Cops Arrest 2 Black Men Sitting In Starbucks For ‘Trespassing’: Video

Thanks once more for the tacit admission you have absolutely no tangible proof of bias against the trespassers And let me stress once more since you are unwilling to be honest, my citations on this have NOT been from blogs or opinion pieces. It's time to stop lying. You were informed to the contrary.
You know better and still lie.

And just by the fact that so many of your witnesses said the two loitering blacks did nothing wrong at all, were just sitting there, etc. shows what their testimony is worth. It's just worthless.

Everything they know about the defiant trespassing removal is formed by one single fact...the police led the two freeloaders out of Starbucks. That's all they know and all they need to know to conclude it was a pure act of racism (even though there is no proof of that).

 

The lies have been told by you. These guys were not trespassing, if someone comes into your home uninvited that's trespassing. Going to a business that is open to the public is not trespassing, so please stop telling that lie.

Let me see, the CEO, corporate office, police commissioner and mayor have all said these young men were mistreated. The witnesses in the store at the time of the incident their word is worthless, but blogs and opinion pieces from folks who weren't even there are truthful. Hell you can't even get a comment from Holly Hylton on why she called he police.

They were there before the police arrived, so why wouldn't they know. Your argument is asinine, because you keep quoting folks who were not even there.

 

Oh and how did this happen? Perhaps magic? I know what happened. The democrats saw after the New Deal that more blacks would vote for them so they continued this type of policy. LBJ even claimed he would have blacks voting democrat for the next 200 years, except he did not put it so nicely.

 

I would give you points for pure stubbornness, if nothing else, except stubbornness in the face of a losing argument you can never possibly win is just mindless time wasting.

And you prove it with points like this one by you: No...going to an open business is not trespassing. And no one has ever said otherwise.
But loitering in a business without buying anything and refusing to buy any product or leave, when given that choice, IS defiant trespassing.
And you know it, even if you can't bring yourself to admit it. You just make yourself seem petty and simplistic.

Holly Hylon's reason for phoning in the cops was plainly stated in her 911 call. And you know that too, so we have a comment.

The material I have cited addresses the issue of Starbucks cracking down on parasites and freeloaders at their businesses and doesn't mention this incident in Philadelphia specifically (it came out well before this case) but it's more than pertinent especially when people try to make this a purely race based issue.

It is not! But that's what race hustlers and those that specialize in racial animus do.

I've demonstrated why in their own words, the comments of bystanders in the Starbucks at that time, were unaware of any underlying issues, and therefore why their comments are pointless.
And, of course, again your repetitious false flag points are plain old garbage.

The CEO, mayor and police commissioner are all making self serving, butt saving comments, quite obviously because all they know
is black people were evicted from Starbucks and using their reptilian brained politithink response that is so bad the mayor actually said he "felt sick to his stomach" by the "racism" of the spectacle.
And with a 44.2% black population and incidents like the MOVE disaster (when an entire city block was burned down by police trying to evict John Africa and his bizarre cult) in people's memories I'm sure it does make him sick to think of what might happen to him if
blacks there got the feeling he wasn't 1,000% in their corner.

Why would people in Starbucks know about a private matter between the manager and the two freeloaders? No one raised their voices. The communications between the two parties were brief. No one announced on the loud speaker
that the racist manager was throwing out the poor maligned black hipsters. LOL...what ridiculous crap you spout.

Clearly by their own comments the poor guilty feeling white customers there had no idea what was happening except the police were removing two black customers! Period! They didn't know why. What's going on?
Why is this happening? What did they do? Clearly they are stunned and clueless.

They couldn't explain it at all except to attribute everything
to racism...just like you choose to do. They have no overview they way you do so they have an excuse at least while you have none!
None at all.

 

The back and forth has gotten old, these young men were not tresassers or looters, the company has pretty much said this manager was dead wrong on her treatment of these young men. Multiple folks have spoken about their experiences at Starbucks that falls in line with what these young men were doing, the witnesses who were in the store at the time have also stated as much. You can either accept this incident for what is or keep trying to make it something it isn't.

 

This is old and how many times has it been pointed out all these two trespassers had to do was buy something, anything, when loitering in Starbucks. They flatly refused and everything that came out of this mess is on their heads.

Well they sure threw her under the bus. No doubt there. However she was trying to enforce the policies management wanted her to put into place.

No doubt Starbucks put their own nuts in a wringer by allowing loitering in their place to begin with. And they've done it again by caving in so completely to race hustlers. But still, they tried to stop the trend and when someone comes over and asks you personally to buy something you have no grounds whatsoever on which to refuse.
In the end it was the overwhelming hubris and arrogance of the freeloaders (Nobody is going to tell me to buy some coffee) that did them in
though it's Starbucks who will be paying a price forever.

The two freeloaders may have a serious case of chapped skin from having so many political, media and Starbucks people kissing their butts.

Bullshit! How many times do I have to go over this? Repeating a lie over and over and over again is a cowardly ineffective way to make an argument.

You should know about that.

 

Here's more:

 

A well thought out commentary on the
Philadelphia Starbucks farce by a distinguished black community development leader (Robert Woodson Sr.). I would like to see someone call him a sheet wearing racist, as at least one poster has called people who expressed a contrary opinion to his on this matter.
Wow! Talk about an hypocritically intolerant clown.

The only question is, was this stink contrived deliberately to manufacture controversy, and give race hustlers an excuse to whip up
anger among the mob thereby giving themselves power?

Based on several reasons which I have identified that's what I suspect.
But of course without an investigation (which is not forthcoming) there is no way to be certain. But if I had to guess I would call this incident pre planned.

What is certain is Mr. Fred Hiatt of the Washington Post, America's second most ridiculous newspaper, has red lined the political hyperbole meter by claiming in the "arc of white supremacy" this incident at Starbucks follows in the tradition of slavery (and lynching and Jim Crow law presumably).

Which makes me wonder about the state of good old American bigotry when it is reduced now to holding black people down by requesting they buy coffee while loitering at Starbucks. Such a sad state of affairs for the white supremacists out there.

At any rate, the citation was a great catch and when everyone is insisting you must be a "hater" because your gut is telling you what so many people are shouting about is trumped up garbage and nonsense, common sense support exists out there though you'll never find it listening to bigots or in government approved left wing media accounts. Thanks Mr. Woodson...the truth will
set you free.

 

Update:

Two black men arrested at Starbucks settle with Philadelphia for $2

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...delphia-starbucks-are-settling-city-2-n870816

 

I saw that on the news about 15 minutes ago. Don't know why that's being considered an update. I heard that like last week.

 

On this thread, it is an update and not a bad outcome IMO.

 

There was considerably more to the settlement than just two dollars.

 

Testing....

 

Well, Starbucks has reaped what it sowed. As a result of changing policy about loitering in the wake of the absurd case of the two black men in Philadelphia that refused to buy product or leave a Starbucks, now the coffee chain has become a magnet for homeless people.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesal...cks-got-tangled-up-in-las-homelessness-crisis

And of course many customers are very upset their favorite coffee shop has become a homeless shelter with people bathing in the bathroom, smoking, snoozing in the big comfy chairs, etc.

Enjoy, Starbucks! You got what you deserved.

 

Here's more:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/starbucks-homeless-problem-1527114340



Link copied…
OPINION WONDER LAND
Starbucks’ Homeless Problem
No matter what you do to try to appease unhappy progressives, you will be wrong.
Starbucks’ Homeless Problem
PHOTO: ©ALEXANDER POHL/NURPHOTO VIA ZUMA PRESS

By Daniel Henninger
May 23, 2018 6:25 p.m. ET
648 COMMENTS
Starbucks has jumped the shark. To put that more precisely, American liberalism has jumped the shark.

In April two black men walked into a Starbucks in Philadelphia. They were there to use the bathroom, not to order anything Starbucks sold. They said they were on business. The manager said they wouldn’t leave.

The manager called the cops, someone posted a video of the two guys being arrested, and, needless to say, Starbucks instantaneously announced it would close its more than 8,000 U.S. stores May 29 so all of its employees could undergo sensitivity training.

With any luck, someone will post a video of that, too. We always thought Starbucks’ baristas were the coolest, most up-to-the-moment workers in America, but who knew?

There’s more, but we need to take a breather to get a grip on what’s happening here.

Howard Schultz wasn’t the founder of Starbucks. But he was the inventor of Starbucks.

A native New Yorker who migrated to Seattle in the 1980s, Howard Schultz saw earlier than most that liberal politics were moving away from their lunch-pail roots and becoming a lifestyle.

Liberalism was black coffee in a white ceramic mug. Progressivism would be drinking coffee through white foam in recyclable cardboard cups.

Mr. Schultz turned “latte” into a household word, at least in some circles. He made it possible for guys to say out loud, “I’d like a grande latte,” without getting beaten up by their pals.

 

Here's more:

 

They will also need to train their employees on how to safely dispose of hypodermic needles and clean up bodily fluids in their new, open to the public, restrooms.

 

Havent read the 101 pages of posts. Read several articles on the original incident but haven't seen anything to suggest that the incident even involved race. Is there some evidence anyone can point to? Or, is the fact that the two men were black, all the evidence anyone needs?

 

Yep. Racism in the US in now over! I just love how we still don't actually know what happened in the Starbucks incident, other than two black guys were in breach of the shop's policy of having to buy something in order to stay and then they fought with the police before finally getting arrested! But no, it was evil, evil RACISM!

 

Was there really absolutely nothing to indicate racism in the incident, other than the fact that the two guys were black? What lunacy over an imagined incident.

 

Apparently the only reason that someone would ask a black person to leave a shop is because they are an evil RACIST!

 

Kind of like the argument that the only motive to limit marriage to men and women is a homophobic hate of homosexuals.