Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Re: Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Threa
And just to prove you wrong, I'll say it: your reasoning (that no one is supposedly allowed to state on here because we mods don't allow it) is that Conn is Jewish therefore automatically hates all Arabs & Muslims.
But you clearly aren't aware that the club has 2 Jewish directors (both appointed by those Arab Muslims they hate so much) and the late Life President was also Jewish. I'm in the same boat as Conn as I was born Jewish, brought up in a not very religious family but now don't practice at all. So does the same apply to me or am I one of the "good" Jews?
And having said that, I'll tell you that the first thing the (Islamophobic, Arab-hating) David Conn said to me when we met up some time after the takeover wasn't "I wish these dirty Arabs would fuck off" or "Why do we have to be owned by a bunch of Jew-hating Muslims?" but "Isn't it great to be a City fan these days?"
Yes he hates the increasing influence of money in football but that's been a constant and consistent theme of his his since Spurs set up a holding company to get round FA financial rules and a cartel of five clubs blackmailed the others into giving up their share of gate receipts from games played away from home.
I understand where he's coming from and have no problem with him criticising Osborne getting reflected glory when his cuts have hit the most vulnerable the hardest. But I'll also criticise him when I have to and he definitely has a blind-spot over the work being done by our owners in East Manchester. We've had the discussion on more than one occasion and it frustrates me that he can't see that something is better than nothing and that the 'something' is not insubstantial, particularly in a blighted area that desperately needs investment and jobs.
And given that he's been publicly critical of the negative impact that Arsenal & Liverpool's respective stadium plans have had on their local environments, you might think that he'd find something positive to say about developments that should have the opposite impact. When you consider what we put into our community as a club, then perhaps he should contrast that with the impact the Glazers have had in Trafford, Abramovich has had on the poorer areas of West London, FSG have had on the people of Anfield, etc. So I agree it's a cheap shot at a club that has far more involvement in its local community than the vast majority of its peers and it wasn't necessary.
I really lose my rag when idiots come out with this shit time and time again. It's only obvious to those with brain cells in single figures and those whose username is the same as a manager who claimed there was no racism in football, after a player had bananas thrown at him as well as being subjected to monkey chants.Del_Bosque said:
And just to prove you wrong, I'll say it: your reasoning (that no one is supposedly allowed to state on here because we mods don't allow it) is that Conn is Jewish therefore automatically hates all Arabs & Muslims.
But you clearly aren't aware that the club has 2 Jewish directors (both appointed by those Arab Muslims they hate so much) and the late Life President was also Jewish. I'm in the same boat as Conn as I was born Jewish, brought up in a not very religious family but now don't practice at all. So does the same apply to me or am I one of the "good" Jews?
And having said that, I'll tell you that the first thing the (Islamophobic, Arab-hating) David Conn said to me when we met up some time after the takeover wasn't "I wish these dirty Arabs would fuck off" or "Why do we have to be owned by a bunch of Jew-hating Muslims?" but "Isn't it great to be a City fan these days?"
Yes he hates the increasing influence of money in football but that's been a constant and consistent theme of his his since Spurs set up a holding company to get round FA financial rules and a cartel of five clubs blackmailed the others into giving up their share of gate receipts from games played away from home.
I understand where he's coming from and have no problem with him criticising Osborne getting reflected glory when his cuts have hit the most vulnerable the hardest. But I'll also criticise him when I have to and he definitely has a blind-spot over the work being done by our owners in East Manchester. We've had the discussion on more than one occasion and it frustrates me that he can't see that something is better than nothing and that the 'something' is not insubstantial, particularly in a blighted area that desperately needs investment and jobs.
And given that he's been publicly critical of the negative impact that Arsenal & Liverpool's respective stadium plans have had on their local environments, you might think that he'd find something positive to say about developments that should have the opposite impact. When you consider what we put into our community as a club, then perhaps he should contrast that with the impact the Glazers have had in Trafford, Abramovich has had on the poorer areas of West London, FSG have had on the people of Anfield, etc. So I agree it's a cheap shot at a club that has far more involvement in its local community than the vast majority of its peers and it wasn't necessary.