Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
M4YON said:
I wasn't referring to you, although looking at some of your posts i can see why you might think i was.

i was referring to the @Wumminator who openly went after an Islamic Redcafe member asking him his stance on homosexuals, then berated him for his answer which has NOTHING to do with this thread topic and also @redcucumber who has stated he doesn't want to be owned by a state with a ' weird religion' great job guys you may be tolerant of sexuality preferences but you lack severely in religious tolerance and understanding.

When the mods finally see all this crap they're going to have a lot of work to do.
Click to expand...
Oh dear, you've made an arse of yourself. I was actually talking specifically about the Vatican, but also just generally not wanting to be owned by a state that is governed by religion. And even if I was talking just about the religion of Islam, how is referring to it as "weird" Islamaphobic? Comes across as extremely precious.

Also, I'm content in being intolerant of any religion, institution or person that is itself intolerant and discriminative of others based on their sexuality, race, or other personal characteristics.
 
I for one welcome our new Qatari overlords. Get the feeling that the whole fanbase is going to go full Geordie and go to all games in bishts and bow to the east every time we score.

Think I’ve read the room correctly…
 
Cloud7 said:
This thread took a steep downhill slide overnight
Click to expand...

It's not really about ownership. It's the fact that some seems to think that a 'horrible' owner will reflect on them as a person. They are trying to rationalise it or express their conflict within themselves.
Afterall new ownership as fans isn't something that we have any control or ability to influence.

Same shite has been tumbling on and on fr the last 300 pages
 
Sviken said:
So what, man? This is a United forum. Everyone has a variety of different beliefs and backgrounds. We're not a monolith


Absolutely agree with this. PSG are badly run Madrid Galacticos circus. As bad as the Glazers are, one good thing about their ownership i'd say is that they're relatively hands free. I wish the new owners are like that too. Invest in the outside stuff, but keep the running of the club to the manager.
Click to expand...
As I've been saying all along to those that have been glazer bashing - be careful what you wish for. The glazers have run the club for a profit, and that is their primary aim, but we could all put together a very long list of worse owners. Apart from United, the two clubs who have been most successful during the period of glazer ownership are Chelsea and Man City. Chelsea were bought by a Russian oligarch, had their club repossessed, and are now owned by someone who thinks there is a global shortage of footballers. City's owners have committed numerous breaches of FFP to fraudulently buy their trophies. So who would you rather switch owners with? PSG? Barcelona?
 
DevilRed said:
Are they the only ones drumming this shite up about morality and the middle east? You've got wankers at skysports suddenly writing essays on morality because they know it will generate views when it comes to Manchester United.

I'm not here to judge who is right or wrong. But sometimes things get a bit hypocritical and that needs to be brought to attention.

Sort of weird how the outrage is only directed towards our club/potential owners, when considering over the last decade, a fair chunk of central London and various major UK companies have been bought up by the middle east without so much as a peep from politicians and media alike.
Click to expand...

The post you replied to mate was disagreeing with a report from Amnesty International.

And yes when arguably the biggest football club in the world is potentially being bought by a middle Eastern state. Then inevitably people will shine a light and draw attention to their human rights record and how they treat people.
 
This thread is madness the mods are just sat there like Michael Jackson in the popcorn gif :lol:
 
Bebestation said:
https://www.historic-cornwall.org.uk/the-british-empires-impact-on-education/

“The British Education System differed from the Indian Education System in several ways. English was introduced to vernacular language instruction as a replacement for vernacular languages. The primary goal of British education was to train a clerical workforce rather than to gain knowledge.”

If you think the English historical education is going to sit and happily talk about all the crap they did to so so so many countries then you are deluded just as much as me :lol:

Ive got to go now because I got a point for dragging the thread away from its focus!

Goodbye!
Click to expand...

Again, you've completely missed the point. You're still viewing history and it's events simply from the point of view of a private Indian education system, as if that isn't in any way bias as well?

I've already told you, I sat and studied history in a UK university, taught by lecturers from all over the world, with students from all over the world. We did talk about all of those things, in detail, in both isolation and in the wider context of world history. Yes, core education in this country is very lacking on empire and there's been a lot of talk about changing that in recent years. Did you miss that bit where people started pulling down statutes?

It still all comes back to your whataboutery, which is getting in the way of discussing the Qatari ownership issue in a fair and logical way with other people on this forum.
 
redcucumber said:
Oh dear, you've made an arse of yourself. I was actually talking specifically about the Vatican, but also just generally not wanting to be owned by a state that is governed by religion. And even if I was talking just about the religion of Islam, how is referring to it as "weird" Islamaphobic? Comes across as extremely precious.

Also, I'm content in being intolerant of any religion, institution or person that is itself intolerant and discriminative of others based on their sexuality, race, or other personal characteristics.
Click to expand...
That's exactly the point i was making, I appreciate you being open about it.
 
I don't seem to remember there being such an uproar when PSG was bought by them.

Did the French fans protest against their new owners for human rights issues?

I do seem to remember that it was the French president who persuaded them to buy the club among other things.
 
GaryLifo said:
When Elon Musk bought twitter did that mean every twitter employee and user now represents his values and beliefs?
Click to expand...

Well, he's been banging on about the liberal culture at the company and firing people who disagree with him, sooo....
 
Crimson King said:
It was hardly a tirade. Anyway, you're really pushing into conspiracy theorist territory here and have completely ignored most of what I said.

You're obviously very small minded and blinkered.
Click to expand...

And so are you. Only seeing things in your way and I’ll see it through mine - aka the abroad countries that got destroyed by the United Kingdom.

Goodbye!
 
M4YON said:
That's exactly the point i was making, I appreciate you being open about it.
Click to expand...

To be honest. Most religions make it pretty hard to stay tolerant towards them. And what's the old saying: No tolerance for intolerance.
 
At the end of the day I'm just gonna choose to appreciate the fact the Glazers are gone if they sell.

I've hated them since the day they got here. I'm not gonna let anyone sour that feeling it will to be rid.


I will then judge the new owners in their own right further down the line whoever they are.
 
Remember the Sir Jim Ratcliffe bid? Those were the good old days. Who else will come in for a bid do we think? Hopefully it doesnt descend into even more madness
 
M4YON said:
I wasn't referring to you, although looking at some of your posts i can see why you might think i was.

i was referring to the @Wumminator who openly went after an Islamic Redcafe member asking him his stance on homosexuals, then berated him for his answer which has NOTHING to do with this thread topic and also @redcucumber who has stated he doesn't want to be owned by a state with a ' weird religion' great job guys you may be tolerant of sexuality preferences but you lack severely in religious tolerance and understanding.

When the mods finally see all this crap they're going to have a lot of work to do.
Click to expand...
Your statement that sexuality is a preference, and therefore a choice, is highly offensive as well as completely and utterly wrong. Call it sexuality, don’t make it something it’s not. Would be just as absurd to say “someone’s skin colour preference”. Utter nonsense.

Religious tolerance and understanding? The irony.
 
Godfather said:
Absolutely not no. I'm not even sure how you got that out of the post I wrote and frankly if you are trying to spin everything people say to fit your agenda I might have to report you as this is unacceptable.

What I said - which shouldn't be hard to comprehend for anyone with half a brain - is that just because the football club I love is owned by a state with questionable human rights record this won't and shouldn't lead to me justifying their acts. The way they handle certain topics should still be harshly criticised. But fans can still point out that their football club is properly run.

I for one won't stop supporting United under a Qatari ownership. Does this mean I'm ok with the way they handle eg LGTB issues? No, of course not. Do I however think they will do a much better job at running United than the Glazers? Of course I do. I can and I will differ and this is the way all of this should be handled in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Some are going to find it hard to separate that - and that isn’t an odd point of view is it?
 
Spark said:
I for one welcome our new Qatari overlords. Get the feeling that the whole fanbase is going to go full Geordie and go to all games in bishts and bow to the east every time we score.

Think I’ve read the room correctly…
Click to expand...

:lol: :lol: :lol: I bet your partner thinks you are sharp as a tack emotionally too!
 
LordSpud said:
Remember the Sir Jim Ratcliffe bid? Those were the good old days. Who else will come in for a bid do we think? Hopefully it doesnt descend into even more madness
Click to expand...

I'm kinda hoping for the Taliban to get a bid in so we can discuss the worlds poppy seed distribution.

That would give a whole other meaning to Remembrance day.

Get a free dope bag under your seat at OT.
 
M4YON said:
I wasn't referring to you, although looking at some of your posts i can see why you might think i was.

i was referring to the @Wumminator who openly went after an Islamic Redcafe member asking him his stance on homosexuals, then berated him for his answer which has NOTHING to do with this thread topic and also @redcucumber who has stated he doesn't want to be owned by a state with a ' weird religion' great job guys you may be tolerant of sexuality preferences but you lack severely in religious tolerance and understanding.

When the mods finally see all this crap they're going to have a lot of work to do.
Click to expand...
Weird.
 
LordSpud said:
Remember the Sir Jim Ratcliffe bid? Those were the good old days. Who else will come in for a bid do we think? Hopefully it doesnt descend into even more madness
Click to expand...

SJR/Ineos and Qatar are pretty much the only confirmed ones.

Rumours of American investment companies, Saudis and Musk flying about.

I imagine a lot more will come out in the run up to Friday.
 
I think Musk is just blagging like he usually does. Maybe The Glazers smell a mark and can sell him the club for £44bn
 
Murder on Zidane's Floor said:
Because empty corporate pandering while maintaining repressive policies back home doesn't wash with me.
Click to expand...
Isn't everything corporate bullshit? Do you think we would have rainbow laces and shirt number if companies didn't gain value from it? Plus, you've got genuinely no idea that the lads making the bid aren't opposed to the human rights policy in their own country. I don't agree with Brexit, I didn't vote for it and yet Swede's speak to me like I'm the one who had the final say in the matter and I'm solely responsible, just because some muppets in England didn't want straight bananas. It's a silly game to start using broad strokes to set your stall.
 
Manncunian said:
Your statement that sexuality is a preference, and therefore a choice, is highly offensive as well as completely and utterly wrong. Call it sexuality, don’t make it something it’s not.

Religious tolerance and understanding? The irony.
Click to expand...
Whoops! I've outed another intolerant fool. The terminology I used is correct and politically correct too, nice try though.
 
horsechoker said:
I think Musk is just blagging like he usually does. Maybe The Glazers smell a mark and can sell him the club for £44bn
Click to expand...
He's the biggest grifter in the world. He just wants his name involved because it's a massive sale, it's like when Dogecoin was doing well and he wanted his face and name associated with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.