• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

ALL NUFC and Sportwashing stuff in here. (Threads will be merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.

UpTheDuff said:
“Saudi investors pump $144m into London’s office market:

Arab investors have invested £1.2 billion ($1.68 billion) in London’s office real estate market since 2018, with Saudi Arabia accounting for £103 million, according to industry data.”

You must be logged on to see external links

And most recently, another Saudi investment up there in the North East which dwarfs the Newcastle deal:

“Saudi Arabia's SABIC to invest at Teesside plant in northeast England:

The British government said that Saudi petrochemical firm Saudi Basic Industries Corp (SABIC) would invest nearly 1 billion pounds ($1.37 billion) at its Teesside facility in northeast England with the aim of decarbonisation.

"Fantastic to see nearly £1 billion invested in @SABIC's Teesside facility, creating and safeguarding 1,000 jobs," British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said in a
You must be logged on to see external links
on Wednesday evening.”

You must be logged on to see external links

Like it or not, the U.K. is awash with Saudi money. Either allow it all, including Newcastle, or reject it all. To pick out one investment (Newcastle) for special criticism looks more like jealousy than concern about human rights.
Click to expand...
The difference has been pointed out loads of times. I don't really care if a crap regime invests money in uber or Disney. I'd rather they didn't, but they aren't using these investments to try and mask or deflect from their atrocities at home, they're simply investing to make money. Investing in a football team is completely different. They own them, they're the face of Newcastle. If they get any success, people will link that to the Saudis, it'll be their success. When someone mentions the Saudis you won't think of Yemen or khashoggi as quickly, a lot of people will think about Newcastle. They, as a club, will continue to support rainbow laces / taking the knee etc to give a veneer of respectability. Again, people will think "they can't be all bad". All the while they continue to persecute and murder in their country. A minor shareholding in a major company doesn't have this effect at all, especially as barely anyone knows who or what they invest in at any one time and the investments are generally very small.

Football clubs are meant to represent the people and the community in which they're based. The Saudis don't give a fuck about Newcastle. Given its reputation as a party and drinking city they no doubt think they're infidel scum, they'd arrest just about every mag if they were in Saudi Arabia, they detest the community. I don't care if a bit part investor in a taxi company I use think that of me, but I wouldn't want the owner of my football club thinking it.

I'm not one who thinks the mags should all turn their back on their club, I wouldn't turn my back on Sunderland tbh. I certainly wouldn't wear Saudi dress, fly their flag or try to justify or explain their actions though. I'd know they didn't give a fuck about me, so why would I be their mouthpiece? They'd be using my club to improve their reputation, I'd see them as undesirable owners who might bring us some bought success. But to compare it to other investments is naive at best.
 
Last edited:
Guinness Guzzler said:
The difference has been pointed out loads of times. I don't really care if a crap regime invests money in uber or Disney. I'd rather they didn't, but they aren't using these investments to try and mask or deflect from their atrocities at home, they're simply investing to make money. Investing in a football team is completely different. They own them, they're the face of Newcastle. If they get any success, people will link that to the Saudis, it'll be their success. When someone mentions the Saudis you won't think of Yemen or khashoggi as quickly, a lot of people will think about Newcastle. They, as a club, will continue to support rainbow laces / taking the knee etc to give a veneer of respectability. Again, people will think "they can't be all bad". All the while they continue to persecute and murder in their country. A minor shareholding in a major company doesn't have this effect at all, especially as barely anyone knows who or what they invest in at any one time and the investments are generally very small.

Football clubs are meant to represent the people and the community in which they're based. The Saudis don't give a fuck about Newcastle. Given its reputation as a party and drinking city they no doubt think they're infidel scum, they'd arrest just about every mag if they were in Saudi Arabia, they detest the community. I don't care if a bit part investor in a taxi company I use think that of me, but I wouldn't want the owner of my football club thinking it.

I'm not one who thinks the mags should all turn their back on their club, I wouldn't turn my back on Sunderland tbh. I certainly wouldn't wear Saudi dress, fly their flag or try to justify or explain their actions though. I'd know they didn't give a fuck about me, so why would I be their mouthpiece? They'd be using my club to improve their reputation, I'd see them as undesirable owners who might bring us some bought success. But to compare it to other investments is naive at best.
Click to expand...

Great post. I've said from day dot, their fans would be better off staying quiet and not saying anything. They can't stay quiet though, their egos and self-entitlement won't allow it, instead the majority have gone into full defensive mode.
Pants said:
Shit, I've missed all this! Where exactly can I find these hordes of non-mags, dressed as mass murderers, dancing about the streets celebrating them and bending over backward to defend their crimes?
Click to expand...

And begging them to purchase their club or business. Fawning over them in social media posts and videos :lol:
Exile 1968 said:
You must be logged on to see media items
Click to expand...

Whilst I disagree with any personal abuse like that, wasn't it one of their own that submitted it in the first place? I agree I'm surprised the paper published it, but they're a sensitive bunch aren't they? Amazing how they react to minor things but refuse to question their new owners because they're hoping they'll splash the cash.

I tell you what, I always wondered how thick people had to be to go along with witch hunts all those years ago, not much has changed really. It's amazing how easily people are brainwashed, many educated people too.
 
Last edited:
Exile 1968 said:
You must be logged on to see media items

Another apologist to Murderers
Click to expand...

Wonder how many times you've been reported/blocked.

They won't like that at all. Showing them up for the deluded, selective memory fools that they are.

When she does shit they will be saying desperate Dan had a shave..

One of them turned up at the training ground with a cabbage on a stick ffs
 
gipetto said:
Great post. I've said from day dot, their fans would be better off staying quiet and not saying anything. They can't stay quiet though, their egos and self-entitlement won't allow it, instead the majority have gone into full defensive mode.


And begging them to purchase their club or business. Fawning over them in social media posts and videos :lol:
Click to expand...
Exactly. Like I say I wouldn't walk away from Sunderland. Some would but most wouldn't. I wouldn't like them being owners but I'd be optimistic about the football side. That doesn't mean they have to jump to their defence constantly though. Daft thing is, a lot have said "we'll use this takeover to engage with them". Fine, do it. But you don't do it by sucking their arseholes on twitter. You do it by reminding them that they've bought into Newcastle, but the other way round. Any time there's an atrocity you say you're disgusted that it's been carried out by people involved in your club. You try your best to deliver the message that Newcastle is an inclusive, welcoming city and that a lot of the things that go on in their country is wholly incompatible. The Saudis wouldn't give a fuck of course, but at least you'd be using your voice. Or stay silent if you aren't that militant / arsed, but certainly don't fawn over the fuckers. They're probably all scared that the Saudis might fuck off and they'll be irrelevant again
 
ilovehorswill said:
Great, using your logic I’ve bought one share in Tesla. I’ve emailed Elon Musk’s secretary re the next director’s meeting and she’s blocked me 🤷

More utter waffle
Click to expand...
Are Tesla part of the PIF or any atrocious regime that you know of? If not then there's no issue.
Buying one share in any company that has ties (in any form) to the regime you argue against, then that's when the morality and hypocrisy starts.
If this isn't you then you're ok to argue it in the belief you're not playing any part.
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Exactly. Like I say I wouldn't walk away from Sunderland. Some would but most wouldn't. I wouldn't like them being owners but I'd be optimistic about the football side. That doesn't mean they have to jump to their defence constantly though. Daft thing is, a lot have said "we'll use this takeover to engage with them". Fine, do it. But you don't do it by sucking their arseholes on twitter. You do it by reminding them that they've bought into Newcastle, but the other way round. Any time there's an atrocity you say you're disgusted that it's been carried out by people involved in your club. You try your best to deliver the message that Newcastle is an inclusive, welcoming city and that a lot of the things that go on in their country is wholly incompatible. The Saudis wouldn't give a fuck of course, but at least you'd be using your voice. Or stay silent if you aren't that militant / arsed, but certainly don't fawn over the fuckers. They're probably all scared that the Saudis might fuck off and they'll be irrelevant again
Click to expand...

They are most definitely scared they'll get cold feet and do one. I don't think they'll be best pleased if they do buy Marseille or Inter.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Are Tesla part of the PIF or any atrocious regime that you know of? If not then there's no issue.
Buying one share in any company that has ties (in any form) to the regime you argue against, then that's when the morality and hypocrisy starts.
If this isn't you then you're ok to argue it in the belief you're not playing any part.
Click to expand...

He's referring to your weak argument about PIF investing in Disney etc. anyone can do that, we could all have the same stock portfolio as PIF only on a far far smaller scale. They don't own these companies you're referring to however, which means you and your fans that are toeing the same line are wasting your time, it's nonsense.
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Exactly. Like I say I wouldn't walk away from Sunderland. Some would but most wouldn't. I wouldn't like them being owners but I'd be optimistic about the football side. That doesn't mean they have to jump to their defence constantly though. Daft thing is, a lot have said "we'll use this takeover to engage with them". Fine, do it. But you don't do it by sucking their arseholes on twitter. You do it by reminding them that they've bought into Newcastle, but the other way round. Any time there's an atrocity you say you're disgusted that it's been carried out by people involved in your club. You try your best to deliver the message that Newcastle is an inclusive, welcoming city and that a lot of the things that go on in their country is wholly incompatible. The Saudis wouldn't give a fuck of course, but at least you'd be using your voice. Or stay silent if you aren't that militant / arsed, but certainly don't fawn over the fuckers. They're probably all scared that the Saudis might fuck off and they'll be irrelevant again
Click to expand...
Desperate to be the “best” supporters they go the extra mile often making complete tits of themselves.

I mean a few sets of supporters made a coffin with their club’s name on to protest about the “death of their club”. It’s dramatic and over the top, alcohol can do that.

But to this day, only one club planned out an entire f***ing funeral complete with vicar and ceremony thinking “gerrin, they’ll show us on Sky Sports and everyone will love us”
 
This isn't about percentages being higher or lower.
If you partake in anything PIF are part of whether it's 00000000000000000.1% or 20%/50%/80% or 100% you're still buying into it.
If you don't buy into any of it and buy into nothing from any country that commit bad/terrible/atrocious acts then you have a stronger argument.
FatDrummer said:
That is utter rubbish.
PIF (Therefore the KSA) OWN 80% of your club. That makes them OWNERS of your club.Not small shareholders with no say on the running of the club or business…..actual OWNERS.
Click to expand...

No. It makes them part owners. But you can argue 1005 owners if you wish. It's all still down to percentages.
Arguing a lesser percentage in something keeps morals higher is basically not an argument.
FatDrummer said:
They NEVER owned Disney (and have sold what shares they had for a profit), they don’t OWN Uber and they don’t own every drop of petroleum on the market, so filling up your car is quite simply a redundant argument.
Click to expand...
If they feed into them and it is allowed it tars them all, including those who partake in what's on offer by those companies.
Subjective morality.
FatDrummer said:
You try to come over as a reasoned human being in your insipid replies to counterpoints, but in reality you are no more than a beige KSA flag waver.
Click to expand...
I don't know what I come over as. All I can do is answer in the manner I think suits.
That answer will not suit those arguing against me, obviously,
FatDrummer said:
“Moralistic viewpoints are subjective” you say….that is true.
BUT if you have the morals which go against everything the KSA stands for (as you have stated you do) then not standing behind those morals to challenge it because you are an ‘NUFC supporter” is washing your hands and turning a blind eye to all of the atrocities perpetrated by your club’s….OWNERS.
Click to expand...

If I want to argue the points like you are then I'll argue that I don't care for the regime but I am a Newcastle United fan and supporter of the club.
If that puts me into the bracket of condoning atrocities by people then there's nothing I can do about that. People willd ecide what they decide, regardless.

FatDrummer said:
You can come back with your bland dissections of this post line by line if you wish, but everyone sees you for the moral vacuum that you are.
Click to expand...
My morals are subjective like the morals of everyone.
Would you say all your morals are intact with no subjectiveness?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top