mordechai had Haman hung from a fifty-, foot tree (עצ =90 plus 70= 160).


The Serpent, also known as the Nachash Hakadmoni, was responsible for the “Primal Sin”, or fall from Grace, the state of pure Benevolence bestowed on humanity since Creation. Chassidus describes this as “Tzimtzum”, or “the contraction of God`s light”.

The middle word in the Chumash – “Gachon”, (Parsha`s Shmeini)  refers to the Archetypal snake as the Tenina Hagadol (Sefer Ha’Sichot 1991 pg. 273).

Had Adam and Chava (Eve) not succumbed to the temptation of eating from the Tree of Knowledge, referred to as the “the clusters of grapes” in Shir Hashirim (12;13) “Hanitzanim nirah b`Aretz”, mankind would have been spared the descent of Daas into the external worlds of B`Y`A` and beyond.

Had Original Man controlled his impulse to consume the clusters of grapes (same say figs) and allowed them to reach full maturation, they would have ripened for use as libation in God`s Temple.

The triumph of the metaphorical contrast – the Evil Archetype –  nurtures all the negative forces that obstruct the Redemption, as expressed in the passage of the middle of the Book of Psalms (Shir Hashirim 2;12 and 13, – “The righteous blossoms are seen and the small figs are ready for their ascent to the Temple.” But in Kepittal פ “Yechasrenu Chazir M`Yair”, translated as “the wild boars of the forest trample the clusters of grapes” (or figs), one sees again this dichotomy of forces:

  • Moshe vs. Pharaoh, 2) the mouths of the Meraglim perverting the beauty of the Land in their evil report (San Hedrin 104 b, the Maharsha explains the Gezeira on the letter “Peh” diminishing the letter “Ayin” (seen in Kepittal , and 3) the grape/fig clusters yearning for libation at the Temple being trampled by the wild boars of the forest.

I will now explore the mysteries of the obstruction to their respective remedies and how they hinder the Geulah:

There are multiple sources for Redemption narrative:

  • The redemption begins with the imprisonment of the Wine-Steward whose sin was pouring Pharaoh’s cup from contaminated wine. His subsequent dream of 3 tendrils bearing clusters of grapes as a premonition for Joseph that in 3 days Pharaoh would make a communal celebration. At which time he would call for his wine-steward, who would be freed and restored to his former state of grace in the eyes of Pharaoh. (footnote 1 This also illustrates that no event is coincidental. Rather, even the apparently trivial events such as the dream of the king`s servant are significant components of the king`s garment).
  • The dream of the clusters of grapes are forgotten until the Creator Visits Pharaoh himself with two disturbing dreams (Genesis Veyeishev).
  • These dreams perplex all of Pharaoh`s Tooth-Sayers until the Wine-Steward remembers Joseph`s powers of interpretation. Joseph`s interpretations resonate so powerfully with Pharaoh that he frees Joseph from prison, promotes him to the position of Secretary of State, which ultimately leads to the descent of Jacob`s family into Egypt.
  • While this saves Jacob, the son of Isaac from the famine in Canaan, it also leads to the enslavement of the Jewish people, their birth as a Nation, and their subsequent liberation.
  • The miraculous Redemption from Egypt is a derivative of the Exile of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden – the result of their succumbing to the temptation of the snake and the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge.
  • The second Archetypal Source of the Jewish Nation`s Exile is when they succumb to the false report of the Spies who negatively spin their observations about the Land of Israel. God`s anger is again In

The Redemption from Mitzraim involved overcoming the dominance emanating from the source of Pharaoh’s negative power which he drew from the Nachash Hakadmoni  – the Archetypal poison from the Tenina Hagadol. This was accomplished through the Ten Makkos, culminating in Makkos Ha`Bochoros (killing of the Egyptian Firstborn). We  draw from the recurrence of the Celestial Power recited in Parsha`s Bo and Beshalach. Just as this occurred at Midnight – the peak of darkness, the snake is referenced by the middle word in Chumash -the Book of Moses- by the word “Gachon” – the snake was shamed to crawl on it`s belly (Gachon).

  • In similar fashion, the remedy for overcoming the obstacle for the Final Redemption – involves the release of the shrunken ע from the Kelipa of the wild boars of the forest– [the middle-word of Sefer Tehillim -which is in Psalm פ ,]. Since this requires the activation of the power of Dovid Malka Meshicha, this remedy is referenced not by the middle word of the Chumash ( connected to Moshe Rebbeinu), but to the middle word of Tehillim – the word “Yair” – the wild boars of the forest that trample the grape-clusters. (found in the Book of Psalms of King David in Kepittal Peh).
  • The reversal of this Gezeira is accomplished by changing the Ayen of Yair into an Aleph of Yaar. The alteration of the single letter ע changes the meaning of the word “forest”, (where wild boars trample the grape-clusters), into “river”- “Yaar – יאר  with an א )where the wild boars drown).
  • In the perish of the Haftorah of Shevii Shel Pesach, (in the footnotes of Likutei Sichos 37, page 111,) the question posed by the Tzamach Tzeddek: “ Rather than reading the Song of Devorah which recounts the Splitting of the Sea of Reeds which is read in the Haftorah of Parsha`s Beshalach, we narrate the Song of David (Mechilta d`Rav Ismael pg. 170: Shmuel II; 22)”.

The Tzemach Tzeddek answers that “On the 7th day of Pesach there is a revelation of the light of the future Redemption of Mashiach, a descendant of King David”.

Regarding the 10 Songs of King David (Shmuel 21:19), the Me`Am Loez refers to Dovid as being called Elchanan, the son of  יער  “since he slew Goliath the Hittite”( ויך אלחנן בן יערי ארגים בית הלחמי את גלית הגתי ). Me`Am Loez also poses the possibility that  Elchanan, as an alternative to King David, may have been a descendant of Betzalel, the weaver of the curtains of the Mishkan, who slew Goliath`s brother Lachmi, one of the other three giants born to Harafa. The praise sang by David in the Haftorah included ten victories, including those over the four giants born to Ofrah (pronounced “Orpah”) after she parted from Naomi (as opposed to Dovid who descended from Ruth, who clung to her mother-in-law Naomi, rather than returning to her nation of origin.

The Me`Am Loez also refers to the use of the word יער for the House built by Solomon “He built his House from the forest of Lebanon (Kings:1: 7;2  “ויבן את בית יער הלבנון ” )

In his Maamer of the Haftorah of Shevii Shel Pesach, rather than repeating the historical narrative commemorating “The splitting of the Sea” (the Song of Devorah from Parsha`s Beshalach),  the Alter Rebbe brings the words from the Prophets regarding the Final Redemption: “V’Heinif Yado al Ha`Naar, Bo Rucha, v` Hikahu L’Sheva Nechalim” (Isaiah: 11;15). Rather than reciting the historical narrative, this again refers to the future Redemption, where Moshiach will split the River (“Yaar” or “Nachal”) into Seven tributaries referenced previously regarding the Malchus of Dovid and Shlomo.

Nachal is the mnemonic of “Notzer Hesed Alaphim” where the 13 Attributes of Mercy nurture the Alephs of Av and Aim, or א’ו’א  = Y-H). As it prophesies “On that Day” B`Yom Ha’hu: –  Y-H-Y-H, rather than Y-H-V-H). The translation of “it will be” (Y-H-Y-H) would simply be transformed from the dimension of time to that of it`s corresponding spiritual domain, where Y = Chochma, H = Bina, V = the 6 Middos of Z`A, and  H = Malchus (Sefer Mamarim תרע’ח “מן המצר קראתי  י-ה) The spiritual domain of Y-H-Y-H (Chochma and Bina without any descent) exists now but will only be revealed to us “on that day” (when the 7th day of Pesach comes to fruition and “U`malei Ha`Aretz Deah es Hashem”).

One comes to this similar deeper metaphorical level of understanding that characterizes that experience another Prophecy that likens the Exodus to Redemption is found in Micah (ז, ט’ו) “כימי צאתך מארץ מארץ אראנו נפלאות.הרי גאולה העתידה תהי נעלית יותר הרבה מהגאולה   דיציאת  מצרים (Sefer Hamamarim, Melukat 4 pg. רכה). The operational distinction of the Future Redemption, the Rebbe continues to explain in this Maamer (Acharon Shel Pesach, 1952) lies in the words אראנו נפלאות. “I will reveal Myself to you”. What will He reveal ? The root of נפלאות is פלא, which, spelled backward, is אלף, also used to symbolize the א of Av `v ` Aim (or Y-H, Chochma and Bina, but not lower into the contractions (Tzimtzumim) penetrated by the Vav of Z`A`.

Again, we see reference to the role of  א  in reversing  the Gezeira of the contracted Ayen of Yair, replacing it with the Aleph of Yaar. The shrunken ע from the Kelipa of the wild boars of the forest in Psalm פ can then revert to the expanded  ע in the שמע and the יער from   Kings:1: 7;2  “ויבן את בית יער הלבנון”.

In summary, the First Days of Pesach commemorate the Liberation from Egypt. Being an historical event, it is accompanied by the recital of the full Hallel and the Blessing of Shechiyanu. In contrast, the Final Days of Pesach allude to the anticipation of the Ultimate Redemption which ushers in the re-establishment of the Monarchy of the House of David.

Being that the Final Days portend of events yet to unfold, we are unable to make the Blessing of Shechiyanu or recite the full Hallel(Shaarei Ha`Moedim, Chag Ha`Pesach:2 pg. 290 [רצ-רצא]): “Shechiyanu pertains to something new. That explains why “Az Yashir” is in the future tense. For this reason, the Haftorah elaborates more on the Redemption of Mashiach which will be much higher than the exodus from Mitzraim. This in act warrants(full Hallel and) a Shechiyanu in its own right, not just as a conclusion of the Seven Days of Pesach). However, being that the Final Days of Pesach refer to the future Monarchy of David, the building of the Third Temple, and the Resurrection: There is only a glimpse, a Petichas Ha`Tzinor of these events, we limit Hallel and refrain from Shechiyanu until this reality is fully manifest [ed.]”.

The differences between the First and Final Days of Pesach can also be traced to the respective  fundamental Archetypal forces that constituted the Exile in Egypt compared with the current exile experience.

The Archetypal source for the Egyptian Exile derives from the original sin of the Chet Eitz Ha`Daas, where we succumbed to the temptation of the Original Serpent – the “Nachash Hakadmoni” as explained in the Rashi of Parsha`s Bo:  When Moshe Rebbeinu had to confront Pharaoh in his inner chamber, where he encountered Pharaoh`s  Spiritual source – the Tenina Hagadol (the Great Serpent, referred to in Ezekiel (29;3) (Sefer Ha’Sichot 1991, pg. 273).

If the Final Days of Pesach were merely the conclusion of the Avodah of overcoming the Negative Archetypal Force of Pharaoh, the customs would be like that of Shemini Atzeres: Concluding the Seven Days of Succoth, where  we recite the Blessing of Shechiyanu and the full Hallel prayer.

Were that the case, the Haftorah of Shevii Shel Pesach would be the Song of Miriam, recited on Shabbos Shira, Parshas Beshalach, which narrates the crossing of the Sea of Reeds. Instead, we recite the Song of David from the book of Shmuel.

This also confirms the independent  Archetypal Sources of the two exile experiences: On the first days, we describe the Redemption from Egypt, as is recited in the Haggadah and in the Haftarah (Joshua 3: 5-7 and 5:  2-6), where Joshua leads the Nation into the Holy-Land.

In contrast, the Final Days, while not yet fully accomplished, are referenced by the narration of the Song of David (Shmuel II:22)” in the Haftorah and subsequently by the Seudah of Mashiach, adopted by the Baal Shem Tov to help in actualizing the revelation of Mashiach, who is a descendant of King David”.


Where does the NFL draw the line on our First Amendment Rights of Free Expression?

The fundamental right of freedom of expression is not as boundless as the public might imagine. Regulatory Bodies are empowered to define the parameters of acceptable behaviors by their employees on and off the field. These Sporting Bodies provide oversight to the conduct of employees at all levels, ranging from payers to coaches, referees, and even club-managers.

Let`s begin carving-out unrestricted freedom of expression to the workplace in general and to the NFL specifically.

At every level of participation, freedom of expression stretches well-beyond the expectation of ethical behavior.

For instance, employers have the right to take action against an employee who engages in speech or behavior that expresses a political cause offensive to an owner, his sponsors, or fan-base.

There are valid reasons an employer would restrict political speech, such as to assure a productive work site or express opinions contrary to those of management. If an employer permits a hostile work environment, he faces the potential risk of having to pay damages from lawsuits.

According to John Whitehead, President of the Rutherford Institute, “Someone who says anything that an employer or official doesn’t like, and they’re gone.”

In an article published in Bloomberg Business Week on August 3, 2012 titled “The Workplace: Where Free Speech goes to die” the author describes the bottom-line as simple: “Be satisfied with talk at work that doesn’t offend colleagues or anger the boss”. The Constitution doesn`t impose restrictions on private employers “An employee would be well-advised keeping this in mind before shooting off his or her mouth at the workplace.”

Let’s take as an example the case reported both by Fox News (August 12th, 2016)1 as well as The Washington Times (August 13th, 2016) 2.

Critical Op-Eds in both publications expressed common outrage on behalf of supporters being denied the opportunity of galvanizing the grief of their supporters paying tribute to the officers killed in the ambush.

Both publications decried the NFL`s bandenying the Cowboys’ request to wear decals on their helmets during the season honoring the five police officers massacred on July 7th” (by an anti-police sniper at a Black Lives Matter protest).

Following the ban imposed by the NFL, a representative of the team released a statement expressing “regret and disappointment at the decision of the NFL preventing the wearing of the ‘Arm in Arm’ helmet decal as a ‘display of unity’ with the Dallas police”.1

Chicago Bears wide receiver Brandon Marshal was fined $10,500 by the NFL for wearing green football shoes in the Oct. 10 game against the New York Giants.

Marshall had said before last Thursday’s game he was wearing the shoes to attract attention to Mental Health Awareness Week.

Following the 9/11 attacks the NFL did not impose fines on players who violated the league`s dress and equipment policy to honor victims, NFL Senior Vice President of Communications Brian McCarthy told USA Today Sports that they shouldn`t read into the leagues failure to punish as a sign of leniency on uniform policy for the future.

USA Today Sports Commentator Lorenzo Reyes commented that “in other words, if Pittsburgh Steelers Running Back DeAngelo Williams again wears eye-black with “Find the Cure” during Breast Cure Awareness Month in honor of his mother who died of Breast Cancer or teammate William Gray wears purple cleats for “Domestic Violence Awareness”, the league would fine them as it did the previous year.3

The NFL responded to these incidents by restating the Policy of the League Office on Uniform and Equipment: “The NFL elaborates that it will not allow players to convey messages which relate to political activities or any other causes, non-football events, campaigns or charitable causes”.

What does the NFL Rule-Book say about the National Anthem?

According to NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy, the policy is one which      has been in place for several years. It falls under the section player equipment, uniforms, and player appearance:

“The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem.

During the National Anthem, players on the field and the bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American Flag is in good condition.

It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country.

Failure to be on the field at the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft-choices for violations of the above, including first offenses.”

One can comfortably draw the following conclusions from the NFL`s code of dress and behavior: The anthem is explicitly incorporated into the book-of-rules that apply to dress and equipment: Under no exception may a player deviate from this code. None of the noble causes described above were considered so exceptional as to fall beyond it`s boundaries:  Whether it was a display of solidarity with slain Police-Officers, Victims of Domestic Abuse, Breast Cancer, or Mental Health, players deviating from the NFL`s Honor-Code were subject to disciplinary action.

Which begs the question: Now that the NFL has decided to throw its time-tested Honor-Code to the dark forces of social discontent, subjugating itself to the anarchy imposed on it by the Deep-State: Is the rest of civil-society expected to join forces with this sinister spiral into moral darkness? Or can we selflessly rally behind the President for our collective honor, and join together for the greater-good ?


2   honoring-fallen-dallas-officers.html 


Robert Mueller to Jury: Name Trump`s crime and I`ll indict him

Robert Mueller oversaw the FBI during its transformation into the “brown-shirts” of the deep-state, a dark secretive organization that participated in the 9/11 bombings, creating the necessary alibi of a “Second Pearl Harbor”. He oversaw the successful attack on America to jolt the country into a sense of shock and collective cry for revenge whereby any means would justify the end. This laid the groundwork for passage of the “Patriot Act” whereby all power would become centralized and unrestrained by the checks and balances set-up by America`s Founding Fathers. Following the election-upset that stripped the leftist leadership of an election rigged to establish leftist dominance over America for perpetuity the Deep-State re-enlisted Mueller as Special Investigator over the newly-elected Donald Trump by a coup disguised as a “Special Investigation” based on trumped-up charges. The charges, over the life of the Investigation would be allowed to define themselves, since there were none. The charges began as a confabulation that Trump, a building magnate all his life was in fact a “Russian Spy”. Failing to find more evidence than a meeting arranged whereby Trump`s son was baited into a meeting with a Russian attorney who specialized in adoptions. Obama had already demonstrated that the civilian population had been sufficiently dumbed-down by a combination of disinformation, vaccination-toxicity and water saturated with Chlorine and Fluoride, that they were ready to run with the false-narratives of “hands up don`t shoot” and “planned-parenthood” whereby movements were spawned based on the population believing that Law-Enforcement Officers under attack were racially-motivated murders and infanticide was the way to protect the rights of parents. The ability of inverted word-meanings and reality-distortions could generate social frenzy, the leftists running the Deep-state were convinced that a sustained assault on the elected President, (despite the rigging of the election to the left with massive voter-fraud), would successfully set the stage to impeach the president on anything. The population had been successfully tested to call for the indictment of a President elected by a record of electoral votes on charges that could be fabricated, or if necessary, not exist at all. Mueller`s role would be to prove that a President had obstructed justice, without requiring factual evidence of their being a legitimate charge. Social engineering at the end would prevail, not logic. A normal society would call the charade for what it was: a coup. A normal society would call for the arrest of Mueller and trial for sedition in a military court. But that normalcy had been stripped from American with the assassination of J.F.K.

Why Congress won`t Repeal Obamacare

Most consumers don`t know about Obamacare`s hidden agenda. When the Patriot Act was passed, we all believed that it was to protect Americans by disrupting or tracking the ways our enemies communicate via social media within our geographic confines. Then we discovered that the surveillance actually was directed towards U.S. Citizens. Later we found that Tea-Party organizations were being targeted by the I.R.S. Did anyone connect the dots ? Obamacare allows the government to have full disclosure of our personal health profiles from the cradle to the grave. When integrating our medical-health records with our age, income, political-affiliation and everything else about our personal profiles, our medical-treatment can be manipulated according to our favorability-scores. Those in government whose loyalties are to the “deep-state” or political-elite, are going to continually sabotage “Repeal and Replace” because it disrupts the central plan of the globalists. The same necessity exists for creating a link between “global-warming” and Carbon-Emissions, with the necessity of stabilizing the population of the planet. These agencies are equally invested in having their hands on the lever of who receives what treatments, based on their cost-productivity, and obedience to a central authority. Just like the I.R.S. was an important tool to stifle the proliferation of Tea-Party organizations, so Obamacare provides central government intimate personal information about your medical needs while correlating them with your level of favorability. That`s a dangerous concept considering the evidence of it already having been used in the I.R.S. scandal. Its the same reason why all the perpetrators got away with it. That is a comment on the intent-factor behind Obamacare. The “benefits-package” was the selling-point. Whether it was affordable, and whether you kept your own physician were irrelevant to the architects of the plan. In similar fashion the emphasis is the “Repeal” component. Anyone understanding a sliver of the implications of its enforcement will now understand the resistance of the Washington swamp in allowing any “Repeal” legislation to be enacted.

With regards to the “Replace” component of Obamacare, its significance is far less critical. Once the country understands that "Universal Health-Care" is nothing more than a euphemism for what really was designed as a "death-certificate", the key to its replacement is keeping it out of the hands of the government. The government has an agenda. And its not about the keeping the population healthy. Whether its the use of Chem-trails, G.M.O.`s, pesticides, Cell-phone towers in urban areas, artificial-light and forced-feeding of the poultry industry, the use of growth-hormone to artificially grow beef, the addition of sub-toxic levels of Chlorine and Fluoride to the water-supply: – it has nothing to do with our well-being, but rather the protection of certain industries, despite their knowledge of their danger to the citizens Congress is betraying.

That`s the reason that government has already disqualified itself in taking charge of our health-care.

Once Congress has been forced by the Citizens to is Repeal  Obamacare, who should be empowered to replace it ? Thats when you bring into the vacuum a budget that Congress and the President can afford. Within that budget we need representatives from all of the industries experienced in health-care. This includes industries dedicated to healthy living habits (disease-prevention), medical educators, I.T. specialists, Community Care Providers, Emergency Intervention Centers, Maternity, experts in Acute and Long-Term Traditional Medical Care, Rehabilitation Centers and a variety of Alternate Care Models. (the latter dramatically reduce the need for expensive treatments and are strongly opposed by the for-profit Health-Care Industry.

All of the above-mentioned components ranging from illness -prevention, healthy-life-habits, and multi-layered treatment, needs to be negotiated and divided between the existing Private Insurance Carriers.

The key to its success is in integrating the above-mentioned components, and keeping government out of the health-care industry.

We also need a regulatory agency to ensure that legislators are not profiting off those industries that make us ill and then create a market for big-pharma.

The dark side of the current entrenchment of government in health-care is that inexpensive breakthroughs in natural holistically-based discoveries about whats making our society sicker is being disrupted by an epidemic of assassinations of the leading physicians in holistic  medicine. None of these have been investigated, adding suspicion to corruption and the resistance at so many levels to change.

But with the Repeal of Obamacare (and the reason for President Trump`s urgency to get this done), non-governmental heath-care providers will have no difficulty in rapidly filling the vacuum with multiple competing inexpensive health-care models. Those in a position to solve the problem are just waiting for government to clear the way.