That thought that the whole Starbucks incident was a setup.
That those two men CHOSE to get arrested.
That they chose to sit there, and when they weren't noticed....when no one cared, they asked to sue the restroom.
Then, after making SURE they were noticed, refused to buy anything. (Hey, thought the dude needed to use the restroom.....yet he just sat there, despite needing to do the needful just moments ago....)
Then, after being asked to either buy something or leave, they both chose to do nothing. Just sat there, refusing to leave.
Then, the cops came, and again, offered them the chance to leave. They chose to be arrested.
And I'm not the only one that noticed and wondered.... WHY?
That those two men CHOSE to get arrested.
That they chose to sit there, and when they weren't noticed....when no one cared, they asked to sue the restroom.
Then, after making SURE they were noticed, refused to buy anything. (Hey, thought the dude needed to use the restroom.....yet he just sat there, despite needing to do the needful just moments ago....)
Then, after being asked to either buy something or leave, they both chose to do nothing. Just sat there, refusing to leave.
Then, the cops came, and again, offered them the chance to leave. They chose to be arrested.
And I'm not the only one that noticed and wondered.... WHY?
2 comments:
And yet, according to philly.com and a story at Philadelphia’s channel 6 news site, the men arrived at 4:35 for a meeting and the 911 call from the Starbucks manager was time stamped at 4:37. Seems like a ‘hair-triggered’ response to me.
In the final analysis, it all comes down to who you WANT to believe based upon preconceived biases. A person can choose to believe a web source, multiple sources, or not. Up to each individual. But as has been shown previously, a single web source, publishing false information that is then picked up and spread by others (citing the original source as “fact”) is not proof of what actually occurred.
Dale
Even so, IF (and it is an IF, INNIT? You gonna believe Philly.com or the other news site? One where, I noticed, you gave no actual web page....and neither site has a story that could easily be found in the search to corroborate your claim of the timeline...) the men refused to leave when asked, and again, when the cops gave 'em the chance. They also "The police incident report, obtained Tuesday by the Inquirer and Daily News, notes that the two men cursed at the store manager and refused to leave even though officers asked “multiple times.”" (from :http://www.philly.com/philly/news/starbucks-philadelphia-arrests-black-controversy-boycott-timeline-20180419.html) ANd according to this, they had been "Quietly hanging out while waiting for a friend, which contradicts you claim that the manager called immediately after they arrived: http://6abc.com/what-a-witness-says-happened-during-phila-starbucks-arrests/3342444/
So what was that about biases?
I stand by my suggestion that the men chose to make trouble and CHOSE to be arrested.
Post a Comment