Please read, you won't be sorry!

From kapap to krav maga - my crowdfunding project

Great news from our friend Noah Gross... BTW, for more information on Kapap and Noah Gross please reference this article ISRAELI MARTIAL ARTS – A LOOK INTO HISTORY: http://iccf.freeforums.org/israeli-martial-arts-a-look-into-history-t66.html

I'm writing you because you are a member of the Historical Kapap group for the past four years since I started this page I have been regularly providing information on the history of Israeli hand to hand combat. That was the purpose of the page and my research which led me to this information.

I have always wanted to have this information and much more in book form readily available to the general public. It is my hope through such a book we can learn to truly appreciate the people and processes that helped shape Kapap and Krav Maga. This remains a yet untold story. 

The process of completing this book involves, trips to archives, interviews, more than 500 hours of work on my part, hiring a professional translator, editor, graphic designer/editor, acquiring publishing writes to images, and printing of the first run of the book.

It is a costly project I cannot afford on my own. That is why i am Asking for your help in what i believe is a very fair way. I need 200 pre-orders of the book to raise the necessary funds for this project.

If you have enjoyed the information on this page and in my articles, and would like to read a lot more about this subject, please go the crowed funding page and pre-order a book by choosing the 40 - 50$ range contribution. This secures a copy for you and will make the project feasible for me.

My book will contain around 150 images and be 400 pages long. It will cover the following subjects: the method of research, and basic terminology, stick culture and the centrality of stick fighting in Israeli hand to hand combat until the 1948, The processes and forces which shaped Israeli hand to hand combat which came to be known as Kapap. The different disciplines contained within Kapap: Judo/Ju-jitsu, Boxing, Knife, Stick, Bayonet. The changes which came with the establishment of the state of Israel and the IDF and the process of change which took place during the 1950's in the IDF shaping hand to hand combat and how Kapap became Krav Maga.


Please go to this link to pre-order the book by making a contribution, I did:http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/israeli-hand-to-hand-combat-from-kapap-to-krav-maga

ACTION - The Fight's In The House Now!

ACT NOW!!!
Included in this version is all the contact information needed...
STOP THEM BEFORE THE REPUBLIC IS LOST!!!
It's YOUR country, please save it for your kids...and spread the word.

Click here for all the contact info: http://iccf.freeforums.org/action-the-fight-s-in-the-house-now-t1019.html

How to Make Saline Solution to Clean a Wound

If you are out camping or hiking, and one of your companions trips and suffers a wound, you will have to help clean it. Straight water can be harsh on wounds, but a simple saline solution can clean the wound, be soothing and help stave off infection. Read on to learn how to make saline solution to clean a wound.

Instructions

Things You'll Need

• 1 tsp. salt
• Eyedropper
• 1/2 tsp. baking soda
• Heat/fire
• 8 oz. water
• Something to stir with
• Storage container
• Pot

Make the Solution

1. Start a fire or turn on a stove and place the pot on it.
2. Pour in the water and let it heat. Be very careful not to let the water boil over.
3. Take the pot off of the heat before the water boils, then pour in the salt and baking soda.
4. Stir until the salt and baking soda are diluted. When finished the solution should have a slightly cloudy color.
5. Take the pot off of the heat and let it cool to "room temperature."
6. Pour the solution from the pot into your plastic storage container. You should have approximately 1 pint (8 oz.) of saline solution.

Apply the Solution

1. Fill the eye dropper with some of the solution and drop it into the wound as needed. Don't worry about dropping too much. Use as much as necessary until the wound is clean and no longer bleeding.
2. Use a gentle touch to apply gauze to the clean wound. This will help it absorb the saline solution.
3. Seal the container as tightly as possible, so that the solution remains sterile and usable for a later time.
4. Dress the wound as needed, taking to care to re-clean and re-dress the wound when necessary.

Tips & Warnings

• The saline solution you are going to make is a 1 percent solution. Be careful not to let the water boil. If the water boils, the concentration of salt will be higher. It will still clean the wound, but it will be much harsher for the injured person.
• Don't use your homemade saline solution for any purpose other than to clean and dress wounds. Saline solution is also used as contact lens solution, and as fluid in nebulizers. However, your homemade solution should only be used in a pinch and for external injuries. Ingesting the solution could cause some serious problems.

T. H. Wintringham & Bert ‘Yank’ Levy - Guerrilla Warfare

Introduction
Source: Guerrilla Warfare, by ‘Yank’ Levy, UK edition, Penguin Special S102, 1941, pp. 5-10.Transcription: Phyll SmithHTML Markup: Brian ReidPublic Domain: Marxists Internet Archive (2008). You may freely copy, distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet Archive” as your source.

Transcriber’s note: The book from which this introduction comes, was written by Tom Wintringham, based upon the experience of both Wintringham and Levy, but calling heavily upon Wintringham’s historical and theoretical knowledge. This introduction, not published in American post-war reprints of the book, acknowledges Wintringham’s authorship of the book.

Introduction
MANY thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of the Home Guard know my friend “Yank” Levy. For those who have heard him, at the Osterley Park Training School for the Home Guard, at the first War Office School for Instructors of the Home Guard, or at the lectures he has been giving from one end of the country to another, “Yank” needs no introduction. This Canadian is without question the best lecturer—most convincing, most detailed and most practical—on the tactics of guerrilla warfare available in Britain.

But many of those who have heard him, and others to whom this booklet will come, may not have realized the basis of experience from which he talks and writes. As soon as he was old enough to handle a weapon he was, to use his own words, “mixed up in Mexico”. He fought in the last Great War, in Palestine and in the desert beyond Jordan. He has taken part in some of the little “troubles” that have occasionally occurred south of Mexico; I shall not be more specific about these troubles, because I gather that a thirty years’ sentence for gun-running still makes him occasionally pensive. He served with the Inter national Brigade in Spain as an officer, and a very good one, in the battalion which I commanded. He was captured south of Madrid and spent about six months in General Franco’s prisons. Released by an exchange of prisoners, he had to be restrained by his friends from returning to Spain, and wrote to me from Canada a little later with the request that I should use my influence to get him a passport, so that he could come back to Spain. He volunteered to join the Canadian Army as soon as this war broke out, and was turned down for flat feet or hammer toes—or perhaps, more seriously, for his reputation as one of the most obstreperous leaders of Canada’s unemployed.

But “Yank” was not going to be kept out of it. At a time when our war had not really started, early in 1940, he worked his passage over here as one of the “black gang”, a stoker on a tramp steamer. Finding that there was no interesting fighting to get into, he continued to work at this job, possibly because it was the most dangerous he could then find. One of his ships went down a week after he left it. He left it to find some sort of war job in Britain. After trying such a job he came to help me at Osterley, and has been teaching the Home Guard ever since. He is still looking for a more interesting and exciting thing to do; any offers sent to him, care of the publisher of this book, will be given due consideration.

So much for the man. Now for the subject on which he writes. I believe guerrilla warfare to be an absolutely vital element in any formula for our victory.

“Yank” is a practical man and not a theoretician. Guerrilla warfare is a very practical business. But same of those who read this may have in their minds objections of a theoretical sort, doubts about the effectiveness of guerrilla warfare under modern conditions. Some soldiers trained on text-books of the past or influenced—quite correctly—by the convincing theorists of mechanized warfare, and by the even more convincing Nazi achievements in mechanized warfare, may think of guerrilla warfare as something of secondary arid minor importance, some thing that cannot “really count now”. And because there are such persons, soldiers and civilians, it may be useful for me to give a little of the theory of the thing.

Those who believe that the tank is the dominant arm in modern warfare are correct. Those who see in the plane, and particularly in the dive-bomber, the decisive supporting arm that must be linked closely with the tank—are also correct. As a matter of fact, and not of theory, these weapons used in masses have secured decision in enough campaigns to establish the Nazi power from Madrid to near Moscow. But because these things are so, because these facts have happened, because these campaigns have been won, we dare not say that it will always be so, that campaigns will always be won mainly by these weapons, that there is no chance of ever defeating a superior force of tanks and planes. To do so would be to consider Nazi methods of warfare the final unchangeable top limit in the development of the art of war. It would be to neglect the fact that war is always changing and can always be changed. And I believe that the direction in which war is changing to-day can be seen in fact and action, can be understood and further developed. That direction, as I see it, is towards the combination between the methods and tactics of mechanized warfare and those of guerrilla warfare.

There are many reasons for this belief of mine. One is that the Red armies of the Soviet Union have for months been resisting, without disaster, the forces of almost all Europe, organized with German thoroughness and flung into battle with Nazi for loss. Their way of resistance has clearly proved effective and dangerous to Hitler’s armies. And part of the method of the Red armies of the Soviet Union has been the use of the tactics of guerrilla warfare, not only by peasant snipers and bands of civilians turned guerrillas, but also by units, large or small, of Russian infantry surrounded by or passed by the swift man of German armoured and unarmoured vehicles.

Another reason for my belief is more theoretical. Mechanized military force has an armoured spear-head very hard to check or destroy. It backs that spearhead with masses of planes and with infantry and artillery whose fire-power protects them against most weapons. But this formidable combination has behind it a weak point: it needs more supplies that any previous type of armed force, and these supplies cannot normally be brought close to the armoured spearhead by railway, but must be spread over a network of roads and carried mainly by relatively unprotected convoys of lorries.

It is the communications of an armoured force, the roads and the lorry-convoys that it needs, that are most vulnerable. But they are not easily vulnerable to our normal infantry and artillery. They are vulnerable to two types of force: our own defending armoured force, with aeroplane support, and our guerrillas.

Those who rightly say that we must make tanks and planes in vast quantities, sometimes wrongly think that these machine should be opposed directly, head-on, to the enemy machines of similar types. Tank should hunt tank, they think, and plane should shoot down plane. Which is like trying to use a pair of nutcrackers to put out of action another pair of nutcrackers. Nutcrackers should be used against nuts. Our air-tank combat teams should be used against the most sensitive, most vulnerable parts of the enemy’s forces. Blitz needs to be answered by counter-blitz. But it is not possible for any defending force continually to exert this type of pressure against an attacker. The guerrilla, on the other hand, can exert against the communications of any enemy force, against his dumps as well as his lorries his headquarters as well as his stragglers, a continual pressure a threat that wears out men and forces. And guerrilla warfare is a method of fighting—a useful method, that will, I believe, in future campaigns become absolutely essential to success—that can be achieved and developed by democracies and by socialist societies, but cannot be developed by Fascism, particularly in the areas where Fascism rules by force against the will of the population.

Successful guerrilla fighting needs the self-confidence and initiative of millions of free men, the support at risk and at heavy sacrifice of almost all the population, and a feeling of close comradeship and solidarity between the guerrilla troops and any regular army and air force supporting them. The Nazis cannot get these qualities at their service, in any of the occupied countries of Europe, even in Italy. We can. And therefore we should not think of guerrilla warfare only in terms of the present heroism of the Soviet Union, or a possible future resistance to invasion in this country. We should think of it also in terms of our own invasion of the Continent. We should be looking for ways of fighting, and combinations between ways of fighting that can enable a democratic force invading Hitler’s Europe to mobilize and use the enormous power of the “hundred million allies” who can be ours.

“Yank” Levy and myself, with others who helped us at Osterley and elsewhere, have been preaching the principles of guerrilla warfare, and teaching its practical details, since June, 1940. We did not learn these principles and details from Crete; and we have been rather amused since the fighting in Crete to find things advocated officially as “lessons of Crete” that we had been advocating nine months before as lessons of common sense.

Fully three-quarters of this book had been written before June, 1941, when the Nazis attacked Russia and guerrilla war came into the newspapers in a big way. The book was delayed because I had to work on another, a hook on mechanized warfare. It was not until this study of “official” war was out of the way that I could turn to the “unofficial” type of warfare described here.
The book on mechanized warfare, on the Nazis’ tactics and the reply to them (Blitzkrieg, by F. O. Miksche), answers those friends and critics who have protested that we who are advocates of guerrilla war give too much importance to this form of warfare.

We are not advocates of guerrilla warfare as opposed to, or in contrast to, mechanized warfare. We are advocates of a combination between the two, in defence and in attack. We have been advocating this combination of two very different methods of fighting since the formation of the Home Guard. And I do not understand those who say that our only way to win this war is by making more tanks and more planes than the Nazis can make. The Nazis have a start in the arms race; it is by no means clear that our production in 1941, even with America’s help, was enough to reduce that start. It seems quite possible that, at the moment when I write this, Nazi Europe is making more tanks and planes than are being made by Britain and America. And while we try to catch up on the Nazis, or try to wake up enough to begin to overhaul them, the Nazi armies conquer new territories. They gain new sources for steel, for other metals out of which to make planes and tanks. I do not see where this process ends, or that it necessarily has an end that is pleasant to contemplate it seems to me that those who rely solely on this race to pile up materials are pessimists, and blind to the main hope that we can have now and in the future. That main hope is, to put it in another way, the hope that men can still beat machines, that materialist simple addition of tank to tank and plane to plane is not the measuring rod of warfare, that to-day as in the past Napoleon’s words hold true: “the moral is to the physical in war as three to one.”

Guerrilla warfare is warfare against the enemy’s morale and his material. It hits at morale where morale is weakest, behind the picked units and the men securely armoured. It hits at material when that material is not in a state to hit back. In a later chapter, for which I am partly responsible, this book tells some of the past of guerrilla warfare. There have been “invincible” armies in the past. There have been the legions of Rome and the proud chivalry of the Middle Ages. And at the same time there have been forces despised by all professional soldiers, barbarians with battle-axes or churls with long-bows, who have met and destroyed utterly the proudest and most heavily armoured “modern” armies of their day. This is some thing that can happen again. I may be optimistic to believe that it can happen soon, next year. But I believe it is happening now, on a limited scale, spontaneously, almost inevitably. If we can make the process conscious, if we can understand what is happening to us, and join our understanding and our will power to press it forward and improve it, then I believe that this war can be won far more quickly than by any other way. That is why I recommend this book not only to every member of the Home Guard but to every soldier who understands that we may need to do a little thinking for victory, and to every civilian who wants to understand what is happening and can happen in this war, how to help if invasion comes to this country, how the Nazis are going to be defeated.

TOM WINTRINGHAM

Surrey, November 1941.

Gun control gets cut down by Occam’s Razor

William of Ockham, born in the village of Ockham in Surrey (England) about 1285, was the most influential philosopher of the 14th century and a controversial theologian.

He entered the Franciscan order at an early age and took the traditional course of theological studies at Oxford. Strong opposition to his opinions from members of the theological faculty prevented him from obtaining his Master's degree. His teaching had also aroused the attention of Pope John XXII, who summoned him to the papal court in Avignion (France) in 1324.

The charges against him were presented by Jogh Lutterell, the former chancellor of the university of Oxford. Ockham was never condemned, but in 1327, while residing in Avignion, he became involved in the dispute over apostolic poverty. When this controversy reached a critical stage in 1328, and the Pope was about to issue a condemnation of the position held by the Franciscans, Ockham and two other Franciscans fled from Avignion to seek the protection of Emperor Louis IV, the Bavarian.

They followed the emperor to Munich (Germany) in 1330, where Ockham wrote fervently against the papacy in a series of treatises on papal power and civil sovereignty. The medieval rule of parsimony, or principle of economy, frequently used by Ockham came to be known as Ockham's razor. The rule, which said that plurality should not be assumed without necessity (or, in modern English, keep it simple, stupid), was used to eliminate many pseudo-explanatory entities.

It is believed that he died in a convent in Munich in 1349, a victim of the Black Death. His name, spelled Occam, lives on in the names of streets and restaurants in Munich ... and in the brave new world of high-performance safety-critical parallel computing.

Occam's razor, or the law of economy or law of parsimony, is a scientific and philosophic rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities.

Stephen Hawking writes in A Brief History of Time: "We could still imagine that there is a set of laws that determines events completely for some supernatural being, who could observe the present state of the universe without disturbing it. However, such models of the universe are not of much interest to us mortals. It seems better to employ the principle known as Occam's razor and cut out all the features of the theory that cannot be observed."

Gun control gets cut down by Occam’s Razor

From the Gun Owners of America

29 January 2013

In the current debate concerning guns in America, I am always astounded by the twisting of facts, logic and reason that the gun control zealots put forth in order to defend their case. By all sense and logic, gun control cannot be viewed as anything other than a means to oppress a free people and to disarm the law abiding.

When looking at the pro-rights argument against the pro-control argument one needs to cut through the hyperbole and sensationalism with Occam’s razor.

Occam’s razor, for those of you who don’t know, is a term used in logic and problem solving. Plainly put, Occam’s razor is the process in which, when you have two competing theories, the one that makes the least amount of assumptions is most likely the correct one. By using the “razor” to cut away the most assumptions you are left with the correct answer.

To apply this to the gun debate, I argue that gun control, when cut to ribbons by the razor cannot stand.

The argument for the 2nd Amendment.

• An armed people are a free people

That’s pretty much the only assumption that needs to be taken into consideration for the 2nd Amendment. Freedom does not guarantee safety, it does not ensure absolute happiness, it only assumes that if people are armed they will be free so long as they remain so.

The argument for gun control requires a lot more assumptions to be made.

• The 2nd Amendment is about hunting
• The founding fathers didn't know what weapons would be available in the future and wouldn’t have written the 2nd Amendment if they had
• Gun control will stop criminals from getting guns
• The government will never turn on its people
• The police are enough to keep you safe
• Criminals will follow gun laws
• Shall not be infringed doesn’t mean that the 2nd Amendment can’t be infringed
• Gun control only fails because we don’t have enough of it
• Only the government needs guns, law abiding people don’t
• Armed citizenry couldn’t stop tyranny

Those are just 10 assumptions that I have heard the gun control zealots use that come to mind. I’m sure many of those reading this have heard even more.

The long and short of it is this, you have to make a LOT of assumptions in order to get on board with gun control while the 2nd Amendment only requires you to make 1 assumption. And that assumption just seems so rational and has been proven in history that it boggles my mind that people still choose to deny it.

So the next time you find yourself in a war of words with some “enlightened” gun control advocate, don’t forget to bring your razor.

Violence Doesn't Solve Anything?

INTRODUCTION TO "ALL-IN FIGHTING"

From my friend Clint Sporman's excellent site "Gutterfighting" http://www.gutterfighting.org/History.html

INTRODUCTION TO "ALL-IN FIGHTING"
By W.E. Fairbairn

This book is based upon earlier works issued under the titles of Defendu, which was written for the police forces of the Far East, and Scientific Self-Defence, published by D. Appleton, of New York. Every method shown in these books has stood the criticism of police from practically every country in the world, including the Far East, which is the recognized home of Jiu-jitsu (Judo). A more expert community for criticizing works on self-defense it would be impossible to find.

The majority of the methods shown are drastic in the extreme. In contrast to judo, they recognize no accepted rules. They are not intended to provide amusement for all-in wrestling spectators, but for use in these dangerous times as part of the national preparedness against our enemies.

The question may well be ask, 'Why should I trouble to learn this "rough-house" method of fighting?'

We wish to make it clear that there is no intention of belittling boxing, wrestling, or rugby football. A knowledge of these is an asset to anyone intending to study all-in fighting, and those who already have it start off with a great advantage over those who have never taken part in these sports. No-one will dispute the effectiveness of a straight left or right hook to the jaw or body, but unfortunately it takes months of practice to develop a good punch. Quite a number of persons, after long and intensive training, have given it up in despair. The edge of the hand blow and chin jab, if applied as demonstrated in this manual, will quickly convince the student that in a matter of days he has developed a blow that is not only as effective as a good punch with the fist, but one which permits him to obtain a knock-out under conditions in which it would be almost impossible to punch effectively with the fist. Every method shown in this manual is practicable, and the majority of them have been successfully used in actual combat on many occasions during the pasty thirty years by the author or his students. They were specially selected to enable the young man of only average strength, and those past middle age, who have not led an active life, to overpower a much stronger opponent. In critical moments the trouble you have taken to master a few of them will more than repay you, and knowledge that you can deal effectively with one or more opponents has its psychological value at all times.

Some readers may be appalled at the suggestion that it should be necessary for human beings of the twentieth century to revert to the grim brutality of the stone age in order to live. But it must be realized that, when dealing with an utterly ruthless enemy who has clearly expressed his intention of wiping this nation out of existence, there is no room for any scruple or compunction about the methods to be employed in preventing him. The reader is requested to imagine that he himself has been wantonly attacked by a thug who has put the heel of his hand under his nose and pushed hard. Let him be honest and realize what his feelings would be. His one, violent desire would be to do the thug the utmost damage-regardless of rules. In circumstances such as this he is forced back to quite primitive reactions, and it is the hope of the author that a study of this book will fit the ordinary man with the skill and the ability to deal AUTOMATICALLY with such a situation.

There are very few men who would not fire back if they were attacked by a man with a gun, and they would have no regrets if their bullet found its mark. But suggest that they retaliate with a knife, or with any of the follow-up methods explained in this manual, and the majority would shrink from using such uncivilized or un-British methods. A gun is an impersonal weapon and kills cleanly and decently at a distance. Killing with the bare hands at close quarters savours too much of pure savagery for most people. They would hesitate to attempt it. But never was the catchword, 'He who hesitates has lost,' more applicable. When it is a matter of life and death, not only of the individual but indeed of the nation, squeamish scruples are out of place. The sooner we realize that fact, the sooner we shall be fitted to face the grim and ruthless realities of total warfare.

In war, your attack can have only two possible objects: either to kill your opponent or to capture him alive. You must realize that he will be fighting for his life or to prevent capture, and that it will be a very difficult matter for you to apply a "Hold", etc., without first having made him receptive by striking him either with your hand, foot, or knee, etc., thus disabling him or rendering him semi-conscious, after which you will have no difficulty in disposing of him by one of the methods shown.

We do not advocate that students should attempt to master all the methods, but that they should select about ten, and specialize in thoroughly mastering them. Although we claim that every method is practicable, it is natural that individuals should find thay can master one much more quickly than another. This is mainly on account of one's height, weight, build, or, in some cases, slight deformity, all of which will have to be taken into consideration before making the final selection.

Students are warned not to consider themselves experts until they can carry out every movement INSTINCTIVELY and AUTOMATICALLY. Until then they should spend at least ten minutes daily in practice with a friend. Every movement is made either with the object of putting your opponent off-balance, or to permit of your getting into position to deal an effective blow or to secure a hold. Students should first practice every movement slowly and smoothly. They should then gradually increase the speed. Pressure should be applied on the points indicated, and only when necessary. Where breaks are indicated in practice, the pressure should be applied gradually and with smoothness-not with a jerk, which will be sure to be painful. Provided that reasonable care is taken, with reasonable consideration for the feelings of your friend, no harm other than a slightly stretched muscle will result.

It will be noted that several methods are demonstrated of breaking away from holds that have been considered unbreakable; and also that ground wrestling and holds on the ground are not shown. The reasona are as follows. The author and his students have had the advantage of trying out these holds in that very hard school of learning - PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE, where they have not infrequently met their master. Ground wrestling is excluded because it takes years of practice to become proficient, even in dealing with one opponent. To attempt it in time of war, when one is not unlikely to be attacked by two or more opponents, cannot be recommended.

No manual of this nature would be complete without reference to the use of the rifle, and we have been very fortunate in obtaining the services of Captain P.N. Walbridge, who is one of the greatest authorities on the subject.

William Ewart Fairbairn,

1942

For the Ladies...(and men too)

You are rarely sans a weapon, here some pointers on how to effectively use what you have.

From “The Womanly Art of Self Defense” by Paul Boesch…

Think about this as you go about your daily business. I'll bet you amaze yourself at what you come up with...

Think About It...

Wasp Spray for Self Defense?

THIS is for

THIS and not

for THIS!

OK, here's the skinny...1) it's never been tested on humans, just wasps, 2) you may be breaking federal and state laws by using it on humans as it is a chemical agent, just like sarin and phosgene, and that conviction is a prison term, and 3) disregarding the first two reasons, are you going to walk about town with this massive aerosol can in your hand?

This is horse shit from the get-go...perpetuating these myths will get someone killed because people are stupid and believe this crap...it says so on the internet!

I do not like ANY chemical agents as a close combat weapon. They simply do not work against a hardened and determined attacker. It's been proven time and time again the he WILL get to you while you're spraying-n-praying. Once he's got you "hands on" you're screwed. He doesn't need to see any longer, he can stab, choke, rip, shred, and mutilate, all by the touch method and he will.

If a chemical agent is all you're allowed to carry due to local laws, my advice is to hell with the law. I had lived in a zero tolerance, democratically controlled, crap hole for 45 years and I lived by these two bits of advice. "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." - Thomas Jefferson, and "you have to be alive to be in trouble." - Me...

^ So remember ladies

(and gents) this ^

^ beats the helloutta

 this any day! ^

URGENT - ACT NOW!!!

House Votes to Defund ObamaCare on the Government Funding Resolution - Anti-gun health care law will fade away if Senate holds tough

“This is probably our last best chance to rid the country of this terrible [anti-gun] health care plan.” -- GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt and Vice Chairman Tim Macy to grassroots activists across the country (Aug, 2013)

URGENT: Calls are needed to your Senators immediately (202-224-3121), as a key vote on ObamaCare is expected this week. Please see the ACTION item below.

UPDATE: By a vote of 230-189 on Friday, the House voted to fund the federal government, while denying funding for ObamaCare. See the vote here and thank or “spank” your Representative accordingly. (“Aye” was the pro-gun vote.)

Kudos to you for your hard work and astounding victory!

But also, kudos to House conservatives, who stood up to Obama and his media minions, and to John Boehner, who to paraphrase Winston Churchill, did the right thing after all other options were exhausted.

Finally, we should give kudos to Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) who spearheaded the whole ObamaCare defunding fight on Capitol Hill. Their push has resulted in this initial victory in the House.

Now, the action moves to the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid will try to reinsert funding for the anti-gun ObamaCare law.

Republican Senators can defeat Reid’s substitute language by filibustering it, and we believe that this is where the battle lines will be drawn. If 41 senators vote in favor of prolonging the filibuster, ObamaCare is dead.

And, frankly, any senator who claims to oppose ObamaCare -- but then votes against the filibuster (thus allowing Reid to reinsert funding for the anti-gun health care law) -- is a lying hypocrite.

So the message for now is this: Oppose any attempt to insert funding for the anti-gun ObamaCare law -- even if it means voting to filibuster the House-passed CR.

Several polls have shown that we have the voice of the American people on our side. According to one poll, 73% of the American people favor repealing ObamaCare, either fully or partially (CNN, March 2012).

So please distribute this alert far and wide and let’s mobilize that 73%!

Remember: ObamaCare will give the federal government the ability to use (and abuse) our medical data as the pretext for keeping law-abiding gun owners from possessing firearms -- just as they have already done to more than 150,000 military veterans. We need to keep the heat on the Senate!

ACTION: Click the link below to contact your Senators. Demand that they oppose any attempt to insert funding for the anti-gun ObamaCare law -- even if it means voting to filibuster the House-passed CR. And don’t forget to forward this alert to your friends and family!

While sending an email is okay, It is preferred that you make phone calls to your Senators as the Senate filibuster vote could be occurring over the next couple of days. So please call 202-224-3121.

http://cqrcengage.com/gunowners/app/write-a-letter?17&engagementId=21058

Dismiss Goth Now!

Well here is yet another example of the leftists hate mongering; On 16 September 13, University of Kansas Associate journalism professor David Guth Tweeted the following despicable statement regarding the recent mass shooting at the DC Navy yard: “The blood is on the hands of the NRA. Next time, let it be YOUR sons and daughters. Shame on you. May God damn you.” This cannot only be verified by the screen shot of the vile Tweet but Guth was interviewed by Campus Reform's Katherine Timpf who reported the following:

Speaking with Campus Reform on Wednesday, Guth confirmed it was he who sent the controversial tweet.
“Hell no, hell no, I do not regret that Tweet,” he said. “I don't take it back one bit.”
Guth also doubled down on the statement when other Twitter users pressed him, suggesting it was shameful to call for the death of children.
“God’s justice takes many forms,” he tweeted in response. 

For the full interview: http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=5088

As far as I am concerned, I believe everyone has a write to their opinion, no matter how vacuous it and they may be. Nonetheless, we are speaking of a malicious person whose vocation it is to frame, influence, and educate the minds of impressionable young men and ladies, i.e. YOUR sons and daughters.

Goth is a contemptible, frivolous, debauched, and undoubtedly mentally disturbed individual who has no business ever being in a position of educating and/or authority again!

I for one call for his dismissal immediately and you can too: Contact the U of K here http://www.ku.edu/about/contact and tell them exactly how you feel, I did!

New Scam???

Using proper mass contact forms I now receive this back from Ron Johnson (R-WI). The reason I pass this on is, if your congressman tries it, DO NOT LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT!

--------------------------------

From Ron: "In future correspondence with my office, I ask you to consider using our online Contact Form. Using the online Contact Form helps us organize your communications to ensure that I am able to respond to your request in the most efficient and thorough manner possible."

My Reply: “That's all well and good if I only want to contact you Ron. However, when I need to contact congress en mass using everyone's contact forms makes it a bit impossible don't you think? Or, perhaps, that is the idea???”

--------------------------------

They can kiss my ass as it's their job to do our bidding...they work for us, we don't work for them...and they need constant reminding of this.

Un-Constitutional laws kill!

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." - Thomas Jefferson

I have been abiding by that credo for many decades now...

If just one person at the Washington Navy Yard had disobeyed this un-Constitutional law...

NEW Flag-Lowering Order

View order here - NEW Flag-Lowering Order

My letter CC'd to US congressmen, state congressmen  and governor...

I am sorry but I respectfully refuse to obey this flag order.

+ Every day approximately 6762 people die in the US from all causes - no flag order.
+ Over 2,400 US dead, so far, in and around Afghanistan - no flag order.
+ Almost 4,500 US dead, so far, in Iraq - no flag order.
+ 4 US deaths in Benghazi Libya, that could have been prevented but were essentially murdered by this regime - no flag order.
+ Fort Hood jihadist mass murder - FINALLY a flag order. Obama had to be FORCED to honor the murder victims of Fort Hood by Texas patriot Anita Ross and others.
+The list goes on and on...

This flag order, and sadly this tragedy, is simply a political ploy and a tool for this regime's anti-American agenda. Our hearts and prayers go out to the victims and their families but I'll not be part of Obama's political games nor will my flag.

God Bless the Republic,
Ken Giorno

National Security Premenision

“I am concerned for the security of our great Nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within.” - General of the Army Douglas MacArthur

 

Don'T Forget Constitution Week

Constitution Week - Sept 17th-23rd, 2013
The week the politicians hate the most...send your congressmen a copy of the Constitution...
"Constitution Week is an American observance to commemorate the adoption of the United States Constitution. The observance runs annually from September 17 to September 23. It was officially enacted on August 2, 1956 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower from a congressional resolution petitioned by the Daughters of the American Revolution, but it was George W Bush who officially declared the inception of Constitution Week in September 2002. The purpose of the observance week is to promote study and education about the constitution which was originally adopted by the American Congress of the Confederation on September 17, 1787."

For easily contacting your congressmen

Why are government and banks destroying the economies of the world's nations?

Answering the question, why are government and banks destroying the economies of the world's nations? "One, because they're a bunch of political whores who will do anything to maintain their position of power, anything. Number two, a lot of them are imbeciles and do not understand even this simple, logical progression. I cannot overemphasize this, stupid people are running the world." - Ann Barnhardt

I agree wholeheartedly...KG59

Activism Works! Go Colorado!

I preach activism constantly, well the good people of Colorado showed that it can and did work...Let's make it happen everywhere...

The door-to-door team that made it happen...God Bless 'em!

Gun Owners of America
Colorado Did It!

“We may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks.” - President George Washington, October 3, 1789

What a startling upset. The voters of Colorado have done it!

Yesterday, Colorado booted two unprincipled, back-stabbing, arrogant legislators from office.

This was truly a historic effort and the first time in Colorado history that there has ever been a recall election -- let alone a successful one.

Democrat Senators John Morse and Angela Giron lost their bid to hold onto their seats in districts that heavily favored Democrats. (In fact, Giron represented a district where only 23 percent of registered voters are Republicans.)

In Morse’s race, 51% of voters pulled the recall lever to eject him from office, while 56% of voters sided against Giron.

The effort to recall Morse and Giron began as a genuine local effort, although the prospects of beating two entrenched Democrats attracted big bucks from out of state. Anti-gun New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent hundreds of thousands of his own dollars in an attempt to help Morse retain his seat.

But it didn’t work. And now the handwriting is on the wall for other legislators.

Morse especially angered constituents earlier this year when he, as the Senate President, helped slam several unconstitutional gun control bills through the legislature and onto Democrat Gov. John Hickenlooper’s desk -- legislation such as magazine restrictions, bans on private gun sales (without a background check), etc.

Gun Owners of America stepped into the fray during the spring and summer, and did its part in rallying the troops to get Colorado voters to the polls.

And so, to the voters of Colorado, we at Gun Owners of America want to thank you all for your efforts to send a powerful message to the rest of the state -- and the rest of the country.

As stated by the New York Times this morning, the recall has given “moderate lawmakers across the country a warning about the political risks of voting for tougher gun laws.”

Your activism in Colorado has truly been a model for the rest of us to follow!

----------------------------------------------------

The battle isn't over. It will never be over as long as anti-Republic, anti-Constitution, un-Americans walk our streets.

Get active and get involved...before it's too late! Join the Gun Owners of America...GOA Membership

Take Care and Stay Safe,
Ken aka kilogulf59

"I do not support my country's current regime nor it's policies, especially concerning foreign intervention."

Amor Patriae Blog – Founder and Administrator

Integrated Close Combat Forum – Founder and Administrator
Gun Owners of America – Life Member
Wisconsin Gun Owners – Annual Member
National Association for Gun Rights, Inc. – Annual Member
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership – Annual Member

The Truth About Guerrilla War

"Thomas Henry (Tom) Wintringham (15 May 1898 -16 August 1949) was a British soldier, military historian, journalist, poet, Marxist, politician and author. He was an important figure in the formation of the Home Guard during World War II and was one of the founders of the Common Wealth Party."

He was also one helluva sharp partisan fighter/organizer whom we can learn much from. Some of the best and most experienced guerrilla fighters of the 20th century were Marxists/Leninists/Communists. While I abhor their political ideology I admire their martial abilities and you will see other writings on the subject by politically misguided and corrupted on this blog.

Licensed to Kill
My father, Tom Wintringham, took me to see the private school for Guerrilla fighters that he was running in Twickenham, Middlesex.
There they taught martial arts, but not in the modern sense: 

• How to stop a tank
• How and where to stab an enemy sentry in the back
• Camouflage, Assassination
• How to advance from house to house, using explosives
• How to decapitate an enemy motor-cyclist with a wire ...

... As a normal bloodthirsty eleven-year-old, I thought it was all marvellous!

Oliver Wintringham

----------------------------------------------------------

The Truth About Guerrilla War

by T. H. Wintringham

Source: The Tribune, #247, September 19, 1941, pp. 8-9
Transcription: Phyll Smith HTML
Markup: Brian Reid
Public Domain: Marxists Internet Archive (2008).
You may freely copy, distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet Archive” as your source.

Transcribers note: Tom Wintringham was the Tribune’s anonymous ‘military correspondent’ from May 1940, this essay published under his own name, was written in response to criticisms of Wintringham provoked by his earlier anonymous article in Tribune—hence THW refering to himself in the third person to maintain the anonymity of the military correspondent.

Has a democracy any advantage over the Nazis when it really makes up its mind to fight? Is guerrilla warfare any use to-day? TOM WINTRINGHAM, first commander of the British Battalion of the International Brigade, and founder of Osterley Park Training Camp for Home Guards, answers critics of his policies—now adopted with such success by the Russians.

WHAT is the relation between guerrilla warfare and mechanised warfare? This question is raised by the TRIBUNE’S Military Correspondent in his article of August 15th and by the letter, answering part of this article, from G. D. H. Douglas in the TRIBUNE for August. It is a question that seems to mc to need still further discussion, because socialists engaged in warfare need to know enough about the general outline of how war is earned on to free them from reliance on non-socialist “experts.”

*  *  *

TO put the matter in Marxist terms, I consider that guerrilla warfare and mechanised warfare are dialectical opposites which can and will interpenetrate. To put the matter less philosophically, a modern army needs to wage both sorts of war, and if it cannot wage both it should do its best to develop the type of war it can wage to the limits of possibility.

I have been pointing out for more than a year that Fascism, because of its class characteristics, can to day only wage mechanised warfare; it cannot arm the population subject to it, or to any great extent its own civilian working classes; and if its forces—Regular or irregular—tried to wage guerrilla warfare they would lack the support of the civilian population which is always necessary for this type of fighting. A socialist democracy on the other hand, or a bourgeois democracy that dare arm its working class and peasantry, is able to wage guerrilla warfare as well as mechanised warfare. When such a combination of the two types of warfare is fully achieved, with a correct balance between them, then I believe the nations that combine the two will be ahead of the Nazis in the technique of war.

Is Infantry Any Use?

The combination of these two methods of warfare, their “interpenetration,” has already begun. In mechanised warfare decisive success in battle is largely gained by manoeuvre by vehicles, as the Military Correspondent of the TRIBUNE points out. On what principles can normal infantry without vehicles—marching infantry—play a useful part in this type of battle? I say that they can only do so by adapting their tactics considerably to include those tactics normal to guerrillas.

These infantry forces, which still form the bulk of every large army and have still a great part to play in war, must split themselves up into relatively small units acting in relative isolation, must use tank-proof country and other cover, must counter armour by invisibility and must be prepared for fighting at very close quarters against armoured troops. In other words guerrilla warfare should not be thought of simply as Hemingway stuff; it is not only the exploits of small half-organised bands behind the enemy line.

*  *  *

That in brief outline is view that I have been developing and defending since Dunkirk. Douglas is quite correct in stating that, before that time I under estimated the potentialities of tanks and aircraft. The reason for this is probably the fact that tanks and aircraft during the first half of the war in Spain were wrongly used, or used on too small a scale to be of great effect. It was only in the latter part of that war, after I had left Spain, that the Germans developed and practiced in miniature the tactics of the Blitzkrieg; the combination of massed tanks, motorised infantry, dive bombers, etc. for attack on a narrow front, and the typical shifting of their thrusts from one thrust-point or direction of thrust to another did not sec these developments in Spain; and my friends who remained there longer than I did never reported them, as far as I can find.

But I think Douglas is unfair to me when he points out that its one chapter of my Penguin New Ways of War I do not mention the use of British tanks and aircraft in order to oppose German tanks and planes. This booklet was written in June, 1940, primarily for the Home Guard; and as the chapter in question says in its first paragraph, it deals with “The methods by which it is possible to meet German tanks and planes.” It was obviously then impossible for the Home Guard to use British tanks and aircraft against German tanks and planes; they hadn’t got any. They have none now and are not likely to have any, and should not have any. It was also in June 1940 very nearly impossible for our Regular Army to meet German tanks with their own tanks. They hadn’t got enough.

The Use Of Tanks

I was dealing with a thing that was possible, not with some ideal of the future. That is why in that booklet and at Osterley I recommended the methods—and as far as I can find out, all the methods—by which the infantry of the Red Army and the population of the Soviet Union are not only meeting the Panzer Divisions hut in many cases stopping them.

I still differ profoundly from those who say, as my friend Hugh Slater says, that “tanks are the only effective anti-tank weapons.” If this were true it would seem un likely that we could beat the Nazis before about 1946. Luckily it is not true. Other and far cheaper weapons, used correctly, can be fully effective against tanks. We ourselves need all the tanks we can possibly make (and we badly need the dive-bombers we have not yet started making). But we do not need the tanks principally as anti-tank weapons for defence: we need them for the offensive, for manoeuvre by vehicles. This type of manoeuvre should be directed against the flanks and rear of the enemy’s weakest and least protected units—against unarmoured men.

*  *  *

WHAT is possible in warfare, and what, is ideal are often at variance. Let us take a topical example. It is, I am convinced, perfectly possible for the British Army, as it now exists, to land a considerable force of infantry with a rather weak force of fighting vehicles on European soil, and so establish a second front. But it is physically impossible for them to land a force largely, or even sufficiently, equipped with fighting vehicles; the tanks do not yet exist.

Those military writers who stress continually the vital importance of the armoured force, as some International Brigadiers have been doing, may be doing useful work as far as their writings influence our tank factories. But their writings are in fact also being used as supporting arguments by those who claim that a British invasion of Europe is impossible. Those who claim this, say “everyone agrees that we must have several armoured divisions for such a job, and these divisions are not yet ready.” Well, I do not agree.

Douglas writes “guerrillas, we believe, cannot stop Panzer divisions—but they can harrass them.” I agree. But an infantry trained in guerrilla tactics and in tank-hunting, and supported by a very small proportion of armoured vehicles, can I believe stop the Panzer divisions; it can so enmesh them and so separate them from their own infantry that they become of relatively little value. If that is “underestimating the Panzers,” then I am glad that the Russians are as guilty of this underestimation as I am.

The Russian Home Guard

“LENINGRAD, Sunday. Every factory is training its reserves. The men learn to handle a rifle, throw grenades and fire bottles. Special attention is paid to anti-tank warfare.” 
That is from the Soviet War News of August 26. The training described is exactly that given at Osterley fifteen months ago. The only difference is that in Russia “every factory” is learning. Fifteen months ago I was fighting for a Home Guard 4 million strong, which would necessarily have included men from every factory. That fight did not succeed, and we need not now discuss why it did not succeed.

But when Douglas writes that I am “obsessed with guerrilla tactics” I do not feel like denying it. It is not a bad thing for socialists, and particularly for revolutionaries, to be obsessed with the tactics suitable for, and attainable by, the masses of the population, while leaving it to others to specialise in the tactics of the knights in armour.

I have stressed this guerrilla business because in fact Bill Alexander, in the review mentioned, and W.R. in the Volunteer for Liberty in June this year, did deny all value to guerrilla tactics. W.R. wrote that “the fantasies of petrol bottles, smoke bombs, snipers in woods, cocoa tin grenades, conjured up by strategists of picture weeklies have been blown to bits” by Panzer divisions. Reading the official Soviet account of the defence of Odessa I find the “fantastic” population of that city are using all these methods, with one change. These proletarians use caviare tins instead of cocoa tins! I’ve no objection.

Lest We Forget...

The U.S. flag is to be flown half staff on Patriot Day September 11.

Patriot Day
September 11, 2001, was a defining moment in American history. On that day, Arab Mohammedan terrorists hijacked four commercial airliners to strike targets in the United States. Nearly 3,000 people died as a consequence of the attacks. Patriot Day and National Day of Service and Remembrance is observed on September 11 in honor of the victims of these Arab Mohammedan terrorist attacks.

Note:
The hijackers in the September 11 attacks were 19 Arab Mohammedan males affiliated with al-Qaeda, and 15 of the 19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. Others were from Egypt, Lebanon, and the UAE. The hijackers were organized into four teams, each led by a pilot-trained hijacker with four "muscle hijackers" who were trained to help subdue the pilots, passengers, and crew.

...and the Arab Mohammedan communities celebrated...of course, this has since been discredited as pure myth even though the major news service ran the films of the celebrations around the world and yes, even in Mohammedan communities in the USA! This is what our country has sunk to...

Welcome to Amor Patriae

Welcome to Amor Patriae http://ap1776.blogspot.com/ A term used quite frequently by our Founding Fathers, Amor Patriae is Latin meaning “ love of one's country”, in other words patriotism.

"Patriotism is as much a virtue as justice, and is as necessary for the support of societies as natural affection is for the support of families. The Amor Patriae is both a moral and a religious duty. It comprehends not only the love of our neighbors but of millions of our fellow creatures, not only of the present but of future generations." - Benjamin Rush: 1773

Being patriotic is more than flag waving (although showing the colors is important), its more than posting presidential birth certificate queries on Facebook, or simply the useless bitching about the government that seems so prevalent nowadays. It's being active politically (more on this later so don't get scared), it's likewise, in the American version of patriotism, being self-sustaining, and most importantly, being able to defend one's family, self, and home...against all comers and in more ways than one.

These are the things that made American and real Americans great...and I'll be damned is a bunch of corrupt, leftist, socialist pissant bastards will stop me and mine from being amor patriae Americans. Are you going to allow them to stop you?

“Courage is fear holding on a minute longer.” - George S. Patton Jr.

Take Care and Stay Safe,
Ken aka kilogulf59

"I do not support my country's current regime nor it's policies, especially concerning foreign intervention."

Amor Patriae Blog - Founder and Administrator

Integrated Close Combat Forum – Founder and Administrator
Gun Owners of America – Life Member
Wisconsin Gun Owners – Annual Member
National Association for Gun Rights, Inc. – Annual Member
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership – Annual Member

www.HyperSmash.com

www.BlogPingSite.com

Pingates