Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think its too plain and simple saying if you support the Qatar bid, you do not care about human rights... does that mean anyone living in the country or has any associations with them, do not care about human rights?

Also, if you look deeply into any owner who is putting up £5bn, you will see that none of them are clean.


Support is proactive. So yeah I'd be sceptical.

So your argument is all money is tainted so who cares how tainted?

That's a fairly grim philosophy that has an even grimmer logical conclusion.
 
I specifically said outside the world cup, for obvious reasons, ie it's the fecking world cup.

It's the only comparible sporting event to the NFL that would have western eyes in Qatar, its the fecking NFL

The fact that people are no longer even bothered that the NFL ruined a man career and they are perfectly happy with NFL team owners (who come together to ruin the man careers) owning PL clubs says a lot don't you think?
 
Does the SJR vs Qatar arguments boil down to whose pile of turd is bigger and smellier?


The thing is that the reflex is to that binary. If you don't like one it is assumed you're a shill for the other. So bizarre. This thread is mostly just bizarre.
 
Saying supporting United under Qatar ownership means you dont care about Human rights is the same as wearing any piece of clothing from Asia, is the same as not caring from human rights?

Do you do your due diligence to check that the product you own is made by companies not violating any human rights?
I don't wear Nike clothes because I support Nike. I don't frequent a Nike forum to talk about how much I love Nike. But I do need to wear clothes, much like I need to have a car and a mobile phone. And I need gas and electricity for my house, food from a supermarket. If I didn't do any of those things then I wouldn't be able to work, get paid, and take care of my family. Literally none of that has any relevance to who I want owning the football team I support, not matter how much you try and push the argument that it does.
 
The thing is that the reflex is to that binary. If you don't like one it is assumed you're a shill for the other. So bizarre. This thread is mostly just bizarre.

Just make it end :o
 
Indeed. He has horrible human rights and environmental record, whilst being a known liar and hypocrite. In bed with the Saudis where he will build another factory with awful conditions for construction workers.
Wait, are you actually equating union issues with the persecution of gay people in Qatar?
 
It's the only comparible sporting event to the NFL that would have western eyes in Qatar, its the fecking NFL

The fact that people are no longer even bothered that the NFL ruined a man career and they are perfectly happy with NFL team owners (who come together to ruin the man career) owning PL clubs says a lot don't you think?

No, I don't get any NFL in my sphere, but I got that.
 
So who's going to mod the mods because you guys are not following your own guidance on these endless moral crusades?
 
I’m largely indifferent to whoever owns us. It’s been coming since 1998 when Murdoch tried to buy us. Back then, people were outraged that a billionaire and his conglomerate would try to take a football club away from its fans and here we are in 2023 involving another billionaire and his conglomerate, as well as a country being involved.

If people want to cease supporting United because Qatar wins, that’s fine. I’m not going to think lesser or greater of them if they do.

As a best case scenario, Qatar mainly eradicate the debt that was put on us by the Glazers, fund a new stadium, fund a new training ground and develop modern infrastructure around the club. They don’t need to manufacture bullshit sponsorship deals and devise FFP loopholes to make us good and if they did end up doing that then feck them.

I personally believe it won’t be long until you see similar takeovers at Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs soon though. Give it 18 months and one of those teams will have new super rich owners.
 
NFL owners own PL clubs so they are in your sphere...

Jesus dude, I know a tiny bit more about my life than you. The amount of Kapernik stuff was hugely out of kilter with the amount of NFL news and info I usually see.

There is no point talking if you're going to do both sides.

Good luck.
 
So who's going to mod the mods because you guys are not following your own guidance on these endless moral crusades?
Come on. Criticizing Sir Jim is fine and hardly a moral crusade, its just that calling him a human rights abuser is a bit over the top.
 
Jesus dude, I know a tiny bit more about my life than you. The amount of Kapernik stuff was hugely out of kilter with the amount of NFL news and info I usually see.

There is no point talking if you're going to do both sides.

Good luck.

Good luck :lol:
Maybe by your own logic you don't really care about human rights since you don't seem to be outraged some of the same owners own PL clubs.... ;)
 
Moral crusades? :lol:
Fine moral arguments. It's just repetitive and you're drowning the thread and we've had these arguments so many times already.

Maybe try to move the discussion to Qatar Vs Ineos thread? This is just a suggestion but I think it might help.
 
,"Romance of the game". One for the "Phrases that annoy you in football" thread.
 
Good luck :lol:
Maybe by your own logic you don't really care about human rights since your don't seem to be outraged the same owners own PL clubs.... ;)


You're literally making no sense now.

You were doing better telling me what I was seeing in my media feeds.
 
Support is proactive. So yeah I'd be sceptical.

So your argument is all money is tainted so who cares how tainted?

That's a fairly grim philosophy that has an even grimmer logical conclusion.

To me the issue is that I don't see the same energy for someone that directly and actively sully democracy through heavy lobbying which has for goal to be allowed to pollute and therefore damage millions of people health just because the billions he currently have aren't enough.

Ratcliffe and Ineos are among the most cynical, greedy, unethical and long term damaging individuals on earth and yet people seem to brush it away. Unlike a "state" decision, Ratcliffe actions are his own actions, logic would dictate that no one can actually mitigate them but it's the opposite people are more willing to mitigate his decisions which affect millions.

To me it's pretty obvious that people aren't using logic, they are using affects because in the case of Qatar there is an identified victim for which people empathize.
 
To me the issue is that I don't see the same energy for someone that directly and actively sully democracy through heavy lobbying which has for goal to be allowed to pollute and therefore damage millions of people health just because the billions he currently have aren't enough.

Ratcliffe and Ineos are among the most cynical, greedy, unethical and long term damaging individuals on earth and yet people seem to brush it away. Unlike a "state" decision, Ratcliffe actions are his own actions, logic would dictate that no one can actually mitigate them but it's the opposite people are more willing to mitigate his decisions which affect millions.

To me it's pretty obvious that people aren't using logic, they are using affects because in the case of Qatar there is an identified victim for which people empathize.

Articulated better than me
 
I don't wear Nike clothes because I support Nike. I don't frequent a Nike forum to talk about how much I love Nike. But I do need to wear clothes, much like I need to have a car and a mobile phone. And I need gas and electricity for my house, food from a supermarket. If I didn't do any of those things then I wouldn't be able to work, get paid, and take care of my family. Literally none of that has any relevance to who I want owning the football team I support, not matter how much you try and push the argument that it does.

So it only bothers you if its ownership?

Why does it not have relevance, when someone is saying if you support Qatar bid you dont care about human rights is wrong.

If you look at the past and history, alot of countries, including ALL the western countries have wronged. Obviously they took steps to rectify it which is what ME states are doing, take Dubai for an example to see how they have developed over the years.

Its always the western world who always think the way they operate is right and everyone else who doesn't follow their ideology is wrong.
 
Fine moral arguments. It's just repetitive and you're drowning the thread and we've had these arguments so many times already.

Maybe try to move the discussion to Qatar Vs Ineos thread? This is just a suggestion but I think it might help.

But I don't have a strong opinion in the Qatar v Ineos debate?
 
So who's going to mod the mods because you guys are not following your own guidance on these endless moral crusades?

You're completely fine with "moral crusades", and are one of the most active "crusaders" in the whole thread. Should we quote your 100 Brexit comments once more? Maybe some of those comments about Ineos's environmental damage? Yet you want moderators to stop moral complaints when they're against the Qatari regime.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.