So if the owners beheaded homosexuals at half time, you'd be OK with that? I ask because you say there is no line. And that is indeed what they do.
Are the Glazers preparing for a sale? | Saudis deny the news
- Thread starter RedTillI'mDead
- Start date
- Status
So if the owners beheaded homosexuals at half time, you'd be OK with that? I ask because you say there is no line. And that is indeed what they do.
This. I dont see why it's so hard for some to separate things like this. It's the same with any famous people when it comes out they're scum. Like with Giggs. I loved Giggs the player. Giggs the player gave us years of joy. Giggs the player is a United legend. Giggs the man I don't care about, nor would I want to. Does him having an affair with his bdothers wife for 8 years taint how I see him as a player? Of course not. Because its separating the man from the profession. You separate the football side of the club from the business side. Who our owners are has absolutely 0 impact on my feelings when I watch football on the pitch. I'm not there waiting for the camera to pan to the owner. Couldnt give a feck about them.
I've always said that politics and sport is a toxic brew and this thread illustrates that perfectly.
have we got an option on Adam Johnson then?
have we got an option on Adam Johnson then?
How do you know he didn't vote for the opposition? How do you know he voted at all?
Such a bizarre argument.
You're telling me there is no difference with the club doing that on their own pitch, and the guy who owns the club also being connected with horrific acts? Theres a massive difference.
So there IS a line after all.
If Ronaldo becomes convicted as a rapist, does he get stripped of his Ballon D'Ors? He'd still have been the same quality footballer. If while these guys are footballers, they do something like this and gets convicted then of course he should be instantly arrested and cut. It's a massive difference though. I'm not going to stop supporting the club because of the actions of one person - the club is a symbol, a brand and that's bigger than the actions of one guy and the views of that guy.
Alright I guess if the club started pulling people down to execute them on the pitch to become a Man United thing then I guess that's a line. A really realistic one, clearly.
Yup. I watch football. I support Man United football club. I dont support the owners, and one guy buying it or selling it to another rich guy isnt going to dictate who I support. I'm not supporting the owner and not switching clubs if a good owner buys a different club. Simple as that IMO.
The only difference is that you can pretend it isn't happening if you don't see it. You're still giving your money to the people doing it.
Would you be OK with it happening in the stadium car park so you couldn't see it? How many yards from the pitch is OK?
Car park's OK Dafuq?
UK and US taxpayers are giving money, literally funding politicians who spend billions on killing people and overthrowing governments. I'd guess most of these taxpayers would not wars, but they are obliged to pay the money. Having Saudis as owners is not an ideal situation, but seeing MBS at OT occasionally would not stop me from supporting United. I would be happy if Saudi money is spent on football players and infrastructure, instead of wars.
and yet he's been using that same argument over and over again in this thread, strange stuff.
Do you realise how utterly daft you sound? A football forum and you've managed to bring beheading into it
.Good grief.Nor me. But it would stop me paying for anything that the club might benefit from.
Do you realise how utterly daft you sound? A football forum and you've managed to bring beheading into it
Why is it daft? Someone who has people beheaded might buy the club. You may not want to address it but that's the situation.
He is not connected with horrific acts. He is personally ordering those horrific acts to happen.
United would be connected with those horrific acts though if MBS buys the club.
Last edited:
Except that it is not. The same guy who hypothetically (cause nothing yet is confirmed, and they even denied it) will buy United, is also the guy under whose regime that country beheads people (in stadiums, if rumors are to be believed), and who has ordered the invasion of Yemen which has resulted in tens of thousands of killings and millions facing starvation.Do you realise how utterly daft you sound? A football forum and you've managed to bring beheading into it
Oh, and he ordered the massacring of a journalist. When results are going bad 'hey Ole, can you come at the embassy to talk about a contract extension'.
Nothing hyperbole about this statement, completely realistic scenario should MBS really become our owner. Well I guess it would further delay our search for a DoF since we would need an executioner first.
You know, i'm usually very tolerant and liberal about most issues, and like you i tend to turn a blind eye to many things in our society. For example, Apple has had numerous scandals regaring their production plants in china and the working conditions and suicides and stuff, it didn't stop me from using iphones although i still talk shit about them from time to time. But I would be extremely uncomfortable if the Saudis took over. For your club to be associated with a regime like that is never a good thing, even if you choose to ignore it. I probably wont turn my back on the club completely like the fcum lads but i will definitely start actively protesting and campaigning for their exit. It's one thing having tight arses for owners, but the Glazers have never associated themselves with any political movement or beliefs, or supported any conflicts etc, they are just businessmen unless you choose to stereotype their nationality, but its another to be associated with a brutal oppressive regime. I mean if someone asked me what have the Glazers done i'd have to think back a bit, if you ask about the Saudis i'd reply back with "just this week or...?"
And by the looks of it it's not coming from United. No need to peddle something that's likely not the case.
The point is where do you draw the line? What if we are asked to play a game in the Saudi capital? What if they held executions there the morning before the match? The day before? Where do you draw the line?
The answer is you can't. You can only chose not to think about it.
Agreed. I'd hate the situation but would never stop supporting the club. For instance situation with Dinamo is that the club I'm a fan of doesn't exist or this Dinamo isn't the Dinamo I support. If that makes sense.
It's really not the same thing. Nobody is pretending like it doesnt happen. What I'm saying is that the actions of the owner with matters unrelated to the football club itself (so his own personal shit) doesnt impact me with the football club. In fact I'm not going to stop supporting a club because some barbaric bought in to the club. The club represents more than who the owner is so who it is doesnt impact who I support.
Or its "temporarily under control of cnuts" but you still wait for the day where it's normal again?Agreed. I'd hate the situation but would never stop supporting the club. For instance situation with Dinamo is that the club I'm a fan of doesn't exist or this Dinamo isn't the Dinamo I support. If that makes sense.
You're saying it's OK to give money and respectability to a mass murderer. How is that unrelated? What personal moral code can support that and remain intact?
Christ, I can't imagine being owned by those cnuts. Along with my own government, who now aids and abets them at every opportunity, MbS's is one of the most evil regimes on the planet. Genocide in Yemen, extrajudicial assassination squads, and United? No fecking thanks.
I know very little about the Saudi regime, so I have to ask:
If, as seems to be the consensus in this thread, the regime sponsors Isis & Al Queda...what the hell is the UK government doing selling arms to the Saudis?
If, as seems to be the consensus in this thread, the regime sponsors Isis & Al Queda...what the hell is the UK government doing selling arms to the Saudis?
Yeah something like that. Thing is if we were bought by the Saudis it would take a long, long time for that to possibly change. That's a lot of time to hate the situation the club is in.
I get what you're saying and while I don't see it the same way you do, I can understand why. But for some of us, the Saudi regime and their illegal activity would be separate from the club. I don't see as turning a blind eye or choosing to ignore it, just the fact that the club wouldn't have anything to do with it. Would you fault players, staff or anyone associated with club for accepting employment? As long as Manchester United remains a Football Club and not some corrupt organization for the Saudi's then it wouldn't affect me. I root for Manchester United, not the Glazers and not the Saudis should they take over.
Exactly, I don't imagine for one minute that this Saudi Prince wants to buy United in order to have somewhere grand to stage executions, if indeed he is considering buying out the Glazers; and if he does it wont change the culture, fabric or philosophy of Manchester United or the vast majority of its supporters, employees, directors or shareholders conceptions of the Club.
Oil.
Same general principle behind the US's undying support for them despite the fact that almost every 9/11 hijacker (plus bin Laden himself) was a Saudi citizen.
Thanks.
I get it. Lots of my friends have worked for morally questionable organisations. I don't filter all my shopping like some demented SJW. We all live in the real world.
But the Saudis are just everything that's wrong in the world. It's hard to ignore that.
Getting tied to that regime would be a dark day in the club's history. Hopefully it never happens.
I'm saying I'm not changing my life and the things I have always liked doing because some guy decided to buy into a club for a few years before inevitably leaving, especially when at the core level of the reason I watch - football on the pitch - not much would change.
The royal family has something like 500 or so people, many of them powerful and rich in their own right. While MBS and the king are not connected to Al Qaeda and IS (and well, those terrorist organizations are a threat to them too), other members of the family have put money in those organizations. Additionally, the ideology (a specific version of Islam) practiced by Saudi Arabia, is not far of from the one practiced by IS and Al Qaeda, making the conversion from one to the other very easy. Many humanitarian organizations originating from Saudi Arabia spread the Wahhabism ideology in different countries (mostly poor and who had have problems), and then suddenly you have hundreds of IS soldiers coming from those countries (Kosovo and Bosna in Europe for example). As you can imagine, while some organisations might have been totally legit, many members of them might have had sympathies for IS/AQ, cause they have essentially the same ideology. Put it this way, without the money coming from Saudi Arabia, IS/AQ would have either not existed at all, or have been much less relevant.
Not surprisingly, everyone involved in 9/11 was from Saudi Arabia. That operation cost, and the money was coming from somewhere. Also, Bin Laden's family while not royalists, had links with royal family.
About your last point, US and UK love money. US even stopped really going deep into 9/11 investigation when it became clear that if they do so, it would become really hard to continue making business with SA (and in fact SA not Iraq would have been needed to be invaded). And without SA's oil, the world economy would have a much bigger crisis than the one of 10 years ago.
Same religion, more or less. Al Qaeda was originally formed as a specific response to the stationing of US troops near Mecca after the first Gulf War.
IS is a bit different. More of a death cult.
- Status