What do you get in a city populated by blacks and run by liberalism?

You get this:

The Washington Post reports:

Metro says that Metrobuses traveling in parts of Southeast Washington are being pelted with rocks. As part of a campaign to discourage this, police are distributing a flier reminding people not to throw rocks at buses or cars.

Actually the flier tells the young savages—though a bit timorously and apologetically—not to throw rocks at buses, and warns them that they will be imprisoned for up to ten years if they do. But the Post, in an unconscious fit of pure PC which sounds as if it were an PBS fund-raising appeal, characterizes the flier as “reminding” the savages not to throw rocks. This is the way refined, upper middle class liberals confront the Primal Jungle.

- end of initial entry -

Paul K. writes:

Future fliers:

A Reminder from DC Police—Looting and Pillaging Are Not Appropriate at the Mall!

A Reminder from DC Police—With Proper Planning, Your Robberies Needn’t “Go Wrong”!

A Reminder from DC Police—Easy on the Random Homicides, Please!

D. Tanner writes:

So the typical liberal’s anti-violence / anti-bullying campaign in this city is now butting heads against the liberal’s typical economic policies, apparently. I also wonder why the flier is only reminding the citizenry against throwing rocks at cars and buses. Apparently people and housing are fine targets?

David B. writes:

Remember this thread of nearly two years ago? It concerned rocks or concrete blocks being thrown off of an overpass onto cars passing underneath. Apparently in Washington D.C. it is easier just to throw rocks at cars and buses.

Gintas writes:

When I was growing up, Southeast DC and the adjoining areas of Prince Georges County were notorious and known to be a “no-go” zone. Someone told me a story of how he was riding his bike through there and he was spray painted.

What Metro needs is someone “riding shotgun” on their buses there.

Thomas O. writes:

I saw advertisements on the Metro buses in Los Angeles that were asking mothers not to throw their newborn babies into dumpsters, but instead to take them to the fire department, where they would be accepted, no questions asked.

LA replies:

Seriously?

Thomas O. replies:

100 percent serious. I was so shocked when I first saw that. I was having a nice dinner at an outdoor café and happened to look up and see a Metro bus stopped in heavy traffic, and there was that sign as an advertising banner across the side of it. It seems that that’s where their intended audience (Hispanics) are most apt to see them. Apparently these Hispanics do not use birth control, because they are “devout” Catholics, and get pregnant with babies they can’t afford or simply don’t want, so they solve that problem by throwing them away into dumpsters. The problem became so large that fire departments are now safe drop-off spots in Los Angeles for discarded babies. A quick Internet search found this piece (to back up what I am saying), but there are several others to be found.

I read somewhere else that the Attorney General had stickers made up for putting on the dumpsters themselves (that was in Santa Cruz County), but the garbage companies made a stink about it and prevented it from happening.

Will D. writes:

I have never forgotten the “rules of conduct” the MTA posted in New York City subway stations in (as I recall) the late eighties. Rule number one was “No destroying MTA property.” I knew immediately that if that was rule number one, it didn’t matter what the other rules were, because the game was lost. I was a nice, agreeable, conventional liberal back then, and continued to be one for some years, but I look back at my reaction to that list of rules as one of the first inklings I had that something was wrong not merely with the state of things but with the way in which we chose to understand the state of things.

January 9

James P. writes:

I note that the police flyer says to remind children not to throw rocks. One suspects that the “children” in question are teenagers who are adults from a physical standpoint. You may recall that Trayvon was often described as an “child” or a “kid” in the initial news stories. Here is an old VFR piece in which Indianapolis police helpfully advise local parents to “supervise their children” more closely so that they don’t shoot people at St. Patrick’s Day parties. Hmmmm, interesting children, those.

The flyer says that throwing rocks at buses is “not just a prank.” The word “just” is interesting, implying as it does that throwing rocks is at some level a bit of lighthearted childish mischief. But so often we see serious and potentially lethal actions downgraded to “pranks” in the news because non-whites commit them—for example, dropping shopping carts on women from high balconies, flash mobs invading and looting convenience stores, putting feces on people’s food, etc.

Reminder: Murder and robbery are not just a prank!

LA replies:

The implication is that if the rock-throwing doesn’t result in serious injury or death, it is just a prank. However, if someone is gravely hurt or killed by the rock-throwing, then the rock-throwing becomes a prank that “tragically went wrong.”

January 10

James P. replies:

They might as well argue that if you shoot at someone but don’t hit them, you are engaging in a harmless prank.

LA replies:

Well, that is more or less the attitude of liberals. Has a bicyclist ever rode very fast and close to you, and you yell, “Hey watch out!”, and he replied self-righteously, “Well, I didn’t hit you.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 08, 2013 05:14 PM | Send