Success at what cost?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Of course you are, but what’s the point?

[Kid Icarus]

Not that I think turning cross hairs on Amnesty International is anything but a shameful look anyway, but considering the worldwide power structures they expose and threaten, including the media, it should come as no surprise to anyone that they're regularly accused of that sort of stuff as if it's unique to them. Not saying it's all false by any means, but I'd take it all with a mountain of salt.

 

Either way this is another pointless distraction. Are they right or wrong? They're right, so that's what should be being addressed.

[Troll]

If you don't care about the Saudi regime's actions, that's fine, it's your choice.  But if you're trying to justify it by trying to discredit Amnesty International you need to take a look at yourself.

[TRon]

I said a while ago that perhaps there was some truth in the view that the Saudi regime is trying to modernise, and buying a British football club may be part of that. You could describe it as sportswashing, but that would be to say the whole thing is a sham. We've since heard from people on here who work out there, that there is indeed movement among the younger generation to move forward. Is it still a barbaric society compared to ours? Of course it is, and no doubt MBS still has some of the murderous traits of his family. But revolution isn't going to happen overnight there, if they are moving in the right direction, and we are part of that, then I can get on board with that. I know not everyone will, but that's fine by me.

[Darth Crooks]

So let me get this right, when discussing the merits of Saudi ownership, you arent allowed to mention:

 

Other areas where we already contribute to Saudi wealth (buying petrol for example)

The other things we buy such as iPhones, built by other questionable states.

Sheffield United (because that's COMPLETELY different)

Other premiership owners because although they are undoubtedly bad people, they arent states, therefore its completely irrelevant.

The fact that the government already deals in arms with SA.

MBS being welcomed with open arms by our government and monarch

 

It's almost as if this arguement is being weighted to help one particular side of the debate.  :lol:

 

With respect it’s because with a lot of merit those arguments are irrelevant, ignore the issue and are tantamount to yeah it’s bad but what about...?’ Sheffield United have investment from Saudis but not the the ones who are definitely in charge of bombing Yemen and called for killings pretty much directly. Governments of Russia, China, Vatican City or whoever aren’t buying football clubs. If there isn’t a difference then it smacks of cognitive dissonance. Don’t get me wrong abramovich is a wrongun close to Luton but he’s copped plenty flak and putin isn’t buying us anytime soon.

[Mag_in_NZ]

After many hours wondering how to phrase my thoughts, this just about sums it up.....

 

http://www.true-faith.co.uk/takeover-ive-supported-newcastle-united-all-my-life-i-wont-be-made-to-feel-guilty-for-it-now/

 

[Dokko]

It added: “As organisational rifts and evidence of nepotism and hypocrisy become public knowledge they will be used by government and other opponents of Amnesty’s work to undercut or dismiss Amnesty’s advocacy around the world, fundamentally jeopardising the organisation’s mission.”

 

The report, undertaken by the KonTerra Group and led by psychologists, to look into lessons learned following the suicides in 2018, found bullying and public humiliation were routinely used by management.

 

“There were multiple reports of managers belittling staff in meetings, deliberately excluding certain staff from reporting, or making demeaning, menacing comments like: ‘You’re shit!’ or: ‘You should quit! If you stay in this position, your life will be a misery,’” it said.

 

The review was based on a survey of 475 staff, 70% of the workforce of Amnesty’s international secretariat, and on scores of interviews. Some experienced “significant distress” during the process, it said.

 

“Amnesty International had a reputation for doing great work but being a hard place to work. Across many interviews the word ‘toxic’ was used to describe the Amnesty work culture as far back as the 1990s. So were the phrases ‘adversarial’, ‘lack of trust’ and ‘bullying’.”

 

Staff reported multiple accounts of discrimination on the basis of race and gender and which women, staff of colour and LGBTQI employees were targeted or treated unfairly.

 

“Given Amnesty’s status and mission – to protect and promote human rights – the number of accounts the assessment team received of ‘bullying’,‘racism’, and ‘sexism’ is disconcerting,” it said. The reviewers provided Amnesty’s secretary general with a private report on allegations of abuse of power, discrimination and unfair treatment, which merit further investigation.

 

They found multiple instances of alleged favouritism or nepotism in hiring and cases where “it appears that positions or individuals may have been made redundant without due process”.

 

One of the issues facing the organisation was a “martyrdom culture”, in which staff would sacrifice their own wellbeing by taking on huge workloads – a clear “recipe for overload and burnout”. The restructuring had “taken a considerable toll” on staff wellbeing, it said.

 

“Amnesty cannot effectively strive to make the world a better place while perpetuating an organisational culture deeply marked by secrecy, mistrust, nepotism and other forms of power abuse.”

 

 

Kumi Naidoo, Amnesty’s secretary-general, said the review was a difficult and profoundly troubling read. In a statement (pdf), he said he would bring forward a reform plan by the end of March.

 

 

 

You'd think an organisation based on defending human rights would have their own house sorted, but have let this go on since the 90s. Decades of this swept under the carpet. Sound familiar? If people want to ignore this because they want to focus simply on SA then ok, but it's not something i'm going to ignore now they are opening up us and our club up to human rights debate.

[Darth Crooks]

Where’s that from?

[STM]

So let me get this right, when discussing the merits of Saudi ownership, you arent allowed to mention:

 

Other areas where we already contribute to Saudi wealth (buying petrol for example)

The other things we buy such as iPhones, built by other questionable states.

Sheffield United (because that's COMPLETELY different)

Other premiership owners because although they are undoubtedly bad people, they arent states, therefore its completely irrelevant.

The fact that the government already deals in arms with SA.

MBS being welcomed with open arms by our government and monarch

 

It's almost as if this arguement is being weighted to help one particular side of the debate.  :lol:

 

With respect it’s because with a lot of merit those arguments are irrelevant, ignore the issue and are tantamount to yeah it’s bad but what about...?’ Sheffield United have investment from Saudis but not the the ones who are definitely in charge of bombing Yemen and called for killings pretty much directly. Governments of Russia, China, Vatican City or whoever aren’t buying football clubs. If there isn’t a difference then it smacks of cognitive dissonance.

 

How is pointing out that our own government sells arms to these people "ignoring the issue".

 

I dont think I have heard one fan say, "love the saudis, me, stand up people."

 

Most of us are just saying; with respect, why should I feel guilty about being owned by the Saudi government if our own government is prepared to deal/welcome them?

 

It's absolutely relevant in my eyes and people using "whataboutery", are avoiding debate.

[Mr Logic]

It added: “As organisational rifts and evidence of nepotism and hypocrisy become public knowledge they will be used by government and other opponents of Amnesty’s work to undercut or dismiss Amnesty’s advocacy around the world, fundamentally jeopardising the organisation’s mission.”

 

The report, undertaken by the KonTerra Group and led by psychologists, to look into lessons learned following the suicides in 2018, found bullying and public humiliation were routinely used by management.

 

“There were multiple reports of managers belittling staff in meetings, deliberately excluding certain staff from reporting, or making demeaning, menacing comments like: ‘You’re shit!’ or: ‘You should quit! If you stay in this position, your life will be a misery,’” it said.

 

The review was based on a survey of 475 staff, 70% of the workforce of Amnesty’s international secretariat, and on scores of interviews. Some experienced “significant distress” during the process, it said.

 

“Amnesty International had a reputation for doing great work but being a hard place to work. Across many interviews the word ‘toxic’ was used to describe the Amnesty work culture as far back as the 1990s. So were the phrases ‘adversarial’, ‘lack of trust’ and ‘bullying’.”

 

Staff reported multiple accounts of discrimination on the basis of race and gender and which women, staff of colour and LGBTQI employees were targeted or treated unfairly.

 

“Given Amnesty’s status and mission – to protect and promote human rights – the number of accounts the assessment team received of ‘bullying’,‘racism’, and ‘sexism’ is disconcerting,” it said. The reviewers provided Amnesty’s secretary general with a private report on allegations of abuse of power, discrimination and unfair treatment, which merit further investigation.

 

They found multiple instances of alleged favouritism or nepotism in hiring and cases where “it appears that positions or individuals may have been made redundant without due process”.

 

One of the issues facing the organisation was a “martyrdom culture”, in which staff would sacrifice their own wellbeing by taking on huge workloads – a clear “recipe for overload and burnout”. The restructuring had “taken a considerable toll” on staff wellbeing, it said.

 

“Amnesty cannot effectively strive to make the world a better place while perpetuating an organisational culture deeply marked by secrecy, mistrust, nepotism and other forms of power abuse.”

 

 

Kumi Naidoo, Amnesty’s secretary-general, said the review was a difficult and profoundly troubling read. In a statement (pdf), he said he would bring forward a reform plan by the end of March.

 

 

 

You'd think an organisation based on defending human rights would have their own house sorted, but have let this go on since the 90s. Decades of this swept under the carpet. Sound familiar? If people want to ignore this because they want to focus simply on SA then ok, but it's not something i'm going to ignore now they are opening up us and our club up to human rights debate.

 

Link? I don't necessarily doubt it but would like to see for myself.

[Darth Crooks]

So let me get this right, when discussing the merits of Saudi ownership, you arent allowed to mention:

 

Other areas where we already contribute to Saudi wealth (buying petrol for example)

The other things we buy such as iPhones, built by other questionable states.

Sheffield United (because that's COMPLETELY different)

Other premiership owners because although they are undoubtedly bad people, they arent states, therefore its completely irrelevant.

The fact that the government already deals in arms with SA.

MBS being welcomed with open arms by our government and monarch

 

It's almost as if this arguement is being weighted to help one particular side of the debate.  :lol:

 

With respect it’s because with a lot of merit those arguments are irrelevant, ignore the issue and are tantamount to yeah it’s bad but what about...?’ Sheffield United have investment from Saudis but not the the ones who are definitely in charge of bombing Yemen and called for killings pretty much directly. Governments of Russia, China, Vatican City or whoever aren’t buying football clubs. If there isn’t a difference then it smacks of cognitive dissonance.

 

How is pointing out that our own government sells arms to these people "ignoring the issue".

 

I dont think I have heard one fan say, "love the saudis, me, stand up people."

 

Most of us are just saying; with respect, why should I feel guilty about being owned by the Saudi government if our own government is prepared to deal/welcome them?

 

It's absolutely relevant in my eyes and people using "whataboutery", are avoiding debate.

 

Literally debated every point made by you bar the royalty one and hey you won’t get anyone criticise government and warped hypocrisy of monarchy more than I but neither the queen nor the british government are buying the club. Citing other teams is the very definition of whatabout as it’s a rhetorical way of circumventing the actual issue. I’m not blaming the fans btw - it fucking sucks. I’d sooner us share a pint and not worry about human rights.

[Troll]

It added: “As organisational rifts and evidence of nepotism and hypocrisy become public knowledge they will be used by government and other opponents of Amnesty’s work to undercut or dismiss Amnesty’s advocacy around the world, fundamentally jeopardising the organisation’s mission.”

 

The report, undertaken by the KonTerra Group and led by psychologists, to look into lessons learned following the suicides in 2018, found bullying and public humiliation were routinely used by management.

 

“There were multiple reports of managers belittling staff in meetings, deliberately excluding certain staff from reporting, or making demeaning, menacing comments like: ‘You’re shit!’ or: ‘You should quit! If you stay in this position, your life will be a misery,’” it said.

 

The review was based on a survey of 475 staff, 70% of the workforce of Amnesty’s international secretariat, and on scores of interviews. Some experienced “significant distress” during the process, it said.

 

“Amnesty International had a reputation for doing great work but being a hard place to work. Across many interviews the word ‘toxic’ was used to describe the Amnesty work culture as far back as the 1990s. So were the phrases ‘adversarial’, ‘lack of trust’ and ‘bullying’.”

 

Staff reported multiple accounts of discrimination on the basis of race and gender and which women, staff of colour and LGBTQI employees were targeted or treated unfairly.

 

“Given Amnesty’s status and mission – to protect and promote human rights – the number of accounts the assessment team received of ‘bullying’,‘racism’, and ‘sexism’ is disconcerting,” it said. The reviewers provided Amnesty’s secretary general with a private report on allegations of abuse of power, discrimination and unfair treatment, which merit further investigation.

 

They found multiple instances of alleged favouritism or nepotism in hiring and cases where “it appears that positions or individuals may have been made redundant without due process”.

 

One of the issues facing the organisation was a “martyrdom culture”, in which staff would sacrifice their own wellbeing by taking on huge workloads – a clear “recipe for overload and burnout”. The restructuring had “taken a considerable toll” on staff wellbeing, it said.

 

“Amnesty cannot effectively strive to make the world a better place while perpetuating an organisational culture deeply marked by secrecy, mistrust, nepotism and other forms of power abuse.”

 

 

Kumi Naidoo, Amnesty’s secretary-general, said the review was a difficult and profoundly troubling read. In a statement (pdf), he said he would bring forward a reform plan by the end of March.

 

 

 

You'd think an organisation based on defending human rights would have their own house sorted, but have let this go on since the 90s. Decades of this swept under the carpet. Sound familiar? If people want to ignore this because they want to focus simply on SA then ok, but it's not something i'm going to ignore now they are opening up us and our club up to human rights debate.

 

How is any of that relevant to Newcastle United?  It's just trying to change the subject and stop talking about how our new owners murder journalists.

[Guest neesy111]

It added: “As organisational rifts and evidence of nepotism and hypocrisy become public knowledge they will be used by government and other opponents of Amnesty’s work to undercut or dismiss Amnesty’s advocacy around the world, fundamentally jeopardising the organisation’s mission.”

 

The report, undertaken by the KonTerra Group and led by psychologists, to look into lessons learned following the suicides in 2018, found bullying and public humiliation were routinely used by management.

 

“There were multiple reports of managers belittling staff in meetings, deliberately excluding certain staff from reporting, or making demeaning, menacing comments like: ‘You’re shit!’ or: ‘You should quit! If you stay in this position, your life will be a misery,’” it said.

 

The review was based on a survey of 475 staff, 70% of the workforce of Amnesty’s international secretariat, and on scores of interviews. Some experienced “significant distress” during the process, it said.

 

“Amnesty International had a reputation for doing great work but being a hard place to work. Across many interviews the word ‘toxic’ was used to describe the Amnesty work culture as far back as the 1990s. So were the phrases ‘adversarial’, ‘lack of trust’ and ‘bullying’.”

 

Staff reported multiple accounts of discrimination on the basis of race and gender and which women, staff of colour and LGBTQI employees were targeted or treated unfairly.

 

“Given Amnesty’s status and mission – to protect and promote human rights – the number of accounts the assessment team received of ‘bullying’,‘racism’, and ‘sexism’ is disconcerting,” it said. The reviewers provided Amnesty’s secretary general with a private report on allegations of abuse of power, discrimination and unfair treatment, which merit further investigation.

 

They found multiple instances of alleged favouritism or nepotism in hiring and cases where “it appears that positions or individuals may have been made redundant without due process”.

 

One of the issues facing the organisation was a “martyrdom culture”, in which staff would sacrifice their own wellbeing by taking on huge workloads – a clear “recipe for overload and burnout”. The restructuring had “taken a considerable toll” on staff wellbeing, it said.

 

“Amnesty cannot effectively strive to make the world a better place while perpetuating an organisational culture deeply marked by secrecy, mistrust, nepotism and other forms of power abuse.”

 

 

Kumi Naidoo, Amnesty’s secretary-general, said the review was a difficult and profoundly troubling read. In a statement (pdf), he said he would bring forward a reform plan by the end of March.

 

 

 

You'd think an organisation based on defending human rights would have their own house sorted, but have let this go on since the 90s. Decades of this swept under the carpet. Sound familiar? If people want to ignore this because they want to focus simply on SA then ok, but it's not something i'm going to ignore now they are opening up us and our club up to human rights debate.

 

Sorry but that looks like your trying to change the subject from SA.  Yes, that needs sorting and I certainly hope their new management has sorted it out, but everything they've said about SA is absolutely valid still.  Oxfam has had massive internal issues recently, still doesn't mean I disregard the great work they do.

[Darth Crooks]

 

I mean that makes a depressing read anyway but to equate a paper manufacturer to an autocratic crown prince who has his family under house arrest and apparent murder of journalists doesn’t balance out. My passport is the same as mike Ashley’s but hopefully the comparisons end there.

 

 

Ashley’s description 😄

[Dokko]

Where’s that from?

 

I posted it 2 pages ago:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/06/amnesty-international-has-toxic-working-culture-report-finds

 

 

[Darth Crooks]

ta

[astraguy]

Ever since they forced Rafa out our (MY) last hope and replaced him with  I've always continued to follow us but never gave a shit if we won or lost because it isn't the club that i fell in  with. I really hope the new owners get Rafa back so he can build from the bottom up and we don't follow Man citys route of just buying the best asap  ,if they do i doubt i'll care again because i don't want to see my area flooded with "New" fans just because we are "Popular" and  have the best players i've waited two decades i can wait longer for success

[Dokko]

Sorry, a few replied there.

 

For me its about finding balance. I'm being told to look in to human rights by a company who failed their own employers for decades up until last year where a damning report in the words of the Guardian 'threatens their credibility' I think its only fair the lens in turned inwards as well. I've done my research in to SA, and I've stated its awful, there's no defending it and i'm torn, so only right to do the same from those who are against.

 

They are trying to stop this takeover. For me that is ending 13 years of misery. I've a cartoonist tell me to walk away from my club and every journo now finding an angle on why we should care as football fans for something that should have started and ended in the political arena. It's a lot to deal with, i'm not taking any of it lightly.

 

I'm not trying to change the subject or avoid it, its there to be discussed between ourselves, i just don't think we need any further outside pressure to deal with especially when their whites aren't exactly clean either. Pointing that out should be allowed, if their opinion is counted. I understand they've done countless good things, but so have many people. It's the one bad thing that everyone remembers. Think of all the celebrity child abusers who were lauded for years, you don't wash away their sins because of all the charity work they've done, do you? Oxfam and the sex workers as ManDoon pointed out. Everyone has something to hide and it seems every org does as well.

 

Whatever all that makes me then fine. Label me, call me out, but I'm trying to digest this the best way possible with facts I find and see. Like everyone else, i have a big decision to make.

[Guest neesy111]

Dokko[/member]

[Dokko]

Also its typical Ashley, this. Sell the club to multibillionaires, but i'll sell it to a tarnished state just to fuck you over one last time.

 

He's divided (and conquered) the fans for years, this may be his biggest one yet as it's even dividing individuals inside. 

 

 

[Mr Logic]

Sorry, a few replied there.

 

For me its about finding balance. I'm being told to look in to human rights by a company who failed their own employers for decades up until last year where a damning report in the words of the Guardian 'threatens their credibility' I think its only fair the lens in turned inwards as well. I've done my research in to SA, and I've stated its awful, there's no defending it and i'm torn, so only right to do the same from those who are against.

 

They are trying to stop this takeover. For me that is ending 13 years of misery. I've a cartoonist tell me to walk away from my club and every journo now finding an angle on why we should care as football fans for something that should have started and ended in the political arena. It's a lot to deal with, i'm not taking any of it lightly.

 

I'm not trying to change the subject or avoid it, its there to be discussed between ourselves, i just don't think we need any further outside pressure to deal with especially when their whites aren't exactly clean either. Pointing that out should be allowed, if their opinion is counted. I understand they've done countless good things, but so have many people. It's the one bad thing that everyone remembers. Think of all the celebrity child abusers who were lauded for years, you don't wash away their sins because of all the charity work they've done, do you? Oxfam and the sex workers as ManDoon pointed out. Everyone has something to hide and it seems every org does as well.

 

Whatever all that makes me then fine. Label me, call me out, but I'm trying to digest this the best way possible with facts I find and see. Like everyone else, i have a big decision to make.

 

 

 

It's absolutely relevant as they (Amnesty Int.) are being presented as the flagbrearer of moral standards.

 

Beyond that, and it has been mentioned numerous times already, turning the focus on the fans and dumping the dilemna on them is duplicitous by the entire media and Twitter loons, (although you cannot expect anything else from Twitter).

 

People who live in glass houses..

[Dokko]

They can’t micro manage every single employee at their org, it’s not good at all and I don’t support it but someone saying “you’re shit” to someone in a meeting? That’s meant to make me question them as an organization? They aren’t mandating that employees of amnesty bully people and from what I read they said they would address it. I just don’t really get the relevance myself, it strikes me as people trying to dig up dirt on them because they said something they don’t like. “Glass houses ffs”  so “you’re shit” is comparable to murder now. Gotcha. And I’m saying this as someone who is forcing my morals down to watch us under new ownership. If my life wasn’t as ridiculously stressful as it is, and having had the worst time recently (got Covid ffs) id be taking a very hard look into whether I’d be interested in watching us. It’s situational for me, I’m aware of the hypocrisy and the selfishness but it is what it is (as Bruce said so eloquently)

 

Course they can’t micro manage individual cases. But that report suggest decades of abuse, blind eyes and events that have led to deaths. 2 recent deaths highlighted, but who is to say more haven’t been lost due to this work culture? It’s certainly not a company I’d work for, but I have a choice. Pretty hard at 38 to choose to support another club.

 

This analysis makes a difference to me, I get it doesn’t to you and countless others. I certainly won’t be pushing my view on to you whether it can or cannot be discussed and the merit it poses on our own situation, everyone will see it with their own eyes and hopefully make up their own minds.

[Troll]

It's a good thing we're not being bought by Amnesty International then.

[Rafalove]

They’d want Beardsley back by the sound of it

[Rompe]

Is everyone who dares criticize Saudi Arabia going to get the same scrutiny as Amnesty on here?

 

Can't believe what I'm seeing.