a story put out by incompetants to explain away their incompetence.

[Guest guest]

--- , " J. Gomez " <aikisurf> wrote:

> To comment Mr. Wilson about how a martial art could not be

leathal.

> Aikido is a good example, not the onlyone, of how a very leathal

> martial art was converted into a art of love and peace, in other

> words from a art of death and war to one of life and peace.

 

> Aikido was declared by the UN as a martial art of peace.

 

Well, that is one of the many oxymorons put out by the politicians

to appease others.

 

It's also a story put out by incompetants to explain away their

incompetence. (Ushiba, the founder, was very valid!)...

 

I mean, " How can anything that matchs the description of a MARTIAL

ART ever be declared to be an art of peace " ?

 

It just ain't so.

 

Most people don't know it but Ushiba's (the FOUNDER of Aikido) own

school, circa 1938, was called HELL SCHOOL (in loving appreciation)

by all his students.

 

Ushiba, that little guy, around 1912, was the number one " killer " on

the fighting fields of China, with his bayonet.

 

What movie star (using the term lightly)that uses movie Aikido

(adapted from the older FIGHTING style AikiJijutsu) crapped his

pants when he had a one-on-one with Judo Gene Labell a few years

back?

 

....the same Judo Gene Labell that took Bruce Lee down a notch or two?

 

NOTE: Gene Labell was also a professional wrestler before he became

a movie stunt man.

 

By the way, he didn't crap his pants out of fear. What Gene did was

get behind him using one of those " vicious " grappling moves, then he

put a Hadaka Jime C on S and S had an accidental bowel movement. I

guess " shit " just happens.

 

Off course Gene was fired...until the entire stuntmen's caste walked

off the set and stayed off the set until the movie star apologized

for his behavior.

 

The movie star's attitude and arrogance had caused the entire

incident.

 

The facts are a bit different than the politics and the sales

propaganda, aren't they?

 

With hugs and kisses,

huggy feely,

 

[Guest guest]

For those of you who consider aikido as nothing but " a dance " and

seriously doubt its lethal techniques, remember (or learn, as I did 2

weeks ago) that it's the martial art used by the Tokyo riot force.

 

I'd recommend this great non-fiction book by Robert Twigger " Angry

White Pyjamas " .

 

It is the account of an English teacher living in Japan who decides

to become a seisushin, a member of the one-year training of kick-ass

aikido...

 

Pierre

[Guest guest]

, " coudertpy "

<coudertpy@c...> wrote:

> For those of you who consider aikido as nothing but " a dance " and

> seriously doubt its lethal techniques, remember (or learn, as I did

2

> weeks ago) that it's the martial art used by the Tokyo riot force.

>

> I'd recommend this great non-fiction book by Robert Twigger " Angry

> White Pyjamas " .

>

> It is the account of an English teacher living in Japan who decides

> to become a seisushin, a member of the one-year training of kick-ass

> aikido...

>

> Pierre

 

Sorry Pierre, your basis for this post is NON-Valid. And because of

that, there is no reason to answer it.

 

Why?

 

Because you switched the topic about what I was posting.

 

The CONTENT of my post, and the " kid's " post are different than YOUR

topic and your premise.

 

You are attempting to defend something that does NOT need defending.

 

And, " NO " the topic was NOT about Aikido.

 

Please re-read that post and then comment " ON-TOPIC " okay?

 

 

[Guest guest]

you switched the topic about what I was posting.

>

> The CONTENT of my post, and the " kid's " post are different than YOUR

> topic and your premise.

 

 

So, having re-read your post, the " URA " content is the way we are made

to believe Aikido is that nice art, overlooking historical evidence.

But there is an " OMOTE " content, or more rightly said there is a

forest behind this tree...I guess I jumped in without

considering " chunking up " (i'm new to this terminology, hope I'm using

it right)

 

So if this post wasn't really about aikido, what would it be about?

 

Hum. The topic has more to do with the discrepancy between facts and

the way we are spoon-fed a half-digested version of them.

 

It's about our responsability to do our own research, because if we

don't, somebody is going to do it for us, because society abhors a

vaccuum... And it can be done either out of incompetence or with

ulterior motives, which any way leads to us giving away our power.

 

An example of that would be (sorry I'm clutching to my martial arts

examples)the view we have on samurais. We are presented the samurais

as these Japenese knights, full of principles of honour based on

Hagakure and Bushido. But these two sources are at best inadequate.

(just as S.'s stunts are inadequate to judge aikido) Yet who knows

that " Hagakure kikigaki " was not written by a warrior but by Yamamoto

Tsunetomo, a monk; who 150 years later, in 1899, inspired an

intellectual, Inazo Nitobe, to write his book " Bushido " , a long time

after the samurai caste had vanished. (quoting Bernard Bordas

in " Etude sur les mystifications dans les arts martiaux " )

 

 

> Please re-read that post and then comment " ON-TOPIC " okay?

 

Well, is it any better?

>

>

 

Pierre

[Guest guest]

You did a great job.

Thank you.

 

 

, " coudertpy "

<coudertpy@c...> wrote:

> you switched the topic about what I was posting.

> >

> > The CONTENT of my post, and the " kid's " post are different than

YOUR

> > topic and your premise.

>

>

> So, having re-read your post, the " URA " content is the way we are

made

> to believe Aikido is that nice art, overlooking historical

evidence.

> But there is an " OMOTE " content, or more rightly said there is a

> forest behind this tree...I guess I jumped in without

> considering " chunking up " (i'm new to this terminology, hope I'm

using

> it right)

>

> So if this post wasn't really about aikido, what would it be

about?

>

> Hum. The topic has more to do with the discrepancy between facts

and

> the way we are spoon-fed a half-digested version of them.

>

> It's about our responsability to do our own research, because if

we

> don't, somebody is going to do it for us, because society abhors a

> vaccuum... And it can be done either out of incompetence or with

> ulterior motives, which any way leads to us giving away our power.

>

> An example of that would be (sorry I'm clutching to my martial

arts

> examples)the view we have on samurais. We are presented the

samurais

> as these Japenese knights, full of principles of honour based on

> Hagakure and Bushido. But these two sources are at best inadequate.

> (just as S.'s stunts are inadequate to judge aikido) Yet who knows

> that " Hagakure kikigaki " was not written by a warrior but by

Yamamoto

> Tsunetomo, a monk; who 150 years later, in 1899, inspired an

> intellectual, Inazo Nitobe, to write his book " Bushido " , a long

time

> after the samurai caste had vanished. (quoting Bernard Bordas

> in " Etude sur les mystifications dans les arts martiaux " )

>

>

> > Please re-read that post and then comment " ON-TOPIC " okay?

>

> Well, is it any better?

> >

> >

>

> Pierre