Black Protesters Storm NYC Restaurants – Target & Harass White People Eating Brunch

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Targeting what are most likely urban Liberals was obviously a very well thought out strategy on their part.

wow...you know the political makeup of a random restaurant?....you must be an extra special person too great for our meager minds.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Retarded logic from and equally retarded "movement".

Sounds like these protesters could use some more education on their side, or at least their "media liaisons" should.

People who enforce the law are the ones who are doing the things she finds abhorrent.

Instead of bothering old ladies and yuppies at lunch, who have no connection to the problem, why not target off-duty cops at a bar? Or on-duty cops at cop lunch hangouts? She can find where they like to go, it's not that tough. Just wait for lunch time and find a wad of cop cars somewhere, and Bob's your uncle.

Protest away. Get in their faces and shriek some names, in a place and time where your protest will have some impact on the ones actually causing you the trouble.

Go to a courthouse, shriek at the judges. Go to the state house and shriek at the politicians.

Only I'm afraid THAT might be a bit more...committed than she'd like.

Hey, Rosa Parks had to sit on the front seat of the bus. It wouldn't have counted anywhere else.

I'm afraid I find her hard to take seriously.

a reply to: Bedlam

I feel the same way. Someone walking into a restaurant where I am with my kids eating and begins talking about killing and reciting names of people who died, likely because they were committing a crime when they died, is not going to persuade me to have any sympathy to the cause.

It will get me to spark a conversation that will likely point out the inadequacies in the protesters argument and show how ignorant they are to the cause they are protesting based on where they are protesting and the names they are using for the protest.

If these "white people of privilege" are eating brunch on Sunday, it is likely they will be eating brunch next Sunday and nto even give a second thought to the protest.

I wonder how many of the protesters sit around at breakfast/lunch/dinner and think about all the children that die in war in other countries.....likely none, because, just like the people they are protesting to, they have lives that they think about and families they try to do for.....

Sorry, but Black Brunch is a massive FAIL in my opinion.

originally posted by: Bedlam





Instead of bothering old ladies and yuppies at lunch, who have no connection to the problem, why not target off-duty cops at a bar? Or on-duty cops at cop lunch hangouts? She can find where they like to go, it's not that tough. Just wait for lunch time and find a wad of cop cars somewhere, and Bob's your uncle.

She won't do that, probably for the same reason PETA protesters only throw fake blood on old ladies wearing furs and not biker gangs wearing leathers.

a reply to: Jamie1

You must be projecting. I'm anti being offended. I'm commenting on the story, not offended. And pointing out how counterproductive the actions are.

Should the diners at these eating establishments feel offended by this? Should they even care?

:-)

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Jamie1

You must be projecting. I'm anti being offended. I'm commenting on the story, not offended. And pointing out how counterproductive the actions are.

Should the diners at these eating establishments feel offended by this? Should they even care?

:-)

No they shouldn't be offended. They had an outcome when they went to lunch. To enjoy their lunch.

The protesters arrived and proactively tried to FORCE their outcome on the diners.

The diners now have a real world problem. People are trying to keep them from enjoying their lunch, like they originally wanted to do. If it were me, I would enjoy the situation even more if I was a diner there by engaging with the protesters.

That said, if somebody walks up to me and says, "I'm here to disrupt your life, your status quo," my engagement with them might be different. When people lead with attitude, "I'm here because it's all about me and I don't care about you," then they will have an experience that maybe they weren't planning.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Peaceful protest on public property is perfectly acceptable as long as it does not disrupt the rights of your fellow citizens do go about their business. King was much more dignified than today's mob mentality.

King took his message and people (both black and white) to the streets. He meant to provoke - it was exactly what he intended to do - and it worked. It was peaceful - and dignified - and so is this

In King's day people considered what he did to be a major disruption - completely out of line - and worthy of a beating (or worse)

Uppity

Peaceful protest is in your face, it's jarring - and it is harmless

For four minutes the diners in an eating establishment are subjected to the reading of the names of black individuals that have died at the hands of the police - instances where there was no justice

What happens on twitter (on both sides) is a social reaction - not part of the actual protest

I find it very amusing how angry people (especially in all the right-wing online rags) are at this when it gets barely a mention anywhere else

No doubt - it's part of a liberal agenda :-)

The appropriate protest would to protest the actual people they are bitching about--the police. Protest in front of town hall or the local police station and leave innocent people alone.

This isn't about the police - this is about what society allows. It is about what we permit our police and our legal system to do in our names. This is on all of us

You and I don't often agree NavyDoc - but that doesn't mean that I don't recognize that you are definitely not a stupid man. You are also not a racist

It's beyond me why you (and others who are like-minded) can't see this for what it is. We're all in this together - both you and I and anyone that recognizes that something here is not right. Whether you agree with the recent verdicts or not - seems to me the fact that people are this angry is not the result of nothing - something in our society is broken and people of color are not barking at the moon. None of us ( black, white - liberal or conservative) that are truly interested in an equal and free society are wasting any time by keeping this situation front and center

Protest is meant to make us uncomfortable - make us aware. This is living art - no matter that you think it's silly or even toothless. Thinking matters - this conversation matters. And we wouldn't be having this conversation if some dedicated individuals didn't interrupt somebody's meal for a few moments to make their point

None of us who call out racism wherever it is - what ever form it takes - are doing something undignified

a reply to: Jamie1

The diners now have a real world problem.

Ah - real world problems - not like stories that you can dismiss :-)

That was not a very honest reply. I guess integrity is not really part of the plan - right?

You've launched a three pronged campaign since you've arrived on this scene...if nothing else - it's sparked some interesting discussions. But then, I'm somebody that appreciates a good troll - not that this is actually great trolling. I'm not sure there are many others that share my interest or appreciation - I guess we'll find out with time

After looking moronic over the Ferguson story, I thought protesters got a lucky break in that the nyc choke case was a good example of police over doing things and an actual story showing the police way overstepping their authority.

Now you got morons like this taking a way any credibility by nature of association. Sure protesting looks fun, you get a day of and a chance to look righteous and say FU to the man. Just make sure you know the point of your protest!

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Jamie1

The diners now have a real world problem.

Ah - real world problems - not like stories that you can dismiss :-)

That was not a very honest reply. I guess integrity is not really part of the plan - right?

You've launched a three pronged campaign since you've arrived on this scene...if nothing else - it's sparked some interesting discussions. But then, I'm somebody that appreciates a good troll - not that this is actually great trolling. I'm not sure there are many others that share my interest or appreciation - I guess we'll find out with time

Your perception of my honesty is a projection of your own beliefs.

You asked me a question, I answered, and you judged my answer as "dishonest" and then personally attacked me instead of discussing the topic.

Why are most thoughts so important to you?

a reply to: Jamie1

It wasn't an attack, it was my honest observation - made out loud in a public forum. It's just your perception that it was an attack

If I had wanted to attack you there would have been a much longer post - and it would probably be removed anyhow

:-)

Why are most thoughts so important to you?

Did you mean most thoughts - or your thoughts? The difference is important to my reply

originally posted by: opethPA
Wow..I can't wait to hear anyone defend some of the tweets reported in that article....

“ATTN WHITE Man, I have no guilt disturbing your brunch. Its YOU that has no right to be here. #blackbrunchnyc”
"#BlackBrunchNYC happening now & white fragility is on full display. When confronted with complicity in genocide most whites brains melt”

or this gem..

"Angry/delusional whites on #BlackBrunchNYC don't understand what racism is. Black people lack power dynamic necessary to be racist 2 whites."

Much like the #blacklivesmatter movement it's pathetic and just perpetuates racism.

I am so tired of the argument that acting in a racist manner, if your group is a "minority" is acceptable. "Black people lack power dynamic...blah blah blah". I remember when Obama got elected I had the thought that the African American people, after all this time, finally had NO EXCUSES left when it came to success. No more excuses about being held down, about being disadvantaged, I was so excited.

Instead Black Americans continue to play the victim...it's so frustrating, grow up and take responsibility for yourselves.

On that note, I'd wish I'd been at that brunch. I don't care what color you are or what your issue is, don't disturb my brunch. I worked for this money, I'm spending it on some Pancakes and an Omelette Bar. If you get in the way of that, you are going to see flying fists...I'll take at least 2 out before you can grab my stack of bacon!!!

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Targeting what are most likely urban Liberals was obviously a very well thought out strategy on their part.

wow...you know the political makeup of a random restaurant?....you must be an extra special person too great for our meager minds.

It's rather easy to deduce the expected political leanings of any any population of people. For instance, if the eatery in question was in a decidedly "blue" town, or even a "blue" district of a typically "red" town, then it would be safe to assume that patrons to this establishment would likely be of a liberal leaning.

Political think tanks have for decades been able to deduce the political leaning of a given population. One need only look to the distribution of "red" vs "blue" counties that are often quite the topic of discussion during elections to know this data has been available for quite some time. Augustus is no special person, he simply looks at data. Does that make him a genius? Well, compared to some, perhaps.

originally posted by: Nowyouseeme

originally posted by: opethPA
Wow..I can't wait to hear anyone defend some of the tweets reported in that article....

“ATTN WHITE Man, I have no guilt disturbing your brunch. Its YOU that has no right to be here. #blackbrunchnyc”
"#BlackBrunchNYC happening now & white fragility is on full display. When confronted with complicity in genocide most whites brains melt”

or this gem..

"Angry/delusional whites on #BlackBrunchNYC don't understand what racism is. Black people lack power dynamic necessary to be racist 2 whites."

Much like the #blacklivesmatter movement it's pathetic and just perpetuates racism.

I am so tired of the argument that acting in a racist manner, if your group is a "minority" is acceptable. "Black people lack power dynamic...blah blah blah". I remember when Obama got elected I had the thought that the African American people, after all this time, finally had NO EXCUSES left when it came to success. No more excuses about being held down, about being disadvantaged, I was so excited.

Instead Black Americans continue to play the victim...it's so frustrating, grow up and take responsibility for yourselves.

On that note, I'd wish I'd been at that brunch. I don't care what color you are or what your issue is, don't disturb my brunch. I worked for this money, I'm spending it on some Pancakes and an Omelette Bar. If you get in the way of that, you are going to see flying fists...I'll take at least 2 out before you can grab my stack of bacon!!!

I talked with a friend yesterday who attends a prestigious university.

Officially, according to what is being taught in school, by definition blacks cannot be labeled racists because they are the minority, and do not have the social power.

Chunk up to a higher level.

Race is just the context in this situation. The higher level pattern being run is this:

Victim > Villain. Hero (politician) arrives to defend victim from villain. It's all about getting enough votes to convince campaign donors to give them money. Donors don't contribute to candidates that have no chance to win.

originally posted by: Salamandy
After looking moronic over the Ferguson story, I thought protesters got a lucky break in that the nyc choke case was a good example of police over doing things and an actual story showing the police way overstepping their authority.

Now you got morons like this taking a way any credibility by nature of association. Sure protesting looks fun, you get a day of and a chance to look righteous and say FU to the man. Just make sure you know the point of your protest!

Important point to take away from the Garner case: don't vote for any laws that you are not willing to see the police kill someone to enforce because that is the ultimate possible end result of force and enforcement. The reason why Garner could make a profit by travelling to Virginia, buying a van load of smokes, travelling up to NY to sell them is because the people of NY (through their representatives) wanted high taxes on smokes to discourage smoking. He ultimately died over something that many people here on ATS advocate--high taxes and using the governmental power of taxation to punish behavior. Everytime someone cries, "there aught to be a law" remember this.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Targeting what are most likely urban Liberals was obviously a very well thought out strategy on their part.

wow...you know the political makeup of a random restaurant?....you must be an extra special person too great for our meager minds.

It's rather easy to deduce the expected political leanings of any any population of people. For instance, if the eatery in question was in a decidedly "blue" town, or even a "blue" district of a typically "red" town, then it would be safe to assume that patrons to this establishment would likely be of a liberal leaning.

Political think tanks have for decades been able to deduce the political leaning of a given population. One need only look to the distribution of "red" vs "blue" counties that are often quite the topic of discussion during elections to know this data has been available for quite some time. Augustus is no special person, he simply looks at data. Does that make him a genius? Well, compared to some, perhaps.

Dead right. If you go to a steak house by the side of the road in Texas you can expect it to be full of cowboys and bikers, go to a vegan noodle bar in San Francisco and it's a fair bet there won't be many of either there.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Jamie1

It wasn't an attack, it was my honest observation - made out loud in a public forum. It's just your perception that it was an attack

If I had wanted to attack you there would have been a much longer post - and it would probably be removed anyhow

:-)

Why are most thoughts so important to you?

Did you mean most thoughts - or your thoughts? The difference is important to my reply

True. Your words were not an attack, and I erred by describing them as an attack. I didn't even think of them as an attack. It was just lazy writing.

Well since you made the distinction, both. Start with my thoughts. Why are my thoughts and posts important enough for you to make conclusions about "campaigns" you think I started, or to think I have some sort of dishonest agenda?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Salamandy
After looking moronic over the Ferguson story, I thought protesters got a lucky break in that the nyc choke case was a good example of police over doing things and an actual story showing the police way overstepping their authority.

Now you got morons like this taking a way any credibility by nature of association. Sure protesting looks fun, you get a day of and a chance to look righteous and say FU to the man. Just make sure you know the point of your protest!

Important point to take away from the Garner case: don't vote for any laws that you are not willing to see the police kill someone to enforce because that is the ultimate possible end result of force and enforcement. The reason why Garner could make a profit by travelling to Virginia, buying a van load of smokes, travelling up to NY to sell them is because the people of NY (through their representatives) wanted high taxes on smokes to discourage smoking. He ultimately died over something that many people here on ATS advocate--high taxes and using the governmental power of taxation to punish behavior. Everytime someone cries, "there aught to be a law" remember this.

Great point.

Laws have consequences, and the ultimate result is enforcement of the law with somebody holding a gun and aiming it at a citizen.

“ATTN WHITE Man, I have no guilt disturbing your brunch. Its YOU that has no right to be here. #blackbrunchnyc”

Really I have 'no right' to be here?

That's funny since I can trace my family ancestry to the 1600s before there ever was a US.

On my mothers side.

Hell over the Christmas holiday I found out that on my dad's side one of my ancestors was a cherokee scout for Washington.

'No right' to be here eh.

There are MILLIONS of descendents like me who have EVERY RIGHT.

a reply to: Jamie1

Well since you made the distinction, both. Start with my thoughts. Why are my thoughts and posts important enough for you to make conclusions about "campaigns" you think I started, or to think I have some sort of dishonest agenda?

I'll start with thoughts - in general. The main reason why I am here at ATS (or reading comments anywhere else on the internet) is that I love to hear what people are thinking - always have. I also love the interaction - the exchange of ideas - and of course the arguing :-)

This is obviously also the answer to why I'm interested in your thoughts

As to your campaign - it's fairly obvious. One need only look at the threads you've made, so - let's not bother with that. You have a point you'd like to make - you've made it several times over. What else can we call that but a campaign? :-)

I never said that you had a dishonest agenda, so again - your perception (and the story you keep telling yourself) is missing it's mark - your agenda seems pretty straight forward actually - obvious - and honest

What I did say is that that one reply was not actually honest - and not in keeping with your personal philosophy (so far as you have been promoting it here at ATS) - and so your argument at that point lacked a certain amount of integrity

Either that - or you believe that some people have the right to feel offended - and other people should just shut up

Circumstance and differing priorities make that determination - but that's never a part of your argument - is it?

:-)