Kurt Zouma

cabbles

KBslittlesis said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Zouma starts for West Ham tonight 

I’m absolutely appalled by this.
🤬

It’s disgusting.  But you have to remember who runs that club.  Gold and Sullivan are scum and so is Brady.  Shitstain of a club 

red10

Have 2 cats, both rescued. However my black cat is the most engaging animal, sleeps next to me at night and talks constantly and always looks you in the eye which normally cats dont do as it is seen as a threat. Any harm comes to her and whoever is responsible will wish they had never been born. This bloke is an absolute scumbag and deserves all the shit he is going to get !!!!!

hoof_it_up_to_benty

West Ham setting a great example by starting him tonight - amazing decision.

eaststandmike

cabbles said:

KBslittlesis said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Zouma starts for West Ham tonight 

I’m absolutely appalled by this.
🤬

It’s disgusting.  But you have to remember who runs that club.  Gold and Sullivan are scum and so is Brady.  Shitstain of a club 

Good point cabbs but I suspect there are a lot more football club owners/managers who would have started him as well. Far too much money involved now to drop your best players, I suspect the "internal" punishment will be minimal as well. 

North Lower Neil

https://twitter.com/TheFLZone/status/1491175272418537474?s=20&t=tu-JLCpPqbNDY7QVHH0lmQ

Bedsaddick

Mendonca In Asdas

Take the cat away for starters, then castrate Zouma, might come to his senses, what a Wally!

hoof_it_up_to_benty

I was worried that West Ham wouldn't take it seriously but they've acted very decisively.
Reflects well on the club and sends out a strong message.

ValleyOfTears

bobmunro said:

ValleyOfTears said:

lordromford said:

ValleyOfTears said:

Carter said:

Utter shithouse of the highest order, complete coward and a bully. Football will do what it does though, it will forgive, he won't get sacked because a club with a lower sense of morality will sign him up. 

Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?" 

It seems noone really knows. 

I like to think noone on these pages would ever do things the likes of Mendy, Zouma, Greenwood et al do/done/did. And seem to laugh at…

This is the second time you’ve tried to make recent horrible behaviour about a lack of faith.

For your information, Mason Greenwood is Christian. Mendy and Zouma are both Muslims. (Edit: Not that this makes any difference. They could be a Jew, a Satanist and an atheist, your argument would still be bunk.)

Stop trying to make this into something it isn’t.

I think you misunderstand the difference between "declaring an affiliation to something" and actually BEING that something.  Calling oneself "a Christian" for example, doesn't mean one IS Christian in their behaviour or even have any faith at all. "Faith" being the operative word. It often just means they were once Christened or baptized. 

But of course if someone were to declare they were a Satanist or athiest ~ to borrow your words ~ it would certainly confirm what they were NOT. A person of faith. 

What is a 'person of faith'? 

I do not have faith in a god as manifested in organised revealed religions - but I do have faith in my wife and children, faith in the consultants that have treated my family, faith in my true friends. To live a good moral life one doesn't need to follow the doctrine of ancient books or to do what the priest says you should do. 

So I am an atheist, but also a person of faith. 

Yes Bob and it is very good you have "faith" in your wife and  your children and medical consultants. All sounds very good and right to me. 

"A person of faith" however could be reasonably understood the world over (we are talking Christian faith in this instance) as a person who has faith in life BEYOND the here and now of wives, children and medical consultants and all the other things we may place our trust in our fleeting temporal life this side of the grave. 

ValleyOfTears

Henry Irving said:

A satanist would be a person of faith as they believe in a supernatural being.

Sadly there are many very ill people in North America that agree with your assertion Henry. 

ValleyOfTears

Henry Irving said: and

ValleyOfTears said:

 And it's actually Jewish belief that first brings us this account not Christian. 

So you reject the old testament?

BTW the Rabbi Jesus was Jewish 

1. No. 
2. He was indeed.

ValleyOfTears

lordromford said:

ValleyOfTears said:

lordromford said:

ValleyOfTears said:

Carter said:

Utter shithouse of the highest order, complete coward and a bully. Football will do what it does though, it will forgive, he won't get sacked because a club with a lower sense of morality will sign him up. 

Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?" 

It seems noone really knows. 

I like to think noone on these pages would ever do things the likes of Mendy, Zouma, Greenwood et al do/done/did. And seem to laugh at…

This is the second time you’ve tried to make recent horrible behaviour about a lack of faith.

For your information, Mason Greenwood is Christian. Mendy and Zouma are both Muslims. (Edit: Not that this makes any difference. They could be a Jew, a Satanist and an atheist, your argument would still be bunk.)

Stop trying to make this into something it isn’t.

I think you misunderstand the difference between "declaring an affiliation to something" and actually BEING that something.  Calling oneself "a Christian" for example, doesn't mean one IS Christian in their behaviour or even have any faith at all. "Faith" being the operative word. It often just means they were once Christened or baptized. 

But of course if someone were to declare they were a Satanist or athiest ~ to borrow your words ~ it would certainly confirm what they were NOT. A person of faith. 

I didn’t misunderstand anything. 

I was pointing out that your argument was risible. Your argument about a post-christian morality or whatever made so many assumptions about these horrible people without even finding out whether they are people of faith. Yes, they might be religious in name only, but the evidence suggests maybe not, yet you chose to originally assume they’re not faithful purely because of their behaviour. Sounds like prejudging (or prejudice, if you prefer) which I would view as ‘not a very high moral position’. I’m only half serious, of course, but you can’t just assume things like that and state them as if they’re obviously true.

I also certainly did understand that you keep trying to equate morals with faith. And I understand that this is an equation that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

To be fair, many people do find faith gives them the comfort they need when living their life in a way they feel is appropriate. It works for them and if that’s your bag, then all power to you. Crack on and good luck. Just don’t hurt anyone in the process and we’ll all get along fine. But if you consider yourself to have good morals, I’d say you’ve achieved much of that despite having faith, not because of it.

Morals and faith, regardless of which version of faith you subscribe to, are not happy bedfellows. There are too many instances of religious scriptures condoning attitudes and behaviours that are patently amoral for anyone to sensibly claim that faith sets a moral example.

Most of the good morals we have today are born out of resistance to religious doctrine, not adherence to it. Even most religious groups recognise this - constantly picking and choosing verses that still have modern relevance while the ones involving selling your daughters into prostitution or sacrificing goats (and/or children) are conveniently ignored. The fact that only the most widely ridiculed fundamentalist groups stick strictly to the original books speaks volumes.

So no. I didn’t misunderstand.
But please don’t start the “modern society is fucked because we’re not christian enough” bollocks again. It’s tiresome and just plain wrong.

Yes, I am aware re: taking verses from Bible can be very problematic. Taking the text out of context to create a pretext. As you may have observed, I have not done this once. On this thread or any other..

And one has to remember it wasn't written in chapter and verse or intended to be read (privately)  that way. But as "a book at a time". 

I have no idea which passage you refer to about prostitution etc 

There is nothing in the OT or NT that should be discarded either.   Much of the points you raise are dealt with perfectly clearly in the early chapters of CS Lewis' " Mere Christianity". A classic. I highly recommend it. 

lordromford

ValleyOfTears said:

lordromford said:

ValleyOfTears said:

lordromford said:

ValleyOfTears said:

Carter said:

Utter shithouse of the highest order, complete coward and a bully. Football will do what it does though, it will forgive, he won't get sacked because a club with a lower sense of morality will sign him up. 

Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?" 

It seems noone really knows. 

I like to think noone on these pages would ever do things the likes of Mendy, Zouma, Greenwood et al do/done/did. And seem to laugh at…

This is the second time you’ve tried to make recent horrible behaviour about a lack of faith.

For your information, Mason Greenwood is Christian. Mendy and Zouma are both Muslims. (Edit: Not that this makes any difference. They could be a Jew, a Satanist and an atheist, your argument would still be bunk.)

Stop trying to make this into something it isn’t.

I think you misunderstand the difference between "declaring an affiliation to something" and actually BEING that something.  Calling oneself "a Christian" for example, doesn't mean one IS Christian in their behaviour or even have any faith at all. "Faith" being the operative word. It often just means they were once Christened or baptized. 

But of course if someone were to declare they were a Satanist or athiest ~ to borrow your words ~ it would certainly confirm what they were NOT. A person of faith. 

I didn’t misunderstand anything. 

I was pointing out that your argument was risible. Your argument about a post-christian morality or whatever made so many assumptions about these horrible people without even finding out whether they are people of faith. Yes, they might be religious in name only, but the evidence suggests maybe not, yet you chose to originally assume they’re not faithful purely because of their behaviour. Sounds like prejudging (or prejudice, if you prefer) which I would view as ‘not a very high moral position’. I’m only half serious, of course, but you can’t just assume things like that and state them as if they’re obviously true.

I also certainly did understand that you keep trying to equate morals with faith. And I understand that this is an equation that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

To be fair, many people do find faith gives them the comfort they need when living their life in a way they feel is appropriate. It works for them and if that’s your bag, then all power to you. Crack on and good luck. Just don’t hurt anyone in the process and we’ll all get along fine. But if you consider yourself to have good morals, I’d say you’ve achieved much of that despite having faith, not because of it.

Morals and faith, regardless of which version of faith you subscribe to, are not happy bedfellows. There are too many instances of religious scriptures condoning attitudes and behaviours that are patently amoral for anyone to sensibly claim that faith sets a moral example.

Most of the good morals we have today are born out of resistance to religious doctrine, not adherence to it. Even most religious groups recognise this - constantly picking and choosing verses that still have modern relevance while the ones involving selling your daughters into prostitution or sacrificing goats (and/or children) are conveniently ignored. The fact that only the most widely ridiculed fundamentalist groups stick strictly to the original books speaks volumes.

So no. I didn’t misunderstand.
But please don’t start the “modern society is fucked because we’re not christian enough” bollocks again. It’s tiresome and just plain wrong.

Yes, I am aware re: taking verses from Bible can be very problematic. Taking the text out of context to create a pretext. As you may have observed, I have not done this once. On this thread or any other..

And one has to remember it wasn't written in chapter and verse or intended to be read (privately)  that way. But as "a book at a time". 

I have no idea which passage you refer to about prostitution etc 

There is nothing in the OT or NT that should be discarded either.   Much of the points you raise are dealt with perfectly clearly in the early chapters of CS Lewis' " Mere Christianity". A classic. I highly recommend it. 

Ok. Great.
Will you refrain from doing the “morality = faith” bit though?

TellyTubby

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

bobmunro

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

TellyTubby

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Fair points that I wasn't aware of. I have only heard the quote that the Police won't be investigating.

My point that he is bang to rights based on the description of the incident still stands. 

Sillybilly

Clarky said:

Keep seeing religion being mentioned and I can't be asked to read all that bollocks but if somebody is trying to connect religion to a grown man kicking a cat across the kitchen floor needs to take a close look at themselves. Apologies if I have got it wrong but if people do want a discussion about religion start a thread on it.

Amen to that.  

guinnessaddick

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Mendonca In Asdas

guinnessaddick said:

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Wow that cat gets around!

Chris_from_Sidcup

Mendonca In Asdas said:

guinnessaddick said:

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Wow that cat gets around!

He lives in Essex.

bobmunro

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Mendonca In Asdas said:

guinnessaddick said:

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Wow that cat gets around!

He lives in Essex.

I did mishear Surrey then!

Arsenetatters

Good luck with the RSPCA doing anything. Bloody useless.

hoof_it_up_to_benty

bobmunro said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Mendonca In Asdas said:

guinnessaddick said:

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Wow that cat gets around!

He lives in Essex.

I did mishear Surrey then!

They seem confused where he lives.

IdleHans

Perhaps he has an enormous kitchen

TellyTubby

hoof_it_up_to_benty said:

bobmunro said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Mendonca In Asdas said:

guinnessaddick said:

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Wow that cat gets around!

He lives in Essex.

I did mishear Surrey then!

They seem confused where he lives.

hoof_it_up_to_benty said:

bobmunro said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Mendonca In Asdas said:

guinnessaddick said:

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Wow that cat gets around!

He lives in Essex.

I did mishear Surrey then!

They seem confused where he lives.

Well I am for sure. 

clive

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Mendonca In Asdas said:

guinnessaddick said:

bobmunro said:

TellyTubby said:

RedArmySE7 said:

The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.

Absolutely this. 

I don't want to view the video but from the description wtf is there to investigate? This bastard is bang to rights, the animals should be immediately removed from the household and he should be prosecuted.

Just what does the Met do under Cressida Dick? 

I may have misheard, but on the radio yesterday I'm sure they said the Surrey police were investigating - so I presume he lives in Surrey.

If that's the case, calling out the Met for not investigating seems misplaced.

Apparently Essex police are looking at it now.

Wow that cat gets around!

He lives in Essex.

Purfleet, maybe.

hoof_it_up_to_benty

Arsenetatters said:

Good luck with the RSPCA doing anything. Bloody useless.

It was just an isolated incident so nothing to worry about. Not sure if Zuma realised what he was doing was wrong.

I think the strong response of West Ham and Moyes has shown how they feel. Leading by example.

cabbles

West Ham have this morning come out and clarified their version of events 1 - It never happened 2 - It happened but no one told them 3 - He kicked the cat but he never meant to 4 - No one told them kicking a cat was animal cruelty

ME14addick

I wasn't going to look at the video but my husband found it and showed it to me.  I am horrified by what I saw, not only was the actual act despicable, but to actually have it videoed and for there to be a row of laughing emojis at the bottom of the video is unbelievable.

Zouma should not be playing for West Ham and must be made an example of. West Ham should have done what Man Utd have done with Mason Greenwood and stopped him training and playing. Violence towards animals is just as bad as violence towards people.

seth plum

Nobody told him it was a cat and he thought he was at a training session.
Learning from a prominent person.