MaltaMon a Big Fat Zero

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#23 Aug 4, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> Zwacko, none of them is true. Not a one. It's interesting that you won't even attempt to refute all those historical documents of yours that I have re-posted to put the real you on display. The reason for your failure to challenge their veracity is that you cannot. They are your own words, your own thoughts, your own original posts. I back my charges against you with hard evidence. You and Pedo Bob can't do that with what you two swinging, swishing hemosexual child predators post about me.(Back in your days as Sir Arthur, you once posted, "Opinions are not proofs" (sic) I agree. So I don't find Pedo Bob's statement at all interesting. It's just more of his nonsense, which isn't much different from yours... although I can't find evidence that Pedo B ever posted child pornogrsphy on Topix, as you have.
I can't see how you can deny any of Bob's accusations against you. As always you try to change the subject to avoid replying to what is obvious about you. Your continuous lies is what gives you zero credibility. And as usual you don't fail this reputation even in this last post of yours. You still haven't proved that those historic documents I have posted are in any way pornography, as you claim, everyone else has rightly called you an idiot for claiming such.
More of your lies claiming that I am DJW and Fortysomething.
More of your lies that I never answered your claims about me, because I did so many times, repeatedly.
If there is anyone who can be called a "hemosexual child predator" it is you with your continuous obsession with this subject. So you aren't fooling anyone.
You also prove another of Bob's claims about you concerning mispelling, at least two in this post alone, "hemosexual" and "pornogrsphy". Minor importance really when compared to the other points of you being the biggest liar on Topix, and the biggest blabberer without doubt.
You are once again outed as a zero.
MaltaMon

Mullica Hill, NJ

#24 Aug 5, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't see how you can deny any of Bob's accusations against you. As always you try to change the subject to avoid replying to what is obvious about you. Your continuous lies is what gives you zero credibility. And as usual you don't fail this reputation even in this last post of yours. You still haven't proved that those historic documents I have posted are in any way pornography, as you claim, everyone else has rightly called you an idiot for claiming such.
More of your lies claiming that I am DJW and Fortysomething.
More of your lies that I never answered your claims about me, because I did so many times, repeatedly.
If there is anyone who can be called a "hemosexual child predator" it is you with your continuous obsession with this subject. So you aren't fooling anyone.
You also prove another of Bob's claims about you concerning mispelling, at least two in this post alone, "hemosexual" and "pornogrsphy". Minor importance really when compared to the other points of you being the biggest liar on Topix, and the biggest blabberer without doubt.
You are once again outed as a zero.
Cut the crap, Zwacko. Your own past statements prove you are a dangerous child sexual predator, and your recent posts prove that you cannot defend your past statements.
djw

Knaresborough, UK

#25 Aug 5, 2013
(CNN)-- A 19-year-old Pennsylvania woman sued her former high school Thursday, claiming school officials invaded her privacy and violated her free-speech rights when they confiscated her cell phone, found semi-nude photos stored inside and turned the phone over to authorities.

The federal lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, says looking at photos on the woman's phone was like opening her mail or viewing private home videos.

"This search was much farther than what the law allows," said Valerie Burch, an attorney for the ACLU of Pennsylvania. "There was no reason to go looking for these pictures on her phone, and unless you have a very good reason, you can't go through someone's private things. We think it is a grave violation of her privacy."

Tunkhannock Area School District officials said they were reviewing the complaint and declined to comment further Thursday.

The lawsuit alleges that the trouble began after a teacher confiscated the cell phone of the student, identified in the suit only as N.N., when she broke school rules by making a call on campus in January 2009.

She was later called to Principal Gregory Ellsworth's office, suspended for three days and told that her cell phone had been turned over to authorities after Ellsworth found semi-nude and nude photos inside, the lawsuit says.

Wyoming County District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. later sent a letter to the school, the lawsuit alleges, threatening to bring child pornography charges against the student unless she completed a re-education course on sexual violence and victimization. N.N. took the class out of fear that she would be prosecuted, the complaint claims.

Skumanick could not be reached for comment.

When other students at the same high school were caught allegedly sending nude and semi-nude photos on their cell phones last year, Skumanick gave them a similar choice: taking re-education classes or facing charges.

"An adult would go to prison for this," Skumanick told CNN when discussing those incidents in 2009. "If you take the photo, you've committed a crime. If you send the photo, you've committed a different crime, but essentially the same crime."

The lawsuit says N.N.'s photos were never printed, distributed or uploaded on the Internet and were intended to be seen only by the student and possibly by her long-time boyfriend.

The lawsuit lists the Tunkhannock Area High School, Ellsworth, Skumanick, the teacher who confiscated the cell phone, a police detective, Wyoming County and several others as defendants.

In the lawsuit, N.N. says she wants damages, reimbursement for the re-education course she was required to take and the deletion of any stored copies of the photographs.

"We are aware of the lawsuit, and we do have an unofficial copy, but we haven't received any formal documentation. We have been in contact with our solicitor, who will be handling the matter, and as such we will have no further public comment at this time," Tunkhannock Area School District Superintendent Michael Healey told CNN.

Solicitor Frank Tunis said officials were reviewing the complaint but declined to comment further.
MaltaMon

Llewellyn, PA

#26 Aug 5, 2013
He's "DJW" on Satuday, then "Zuiko" on Sunday, then "DJW" on Monday. Back and forth; back and forth. And it's all hypocritical bullshit, because we all know from his past statements, many of which are now available on the super-convenient, "When Zuiko was Sir Arthur He Insisted That Schoolboys Swim Naked". This is a sleaxy, very disturbed (and very disturbing) dangerous child sexual preadator. And all you need do to verify that is to visit that thread.
MaltaMon

New Castle, DE

#28 Aug 11, 2013
The newest "Bob" thread. Not even a month old.
doing jury work

Colchester, UK

#29 Aug 12, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> Zwacko, none of them is true. Not a one. It's interesting that you won't even attempt to refute all those historical documents of yours that I have re-posted to put the real you on display. The reason for your failure to challenge their veracity is that you cannot. They are your own words, your own thoughts, your own original posts. I back my charges against you with hard evidence. You and Pedo Bob can't do that with what you two swinging, swishing hemosexual child predators post about me.(Back in your days as Sir Arthur, you once posted, "Opinions are not proofs" (sic) I agree. So I don't find Pedo Bob's statement at all interesting. It's just more of his nonsense, which isn't much different from yours... although I can't find evidence that Pedo B ever posted child pornogrsphy on Topix, as you have.
Molly I find you guilty of being a PA Pederast in the 1st degree.
Put the cubicles back on the boys toilet y'all.
Bob in Dorval

Trois-rivières, Canada

#30 Aug 12, 2013
Here's another we can add to MaltaMon's zero list:

Number of readers who have posted in favor of MaltaMon, or to give him support, or to indicate that they take him seriously:

Zero.

One more reason MaltaMon is A BIG FAT ZERO.

Hahahahahahaha!
MaltaMon

Wilmington, DE

#31 Aug 12, 2013
Bob in Dorval wrote:
Here's another we can add to MaltaMon's zero list:
Number of readers who have posted in favor of MaltaMon, or to give him support, or to indicate that they take him seriously:
Zero.
One more reason MaltaMon is A BIG FAT ZERO.
Hahahahahahaha!
Lol. Number of readers who took seriously Pedo Bob's request for responses about me: zero. Remember, my dear Pedophile Boy Rapist, you posed the question, not I. Meanwhile, I had made it quite clear on these threads that I couldn't care less what anyone might say if anyone bothered.. You just can't handle the truth, much less tell it. And the truth is that nobody regards your request with the slightest modicum of seriousness. Moreover, nobody wants to get onto either side of a pissing contest. The rejection is of you, my dear depraved pederast.
Bob

Montréal, Canada

#34 Aug 15, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> Lol. Number of readers who took seriously Pedo Bob's request for responses about me: zero. Remember, my dear Pedophile Boy Rapist, you posed the question, not I. Meanwhile, I had made it quite clear on these threads that I couldn't care less what anyone might say if anyone bothered.. You just can't handle the truth, much less tell it. And the truth is that nobody regards your request with the slightest modicum of seriousness. Moreover, nobody wants to get onto either side of a pissing contest. The rejection is of you, my dear depraved pederast.
And the big fat zero embarrasses himself again!

Hahahahaha!

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#35 Aug 16, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
He's "DJW" on Satuday, then "Zuiko" on Sunday, then "DJW" on Monday. Back and forth; back and forth. And it's all hypocritical bullshit, because we all know from his past statements, many of which are now available on the super-convenient, "When Zuiko was Sir Arthur He Insisted That Schoolboys Swim Naked". This is a sleaxy, very disturbed (and very disturbing) dangerous child sexual preadator. And all you need do to verify that is to visit that thread.
The only thing you have proved is what a confused, lying pervert you are. Your lying claims are so fantastic not even a child will believe them, unless you assume that all people are idiots like you.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#36 Aug 16, 2013
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
And the big fat zero embarrasses himself again!
Hahahahaha!
The lying pervert keeps embarrassing himself with every blabbering post of his.
MaltaMon

Woodstown, NJ

#38 Aug 19, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
The only thing you have proved is what a confused, lying pervert you are. Your lying claims are so fantastic not even a child will believe them, unless you assume that all people are idiots like you.
"Lying claims"? The proof is in your own postings, Sweetie. I have used only your own statements as evidence. And you have left a prodigious archive of self-incriminating statements and postings of child pornography. "Lying pervert"? You know I'm telling the truth, ZWACKO About you? Lol. Why, dear Zwacko, I am using your own statements.. And they clearly indicate who the pervert is.
Bob

Montréal, Canada

#39 Dec 9, 2015
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't see how you can deny any of Bob's accusations against you. As always you try to change the subject to avoid replying to what is obvious about you. Your continuous lies is what gives you zero credibility. And as usual you don't fail this reputation even in this last post of yours. You still haven't proved that those historic documents I have posted are in any way pornography, as you claim, everyone else has rightly called you an idiot for claiming such.
More of your lies claiming that I am DJW and Fortysomething.
More of your lies that I never answered your claims about me, because I did so many times, repeatedly.
If there is anyone who can be called a "hemosexual child predator" it is you with your continuous obsession with this subject. So you aren't fooling anyone.
You also prove another of Bob's claims about you concerning mispelling, at least two in this post alone, "hemosexual" and "pornogrsphy". Minor importance really when compared to the other points of you being the biggest liar on Topix, and the biggest blabberer without doubt.
You are once again outed as a zero.
Zuiko posted this two years ago. Funny how it is still relevant. Funny how MaltaMon is still a big fat zero.
And funny how PHIL-THE-LOSER is still a big fat loser!

Hahahaha!
Phil

UK

#40 Dec 9, 2015
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Zuiko posted this two years ago. Funny how it is still relevant. Funny how MaltaMon is still a big fat zero.
And funny how PHIL-THE-LOSER is still a big fat loser!
Hahahaha!
Funny how Bob is still an admitted liar and weak, cowardly little man.
Funny how I don't recall Maltamon or myself posting child pornography and then being stupid enough to admit to it, deny it and post some more.
Funny how Bob demanded I show him what law he had broken, so I did, and Bob had a tantrum and rewrote the law to suit him.
Funny how Bob is as thick as pigshit.
Bob

Montréal, Canada

#41 Dec 9, 2015
Funny how PHIL-THE-LOSER zooms in once again!

I thought he "couldn't be bothered"!

I thought it was a "waste of his valuable time"!

I thought he was a LOSER!

I was right!

Hahahaha!
Phil

UK

#42 Dec 10, 2015
Bob wrote:
Funny how PHIL-THE-LOSER zooms in once again!
I thought he "couldn't be bothered"!
I thought it was a "waste of his valuable time"!
I thought he was a LOSER!
I was right!
Hahahaha!
Bob thinks he is being insulting calling me a loser.
This from a proven and admitted pedophile.
Then again when you are as dim and as dull as the village idiot from Dorval what else can he do.
Bob the Winner

Montréal, Canada

#43 Dec 10, 2015
PHIL-THE-LOSER is being a loser calling me insulting.
This from a proven and admitted LOSER.
Then again when you are as dull and boring as the LOSER from Salford, what else can PHIL-THE-LOSER do?

Hahahaha!
Loser.
Bob

Beaconsfield, Canada

#44 May 1, 2016
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>

I can't see how you can deny any of Bob's accusations against you. As always you try to change the subject to avoid replying to what is obvious about you. Your continuous lies is what gives you zero credibility. And as usual you don't fail this reputation even in this last post of yours. You still haven't proved that those historic documents I have posted are in any way pornography, as you claim, everyone else has rightly called you an idiot for claiming such.
More of your lies claiming that I am DJW and Fortysomething.
More of your lies that I never answered your claims about me, because I did so many times, repeatedly.
If there is anyone who can be called a "hemosexual child predator" it is you with your continuous obsession with this subject. So you aren't fooling anyone.
You also prove another of Bob's claims about you concerning mispelling, at least two in this post alone, "hemosexual" and "pornogrsphy". Minor importance really when compared to the other points of you being the biggest liar on Topix, and the biggest blabberer without doubt.
You are once again outed as a zero.
Three years later, MaltaMon is still a loser!

Hahahahaha!
Mr coach

Badalona, Spain

#45 May 26, 2016
Not even substitute teachers? But,honestly,if it was a mixed school(or was it?) there was bound to be some girls around the area. And even if it was a Boys'only there certainly must have been some female teachers at the school. I wouldn't think it would have been barred from them.
It seems to have been the normal practice in most schools across the USA where they had indoor school swimming pools. There is a whole forum on this on Voyforums with over 600 postings all agreeing that it went on up to the early 70s,when some parents decided to protest. But unfortunataly it's an all-American forum.
However there were two postings from English girls who mentioned that this practice went on in two different English schools,and they even mentioned them by name and area. one was in London and the other somewhere in the south of England. Unfortunataly I've lost all traces of them,and I don't know if it's on the same forum or somewhere else.
Again they don't give very much detail of what went on except for the area.
On the contrary the American postings go into the minutest details,some of them very shocking.
So could someone give us more details about these British schools which had these facilities?
MichaelN

UK

#47 Jul 3, 2016
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> Zwacko, none of them is true. Not a one. It's interesting that you won't even attempt to refute all those historical documents of yours that I have re-posted to put the real you on display. The reason for your failure to challenge their veracity is that you cannot. They are your own words, your own thoughts, your own original posts. I back my charges against you with hard evidence. You and Pedo Bob can't do that with what you two swinging, swishing hemosexual child predators post about me.(Back in your days as Sir Arthur, you once posted, "Opinions are not proofs" (sic) I agree. So I don't find Pedo Bob's statement at all interesting. It's just more of his nonsense, which isn't much different from yours... although I can't find evidence that Pedo B ever posted child pornogrsphy on Topix, as you have.
Lets say a firm No to change in underwear

http://www.mineheadmiddle.somerset.sch.uk/uni...

Shoes Advice

In view of the large number of steps in the School, children should wear sensible shoes with low profile soles and broad-based heels so that unnecessary accidents can be avoided. Government Health and Safety Regulations now make such measures a requirement. Shoes should, therefore, be practical, fully enclosed, comfortable and safe with a maximum height of 5cms or 2ins measured at the back of the heel. Fashion shoes (eg slipper or dolly style), trainers or boots should not be worn.



P.E. Kit

Navy T-shirt for indoor work *

Blue reversible with yellow band Rugby shirt for outdoor work *

Navy shorts *

Navy football socks *

White ankle socks.

Non marking soled training shoes for indoor activities.

Outdoor trainers or studded boots for games activities on the playground or field.

Shin pads & gum shields (boys & girls) in the Autumn term.

Change of underwear.



Other Advice

Make-up of any kind should not be worn (including nail varnish).

Jewellery is limited to small, stud earrings and a watch. &#12288;

Hair should be tied up, natural in style and colour. Extreme styles, including tram lines, are not appropriate.

Chewing gum is strictly not allowed.

All items of clothing and property should be clearly labelled.

Valuable items should not be brought in. Mobile phones should be handed in, clearly named, to Reception for safe keeping.

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
Microsoft MCSD 70-486 exam test questions 1 hr Big Dinkie 2
News Pittsfield Super Tracking Impacts of... 4 hr Cops are degenerates 2
C9010-022 AIX Administration V1 exam software u... 6 hr Little Willie 2
Update IBM C9010-022 dumps book 6 hr MichaelNoanchovies 2
PE lessons (Feb '13) Wed Phil 132
Bob: Were Boys Forced to Attend School Swim Les... (Sep '12) Wed Doug Just Waded 2,323
Bennett Kalllas and spanking boys Wed Denise Just Watches 7
females supervising male nude swimming programs... (Feb '13) Wed smallballs 659
More from around the web