South Carolina restaurant kicks blacks out

[Srboslavija]

http://www.live5news.com/story/23235524 ... o-facebook

From that source:

Brown says an apology was offered and a free meal for the entire group, but he says he's not completely satisfied.

"We weren't coming there for a free meal. When we came there that night, we were coming to patronize the business. This is not a situation where you can just give us a free meal and everything is ok because it's deeper than that."

Seeing that the restaurant tried to buy their way out of it with a free meal, it seems they are aware they were in the wrong.

A gesture of goodwill to a regular customer who feels wronged.

The restaurant gains nothing from dragging out the issue and having to deal with people like you, with the misplaced moral outrage and whatnot.

[Condunum]

Umm, the article you posted.....

Does it?

NORTH CHARLESTON (WCSC) -
Michael Brown says he was celebrating his cousin's last day in Charleston last month at Wild Wing Cafe in North Charleston. He says after his party of 25 waited two hours for a table, the shift manager told them there was a "situation."

"She 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, which totally alarmed all of us because we're sitting there peaceably for two hours," explains Brown. "Obviously, if we were causing any conflict, we would have been ejected out of the place hours before."

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.

"I asked her I want to be clear with you," says Brown. "I said so you're telling me I have to leave. She said I have a right to deny you service. I said so you're asking me to leave because you're upset because he was recording you, after we've waited for two hours, and after you've already pretty much discriminated on us, and she answered yes."

Brown says several calls were made to the corporate office in Mt. Pleasant, but he says they did not receive a call back, so he took to Facebook with this post Thursday.

I will never go to Wild wings cafe in N. Chs again! We (Party of 25 family and friends) waited 2hrs, patiently and were refused service because another customer (White) felt threatened by us. This type of racial discrimination is unacceptable and we have to put a STOP TO IT. The manager looked me dead in the face and said she was refusing us service because she had a right to and simply she felt like it. DO NOT SUPPORT THIS ESTABLISHMENT... PLEASE SHARE THIS POST... We need your help.

That caught the restaurant's attention.

"We got alerted through social media, so we always encourage our customers to respond to us or to comment on our social media pages," says Debra Stokes, the chief marketing officer for Wild Wing Cafe.

Representatives for Wild Wing Cafe say they immediately responded and spoke to Brown.

"We had a conversation," says Stokes. "It was a really good conversation. He and many of his family and friends were there about a month ago, and they are regular customers of ours. So, they were having a going away party, and they just didn't receive the experience that they have come to know and love."

Brown says an apology was offered and a free meal for the entire group, but he says he's not completely satisfied.

"We weren't coming there for a free meal. When we came there that night, we were coming to patronize the business. This is not a situation where you can just give us a free meal and everything is ok because it's deeper than that."

As of Thursday night, Brown said his post had been shared 900 times on business' Facebook page and his own page.

The only thing I see is this, "she asked us not to seat you in our section." I'm not even sure what that means.

Restaurants are divided into sections, usually according to how the divide tables between staff, but sometimes simply for order.

[Greed and Death]

Ummmm.....
Haven't you thought that maybe they were kicked out not because they are Africans? Maybe people were actually threatened by them?

So the restauraunt kicked out 25 people who were reported as regular customers because one person said they were threatening and somehow this is justified because somehow these regular customers who just arrived were making sorry little bubba's pants get brown.

No fuck that.

Indeed a claim of racism is a very insidious claim.
However, I do not think claimant has alleged sufficient facts to back that claim up. Further, those facts he has alleged seem to be beyond what he could have know at the time. Next his story is not internally consistent and this puts his credibility into question. Last it appears his group was kicked out for recording the event.

[Latinorium]

The only thing I see is this, "she asked us not to seat you in our section." I'm not even sure what that means.

It means she didn't want them to sit in her section. And restaurants usually don't want to start problems so they were not going to put them in the same section.

[Condunum]

From that source:



Seeing that the restaurant tried to buy their way out of it with a free meal, it seems they are aware they were in the wrong.

A gesture of goodwill to a regular customer who feels wronged.

The restaurant gains nothing from dragging out the issue and having to deal with people like you, with the misplaced moral outrage and whatnot.

No, an attempt to scoot out of the issue. Never, ever take free meals as gestures of good will. They are the go to response from management on almost every level to get people to shut up about things. The thought is that if we give them food, maybe they'll forget that we allowed one person's discomfort to remove them from the building.

I'll say it again, free meals are never a gesture of good will. It's what management does to get people out of their hair.

[Luveria]

From that source:



Seeing that the restaurant tried to buy their way out of it with a free meal, it seems they are aware they were in the wrong.

A gesture of goodwill to a regular customer who feels wronged.

The restaurant gains nothing from dragging out the issue and having to deal with people like you, with the misplaced moral outrage and whatnot.

Oh really now, people like me? What kind of people would that be?

[Condunum]

So the restauraunt kicked out 25 people who were reported as regular customers because one person said they were threatening and somehow this is justified because somehow these regular customers who just arrived were making sorry little bubba's pants get brown.

No fuck that.

Indeed a claim of racism is a very insidious claim.
However, I do not think claimant has alleged sufficient facts to back that claim up. Further, those facts he has alleged seem to be beyond what he could have know at the time. Next his story is not internally consistent and this puts his credibility into question. Last it appears his group was kicked out for recording the event.

Racism apologists never cease to amaze.

[Condunum]

A gesture of goodwill to a regular customer who feels wronged.

The restaurant gains nothing from dragging out the issue and having to deal with people like you, with the misplaced moral outrage and whatnot.

Oh really now, people like me? What kind of people would that be?

Racial-sensitives *nod*

[Condunum]

The only thing I see is this, "she asked us not to seat you in our section." I'm not even sure what that means.

It means she didn't want them to sit in her section. And restaurants usually don't want to start problems so they were not going to put them in the same section.

The restaurant decided it was better to move the group of 25 people who had been there for 2 hours instead of the other customer, who's party appears to have been smaller.

Because this is all to keep things orderly. Yeah.

[Luveria]

Oh really now, people like me? What kind of people would that be?

Racial-sensitives *nod*

It's rich coming from someone with this sig:

Pro: LGBT rights, love, choice, YOLO, separation of church and state, hugs, free will, equal rights
Anti: Homophobia, guns, inequality, genocide, racism, war, discrimination, sexism, Tsaraine

It's amusing that "people like me" see something wrong with removing twenty-five regular customers because of one person's complaint, because he felt "threatened", when the group was recording a video anyway, so why would they be recording their own incriminating actions if they were to blame? How does that make any sense?

I'd really like to know what was meant by "people like me".

[Greed and Death]

Indeed a claim of racism is a very insidious claim.
However, I do not think claimant has alleged sufficient facts to back that claim up. Further, those facts he has alleged seem to be beyond what he could have know at the time. Next his story is not internally consistent and this puts his credibility into question. Last it appears his group was kicked out for recording the event.

Racism apologists never cease to amaze.

If demanding sufficient evidence makes me an apologist so be it.

[Hebalobia]

It's an establishment's right to choose who they serve.

Not according to the law.

[Condunum]

Racial-sensitives *nod*

It's rich coming from someone with this sig:

Pro: LGBT rights, love, choice, YOLO, separation of church and state, hugs, free will, equal rights
Anti: Homophobia, guns, inequality, genocide, racism, war, discrimination, sexism, Tsaraine

It's amusing that "people like me" see something wrong with removing twenty-five regular customers because of one person's complaint, because he felt "threatened", when the group was recording a video anyway, so why would they be recording their own incriminating actions if they were to blame? How does that make any sense?

I'd really like to know what was meant by "people like me".

You're reading too much into it, Luv. It's not anything to do with you personally. He means anyone who's offended by this at all.

Racism apologists never cease to amaze.

If demanding sufficient evidence makes me an apologist so be it.

Because current evidence isn't enough to at least suggest fault on the restaurants part, nopenopenope it's always the customer's fault.

Give me a fucking break. You can hide behind what you want, you're either playing devil's advocate or you actually think there's no reason to be outraged. Which is a fucking stupid thing to think.

[Greed and Death]

The only thing I see is this, "she asked us not to seat you in our section." I'm not even sure what that means.

It means she didn't want them to sit in her section. And restaurants usually don't want to start problems so they were not going to put them in the same section.

Which raises a lot of questions of why. Was it race ? Was it I am having a quite meal and being seated next to 25 people will be distracting? Was it because the 25 people who had been waiting for two hours had waited in the bar and now and a little drunk ?

What I need is more information.

[Luveria]

It's rich coming from someone with this sig:



It's amusing that "people like me" see something wrong with removing twenty-five regular customers because of one person's complaint, because he felt "threatened", when the group was recording a video anyway, so why would they be recording their own incriminating actions if they were to blame? How does that make any sense?

I'd really like to know what was meant by "people like me".

You're reading too much into it, Luv. It's not anything to do with you personally. He means anyone who's offended by this at all.

I'm not reading into it personally at all. If I'm not mistaken, it's being implied I'm something of a hypersensitive liberal who gets all touchy at the slightest cries of racism, along with everyone else who sees something wrong with a group of twenty-five regular customers getting removed due to one person's complaint, while those twenty-five people were recording a video and would be recording their own incriminating actions. I just find it ironic coming from who's making those implications.

[Condunum]

You're reading too much into it, Luv. It's not anything to do with you personally. He means anyone who's offended by this at all.

I'm not reading into it personally at all. If I'm not mistaken, it's being implied I'm something of a hypersensitive liberal who gets all touchy at the slightest cries of racism, along with everyone else who sees something wrong with a group of twenty-five regular customers getting removed due to one person's complaint, while those twenty-five people were recording a video and would be recording their own incriminating actions. I just find it ironic coming from who's making those implications.

If I'm not mistaken, this poster has a track record of this.

[Condunum]

It means she didn't want them to sit in her section. And restaurants usually don't want to start problems so they were not going to put them in the same section.

Which raises a lot of questions of why. Was it race ? Was it I am having a quite meal and being seated next to 25 people will be distracting? Was it because the 25 people who had been waiting for two hours had waited in the bar and now and a little drunk ?

What I need is more information.

What I want to know is why is it reasonable to move 25 people at the complaint of one person when these people are said by the management to be regular customers? Further, why not just move the person who has the issue? It's their fucking issue.

[Luveria]

I'm not reading into it personally at all. If I'm not mistaken, it's being implied I'm something of a hypersensitive liberal who gets all touchy at the slightest cries of racism, along with everyone else who sees something wrong with a group of twenty-five regular customers getting removed due to one person's complaint, while those twenty-five people were recording a video and would be recording their own incriminating actions. I just find it ironic coming from who's making those implications.

If I'm not mistaken, this poster has a track record of this.

Then they should probably fix up their sig so there's less hypocrisy.

[TaQud]

The Carolinas do pretty weird shit these days.

Let's ban them or DEAT them.

What did The Carolinas ever do to you?

[The Fiery Wastelands]

I kid you not: because one white customer felt "threatened" by a party of 25 African-American customers (there to see a relative off on his travels), the management of the Wild Wing Cafe in North Charleston asked the entire party of African-Americans to leave:

A group of 25 African Americans waited two hours to get in a Wild Wing Cafe restaurant in North Charleston, South Carolina, only to be asked to leave almost immediately after entering the restaurant because a white patron felt “threatened” by them. One member of the group took his complaint to Facebook when the corporate office of the restaurant did not call him back.

In the accompanying interview by local TV station WNEM-5, the restaurant's marketing manager describes the party as "regular customers", to boot!

And people say that America's a "post-racial" society, because they've elected someone whose skin isn't lily-white to the highest office of the land. Yeah, right.

NSG, your thoughts on the matter? Should the restaurant be sued under the anti-segregation portions of the Civil Rights Act? Should Michael Brown and his family leave it off at the free meal they've been offered (which they've declined, considering the matter to be more important than a free feed)? Should the manager in question be fired?

... Why am I not surprised?

[Srboslavija]

A gesture of goodwill to a regular customer who feels wronged.

The restaurant gains nothing from dragging out the issue and having to deal with people like you, with the misplaced moral outrage and whatnot.

Oh really now, people like me? What kind of people would that be?

This needs a more in-depth response but in short, there is an active group of people (on the internets, in real life) who get outraged purely for the sake of being outraged, and actively seek to find outrage even when it does not need to be applied.

And while your convictions are correct and I do share them - yes, racism is bad - they are sometimes misplaced. Like now.

That's all I meant.

[Fartsniffage]

Which raises a lot of questions of why. Was it race ? Was it I am having a quite meal and being seated next to 25 people will be distracting? Was it because the 25 people who had been waiting for two hours had waited in the bar and now and a little drunk ?

What I need is more information.

What I want to know is why is it reasonable to move 25 people at the complaint of one person when these people are said by the management to be regular customers? Further, why not just move the person who has the issue? It's their fucking issue.

I would assume that it's because the group had just sat down and the complainer was already eating a meal. Also, no where in the articles posted does it say the complainer was eating alone. They may also have been part of a sizable party.

[Srboslavija]

Which raises a lot of questions of why. Was it race ? Was it I am having a quite meal and being seated next to 25 people will be distracting? Was it because the 25 people who had been waiting for two hours had waited in the bar and now and a little drunk ?

What I need is more information.

What I want to know is why is it reasonable to move 25 people at the complaint of one person when these people are said by the management to be regular customers? Further, why not just move the person who has the issue? It's their fucking issue.

Obviously you know more than the manager who took the complaint.

As far as I can tell from the responses here, the situation should have been allowed to escalate between the patrons, potentially have the police involved and let it go from there.

[Luveria]

Oh really now, people like me? What kind of people would that be?

This needs a more in-depth response but in short, there is an active group of people (on the internets, in real life) who get outraged purely for the sake of being outraged, and actively seek to find outrage even when it does not need to be applied.

And while your convictions are correct and I do share them - yes, racism is bad - they are sometimes misplaced. Like now.

That's all I meant.

Except I'm not outraged, so I don't see why you directed it specifically at me. I've got better things to do than get outraged for the sake of being outraged. I'm only questioning why twenty-five regular customers who were recording a video would get kicked out at the request of one person. I'm not sure that's a misplaced thing to question, as it's entirely plausible there could be something to their claims and it's worth looking into instead of automatically dismissing it as an empty cry of racism to get a free meal, which the customers turned down.

[Asein]

Except that's not what the law says.

The restaurant had a complaint from another patron. They did the right thing and removed the offenders before causing a bigger scene with the person who complained. This was a move to protect their business, not some racist ulterior motive.

Then how about the person complaining leaves, why have an entire party leave just because one person feels threatened?