25 blacks asked to leave because 1 white "feels threatened"

[NoNukes]

When you saw this thread did you know the source of it is a Facebook post?
What do you think of that?

I think that it being based on a Facebook post does not mean that it is not true.

Does it mean it is true?

Of course not. There is probably something to it though.

 

[Redfish]

That was pretty dumb of the waitress. She probably just lost the company a lot of money and potential customers when all she had to do was ask the "threatened" person to leave instead. Hit them where it hurts. In the wallets. If there is a case for punitive damages go for that as well.

did you miss the part about one of the blacks calling the waitress a white *****? maybe thats why they were asked to leave.

remember, liberals always edit stories.

 

[g5000]

She (the shift manager) said there’s a situation where one of our customers feels threatened by your party, so she asked us not to seat you in our section

The alleged incident began with a patron complaining about the group. Everything which followed is because of this initial complaint. The patron wanted the 25 people moved elsewhere. The patron did not want them nearby.

So what was the patron's problem with this group? Dining while black?

That seems to be the assumption the group made, and it isn't necessarily an incorrect one. Did the manager explain what the patron's beef was to this group? If not, that was pretty stupid of her not to do that.

 

[g5000]

The group was not tossed out for filming. They were tossed out for having the audacity to question why a single patron's complaint superceded 25 people's desire to eat there.

 

[Redfish]

Blacks Asked To Leave South Carolina Restaurant Because White Customer Felt Threatened (Video)



One person after 2 hours of waiting called the waitress a white *****. USMB Repubs scream racism Just kidding guys about the first part

if true, that was wrong, they should sue the restaurant. But you may not have the whole story, imagine that.

Uhhmmm...And I may have the whole story...uh...Imagine that. *shrugs*

were they asked to leave before or after one of them called the waitress a white *****? Is that why the customer felt uncomfortable?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

She (the shift manager) said there’s a situation where one of our customers feels threatened by your party, so she asked us not to seat you in our section

The alleged incident began with a patron complaining about the group. Everything which followed is because of this initial complaint. The patron wanted the 25 people moved elsewhere. The patron did not want them nearby.

So what was the patron's problem with this group? Dining while black?

That seems to be the assumption the group made, and it isn't necessarily an incorrect one. Did the manager explain what the patron's beef was to this group? If not, that was pretty stupid of her not to do that.

The answer to every question you have here is in your own post - the first three words.

 

[ClosedCaption]

That was pretty dumb of the waitress. She probably just lost the company a lot of money and potential customers when all she had to do was ask the "threatened" person to leave instead. Hit them where it hurts. In the wallets. If there is a case for punitive damages go for that as well.

did you miss the part about one of the blacks calling the waitress a white *****? maybe thats why they were asked to leave.

remember, liberals always edit stories.

I added that part and even said that I was joking. You still fell right into it.

No matter what happens some will see only what the black person did. That was the point I made being sarcastic. It really couldn't have happened any better. lolol

 

[ClosedCaption]

if true, that was wrong, they should sue the restaurant. But you may not have the whole story, imagine that.

Uhhmmm...And I may have the whole story...uh...Imagine that. *shrugs*

were they asked to leave before or after one of them called the waitress a white *****? Is that why the customer felt uncomfortable?

I added that part and even said "just kidding". It was sarcasm to show that even tho they were made to wait 2 hours then put out that some people would try to find MORE wrong in saying "White *****" than to waste someones time (2 hours) then deny then service.

Then you came along and proved me right.

To everyone else. I SWEAR I did NOT pay Redfish in any way to appear this stupid

 

[squeeze berry]

She (the shift manager) said there’s a situation where one of our customers feels threatened by your party, so she asked us not to seat you in our section

The alleged incident began with a patron complaining about the group. Everything which followed is because of this initial complaint. The patron wanted the 25 people moved elsewhere. The patron did not want them nearby.

So what was the patron's problem with this group? Dining while black?

That seems to be the assumption the group made, and it isn't necessarily an incorrect one. Did the manager explain what the patron's beef was to this group? If not, that was pretty stupid of her not to do that.

The answer to every question you have here is in your own post - the first three words.

those idiots don't get that. they are too busy looking for any outrage no matter how small or imagined

 

[Asclepias]

That was pretty dumb of the waitress. She probably just lost the company a lot of money and potential customers when all she had to do was ask the "threatened" person to leave instead. Hit them where it hurts. In the wallets. If there is a case for punitive damages go for that as well.

did you miss the part about one of the blacks calling the waitress a white *****? maybe thats why they were asked to leave.

remember, liberals always edit stories.

I think you missed the part where he said he was kidding?

 

[squeeze berry]

The group was not tossed out for filming. They were tossed out for having the audacity to question why a single patron's complaint superceded 25 people's desire to eat there.

would you bet your life on that?

 

[Redfish]

That was pretty dumb of the waitress. She probably just lost the company a lot of money and potential customers when all she had to do was ask the "threatened" person to leave instead. Hit them where it hurts. In the wallets. If there is a case for punitive damages go for that as well.

did you miss the part about one of the blacks calling the waitress a white *****? maybe thats why they were asked to leave.

remember, liberals always edit stories.

I think you missed the part where he said he was kidding?

Yes, I did. He got me. I admit it

 

[Missourian]

Why were they asked to leave?

For video recording.

Brown says while he was talking to the shift manager, someone in his group began videotaping the conversation. Brown says that's when the manager became upset and refused to seat them.

Complaint of racial discrimination at restaurant taken to Facebo - Live5News.com | Charleston, SC | News, Weather, Sports
​

Where in the article did it say that.

I gave you the link.

If you mean where in Luddly's bullshit Daily KOS Blog entry...that's a damn fine question.

Why do you think they left that out?

It's in the news report they sourced, which I linked.

NEWSFLASH: There is a reason we don't accept these sources...it's cuz they are full of shit.

 

[Asclepias]

did you miss the part about one of the blacks calling the waitress a white *****? maybe thats why they were asked to leave.

remember, liberals always edit stories.

I think you missed the part where he said he was kidding?

Yes, I did. He got me. I admit it

Wow! You actually admitted you were wrong! Theres hope for you yet.

 

[Katzndogz]

Sooo...from what I am getting from various sources is that this entire story is based on a Facebook post made by one person. No interviews conducted, no getting another side of the story - a Facebook post.
One story said there were "several issues that gave the manager reason to act"...but would not specify (as you would expect if they think there might be litigation)
So in a nutshell - the story is one-sided from one persons view, totally unvetted, and DailyKos made only one attempt to contact the company.

Exactly.

No explanation as to why anyone "felt threatened".

No evidence the person who felt threaten was white.

They were not asked to leave because someone felt threatened.

They were asked to leave for video recording.

Where's the video they recorded?

The entire story is bogus.

You mean it's another oprah handbag story?

Thought so.

 

[Missourian]

The group was not tossed out for filming. They were tossed out for having the audacity to question why a single patron's complaint superceded 25 people's desire to eat there.

The person who wrote the complaint said himself that they were asked to leave for video recording.

Are you questioning a black man's honesty and integrity because he is black?

 

[Redfish]

I think you missed the part where he said he was kidding?

Yes, I did. He got me. I admit it

Wow! You actually admitted you were wrong! Theres hope for you yet.

unlike most of the liberals on this board, I will always admit it when I am wrong. Doesn't happen very often, but when it does I will step up and take responsibility.

It would be refreshing if just one of our lib posters would do that.

 

[Annie]

read Duddley's article "contribution" again. They were asked to leave after they began filming the incident. Furthermore, it was the decision of the manager to do so, as their right. We dont know any other details than that. Which means we have us a Duddley story. Half to go with the half working brain.

Using your entire brain cell, you don't make sense.

How could there have been an "incident" to film if they had not already been asked to leave?

Which is it?

Facts please.

First off, I agree that if a manager, I'd have told the 'white woman' to choose another establishment and not have even approached the party of 24, $$ count.

Since all we have to go on is your link, the manager didn't do what I would have. Instead, he/she went to the party and said they wouldn't seat them in the section of the 'white woman that complained,' which implies they were going to seat them elsewhere, but when filming started, he/she refused service.

That is how TASB got 'there.'

BTW, based on the one side only, I agree they probably have legal recourse from the get go.

 

[Asclepias]

Yes, I did. He got me. I admit it

Wow! You actually admitted you were wrong! Theres hope for you yet.

unlike most of the liberals on this board, I will always admit it when I am wrong. Doesn't happen very often, but when it does I will step up and take responsibility.

It would be refreshing if just one of our lib posters would do that.

The minute someone proves me wrong I will be the first. I have no ego.

 

[NoNukes]

For video recording.

Brown says while he was talking to the shift manager, someone in his group began videotaping the conversation. Brown says that's when the manager became upset and refused to seat them.

Complaint of racial discrimination at restaurant taken to Facebo - Live5News.com | Charleston, SC | News, Weather, Sports
​

Where in the article did it say that.

I gave you the link.

If you mean where in Luddly's bullshit Daily KOS Blog entry...that's a damn fine question.

Why do you think they left that out?

It's in the news report they sourced, which I linked.

NEWSFLASH: There is a reason we don't accept these sources...it's cuz they are full of shit.

She had already told them that someone did not want them in their section before the videoing began. That is why it began.