Search the Community

George Hayduke Approved "One of them had a big knife, then he came in and walked around the restaurant, I guess they just kind of stabbed anyone that they saw and knocked things on the ground and then we just hid." So this last weekend - mid Ramadan (but the UK authorities are adamant that has nothing to do with it) - yet another series of well coordinated attacks in London. The timing was on cue, and the technology was primitive, yet the effect was successful. The weapons were simple: Aggression, Motor Vehicles, and Knives. Unless the nanny-state wishes to now castrate the aggression out of all males, prohibit all sharp instruments in an Okinawan-like decree, and force everyone to use public transportation, the ability of the state to prevent the next one is ridiculously impossible as long as the culture that advocates such things is allowed to roam free in the west. That last bit is out of the hands of normal people like us, yet we are the ones that will stand at the front line of the effects of the political decisions made by those in charge. And we will either stand as ready sacrifices to the death cult, or as combatants. Britain seems to have already chosen out of their self-imposed helplessness. Soon the west, and Europe in particular, will either find its warrior heart and embrace the old ways, or it will be bent over the table and given its fate. In this article, which I am certain will upset the "martial arts" guys, I will discuss the reality of facing a jihadist with a knife bent of "stabbing anyone they see". I will discuss "The Jihadist Vehicle Attacks" later. So here we go - 1). Forget the fantasy of empty hand defenses: Do not think for one minute that your secret Jujitsu or Kung Fu methods will guarantee you winning against a dedicated, motivated, young and fit jihadist armed with a big knife intent on killing you. Add to that his expectation of dying that day...add to that his accomplices, also armed with knives, and you get a clearer picture. And winning does not mean 7 out of 10 in the drills at the dojo...it means we want a solid chance at a 100% success rate because anything less means that you die. Your chances may be better if you have devoted your entire life to nothing but full contact martial arts training (and if your adversaries are unskilled)...but otherwise...unarmed against the knife is a very foolish match to go into. 2). Instead of going Jackie Chan, use a weapon: Yes, I know...it may mean violating the rules. As I have said...and it is almost a cliche now...we live in a time of war and we must make adjustments to the reality and accept that the authorities cannot prevent these events from taking place. So if you live in a free state, carry a firearm with you - EVERYWHERE. Ignore the sign if there is one saying you cannot. If you live in a not so free state, carry a firearm with you anyway and always obey the speed limit. If you live in a country intentionally bereft of any warrior culture, see item three. 3). Always be armed no matter the rules: "But Gabe...we live in (insert oppressed socialist state or nation here) and we can't even buy a picture of a gun here". A modern, educated man with a set of nuts in his bag will always figure out a way to be armed. No guns? OK, get your own knife. Knife versus knife is a far better proposition than unarmed versus knife is it not? My God, at the very least get a big fat stick that you can claim is a cane and that you can crush skulls with. It really is not that difficult if there is courage, and a will, and a defiant heart that denies the state's right to control your destiny. "But Gabe, the rules say I cannot have guns, knives, sticks, anything that could possibly be used as a weapon and they are about to pass laws banning ill will". When you cannot live in safety, and in obedience to the established law, a learned man will happily become a scofflaw. If you disagree with that, I really have nothing for you. Sorry...good luck. 4). Learn to be violent: This is why I am not impressed with the majority of martial arts training. Too much sport. Too much esoteric spiritual stuff. Not enough violence. We need more "martial", and less "art" - as it were. I expect that today, the Monday after the London Bridge attack, the martial arts schools in the UK (and USA) will be filled with eager soccer moms and football dads (cricket-moms and rugby-dads?) looking for the easy solution to this problem. And they will be taught esoteric stuff intended for the "perfection of character", or stuff developed for winning a match somewhere. What they need is to be taught to physically destroy their opponent, crushing windpipes, smashing skulls, breaking bones. The "real karate" that so few schools even understand much less teach. But again, see item 1. I have trained in hand to hand stuff since I was ten years old and I would prefer to not face against a knife empty handed. 5). Learn preemption: It is 2017. Are we already forgetting that there is a true social-religious-political culture living in the west...in truth invited by the west, that seeks to supplant western culture by force and attrition with its own culture? If you see a couple of strong young men, that look like they just got off the boat from Afghanistan moving aggressively toward you with knives in their hands - do we really need to have a time out to explain what their intentions are for you? This is the time to draw and shoot each one of them to the ground, not running or hiding. 6). Keep alert: All the weapons and willingness to violence will not help you in the least if you are asleep at the bar. The first part of all this is staying alert. Sit where you can see the exit, have your back covered or have an equally alert associate watching it. Look around constantly and know who is moving and what is happening. Don't want to live like that you say? Well, western nations, you should have thought about that before you invited the death cult into your country, or voted for fools that did so. You live in a time of war and you will either deny it and hope you are not selected by the next jihadist, or you accept reality and prepare to meet him. That is all. There are no secret techniques to defend against the knife by physically frail and empty handed males. It takes violence and weapons. And in that order. GABE SUAREZ

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-21/pentagon-admits-war-terror-will-never-end The Pentagon Admits: The "War On Terror" Will Never End Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/21/2013 21:26 -0400 fixed national security Obama Administration Submitted by Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog, It is hard to resist the conclusion that this war has no purpose other than its own eternal perpetuation. This war is not a means to any end but rather is the end in itself. Not only is it the end itself, but it is also its own fuel: it is precisely this endless war – justified in the name of stopping the threat of terrorism – that is the single greatest cause of that threat. - Glenn Greenwald from his recent article: Washington Gets Explicit: Its “War on Terror” is Permanent-LINK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/17/endless-war-on-terror-obama So last Thursday at a hearing held by the Senate Armed Services Committee, we found out what many of us already knew. That the “war on terror” is never going to end. Indeed, it was never supposed to end. This never-ending “war” on a fantastical enemy provides the American oligarch class with too much money and too much power to ever make it worthwhile for the establishment to shut down. It matters not to them that this civil liberties destroying fraud has been going on for my entire post-college life and, if they have their way, for the remainder of it. It matters not to them that the “war on terror” itself has done more to destroy the Constitution and vital essence of this nation than any terrorist act ever could. No, it matters very little indeed. What matters to them is money and power, and the “war on terror” provides them with boatloads of both. My favorite excerpts from Glenn’s article are below: On Thursday, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on whether the statutory basis for this “war” – the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) – should be revised (meaning: expanded). This is how Wired’s Spencer Ackerman (soon to be the Guardian US’s national security editor) described the most significant exchange: “Asked at a Senate hearing today how long the war on terrorism will last, Michael Sheehan, the assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, answered, ’At least 10 to 20 years.’ . . . A spokeswoman, Army Col. Anne Edgecomb, clarified that Sheehan meant the conflict is likely to last 10 to 20 more years from today – atop the 12 years that the conflict has already lasted. Welcome to America’s Thirty Years War.” That the Obama administration is now repeatedly declaring that the “war on terror” will last at least another decade (or two) is vastly more significant than all three of this week’s big media controversies (Benghazi, IRS, and AP/DOJ) combined. The military historian Andrew Bacevich has spent years warning that US policy planners have adopted an explicit doctrine of “endless war”. Obama officials, despite repeatedly boasting that they have delivered permanently crippling blows to al-Qaida, are now, as clearly as the English language permits, openly declaring this to be so. It is hard to resist the conclusion that this war has no purpose other than its own eternal perpetuation. This war is not a means to any end but rather is the end in itself. Not only is it the end itself, but it is also its own fuel: it is precisely this endless war – justified in the name of stopping the threat of terrorism – that is the single greatest cause of that threat. In response, I wrote that the “war on terror” cannot and will not end on its own for two reasons: (1) it is designed by its very terms to be permanent, incapable of ending, since the war itself ironically ensures that there will never come a time when people stop wanting to bring violence back to the US (the operational definition of “terrorism”), and (2) the nation’s most powerful political and economic factions reap a bonanza of benefits from its continuation. Whatever else is true, it is now beyond doubt that ending this war is the last thing on the mind of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner and those who work at the highest levels of his administration. Is there any way they can make that clearer beyond declaring that it will continue for “at least” another 10-20 years? And then there’s the most intangible yet most significant cost: each year of endless war that passes further normalizes the endless rights erosions justified in its name. The second term of the Bush administration and first five years of the Obama presidency have been devoted to codifying and institutionalizing the vast and unchecked powers that are typically vested in leaders in the name of war. Those powers of secrecy, indefinite detention, mass surveillance, and due-process-free assassination are not going anywhere. They are now permanent fixtures not only in the US political system but, worse, in American political culture. Each year that passes, millions of young Americans come of age having spent their entire lives, literally, with these powers and this climate fixed in place: to them, there is nothing radical or aberrational about any of it. The post-9/11 era is all they have been trained to know. That is how a state of permanent war not only devastates its foreign targets but also degrades the population of the nation that prosecutes it. This war will end only once Americans realize the vast and multi-faceted costs they are bearing so that the nation’s political elites can be empowered and its oligarchs can further prosper. But Washington clearly has no fear that such realizations are imminent. They are moving in the other direction: aggressively planning how to further entrench and expand this war. Newly elected independent Sen. Angus King of Maine said after listening to how the Obama administration interprets its war powers under the AUMF: This is the most astounding and most astoundingly disturbing hearing that I’ve been to since I’ve been here. You guys have essentially rewritten the Constitution today.” Former Bush DOJ official Jack Goldsmith, who testified at the hearing,summarized what was said after it was over: Obama officials argued that “they had domestic authority to use force in Mali, Syria, Libya, and Congo, against Islamist terrorist threats there”; that “they were actively considering emerging threats and stated that it was possible they would need to return to Congress for new authorities against those threats but did not at present need new authorities”; that “the conflict authorized by the AUMF was not nearly over”; and that “several members of the Committee were surprised by the breadth of DOD’s interpretation of the AUMF.” Conveying the dark irony of America’s war machine, seemingly lifted right out of the Cold War era film Dr. Strangelove, Goldsmith added: Amazingly, there is a very large question even in the Armed Services Committee about who the United States is at war against and where, and how those determinations are made.” Nobody really even knows with whom the US is at war, or where. Everyone just knows that it is vital that it continue in unlimited form indefinitely. 1984 really was an instruction manual for the people in power. Terrifying.