David Conn on Abu Dhabi and Human Rights

[moomba]

I've know nowhere near enough to hold a worthwhile opinion on human rights in Abu Dhabi - but a quick Google search reveals there's clearly a debate to be had.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/united-arab-emirates" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/ ... b-emirates</a>

That debate isn't really happening on this thread as everyone is all too happy to lay into Conn (which I can understand as he does seem an opportunist) whilst ignoring the wider issue. It's a bit cringeworthy that people don't want to look at whether our owners have been involved in very unethical practices or not. Again I'm not saying that he has, but I worry that many Bluemooners would have zero interest in finding out.

Mansour has been the best thing to ever happen to City as far as I'm concerned but at the end of the day he's just a very very very rich guy putting a tiny fraction of his wealth into our club and it could easily have been someone else or another club. He doesn't deserve a free ride on human rights just because he's bought a few football players with his sparecash.

Remember that this is a football forum, I certainly don't come onto bluemoon to debate world politics.

 

[nomorethaksintimes]

I've know nowhere near enough to hold a worthwhile opinion on human rights in Abu Dhabi - but a quick Google search reveals there's clearly a debate to be had.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/united-arab-emirates" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/ ... b-emirates</a>

That debate isn't really happening on this thread as everyone is all too happy to lay into Conn (which I can understand as he does seem an opportunist) whilst ignoring the wider issue. It's a bit cringeworthy that people don't want to look at whether our owners have been involved in very unethical practices or not. Again I'm not saying that he has, but I worry that many Bluemooners would have zero interest in finding out.

Mansour has been the best thing to ever happen to City as far as I'm concerned but at the end of the day he's just a very very very rich guy putting a tiny fraction of his wealth into our club and it could easily have been someone else or another club. He doesn't deserve a free ride on human rights just because he's bought a few football players with his sparecash.

Remember that this is a football forum, I certainly don't come onto bluemoon to debate world politics.

What is this thread for then? Just to have a go at David Conn and nothing else?

 

[moomba]

I've know nowhere near enough to hold a worthwhile opinion on human rights in Abu Dhabi - but a quick Google search reveals there's clearly a debate to be had.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/united-arab-emirates" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/ ... b-emirates</a>

That debate isn't really happening on this thread as everyone is all too happy to lay into Conn (which I can understand as he does seem an opportunist) whilst ignoring the wider issue. It's a bit cringeworthy that people don't want to look at whether our owners have been involved in very unethical practices or not. Again I'm not saying that he has, but I worry that many Bluemooners would have zero interest in finding out.

Mansour has been the best thing to ever happen to City as far as I'm concerned but at the end of the day he's just a very very very rich guy putting a tiny fraction of his wealth into our club and it could easily have been someone else or another club. He doesn't deserve a free ride on human rights just because he's bought a few football players with his sparecash.

Remember that this is a football forum, I certainly don't come onto bluemoon to debate world politics.

What is this thread for then? Just to have a go at David Conn and nothing else?

I've not had a go at David Conn. I've questioned why he felt the need to make his sensationalise his article by making it about the club (ie the club that I go onto this forum to discuss).

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14703998" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14703998</a> for a much more balanced assessment of the UAE, of which Abu Dhabi is a part of.
But if City are to be criticized for ADUG ownership, shouldn't Arsenal likewise be criticized for accepting sponsorship money for their Emirates stadium?

 

[gooner6729]

I'm uncomfortable with the type of foreign owners who have invaded the English game in particular, but also European clubs like PSG and Monaco.

None of them are good for football, and none of them are ethically clean. Whether its the alleged human rights abuses in middle Eastern countries , the alleged criminal activities carried out by owners from the former USSR or the exploitative greed of American owners. It all stinks to high heaven. So does the deeply ingrained corruption of FIFA, the business practices of major sponsors (my own small protest is refusing to buy Nike gear) and abominations like a winter World Cup in Qatar. It's all ugly.

By the same token so is everything else. I work in precious metals and Im aware of the human exploitation and environmental devastation that causes. Ditto for many other industries.

I grew up in an era when football was tarnished by poor facilities, violence and racism. People talked about the need to clean it up. Ironically, despite its ugly flaws, it was much cleaner than it is.

As a fan it's hard to walk away from something that is a major part of who you are and what your background is. That's what clubs are to most fans, so the only real option is to accept things we are powerless to change, but without closing our eyes to what has happened to our game.

As an Arsenal fan I openly admit that I would prefer Usmanov in control to the Yank Kroenke. Morally, I understand the alleged crimes of the former are probably greater than those of the latter, but if you have been put into a situation where you have to get in bed with a crook, you might as well go for the one who offers the most success.

The people who are responsible for this are those who prostituted English football to the world with the creation of the Premiership, and not the fans. The Germans have the right idea keeping certain elements out of their game. It might mean a few million less tv fans in Asia and smaller club budgets, but their game is pure in comparison to ours.

 

[S04]

Time to close this shit thread..The "preaching to the perverted" theme in the article have set everyones teeth on edge.
Conn have this idea of how the world ought to be and doesn´t care if he steps on some toes to get it across, that City/Abu Dhabi was targeted is just because UAE is the best in class in that part of the world but have together with the other GCC states told everyone that in their part of the world it´s their rule that matters. Not some western value.

Not that anyone in UK is interested but it was an article by a Gulf journo demonizing western democratic governments for enslaving their citizens in a montain of public debt a few years ago..according to him it was an immoral and sickening act that ought to have been illegal.

 

[gooner6729]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14703998 for a much more balanced assessment of the UAE, of which Abu Dhabi is a part of.
But if City are to be criticized for ADUG ownership, shouldn't Arsenal likewise be criticized for accepting sponsorship money for their Emirates stadium?

Yes, we should, although there is a difference between receiving sponsorship fees from a company to being controlled by the ruling family of a nation that allegedly abuses human rights.

I'm not suggesting any of the Emirates are anything like Nazi Germany, but think of it like this. Nobody would or should have batted an eyelid in 1939 if a racing driver received support from Mercedes Benz. It was and is a company that builds cars. Taking money from the Nazi party would have been rather different.<br /><br />-- Wed Jul 31, 2013 6:14 pm --<br /><br />

Time to close this shit thread..The "preaching to the perverted" theme in the article have set everyones teeth on edge.
Conn have this idea of how the world ought to be and doesn´t care if he steps on some toes to get it across, that City/Abu Dhabi was targeted is just because UAE is the best in class in that part of the world but have together with the other GCC states told everyone that in their part of the world it´s their rule that matters. Not some western value.

Not that anyone in UK is interested but it was an article by a Gulf journo demonizing western democratic governments for enslaving their citizens in a montain of public debt a few years ago..according to him it was an immoral and sickening act that ought to have been illegal.

Assuming the S04 stands for Schalke your attitude is not surprising. Didn't Schalke enjoy great government sympathy during their golden 1930s era, while other clubs were suffering under the same Nazi govt?

 

[Nealy]

British Human Rights & Justice Record = Hillsborough, Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Bloody Sunday, Stephen Lawrence etc etc

 

[1972Bramhall_Blue]

David Conn seems to endlessly hark back to some imagined socialistic footballing utopia where money was unimportant, where the Macclesfield Town’s of this world could compete with the Manchester City’s or United’s and where fans were respected and listened to by the clubs. Such a world has never existed and never will, in football money has always talked and all that has changed is the amount you need to sit at the top table. Mr Conn has made some good points in the past, ‘The Football Business’ and ‘The beautiful Game’ were excellent books showing the darker side of the Premier League revolution, but where Conn fails utterly is to suggest a workable alternative now that it *has happened* beyond a few woolly and uninformed platitudes about Germany and his love in with the footballing dead end that is FC United. He also completely fails to suggest how a club like City (or Everton, Villa, Spurs etc.) are supposed to hope to compete with the clubs who were in the right place at the right time when the Champions League gravy train set off without the backing of an owner who is ‘richer than god’. Conn comes across as a serial malcontent and golden ager– eternally raging about the iniquities of the modern game while harking back to a glorious past that never was but without anything to say about building a better future.

 

[nomorethaksintimes]

British Human Rights & Justice Record = Hillsborough, Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Bloody Sunday, Stephen Lawrence etc etc

Moral relativism again.