Crucifixion, liberal-style

(Note, April 23: there is a complaint by a homosexual advocacy group, unconfirmed by local police four days after the attack, that the victim was a “transgender woman.” I discuss how that possible fact changes and doesn’t change the issue. Further update: it’s been established from police reports that the victim is a man, or a former man.)

The terrible video you are about to see is not inappropriate on Good Friday. The woman in this video who is beaten to the floor of a fast food restaurant, and then, in her helpless, stunned state, is beaten again, and then beaten again, until she goes into seizures, is the victim of a modern Crucifixion.

In the original Crucifixion, Jesus Christ deliberately delivered himself into the hands of violent men, in order, through his perfect, voluntary death, to transcend all fear and all violence, to show us how to live and how to die. In the nightmare, parodic Crucifixion of white America, liberal whites, in the name of a secularized, perverted form of Christianity and its man-centered compassion, with no understanding of what they are doing, and learning nothing from the resulting disaster, have liberated and unleashed the savage energies of a primitive people against themselves.

- end of initial entry -

Sam Karnick writes:

Not surprising, Larry, alas, but nonetheless appalling. This is the world our progressive overlords have made. Revolting. Have a blessed Easter despite the decline of this great nation.

Buck O. writes:

I saw that earlier on Drudge. I’ve seen a lot. I know what a fight is. That was evil. It turned my stomach, angered me. To see and hear men just watching. I was filling with feelings of revenge.

Mark P. writes:

Concealed carry … even if you have to do so illegally.

A reader writes:

Very powerful statement, Larry.

Another reader writes:

Kinda makes you wonder about desegregating those lunch counters, doesn’t it?

Jim C. writes:

Brilliant. Happy Easter.

Mark A. writes:

According to this article linked at Drudge, the attack occurred in Rosedale, Maryland. Per Wikipedia, Rosedale was 21.2 percent black according to the 2000 census.

This woman did not appear to use a bathroom at a McDonald’s in Compton, CA, or Camden, NJ. This appears to be a decent area. (Perhaps some Baltimore readers can chime in.) Thus, I’m not sure if this is an example of a woman delivering herself to be crucified, or rather that she was thrown to the lions as a result of the Marxist policies of the Liberal Elite: affirmative action, Section 8 housing, etc. (Although your point about crucifixion, liberal-style is brilliant and applicable to 70 percent of the white population.)

I recall reading in a book once a story about South Africa during Apartheid when an irate Western reporter asked one of the white policeman why the only road to the black neighborhood was so small and narrow. His reply: “That way they can only s**t in their own nest.”

LA replies:

The truth of the liberal crucifixion metaphor doesn’t depend on the precise circumstances which led to this women’s beating. Her beating was so horrible that it made me think of a crucifixion. But the liberal crucifixion is going on all over the country, wherever blacks and whites inhabit the same cities, continually. Consider the story posted just before this one, about a gang of 30 “teens” invading an Atlanta commuter train and beating and terrorizing the passengers. Think of many other gang attacks on commuter trains that have occurred in recent years. Think of the Knoxville Atrocity. Think of the Wichita Massacre. Think of the Central Park jogger. Think of the innumerable murders of naive whites who have wandered into black areas. Think of the murder of the two young Englishmen in Sarasota this past week. Think of Reginald Denny. Think of the white man in South Carolina who was knocked off his bicycle and kicked repeatedly in the head until he was brain damaged for life. Liberalism has unleashed chaos and evil, and particularly a racial form of chaos and evil directed at whites themselves, and whites never learn from this, they remain unconscious, in denial, and so keep being victimized. In the original Crucifixion, Jesus, who “knew what was in man,” knew what he was doing, and transcended it all. In the liberal parody of the Crucifixion, whites don’t know what is in man, particularly the black man, whites don’t know what they are doing, and keep allowing black violence on themselves. Far from transcending the evil that is being done to them, they are so immersed in liberal illusions and lies that they learn nothing from the evil and keep allowing it to recur.

The Crucifixion of Jesus Christ deivers man from hell.

The liberal Crucifixion delivers man into hell. It is hell.

LA continues:

Also, we could say that the liberal crucifixion is another dimension of the Eloi/Morlock idea.

Alissa writes:

That is NOT a woman.

That is a MAN. That is a transvestite. The black girls got crazy because that SWPL liberal boy was putting up a scene and wouldn’t leave the girls’ bathroom. The man, dressed and impersonating a woman, entered the woman’s bathroom and wouldn’t leave. He was conceited and the black girls got angry therefore beating him up.

While I HATE black dysfunction, that LGBTQ creature was an abomination.

LA replies:

That’s too much to take in. The beaten woman, sitting on the floor at the beginning of the video holding the child until the black girls came back and started beating her again, looked like a woman holding her child and trying to comfort the child and herself. Nothing about her looked male or like a transvestite.

But if what you say were true (and I will hold off on concluding that until I have definite information), it would be another form of the clueless self-crucifixion of white liberals, wouldn’t it?

Jeannette V. writes:

I saw, I don’t agree with that poster. If it is true that this was a man dressed as a woman I would sympathetic to a broken nose, but these black thugs were trying to kill that “woman.” As as you have pointed out before these black thugs were doing they typical behavior of kicking a person in the head.

It she was indeed a man dressed as a woman then she/he is also a victim of liberalism. All that GLBT “rights” will do is create more victims, because the normal reaction to perversion is revulsion.

LA replies:

In that early scene where the victim was sitting on the floor, I thought she was hugging a child. But now that I look at it again, I see no child. Also, I’m not longer as positive as I was that the victim is a woman.

I took out Allisa’s statement that the victim deserved it. I don’t allow that kind of statement here. This was an attempt to destroy a human being. It was the classic black feral behavior of knocking someone senseless to the ground, and then attacking the helpless victim over and over, typically with kicks to the head, as in the attack on Reginald Denny. Such attacks are not limited to transvestite men trying to use women’s restrooms, if that is what happened here.

April 23

LA writes:

This is very strange. According to a story posted last evening at the Baltimore Sun which a reader has sent:

Equality Maryland said the victim is a transgender woman and called on state Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler to step in and investigate the case as a hate crime. Police and prosecutors said they did not know whether the victim is a transgender woman.

The attack took place April 18, the article was written late on April 22: four days after the crime, and the police still do not know whether the victim is a female or a transgender woman?

In any case, if the police do not know such a basic fact about the victim at this point, then we do not know that fact either. The victim may be a transgender woman, but we don’t know.

However, if the victim was in fact a sexual freak using a women’s room and that’s what set on the attack, that would, on one hand, confuse the issue by making the victim seem less innocent; on the other hand, it wouldn’t change the issue at all, by which I mean the ongoing crucifixion of whites at the hands of blacks, combined with whites’ passive, clueless response to same, in which not only do they learn nothing, but they never even acknowledge that blacks are doing this to them.

This 2008 VFR entry (which is included in the entry, Black and other nonwhite violence against whites: a grim collection) lists various black on white attacks in recent years. Among them is the destruction of a man named Troy Knapp, which he incurred, not by the provocative act of dressing as a woman (or being surgically changed into a “woman”) and using the women’s room in a fast food restaurant with a lot of black customers, but by the innocent if naive act of bicycling through a black neighborhood. I wrote about it:

Here’s a classic black “wilding,” from my files (the article is also online at FrontPage Magazine). Two white men were biking through a black neighborhood in Charleston, and a gang of blacks suddenly erupted, beating one of the men on the head with pipes and trash cans and so damaging his brain that his life effectively is over. And Fox News, which is better than most because it at least reported the story, reports it in a passive, toneless way. Look at the headline: “A Black-on-White Attack Prompts Question Of What ‘Hate Crime’ Really Means.” This savage, sub-human destruction of a man’s life—and Fox says it prompts questions? That’s it? And look at the passive, affectless, helpless response of the victim’s friend: “It’s senseless. He didn’t do anything to deserve this.” Duh! Of course he didn’t do anything to deserve it. Is that the most you can say? No anger, no indignation, no demand for justice?

But such are the typical, effete responses of white people to black-on-white savagery in the contemporary West: “It’s senseless.” “It prompts questions.” Liberalism with its conviction of white racial guilt has deprived whites of the heart, the guts, the belief in right and wrong, the proud sense of membership in a nation that believes in right and wrong, that would enable them to respond like men to this act of racial evil. [text of Fox story follows.]

Aditya B. writes:

The Baltimore Sun seems to confirm that the victim was a “tranny.” Which does nothing to excuse this atrocity. Like Jeanette V. says, a broken nose would be “excus[able],” but this is way beyond that. This community is not sick. It’s simply primitive. We have a real problem. As Mao put it, it’s always darkest before it goes pitch black.

LA replies:

Thanks for sending the article. I’ve just posted a comment quoting the article and responding to it. But the Sun does not confirm that the victim was a “tranny.” To the contrary, it says the police have no knowledge that the victim was a “tranny.” It may be true, but we don’t know that yet.

Andrew C. writes:

I live in Middle River, Maryland, which is about a five minute drive from Rosedale. My wife and I frequent a Mexican restaurant not far from this McDonald’s. The area is not unlike parts of Prince George’s County, where twenty years ago. I grew up there in a suburb of Washington, DC.

The racial numbers, at the time, were about the same as Rosedale is now. Neither immediate area featured the archetypal housing projects, debris, graffiti and daily drug violence that one associates with the inner-city danger zones in much of DC and West Baltimore. What one did see, and still does, is the children of “middle-class” black areas often mimicking the thug/rap culture. To be fair, one sees this often in white teens as well. In both cases, they are usually harmless. In some cases, they clearly are not.

Three things strike me when surveying the seemingly increasing level of black-on-white group violence in everyday settings. The attacks are against those the groups perceive to be easy targets, often women or those in settings where they are clearly shocked to be in a violent clash. There are all sorts of analyses one can make of the psychology behind it, but over the years it has led me to be very aware of my surroundings and calculate what my actions would be in a certain situation. My work leads me to some potentially dangerous places, both at home and abroad, and I believe this sense of awareness is picked up on. Though I am not particularly big or menacing, I have sensed some situations diffuse before they started.

Second, there seems to be almost a fad of black female violence over the past few years. When this is targeted at white women or girls it can be devastating, as most are not naturally violent and unable, sometimes unwilling to defend themselves.

Finally, putting the two together has led me at times to consider my actions should I witness a case like this one in Rosedale. We rightly criticize onlookers for being stunned and scared into inaction (and are horrified when black onlookers and establishment workers are amused.) We should have some serious discussion, however, at what the proper moral response and probable (though insane) consequences of such would be, particularly in a state like Maryland. As a grown man, I cannot allow a vicious violent attack on an innocent person to continue in my presence. Regardless of the age, race or sex of the perpetrators or victims. Knowing what we know, intervening in an attack by young black women would be a very difficult situation. I have no expectation that words or any shielding of the victim would stop the attack. Only violence would.

So I pose to your excellent readership, bravado aside, to what level of violence does a man rightfully escalate to protect an innocent when the attackers are young black females? Were the attack against my wife or an elderly woman, the answer is clearly “whatever it takes” and damn the consequences. But in our current state of affairs and toxic political correctness and race relations, I would know full well that I am about to put myself in great legal jeopardy in addition to whatever physical danger there is.

Our society is indeed insane.

P.S. I must thank you for your excellent blog. My wife and I often discuss current events in a philosophical and decidedly un-politically correct way. These discussions are taking place all of the country in workplaces and living rooms, every day. Because many of us have just had it. Your blog, and the tremendous contributions of your readership, really tap into what a lot of us are thinking and saying. Much of your writing mirrors my own opinions, though not all. Keep up the good work and may your readership increase. I can only imagine the beating one takes for so publicly and constantly stating the obvious.

LA writes:

Related to the theme of the harm caused to whites by blacks is a study showing that white mortality is significantly higher in areas of the U.S. with large a black population It’s posted in the next entry.

Buck O. writes:

Little changes if he/she is either. I can understand the revulsion at discovering this person in their bathroom—certainly if he/she was acting out. But not the attack. Leave. There is no justification for these feral females to turn on another—albeit malfunctioning—human, in an effort to destroy him/her. They turned animal. The witnesses or spectators were soulless cretins. None of this violence was in self-defense or to protect. The attackers were simply offended.

What creature deserves death or destruction for being a freak. This is evil.

In the National Zoo in Washington DC, a local white tail deer (they’re everywhere—unnatural population growth) managed to get into the lion’s outside pen while tourist were watching. No one could do a thing, but they all watched. Naturally, no one would do anything. That was nature.

What is this?

LA replies:

Beautifully said.

LA to Jeannette V.
Thanks again for pointing out to me that there wasn’t a child. That was very strange. I could have sworn she was holding a child. It was some kind of optical illusion.

Jeannette replies:

When you said she was holding child I went back and watched it over and over again. I did see a hair piece being ripped off as well.

BTW the “sodomy lobby” is really going to town with the “trans” angle. And yet the only thing we have saying that this was really a man is that goons post.

Jeannette V. writes:

It look like it was a man.

The Smoking Gun reports—The police report identifies the victim as 22-year-old Chrissy Lee Polis, who appears identical to Christopher Lee Polis, whose rap sheet includes convictions for disorderly conduct, property destruction, and prostitution, according to court records. Polis told police that she was walking to the restaurant’s bathroom when she “got into a verbal argument with two black females” who “began punching her in the face with their fists and pulling her hair.”

And here:

The police report identifies the victim as 22-year-old Chrissy Lee Polis, who appears identical to Christopher Lee Polis, whose rap sheet includes convictions for disorderly conduct, property destruction, and prostitution, according to court records. The civil rights group Equality Maryland has identified the McDonald’s victim as a transgender woman.

Now as the article says, this is a 22 year old man going into the ladies bathroom where there is a 14 year old girl…. what a nightmare liberalism has given us.

LA replies:

So, there it is.

Jeannette continues:

LOL, this gets even more bizarre:

“The victim has been identified as Christopher Lee Polis and a male of Arab or Indian descent who dressed as a woman.”

LA replies:

I will repeat an anecdote I’ve told before. Once in the mid-’90s, a conservative acquaintance and I were on the phone talking about the multidimensional madness of liberalism. I threw out this rhetorical question: “How many perversities can be squeezed into a single situation?” He replied: “America is about finding out!”

Paul of Stuff Black People Don’t Like writes:

Regardless of what comes of the story in Baltimore, what you wrote about “Crucifixion—liberal-style,” nailed my thoughts completely.

The other day a reader sent you a letter thanking you for all your hard work and for opening his eyes. Allow me to do the same now. I’ve been reading you for quite some time and have come to realize that you represent the one voice of reason, steady and unwavering, in the so-called conservative movement.

Regarding Baltimore, a city I don’t live far from, you have two stories in your archives describing black-on-white attacks from the past four years, here and here.

That black people are now documenting black attacks on whites and other strange behavior and posting them on for the world too see, is amazing. Asians have no hang-ups when it comes to understanding the black underclass in America; neither do Hispanics. More and more whites wake up every day and because you (and other people) have put up a strong flag—with your web site—for people to rally around and learn of the greater threat to the West. This is why I think things will turn around.

There is never reason to despair.

I hope you have a wonderful Easter.

LA replies:

Thank you very much.

Alan Roebuck writes:

In “Crucifixion, liberal style,” you wrote:

In the original Crucifixion, Jesus Christ deliberately delivered himself into the hands of violent men, in order, through his perfect, voluntary death, to transcend all fear and all violence, to show us how to live and how to die.

But the primary reason Jesus delivered himself over to be crucified was to atone for our sins by propitiating the just wrath of God against us. As the hymn says:

What can wash away my sins?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus
What can make me whole again?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus

That’s the good news: God doing for us what we could not do.

Happy Easter, Larry.

Jeannette writes:

Did you read the rap sheet? It seems this victim has been arrested for prostitution and beating a woman. My God, how much more creepy absurdity can we roll up into this one incident? I feel like I’m watching a Monty Python commentary about liberalism….

I used to tell jokes about the double amputee shoplifter who was rehabilitated so he could do his old “job” again. I’m beginning to think this could actually happen …

Have a blessed Easter, Larry. I’m off to photograph several Easter Baptisms.

Ken Hechtman writes:

When trans-sexuals use the wrong bathroom, they’re not necessarily acting out. They could be following doctor’s orders. Respectable surgeons don’t do sex change operations on demand. Chop-shops in Singapore do that. Respectable doctors will require trans-sexuals to spend two years living as the opposite sex before they’ll do the surgery. That includes dressing and it includes public bathrooms. There’s a reason for the practice. It weeds out the people who aren’t serious.

LA replies:

Right. Responsible doctors only want people who are seriously, seriously insane to have sex change operations.

Jeannette V. writes:

I love your comment, “Right. Responsible doctors only want people who are seriously, seriously insane to have sex change operations.”

Why is it considered a mental illness to want one’s limbs amputated, but perfectly normal to want one’s healthy sexual parts amputated?

LA replies:

Liberalism says that human beings have no essence or nature, that they are not created or formed by anything outside their own will and desires, and that only what we choose for ourselves, including our sex, is genuine. So to say that the sex one was born with is not one’s “real” sex because it doesn’t match one’s “true” desires and preferences, to say that one’s sex has been unfairly or inappropriately imposed on oneself and that one must have a series of radical surgical operation to remove one’s sex organs and have artificial sex organs of the other sex put in their place, is is the ultimate and purest expression of liberalism.

April 24

James P. writes:

I don’t think it matters that the victim was a tranny. They attacked “her” because “she” was white, not because “she” was a tranny. It is ironic that attacking a tranny can be a “hate crime” but not attacking a white.

Andrew C. wrote:

So I pose to your excellent readership, bravado aside, to what level of violence does a man rightfully escalate to protect an innocent when the attackers are young black females? Were the attack against my wife or an elderly woman, the answer is clearly “whatever it takes” and damn the consequences. But in our current state of affairs and toxic political correctness and race relations, I would know full well that I am about to put myself in great legal jeopardy in addition to whatever physical danger there is.

In this situation, a white man who intervened would be attacked first by the black females, and then the white man would be attacked by all the black males who were standing around indifferently observing the original beating. What black could resist a “justified” beat-down of whitey, even when whitey was being a “white knight” for a helpless female? Don’t do this unless you are armed, willing to shoot, and willing to endure the social, legal, and economic consequences.

April 25

Donald M. writes:

The violence at MacDonald’s in various venues is quite ironic. A few years ago, MacD’s changed its media image, replacing the picture of MacDonald’s as a family friendly drive-in place to a ghetto inspired jamming place. Its TV commercials now feature distinct black voices with a rap beat.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 22, 2011 06:48 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):