Black youth terrorizing white passengers in Portland, Oregon rail system
Note: This entry segues into a discussion of the differences between barbarism and savagery, and how Islamic jihad employs both of them.
The fact is that these beasts walk among us, looking to pounce.
From the Oregonian
—Lawrence Auster, June 7, 2008
When I say that beasts and savages walk among us, am I … speaking about black people as such? Of course not. I am speaking about a segment of the black population, which we—society—need to identify and suppress.
—Lawrence Auster, June 12, 2008
, June 13, 2008
Teenage boys and girls punched, used racial epithets and stole the purse of a 28-year-old Vancouver woman who was taking her first-ever MAX ride early Monday evening. The woman, who is white, had just had a conversation with the teens, who are African American and were harassing another woman, according to Portland police.
- end of initial entry -
“It was completely traumatizing and absolutely horrifying for me,” said the Vancouver woman, who did not want to be identified for fear of retaliation. “It seemed like forever.”
… News of the woman’s assault on the MAX Yellow Line, on North Interstate Avenue, triggered quick association with a November attack at a Gresham MAX stop that sparked regionwide outrage. A 16-year-old [the article implies black] boy on Thursday was sentenced to 9 1/2 years in prison for that attack, in which he used a baseball bat to bludgeon a [the article implies white] man, then 71.
Weeks after the beating, a 19-year-old [the article implies white] man was stabbed in the chest at the Rockwood Transit Center, and on Christmas Eve a [the article implies white] woman was groped at a MAX stop in Gresham….
The November beating in Gresham had sparked cries for greater police presence throughout the MAX system….
TriMet has also contracted with rider advocates, former [the article implies black] gang members who work with [the article implies black] youth to prevent [the article implies black] gang activity on the MAX system.
Police said they have arrested four [black] youths ages 14 to 16 suspected in the Monday assault. A fifth [black] teenager is still at large, and officials released security camera video of the incident in hopes that the public can help identify the thin, 5-foot-6 [black] suspect wearing light-colored clothing and going by the name Adrian.
Police said the [black] teens initially called the Vancouver woman racially derogatory names. Then, as the train approached a station at North Interstate Avenue and North Prescott Street, they started punching her, police said.
The woman said a boy stole her purse and ran from the train after it stopped. A mix of boys and girls repeatedly punched her, and some girls hit her with purses. She said she also was hit with a can of beer.
She said the attack escalated when the group turned on her while harassing another, older woman, who had asked the teens to tone down their act. There was no transit security on the train, she said.
“I did not intervene,” the Vancouver woman said, adding that she had tried to ignore them. “They got in my face.
“Finally, I just said, ‘I don’t care what color you are, if I want you out of my face, I’d tell you to get out of my face.’ ”
That’s when the teens got physical. She said she tried to fight back but was punched and stepped on.
“Then they took my purse, and then they ran out” of the train, she said. “And then I was standing at the door, on the phone with 9-1-1 because nobody would call.”
The four teens are accused of robbery, assault and intimidation. The intimidation count stems from the alleged racial comments, said Sgt. Brian Schmautz, a police spokesman….
Adela G. writes:
You write: A 16-year-old [the article implies black] boy on Thursday was sentenced to 9 1/2 years in prison for that attack, in which he used a baseball bat to bludgeon a [the article implies white] man, then 71.
According to another article in the link you provided, the teen who bludgeoned the old man is Hispanic, Chavez-Garcia, with an extensive arrest record. I infer that he is also an illegal alien.
“Chavez-Garcia probably will serve his sentence at the MacLaren Correctional Youth Facility in Woodburn. Although it’s unknown how he entered the country, he is not a U.S. citizen and faces deportation proceedings once he completes his sentence.”
Terry Morris writes:
“And then I was standing at the door, on the phone with 9-1-1 because nobody would call.”
That’s one of the most disturbing sentences in the article.
Adela G. writes:
By the way, here’s my own story about being set upon by a group of blacks. In the early 1990s, I was working as an apartment manager in Columbia, MO. Early one evening, I realized I was going to be late walking to meet a friend. So I started trotting down the street through a mixed neighborhood. I heard some females shout something like, “Let’s get her!” and realized a group of young black women was chasing me while hollering racial remarks. They caught up with me and surrounded me, forcing me to stop. Just then the leader said, “Oh, it’s you!” It was one of my tenants. She turned to her friends and said, “She’s my landlady, it’s OK, she’s cool.” We chatted a moment, with me wisely suppressing my anger at realizing they’d chased me down just because I was a white woman.
I have no idea what they would have done if my tenant hadn’t vouched for me. But the worst beating I ever saw was one given to a white woman who’d paid too much attention to a black man at a bar there in Columbia. His black girlfriend and her black friends beat the white woman’s face to a pulp.
I think this is a fairly common experience for any white person going alone through a black neighborhood. There is within the black community an element that is always ready to pounce. Maybe one of them just threateningly suggests pouncing or gives you a threatening look as you go by and nothing happens. And then there are the unlucky whites who are set upon by blacks. But whether actual violence occurs or not, the readiness to pounce is there, an ever-existing potential. This is not what is called barbarism. It is lower than barbarism. It is the primitiveness of savages. This is the reality. The reality that is never spoken, because, as stated by Auster’s First Law of Majority-Minority Relations in Liberal Society, the more dysfunctional, dangerous, and different from “us” a designated nonwhite or non-Western group is, the more we must cover up their negative or alien behavior, and the more “racist” we are if we speak the truth about it.
This is why it’s somewhat misleading to describe the crime differential between blacks and whites only in terms of statistics. It’s not just a matter of the black rate of crime versus the white rate of crime. Percentages do not convey the full truth. It is a profound, qualitative difference between a more or less civilized white population and a black population that contains a significant savage element.
And this is why any white society that has a large population of blacks must exert special controls over the black population. A greater level of discipline, of police supervision, is required for the blacks. These are just facts of life.
I’m not saying anything here that is not universally known. The only difference is that I’m stating it out loud and plainly. Remember Joe Clark, the pioneering black school principal in Paterson, New Jersey?
Principal Joe Clark came into the national spotlight in the late 1980s for his controversial methods of management at Eastside High, an inner-city school in Paterson, New Jersey. Symbolized by his familiar bullhorn and Louisville Slugger baseball bat, which he toted as he patrolled the halls of Eastside, Clark maintained an environment of staunch authoritarian discipline at the school, regularly expelling what he called “parasites”: students who were disruptive, truant, or “hoodlums, thugs and pathological deviants.”
Society won’t put it this way, but Clark’s methods were necessary, and enormously beneficial, because the black population, especially its youth, are much closer to the savage state (which is just a more precise though more politically incorrect way of saying “hoodlums, thugs and pathological deviants”), and so require a vastly higher level of discipline, intimidation, and sheer physical assertion, to keep them in line. Anyone will remember this from seeing the stirring movie that was made about Joe Clark, a model of a tough, civilized leader bringing order to the jungle.
Clark’s drastic methods have won him the support and admiration of many students and teachers and the public praise of President Ronald Reagan, who said Clark represented the tough leadership necessary to manage inner-city schools in crisis.
Does anyone want to call me a “racist” for saying these true things? Go ahead. Make my day.
Barbarism and savagery are often used today as synonyms. This is a mistake, as the two words have distinct meanings and represent different levels on the scale of humanity.
Barbarians go around sacking cities, raping, killing, and destroying for the fun of it; but when they’re not sacking cities, which is most of the time, they behave under an ordered code of behavior.
Savages lack any code, at least with regard to outsiders, and are liable to erupt at any moment into causeless mayhem. If a non-member of their group falls into their hands, he is likely to be subjected to horrible torture and killed.
The Greeks under Agamemnon and Achilles besieging Troy were barbarians (though Achilles in his uncontrollable anger sank to the level of a savage, as when he dragged the body of Hector around and around the city behind his chariot). The Goths who sacked Rome in 410 were barbarians, though many of them were Arian Christians who conducted Roman women to churches where they would be safe. The Vikings who brought ruin to the high Christian culture of ninth century northern England were barbarians, though they themselves settled down and became Christians. The Normans who occupied Northern France in the early 10th century were barbarians, though 150 years later they had become the greatest spreaders of civilization in Europe.
The blacks who surrounded and beat Reginald Denny during the Los Angeles riots were savages. The blacks who attacked the Vancouver woman on the Oregon train were savages. The black women who surrounded Adela G. (though thankfully they didn’t do anything) were savages. Then there were the “merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions,” spoken in the Declaration of Independence.
Adela G. writes:
You write (regarding my being chased by black women): “I think this is a fairly common experience for any white person going alone through a black neighborhood.”
True. But, as I may have failed to make clear, I was actually going through a mixed race neighborhood, majority white, probably about a 70/30 split.
Perhaps it’s some lingering vestige of my former liberalism, but I can see where a white person going through an all-black neighborhood would be viewed with hostility by blacks. Since white liberals have convinced blacks that the latter are still marginalized in America, blacks seem to feel that since they aren’t allowed in white neighborhoods, black neighborhoods should be strictly off-limits to whites. (Never mind that the taxes whites pay often provide or subsidize the housing in those black neighborhoods.) But it’s worse than that. Blacks now commonly behave as though any place in which they reside or just happen to located at the moment is theirs and whites who venture anywhere near them do so at their own peril. The lackluster response of authorities to black on white crime only reinforces this perception on the part of blacks.
I lived for years in a mixed-race neighborhood, I would never do so again voluntarily.
You’re right. I didn’t take in what you said about your walking through a “mixed” neighborhood. I unconsciously assumed it had to be an all-black neighborhood for such a thing to happen.
Adela G. writes:
I keep telling you, I’m so glum because I can easily see that the liberal rot is so advanced.
It is the collusion and encouragement of white liberals with illegal aliens (particularly Hispanics), Islamists and blacks who’ve landed us in our current mess.
It’s one thing for a white person to be accosted in an all-black neighborhood. Most non-liberals understand how territorial all humans are. It’s quite another thing for a minority—an impoverished minority subsidized by the majority—to take over any neighborhood in which it finds itself. Blacks could never do this without the consent of white liberals.
Just imagine, if you will, how much more blacks will be emboldened to do after the white liberals vote for the black, left-wing candidate.
On a non-violent cultural note, I’m already noticing far more dark faces on TV commercials, MSN and Yahoo! homepages and even the homepage of The Guardian Online. I trace this directly back to you-know-who’s rapid and horrifying ascendency. God help all white Westerners if he is elected.
P.S. Yes, I really am a silly female, unable even to type his name out of sheer disgust and frustration.
Jonathan L. writes:
And remember the Chinese exchange student who was chased into oncoming traffic by a gang of black thugs after one of them bragged to his buddies “Hey, watch what I can do to this guy”? In better understanding this very primitive sort of patrolling behavior, though, I find I can’t get too angry at blacks for exhibiting it, as they do not seem to reserve it only for outsiders, but practice it among themselves as well (think of the turf wars betweens inner-city gangs, or the endemic ethnic strife of Africa). This is simply the way they are, and it would make no more sense to become angry at them for being this way than it would be to become angry at Muslims for practicing a fundamental element of their faith (namely, jihad).
And regarding your interesting distinction between “barbarism” and “savagery,” I think this applies particularly well to Islam. Islam, in its higher manifestations, is a form of barbarism- it instigates its followers to invade, conquer, and despoil, but within certain limits and with the ultimate aim of incorporating its conquests into Islam’s own civilization. When successful it is able to sublimate the natural instincts of its adherents, who are themselves largely savage, into this project of world empire. Yet in its cultivation of an implacable hostility towards all infidels, it perpetuates in its followers their original state of savagery, which they are just as likely to unleash against one another as against non-Muslims (consider the mass graves of horribly mutilated bodies turning up all over Iraq, or the attacks on Muslim holy places and pilgrims by fellow Muslims). Though Muslims themselves would never admit to the existence of this vicious circle, to me it seems obvious that the blowing up of a mosque is as fundamentally an Islamic act (according to Islam’s own lower, more primitive faculties) as the building of one.
Jonathan L. noted the presence of both “barbarism” and “savagery” in Islam, but I think this interesting point needs to be articulated more closely to bring out the uniqueness of Islam.
I think Islam is a special case that strains Mr. Auster’s distinction between “barbarism and “savagery” but in the end does not break it. Mr. Auster’s distinction offers a helpful model by which to understand one angle of the uniqueness of Islam (which has many angles and dimensions). While other populations noted by Auster (Blacks, Vikings, Greeks, etc.) evince either barbarism or savagery, Islam combines them in two facets of its trans-national society that complement each other and work in different ways for the same goal of jihad.
The barbarism of Islam is represented today by the more concerted efforts of death threats, menacing public demonstrations, terrorist attacks and, in non-Western areas where they pursue ongoing conflict, of their more medieval paramilitary tactic of “razzias” (Blitzkrieg raids to terrorize and soften up a population). Of course, in a couple of hot spots (e.g., Sudan), this has unfolded into actual barbaric warfare. The savagery of Islam is represented by such phenomena as the “sudden jihad syndrome”, gang-rapes (mostly in Europe, and often including savage beatings of the women), the abduction and torture of individuals who are objects of Islamic hate (Jews, Christians, apostate Muslims, or as in the case of Kriss Donald in England, simply a white boy), the lynching of random Hindus and African Christians often occurring directly after Friday mosque prayers, the rioting in France and Holland, etc.
The nuance I think Jonathan L. did not sufficiently explicate is that the savagery component among Muslims is not merely a matter of a state of civilizational retardation that just happens to co-exist among other features of Islam, but is also understood—in various degrees ranging from explicitly conscious to implicitly semi-conscious—by a certain number of Muslims themselves as a part of the larger, perennial jihad. Thus, the unique feature of Islam is that savagery, while retaining its distinct features as Mr. Auster has clarified, is deployed and expressed in collusion with barbarism—and these two, in turn, are in Islam part of the warp and woof of an ideological blueprint for supremacist conquest far more concerted and sophisticated than existed among any of the Barbarian movements one can adduce from history.
Mike Berman writes:
Jonathan L. writes:
Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 13, 2008 11:58 PM | Send
I find I can’t get too angry at blacks for exhibiting it, as they do not seem to reserve it only for outsiders, but practice it among themselves as well … This is simply the way they are, and it would make no more sense to become angry at them for being this way than it would be to become angry at Muslims for practicing a fundamental element of their faith (namely, jihad).
Jonathan is getting near a fundamental truth here. While you stated above that it is somewhat misleading to describe the crime differential between blacks and whites only in terms of statistics, a correlation in racial tendencies towards savagery does exist. That Muslims are capable of acts of both barbarism and savagery conforms to the fact that Arab populations possess mean IQs which lie between those of blacks and whites.
Jonathan L.’s anger should properly be reserved for liberals. It is they who, in the name of equality, have the inmates running the asylum.