You have already stated that you knew it was Thot Gor who was the fake mum who said that she had a seven-year-old son called Mohammed. Therefore you already knew that the bit about a seven-year-old son was a lie, yet you went ahead and posted it.
I thought he was seven years old. I don't think Thot picked that age from nowhere. Notice I did not call him "Mohammed" since I know that is likely not to be correct. This proves me correct here.
The real McMum stated on a number of occasions that her son was a teenager (it is all in the thread), but you chose to take the word of someone who you admitted to knowing was a fake McMum. It also proves The that you didn’t even bother to read what the real McMum had to say before lying about her. It certainly does not prove you correct here.
What proof do you have that the real McMum is an AB/DL?
Why would an ordinary mum, interested in her kid's innocent wetting problem, be constantly discussing the colour of her child's nappies? I've had 4 kids with a 5th on the way - I don't give a damn what colour they are as long as they do the job. She gave a pathetic reply which I'm sure you'll support!
The real McMum posted at length about the nature of her son’s condition, but you weren’t interested in reading it (it is all in the thread). Not once did McMum discuss the colour of her son’s nappies. As she stated that he wore terry nappies and even mentioned a supplier of larger size nappies, they were almost certainly white. If you were the age you claim to be (50), you would know that waterproof plastic pants are needed to be worn over terry nappies, and that traditionally these were produced in semi-transparent white. When one of the other mothers pointed out that these days Suprima plastic pants could be obtained in darker opaque colours, McMum asked about these as her teenage son understandably felt very self conscious about wearing plastic pants that were effectively see-thru. Everyone on that thread seemed to comprehend this apart from you, so when a fake McMum post appeared in an AB/DL thread stating that either terry nappies OR coloured Suprima pants could be worn, there were no prizes for guessing who the prime suspect for being the fake McMum was.
There was nothing in McMum’s posts that indicated that she was an AB/DL, but there was something in some of the fake posts that indicated that the probable fake McMum was the Colonel, because only he thought that Suprima pants were a type of nappy (it’s all in the thread).
A diaper lover would be interested in coloured nappies. An ordinary parent, like myself, would not be.
As McMum showed no indication that she was interested in coloured nappies (see above) this would put her in the same category as you claim to be, i.e. an ordinary parent.
What proof do you have that the real McMum has Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy?
Sodium Penothol diagnosed her with that. Get your facts correct. The reasoning for that diagnosis - he discussed himself in the thread. Refer to that for an explanation.
You are not seriously telling me that you would go to Sodium Pentothol (who you don’t even know, or perhaps you do) on the Internet for a medical diagnosis, are you? SP’s reasoning for his amateurish diagnosis was that he had read that some sufferers of MSbP claimed that their child was disabled. You then jumped at this as proof that McMum had MSbP, because she had stated that her son had a disability, and started to announce it as proven fact (it’s all in the thread). Some murderers in the past have been Lieutenant Colonels, but does that automatically mean that ALL Lieutenant Colonels are murderers? By your logic you must be a proven murderer Colonel.
What proof do you have that the real McMum forced her son into nappies?
A mother more interested in the colour of her son's nappies than in his problem?
As McMum was not more interested in the colour of her son’s nappies than in his medical condition (see above), this does not apply (it’s all in the thread).
A mother who actually insulted her own son, by calling me (after producing a fake website with someone else by the name of The Colonel, and trying to pass that off as me - I notice you don't mention that!) something along the lines of (from memory) a deviant nappy wearer with a wetting problem. (Something close to that, it is all in the thread.)
Yes, unfortunately for you it is all in the thread. McMum did not produce a fake website. She posted a URL linking to a REAL website in which someone calling himself “The Colonel” (coincidence or what?) admitted to having had a wetting problem up until the age of twelve. Nowhere was the word ‘deviant’ mentioned. McMum merely postulated that this could possibly provide an explanation for your apparent presence in, and obsession with, nappy threads, as your many hundreds of posts had easily outnumbered those of most of the participating mums put together (it’s all in the thread).
As I pointed out at the time, it insults her son as a deviant person. I also commented her statement made as much sense as me calling my (now) 16 year old "a queer". You just don't do it! Not a mother!
Because of your obsession with nappy threads, another member or guest called you ‘Colonel Nappy’. As you had been a perpetual pest/troll since first posting in the thread, McMum adopted this name for you, but nowhere was the word ‘deviant’ used. Get your facts straight (it’s all in the thread).
What proof do you have that the real McMum was arrested?
Haven't seen her around for a long time, have you?
So whenever you haven’t seen someone around for a long time, do you automatically assume that they have been arrested, and then state categorically that this is so on a public forum? You are either an idiot or a pathological liar. I have given you the benefit of the doubt and assumed the latter.
In fact in McMum’s last post on this thread she stated that she would only return if and when she had anything relevant to say. As you effectively destroyed this thread (which you had previously boasted was your intention), McMum probably realised that the occasion for saying anything else of relevance would probably never arise (it’s all in the thread). She has probably gone elsewhere to post because of morons like you, or just not bothered.
What proof do you have that the real McMum’s son was taken into care?
I don't believe she had a son, for the reason I listed above. No mother would say that about a child. It was a fantasy of hers.
If you believed that McMum didn’t even have a son, then your insistence that she forced her ‘non-existent’ son into nappies and that he was taken into care is clearly a fantasy of yours and a lie. There is no other explanation. Just because you live in a world of pure fantasy, it does not mean that all other people do.
I want answers to ALL of these questions, otherwise one can only conclude that you are a pathological liar, who is guilty of gross libel. Blaming others, e.g. Sodium Pentothol, Myron, Lena, etc. will not wash, as you were the one who was responsible for the above quote.
Quotes can be tongue in cheek.
What you refer to as “tongue in cheek”, most ordinary sane people would refer to as downright lies. It is perfectly clear to any NORMAL person that you set out to convince the posters in the Adult Baby Fetish thread that McMum was a thoroughly despicable AB/DL with MSbP, who had been arrested and her son (who you now say didn’t exist) was put into care. In your case, the term pathological liar fits better than for any other person I have ever come across. Don’t you realise that you tell so many lies that if and when you genuinely do ‘cry wolf’, no one is going to believe you. I pity you, as like most people who are habitual liars you are probably very insecure.
So what it boils down to is that you haven’t been able to present one iota of real evidence against McMum, and what you do have has been pure malicious invention and distortion. In a court case you would be laughed out of court with such evidence and almost certainly fined for wasting the court’s time, and possibly even charged with perjury.
Perhaps you can’t help being a lying bas***d if you really are (as you claim) a direct descendent of William the Conqueror, otherwise known to history as ‘William the b*****’.
by The Colonel on Mon May 26, 2008 3:04 pm 
