The Several Kinds of Congress, According to Kamasutra

According to Kamasutra:

Congress is of the following kinds:

Loving congress
Congress of subsequent love
Congress of artificial love
Congress of transferred love
Congress like that of eunuchs
Deceitful congress
Congress of spontaneous love

Question is, which kind is the US Congress?

I guess it takes all kinds.

30-State Concealed Carry (CCW) Class at Laguna Hills office in South Orange County, CA

Visit for details. 

The Christian View of the Right and Duty of Self-Defense

From NRA's America's 1st Freedom, an excellent article by Dave Kopel entitled, "Is the Best Defense a Good Book?" which rebuts the pacifist view, pointing out the many New Testament examples of good Christian soldiers and of disciples carrying arms, and of Jesus actually using force when justified.  His arguments include that "turning the other cheek" is in the context of insult and seeking revenge, not self-defense.

If you like the Kopel article, you may want to check out a book I read quite awhile ago, now published by WND, "Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense," written by a South African who shot back at terrorists attacking his church.  That book has even more Scripture, including some from the Old Testament, like this gem.

Also, see Dave Kopel's law review article, The Catholic Second Amendment, and his latest law review article, The Human Right of Self-Defense.

Putin Gets Sympathy from Pat Buchanan

Link: WorldNetDaily: Does Putin not have a point?.

How would we react if China today brought Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela into a military alliance, convinced Mexico to sell oil to Beijing and bypass the United States, and began meddling in the affairs of Central America and Caribbean countries to effect the electoral defeat of regimes friendly to the United States? How would we react to a Russian move to put anti-missile missiles on Greenland?

Putting aside Clinton's murderous blunder in bombing the Serbs, which was a weird and illegal Clinton/UN thing that was against our national interest, the actions of the Bush Administration can be seen as merely fostering self-determination, along with some strategic defense measures which are completely reasonable considering the reality of how little power dynamics changed when the commie apparatchiks and oligarchs adopted capitalism as a new designer label for their old line of Russian imperial dress.  We did win the Cold War after all, didn't we?  Should we not make sure there is no recurrence?  Did not the Cold War have a point?

Mr. Buchanan's China analogy quoted above is inapposite because we are not in a situation where we have defeated China in a Cold War.  (The Cold War with China has not even started yet, unfortunately.)

Missile defenses in Poland may have been "offensive" in MAD Cold War terms, but in an age of terrorism and Russian corruption, I don't think it has to be viewed that way.  Who exactly wants to invade Mother Russia?  Certainly not America or Europe.  Europe is busy losing population and building mosques.  And what of the looming possibility of a revanchist Russia?  We did win the Cold War, after all, and that threat must not be allowed to emerge.  But as Mr. Buchanan's latest book points out, Russia's population will drop one-third by 2050.  Russia should be much more worried about China, and will need to work with us on that problem.

In particular, I am surprised that Mr. Buchanan, an ardent nationalist, would dismiss Ukraine's self-determination as simply a Cold War move on our part.  Ukraine is the largest country in Europe.  It has a strong national identity and was known as Europe's breadbasket before Stalin's artificial famines murdered ten million Ukrainian peasant farmers.  Yet there is a large ethnic Russian population in Ukraine (including my wife's family) and Ukraine is now too connected to Russia to ever be a danger to it.  Increased Western presence in Ukraine will benefit Russia economically, and will serve as a buffer against Russian imperialism.  This should be one of those areas in which Mr. Buchanan would agree that national sovereignty benefits everyone.

BOOK REVIEW: Nathan Tabor’s “Beast on the East River” … Should we tame it? cage it? kill it?

[Click permalink for extended book highlights.]

I just finished reading a GREAT new book: The Beast on the East River: The UN Threat to America’s Sovereignty and Security, by Nathan Tabor (published by Nelson Current). 

This is a book that will change you.  For example, I now believe in black helicopters.

From and Wayne LaPierre’s recent book, “The Global War on Your Guns” (same publisher), and in particular from watching the televised debate between Wayne LaPierre and Rebecca Peters of IANSA, I already appreciated the emerging threat the UN poses to gunowners.

But black helicopters?  No one wants to be accused of “black helicopter thinking!”  That implies a belief that globalists plot to impose one-world government, including the military apparatus necessary for such government.

Well, it turns out I am in very good company as a “black helicopter thinker.”  Walter Cronkite (“America’s anchorman,” the “most trusted man in America”) went on record advocating world government (including requisite police and standing army) while at the UN accepting an award from the World Federalist Association in 1999.  Cronkite does not merely believe such globalists exist; he appears to actually be one, which is news to a lot of us who grew up with him “objectively” covering our news.

But does a force of “black helicopters” (permanent UN military force) actually exist beyond the planning stage? 

Yes, that’s the way it is, according to Nathan Tabor’s seismically significant book.  The Multinational Stand-by High Readiness Brigade for United Nations Operations (SHIRBRIG), the first permanent UN military force in history, was mobilized secretly in 1997 and kept quiet until media learned of a secret $200,000 donation made as “backdoor support” by the US State Department.  Countries initially pledging to send troops included Canada, Denmark, Austria, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, and Sweden.  Operational headquarters were established in Copenhagen.  SHIRBRIG became fully operational in 2000 with about 5000 troops, and a potential pool of 147,500 troops pledged from 88 countries.  Both Clinton and the UN denied there was any standing army.  While the denial was perhaps technically correct, SHIRBRIG was at least the functional equivalent of a standing army since all command and control systems and logistical infrastructure were in place and the troops needed to be merely “plugged in.”

Moreover, new plans supported by Bush will create a permanent UN force of 75,000 in Africa.

The Beast on the East River: The UN Threat to America’s Sovereignty and Security is a well-researched primer on UN organizational structure and its most nefarious activities.  It makes a very complicated subject understandable.  The book is a good read and an essential resource for any patriot’s library.  No matter what your main issue is, the nonsense (norm changing) side of it is probably being pushed by the UN or affiliated “transnationalists.”  Things make a lot more sense after reading this book.

A few highlights of what is documented in The Beast:

  • Rape and murder of women and children, prostitution rings, human trafficking, and other atrocities, almost everywhere UN peacekeepers operate.
  • Shocking UN facilitation of genocide of 800,000 Tutsis (mostly by clubs and machetes) in Rwanda; sale of arms to Hutus by Egypt’s foreign minister under Boutros-Ghali; elevation of Boutros-Ghali to UN Secretary-General; urgent cable from UN Force Commander in Rwanda, General Romeo Dallaire, requesting permission to defend Tutsis who sought refuge in UN compounds; denial by then-head of UN peacekeeping operations Kofi Annan despite capability to defend easily with troops in place; Kofi Annan’s promotion to UN Secretary-General.

Continue reading