Saturday, 7 April 2018

The one with the tantrum

Afternoon all,

Well, I hadn't expected to be back so soon, but needs must when the menopausal dingbat drives.

Loopydrawers put up a postscript

Post Scriptum:

We would like leave to the consideration of readers the sense of humour of this sick individual:

As Not Textusa, this is what he has considered funny calling the locations where Maddie's body was signalled by Eddie in apartment 5A:

His words: “The staff were getting wise to Textusa, and had drawn a map of her favourite toileting spots”.
And as you well know, I am taking the piss out of you, dear. Frankly, you have a nerve speaking about disrespect when you have portrayed Madeleine being the victim of a vicious assault by someone who is not in a position to defend himself, having witnessed a pornographic scene of your own invention 

Now, as Meercat, he thinks it’s funny to compare the child carried by Smithman to some sort of snack:

So I am supposed to be Meercat now?

I am losing track of how many twitter users you have accused me of being, Textusa - can we have a list?

**Standard disclaimer - I am not any of these people, nor do I know them, or have any association with them and nor do I have a twitter presence**

Do notice who found this to be funny as well.
It is funny. Perhaps if you weren't so far up your own arsehole you would appreciate it.

And, this is the picture we have used in this post:

And Insane decided to change it to this on his tweet:
Once again, nothing to do with me 


No idea - why don't you go and tweet the person concerned? 

I think the truth here is that it is quite obvious more and more people are wise to Textusa and her nonsense. She is widely ridiculed, deservingly so, on twitter and elsewhere. Her response is to try to claim it all emanates from one individual. 

Sorry, dear. Everyone thinks you are a complete fucktard, with a few notable exceptions, mainly other fucktards


  1. She cannot see what other people see so she just invents, and it all comes directly from her own vivid imagination.

    1. I would honestly describe her as a con artist. I am not convinced it's just bogstandard fuckwittery in her case. I think she knows that what she tells her followers is a load of crap, but the crucial thing for her is that they continue to believe the mad old trout. However, I will be publishing an article about conspiraloons, so we shall see how many of the boxes she ticks (Hint: it will be all of them)

  2. Its all got a little strange putting it politely, thanks for highlighting all the discrepancies, newish reader to your site.

    1. You are very welcome, thanks for popping in.


Leave a message. If you're a conspiraloon, we might publish it, but we reserve the right to take the piss mercilessly. Have a nice day.

Messages not for publication can also be left, or you can email