coyote

Halifax, Canada

#186 Mar 6, 2013
Large: careful...some witty comedy is appearing under your posts this eve...much better than the stuff you were sending-- keep the funny coming....
SLC

Arlington, VA

#188 Mar 7, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Look in the dictionary. Even there it says it is a union between a man and a women, ignorant snobhead!
What does the dictionary have to do with anything? There is nothing in the Constitution about marriage as such at all. Definitions in the dictionary change all the time as the application of words evolves. I note once again that Largelanguage conspicuously fails to comment on the law recognizing same sex marriage which just passed the British Parliament. I find that rather amusing since he posts from the UK.
Phil

Manchester, UK

#190 Mar 8, 2013
Fool proof?
That's you stuffed then, Large!
MaltaMon

Gladwyne, PA

#192 Mar 8, 2013
"Stuffed"? That IS funny. As I said, Phil is the clown on this forum.
MaltaMon

Philadelphia, PA

#194 Mar 9, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
Whose worse, Zuiko or Phil, that is, if they are not the same posters?
Zuiko sometimes exhibits interests that exceed the narrow parameters of this dialogue. But when it comes to the other, Large, there is no friggin' contest. ZuikiSomething comes across as FDR or Churchill by comparison.
D-J-W

Bath, UK

#196 Mar 9, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> Zuiko sometimes exhibits interests that exceed the narrow parameters of this dialogue. But when it comes to the other, Large, there is no friggin' contest. ZuikiSomething comes across as FDR or Churchill by comparison.
Back to the Sandusky penitentiary ya'll. Maltamom continues his campaign for males to parade nude in front of female reporters!
Phil

Manchester, UK

#198 Mar 9, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
What is wrong with that?
True colours?
They all reveal themselves in the end.
MaltaMon

Collegeville, PA

#200 Mar 9, 2013
D-J-W wrote:
<quoted text>
Back to the Sandusky penitentiary ya'll. Maltamom continues his campaign for males to parade nude in front of female reporters!
Unh-unh. Not the same.
MaltaMon

Conestoga, PA

#202 Mar 9, 2013
DJW wrote:
<quoted text>
Time to rage against the female reporter invading the male changing room instead!
Back for more? Did you bring any child pornography to post this time, DJ?
D-J-W

Bath, UK

#203 Mar 9, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
D-J-W I assume wants to prohibit men from being seen by heterosexual women because he is one of those kinds who wants to infest america with homosexuality and to starve it completely of heterosexuality.
No doubt you and Maltamom will be busy "conscripting" young men to forced communal showers and bare-chested physical education in the name of this is no more than "hetero-sexual" men going through a "rite of passage" by being at the mercy of journalists, school medics and "female educationalists".

Lets respect all sexual orientation and make work and education completely gender neutral. no one shall be compelled to be nude or topless.

The Jimmy Saville society is over LargeLanguage. Lets hope Maltamom makes his rousing Gettysburg address and campaigns for privacy and child protection. Then we will really have a kinder gentler America!

That is what the founding fathers would have wanted not Guantanamo style state sponsored voyeurism! Honour bound to defend dignity :-)
MaltaMon

Phillipsburg, NJ

#204 Mar 9, 2013
Or do you think that you posted enough child porn here in December. Have you reflected since then upon the dramatic inconsistency of your strident statements against child abuse (which I applaud) versus your posting of photos of abused children, stripped naked for the camera and exposed, many of them posed deliberately and suggestively, expressly to appeal to the collectors and enthusiasts of child pornography? I can neither understand nor accept your having posted those repugnant, heart-rending photos of kids exploited merely to satisfy the prurient desires of some very sick, sociopathic adults. I would be very interested in hearing from you an explanation. And despite all appearances, I'll keep my mind open if you do and will read it carefully. Thanks.
MaltaMon

Oaklyn, NJ

#205 Mar 9, 2013
D-J-W wrote:
<quoted text>
No doubt you and Maltamom will be busy "conscripting" young men to forced communal showers and bare-chested physical education in the name of this is no more than "hetero-sexual" men going through a "rite of passage" by being at the mercy of journalists, school medics and "female educationalists".
Lets respect all sexual orientation and make work and education completely gender neutral. no one shall be compelled to be nude or topless.
The Jimmy Saville society is over LargeLanguage. Lets hope Maltamom makes his rousing Gettysburg address and campaigns for privacy and child protection. Then we will really have a kinder gentler America!
That is what the founding fathers would have wanted not Guantanamo style state sponsored voyeurism! Honour bound to defend dignity :-)
Just going to ignore my request for an explanation? You have to realize that posting child pornography as you did undercuts your message. So let's hear it, DJ. Ignoring it won't make it go away. ThxThx
coyote

Halifax, Canada

#206 Mar 9, 2013
Jimmy Saville Society is over-- geez- t'morrow will be another tough one for little Large's momma if he finds out that info. How cruel you are ! Maybe the parrot will note your post and delete it.
MaltaMon

Riverton, NJ

#208 Mar 10, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
But MaltaMon didn't condone it, he only let threads condoning nude males being forced to be viewed by females a pass. It was nude sports personalities anyway.
Honesty doesn't matter to these propagandists. You will note that in mid-December, around the 17th or so, DJW posted much more and worse child porn than Zuiko. His includes very young boys posed in sick "erotic" positions.
MaltaMon

Cherry Hill, NJ

#210 Mar 17, 2013
This thread deserves to be put down as well.
MaltaMon

Oaklyn, NJ

#211 Mar 25, 2013
A week without a post. RIP.
Bob

Dorval, Canada

#212 Mar 27, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> Honesty doesn't matter to these propagandists. You will note that in mid-December, around the 17th or so, DJW posted much more and worse child porn than Zuiko. His includes very young boys posed in sick "erotic" positions.
Note that right here MaltaMon openly admits to viewing child porn.
Poor pathetic MaltaMon. Outed yet again!
MaltaMon

Merchantville, NJ

#213 Mar 28, 2013
I looked at what these two posted, was appalled, and have encouraged their ban from this site on the basis of their criminal activity. Police and federal agents must look at it, too, to determine that it is, indeed, child pornography and go after the criminals who posted it. As must any private citizen, such as I, who report it. If I hadn't checked it, I wouldn't be aware that DJW and ZuiJO posted child porn here. Nor would anyone else. Which means that nobody would be aware that two contributors to this site are distributing child porn here. Moreover, they posted those sites misleadingly. Don't be silly, Bob. Of nobody looked, including the police, nobody would know and the perpetrators would get away with it. You're as disingenuous and as reckless a man as I've ever encountered. Even you know that your statement is stupid. Go home, Bob. What are you doing in Montreal? After my son, I suppose. I accused you,,and soon thereafter you turned up in a neighboring town. Go home.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#214 Mar 28, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
I looked at what these two posted, was appalled, and have encouraged their ban from this site on the basis of their criminal activity. Police and federal agents must look at it, too, to determine that it is, indeed, child pornography and go after the criminals who posted it. As must any private citizen, such as I, who report it. If I hadn't checked it, I wouldn't be aware that DJW and ZuiJO posted child porn here. Nor would anyone else. Which means that nobody would be aware that two contributors to this site are distributing child porn here. Moreover, they posted those sites misleadingly. Don't be silly, Bob. Of nobody looked, including the police, nobody would know and the perpetrators would get away with it. You're as disingenuous and as reckless a man as I've ever encountered. Even you know that your statement is stupid. Go home, Bob. What are you doing in Montreal? After my son, I suppose. I accused you,,and soon thereafter you turned up in a neighboring town. Go home.
Police and federal agancies must look into your support of abusing young girls, not someone who posted a link to a legal google site. You must be investigated as a child predator and abuser, and a danger to children.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#215 Mar 28, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
I looked at what these two posted, was appalled, and have encouraged their ban from this site on the basis of their criminal activity. Police and federal agents must look at it, too, to determine that it is, indeed, child pornography and go after the criminals who posted it. As must any private citizen, such as I, who report it. If I hadn't checked it, I wouldn't be aware that DJW and ZuiJO posted child porn here. Nor would anyone else. Which means that nobody would be aware that two contributors to this site are distributing child porn here. Moreover, they posted those sites misleadingly. Don't be silly, Bob. Of nobody looked, including the police, nobody would know and the perpetrators would get away with it. You're as disingenuous and as reckless a man as I've ever encountered. Even you know that your statement is stupid. Go home, Bob. What are you doing in Montreal? After my son, I suppose. I accused you,,and soon thereafter you turned up in a neighboring town. Go home.
It is your son who wants to be away from you and close to Bob, which is a sure sign that you have abused him.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Education Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Did You Swim Nude In High School? (Dec '12) 40 min Phil 1,385
Can tnmtndude perform (Dec '11) 5 hr Maltamon 39
News St. Paul schools struggle to meet lofty goals 6 hr Maltamon 16
nudity in co-ed contexts (May '14) 6 hr bob 23
Survey for Students or Parents who have used tu... 12 hr bob 65
Cisco PANGNFE 650-756 practice exam & 650-756 q... 14 hr Bbob 7
Outlaw men teachers! (Jul '14) Sun Bob 9
More from around the web