Bob: Were Boys Forced to Attend Schoo...
Bob

Trois-rivières, Canada

#2389 Feb 21, 2014
Phil wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?
You post on other's Topix users unrelated threads which could have many readers and you really believe only myself and Maltamon read them?
Really?
Please tell me you are not that stupid.
Hang on, don't bother.
I already know the answer to that one.
Stop lying to yourself by trying lamely to justify your perversions by projecting them on others.
I resurrect some post which has one comment, and no responses in two years. Obviously, no one is reading it.
Please tell you me that YOU are not that......oh wait, we already know that you're that stupid.
Bob

Trois-rivières, Canada

#2390 Feb 21, 2014
Phil wrote:
<quoted text>
"Obviously you two filth-pigs haven't informed the authorities"
I just did.
I logged a complaint on this website:
http://www.spvm.qc.ca/en/nousjoindre.asp
and asked that if it was not the ideal point of contact that they should forward my report to the appropriate section.
My complaint concerned your post on this thread:
http://www.topix.com/forum/education/T10NADS3...
I did of course point out that it was you 'Bob' in Dorval and not Maltamon who posted item number 2 on that thread.
I also took a copy of it and a screen shot in case that thread should disappear.
Did you point out that someone in Dorval posted under the name "MaltaMon", and who it actually was is unknown, since Topix is an anonymous internedt forum? What proof do you have that it was me? It may have been my style, but seriously, do you have proof that would stand up in court.

I have retained the services of the legal firm Donaldson, James, and Woodworth, Barristers & Solicitors. They inform me that to post a frivolous post under a non-registered name on an anonymous internet forum violates no law in the UK, the US, or Canada. Also, to post an opinion in favour of nude swimming, group showers, or bare-bottom spanking violates no law in the aforementioned countries.

So bite a fart, Pedo Phil.

(Make sure you take a screen shot.)
MaltaMon

Wilmington, DE

#2391 Feb 21, 2014
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you point out that someone in Dorval posted under the name "MaltaMon", and who it actually was is unknown, since Topix is an anonymous internedt forum? What proof do you have that it was me? It may have been my style, but seriously, do you have proof that would stand up in court.
I have retained the services of the legal firm Donaldson, James, and Woodworth, Barristers & Solicitors. They inform me that to post a frivolous post under a non-registered name on an anonymous internet forum violates no law in the UK, the US, or Canada. Also, to post an opinion in favour of nude swimming, group showers, or bare-bottom spanking violates no law in the aforementioned countries.
So bite a fart, Pedo Phil.
(Make sure you take a screen shot.)
Bob, it doesn't matter if Phil has proof or not. Topix will turn over to any investigating authority the identity of the computer from which a post originated as well as the name of the ISP through which it accessed Topix. The ISP will cooperate as well. They have done so in other cases, including both civil and criminal matters. All that is required in criminal matters is a request from the police investigating a possible criminal act online. In civil matters, a subpoena (at least in the US) is necessary. So no, Bob, this is not really an issue of anonymity. Your lawyers would know that. A pity that they haven't so counseled you when you've paid them a retainer. Did they also advise you to keep on posting here, as you have on a half-dozen threads today? Did they suggest that you identify them by name and location to everyone on this "anonymous" site ? Why would you retain the services of a law firm if all they needed to tell you was that you've done nothing wrong, much less anything that would necessitate your keeping them on retainer for a possible a legal defense?
MaltaMon

Wilmington, DE

#2392 Feb 21, 2014
Question; Are you saying that the post that Phil reported to the Montreal, the one posted from Dorval under my screen name--just like so many others you have posted--was posted by someone other than you?
Bob

Trois-rivières, Canada

#2394 Feb 22, 2014
Bob, it doesn't matter if Phil has proof or not....(yes it does)

Topix will turn over to any investigating authority the identity of the computer from which a post originated as well as the name of the ISP through which it accessed Topix.(not without a warrant, and the ISP of a laptop purchased for cash at the Hudson fleamarket and used at a free anonymous internet cafe won't help them much.)

The ISP will cooperate as well. They have done so in other cases, including both civil and criminal matters. All that is required in criminal matters is a request from the police investigating a possible criminal act online. In civil matters, a subpoena (at least in the US) is necessary.
(in order to have a warrant or a subpoena, you must have reasonable suspicion that illegal activity has taken place)

So no, Bob, this is not really an issue of anonymity.(no, it's an issue of legality and credibility: I have done nothing wrong. To post frivolity, no matter how distasteful, on an anonymous internet forum is not illegal. To express an opinion in favor of nude swimming, or group showers, or bare-bottom spanking, no matter how distasteful, is not illegal. As to credibility, the credibility of any of your claims is laughable. No judge or grand jury would ever act based on your blabbery.)

Your lawyers would know that. A pity that they haven't so counseled you when you've paid them a retainer. Did they also advise you to keep on posting here, as you have on a half-dozen threads today? Did they suggest that you identify them by name and location to everyone on this "anonymous" site ? Why would you retain the services of a law firm if all they needed to tell you was that you've done nothing wrong, much less anything that would necessitate your keeping them on retainer for a possible a legal defense?(I asked the law firm to investigate if posting in favour of nude swimming on an anonymous internet forum was illegal, either in the UK, the US, or in Canada. I availed myself of their superior resources. They confirmed I have done nothing illegal, and have nothing to fear. They did indicate that your continual phony accusation that I raped your son to be slander, which IS illegal.)
MaltaMon

Mullica Hill, NJ

#2395 Feb 22, 2014
Pedo Bob, you clearly have NOT spoken to a lawyer, so your retainer story is fictitious. Slander is a civil matter--not criminal--and you must be able to prove that,I lied.with the intention of damaging your good reputation. (1) I didn't lie (2) you have admitted in many posts that you raped my son. Regardless of whether or not it is true, you have posted such admissions many times over the past two years, and (3) you therefore have no good reputation among those who read these threads to protect. What Phil reported you for, however, is a criminal matter.
Bob

Trois-rivières, Canada

#2396 Feb 22, 2014
Pedo Bob, you clearly have NOT spoken to a lawyer, so your retainer story is fictitious.(I admitted it was a joke on another thread. Hint: look at the initials of the law firm...moron.)

Slander is a civil matter--not criminal--and you must be able to prove that,I lied.with the intention of damaging your good reputation.((civil, criminal, who cares. You lied. All your blabbery is just that. Blabbery)

I didn't lie (All your claims are lies.)

(2) you have admitted in many posts that you raped my son.() have admitted raping your son as a form of mockery. Because your story is so obviously false. A way of saying "yo mama!")

(2) you have admitted in many posts that you raped my son.(you have no son)

Regardless of whether or not it is true,( If it is not true, then I have committed no crime. It is not illegal to claim to have committed a criminal act against a person who doesn't exist.)

you have posted such admissions many times over the past two years, and (3) you therefore have no good reputation among those who read these threads to protect.(The only persons reading these threads is you and Pedo Phil.

What Pedo Phil reported you for, however, is a criminal matter.(Oh? and what did he actually report me for? Mocking a seven-year old post that no one had responded to, and is most likely a front for a charity scam? I asked the fellows at my law firm what part of the criminal code forbids the mockery of an unanswered, ageing post on an anonymous internet forum, and they could find nothing.)

So bite a fart, moron.
Phil

Dunfermline, UK

#2397 Feb 23, 2014
Bob wrote:
Bob, it doesn't matter if Phil has proof or not....(yes it does)
Topix will turn over to any investigating authority the identity of the computer from which a post originated as well as the name of the ISP through which it accessed Topix.(not without a warrant, and the ISP of a laptop purchased for cash at the Hudson fleamarket and used at a free anonymous internet cafe won't help them much.)
The ISP will cooperate as well. They have done so in other cases, including both civil and criminal matters. All that is required in criminal matters is a request from the police investigating a possible criminal act online. In civil matters, a subpoena (at least in the US) is necessary.
(in order to have a warrant or a subpoena, you must have reasonable suspicion that illegal activity has taken place)
So no, Bob, this is not really an issue of anonymity.(no, it's an issue of legality and credibility: I have done nothing wrong. To post frivolity, no matter how distasteful, on an anonymous internet forum is not illegal. To express an opinion in favor of nude swimming, or group showers, or bare-bottom spanking, no matter how distasteful, is not illegal. As to credibility, the credibility of any of your claims is laughable. No judge or grand jury would ever act based on your blabbery.)
Your lawyers would know that. A pity that they haven't so counseled you when you've paid them a retainer. Did they also advise you to keep on posting here, as you have on a half-dozen threads today? Did they suggest that you identify them by name and location to everyone on this "anonymous" site ? Why would you retain the services of a law firm if all they needed to tell you was that you've done nothing wrong, much less anything that would necessitate your keeping them on retainer for a possible a legal defense?(I asked the law firm to investigate if posting in favour of nude swimming on an anonymous internet forum was illegal, either in the UK, the US, or in Canada. I availed myself of their superior resources. They confirmed I have done nothing illegal, and have nothing to fear. They did indicate that your continual phony accusation that I raped your son to be slander, which IS illegal.)
"...a laptop purchased for cash at the Hudson fleamarket and used at a free anonymous internet cafe..."

If you have nothing to fear and you really believe what you do is the work of a healthy, heterosexual male why go to all that trouble?
What are you hiding?
What are you scared of?
The lawyer's for the prosecution will ask this question along with the nature and content of your posts involving your desire to touch children or have them in various states of undress.
I don't recall myself or Maltamon posting such content and I post from home using my own name and the same ISP I have used for years.
It will not take them long to trace it.
It's not looking good for you, Bob.
MaltaMon

Mullica Hill, NJ

#2398 Feb 23, 2014
Bob wrote:
Pedo Bob, you clearly have NOT spoken to a lawyer, so your retainer story is fictitious.(I admitted it was a joke on another thread. Hint: look at the initials of the law firm...moron.)
Slander is a civil matter--not criminal--and you must be able to prove that,I lied.with the intention of damaging your good reputation.((civil, criminal, who cares. You lied. All your blabbery is just that. Blabbery)
I didn't lie (All your claims are lies.)
(2) you have admitted in many posts that you raped my son.() have admitted raping your son as a form of mockery. Because your story is so obviously false. A way of saying "yo mama!")
(2) you have admitted in many posts that you raped my son.(you have no son)
Regardless of whether or not it is true,( If it is not true, then I have committed no crime. It is not illegal to claim to have committed a criminal act against a person who doesn't exist.)
you have posted such admissions many times over the past two years, and (3) you therefore have no good reputation among those who read these threads to protect.(The only persons reading these threads is you and Pedo Phil.
What Pedo Phil reported you for, however, is a criminal matter.(Oh? and what did he actually report me for? Mocking a seven-year old post that no one had responded to, and is most likely a front for a charity scam? I asked the fellows at my law firm what part of the criminal code forbids the mockery of an unanswered, ageing post on an anonymous internet forum, and they could find nothing.)
So bite a fart, moron.
All I said in my post is (1) that slander is a civil matter,(2) that you would be unable to prove that I slandered you given what you have posted here in the past. That was in response to your suggestion that I could be prosecuted for slander, which I can't. Now, that's quite a defense you have mounted for so small an issue. It's all over the place. A laptop purchased at a flea market, an anonymous internet cafe, an unanswered, ageing post on an anonymous internet forum, a law firm who searched and searched on your behalf and could find nothing? You seem to have quite a lot on your mind, Bob.
MaltaMon

Norristown, PA

#2401 Aug 16, 2014
coyote wrote:
nope--- u r correct on that one phil---congrats ! jest sayin'!
Soooo glad that this old queen from Halifax gave up. Or had a stroke. Or died. I don't care which.
Bob

Châteauguay, Canada

#2404 Aug 16, 2014
MaltaMon wrote: "Oh, and I suppose that if your tale of posting only from internet cafes is true, you clearly have spent all of this day at the cafe"

Not really. That's the beauty of wi-fi. There's plenty of open connections you can use legally to access the net.
Too bad you're too much of a moron to know that.

Mange la marde, moron.

Hahahahahaha!
Phil

Godstone, UK

#2405 Aug 17, 2014
Bob wrote:
MaltaMon wrote: "Oh, and I suppose that if your tale of posting only from internet cafes is true, you clearly have spent all of this day at the cafe"
Not really. That's the beauty of wi-fi. There's plenty of open connections you can use legally to access the net.
Too bad you're too much of a moron to know that.
Mange la marde, moron.
Hahahahahaha!
For the record Bob you don't post for my benefit.
I don't get any pleasure from your immature, pathetic ramblings.
I'd rather you didn't post and you are not doing me any favours by doing so.
You claim I only read what you and your "colleague" posts but again you confuse reading and responding.
Some time back I started a thread asking for advice about my buying a laptop.
Nobody responded with any useful tips but it doesn't mean nobody read it.
However, you made an effort to find it and respond with your usual garbage because that is clearly what you live for, what gets you out of bed of a morning, desperate for some attention to show the world you exist, crying out to be noticed which is why you post on random threads started by others and then stupidly claim nobody reads them, which is the opposite of what you intend, what you crave.
Your apology for a life is a car crash waiting to happen, spending your lonely existence in internet cafe's with all the other creeps and weirdos with whom you obviously have an affinity.
Next time you go don't forget your tissues and wet wipes.
Phil

Manchester, UK

#2407 Aug 17, 2014
Bob wrote:
Again Phil, you confuse reading and responding. If you respond, you have read.
I don't know how many read and don't respond. And neither do you.
What everyone knows for sure is that you and MaltaMon read everything DJW and I post.
You'd rather I didn't post? Oh give me an effing break!
Can I have the name please of the person holding a gun to your head, forcing you to visit Topix every day?
If indeed I am crying out to be noticed, I have certainly got your and MaltaMon's attention.
No matter what DJW and I post, no matter what thread, no matter what subject, you and MaltaMon invariably show up to scoff, and put-down, and insult, and then claim you have no pleasure in doing so.
I think we all know who has the lonely existence: that "kindly old choir master" living in his retirement flat in Manchester.(...and the pathetic old son-raper in Pennsylvania.)
Hahahaha!
Loser.
"I don't know how many read and don't respond"

An admission that it's not just myself or Maltamon that reads your posts.
You don't know that.
We got there in the end.

"...show up to scoff, and put-down, and insult, and then claim you have no pleasure in doing so"

That doesn't hurt admittedly, but the content of your posts do nothing for me.
You an DJW obviously get off on it but nobody else does.
Sorry to disappoint you.

"... I have certainly got your and MaltaMon's attention"

Not just ours.
I did warn you.
MaltaMon

Chester, PA

#2409 Aug 17, 2014
Bob wrote:
I don't know how many read and don't respond.......means that there could be no one else reading also. You are thick, Phil, and I don't mean your penis.
In fact, I am comfortable that no one else besides you and MaltaMon read my stuff.
You don't disappoint me Phil, I know that despite all your melodramatic protestations, you get off on my writing.
And whose attention besides yours do I have? Please don't sIay the police unless you're prepared to say what law I have broken.
(And since you'd "rather I didn't post", who held a gun to your head to make you come to Topix and read what I wrote?)
You boring pathetic loser, Phil!
Hahahaha!
Just an example of the convoluted logic deployed on everyone by Pedo Bob, the Don Juan of Dorval Boyhood:
" 'I don't know how many read and don't respond,' MEANS (emphasis added) that there could be no one else reading also." Ahem. The pedophile Bob of Dorval, one of Canada's great sociopathic predators of children, is also Canada's dumbest citizen.
Phil

UK

#2413 Aug 18, 2014
Bob wrote:
Today's lesson for morons: we don't know how many read and don't respond. Presumably the people at Topix have the stats, MaltaMon, but you and Phil don't, and neither do I. It could be a few, a dozen, hundreds, or even thousands. And it could be no one.
I personally believe that NO ONE, other than MaltaMon and Phil, read what DJW and I write.(And no, not even the police.)
MM and Phil have offered no proof, or even a convincing argument, of any other possibility.
What we do know for sure, is that MaltaMon and Phil read everything I write, and download it, in case the thread should ever be deleted.
You claimed with absolute certainty that myself and Maltamon were the only people who read posts you deposited on the threads of other Topix users but now you admit you have no idea if this is true and now your latest lie is "I personally believe" and "what we do know for sure".
What a dickhead.
MaltaMon

Lancaster, PA

#2415 Aug 22, 2014
The following selection comes from the poetic "oeuvre" of NAMBLA Bob, the artist formerly known as Pedo Bob. Published here on Topix ( http://www.topix.com/forum/education/TGV207OB... )
for my benefit (which is obvious from the substance of the verse itself), it was discovered on a NAMBLA blog Wednesday by a police detective combing the NAMBLA websites for potential child sexual predators, child pornographers, and others who represent a threat to our children. Now that Bob has made it to the Big Time--now that he's an author recognized for his pro-pedophile smut by the most notorious and most widely recognized purveyors and defenders of pedophilia as a legitimate lifestyle, The North American Man-Boy Love Association, Bob is no longer ours--no longer of Topix. He belongs to the wider network of NAMBLA. And if he somehow had eluded the notice of law enforcement in his community in Montreal before (which is unlikely) he surely has their attention now that he's a featured NAMBLA author. We would like to congratulate NAMBLA Bob for his achievement, as well as for his recklessness, his self-destructive impulses, his monumental stupidity and delusional short-sightedness, and for whatever the future may have in store for him. Meanwhile, I implore readers to recognize that the following was written by a "man" in his fifties, who denies that he has any sexual interest in boys, and yet who has insisted again and again and again that this sort of self-expression is perfectly normal for a middle-aged Canadian man. Aye, Bobbie, we hardly knew ye!

Anon
Pointe-claire, Canada
Reply »|Report Abuse|Judge it!|#34Tuesday Aug 19
Judged:Racy1Touching1Helpful1
Whatcha gonna do about it MaltaMon?
Whatcha gonna do since I raped your son?
Whatcha gonna do about it MaltaMon?
Whatcha gonna do, hey, come on, come on!
I took down his spiderman underwear,
Exposing his little bottom bare;
I gave it a lick,
And stuck in my thumb;
And then put my dick,
Inside his bum.
Whatcha gonna do about it, MaltaMon?
Whatcha gonna do since I raped your son?
Whatcha gonna do about it, MaltaMon?
Whatcha gonna do now, come on, come on!
Hahahaha!
jackjohnson

Gainesville, FL

#2417 Aug 23, 2014
MaltaMon wrote:
If you put these posters under oath, under threat of imprisonment for perjury, their vehemence would vanish like dew on a warm morning. That's the beauty of the internet: you can say anything.
I am dismayed by the vehemence of your denials. The Ansonia, CT, YMCA had compulsory nude swimming for the boys through the 50s. No girls there then. But the facts were well known, and pre-teen and teenaged girls would climb a small ill nearby and look in the window. Two of them told me they had done so. Separately. I believe them. My best friend was a Y member (I was not). He said hey were required to swim nude. I believe him. You are free to disbelieve, but you are simply wrong.
maltamon

Bournemouth, UK

#2422 Jan 31, 2015
Well when I was a growing up in the 1950s we swam nude at the YMCA and summer camp. I don&#146;t know when nude swimming ended there since the last time I was at the Y was about 1966 but I&#146;ve been told that no Ys have nude swimming now. Swim trunks in the &#145;60s & &#145;70s were very brief- like gym trucks. Most had net supporters inside because the legs were so short you&#146;d likely hang out otherwise. Speedos were also popular in the 70&#146;s although I never wore them. For several years during the 1970s I was a member of a naturist(nudist) resort and ofcourse swam nude there. It&#146;s certainly the best way- and the way I swim now in my own pool at home. I haven&#146;t been to the beach in some years but when I did I&#146;d wear old trunks I had left over from the 1980s which were certainly unfashionably short by today&#146;s standards. The long baggy swimsuits guys wear now a days just totally baffle me.

The YMCA I belong to in Oak Park, Illinois has the normal mixed areas, but also separate areas for men and women. When I first joined a year ago, I was rather surprised by the number of guys swam and worked out nude in the men only area. Mostly older guys; very few of room the younger members work out au natural.

I'm ok with swimming nude, but being with some nude old guys (my age and above) running naked on treadmills is just not something I enjoy.

Bob

Montréal, Canada

#2423 Jan 31, 2015
MaltaMon sure has some special childhood memories!
Phil

Bournemouth, UK

#2424 Mar 1, 2015
Let us stop radicalisation in Danish schools by giving all pupils including Muslim kids their privacy back!

http://www.information.dk/82621

There is no common guidelines so that schools must make their own rules for how sports, swimming and bathing should be conducted to get all the students," he said. "The general problem is that many immigrant parents have no clue how the teaching of example. sports and swimming going on, or how students bathe for hours. They imagine that there is anything indecent. "Fahmy Almajids experience is that information and practical compromises in most cases solves the problems. "I have helped to find many different practical solutions. Sometimes it has been necessary to separate girls and boys on Abildgårdskolen, other times it has been enough to put the curtain up so students can shower in private. My starting point is the child's best interests, and that is to participate in both sports as swimming.

If the solution is shower curtains, buy, however the shower curtain to 20 kr. Each!- Or part students need, "he said. FACTS Mixed swimming is prohibited * the Islamic Faith Society offers on its website the following guidance to Muslim parents regarding sports and swimming, "the boy should be covered from the navel to the knees after he came into puberty. This means that he must not wear shorts or trunks that goes above the knees, even when he swims. If boys are not allowed to wear trousers that reach the knees or to swim without clothes on at all in swimming classes (which is not uncommon), he must instead sign up with an swimming class outside the school, where one wears clothes during swimming . The school's main task is to teach the child to swim, therefore, school authorities have no objection to the child participating in swim classes elsewhere and get a swim test at school year.(...) Girls who participate in teams, in their physical training refers to a kind of clothes that suit their taste and conscience with the director's approval.

By swimming in public places, girls can wear a long, not tight-fitting tunic with sleeves corresponding long pants and a head covering ...(...) In the context of decency, the Prophet banned women to look at the private parts of other women, or men, and men observing other men, or women, intimate parts. For both boys and girls can be a problem for sports play, etc., when it is expected that young people need to change clothes before the eyes of others of the same sex and to bathe naked, without being able to be alone, or in some cases swim naked along with others of the same sex. This problem can usually be avoided by parents talk with teachers about their young people may be allowed to dress on in a separate room ...

Skolerne må selv finde de vises sten | Information

www.information.dk/82621

Translate this page
16 Jun 2003 - Der er stor forskel på, hvordan danske skoler takler muslimske ... Til gengæld er både deltagelsen i fælles idræt og svømning og i den ... Eneste begrænsning er, at hovedbeklædning skal være noget andet end tørklæde.

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
News 'Pro-Islam' textbook stirs debate in Brevard - ... 15 hr Simran 17
News 3 Philadelphia Principals Fired In Test Cheatin... (Jan '14) 17 hr Gre 2
tnmtndude arrested in California 20 hr Western Nude Cabin 1
Education Forum overrun by exam dump spam 20 hr Slam the Spam 3
Released 352-001 Cisco Certified Design Expert ... 21 hr Exam Dump Spam 2
Updated CompTIA A+ Certification 220-902 dumps 21 hr Exam Dump Spam 2
Azure Infrastructure Exam 70-533 braindumps 21 hr Exam Dump Spam 2
More from around the web