Can you guess why these two black real estate agents were arrested while waiting for a friend at Starbucks?

If you guessed, "for having black skin," you win a prize!

A video of an incident at a Philadelphia Starbucks went viral after it was shared with text stating that it captured two black real estate agents being arrested simply for waiting on a friend at the coffee chain outlet:

Two Black real estate agents were arrested at a Philadelphia Starbucks for waiting for a friend who showed up as they were being handcuffed. The police were called by a barista because the men hadn’t ordered anything, yet.

Many of the white patrons at the Starbucks wondered why they have never been arrested while waiting to meet someone for coffee.
#BoycottStarbucks
#BlackLivesMatter

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/philadelphia-starbucks-arrest/

Video at source.

Oh, and THAT is white privilege. I don't care how poor the white people in there were, they wouldn't have had police called on them for waiting for a friend.

You’re absolutely right and this is a good example of white privilege. I do think it’s overused on here at times (you know my hatred of labels) or used in the wrong context, but this story absolutely terrible.

It’s like being back in the 60’s.

Being arrested for standing there simply minding your own  business  ???

Should be a good case for suing that police depertment in there somewhere..

And maybe getting that "Barrista" sacked, as well ?  (And just shows what a joke those overrated "double and triple price" Starbucks stores are, anyways --  as they don't employ genuine properly-qualified barristas, but quickly-trained pretenders..).


P.S.  What a bunch of whiny wimps those police were !   SIX cops to arrest two unarmed and unresisting and confused men..  (And, I was also surprised at how small those cops are --  I could easily lift the biggest of those muppets above my head..).

Edds' you weren't alive in the 60's ????

eddie wrote:You’re absolutely right and this is a good example of white privilege.  I do think it’s overused on here at times (you know my hatred of labels) or used in the wrong context, but this story absolutely terrible.  

It’s like being back in the 60’s.

Oh FFS! Please dont you go down that road of using that stupid meaningless expression


and what would you know about living in the 60s, pray tell?

gelico wrote:

eddie wrote:You’re absolutely right and this is a good example of white privilege.  I do think it’s overused on here at times (you know my hatred of labels) or used in the wrong context, but this story absolutely terrible.  

It’s like being back in the 60’s.

Oh FFS!  Please dont you go down that road of using that stupid meaningless expression


and what would you know about living in the 60s, pray tell?

Family, friends, who experinced this by any chance?

Just as I know and understand what happened in events in history

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:Oh, and THAT is white privilege. I don't care how poor the white people in there were, they wouldn't have had police called on them for waiting for a friend.

How is that white privilege?


I call that simple applling how they acted based on sterotypes

Which is what is the problem

I think you will now find laws discriminate against white people, when they are forced to have quotas of asian and black minorities

People should get jobs based off their abilities, not skin colour.

I understand why such laws are introduced because of racial discrimination, but all this does is continue such discrimination

What people are essentially claiming by white privilege, is that people are racist by the colour of their skin and that is appalling. We all have forms of privilege, dependent on the country we live in. Not the colour of our skin. Its certain people that are either racist or are taken in by poor sterotypes

To claim this, is insulting and in effect racist, when many people labelled black and asian do have jobs. Many are in Universities studying

Are many poor white kids privilidged, when they are the worst performers?

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/asian-Muslims-and-black-people-do-better-in-school-worse-in-work


Is it down to skin colour, using such poor reasoning?

gelico wrote:

eddie wrote:You’re absolutely right and this is a good example of white privilege.  I do think it’s overused on here at times (you know my hatred of labels) or used in the wrong context, but this story absolutely terrible.  

It’s like being back in the 60’s.

Oh FFS!  Please dont you go down that road of using that stupid meaningless expression


and what would you know about living in the 60s, pray tell?

I wasn't alive in the mid 1800's but that didn't stop me doing research and writing about it. Anyone with a brain can educate themselves about history, and the racial turmoil of that decade. So,yes, this seems to hark back to the days of Whites Only being emblazoned in the doorways of public places.

Having said that, the term White Privilege is getting to be a cliche, passed around like peanuts along with the current trend to be universally offended.

How about a pair of white trailer trash redneck hillbillies standing there in Starbucks?

Charles Dickens quote comes to mind. "This girl is Fear. This boy is Ignorance."

HoratioTarr wrote:

gelico wrote:

Oh FFS!  Please dont you go down that road of using that stupid meaningless expression


and what would you know about living in the 60s, pray tell?

I wasn't alive in the mid 1800's but that didn't stop me doing research and writing about it.    Anyone with a brain can educate themselves about history, and  the racial turmoil of that decade.   So,yes, this seems to hark back to the days of Whites Only being emblazoned in the doorways of public places.  

Having said that, the term White Privilege is getting to be a cliche, passed around like peanuts along with the current trend to be universally offended.

How about a pair of white trailer trash redneck hillbillies standing there in Starbucks?  

Charles Dickens quote comes to mind.  "This girl is Fear.   This boy is Ignorance."  

It seemed like vile racism pure and simple

If it were two white folks who hadnt ordered anything yet they would not have called the police, I feel sure of that

it seems to me that someone automatically thought they were up to no good just by sitting quietly at a table

why? cos they iz black

it's depressing

gelico wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

I wasn't alive in the mid 1800's but that didn't stop me doing research and writing about it.    Anyone with a brain can educate themselves about history, and  the racial turmoil of that decade.   So,yes, this seems to hark back to the days of Whites Only being emblazoned in the doorways of public places.  

Having said that, the term White Privilege is getting to be a cliche, passed around like peanuts along with the current trend to be universally offended.

How about a pair of white trailer trash redneck hillbillies standing there in Starbucks?  

Charles Dickens quote comes to mind.  "This girl is Fear.   This boy is Ignorance."  

It seemed like vile racism pure and simple

If it were two white folks who hadnt ordered anything yet they would  not have called the police, I feel sure of that

it seems to me that someone automatically thought they were up to no good just by sitting quietly at a table

why?  cos they iz black

it's depressing

Who knows if the person who called the police hasn't been threatened before and was feeling nervous? It is depressing. What's really depressing is that we distrust each other so much but often have our reasons. Just reading the news can put the fear of God into you.

HoratioTarr wrote:

gelico wrote:


It seemed like vile racism pure and simple

If it were two white folks who hadnt ordered anything yet they would  not have called the police, I feel sure of that

it seems to me that someone automatically thought they were up to no good just by sitting quietly at a table

why?  cos they iz black

it's depressing

Who knows if the person who called the police hasn't been threatened  before and was feeling nervous?    It is depressing.   What's really depressing is that we distrust each other so much but often have our reasons.   Just reading the news can put the fear of God into you.

I don't buy that one at all.

If they had been threatened before by the men who were there then they could have been banned.

If they hadn't been then there is no excuse whatsoever.

All the witnesses said they had done nothing whatsoever wrong at all

Those men have every right imo to be suing there arses big time

gelico wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Who knows if the person who called the police hasn't been threatened  before and was feeling nervous?    It is depressing.   What's really depressing is that we distrust each other so much but often have our reasons.   Just reading the news can put the fear of God into you.

I don't buy that one at all.

If they had been threatened before by the men who were there then they could have been banned.

If they hadn't been then there is no excuse whatsoever.

All the witnesses said they had done nothing whatsoever wrong at all

Those men have every right imo to  be suing there arses big time

You dont buy that at all, but buy a claim to Hilary Clinton being part of a peado gang

Priceless

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:Oh, and THAT is white privilege. I don't care how poor the white people in there were, they wouldn't have had police called on them for waiting for a friend.

Perhaps a more appropriate term would be "white nationalism", because this appears to be a disease that exists throughout a large part of the general white population in the US...especially those affected by southern ideology. This behavior is a cultural pattern, not just one individual's bad decision.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:Oh, and THAT is white privilege. I don't care how poor the white people in there were, they wouldn't have had police called on them for waiting for a friend.

Perhaps a more appropriate term would be "white nationalism", because this appears to be a disease that exists throughout a large part of the general white population in the US...especially those affected by southern ideology.  This behavior is a cultural pattern, not just one individual's bad decision.

Now that is better Quill and makes sense to speak of nationalism and not privilege, though around a minority of the US white population.

If it was a majority, then the KKK would be in power

HoratioTarr wrote:

gelico wrote:


It seemed like vile racism pure and simple

If it were two white folks who hadnt ordered anything yet they would  not have called the police, I feel sure of that

it seems to me that someone automatically thought they were up to no good just by sitting quietly at a table

why?  cos they iz black

it's depressing

Who knows if the person who called the police hasn't been threatened  before and was feeling nervous?    It is depressing.   What's really depressing is that we distrust each other so much but often have our reasons.   Just reading the news can put the fear of God into you.

Indeed, who knows? It seems that before raising an issue, there ought to be some evidence that the issue exists. The "who knows if..." comment has been the basis of a lot of fake news stories these days.

Maybe we ought to avoid that tact, unless and until there is the probable cause to raise it.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Perhaps a more appropriate term would be "white nationalism", because this appears to be a disease that exists throughout a large part of the general white population in the US...especially those affected by southern ideology.  This behavior is a cultural pattern, not just one individual's bad decision.

Now that is better Quill and makes sense to speak of nationalism and not privilege, though around a minority of the US white population.

If it was a majority, then the KKK would be in power

You might be surprised that I hear and listen to you now and then, Didge. I use critical comments to refine my arguments all the time. It helps me understand my audience, and tailor my communications.

This "white privilege" nonsense is imported from America, and I hope Brits don't start using that silly phrase. There's nothing privileged about not being arrested at Starbucks anyway.

Raggamuffin wrote:This "white privilege" nonsense is imported from America, and I hope Brits don't start using that silly phrase. There's nothing privileged about not being arrested at Starbucks anyway.

Well, if white privilege doesn't exist in Britain there's no reason to mention it.  I would point out that the Americans who started the institution of white privilege in America, were Brits when they started it.  Moreover, many of the slave ships that brought the institution to America were British.

That gives one pause to reflect if maybe...

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:This "white privilege" nonsense is imported from America, and I hope Brits don't start using that silly phrase. There's nothing privileged about not being arrested at Starbucks anyway.

Well, if white privilege doesn't exist in Britain there's no reason to mention it.  I would point out that the Americans who started the institution of white privilege in America, were Brits when they started it.  Moreover, many of the slave ships that brought the institution to America were British.

That gives one pause to reflect if maybe...

It's a pity that eddie has started using the phrase. I hope it doesn't catch on here.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well, if white privilege doesn't exist in Britain there's no reason to mention it.  I would point out that the Americans who started the institution of white privilege in America, were Brits when they started it.  Moreover, many of the slave ships that brought the institution to America were British.

That gives one pause to reflect if maybe...

It's a pity that eddie has started using the phrase. I hope it doesn't catch on here.

I agree there is less 'white privilege' over there.  When I was in the UK I marveled at how whites and blacks got along, at least in London.  Not at all like Alabama or Louisiana.

However, when I mentioned it hereI got beaten up most severely.  

gelico wrote:

eddie wrote:You’re absolutely right and this is a good example of white privilege.  I do think it’s overused on here at times (you know my hatred of labels) or used in the wrong context, but this story absolutely terrible.  

It’s like being back in the 60’s.

Oh FFS!  Please dont you go down that road of using that stupid meaningless expression


and what would you know about living in the 60s, pray tell?

'Jeeze', you really are a fucking idiot, Gelico....

Better that you had stayed quite, and let everybody think you're a clueless racist dolt..

Then hit your keyboard, and prove it.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Perhaps a more appropriate term would be "white nationalism", because this appears to be a disease that exists throughout a large part of the general white population in the US...especially those affected by southern ideology.  This behavior is a cultural pattern, not just one individual's bad decision.

Now that is better Quill and makes sense to speak of nationalism and not privilege, though around a minority of the US white population.

If it was a majority, then the KKK would be in power

I agree with both of you here...

When I hear the term "white privilege", I am reminded of the US a d Oz in the 1960s, and South Africa and Rhodesia in the 1970s..

Many of those people relaunching and over-using that terminology now only seem to be in their 20s and 30s; throwing around claims and insults a lot quicker than their parents did before them.

(P.S. and from their idiotic outbursts above, I still consider Gelico and Horatio to be clueless dolts on this issue, totally ignorant on what is happening all around them, often showing their own inherent racist and xenophobic leanings..).

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Didge wrote:

Now that is better Quill and makes sense to speak of nationalism and not privilege, though around a minority of the US white population.

If it was a majority, then the KKK would be in power

I agree with both of you here...

When I hear the term "white privilege", I am reminded of the US a d Oz in the 1960s, and South Africa and Rhodesia in the 1970s..

Many of those people relaunching and over-using that terminology now only seem to be in their 20s and 30s;  throwing around claims and insults a lot quicker than their parents did before them.

(P.S.  and from their idiotic outbursts above, I still consider Gelico and Horatio to be clueless dolts on this issue, totally ignorant on what is happening all around them, often showing their own inherent racist and xenophobic leanings..).

You just agreed with Gelico that the phrase "white privilege" is overused.

I've never been in a starbucks, but I would think that the seating is provided for paying customers only... not a waiting room for anyone to just sit around in for as long as they like without buying something...!


Sounds like a set up to me...!


I wonder how long they'd been sitting in there? And how many times they had been told that seating was for paying customers only, and that they must buy something or leave the premises...!?


I bet the woman filming it was in on it all... and the friend was in on it too, walking in right on time, after waiting outside for ages until cops arrived...!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:I've never been in a starbucks, but I would think that the seating is provided for paying customers only... not a waiting room for anyone to just sit around in for as long as they like without buying something...!

Sounds like a set up to me...!

I wonder how long they'd been sitting in there? And how many times they had been told that seating was for paying customers only, and that they must buy something or leave the premises...!?

I bet the woman filming it was in on it all... and the friend was in on it too, walking in right on time, after waiting outside for ages until cops arrived...!!!

In fact, tommy, Starbuck's business model is 'come in, sit down with your computers, and maybe buy a coffee, maybe not.' They encourage customers to think of the place as more than a point of purchase, but as a hang-out.

Lest anyone think's I was critical of ed's use of "white privilege", I wasn't. I was merely saying that 'white nationalism' is more appropriate because this isn't a one-off experience. This nasty attitude toward blacks is what is behind the many shootings of black men. This is proof that had we not had the Birmingham sit-ins, and Rosa Parks with buses, we'd still be segregating like nothing ever happened.

Shame on the Philadelphia Police. Shame on the CEO of Starbucks. He apologized, well and good, but he should have had that branch manager up before the cameras, admitting to the nation that he is a racist, and apologizing to the nation for it. This is an affront to whites as well as blacks...thinking that we need to experience this kind of institutional racism in this day and age.

Bullshit!!!


Do you really think that they are going to let non paying public occupy their in house seating, while paying customers are wanting to sit down in there, but having to stand up instead...!!!???


I bet this whole thing was a set up... and that the 2 had been told numerous times to buy something or leave!!!


Snopes = bullshit

Tommy Monk wrote:Bullshit!!!

Do you really think that they are going to let non paying public occupy their in house seating, while paying customers are wanting to sit down in there, but having to stand up instead...!!!???

I bet this whole thing was a set up... and that the 2 had been told numerous times to buy something or leave!!!

Snopes = bullshit

You're the only one spouting bullshit here, Tommy...

First off, you admit to never having been in a Starbucks..

Then you facetiously claim "set up" with no actual basis to your claim, and state that "Snopes = bullshit", even though they have much more credence than your own usual and favoured sources.

Tommy Monk wrote:Bullshit!!!

Do you really think that they are going to let non paying public occupy their in house seating, while paying customers are wanting to sit down in there, but having to stand up instead...!!!???

I bet this whole thing was a set up... and that the 2 had been told numerous times to buy something or leave!!!

Snopes = bullshit

It's their business model, nonce.  You keep dealing in 20-year old platitudes, and normal is not their stock in trade.

They convey that their cafe is your office away from home, for people who work without a work site or office.  That's why Starbuck's has Wi-Fi.  People come in and spend all-day on their computers.  They encourage it.

They only reason they resorted to 'trespassing' this time, is they are racist cock-suckers. Get it?

And, with many Starbucks coffee shops being franchised businesses, the extent of these problems will probably vary widely from one region to another...

Indeed, you will probably find a few Starbucks franchises in some regions --  especially in places like Oz, Brazil, Britain and parts of Europe  --  not only being staffed with people from African/Negro and Asian ethnicities, but also owned by various 'ethnic' franchisees..

Showing up weaknesses in Starbucks overall corporate governance, that they even allow situations like this to arise in some of their shops in the first place.

Was a set up... bet they were sitting there ages and had been told numerous times to buy something or leave!!!

Starbucks has apologised to two black men who were arrested while waiting for a friend at one of its branches in Philadelphia.

Cellphone footage shows the pair being placed in handcuffs and led quietly from the store while perplexed onlookers can be heard saying they had done nothing wrong.

An apology issued at the weekend was not enough to prevent demonstrators gathering to highlight Thursday incident and what they said was yet another example of how black people are still treated as second-class citizens in America.

It is an embarrassing episode to a coffee chain that styles itself as a hang-out for people to meet and linger.

Kevin Johnson, Starbucks chief executive, described the video as "hard to watch" and the arrests as a "reprehensible outcome".


[ltr]
View image on Twitter
[/ltr]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/16/starbucks-apologises-outrage-grows-arrest-two-black-men-waited/

Apologise was the easiest thing to do...

To put the issue in stark relief, a woman customer who was there at the time said she had been there for over an hour, just hanging out, and no one said a thing to her.  SHE WAS WHITE.  This is proof that the gentlemen were arrested for being black.  It wasn't anything they had done.  The only difference between them and the woman is they were black.

BTW, Kevin Johnson, CEO of Starbucks, looked pathetic this morning on Good Morning America, as he touted highfalutin, abstract goals and programs, but didn't address the issue.  Fire the manager.  The only way that racists will understand, is if you get into their pocketbooks.

BOYCOTT STARBUCKS!

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Bullshit!!!

Do you really think that they are going to let non paying public occupy their in house seating, while paying customers are wanting to sit down in there, but having to stand up instead...!!!???

I bet this whole thing was a set up... and that the 2 had been told numerous times to buy something or leave!!!

Snopes = bullshit

It's their business model, nonce.  You keep dealing in 20-year old platitudes, and normal is not their stock in trade.

They convey that their cafe is your office away from home, for people who work without a work site or office.  That's why Starbuck's has Wi-Fi.  People come in and spend all-day on their computers.  They encourage it.

They only reason they resorted to 'trespassing' this time, is they are racist cock-suckers.  Get it?

There was no need for that.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It's their business model, nonce.  You keep dealing in 20-year old platitudes, and normal is not their stock in trade.

They convey that their cafe is your office away from home, for people who work without a work site or office.  That's why Starbuck's has Wi-Fi.  People come in and spend all-day on their computers.  They encourage it.

They only reason they resorted to 'trespassing' this time, is they are racist cock-suckers.  Get it?

There was no need for that.

To respond would be gratuitous.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

There was no need for that.

To respond would be gratuitous.

Calling Tommy a paedophile is disgusting, so get off your high horse.

Tommy Monk wrote:Bullshit!!!


Do you really think that they are going to let non paying public occupy their in house seating, while paying customers are wanting to sit down in there, but having to stand up instead...!!!???


I bet this whole thing was a set up... and that the 2 had been told numerous times to buy something or leave!!!


Snopes = bullshit

Tommy there was a few people in there but there were loads of empty seats. Clearly that was not the case at all.

gelico wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:
Bullshit!!!

Do you really think that they are going to let non paying public occupy their in house seating, while paying customers are wanting to sit down in there, but having to stand up instead...!!!???

I bet this whole thing was a set up... and that the 2 had been told numerous times to buy something or leave!!!

Snopes = bullshit

Tommy there was a few people in there but there were loads of empty seats.  Clearly that was not the case at all.

Tommy is obviously simply and stubbornly 'acting the idiot' here today...

As he often does when he's clearly already lost the argument..

I was in a pub a few weeks ago for a quick couple of pints of ale... there was a bloke sitting in the corner by the window, the manager said he had been there for about half hour but hadn't bought a drink or anything... he was told a couple of times by staff that he couldn't just carry on sitting there without buying a drink or food etc and that he had to leave... he still carried on sitting there without buying anything, and eventually police turned up and moved him on...


The police told him that he was to leave or he would be arrested...


He was a white bloke...


If he had been sitting with other paying customers without a drink, or if he was known by staff as a regular visiting customer but hadn't bought a drink that time, then I'm sure he would have been ok sitting there for the while... he wouldn't have been told to leave... and police wouldn't have been called...!


For those who think the two in op were getting picked on unfairly... try a little test... you and a friend go into a coffee shop or some other drink/food type place and sit down at a table without ordering anything... then when asked to order, say that you will be ordering but just waiting for a friend to arrive... then see how long you can keep sitting there saying the same thing to the staff before they tell you to leave... and see how long it takes before the police arrive...!!!


Because I guarantee you that you will be told to leave and that the police will then arrive soon after!!!


Go on... give it a try and see what happens...!?


Let us know how you get on...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:I was in a pub a few weeks ago for a quick couple of pints of ale... there was a bloke sitting in the corner by the window, the manager said he had been there for about half hour but hadn't bought a drink or anything... he was told a couple of times by staff that he couldn't just carry on sitting there without buying a drink or food etc and that he had to leave... he still carried on sitting there without buying anything, and eventually police turned up and moved him on...

The police told him that he was to leave or he would be arrested...

He was a white bloke...

It was a pub, right?  Over here that's called 'pushing alcohol' and it's illegal in many jurisdictions.  In fact, pub owners don't do it because it exposes them to dram-shop liability...when the guy leaves and gets into a drunk-driving accident, the pub is liable.  Much better to let them go slowly and evenly.

Starbuck's is a coffee-shop.  Different thing altogether, tho both encourage hanging around. Both make their money by encouraging people to linger, enjoy the ambiance, or music, and leisurely order drinks and sandwiches, etc. Much more money if people stay, than if they go.

In this case, the gentlemen were indeed waiting for the third friend. Presumably, then, they would all have ordered lunch, etc. It was clearly a racially motivated act.

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:I was in a pub a few weeks ago for a quick couple of pints of ale... there was a bloke sitting in the corner by the window, the manager said he had been there for about half hour but hadn't bought a drink or anything... he was told a couple of times by staff that he couldn't just carry on sitting there without buying a drink or food etc and that he had to leave... he still carried on sitting there without buying anything, and eventually police turned up and moved him on...

The police told him that he was to leave or he would be arrested...

He was a white bloke...

It was a pub, right?  Over here that's called 'pushing alcohol' and it's illegal in many jurisdictions.  In fact, pub owners don't do it because it exposes them to dram-shop liability...when the guy leaves and gets into a drunk-driving accident, the pub is liable.  Much better to let them go slowly and evenly.

Starbuck's is a coffee-shop.  Different thing altogether, tho both encourage hanging around.

Eh? Tommy said the man hadn't bought a drink, so how could he leave when he was drunk?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It was a pub, right?  Over here that's called 'pushing alcohol' and it's illegal in many jurisdictions.  In fact, pub owners don't do it because it exposes them to dram-shop liability...when the guy leaves and gets into a drunk-driving accident, the pub is liable.  Much better to let them go slowly and evenly.

Starbuck's is a coffee-shop.  Different thing altogether, tho both encourage hanging around.

Eh? Tommy said the man hadn't bought a drink, so how could he leave when he was drunk?

Tommy is talking about a different jurisdiction, as I mentioned. The man was likely waiting for someone, and they they would have spent loads of money.

In public eateries it's bad business to discourage people from being there.

gelico wrote:

eddie wrote:You’re absolutely right and this is a good example of white privilege.  I do think it’s overused on here at times (you know my hatred of labels) or used in the wrong context, but this story absolutely terrible.  

It’s like being back in the 60’s.

Oh FFS!  Please dont you go down that road of using that stupid meaningless expression


and what would you know about living in the 60s, pray tell?

Well firstly, I can remember history and I do remember how black people were treated back then and even in the 80’s - I dated black guys so I know firsthand how the police treated them.

Secondly, this is a perfect example of how whites are treated differently to blacks in these situations (not so in the UK) and when I see a case of real white privilege I’ll say so.
There are many times when posters use that label here and it simply doesn’t apply imo.

It was a Weatherspoons pub... serving a wide selection of food and non alcohol drinks... even tea & coffee...


He could have ordered a glass of lime cordial & water for about 30pence... and stayed sitting there as long as he liked...


Just like the 2 in op could have ordered a tea/coffee each while waiting for their friend...


As is the normal way of things when friends arrange to meet up in a coffee shop...


It is normal to sit and have a cup of tea/coffee etc while waiting for someone/something... not to sit and wait to have a cup of tea/coffee until someone arrives...!!!


Unless of course, you are waiting to have a cup because the person arriving was bringing the ingredients!!!


It's not like they were meeting for a lunch/dinner date and they were going to be eating together, hence the waiting... as you would still order a drink of some kind while waiting... but they were in a drink shop while sitting there for ages ordering nothing!!!



Try it yourself, as I said earlier... 2 of you go in a place and sit down ordering nothing, saying waiting for a friend... and see how long you can carry it on for before police arrive...!!!???

Tommy I worked in a sandwich shop/coffee shop once and we didn’t ask people to leave if they were waiting for someone.
You’re chatting breeze mate.

I dont recon they were asked to leave because they were black...more likely cos they were estate agents......the most hated eployment in the world after used car salesmen

Lord Foul wrote:I dont recon they were asked to leave because they were black...more likely cos they were estate agents......the most hated eployment in the world after used car salesmen

You may have a point there....

Oi eddie...are you stalking me tonite ?