Coffee shop refuses to serve man caught on tape confronting Muslim woman

[fredtoast]

(05-16-2018, 04:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Please point to one thing I have done to defend the man. Otherwise STFU

You claimed that the "appearance" that he was a hatful bigot was actually just due to "bias emotions" clouding our judgement.


When in fact everyone but you read the story which explained what happened so we did not have to rely on "bias emotions".

What's your theory of what happened?  The entire crowd just picked a random white guy to start yelling at for no reason?

[*bfine32*]

(05-16-2018, 04:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You claimed that the "appearance" that he was a hatful bigot was actually just due to "bias emotions" clouding our judgement.


When in fact everyone but you read the story which explained what happened so we did not have to rely on "bias emotions".

What's your theory of what happened?  The entire crowd just picked a random white guy to start yelling at for no reason?

I don't really understand what you are asserting here, but yes the man does appear to be a hateful bigot

I did read the story and it simply provided facts that I have not disputed

My theory is that those in the crowd saw far less color than many on here and thy heard what was exchanged and sided with the female. But as to what instigated the confrontation, I have no idea. Of course you know. 

[fredtoast]

(05-16-2018, 04:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You claimed that the "appearance" that he was a hatful bigot was actually just due to "bias emotions" clouding our judgement.

(05-16-2018, 05:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I don't really understand what you are asserting here,

Then explain what you were asserting with this line.

(05-16-2018, 04:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  Of course he appears to be a hateful bigot, but we cannot always let or bias, emotion cloud what is actually happening.  

[fredtoast]

(05-16-2018, 05:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I did read the story and it simply provided facts that I have not disputed

You claimed he was not even disruptive when the story says he was the one who started the disruption.

[*bfine32*]

(05-16-2018, 05:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Then explain what you were asserting with this line.

I was stating that our hatred for bigots cannot let us cloud what we see with our eyes. 

[fredtoast]

(05-16-2018, 05:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I was stating that our hatred for bigots cannot let us cloud what we see with our eyes. 

And what I saw was a bunch of people responding to a guy who started a disruption.

What did you see?

You try to act like there is no proof of the guy doing anything wrong yet that is not what the video shows at all.  It clearly shows a group of people upset with him for something.  

Since your judgement is not "clouded" please explain exactly what your unbiased opinion is of what happened.

[*bfine32*]

(05-16-2018, 06:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And what I saw was a bunch of people responding to a guy who started a disruption.

What did you see?

You try to act like there is no proof of the guy doing anything wrong yet that is not what the video shows at all.  It clearly shows a group of people upset with him for something.  

Since your judgement is not "clouded" please explain exactly what your unbiased opinion is of what happened.

I have no idea how many more times I can type it before it is read: Where have I stated there is no proof that the guy did something wrong. Nor do I have any idea how many times I have to type what I saw.

I saw a man who appears to be a hateful bigot trying to disengage from a verbal altercation and the other party trying to continue the verbal altercation. 

Who (besides apparently you in this forum) knows what he or she said before the video?

[*Nately120*]

(05-16-2018, 06:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have no idea how many more times I can type it before it is read: Where have I stated there is no proof that the guy did something wrong. Nor do I have any idea how many times I have to type what I saw.

I saw a man who appears to be a hateful bigot trying to disengage from a verbal altercation and the other party trying to continue the verbal altercation. 

Who (besides apparently you in this forum) knows what he or she said before the video?

Meh, that guy doesn't seem like the type who has to have his arm twisted in order to state his beliefs.  I wasn't there though, so for all I know she started it...though, the subject of their conversation seems to center on him not liking/trusting people of her type, so I'd say the odds are that he started it via some comment.

Again though, doesn't this go back to the whole "you're asking for it, when you dress like that" argument?  When you dress in a manner which makes it clear that you aren't of the majority, you can expect to get targeted.  Wow, it's like high school all over again.  Wear that spiked collar and the jocks are going to fall over themselves to hassle you.

[GMDino]

(05-16-2018, 06:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have no idea how many more times I can type it before it is read: Where have I stated there is no proof that the guy did something wrong. Nor do I have any idea how many times I have to type what I saw.

I saw a man who appears to be a hateful bigot trying to disengage from a verbal altercation and the other party trying to continue the verbal altercation. 

Who (besides apparently you in this forum) knows what he or she said before the video?

Poor, "hateful bigot" was just trying to get away from that mean lady who was confronting him for (what I am sure) is no reason! 

People just wouldn't believe the things I read here.

All seriousness aside the VERY FIRST THING on the video is him confronting her.  First thing.  Then when she asks why he would say something like that and the conversation continues.

First thing.

Unless you are suggesting this woman somehow was antagonizing the guy (which there have been zero reports of) before the video starts then you are doing nothing but protecting another "hateful bigot".  Congrats on the consistency.

[*bfine32*]

(05-16-2018, 07:50 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Poor, "hateful bigot" was just trying to get away from that mean lady who was confronting him for (what I am sure) is no reason! 

People just wouldn't believe the things I read here.

All seriousness aside the VERY FIRST THING on the video is him confronting her.  First thing.  Then when she asks why he would say something like that and the conversation continues.

First thing.

Unless you are suggesting this woman somehow was antagonizing the guy (which there have been zero reports of) before the video starts then you are doing nothing but protecting another "hateful bigot".  Congrats on the consistency.

I am suggesting/assuming nothing; that is the difference between my observations and those of yours and Fred's. However, this has not stopped the two of you from trying to paint me a a bigot, simply because I state what I see in the video. I have provided observations and you and Fred have done your usual "try to shame" tactic. 

WTS, I'm done "discussing" issues with you, Fred, and those that engage in this form of debate. As I said, I fully understand why you feel emboldened in this forum and feel that you can imply the worst in other people without being held accountable for your baseless claims.

Good luck "discussing" issues with those that will entertain you. 

[GMDino]

(05-16-2018, 08:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I am suggesting/assuming nothing; that is the difference between my observations and those of yours and Fred's. However, this has not stopped the two of you from trying to paint me a a bigot, simply because I state what I see in the video. I have provided observations and you and Fred have done your usual "try to shame" tactic. 

WTS, I'm done "discussing" issues with you, Fred, and those that engage in this form of debate. As I said, I fully understand why you feel emboldened in this forum and feel that you can imply the worst in other people without being held accountable for your baseless claims.

Good luck "discussing" issues with those that will entertain you. 

Thanks and good luck to you too!  Have a great night!

[Dill]

(05-15-2018, 08:10 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He said what he said, which was a jerk comment, but her insistence to ramp up the comment into way more than it needed to be.....   her persistence to try and talk about her religion is ridiculous.  Just roll your eyes and order your coffee.  That goes for both of them.  

As to her hijab or whatever it’s called.  We live in a full face society, we see everyone’s face, we don’t allow masks to be worn.  Western culture is based on seeing everyone’s face.

I thought Western culture was based on "freedom"?

[Dill]

(05-15-2018, 01:39 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I also don't particularly care for women wearing something that only allows her eyeballs to be seen, but then again we live in a country where a number of people seem to think men have little to no control over their sexual urges and that the attire a woman is wearing plays a significant role in how likely a man will be able to keep himself from sexually assaulting her.

We're a complicated society, that's for sure.

It can be a hot look.  Flirting can go hyper.  This said as ethnological observation.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-16-2018, 09:48 PM)Dill Wrote: I thought Western culture was based on "freedom"?

We see everyone’s face.

[Dill]

(05-16-2018, 11:14 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: We see everyone’s face.

Not "freedom" then?

[StLucieBengal]

(05-16-2018, 11:19 PM)Dill Wrote: Not "freedom" then?

Sure it is. We free women from the grips of oppression. Women choose to be oppressed with that ninja costume the same way battered women choose to stay with their wife beater husbands.

[Dill]

(05-16-2018, 11:38 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Sure it is.  We free women from the grips of oppression.   Women choose to be oppressed with that ninja costume the same way battered women choose to stay with their wife beater husbands.

The woman in the video didn't sound oppressed. Maybe she doesn't know? 

The French have outlawed the niqab, haven't they?  More freedom there.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(05-16-2018, 11:14 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: We see everyone’s face.

Except we don't because of religious freedom in this country.  Their are no laws that I'm aware of that require "open faces" (a term I'm fairly certain you made up), and if there are, you can bet they are being challenged in court as unconstitutional.  Face it veils and hijabs just make YOU uncomfortable and that hang up is on YOU.

[*michaelsean*]

(05-16-2018, 06:39 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Meh, that guy doesn't seem like the type who has to have his arm twisted in order to state his beliefs.  I wasn't there though, so for all I know she started it...though, the subject of their conversation seems to center on him not liking/trusting people of her type, so I'd say the odds are that he started it via some comment.

Again though, doesn't this go back to the whole "you're asking for it, when you dress like that" argument?  When you dress in a manner which makes it clear that you aren't of the majority, you can expect to get targeted.  Wow, it's like high school all over again. Wear that spiked collar and the jocks are going to fall over themselves to hassle you.

Well that's a definite "asked for it".   And when you show up at the Bengals Board Bash wearing one, it's going to be like high school all over again.

[fredtoast]

(05-16-2018, 08:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I am suggesting/assuming nothing; that is the difference between my observations and those of yours and Fred's.

You absolutely suggested that the man was not the one being disrruptive.

(05-15-2018, 08:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Not sure the man was the one being disruptive 

This is what you always do.  Throw out a comment and then try to act like you never said it.

Then when everyone calls you on it you play your victim card and run away.