Manchester City are Champions of England for the 7th time!

[Hayley Croppers chopper]

Very rare to want the Dodgers to win, but please keep Klopps Klanfielders out of top 4.

A draw feels less dirty

 

[bumbleblue]

Feeble attempt by me to bring us back on topic:

Fucking champions ( again) so stick that up your raggy, dipper, spuds. Tarquin arses!

 

[ONTHERUNWITHTHAKSIN]

 

[eastmanc]

In one episode, he’s trying to explain to his imbecile colleague, Father Dougal, about scale.

He’s holding a small, plastic model cow, and says, "This cow is very small, but those cows (real ones) are far away".

Go on, go on ,GO ON.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I don’t disagree with any of your points mate.

I do understand the history, and I think you’ve captured that eloquently.

But my point wasn’t necessarily about the politics of the UAE. My point was about David Mooney’s right to hold an opinion.

The other poster was accusing Mooney of being some kind of “judeo-Christian” fascist for disagreeing with the UAE’s stance against gay men. That’s classic victim blaming for me, and should be called out.

For the record, the devil himself could own Manchester City and it wouldn’t stop me being a fan. I was here long before him and I’ll be here long after.

It’s perfectly legitimate to separate the owner from the club itself. I also think it’s perfectly legitimate to not hold Sheikh Mansour personally responsible for the ills of the UAE. He’s one man, and his ownership of the club is completely disconnected from human rights abuses in the UAE, in my view.

I didn’t feel comfortable in the culture in the UAE. David Mooney doesn’t agree with their politics towards gays. And we’re both perfectly entitled to those views.

It doesn’t mean we don’t understand the historical and cultural reasons behind it. And it certainly doesn’t mean we love Manchester City any less.

It’s reasonable to separate Manchester City from Sheikh Mansour, and it’s reasonable to separate Sheikh Mansour from the UAE’s human rights record.

Opposing fans and media have tried to bundle it all up together, which is totally wrong in my view.

And the previous poster is basically doing exactly the same thing - equating David Mooney’s criticism of the UAE’s policies against gays as a criticism of the club. I don’t believe that to be true whatsoever.

It’s possible to support Manchester City, be grateful for all Sheikh Mansour has done for the club, and oppose the UAE’s policy towards gays. Irrespective of the historical explanations for those policies.

All the posts bar this one have been deleted.

So I'll answer the points in this one that relate to me....

The other poster was accusing Mooney of being some kind of “judeo-Christian” fascist for disagreeing with the UAE’s stance against gay men. That’s classic victim blaming for me, and should be called out.

Victim blaming? "judeo-Christian" fascist? Is that so? I think not. You have to ask yourself a question, when has a set of values, imposed on others that do not share them ever worked?

It doesn't matter how enlightened they are, it doesn't matter whether one has stuck a label called "universal human rights" on them, if they run counter to social and cultural norms, if they do not have popular support, if they have not bubbled up over time from within the prevailing culture they are rejected, often violently. In a practical sense, quite separate from political or ethical considerations telling people what they must think and do when they do not share the same value structure as you, not matter how laudable you believe your aims are rarely works.

I didn’t feel comfortable in the culture in the UAE. David Mooney doesn’t agree with their politics towards gays. And we’re both perfectly entitled to those views.

Of course he is, as long as he indicates they are his views and don't reflect a wider consensus within the fan base.

It’s possible to support Manchester City, be grateful for all Sheikh Mansour has done for the club, and oppose the UAE’s policy towards gays. Irrespective of the historical explanations for those policies.

It is possible, but only if your opposing has no practical implications, which isn't really opposing at all is it?

I'm afraid the only way you can square the circle, beyond saying there's no circle and you don't give a fuck, is if you believe that Sheikh Mansour has a right to hold the opinions he does and this trumps, now and forever your desire to impose your values on him and his country.

David can't easily do that, so he's bridged the gap between what he has and want he wants by qualifying his support.

Which he is perfectly entitled to do.

PS: Don't reply if you can't keep it civil.

 

[Shaelumstash]

All the posts bar this one have been deleted.

So I'll answer the points in this one that relate to me....



Victim blaming? "judeo-Christian" fascist? Is that so? I think not. You have to ask yourself a question, when has a set of values, imposed on others that do not share them ever worked?

It doesn't matter how enlightened they are, it doesn't matter whether one has stuck a label called "universal human rights" on them, if they run counter to social and cultural norms, if they do not have popular support, if they have not bubbled up over time from within the prevailing culture they are rejected, often violently. In a practical sense, quite separate from political or ethical considerations telling people what they must think and do when they do not share the same value structure as you, not matter how laudable you believe your aims are rarely works.



Of course he is, as long as he indicates they are his views and don't reflect a wider consensus within the fan base.



It is possible, but only if your opposing has no practical implications, which isn't really opposing at all is it?

I'm afraid the only way you can square the circle, beyond saying there's no circle and you don't give a fuck, is if you believe that Sheikh Mansour has a right to hold the opinions he does and this trumps, now and forever your desire to impose your values on him and his country.

David can't easily do that, so he's bridged the gap between what he has and want he wants by qualifying his support.

Which he is perfectly entitled to do.

PS: Don't reply if you can't keep it civil.

I didn't get the impression that Mooney was trying to talk for the entire fan base at all. He was talking for himself.

He's perfectly entitled to his views on the UAE. And entitled to say, and take any action he considers reasonable.

That's not "imposing his views on people" that's standing up for what he believes in.

I'm sorry, but it's another classic alt-right Twitter barb - "well you can't really care that much, what are you doing about it?" it's thrown at people standing up for asylum seekers "Oh, well you can't care that much, why don't you let them live in your kitchen?"

People are quite entitled to believe in something and voice that without taking direct action. My guess is you're against murder, rape and paedophillia, but you don't have to go on marches, or become a counsellor or take the victims in to your own home to be able to justify your views. You have your own life to lead.

As for "when has a set of values, imposed on others that do not share them ever worked?" off the top of my head - the end of apartheid in South Africa, the liberation of the slaves in the southern states of America, the defeat of Nazi Germany, shall I go on?

All of the above has led to subsequent ongoing problems, no question. But to suggest the alternative of taking no action and letting those views go unchallenged is a better solution is just absolutely absurd, and you know it is.

And the most glaringly obvious flaw in your point is - who is "imposing their views on Sheikh Mansour"? I'm not imposing anything. Nor is Moony. If I choose not to go on holiday to the UAE, or Moony chooses not to buy anything from the club shop, it's not for you, or Sheikh Mansour to decide whether that's ok or not.

It's quite reasonable to support Manchester City, be grateful for everything that Sheikh Mansour has done for the club and for Manchester, but to disagree with the UAE's politics on gays and migrant workers.

Manchester City, Sheikh Mansour and the UAE are all separate entities. A criticism of the UAE should not be seen as a criticism of Manchester City.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I didn't get the impression that Mooney was trying to talk for the entire fan base at all. He was talking for himself.

He's perfectly entitled to his views on the UAE. And entitled to say, and take any action he considers reasonable.

That's not "imposing his views on people" that's standing up for what he believes in.

I'm sorry, but it's another classic alt-right Twitter barb - "well you can't really care that much, what are you doing about it?" it's thrown at people standing up for asylum seekers "Oh, well you can't care that much, why don't you let them live in your kitchen?"

People are quite entitled to believe in something and voice that without taking direct action. My guess is you're against murder, rape and paedophillia, but you don't have to go on marches, or become a counsellor or take the victims in to your own home to be able to justify your views. You have your own life to lead.

As for "when has a set of values, imposed on others that do not share them ever worked?" off the top of my head - the end of apartheid in South Africa, the liberation of the slaves in the southern states of America, the defeat of Nazi Germany, shall I go on?

All of the above has led to subsequent ongoing problems, no question. But to suggest the alternative of taking no action and letting those views go unchallenged is a better solution is just absolutely absurd, and you know it is.

And the most glaringly obvious flaw in your point is - who is "imposing their views on Sheikh Mansour"? I'm not imposing anything. Nor is Moony. If I choose not to go on holiday to the UAE, or Moony chooses not to buy anything from the club shop, it's not for you, or Sheikh Mansour to decide whether that's ok or not.

It's quite reasonable to support Manchester City, be grateful for everything that Sheikh Mansour has done for the club and for Manchester, but to disagree with the UAE's politics on gays and migrant workers.

Manchester City, Sheikh Mansour and the UAE are all separate entities. A criticism of the UAE should not be seen as a criticism of Manchester City.

Alt-right?

Oh do fuck off.

A few years back I was at a seminar at Old Trafford of all places, it was organised by the Saudi British Chamber of Commerce, at the end of the day, one of the Saudi representatives lost it in a group discussion and blurted out at the Brits present "who the fuck are you to tell us what to do and how to lead our lives?"

It was a good question, maybe you should ask it of yourself.

I've been to Saudi close to a hundred times over the years, I hate the place, particularly its treatment of women, year after year and nothing ever changed. I had high hopes for the Arab spring but it rammed home one thing I knew already. that the vast majority of the population in the Arab world is even more orthodox, more deeply socially conservative than most of its rulers.

Anyways, this is beside the point.

You and I are posting past each other, and these posts are probably going to be deleted anyway, so goodbye and good luck.

 

[The perfect fumble]

 

[Shaelumstash]

Alt-right?

Oh do fuck off.

A few years back I was at a seminar at Old Trafford of all places, it was organised by the Saudi British Chamber of Commerce, at the end of the day, one of the Saudi representatives lost it in a group discussion and blurted out at the Brits present "who the fuck are you to tell us what to do and how to lead our lives?"

It was a good question, maybe you should ask it of yourself.

I've been to Saudi close to a hundred times over the years, I hate the place, particularly its treatment of women, year after year and nothing ever changed. I had high hopes for the Arab spring but it rammed home one thing I knew already. that the vast majority of the population in the Arab world is even more orthodox, more deeply socially conservative than most of its rulers.

Anyways, this is beside the point.

You and I are posting past each other, and these posts are probably going to be deleted anyway, so goodbye and good luck.

So what are you doing to oppose the treatment of women in Saudi...?

See how absurd it is?

Alt-right, far right, ****, you take your pick. And I wasn't suggesting you were alt-right by the way. I was saying the tactics you were using were the classic gaslighting deflection tactics used by the alt-right.

Cool story about your friend from Saudi. My guess is Confederates in the South, Nazi's in Germany and Boers in South Africa took exactly the same position as him. Thankfully, the "noeliberals" managed to have a bit more backbone and stood up for their fellow human beings to be treated as such.

Enjoy sticking up for people's right to be a ****. :-)

 

[Airbags Optional]

So what are you doing to oppose the treatment of women in Saudi...?

See how absurd it is?

Alt-right, far right, ****, you take your pick. And I wasn't suggesting you were alt-right by the way. I was saying the tactics you were using were the classic gaslighting deflection tactics used by the alt-right.

Cool story about your friend from Saudi. My guess is Confederates in the South, Nazi's in Germany and Boers in South Africa took exactly the same position as him. Thankfully, the "noeliberals" managed to have a bit more backbone and stood up for their fellow human beings to be treated as such.

Enjoy sticking up for people's right to be a ****. :-)

Can we get back to topic please lads, interesting that this debate is