The Real Spin On Global Flu: Fill & Download for Free

The back swingThis spin strike, also known as the spinning hammerfist, was banned in boxing way back at the end of the 19th century, when the art was late in the stage of being turned into a gloved punching sport. It can still be seen in many original rules under the Fouls section as ’no pivot punch’: that’s how it was described in 1960’s boxing rules.In all trad boxing there are 4 classic swings and many other strikes. Partly this is because there were no hooks if you go back far enough: there were straight punches and strikes, combined with wrestling. The 4 swings (still used by some fighters today in muay Thai and MMA) are:The front swingA full circle strike with the topfist (thumb end) and the distal radius. In other words it connects with any/all of a point between the centre of the forearm on the thumb side, and the top of the fist at the thumb end (the opposite end of the fist to the hammerfist, aka bottomfist). The thumb can be repositioned in this swing, to flatten the topfist surface - by moving the pad of the thumb down to the third finger instead of the second. Bareknuckle fighters used 3 positions for the thumb, according to the moment.This swing is also called a ‘clothesline’ in some places.Back swingA spinning hammerfist: again a full circle strike, using the bottom of the fist and/or the distal ulna. It is the arm version of a wheel kick, aka spinning heel kick: the one similar to a spin hook kick but with the leg locked out straight. Probably seen most in Hapkido.This classic swing from traditional boxing has to be altered to a backfist where contest rules do not permit a strike with a less-padded part of the glove; it is not as effective as the hammerfist swing, but still works. It was not used in trad bareknuckle because of 3 factors:The hammerfist is more effective.The forearm bones need to change alignment, and hit flat, so you no longer get the ‘sword’ effect of the ulna chopping into the neck, when the range suits that version of the move.The back hand bones / metacarpals are more vulnerable to breakage in bare hand fighting - if the opponent blocks with an elbow then the hand is gone.Up swingThis is an upward topfist swing, now replaced by the uppercut. The fist was swung upward in a full-circle strike with the topfist, under the chin. The only current user of this move I can think of is Khabib N, who regularly knocks down or KOs opponents shooting-in for a leg pickup; or just those who hang their chin out and beg for it like Tavares.It’s fun listening to fight commentators trying to figure out what just happened. They have no clue, not having any knowledge of real fighting systems of the past.Overhead swingThis is a full-circle straight-arm swing coming over the top. The only recent user that comes to mind is Chuck Liddell, who did flatten plenty of people with it.In theory it doesn’t work against good fighters; but plenty of them seemed to end up lying at his feet listening to cuckoos.These are the 4 classic swings of traditional boxing. Mostly forgotten now, as there was a long period in the 20th century when - understandably given the scale of death and destruction - nobody was interested in real fighting, just safe sports. Plus, all the old teachers were wiped out in WW1 and the global flu pandemic of 1918.When boxing changedIt changed from being a comprehensive combat system used for road defence along with sword and staff, to being, essentially, an unrelated combat sport that only used punches.Banning all the fighting technique of boxing was part of the move toward allowing only blows with the forefist, to the front of the body, which turned English traditional boxing into International boxing. Originally, boxing was a road defence survival art using swords and staves alongside an unarmed combat system that included punching, throws, strikes and wrestling; of course it had nothing to do with a sport in those days. It was designed to help the user survive out on the lawless roads, and that was its only function - read up on the life of James Figg, the premier boxing master, for example. He was primarily a wrestler/slugger and weapons master. The term ‘boxing’ comes from around 1350–1400 and had a different meaning from how we perceive it now.The back swing featured in all traditional boxing, such as English boxing and muay Thai, since originally there were no hooks: the arm/hand moves featured only straight punches, swings and strikes. Today most people prefer the hooks, although the old moves are still legal in Thai boxing. Hooks came to be used after around 1750 in England, and the next 200 years saw an enormous variety of them developed as the technique spread globally. Today there are far more hook variants than straight punches.‘Spinning backfist’There was no such thing originally as it is too dangerous for the hand in bareknuckle fighting. One of the greatest priorities in bare fist fighting is simply: Don’t break your hands.It tends to outweigh everything else, because the man with the broken hand died: he couldn’t punch or use his sword or cudgel. Today this seems to have no real meaning for people, because (1) the only system in the world specialising in bareknuckle head punching, traditional boxing, has been almost completely forgotten; (2) death is no longer the normal consequence of smashing your hand, as it may have been in the past; and (3) we now wear heavy wraps and gloves for sport combat, which is the only kind 99.9% of people will ever see; and the hands are almost bombproof with this protection.Where kickboxing got this move fromIn the late 60’s, some US servicemen on R&R, off duty in the Vietnam war, saw muay Thai bouts in Pattaya, Thailand. At that time International boxing had not completely taken over the handwork in Thai boxing, and many fighters still used the old swings, along with their elbow / knee / clinch / throw / straight punch mix (head punches always scored the lowest of all moves in muay Thai, as most of the boxers were bantamweights, didn’t like punching, and hit harder with every other move anyway).They had never seen full-contact martial arts before and didn’t know such a thing existed. After leaving the services they started Contact Karate back in the States, as they were all karate and TKD black belts, and had no interest at all in retraining in muay Thai (apart from stand-out American stars of combat such as lightweight Dale Kvalheim, who went back to Bangkok and retrained as a pro fighter in muay Thai - for more detail on Kvalheim, the first American Thai boxer, read Hardy Stockman’s book on mid-20th century boxing in Thailand).The organisation running US contact karate was called the PKA, which stood for the Professional Karate Association. Things changed over time and it was next called Full Contact; then later Kickboxing. This is where US kickboxing comes from. Basically they started out with karate punches and Korean kicks; then changed over to boxing handwork; then added some moves from Thai boxing (e.g. low kicks) later on, after meeting with the Dutch Thai boxers in Amsterdam bouts (which didn’t go well, but that’s another story). The PKA changed its name to the Professional Kickboxing Association along the way, which worked out handily as the initials / badge / docs etc. needed no change :)The PKA prohibited any strike with an unpadded part of the glove, so the ancient boxing technique of spin hammerfist was changed to a spinning backfist. It isn’t as effective, but even so has caused countless knockdowns / KOs; though it should not be used barefist due to the risk for broken metacarpals (which is why it was never used historically - no matter what fantasy someone tells you - it is a classical boxing technique and they really, really did not want to break their hands).People primarily needed weapons skills in past eras, not unarmed combat skill, which was an add-on: a fall-back skill that helped keep the exponent fit, strong, and handy when in close. The unarmed man died, and likewise one with a broken sword hand.You can see this basic fact with crystal clarity in English traditional boxing, and surely this alone makes the issue clear to you: Figg challenged other reputable boxing teachers to 3 round matches with sword, staff and unarmed combat - note the 2 to 1 preference for weapons skill - because you paid the master to teach you survival skills, not some modern idea of a fantasy: barehand combat methods to be used against armed robbers.Jump punchesMoving on to the next part of the question, jump punches: in jump techniques there are 3 stages of progression, in the technique of many combat arts:Reach / slideJumpingFlyingThis applies to kicks and punches. In other words the move starts without too much of a leap and then gets more adventurous - it applies to several classes of technique.Today we can most clearly see these moves employed in Thai boxing because they didn’t censor out all the useful technique, they just adopted the admin process used by International boxing.So we see the Reaching Punch used there, which is stage 1 of this progression. It is a massive over-commit long right, seen in no Western boxing book this century as it is deemed to be terrible technique these days. Nevertheless advanced boxing technicians like Duran and Mayweather smashed it in successfully many times, and there are photos, like this:A classic Reaching Punch as used in many forms of traditional boxing, but long forgotten by 1918, with all the old teachers killed off in wars and flu epidemics. Except for good old muay Thai, coming to the rescue once again. A lot of the old stuff lives on in muay boran. Here we see Floyd M banging in a hard reaching punch - you can see by the sweat spray-off from his opponent’s head that this shot connected well. Note the front foot pointing directly forward; the punch is done with a run-in; and the right foot is way off the ground in ‘running mode’.According to 1950’s boxing coaching this is a terrible idea that will never work. However it does work, for the athletic and fast..OK that’s stage 1 of this move type.Next comes the Jump Punch, which is a quick jump-in with the same shot. It’s identical except the feet are both off the ground. In MMA in the USA they call this a ‘superman punch’, as they only know that one and have no taxonomy within which to place it.And, if you take a run-up of two steps or more and then jump: it becomes a Flying Punch. The same deal applies to kicks and you can see exactly the same progression there: slide - jump - flying; perhaps seen best in Korean kicking methods. If you learned the Korean aerial kick progression then you will understand the Thai aerial punch progression too.Legal in boxing today?Yes.I have looked at every set of boxing rules, of all kinds, that I could find since about 1970. There is nothing in any boxing rules preventing a jump punch, as long as you hit with the forefist, to the front of the opponent: the front of their head / body / arms; it’s all good.I think this is for the very simple reason that the originators of today’s boxing rules had no idea such a thing even existed - so they didn’t think of banning it, mostly because they had never heard of it.And thus you will see everyone from Ray Leonard to Mike Tyson using a jumping-in left hook, for example, which you can clearly see often connects with both feet off the deck. I think Floyd Patterson was the first user of that shot in the Cus D’Amato camp, so it looks as if the old boy had picked it up somewhere. Maybe he’d taken a vacation in Thailand…There are all sorts of inertial inputs possible in punching, from drop steps to rising steps to jumping. Lots of flavours. There is no ‘right’ way to inertialise a punch (add momentum to the existing force of the punch), many choices exist. For example the Dempsey drop step, and the D’Amato camp’s jump left hook - though it does need to fit your house style.ReffingBut I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that if boxers start jumping and colliding with each other, the ref will stop it. This is because it would then qualify as barging, which is seen in today’s boxing as a kind of wrestling move.So there you go. Back swing (aka the ‘pivot punch’) is a no-go; jump punches are OK within reason; laying it on thick will get you a warning.Did you get this far? Well congrats, dude :-D

different.. ‘deadly’ depends on various factors.. plague is spread mainly by fleas, whereas coronavirus is spread mainly by dropet and microdroplet direct infection from human to human.. with todays sanitary conditions generally, plague would likely come from a diseased marmot or suchlike,, whereas due again to various factors, this coronavirus, has inevitably become a global pandemic, an incurable deadly global pandemic..ie, infection can happen from say, singing in a choir with an infected singer, or sitting in a restaurant part of diners in line with recirculating air conditioning with an infected person, or simply being close to an infected person in a long cab ride, or virtually any close contact, especially with infected people sneezing, coughing, yelling, shouting, singing, even taking excitedly etc.. the virus remains infective on various common surfaces found in buildings, busses, trains, etc.. thus is you touchj that point, light switch say, then wipe your eye or nose with the same finger, you may be infected.this is a virus,, ie, it will, mutate, on every transmission there will be changes which virologists can identify, thus trace back thru infections certain ‘strain’ of the virus, but more importantly for the question, mutations will involve ‘dealdiness’ factors such as can be defined in simple factors such as age of victims, infected, progressing to more dangerous symptoms beyond initial effects, thus it is inevitable given time, which it has been given by decision by govts worldwide [ aside from sane responsible nz] that victims from infection to serkious progressions, will include younger victimas..virtually everything a or the virus displays as its capabilities and potentials will getr worse, for humans, given only time and the ongoing mass infections still happening worldwide.. it will become easier to infect, into younger ages, with worse effects, including lingering negative effects on systems such as cardiovascular [heart] and respiratory [lungs] and [ ? ]the first coronavirus sars killed victims soon after infection, thus wiping itself out thru only x thousand victims.. this new coronavirus onset of symptoms is 7 - 10 days, and even then, up to now,, many victims have minor symptoms, like a cold, and dont quarantine and still go to work and interact with others.. symptom free people infecting others, who may also be infection free, and continue this reality of community infections,, many victims having minor symptoms, unlike sars, thus spreading this coronavirus worldwide… giving it the worlds population to evolve into, including the inevitable increasingly danerous potentials incl ‘deadliness’..plans made after the first coronavirus sars, for ppe and ventilators and so on, were not implemented… thus politicians couldnt admit this negligent failure,, so made out it was ‘just like the flu’ and ‘it will go away in two weeks’ ‘masks not recommended’, just wash your hands’.. and so on.. they didnt have masks.. or ppe.. not enough ventilators [essential, for coronavirus] so they let people die.. simple as that..of course it wont be expressed that way, but in things like ‘flattening the curve’ and suchlike.. which means, allowing or accepting deaths.. until they could scramble and make or obtain masks, ppe, ventilators, and of course the magic vaccine..so to be fair, to the question on deadliness, those last political etc incompetence and coverup spin on the reailities, are another shade of real ‘deadliness’..[i’m nobody, but on hearing a news report of another new coronaviorus, i immediately ordered my vox of p2 respirator masks.. no problem.. no demand yet..rest assured of i could recognise another deadly epidemic sars virus, politicians would all know.. that was in january.. for details etc of this virus, trust only genuine virologists or others you can trust, which is not politicians who dont know or wont tell you]

I think you named it, and it hardly gets any simpler. It is my body and my choice not to wear a mask. I have heard all the scientific arguments and in my opinion, they are malarky— horse apples. And many professionals agree.The mask is a political statement of conformity and submission to authority. “Yeah, but all the best doctors said …”Yeah, and people with masks are getting sick at the same rate as people without masks. And that rate is so tiny, you need a microscope to find it on a graph. Johns Hopkins study explodes COVID death hoax; it’s re-labeling on a grand scaleJohns Hopkins study explodes COVID death hoax; it’s re-labeling on a grand scale"This patient who died had an ordinary heart attack.""Not anymore. We’re repackaging it as COVID."by Jon Rappoport(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)Don’t blink. Johns Hopkins may delete or retract their analysis at any moment. Their author’s study is devastating. Too hot to handle.UPDATE: Yes, I wrote that opener a few hours before Johns Hopkins stepped in and DID retract the article. Boom.Hopkins claims the article has been used to spread misinformation about the pandemic, and contains factual errors. CDC is cited as one correct source of facts. Hmm.Regardless, here is my article, finished before the Johns Hopkins retraction. Since then, I’ve only polished it a bit in several places, for clarity:Months ago, I told you this, in a number of articles: The overwhelming percentage of people who are “dying from the virus” are actually dying from traditional diseases.These people have been relabeled and repackaged as “COVID-19.”It has nothing to do with “the virus.”A new analysis from Johns Hopkins confirms this in spades.The Johns Hopkins News-Letter article, in a student publication, is headlined, “A closer look at US deaths due to COVID-19.” It lays out the case made by “Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Hopkins.”As you keep reading, keep this in mind: If the so-called increase in mortality from COVID is offset, almost exactly, by a decrease in deaths from all other major diseases…Indicating that the so-called COVID deaths are nothing more than an exercise in re-labeling, then…You can say there is a new coronavirus, but it’s even less harmful than flu, because virtually everybody recovers…Or you can say the whole story of a new coronavirus is a fake narrative. There is no new virus.My readers know I’ve been offering much evidence for the latter conclusion.Here are key quotes from the Johns Hopkins News-Letter article:“These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.”“This comes as a shock to many people. How is it that the data lie so far from our perception?”“When Briand looked at the 2020 data during that seasonal period, COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases. This was highly unusual since heart disease has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths. However, when taking a closer look at the death numbers, she noted something strange. As Briand compared the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to [deaths per cause in] 2018, she noticed that instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising, as seen in the graph below, this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes.”“This trend is completely contrary to the pattern observed in all previous years. Interestingly, as depicted in the table below, the total decrease in deaths by other causes almost exactly equals the increase in deaths by COVID-19. This suggests, according to Briand, that the COVID-19 death toll is misleading. Briand believes that deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may instead be [may have been] recategorized as being due to COVID-19.”“The CDC classified all deaths that are related to COVID-19 simply as COVID-19 deaths. Even patients dying from other underlying diseases but are infected with COVID-19 count as COVID-19 deaths. This is likely the main explanation as to why COVID-19 deaths drastically increased while deaths by all other diseases experienced a significant decrease.”“’All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary,’ Briand concluded.”“’If [the COVID-19 death toll] was not misleading at all, what we should have observed is an increased number of heart attacks and increased COVID-19 numbers. But a decreased number of heart attacks and all the other death causes doesn’t give us a choice but to point to some misclassification [re-labeling],’ Briand replied.”“In other words, the effect of COVID-19 on deaths in the U.S. is considered problematic only when it increases the total number of deaths or the true death burden by a significant amount in addition to the expected deaths by other causes. Since the crude number of total deaths by all causes before and after COVID-19 [was first announced] has stayed the same, one can hardly say, in Briand’s view, that COVID-19 deaths are concerning.”Of course, there is some mealy-mouthed backtracking in the article. The virus is deadly and the pandemic is real, etc. But the data are the data.The whole COVID operation is a hoax.If I thought other honest researchers would investigate and re-calculate the Hopkins analysis, I would say, let’s see what they come up with. But based on my experience, there will be, at best, a brief flurry of articles in the press about this extraordinary finding, and then the scientific and press denizens will move on, as if nothing happened. That is their way. They briefly expose a scandal and then they slither off to cover up the scandal.The other possibility is: Hopkins will retract the analysis, claiming it was flawed. That is the other strategy the low-crawling creatures sometimes deploy.So there you have it.Hoax. Con. Fake.As I keep reporting, the virus (never proven to exist) is the cover story for the true phase-one goal: destruction of the economy.If the virus were real, if it were attacking people left and right, the all-cause mortality numbers would be through the roof.But they aren’t.“I have a great idea, Bill. Let’s declare a fake pandemic. We’ll report all sorts of high death numbers. But really, we’ll just be subtracting numbers from other traditional diseases that cause deaths, and we’ll add those numbers to our fake pandemic.”“Sounds great, Tony. Can you pull it off? I mean, it’s pretty obvious.”“Sure, we can pull it off. And if some journalist with a mainstream reputation or an institution suddenly develops a brief infection of ETHICS, we’ll call their work a mistake or a lapse in judgment.”“You mean an institution like the World Health Organization or Johns Hopkins?”“Right. We’ll say the institution didn’t issue the study, it was just one of their people, a lone researcher. And if necessary, the institution, under pressure, will back off. But that’s assuming anyone noticed the study in the first place. Normally, these ‘revelations’ surface for a moment and then sink like a stone. No one cares. A pandemic is a money waterfall. The beneficiaries won’t sacrifice their bottom lines, or their reputations…”Of course, people can rise up and raise holy hell.(The link to this article posted on my blog is here -- with sources.)==============================Jon RappoportThe author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can find this article and more at NoMoreFakeNews.