Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Kurt Zouma
Comments
-
I have not seen the video.
But apart from the appalling treatment the innocent creature gets, putting it on the internet!!!
What’s that all about?
A non fungus token?
I hear (sorry if this is derailing) that the people who harass Nick Watt, or Chris Whitty, or Kier Starmer actually profit from doing that stuff once they up or download it onto the internet.
Maybe animal abuse is C*nt Zouma’s money making side hustle.0 -
Gravesend_Addick said:Professional footballer being a cnut.....shock horror
It is a bit of an ongoing strange trend these days. A lot of stories coming out and quickly.
Professional footballers are not all arrogant violent clowns.
Most of them do appear to know how to just get on with stuff and be ok/normal.
0 -
Who would do this let alone film it. I hope West Ham do the right thing by dropping or even sacking him. What goes on in these peoples heads.4
-
Just out of interest how does that fit with a God, that according to Christian belief committed Genocide on all mankind except a few and killed all land animals except for two of each species in a flood?ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.Not a great track record on animal right you could argue1 -
Met police not investigating apparently - absolute joke. Clear evidence on video he’s broken the law.1
-
I think if he is convicted he could be banned from keeping animals for a while.
At least that way some poor creatures will not be at risk for a while.
Of course there should be police action, if ever there was a chance to set an (heavy punishment) example to others, this case is it.0 -
Probably because it's already happened, after all they don't want to investigate things that have happened in the past...RedArmySE7 said:The Met Police have announced they won't investigate. They don't seem to investigate very much those guys.0 -
Bastard Iron Scum.0
-
If we saw one of our players doing that. We'd want him out of the club immediately. It wouldn't matter if he was a 20+ goals a season specialist and or anything else positive.
Most West ham fans will feel embarrassed and ashamed. They will want him out the club and they will make it well known.
I just really desperately hope pathetic racism does not follow the pathway of any of this.
I've already seen a few stupid comments. It's probably unfortunately going to be a magnet for morons to say stupid things.1 -
We may "want him out of our club" and I am sure there are West Ham fans that "want him out of their club". However reality is the management, owners and directors will all be looking at the impact this will have on the club.Dave2l said:If we saw one of our players doing that. We'd want him out of the club immediately. It wouldn't matter if he was a 20+ goals a season specialist and or anything else positive.
Most West ham fans will feel embarrassed and ashamed. They will want him out the club and they will make it well known.
I just really desperately hope pathetic racism does not follow the pathway of any of this.
I've already seen a few stupid comments. It's probably unfortunately going to be a magnet for morons to say stupid things.
There are players who have carried out far worse than kicking the cat still gainfully employed by their host club.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Unfortunately mate, it's God's will that this cat sufferedValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.
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 too.
But these things don't START with torturing animals, beating up and sexually assaulting young women.
These are outward behaviours (and probably regular behaviours too) reflecting their inner distorted thoughts that they believe are normal and acceptable.
We kid ourselves if we think by outlawing racist words from the terraces we have defeated hatred. If we prohibit the use of anti-LGBT expressions we have defeated hatred. And if we no longer condone any offensive terms towards women we suddenly create a loving ordered society where men and women can attain their highest most noble selves and we have relegated mysoginy to the history books.
It's utter rubbish. We merely eject those from the ground who openly reveal the contents of their hearts in song. What about the many people who also share their expressions but are "wise enough" to keep quiet? Aka "clever enough to go undetected". What therefore has changed?
We have merely reminded people there are things we are not allowed to say in public anymore. But that doesn't change anyone.
By all means do all these polite expressions and yes, courtesy is a dying art in this age but don't expect it to actually stop the Mendys, Zoumas, Greenwoods from causing absolute misery to others. (And to animals)
This new morality is not morality at all. It is a la carte Morality where we pick this issue and choose that moral issue but it isn't morality..It leaves plenty of room and acceptable room for people to be completely immoral. Evil in fact! And Mendy, Zouma and Greenwood have found that loophole in our fake new morality.
He could have stopped it - take the matter up with him and not with Zouma who is merely God's messenger0 -
Despicable piece of sh*t.I hope somebody gives him a career ending kicking.0
-
Statement from Zouma’s club.1
-
Maybe these cats can turn up WHU next home game and give him kicking?
3 -
what a truly awful musical that is.iaitch said:
Maybe these cats can turn up WHU next home game and give him kicking?2 -
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.lordromford said:
This is the second time you’ve tried to make recent horrible behaviour about a lack of faith.ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.
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…
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.
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.0 -
What is a 'person of faith'?ValleyOfTears said:
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.lordromford said:
This is the second time you’ve tried to make recent horrible behaviour about a lack of faith.ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.
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…
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.
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 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.1 -
A satanist would be a person of faith as they believe in a supernatural being.
5 -
But that's just it. Your "progressive utopia" is neither bringing evil (greenwood, Mendy, Zouma) out into the light or keeping evil hidden.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Post-Christian morality? When the Catholic Church has abused more young children than any other organisation on the planet.ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.
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 too.
But these things don't START with torturing animals, beating up and sexually assaulting young women.
These are outward behaviours (and probably regular behaviours too) reflecting their inner distorted thoughts that they believe are normal and acceptable.
We kid ourselves if we think by outlawing racist words from the terraces we have defeated hatred. If we prohibit the use of anti-LGBT expressions we have defeated hatred. And if we no longer condone any offensive terms towards women we suddenly create a loving ordered society where men and women can attain their highest most noble selves and we have relegated mysoginy to the history books.
It's utter rubbish. We merely eject those from the ground who openly reveal the contents of their hearts in song. What about the many people who also share their expressions but are "wise enough" to keep quiet? Aka "clever enough to go undetected". What therefore has changed?
We have merely reminded people there are things we are not allowed to say in public anymore. But that doesn't change anyone.
By all means do all these polite expressions and yes, courtesy is a dying art in this age but don't expect it to actually stop the Mendys, Zoumas, Greenwoods from causing absolute misery to others. (And to animals)
This new morality is not morality at all. It is a la carte Morality where we pick this issue and choose that moral issue but it isn't morality..It leaves plenty of room and acceptable room for people to be completely immoral. Evil in fact! And Mendy, Zouma and Greenwood have found that loophole in our fake new morality.
Of course things are changing for the better, whilst some may keep their own evil agenda hidden, many others are coming round to a more progressive way of thinking, which can clearly be seen in almost all statistics relating to crime, violent or otherwise.
While I agree great evils have taken place in Church organisations (the atheist media do all they can to highlight these evils of course too) it is not the teaching of Truth that is the cause but the failure to live by that Truth that is.
In our desperate attempt to bury Christianity for a post Christian society we haven't eradicated the evil of abuse (it's everywhere now!) but we have erased the teaching, the community of prayer and worship and the hope that these essential aspects of faith give to people.
0 -
His Creation He can do as He pleases surely?Gary Poole said:
Just out of interest how does that fit with a God, that according to Christian belief committed Genocide on all mankind except a few and killed all land animals except for two of each species in a flood?ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.Not a great track record on animal right you could argue
You would do well to read WHY He chose to leave such people to their own wicked schemes and then destroy them. Hardly "genocide". Makes perfect sense. And it's actually Jewish belief that first brings us this account not Christian.
And then you use the Ark as proof of animal cruelty!! Surely saving every type of animal is quite the opposite. What a strange set of opinions you have.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
So you reject the old testament?ValleyOfTears said:And it's actually Jewish belief that first brings us this account not Christian.
BTW the Rabbi Jesus was Jewish
1 -
-
So by your logic and set of Christian rules you can kill your own children?PValleyOfTears said:
His Creation He can do as He pleases surely?Gary Poole said:
Just out of interest how does that fit with a God, that according to Christian belief committed Genocide on all mankind except a few and killed all land animals except for two of each species in a flood?ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.Not a great track record on animal right you could argue2 -
I didn’t misunderstand anything.ValleyOfTears said:
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.lordromford said:
This is the second time you’ve tried to make recent horrible behaviour about a lack of faith.ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.
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…
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.
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 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.4 -
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.11
-
So if Zouma had kicked every cat in the world except two of them that would be ok?ValleyOfTears said:
And then you use the Ark as proof of animal cruelty!! Surely saving every type of animal is quite the opposite. What a strange set of opinions you have.Gary Poole said:
Just out of interest how does that fit with a God, that according to Christian belief committed Genocide on all mankind except a few and killed all land animals except for two of each species in a flood?ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.Not a great track record on animal right you could argu
And you think I’m the one with the strange opinions.7 -
Only one person doing that.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.2 -
I have faith in Joe Pesci - now he looks like a man who can get things done!lordromford said:
I didn’t misunderstand anything.ValleyOfTears said:
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.lordromford said:
This is the second time you’ve tried to make recent horrible behaviour about a lack of faith.ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"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.
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…
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.
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 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.
(will only make sense to those familiar with the work of the great George Carlin).2
