Mob of blacks attacks police officers in London

Two British police officers were injured after some 30 teenagers, some in school uniform, attacked them “like animals” after they asked a girl to pick up a piece of litter, officers said Friday.

As I said last week, one could run a website devoted exclusively to the ongoing manifestations of black savagery in the U.S. and Britain. This latest story, reported by Agence France Presse, not only gives the race of the attackers but quotes, without disapproval, one of the victims describing them as “animals”: “They were acting like animals, but I hate using the term ‘animals’ because they would not do that. Animals have a reason for doing something….”

Unfortunately, lot of blacks do have a reason. They hate whites. And it has nothing to do with anything whites have done to them in the past. Even if there had never been slavery and Jim Crow, the racial differences between whites and blacks, particularly the vast gap in intellectual abilities and behavior that lead to whites being far more successful and well-off than blacks, would lead, in any white-and-black society, to a decisive number of blacks seeing whites as their racially hostile oppressors. Just the other day, in a New York City bus, I politely asked a black woman who was talking loudly on her cell phone, “Would you lower your voice, please?”, and she immediately accused me of trying to bring back slavery and threatened to attack me physically. (The confrontation, which I’ll describe in detail in a later entry, went on for some time but ended peacefully, with the woman getting off her cell phone and playing quietly with her child.) Slavery ended 143 years ago. So why is slavery still so close the surface of the consciousness of so many blacks that even a mild interchange brings it out? In my view it’s because blacks are aware that whites are better off than them and, let’s put it frankly, above them in so many ways, and crying “slavery” and “racism” is the easy way for them to get back at the whites and exert power over them and equalize the playing field. Because of the conspicuous physical difference between the races, which by itself produces racial consciousness, combined with the significant racial differences in abilities and aspirations, I am convinced that there can be no end to black resentment of whites, so long as large numbers of blacks and whites live in the same society.

However, black resentment and hatred of whites, as well as black violence and savagery, could be substantially mitigated, even in existing, bi-racial societies, if we did the following: (1) stop empowering blacks, as modern liberal society does, which only makes the blacks more resentful (e.g. Michelle Obama), and disempower them instead; and (2) return to traditional morality and its strong disapproval of out-of-wedlock births. Blacks will never have the same abilities as whites. But if blacks were raised by married parents, so that black boys had a father, the black savagery that has become a fixture in the U.S. and Britain over the last half century would be greatly reduced. Of course, in Britain, white illegitimacy and welfare have produced white savages as well.

Here’s the article:

Mob of teenagers attacks British police over litter row
AFP—Friday, July 18

LONDON (AFP)—Two British police officers were injured after some 30 teenagers, some in school uniform, attacked them “like animals” after they asked a girl to pick up a piece of litter, officers said Friday.

One of the policemen was treated in hospital for bite wounds after the attack in a shopping precinct in Croydon, south London, Wednesday. The officers, aged 34 and 29, were on sick leave with bruising and knee injuries.

The teenage girl was initially asked to pick up a piece of litter. She did so but immediately dropped it again. When asked to pick it up again she became aggressive, and a group of teenagers gathered round and attacked them.

A number of men in their 30s and 40s and several women joined in the attack. All those involved were black, London’s Metropolitan Police said.

One of the officers who was bitten, and is now recovering at home, said: “They were acting like animals, but I hate using the term ‘animals’ because they would not do that. Animals have a reason for doing something….

A 15-year-old girl was arrested at the scene on suspicion of assault and bailed. When her parents arrived to pick her up, they complained about having their summer holiday interrupted, one of the attacked officers added.

The issue of youth violence has been highlighted by a string of fatal knife attacks in London and elsewhere in recent months, and was a hotly-debated theme during the campaign for the capital’s mayoralty in May.

Does the imperious complaint by the girls’ parents about having their holiday interupted ring a bell for you? It is a standard response by today’s entitlement-inflated black parents when their children are arrested for criminal behavior. After the famous Central Park “wilding” attack in 1989, the mother of one of the suspects showed up at the police station and arrogantly said, “Can I take my son home now?” The fact that her son had been involved in the gang rape, beating into a coma, and near murder of a white woman fazed the mother not at all.

And here is an extended article by Nicholas Stix about the larger-scale “wilding” in Central Part in 2000, when over a period of several hours about 50 women, all of them white, were sexually assaulted by a roaming mob of blacks and Hispanics.

As for the liberal angle on the 2000 Central Park incident, Jonathan Foreman wrote in Salon:

It became savagely comical as more and more photographs and videos of the alleged perpetrators were published in the papers and on TV. Even as newsfolk waxed concerned about our society’s shocking tolerance of violence against women, egged on by gleeful spokespersons from organizations like NOW, everyone pretended not to notice that nearly all the guys who soaked, stripped and molested up to 50 women in the park were Puerto Rican and black.

In its patronizing, racist way, the media pretended it had just seen the manifestation of some kind of generalized social problem—a conclusion unfair both to the wider society and Puerto Ricans and black communities.

There’s liberalism for you. If society is putatively unfair to blacks, it’s racist. If society covers up for blacks, it’s still racist.

—end of initial entry—

John D writes:

It simply astounds me that in a short 300 word article about a pack of rabid, teen and middle-aged black savages’ attack on police officers, they end up attributing it to a general problem of “youth violence.”

LA replies:

I’m less bothered by the “youth violence” in this story than usual, since the story identifies the mob as all black and uncritically quotes the officer describing his attackers as lower than animals. As a result, when the story gets around to the obligatory reference to “youth violence,” “youth” has already been implicitly defined as blacks who behave worse than animals.

By the way, I’m very pleased that the officer made that distinction between animals and savage humans .I’ve always felt it was very unfair to animals to speak of morally depraved humans as “animals,” since animals do not do the kind of things that depraved humans do.

John D. replies:

The problem with using “youth violence” even as a secondary identifier is that it dismisses the fact that they were joined by a number of middle-aged men and women, which relegates the violence to an issue of inexperience rather than one of a specific culture.

LA replies:

You’re right. The phrase “youth crime” in this instance not only covers up that it’s black youth, it covers up that it’s blacks of all ages. A multigenerational act of black savagery has been assimilated into “the issue of youth violence.” So it’s a super euphemism.

Greco writes:

There is a website devoted to black crimes in America. It’s called The Thug Report, sort of a pun on The Drudge Report, and it is laid out in that style. It proves your point big time:

The site is run by an old acquaintance of mine, Nick Kasoff, a libertarian activist in St. Louis and former radio talk show host.

Joseph L. writes:

You write:

“Just the other day, in a New York City bus, I politely asked a black woman who was talking loudly on her cell phone, “Would you lower your voice, please?,” and she immediately accused me of trying to bring back slavery and threatened to attack me physically.”

Another thing which is shown in your story is with what little seriousness this woman really takes the ordeal of slavery. A person who honestly believes that the Middle Passage was the greatest crime in history, as many blacks claim to, could never have compared it to a polite request to keep her voice down in a bus. We have an example where the word “slavery” not just could have been, but demonstrably was no more than an expedient formula.

Nonetheless, invocations of slavery can be expected to follow the pattern of Auster’s First Law: as white society hurries to make more and more adaptation to the culture of blacks, not only will slavery be blamed for a wider and wider variety of things, but the experience of slavery will be described in more and more lurid terms and its aftereffects will be found to be more and more devastating.

LA replies:

Exactly. Thus there is going to be a museum of slavery on the Washington Mall.

Alan Levine writes:

I’ve seen the “Thug Report” referred to by Greco, and it is not about just black crime. The author insists it is about urban crime, and if he shows a disproportionate number of black faces, that is just because blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime. He is blunt, but has no racial or ethnic agenda I could tell.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 20, 2008 05:43 PM | Send