Note: The
following information is provided for your knowledge only. Although
everyone has a right to self-defense, it is incumbent on you to know the
self-defense laws in your area if you ever have to physically protect
yourself or others. Furthermore, a knife should only be used in
self-defense when you, or someone else, is at risk of death or serious
bodily harm. As such, use this information at your own risk.
In this present article, it is now time to articulate
when to use a folding knife. And by this, I do not mean the obvious idea
of when to use a folder for standard cutting tasks, but
rather, I am speaking of when to use a folding knife for your own
personal protection.
After all, when life and limb are on the line, it is critical to know
when to deploy that blade in your pocket; otherwise, it’s just a
glorified paperweight. So, let’s get started.
Not a Fantasy Knife-Fight
The first thing to understand about using a knife for self-defense is
that doing so will not be a pretty thing. Whether you are the one doing
the cutting, or the one getting cut—or most likely both—any altercation
with a blade will be brutal, bloody, and bestial.
This is not some fantasy duel where you are tossing your knife from
hand-to-hand as you parry and jab with your opponent, just waiting for
the perfect moment to execute that Jet Li triple-strike. No, instead,
any real knife-fight will likely involve shock, surprise, and serious
unpleasantness. You likely won’t even see your opponent’s knife until
you have been stabbed with it a few times. This won’t be like the
movies; instead, it will be a life-and-death struggle the likes of which
few modern humans have ever been involved in.
So, given all of the above, please realize that the very first rule
of knife-fighting is this: avoid any knife-fight if you can. Run, swim,
or jump if you have to, but in the end, do whatever you can to avoid
battling a blade. And if you cannot avoid some guy with a knife then
shoot the prick. That is the second rule of knife-fighting. However, if
you have no gun, then the third rule of knife-fighting is to know when
to use your own folder. And, ultimately, there are only two ways to
deploy your folding knife: reactively and proactively.
Reactive Knife Deployment
Know that if you are faced with a knife-wielding opponent who has
already deployed his own blade and is coming after you, then it will be
quite difficult to have the time to deploy your own folder in response.
However, while this will be difficult, it is not impossible, for there
are a number of circumstances where reacting with your own blade is a
perfectly reasonable response.
First, consider that there are individuals who have become so quick
with deploying their own folding knife that they can draw it and open it
as fast as they could draw a pistol. Now, doing so takes a great deal
of practice, but nevertheless, if you are a knife enthusiast, and if you
practice so much that you could draw your folder in a split second, it
might be entirely appropriate for you to draw and use your own knife if
you are suddenly faced with a close-range blade-wielding opponent.
For other people, empty-handed self-defense techniques might be
preferable in such circumstances given that you will likely get stabbed
repeatedly while fumbling about for your own knife. So, know your own
level of skill and only reactively deploy your folder if you know that
you can do so.
Second, if you are attacked by a knife-wielding individual, and if
you are able to turn and run from the assailant for a short period of
time, this will give you the few precious moments that you need to draw
and ready your own folder just in case you cannot run far or fast
enough. After all, when facing a knife, better to have your own knife
then to have no knife at all.
Third, if you happen to be fighting against an enemy with a knife (or
another lethal weapon), and if—God forbid—you happen to find yourself
grappling and wrestling with such an opponent, then this might give you a
moment to react and draw your own folder to end the struggle while in
that grappling situation. Again, this won’t be pretty, but better that
he is stabbed than you.
So, even when faced with a knife-wielding opponent, there are certain circumstances when you can effectively react with your own knife, even if doing so might be difficult under such conditions.
Proactive Knife Deployment
Although it is possible to effectively react with your folder, the
fact is that a folding knife is even better in a proactive role. By this
I mean that, in certain situations, it is possible to preemptively
deploy your folding knife in preparation for use in a self defense
scenario.
For example, if you ever find yourself in the wrong part of a city,
suddenly being approached by a gang of rather feral-looking youths, then
it is perfectly sensible, in such a situation, to preemptively deploy
your folder in preparation for a confrontation. Of course, you will
conceal your folder and not let them know that you have it deployed, but
it will be ready nonetheless.
If the gang leaves you alone, then so much the better, but at least
you were prepared. Note as well that this course of action would be
quite legal because if the gang attacks you, then it would be easy to
articulate why you felt the need to use your folding knife to protect
yourself in this drastically outnumbered situation given that your life
was arguably at risk. Note as well that such reasoning would also apply
if a very small (or elderly) man was facing a much larger and more
youthful opponent.
Second, and similar to the first scenario, if you are on the wrong
side of the tracks and are facing one unarmed individual who looks like
he is going to cause you some trouble, feel free to get your knife ready
as well. However, don’t open it, as using the blade could be construed
as using lethal force in a situation that did not warrant it.
Instead, just have the knife in a tight grip with the bottom of the
knife just slightly beyond the bottom of your closed fist. Then, if
attacked, feel free to rain hammer blows down on your assailant with the
bottom end of the knife giving your blows a little extra “bite”. This
way, you stay within the bounds of the law, but you nevertheless gain an
advantage over your unarmed attacker.
Finally, in countries where gun ownership is difficult, having a
knife for proactive home-defense is also a must—although, in the case of
home-defense, I would recommend a short sword or kukri, not just a
knife. Either way though, when you hear that bump in the night, never
get out of bed until your hand has closed around the grip of your
bedside folder.
Conclusion
In the end, knife-fighting is not a game, nor is it something that
you want to engage in. Avoid a knife-fight if at all possible and shoot
the bastard if you can’t. But when all else fails, better to know when
to reactively or proactively use your own folder if circumstances force
you to do so. So be ready.
The popular image of survivalists is that of right-wing preppers from
“Flyover Country”; basically the most hardcore fraction of what those Comrade Obama, bless his heart, described in the following way:
It’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to
guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or
anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain
their frustrations.
Therefore, it may come as a surprise that the oligarch class has its
share of survivalists, a trend dramatically on the rise. New Zealand is a
very popular location lately. Maybe some are motivated by vague,
unspecific safety concerns (“just in case”), or want extremely durable vacation homes, but there seems more to it than that. A Daily Mail article from February describes this:
Attracted by a remote First World country that has the
potential to be self-sufficient and is on no one’s list of nuclear
targets, the super-rich kings of Silicon Valley and Wall Street are
buying up vast tracts of its land—in anticipation of the day when they
may need to live there. […]
What the catastrophe will precisely be remains unclear, but
possibilities include a devastating asteroid impact, giant earthquake,
nuclear war, civil war, pandemic, zombie invasion and the Second Coming.
Tellingly, the geeks of Silicon Valley appear to be most worried that
it will be a struggle between rich and poor in a world economy turned
upside down by new technology—with them as the main targets.
What do they fear?
Is war what’s on their minds – or something else?
I concur with the analysis that class warfare targeting the oligarchs may well occur if all hell breaks loose.
It’s considerably more probable than asteroids (bunkers probably won’t
help), earthquakes (Mother Nature gives no warning), pandemics (far more
modest shelters will suffice), zombies (seriously?), or the Second
Coming (if Judgment Day is the real deal, they’re going to hell anyway).
So we’re left with nuclear war or civil war as reasons justifying
spending huge sums on extensive fortifications.
The article speculates that citizens could be angered about new
inventions by tech billionaires—as it suggests further down, this could
include robotics. However, anti-robot demonstrations haven’t been too
common lately, and there are no groundbreaking advances just on the
horizon (like actual artificial intelligence) that suddenly could put
millions out of work. That scenario doesn’t explain why Wall Street
types are buying hideouts in New Zealand too. So, the public becoming
angry merely about disruptive technologies seems pretty improbable.
Are they afraid of political instability? As the article states further:
Local estate agents say their U.S. clients rarely intend
to live in New Zealand, but cite reasons for their purchases such as the
toxic presidential election and the spate of mass shootings in America.
In the first ten months of last year, foreigners—mainly Australians
and Americans—bought nearly 1,400 square miles of land there, more than
four times what they bought in the same period the previous year.
Indeed, 2016 was the most turbulent year since the engineered agitation of the 1960s; apparently some interesting things were afoot. Now here’s some more food for thought:
All this panic among the super-rich begs an obvious question: what do they know that the rest of us don’t?
Certainly, preparing for the Apocalypse has been a multi-billion dollar business for many years.
Polls have shown around 22 per cent of Americans believe the world
will ‘end’ in their lifetime. Many right-wingers were convinced that
Barack Obama would start a civil war by trying to seize citizens’ guns.
Now, there’s the unpredictable Donald Trump to disturb their dreams.
More than 13,000 Americans registered to buy a home in New Zealand—17
times the usual rate—in the week after he was elected president.
That’s a very interesting statistical anomaly! A few lefty celebs promised to move to Canada if Trump got elected, but still
won’t leave even though they could just drive there in a moving van.
Unlike them, these guys—apparently over twelve thousand beyond the usual
number of applicants—actually got serious about taking the
plunge the following week. Did they get an unusually powerful case of
the jitters after the election, or could there be something
more—possibly even inside information—compelling them to seek a hideout
in a remote part of the world?
Did they fear President Trump might push the button? That’s pretty
improbable. He wishes to pursue friendly relations with Russia, the
USA’s most credible potential nuclear threat. It was Hillary who was
antagonizing the Russians. The sore losers are still at it with the malarkey that Putin supposedly “hacked the election”.
(On that note, if it’s possible to hack an election, why aren’t they
demanding a return to paper ballots before 2020?) How about other
potentially hostile nuclear powers? China wouldn’t go to war over a
tariff increase; besides, they’d blow up too many WalMarts. North Korea’s arsenal and delivery capabilities are still inferior to what the USA had in 1945.
Maybe they’re worried about more than The Donald himself. The groundswell that got him elected—even despite the Republican bosses trying to hamstring their own top candidate every step of the way—was spearheaded by the very same people who are calling out globalist oligarchs on their manipulations.
The potentates precipitously perceived that they’re not as powerful as
they presumed, and they’re panicking about what this perhaps portends.
Probably the plutocratic preppers are pondering the possibilities. I
certainly see why that scares the snot out of them.
A friendly word to the wise
The monarchs of old—even tyrants—usually acted toward what they
considered the best long-term interests of their countries. The Robber
Barons of the Gilded Age were notoriously cheap, but certainly realized
where their wealth came from and had civic-minded moments. Today’s
aristocrats are often globalists with little loyalty to their countries,
acting in the best short-term interests of the next quarterly financial
statement.
Every day, more people are waking up to the fact that this is a
problem. If unchecked, today’s trajectory eventually will lead to
international feudalism characterized by Third World conditions across
the planet, immense extremes of wealth, and annihilation of unique
nationalities and cultures. As time goes on, this will become
increasingly obvious and unpopular.
Peace is good, so let’s keep things peaceful. Rather than buying
hideouts where their supplies eventually will run out if things end
badly, I have a better idea for oligarchs who have nightmares involving
torches and pitchforks. They can start repairing their image. Their
actions have created some public relations problems.
Sam Francis wrote an article about managerial elites selling out their people. It’s quite extensive, and
I’ve provided my own take
on it. The short version is that the oligarch class is happy to send
the public down the primrose path. Really, that’s not a very good way to
earn admiration and respect. Maybe it’s time for them to reconsider doing things like that. It’s a win-win for everyone.
As Pat Buchanan put it:
Undeniably, Americans cherish their economic freedom and
respect the men who helped make America great, inventors such as
Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison and industrialists such as Henry
Ford.
But they do not revere the men who make millions and billions at the big casinos of capitalism. They do not admire a George Soros for winning his billion-dollar bet shorting the British pound.
If their actions are so unpopular that they fear a public uprising, then they need to realize that they’re doing something wrong. If they want to mend fences, those who got rich from American consumers should start showing some loyalty. They should stop bringing in H1-B workers to drive down wages, sending factories to Third World sweatshops, encouraging population replacement immigration, and the like. Another token of good faith would be to stop virtue signaling and stop promoting and funding crazy leftist causes.
It might be a lot to ask for, but it would be in their best interests to start acting prudently, while they still have a chance.
The demand for refraining from judgment is commonplace today. It’s
even elevated to a cardinal virtue, one of the few still remaining. As
Aristotle said:
Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.
These things now feature centrally in today’s political rhetoric.
This stifles debate, and demands us not to notice things that are bad
for society, or especially do anything about them. There’s a difference between liberty and license. The
freedom to act toward one’s best interests, guided by the power of
reason, is a good thing. Doing whatever the hell you want doesn’t always
work so well. Expecting people not to pass judgment on negative
consequences, be they potential or evident, is silly. The demand for
radical personal autonomy, and the lack of social pressure to enforce morality, has had many negative effects.
The case against judgment:
Making the case for mercy and compassion.
Still, remember that this ends with “Go and sin no more.”
The following Biblical passage is well known:
Judge not, lest ye be judged.
The way I read this is that you’d better have
your house in order before pointing fingers. Another interpretation is
as an absolute prohibition, though I recognize limits in its
applicability since my patience is not infinite. My capacity for
forgiveness has practical limits too; I’ll concur with Edmund Burke:
There is, however, a limit at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue.
John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty argues
powerfully in the second chapter for freedom of thought and freedom of
speech. In the third, he advocated personal autonomy:
Acts of whatever kind, which, without justifiable cause,
do harm to others, may be, and in the more important cases absolutely
require to be, controlled by the unfavourable sentiments, and, when
needful, by the active interference of mankind. The liberty of the
individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance
to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in what
concerns them, and merely acts according to his own inclination and
judgment in things which concern himself, the same reasons which show
that opinion should be free, prove also that he should be allowed,
without molestation, to carry his opinions into practice at his own
cost.
Theodore Dalrymple, in classic Aristotelian debate form, lays out the thesis before arguing the antithesis:
A man who judges others will sometimes condemn them and
therefore deny them aid and assistance: whereas the man who refuses to
judge excludes no one from his all-embracing compassion. He never asks
where his fellowman’s suffering comes from, whether it be self-inflicted
or no: for whatever its source, he sympathizes with it and succors the
sufferer.
However, none of that is all to be said on the subject.
The case for judgment:
Jesus never said “Anything goes.”
The Bible tells us not to judge, though Jesus certainly calls out
others for wrongdoing. (One certainly could argue that being a deity
grants the required street cred.) In any case, compassion is
granted—quite touchingly, in some passages—for those who repent from
sin. Still, hypocrites and the unrepentant don’t get excused from
judgment. Righteous conduct is expected, though it’s understood that
human fallibility means everyone misses the mark from time to time. It’s
fair to say that the Gospel message doesn’t give license to be a rotten
scoundrel six days a week so long as one apologizes on Sunday.
Mill’s classic On Liberty argues for personal autonomy, but
recognizes practical limits. The basic idea, particularly spelled out in
the fourth chapter, is that things which can affect society are legitimate matters of public notice.
Thus, where necessary, such things may be prohibited by legislation. It
seems strange to imagine these days, but liberals actually used to make
sense, at least back in the 19th century.
Theodore Dalrymple’s article describes how the attitude of
non-judgmentalism leads to a reckless form of apathy by society. Without
outside encouragement to steer the right course, people won’t even
examine their own lives (as Socrates strongly recommended) and learn
from their mistakes. He describes several instances where women hook up
at a bar with violent losers, and then after their Stockholm Syndrome relationship ends, they immediately find another guy just like him.
Although glaringly irrational, this is hardly a surprise to us. What is surprising is that Dalrymple actually was able to talk sense into some of them. Naturally, daring to point out the obvious is a critical first step.
The political angle:
The demand for non-judgmentalism often supports an agenda,
particularly to chip away at the established political, cultural, or
moral order. This usually is phrased in terms of personal autonomy,
doing your own thing, and all the rest of it. Declaring something to be a
right, when no legal basis exists for it, is a common rhetorical trick.
They’ll state “I have the right to X” rather than “I should be granted the special right to do X“; then the legal system’s nonrecognition of X is spun as an atrocity equivalent to the Mongols wiping out Baghdad. In Rights Talk, Mary Ann Glendon notes that this isn’t constructive:
Discourse about rights has become the principal language
that we use in public settings to discuss weighty questions of both
right and wrong, but time and again it proves inadequate, or leads to a
standoff of one right against another. The problem is not, however, as
some contend, with the very notion of rights, or with our strong rights
tradition. It is with a new version of rights discourse that has
achieved dominance over the past thirty years.
Pat Buchanan, in Right From the Beginning, points out that such demands on society aren’t about neutrality, but rather to promote an agenda:
Traditionalists and conservatives have as much right as
secularists to see our values written into law, to have our beliefs
serve as the basis for federal legislation… [We must not stop fighting]
until we have re-created a government and an America that conforms, as
close as possible, to our image of the Good Society, if you will, a
Godly country… Someone’s values are going to prevail. Why not ours?
Whose country is it, anyway? Whose moral code says we may interfere with
a man’s right to be a practicing bigot, but must respect and protect
his right to be a practicing sodomite?
Jonah Goldberg argues that society needs to promote its values, rather than maintain a wishy-washy posture of neutrality:
Look, the libertarian
critique of the state is useful, valuable, important, and much needed.
But, in my humble opinion, the libertarian critique of the
culture—“established authority”—tends to be exactly what I’ve always
said it was: a celebration of personal liberty over everything else, and
in many (but certainly not all) respects indistinguishable from the
more asinine prattle we hear from the Left. […]
Without character-forming institutions which softly coerce (persuade)
kids—and remind adults—to revere our open, free, and tolerant culture
over others, we run the risk of having them embrace any old creed or
ideology that they find most rewarding or exciting, including some value systems which take it on blind faith that America is evil and, say, Cuba or Osama bin Laden is wonderful. That’s precisely why campuses today are infested with so many silly radicals, and why libertarians in their own way encourage the dismantling of the soapboxes they stand on.
Finally, Theodore Dalrymple argues elsewhere against drug legalization:
The philosophic argument is that, in a free society,
adults should be permitted to do whatever they please, always provided
that they are prepared to take the consequences of their own choices and
that they cause no direct harm to others. […]
In practice, of course, it is exceedingly difficult to make people
take all the consequences of their own actions… Addiction to, or regular
use of, most currently prohibited drugs cannot affect only the person
who takes them—and not his spouse, children, neighbors, or employers.
Indeed, making people deal with the repercussions of their mistakes
is quite a vexing problem. This is especially so when society
continually bails people out after they screw up their lives, and a social taboo (non-judgmentalism) exists against warning them of future consequences.
Et enfin:
Those who demand that we refrain from judgment often refer to it as
“shaming”. The unstated assumption is that this is always a bad thing.
However, if it makes people think twice about making bad choices and
messing up their lives, it’s actually a good thing. The tension between
individual desires and what’s necessary for society to function
properly is difficult to resolve; ultimately, these are legitimate matters to be resolved by public debate and the legislative process.
Where does judgment come from? It’s the product of the rational mind. When someone advocates refraining from judgment, it’s a demand to turn off part of your brain. To hell with that!
Since the dawn of Man, our ancestors have used knives for a myriad of
vital tasks, from hunting to self-defense. And today is no different.
After all, manual cutting tasks still need to get done, and even
self-defense remains a live possibility which every modern man must be
prepared for. Consequently, just as our ancestors carried knives, we too
should arm ourselves in a similar manner.
In modern times, what this means is that we should own a quality folding
knife. Indeed, in our present time, a folding knife is the most
versatile bladed tool that a man can carry, and so every man should have
one. However, given the numerous options that are available, it is hard
to know which features to look for when choosing such a knife. That is
why this article will give you some tips concerning the type of folder
that you should purchase.
As mentioned, this article will only deal with folding knives. The
reason for this is simple. This article is meant for everyone, and it is
rather hard to attend most modern workplaces with a seven-inch fixed
blade hanging from your belt. By contrast, every man—even the most
den-dwelling computer techie—can carry a solid folder in his pocket.
Additionally, folders are still fast enough to open that they can be
effectively used for personal defense, and they are also versatile
enough to use for other purposes as well. Consequently, folders are the
best all-around knife to discuss for the widest audience of men, which
is why this article will focus solely on them.
The General Points
Now, the first piece of advice to remember when buying a folding
knife is obvious: do not be cheap! This is especially important if this
is going to be your sole knife. After all, you do not want your only
knife to fail you when you need it most. So quality counts. Now, this
does not mean that price equals quality, but a $10 folder is not going
to cut it. However, also remember that it is always better to have a
knife than no knife at all, so just get the highest quality folder that
you can afford.
Additionally, focus on functionality over fanciness. If a particular
knife looks like it was designed based on the fevered dreams of a sci-fi
geek hoping to impress the ladies with his mad knife-designing
“skills”, then it probably is not the knife for you.
Finally, fit the knife to your life. This means that if you are an
office-worker, then the folder that you choose might have to be slightly
thinner and more concealable than the folding knife used by a trucker.
So keep your lifestyle in mind when picking your folder.
The Blade
When it comes to the blade, the critical point is to pick a blade that has an optimal balance for your specific needs of
toughness, hardness, corrosion-resistance and edge-retention. Now,
since this is a very detailed topic, and since there are several
different blade steels to choose from depending on your needs, I would
thus recommend that you read such webpages as Knife Informer’s ‘Guide to the Best Knife Steel’ article for further information on choosing the best blade metal for you.
Concerning length, the blade should be anywhere from two-to-five
inches long; anything shorter will seriously reduce the knife’s
functionality while anything longer will make the knife way too bulky
for your pocket. The blade should also be of sufficient depth and width
so that it is sturdy and can clearly handle a great deal of use.
Essentially, you should be able to stab and/or cut things repeatedly
without the knife breaking or becoming compromised.
Next, a half-serrated blade is recommended. Not only does a
serrated edge often cut certain things better than a straight blade, but
the possession of such a “utility” function on your knife will give you
plausible deniability if you are ever stopped and questioned as to why
you are carrying a knife.
Now, as far as the blade tip is concerned, so long as the tip is
solid and sharp, feel free to choose whatever tip you like, be it a
tanto-style tip or not.
Additionally, make sure that whatever mechanism or stud that is used
to open the blade is both solid and allows for rapid opening. It should
also be ambidextrous. There are many options, so play around with them
until you find the right one for you. However, remember that the key is
that the opening mechanism needs to easily and quickly work whenever its
needed, but it should not be so big and bulky that it jams up your
handling of the knife.
Finally, I would recommend a black matte finish to the blade to
reduce any reflections off the blade; after all, no reason to give away
the fact that you have a knife if you can avoid it.
The Handle
The handle should obviously fit your hand comfortably and firmly, it
should have an anti-slip grip, and it should also be a black matte
finish to prevent any unnecessary shine.
At the same time, it is critical to have a very strong locking
mechanism for your blade within the handler, so that there is no chance
of the blade collapsing when you are using the knife. Additionally, the
locking mechanism needs to be quickly and easily accessible with one
hand so that you can rapidly fold the blade back in if you need to
conceal it.
The handle should have a clip which, once put in your pocket, will be
tight enough to ensure that the knife does not slip out or move. But
the clip should also be loose enough that it will not restrict the knife
from being pulled out of your pocket in one smooth motion. Furthermore,
the clip’s ending should be as close to the end of the handle as
possible, which will allow the knife to sit deeper in your pocket and
thereby be better concealed. The clip should also be mountable on either
side of the handle, as well as reversible, which means that it can
cause the knife to be situated blade up or blade down in your pocket.
Finally, make sure that the knife contains a window-breaking spike as
well as a seat-belt cutter within the handle. Not only are these useful
tools in their own right, but again, they give you plausible
deniability about why you are carrying your knife.
Remember, while any folding knife is better than no knife at all, if
you can carry a high-quality folder with the features described above,
then you will be well set to meet whatever challenges come your way, so
long as you know how to use it, that is! But that is a topic for another
article.
I hate Caucasians, despises Americans, and has nothing but contempt for women.
I am master Pai Mei. You might remember me from the Quentin Tarantino
double film “Kill Bill” which was released in the 2000s. In that film I
helped this petulant yellow-haired white woman from the United States
become a contract killer. Her time with me was most irritating, like 95%
of women who hail from that country, but I was able to make her
somewhat agreeable due to months of a highly active and regimented
schedule where degenerate western female behaviors are severely
curtailed and restricted.
Having seen firsthand how far American women have fallen as worthy
domestic partners due to rampant obesity, bitchiness, man-hating
propaganda, and culinary retardation, I have developed a program for the
masses which will make females from the United States into potentially
marriageable ladies again.
I call it the “Cruel Tutelage Of Pai Mei”, and the following article
will address four ways that the program will be most beneficial.
1. They Will Get Off Their Fat Ass And Lose Weight
“Just
looking at those steps makes me ache. You’re gonna have plenty of fun
carrying buckets of water up and down that fucker.” – Bill
Per head of population, among any westerners I have witnessed,
American women have got to be the fattest and most slovenly looking
females my poor old eyes have ever seen. They are like gazing upon an
enormous factory farm animal, who should be harvested for her whale
blubber (to make something useful like soap) rather than sitting on her
bloated behind in some useless “marketing” or “human resources” job they love so much.
Even worse, their idea of after-work relaxation is not going to the
gym or learning how to make a healthy new recipe, but curling up under
the covers to “Netflix and chill” and gorge themselves on high calorie
sweets like some morbidly obese pig. Observe an American woman in her
natural habitat…
Disgusting.
At the cruel tutelage of Pai Mei, I will teach these “HR” (or
whatever they call themselves) swamp donkeys how to get into shape and
to stay in shape through rigorous and unrelenting physical training,
discipline, and repetition. Weeks on end of carrying buckets of water up
and down temple steps in 30-something degree weather will help shed
that whale blubber and (hopefully) instill a regimen that will keep that weight off for life.
2. They Will Learn Humility And Respect For Men
Too many American women think they are “just as good as any man”
At the cruel tutelage of Pai Mei, we understand that young American
women have absolutely no humility and that their arrogant egos have
spiraled completely out of control.
Social media has given very average looking women the impression that
they are “goddesses”, and that their impotent non-profit venture or
virtue signaling is supposed to “change the world” somehow. Furthermore,
this thing called “feminism” in the west is infecting women with the
crazy idea that they are either equal or even superior to men in most
facets of life, and should be able to do exactly the same things that
men do.
Well under my tutelage, American women are quickly going to come to the realization that men are far stronger physically,
and have much greater capacity for accepting sound logic and reason,
rather than what simply “feels” right about society. They will also
learn to respect men, rather than treating them as disposable utilities,
and learn to take full responsibility for their malevolent actions and
face the consequences of such actions.
So do you think American women can attempt to strike a man and he’s
supposed to do nothing about it? Or that some white knight chump is
going to jump in and save his “mi’lady” when that man exercises his
natural right to self-defense and suitable retaliation? WRONG.
If you attempt any physical altercation with a man under my tutelage,
you can expect to be painfully struck back and subdued using the full
weight and force under that man’s disposal, which is going to be a LOT
more than what a comparable woman can muster.
Respect men, and they will respect you. Far too many American women
think they are immune to retaliation for being physically aggressive
with men, and thanks to master Pai Mei, we are going to forever wipe
that psychotic idea from their feeble yankee brains.
3. They Will Learn Discipline And Understand Real Suffering
Timeless Eastern Wisdom
American women have got to be the most sheltered, protected, and
coddled women on planet Earth. No other type of female inhabiting this
blue marble floating in space has their hand held longer, and has their
problems magically disappear via financial contribution, public
forgiveness, or an “empowerment” narrative, than a national of the stars
and bars.
Under my cruel tutelage, bogus yankee 1st world “problems” like the gender pay gap lie or a mythical “rape culture” will be forever removed from their feeble female minds.
Long days of carrying heavy buckets of water up and down steps, rigid
military-style kung fu routines, and repeatedly smashing their knuckles
against heavy wooden boards will also teach them about the stress and
suffering that billions of less fortunate people around the world endure
on a daily basis.
So there’s no Iphone’s, Instagram, All-Night Happy Hour and In-N-Out
Burger where you’ll be going young lady! But when it’s all said and
done, your newfound rudimentary Kung Fu skills will be able to help fend
off those storybook “rapists” that you are so concerned about.
4. They Will Learn To Cook Healthy Meals And Eat Properly
“If you want to eat like a human being….PICK UP THOSE STICKS”
Finally, there was a man on this stupid piece of western communications technology called ‘Twitter’ who once mentioned “If
you walk up to a western Millennial girl with a cast iron skillet, 97%
would rather take a beating than use it to cook dinner”.
I had my obligatory laugh, followed by the emotionally painful
realization that his Confucius-like wisdom is hardly very separate from
reality. Young American women just cannot cook anymore, and compound
that problem by consuming awful and fattening pre-packaged diets.
Along with these American female tubs of lard shedding massive
amounts of weight via the water-and-steps routine, my tutelage will
include basic home cooking skills and mealtime etiquette. Rest assured
they are going to use that cast iron skillet dammit.
Foods high in carbohydrates, fats, sugars, salts, and flour will be
neither prepared nor consumed. This is pretty much epitomized by obese
Americans’ obsession with these nutritionally bankrupt monstrosities
called doughnuts, or as I like to call them “crumbly cunt cakes”.
Conclusion
When it is all said and done, American women will finally be of an
agreeable weight, have adequate cooking skills, stop acting like spoiled
and petulant children, and have a much greater appreciation for western
men, due to their greater understanding of the high quality of life
that their workmanship and sacrifice provides for them.
Maybe, just maybe, the tide of men looking towards Brazil,
Colombia, Russia, Ukraine, Japan, or Vietnam as places to find an
agreeable life partner can be reversed if these obese land whales from
North America follow my teachings.
Roy Larner who
fought off the three London Bridge jihadis and told them “Fuck off, I’m
Millwall” has revealed his horrific injuries as he recovers in hospital.
The hero is recovering from his horrific injuries, which include a gash to his neck
The Millwall fan opened up to The Sun about his injuries
The footie fan said he didn’t want the terrorists to attack the families and children, and the police was as so often some other place.
“For me, stopping them hurting more people and I feel quite proud of myself.”
He said one of the men he tackled was wearing an Arsenal top.
Roy, of Peckham, South East London, suffered eight wounds including a
punctured lung, as well as stab wounds to his arms and hands and an
eight inch slash from his ear to neck.
Speaking from his bed at St Thomas’s Hospital, he said the men had
been chanting as they came back, with him immediately challenging them.
He said: “Like an idiot I shouted back at them. I thought, ‘I need to take the piss out of these bitches’.”
Flowers and messages laid at London Bridge in memory to those who died in terror attack
He later added: "They started saying all that, I don't know why I said all that back."
They fled into the street, where he watched armed police blast them.
Roy said: “They died around me, which was one of the best feelings ever.”
He said: "I'm quite proud of doing what I did. I've got slashes to the arms and the hands. Stabbed in the side of me stomach.
"I got slashed on my neck, head and ear hole is coming off."
'HOW WILL I EXPLAIN TO OUR DAUGHTER?'
Wife of London Bridge attacker Rachid Redouane says she's dreading
telling their 20-month-old daughter about his deadly terror spree as
their wedding pictures emerge
Continuing to recount the attack, he said: "All three were on me. I
couldn’t hold them back. Two got past me and I was one-on-one.
"I didn’t think of my safety at the time. I’d had four or five pints — nothing major.
"It wasn’t until I was in a police car that I realised I was in a bad way. I’d been sliced up all over."
Doctors took him off the critical list on Sunday, with NHS England saying 32 patients remained in hospital as of today.
Fifteen people remain in a critical condition.
Roy has been hailed a hero by friends who want him honoured with a George Cross for bravery and raising money for his recovery.
He added: "I was determined not to let them in and luckily they died around me which was one of the best feelings ever."
The hospital has been overwhelmed with visitors wanting to see Roy - most of them have been from Millwall fans.
Mum Phyllis learned of her son’s heroism the next day when his
partner Tracey Wicks rang, saying: "I wasn’t shocked, to be honest. He
wouldn’t care who fronts him up. He says what he has to say and is not
scared of anyone.
"He must have been trying to help friends or something."
Friends who got to see him jokingly gave him a Runner’s World magazine with the headline “Learn To Run”.
However, it also emerged yesterday that he is homeless and kipping on someone’s sofa.
He is on a housing waiting list but pals have urged council chiefs to reward his heroics by putting a roof over his head.
Former partner Tracy Wicks, 54 — mum of his daughter Freya, 14 — visited him in hospital.
She said: “He told me, ‘I could have died’. It’s incredible what he
did. He said he thought there was just one of them, then ended up
fighting all three.
“He is homeless at the moment and sleeping at a friend’s house. He really does deserve help.”
The PhilippinesFilipino: Pilipinas, officially the Republic of the Philippines (Filipino: Republika ng Pilipinas), is a sovereignisland country in Southeast Asia situated in the western Pacific Ocean. It consists of about 7,641 islandsthat are categorized broadly under three main geographical divisions from north to south: Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. The capital city of the Philippines is Manila and the most populous city is Quezon City, both part of Metro Manila. Rodrigo "Rody" Roa Duterte (born March 28, 1945), also known as Digong, is a Filipino politician and jurist who is the 16th and current President of the Philippines.He is the first Mindanaoan to hold the office, and the fourth of Visayan descent.
Yeah right-on: Here we have a president who WANTS vigilantism, the true justice when systems fail, and it is hillarious to hear all the libtards whining for their beloved criminals.
No typical druggie and libtard exuses are made, the vigilante president declear them all for a pest, and he simply wants to get rid of the druggie bandits, every single one of them.
It's sweet music of justice, that someone finally is going to give this festering trash what they deserve.
The horrific shooting massacre in Orlando was feared to happen, but also warned of by IS – which has for long urged “lone wolves” to strike against Western targets.
Countless terrorist plot has been revealed and stopped at the last moment by Western law enforcement in recent years, but the attack in Orlando went under the radar, and joins a long line of relentless terrorist attacks by jihadists – attacks that had clear similarities.
But then something strange happens: The newspapers are full of exhortations to “purposeful struggle against homophobia”. But was attacked in Orlando driven by homophobia? Really?
It takes a strange and dangerous rewriting of reality to think like that.
The Orlando attack is all of a sudden just about gay struggle, to avoid having to talk about “what-who-don’t-you-mention” – ISLAM.
Barack Obama can not take the word “jihad” in its mouth. But one takes the perpetrators motives out of the larger context, and his actions out of historical context. And what we are left with is confusion. For this perpetrator was not just homophobic, as the media likes to point out. Was he?
Did 9/11 happen due to trade phobia?
What if this strange reaction pattern was transferred to previous terrorist attacks? This would provide a rather surreal image of single events, which clearly shows how we’re on some wrong track:
The attack on Charlie Hedboe happened due to caricature phobia.
The attack on Bataclan was caused by rock phobia.
The attack in Boston due to marathon phobia.
The attack in Bamako due to hotel phobia.
The attack in Sousse due to bikini phobia.
And the planned attack on the European Championships in Paris due to football phobia.
To pulverize context, let the real reason slip away.
But Orlando massacre was NOT caused by homophobia, hatred, poverty, despair, racism, gulf wars, colonialism, offense or othet shait. All these attacks are interrelated and have a common driving force. But Barack Obama wont admit it, and where are we headed then?
Terror attacks by jihadists are not isolated incidents. They are interrelated.
All attacks are an assault on the same thing: Western culture of liberty.
And all the attackers had the same impetus: The Religion of “Submission”.
Submission is just the opposite of freedom.
Combining submission and “god-given” laws, with freedom and human laws, a huge culture clash. A civilizational clash.
The attack in Boston happened due to a religious struggle that has lasted for 1400 years, and has created a greater and greater chaos since the revival of political Islam in Iran in 1979. Look how far we’ve come down in the maelstrom.
But I have not Islamophobia. It is Islam that has freedom phobia.
It is not I who violate peaceful Muslims.
It is the terrorists who do.
It is not me who makes the world dangerous.
It is the violent men who do.
It is not I who create “us and them”.
That is what Islam does.
And it’s not us messengers that creates more and more terrorists.
It is the Muslim clerics and scholars who are doing that.
As long as one does not want to place the blame where it belongs, but rather blame anything else, then the problem becomes worse: weakness, excuses, scapegoats and obfuscation has never stopped forward march of some ideology or religion. That is not the way the world works. Only firmness and facts works.
But the West no longer has leaders with strength.
We have leaders with good intentions and truth phobia.
Islam WANT something.
And I want the opposite.
Freedom comes from sane choices, not from compromises with democratic ideals, political correctness, cowardice or obfuscation.
There lies the solution.
And time is running out to agree on a solution.
For the next jihadi attack on a subway will NOT happen due to train phobia, or me for that matter.
"I didn’t think of my safety at the time. I’d had four or five pints — nothing major.
