• 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.

NUFC and other Sportswashing Spring 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s like having the fish back with this clown.

Why these terrorist lovers spend their lives posting repetitive shite on here is beyond me, surely they have their own forum where like minded teal towel wearers post?
 

Nukehasslefan said:
Let me make this abundantly clear.
Any person or people that commit atrocities or gain wealth on the back of the demise or detriment of others should be punished for it.
Now here's the problem.
We are basically under the control of people who are willing to do all of that stuff and by that, I mean governments and dictators on top of massive moneymen/women from all walks of life.
This does not just include Newcastle United.

Now then, I could offer up morals and say "right that's it I don't support Newcastle United anymore and on top of that I'm stopping watching all sports that consist of being owned by moneymen/women who gain their wealth on the back of atrocities or detriment of others.
I then have to start putting a block on anything and everything associated with that setup.
Basically, I'll find myself picking up scraps or living off the land.



Like I said above. If we only knew a tiny p[ercentage of it all we wouldn't just be arguing about Newcastle United and whoever owns it. But seeing as this is a rival board it is one thing that naturally stands out as a major battering ram and I get it.

Nothing's a swerve. It consists of almost everything but it comes down to a choice of what constitutes selective morals.
It comes down to us all being hypocrites.
You're using a more powerful conveyance with Saudis and Newcastle as your main battering ram and will massively rest on your laurels as it stands but deep down you will know you are partaking in many things that constitute some atrocities or the detriment of people or animals and so on.

A "yeah but" is no get-out-of-jail-free card. It comes down to hypocritical views and we are all guilty of it.

Absolutely but we can argue all kinds of stuff based on this mindset.
If Manufacturers didn't make guns then nobody would be shot. And because they obviously do manufacture guns and weapons, when does it become morally legal to use them?
Somebody or something has to be on the end of an atrocity or to be at the detriment of it.
I could make many arguments with this just as you could for it.

And this comes back to morals as I mentioned a while ago in this thread.
Let's make this clear.
If an army rushes a village that houses potential terrorists and wipes out that village, knowing there are many innocent people in it but they had little or no real choice but to accept them and stay silent or face the consequences, many people would have many different views.
Some would say, " well they housed terrorists and knew it, so paid the penalty."
Others would say "why couldn't the terrorists be rooted out and the innocents are left alone."
Some would say " In war innocents unfortunately die."
Some would say, "why kill anyone?"

And this comes down to selective morals and people basically being hypocrites when it is on their own doorstep, kind of thing.
It's just finding a reason as and when to use one argument against another if it appears to have a powerful one-upmanship over another person at any particular time.
This is a classic example of that.

Of course, it's black and white. It's news saturation and a massive reason to have something to beat down on something that's in the limelight. More so with Sunderland fans, because the hate from some goes beyond reasoning, so stands out as the absolute bitterness it shows.
I get that and I know Newcastle fans (some) would offer the very same if the boot was on the other foot and Sunderland fans (some) would be offering similar arguments as to what Newcastle fans offer.
As I said, it comes down to selective morals based on what suits at any particular time.



Let's be totally honest from my side. I am absolutely not going to stop supporting Newcastle United, no matter what I like or dislike about what's going on in the world.
I hate a lot of things that go on but I can not stop anything happening that is not directly within my physical grasp and ability.
You can argue I could stop supporting the club but that doesn't change anything except me taking some kind of stance that others do not, so I change nothing other than one hypocritical stance based on what other hypocrites think is correct, which is not entirely based on morals alone, more hatred and jealousy mixed in but will obviously be denied.

If we only knew half of what goes on in the world. If we only knew the truth of selective news stories.
What goes on behind closed doors in governments and large consortiums of people who get the spoils of what's on offer for collaboration with each nation.

If I had my way I'd scrap all sport and money people and hand it back to grassroots people to run for the people, by the people.
I'd get rid of armies and killing in an ideal world.
I'd let animals live naturally.
I'd let people live naturally.

And so on and so on.

But......................
Click to expand...

What’s you do last night, mate?

Spent the entire night justifying wor club to Mackems because I don’t care what they think about us. Get a grip, man :lol:
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Let me make this abundantly clear.
Any person or people that commit atrocities or gain wealth on the back of the demise or detriment of others should be punished for it.
Now here's the problem.
We are basically under the control of people who are willing to do all of that stuff and by that, I mean governments and dictators on top of massive moneymen/women from all walks of life.
This does not just include Newcastle United.

Now then, I could offer up morals and say "right that's it I don't support Newcastle United anymore and on top of that I'm stopping watching all sports that consist of being owned by moneymen/women who gain their wealth on the back of atrocities or detriment of others.
I then have to start putting a block on anything and everything associated with that setup.
Basically, I'll find myself picking up scraps or living off the land.



Like I said above. If we only knew a tiny p[ercentage of it all we wouldn't just be arguing about Newcastle United and whoever owns it. But seeing as this is a rival board it is one thing that naturally stands out as a major battering ram and I get it.

Nothing's a swerve. It consists of almost everything but it comes down to a choice of what constitutes selective morals.
It comes down to us all being hypocrites.
You're using a more powerful conveyance with Saudis and Newcastle as your main battering ram and will massively rest on your laurels as it stands but deep down you will know you are partaking in many things that constitute some atrocities or the detriment of people or animals and so on.

A "yeah but" is no get-out-of-jail-free card. It comes down to hypocritical views and we are all guilty of it.

Absolutely but we can argue all kinds of stuff based on this mindset.
If Manufacturers didn't make guns then nobody would be shot. And because they obviously do manufacture guns and weapons, when does it become morally legal to use them?
Somebody or something has to be on the end of an atrocity or to be at the detriment of it.
I could make many arguments with this just as you could for it.

And this comes back to morals as I mentioned a while ago in this thread.
Let's make this clear.
If an army rushes a village that houses potential terrorists and wipes out that village, knowing there are many innocent people in it but they had little or no real choice but to accept them and stay silent or face the consequences, many people would have many different views.
Some would say, " well they housed terrorists and knew it, so paid the penalty."
Others would say "why couldn't the terrorists be rooted out and the innocents are left alone."
Some would say " In war innocents unfortunately die."
Some would say, "why kill anyone?"

And this comes down to selective morals and people basically being hypocrites when it is on their own doorstep, kind of thing.
It's just finding a reason as and when to use one argument against another if it appears to have a powerful one-upmanship over another person at any particular time.
This is a classic example of that.

Of course, it's black and white. It's news saturation and a massive reason to have something to beat down on something that's in the limelight. More so with Sunderland fans, because the hate from some goes beyond reasoning, so stands out as the absolute bitterness it shows.
I get that and I know Newcastle fans (some) would offer the very same if the boot was on the other foot and Sunderland fans (some) would be offering similar arguments as to what Newcastle fans offer.
As I said, it comes down to selective morals based on what suits at any particular time.



Let's be totally honest from my side. I am absolutely not going to stop supporting Newcastle United, no matter what I like or dislike about what's going on in the world.
I hate a lot of things that go on but I can not stop anything happening that is not directly within my physical grasp and ability.
You can argue I could stop supporting the club but that doesn't change anything except me taking some kind of stance that others do not, so I change nothing other than one hypocritical stance based on what other hypocrites think is correct, which is not entirely based on morals alone, more hatred and jealousy mixed in but will obviously be denied.

If we only knew half of what goes on in the world. If we only knew the truth of selective news stories.
What goes on behind closed doors in governments and large consortiums of people who get the spoils of what's on offer for collaboration with each nation.

If I had my way I'd scrap all sport and money people and hand it back to grassroots people to run for the people, by the people.
I'd get rid of armies and killing in an ideal world.
I'd let animals live naturally.
I'd let people live naturally.

And so on and so on.

But......................
Click to expand...
Dear God, not reading all that...
 
Skylon said:
How many whatabouts in this pile of shite. Listen you absolute sportswashed fool, the overlords that you bow down to, actually commit atrocities. Stone raped women, chuck gays off buildings, marry 11 year olds, genocide in Yemen. But you just don't care , cos you now have chris wood up front!
Click to expand...

Yet no "watabout" Mike Ashley?

A man who inspired protests and MPs to stand up and denounce his (perfectly legal - if morally dubious) work practices inflicted on workers who were free to hand their notice in?

They all had a conscience then. That man was the devil.

Murdering Saudis that imprison women who have been abused?

WARABOUT ALL THE OTHER BAD GUYS?
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Let me make this abundantly clear.
Any person or people that commit atrocities or gain wealth on the back of the demise or detriment of others should be punished for it.
Now here's the problem.
We are basically under the control of people who are willing to do all of that stuff and by that, I mean governments and dictators on top of massive moneymen/women from all walks of life.
This does not just include Newcastle United.

Now then, I could offer up morals and say "right that's it I don't support Newcastle United anymore and on top of that I'm stopping watching all sports that consist of being owned by moneymen/women who gain their wealth on the back of atrocities or detriment of others.
I then have to start putting a block on anything and everything associated with that setup.
Basically, I'll find myself picking up scraps or living off the land.



Like I said above. If we only knew a tiny p[ercentage of it all we wouldn't just be arguing about Newcastle United and whoever owns it. But seeing as this is a rival board it is one thing that naturally stands out as a major battering ram and I get it.

Nothing's a swerve. It consists of almost everything but it comes down to a choice of what constitutes selective morals.
It comes down to us all being hypocrites.
You're using a more powerful conveyance with Saudis and Newcastle as your main battering ram and will massively rest on your laurels as it stands but deep down you will know you are partaking in many things that constitute some atrocities or the detriment of people or animals and so on.

A "yeah but" is no get-out-of-jail-free card. It comes down to hypocritical views and we are all guilty of it.

Absolutely but we can argue all kinds of stuff based on this mindset.
If Manufacturers didn't make guns then nobody would be shot. And because they obviously do manufacture guns and weapons, when does it become morally legal to use them?
Somebody or something has to be on the end of an atrocity or to be at the detriment of it.
I could make many arguments with this just as you could for it.

And this comes back to morals as I mentioned a while ago in this thread.
Let's make this clear.
If an army rushes a village that houses potential terrorists and wipes out that village, knowing there are many innocent people in it but they had little or no real choice but to accept them and stay silent or face the consequences, many people would have many different views.
Some would say, " well they housed terrorists and knew it, so paid the penalty."
Others would say "why couldn't the terrorists be rooted out and the innocents are left alone."
Some would say " In war innocents unfortunately die."
Some would say, "why kill anyone?"

And this comes down to selective morals and people basically being hypocrites when it is on their own doorstep, kind of thing.
It's just finding a reason as and when to use one argument against another if it appears to have a powerful one-upmanship over another person at any particular time.
This is a classic example of that.

Of course, it's black and white. It's news saturation and a massive reason to have something to beat down on something that's in the limelight. More so with Sunderland fans, because the hate from some goes beyond reasoning, so stands out as the absolute bitterness it shows.
I get that and I know Newcastle fans (some) would offer the very same if the boot was on the other foot and Sunderland fans (some) would be offering similar arguments as to what Newcastle fans offer.
As I said, it comes down to selective morals based on what suits at any particular time.



Let's be totally honest from my side. I am absolutely not going to stop supporting Newcastle United, no matter what I like or dislike about what's going on in the world.
I hate a lot of things that go on but I can not stop anything happening that is not directly within my physical grasp and ability.
You can argue I could stop supporting the club but that doesn't change anything except me taking some kind of stance that others do not, so I change nothing other than one hypocritical stance based on what other hypocrites think is correct, which is not entirely based on morals alone, more hatred and jealousy mixed in but will obviously be denied.

If we only knew half of what goes on in the world. If we only knew the truth of selective news stories.
What goes on behind closed doors in governments and large consortiums of people who get the spoils of what's on offer for collaboration with each nation.

If I had my way I'd scrap all sport and money people and hand it back to grassroots people to run for the people, by the people.
I'd get rid of armies and killing in an ideal world.
I'd let animals live naturally.
I'd let people live naturally.

And so on and so on.

But......................
Click to expand...
Did you or any other like minded Newcastle fans who find the actions of your owners abhorrent put in any effort whatsoever to tell the new owners that

  • They weren’t welcome
  • their investment in the club wasn’t wanted
  • That their human rights record is/was appalling and would be a stain on the clubs name
  • Write to a local MP to ask them to lobby against the potential new owners
  • Arrange a petition to demonstrate in some way your unhappiness at the new owners.
There were a large number of fans very vocal in the challenging of your former owners business practices yet the new owners seem to have no such issues

  • Have any like minded fans arranged any protests outside/inside the ground
  • Has there been an ongoing concerted campaign to tell the new owners they are not wanted
If potential owners want the club that bad these things may not have the desired impact and of course you still have the dilemma of supporting your team or not (an horrendous decision to make and not one any fan should have to make) but at the very least you could say you have tried rather than just meekly and passively accepted their ownership.

Even if the selective morality argument which you are so fond of has some validity it is watered down to an insignificant level when you look at the lack of opposition to the new ownership regime.

Anyone who professes love for their club and sits idly by when new owners with an abhorrent human rights record are looking to purchase and place an indelible stain on their club is as complicit as those idiots who dressed up in saudi traditional get up and as complicit as those who look to defend to the absolute hilt the new owners.

I’ll await the usual whataboutery and salty, jealous Mackem response.
 
Meathead said:
You’re on the Sunderland message boards first thing on a morning, are you not?
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
If I came on to slag off Sunderland I'd be as sad as hell but I come on because the people who frequent it are generally canny and there's plenty to discuss.
I don't bear ill will towards people who simply live in a different city, town, village, or postcode.

I don't use Twitter or Facebook or stuff like that so I pick select forums that I think are worth viewing and even replying to, whether that's thought of as good, bad, or ugly by whoever.
This one I think is one of the better ones I've come across.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Absolutely.
If I came on to slag off Sunderland I'd be as sad as hell but I come on because the people who frequent it are generally canny and there's plenty to discuss.
I don't bear ill will towards people who simply live in a different city, town, village, or postcode.

I don't use Twitter or Facebook or stuff like that so I pick select forums that I think are worth viewing and even replying to, whether that's thought of as good, bad, or ugly by whoever.
This one I think is one of the better ones I've come across.
Click to expand...

You must spend a lot more time on this forum than the Newcastle forum in that case, given the frequency of your posts? Says a lot about the quality of debate you can have over there among your lot, I suppose.
 
one footed wonder said:
Did you or any other like minded Newcastle fans who find the actions of your owners abhorrent put in any effort whatsoever to tell the new owners that
  • They weren’t welcome
  • their investment in the club wasn’t wanted
  • That their human rights record is/was appalling and would be a stain on the clubs name
  • Write to a local MP to ask them to lobby against the potential new owners
  • Arrange a petition to demonstrate in some way your unhappiness at the new owners.
Click to expand...
Not me, no.
How would I do that and who to?
Are you suggesting I walk up to Amanda Staveley or Merdhad or someone and protest about murder and such or are you suggesting I go to Saudi and tell their ruler to get everyone out of Newcastle?
one footed wonder said:
There were a large number of fans very vocal in the challenging of your former owners business practices yet the new owners seem to have no such issues
Click to expand...
Of course.
Many fans disliked Ashley for varying reasons.
Some were more vociferous than others.
Some, including me, didn't dislike him but knew his position was becoming untenable by the day and who also knew he wasn't going to go the extra mile for the club to appease the fans, in terms of trying to push the club to the dizzy heights.
For a few reasons.
1. He knew he couldn't keep up with the elites and knew that to try and fail would destroy him and the club.
2. His love for the club massively declined when the pure bile and hatred came out when things didn't suit certain fans at first.

I had no ill will towards Ashley and I would've rolled along with him but I would not have been overly happy with all the turmoil that his presence created among many Newcastle fans.

one footed wonder said:
  • Have any like minded fans arranged any protests outside/inside the ground
Click to expand...
I'm sure you know how things work in life, not just football.
To create a protest and mean something you need a pro-majority mindset as well as physical protesting bodies on the ground.
You will not get a pro-majority mindset or majority presence on the ground when your fanbase has had a mindset of being kicked for years and offered scraps (in their bandwagon minds) to be then offered the potential finest meals and trimmings to order as time goes on.

Human wants and morals can and will be subjective based on those wants, whether it's in football or anywhere in life where any person has the opportunity to see something that benefits them over others who think that certain benefit should never be because they are not being a part of it.
one footed wonder said:
  • Has there been an ongoing concerted campaign to tell the new owners they are not wanted
Click to expand...
Not at all, except for those who are generally not Newcastle United fans.
I'd say very few Newcastle United fans would be protesting due to the reasons I gave above. Minority gains little against majority...in anything, until such a time when perseverance by a minority can influence some of the majority to become a bigger minority, to them gain some traction.
That'll only ever happen if the owners incur the wrath of the fans by allowing the club to go on a downward spiral.
That's basically fickleness more than anything but a pretence of morals would certainly rear up with some if they believed they were scorned.

That applies to all people in whatever sports or issues in life.

Subjective morality and selective arguments for it or against something.
one footed wonder said:
If potential owners want the club that bad these things may not have the desired impact and of course you still have the dilemma of supporting your team or not (an horrendous decision to make and not one any fan should have to make) but at the very least you could say you have tried rather than just meekly and passively accepted their ownership.
Click to expand...
I'll be brutally honest. I don't generally give anything a second thought when dealing with supporting and being a fan of Newcastle United.
I have blinkers on for the club and what the team can offer in a game or players bought can offer me an exciting potential to the club. And so on.
And the truth is, most people don't think of atrocities in the world when they go about their daily lives.
They may have their consciences tapped with every news channel or a radio broadcast that offers whatever atrocity that goes on but most people will not overly concern themselves if something is not directly affecting them.



one footed wonder said:
Even if the selective morality argument which you are so fond of has some validity it is watered down to an insignificant level when you look at the lack of opposition to the new ownership regime.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter how watered down something is. If it's morally not right then it's no different, whether it's a solid block or a trace so diluted.
The strength of argument with each individual is based on their reasoning of them being a bit part to someone who they class as being a large part of something they believe is morally wrong.


one footed wonder said:
Anyone who professes love for their club and sits idly by when new owners with an abhorrent human rights record are looking to purchase and place an indelible stain on their club is as complicit as those idiots who dressed up in saudi traditional get up and as complicit as those who look to defend to the absolute hilt the new owners.
Click to expand...
Then we're all complicity in everything because we all partake in all kinds of things that come about due to suffering and yet nobody really wants to go down those routes when they see bigger in-your-face stuff on the agenda.
Your argument has no merit with me in this respect. If you say I'm complicit then you must add yourself into the equation, as well as all others.
The only difference here is, that you have a focus on something you feel doesn't involve you as being complicit in and your moral stance is to believe you're clear to offer your disgust.



one footed wonder said:
I’ll await the usual whataboutery and salty, jealous Mackem response.
Click to expand...
You could've ignored me but you seemed to offer this for a reply, so here it is.

If you do not wish me to reply then simply add-in, do not reply and I will honour it.
 
Last edited:
Nukehasslefan said:
Not me, no.
How would I do that and who to?
Are you suggesting I walk up to Amanda Staveley or Merdhad or someone and protest about murder and such or are you suggesting I go to Saudi and tell their ruler to get everyone out of Newcastle?

Of course.
Many fans disliked Ashley for varying reasons.
Some were more vociferous than others.
Some, including me, didn't dislike him but knew his position was becoming untenable by the day and who also knew he wasn't going to go the extra mile for the club to appease the fans, in terms of trying to push the club to the dizzy heights.
For a few reasons.
1. He knew he couldn't keep up with the elites and knew that to try and fail would destroy him and the club.
2. His love for the club massively declined when the pure bile and hatred came out when things didn't suit certain fans at first.

I had no ill will towards Ashley and I would've rolled along with him but I would not have been overly happy with all the turmoil that his presence created among many Newcastle fans.


I'm sure you know how things work in life, not just football.
To create a protest and mean something you need a pro-majority mindset as well as physical protesting bodies on the ground.
You will not get a pro-majority mindset or majority presence on the ground when your fanbase has had a mindset of being kicked for years and offered scraps (in their bandwagon minds) to be then offered the potential finest meals and trimmings to order as time goes on.

Human wants and morals can and will be subjective based on those wants, whether it's in football or anywhere in life where any person has the opportunity to see something that benefits them over others who think that certain benefit should never be because they are not being a part of it.

Not at all, except for those who are generally not Newcastle United fans.
I'd say very few Newcastle United fans would be protesting due to the reasons I gave above. Minority gains little against majority...in anything, until such a time when perseverance by a minority can influence some of the majority to become a bigger minority, to them gain some traction.
That'll only ever happen if the owners incur the wrath of the fans by allowing the club to go on a downward spiral.
That's basically fickleness more than anything but a pretence of morals would certainly rear up with some iof they believed they were scored.

That applies to all people in whatever sports or issues in life.

Subjective morality and selective arguments for it or against something.

I'll be brutally honest. I don't generally give anything a second thought when dealing with supporting and being a fan of Newcastle United.
I have blinkers on for the club and what the team can offer in a game or players bought can offer me an exciting potential to the club. And so on.
And the truth is, most people don't think of atrocities in the world when they go about their daily lives.
They may have their consciences tapped with every news channel or a radio broadcast that offers whatever atrocity that goes on but most people will not overly concern themselves if something is not directly affecting them.




It doesn't matter how watered down something is. If it's morally not right then it's no different, whether it's a solid block or a trace so diluted.
The strength of argument with each individual is based on their reasoning of them being a bit part to someone who they class as being a large part of something they believe is morally wrong.



Then we're all complicity in everything because we all partake in all kinds of things that come about due to suffering and yet nobody really wants to go down those routes when they see bigger in-your-face stuff on the agenda.
Your argument has no merit with me in this respect. If you say I'm complicit then you must add yourself into the equation, as well as all others.
The only difference here is, that you have a focus on something you feel doesn't involve you as being complicit in and your moral stance is to believe you're clear to offer your disgust.




You could've ignored me but you seemed to offer this for a reply, so here it is.

If you do not wish me to reply then simply add-in, do not reply and I will honour it.
Click to expand...
Do not reply to anyone, you are stinking this forum out ffs.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Absolutely.
If I came on to slag off Sunderland I'd be as sad as hell but I come on because the people who frequent it are generally canny and there's plenty to discuss.
I don't bear ill will towards people who simply live in a different city, town, village, or postcode.

I don't use Twitter or Facebook or stuff like that so I pick select forums that I think are worth viewing and even replying to, whether that's thought of as good, bad, or ugly by whoever.
This one I think is one of the better ones I've come across.
Click to expand...
You come on a Sunderland board to simply defend and justify Saudi Utd. Fans and MPs who protested against a UK businessman simply because he wasn’t prepared to bankroll the utterly selfish wishes of them. Used Johnson and his donors to push through a takeover from an abhorrent regime, not because it was ‘good for the region’ but because they hope to become the new Man City. The shit of ‘they’ll change when they take us over’ has been proven to be an attempt to ignore what they really are and how fans ignorance and acceptance of them is what they want (sportswashing)
If these despots don’t stump up mega 💰💰 then the whinging ‘needy’ fans of Saudi Utd will start their usual wailing and gnashing of teeth ‘wi disorve betta’
Why spend time on here trying to justify the indefensible to Sunderland supporters ? You haven’t ‘got your club back’ You have simply sold the soul of your club in the desperate hope of the shiny silverware you have craved since this manifestation of the club was formed in 1992
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top