Reflections
Ron
have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
themselves, despite what is said by others about them. In this case the
individual that wrote and maintains the "aboutkenpangborn" site seems to
have kens number quite clearly. Nearly everything said on that site about
mr pangborn was proven by ken himself, here in this news group, before I
took the time to visit that web site. It was like reading a good novel for
the second time, one already knows the plot and the characters, but missed
some of the subtle interplay of the characters the first time through. It
was both interesting and entertaining.
As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only conclusion
that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by the
other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as a
professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the substance of
facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg didn't
research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone who
was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than gregg
is.
That is a situation that usually I would find irritating, but in this case
it is amusing to me. The humor I find in this is that just like every other
member of what I call the Anti-CPS mob, mr pangborn uses misdirection,
deception, and outright lies as the basis of his posting style. Just as
claimed in the "aboutkenpangborn" site. That of course begs the question
"Why is it that those who oppose the CPS system here are never able to
support their claims?". Ken could be a clone of so many others who have
posted here, he is like watching someone looking at their own reflections in
multiple mirrors.
Once again my apologies to the individual(s) who followed mr pangborn into
this news group. You were right, I was wrong. I find it amazing that
people with ken's and greggs type of personality flaw find their way into
Usenet where those flaws can grow and flourish like flowers in a greenhouse.
I guess that even nuts need an outlet for their emotions.
Ron
Ron
when offered. You were right Dan, and its not the first time.
Ron
"Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:b08oh.78$uL1...@newsfe22.lga...
freedom
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, "Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
>ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>
>One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
>themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't remain
openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when the
proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
black and white.
I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com, and I am glad that
you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's abuse
and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
"altered" his words.
A good example of this is http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html,
which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
alt.atheism regulars. I also bring this up because he has now made a few
forgeries of peope here....and, now that you have spoken out against him,
you'll likely be added to the list of his "marks" or targets.
He'll also likely accuse that you must be me posting under another address,
or that we are somehow associated with one another.
> In this case the
>individual that wrote and maintains the "aboutkenpangborn" site seems to
>have kens number quite clearly.
I do...unfortunately, it's because my children and I have been harassed and
stalked by Pangborn, going on nine years now. This has included both
online and offline harassment.....including a bogus report to CPS by Ken in
2001.
And, before anyone gives me the speech about "turn off your computer"....I
did. On some occasions, I was off usenet literally for months....then
would return and browse the newsgroups, and find Ken still mentioning me in
nearly every single post, arguing with others whom he has falsely
identified as me, etc. Go look in alt.dads-rights.unmoderated on any given
day, and 90% of his posts will usually be about me. On rare occasions, one
or two of them are actually in response to a comment I made.
> Nearly everything said on that site about
>mr pangborn was proven by ken himself, here in this news group, before I
>took the time to visit that web site. It was like reading a good novel for
>the second time, one already knows the plot and the characters, but missed
>some of the subtle interplay of the characters the first time through. It
>was both interesting and entertaining.
It's good entertainment value....but at the same time, it's difficult to
laugh too hard at him. Ken Pangborn is harming people who are in bad
situations. He represents himself as someone he clearly is not (fake
college degrees as well as his general lack of knowledge) and relies upon
pressure "used car" sales techniques to get his victims' money. As one
former client put it, "once he had my money he turned ugly and abusive."
I'm glad the word is out in this newsgroup. It could lead to a situation
such as "you're planning to hire Ken Pangborn to help you with your CPS
case? Ok...but hey, go read http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com first." If
this saves one family, it's worth it.
>
>As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
>individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only conclusion
>that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by the
>other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as a
>professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the substance of
>facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg didn't
>research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone who
>was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than gregg
>is.
I don't know Gregg, but that pretty much sums up Ken Pangborn.
>
>That is a situation that usually I would find irritating, but in this case
>it is amusing to me. The humor I find in this is that just like every other
>member of what I call the Anti-CPS mob, mr pangborn uses misdirection,
>deception, and outright lies as the basis of his posting style. Just as
>claimed in the "aboutkenpangborn" site. That of course begs the question
>"Why is it that those who oppose the CPS system here are never able to
>support their claims?".
Well, all I can tell you is that he wasn't "opposing" it when he was using
it as a tool to harass my children!
> Ken could be a clone of so many others who have
>posted here, he is like watching someone looking at their own reflections in
>multiple mirrors.
>
>Once again my apologies to the individual(s) who followed mr pangborn into
>this news group. You were right, I was wrong.
No problem...it's not a bad trait to not assume the worst about someone.
It is an admirable trait, however, when one is open-minded and can admit
that they were in error. This is the very kind of integrity which Ken
Pangborn lacks...otherwise, there would not be a need for
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com at all.
I first created the site in response to a number of lies Ken was publishing
about me on usenet: specifically, that I had been discharged from the
Marine Corps under other than honorable circumstances, that I had had a
"1000 mile restraining order" issued against me, that I "blackmailed women
into having sex with me" (a lie which he has repeated as recently as today)
and many others. The lies were ludicrous on their face and obviously
untrue, but I felt the need to set the record straight. Basically I
started out by archiving his falsehoods about my military service record,
pointing out his several claims and how he contradicted himself with them
(in one post he said I had been kicked out for "section 8", another it was
"running from the enemy" and yet another time he invented the "spouse
abuse" story.) I also added a bit of his own history, such as his threat
to arrange for a woman's rape on a rape support newsgroup when she wouldn't
"shut up".
To keep it somewhat brief, though: I offered to remove
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web, in exchange for Ken
apologizing and admitting his error. All he had to do was to admit that he
had lied...mostly, on issues which he had already been thoroughly exposed
on. He lacked the integrity to do so....as a result,
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com is now the #1 return in any search engine
in response to a query on "ken pangborn" or "kenneth pangborn". A couple
years ago, he went from 90k annually to 30k, and I like to think that
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com had something to do with that.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaFP8Qu6zDezw650EQJ+CACg7s4C25v8B2Pcw+YF+YWiJB+yCkwAoNpF
e6EykMI3Q+0HGpHuTMHDBvmT
=5/Xj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Greegor
> >After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
> >have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
> >ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
> >
> >One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
> >themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
>
> That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't remain
> openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when the
> proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
> black and white.
You believe everything in print???
Your proof that Ken is the "false flag" operator is that one of
the false flag posts included Ken's ""Signature""??
You DO realize how (falling off a log) easy it is to cut and paste
text, right?
freedom wrote
> I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com, and I am glad that
> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's abuse
> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
> "altered" his words.
>
> A good example of this is http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html,
> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
> alt.atheism regulars.
> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
> forgeries of [people] here...
And you know this because the forger cloned Ken's ""signature"" on a
message?
Golly, NOBODY can figure out how a forger could forge a signature??
Do you think cut and paste is BEYOND the "false flag" forger?
>.and, now that you have spoken out against him,
> you'll likely be added to the list of his "marks" or targets.
Well, the supposed ""third party"" who is forging would
likely see this comment as an opportunity now wouldn't they?
Wouldn't a ""third party forger"" be motivated enough to do
all of the other posts yet miss the opportunity to fulfill this
prophecy??
Fulfilling your ""prophecy"" would of course be imperative
to a "false flag" operation.
You do know what a "false flag" operation is don't you?
> He'll also likely accuse that you must be me
> posting under another address, or that we are
> somehow associated with one another.
This would be Ken falling prey to a "false flag" operation.
He has reason to suspect you, of course.
But a ""third party"" running a "false flag" would
be absolutely overjoyed about this all around!
Your comment would of course also be a good
strategy if you are yourself the "false flag" operator.
> > In this case the
> >individual that wrote and maintains the "aboutkenpangborn" site seems to
> >have kens number quite clearly.
Ron only says this because Ken and him strongly disagreed.
It's a structural and elaborate form of ad hominem.
Ron's wish to vilify an opponent is blatantly obvious.
> I do...unfortunately, it's because my children and I have been harassed and
> stalked by Pangborn, going on nine years now. This has included both
> online and offline harassment.....including a bogus report to CPS by Ken in
> 2001.
And you can prove this how?
The people in the ascps newsgroup can confirm that it
it almost impossible to expose who reported abuse to CPS.
The "vested interest" in supporting and encouraging false reports
at the agencies is well understood.
> And, before anyone gives me the speech about "turn off your computer"....I
> did. On some occasions, I was off usenet literally for months....then
> would return and browse the newsgroups, and find Ken still mentioning me in
> nearly every single post, arguing with others whom he has falsely
> identified as me, etc. Go look in alt.dads-rights.unmoderated on any given
> day, and 90% of his posts will usually be about me. On rare occasions, one
> or two of them are actually in response to a comment I made.
Look up comments Kane has made about Fern, and she has been
gone for like a year.
Kane drove the grandmother away using the c-word obscenity and
lies he has since been caught at about abuse she "supported".
> > Nearly everything said on that site about
> >mr pangborn was proven by ken himself, here in this news group, before I
> >took the time to visit that web site. It was like reading a good novel for
> >the second time, one already knows the plot and the characters, but missed
> >some of the subtle interplay of the characters the first time through. It
> >was both interesting and entertaining.
>
> It's good entertainment value....but at the same time, it's difficult to
> laugh too hard at him. Ken Pangborn is harming people who are in bad
> situations. He represents himself as someone he clearly is not (fake
> college degrees as well as his general lack of knowledge) and relies upon
> pressure "used car" sales techniques to get his victims' money. As one
> former client put it, "once he had my money he turned ugly and abusive."
>
> I'm glad the word is out in this newsgroup. It could lead to a situation
> such as "you're planning to hire Ken Pangborn to help you with your CPS
> case? Ok...but hey, go read http://www.aboutken[] first." If
> this saves one family, it's worth it.
Most of the people coming here needing help can't afford Ken or his
associates.
You forget of course that Ken as a consultant would only be a PART
of any dream team that a more affluent family would hire.
CPS agencies rarely attack families with even moderate wealth,
although since more and more people in blue collar neighborhoods
are successfully fending off CPS, the agencies seem to be trying
to make more cases with naive middle class families.
Family Rights people LOVE this because middle class families
can politically destroy CPS once their naivety is punctured.
A few of them might hire a "dream team" even if they have to
take out loans or seek financial help from more affluent relatives.
The political forces on the side of the Child Protection INDUSTRY
have actually taken note of the threat to their industry presented
by Family Rights groups after some of them have actually
gotten laws passed to declaw the abusive CPS monster.
The Child Protection INDUSTRY is scared shitless because
in some places their most common and aggregious ABUSES
absolutely will not be tolerated anymore and Family Rights
is just warming up for more.
Ronald Van Dyne of Nebraska is a Foster Contractor, a person
who is a "beneficiary" of the crappy status quo system.
Ken seems to be diametrically opposed to the status quo system.
> >As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
> >individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only conclusion
> >that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by the
> >other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as a
> >professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the substance of
> >facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg didn't
> >research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone who
> >was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than gregg
> >is.
This sounds good but if you look at the archive of posts you
will see that Dan began calling me turdbrain repeatedly and
that brought up a resemblance to Ken Pangborn.
You will then see that I did research fake degrees and posted
about the government coverup of employees in all branches
of government who used phoney degrees to get their cushy jobs.
Many even got phoney degrees paid for BY the government
so they could advance in position and pay grade.
A Judge in a Federal Court is preventing this DISGRACE
from being investigated name by name by the public.
LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
There is NO QUESTION Mr. Moore, that you would use
any such openness as a means to another attack.
I conceded that we don't know the exact details of
your education, or Dan's or Don's, etc.
I cannot give testament to Ken's credentials, that is true.
But Ken has STILL been more open than the various
other posters in the newsgroups really.
> I don't know Gregg, but that pretty much sums up Ken Pangborn.
This "simily" tactic was not exactly high ethical concept.
> >That is a situation that usually I would find irritating, but in this case
> >it is amusing to me. The humor I find in this is that just like every other
> >member of what I call the Anti-CPS mob, mr pangborn uses misdirection,
> >deception, and outright lies as the basis of his posting style. Just as
> >claimed in the "aboutkenpangborn" site. That of course begs the question
> >"Why is it that those who oppose the CPS system here are never able to
> >support their claims?".
This is like a determined religious fanatic asking why it is that the
Nietzschean atheists can't disprove God's existance to their
satisfaction!
Or like Nietzschean atheists asking why the religionists can prove
God's existance to the Nietzschean atheists satisfaction.
> Well, all I can tell you is that he wasn't "opposing" it when he was using
> it as a tool to harass my children!
Has Ken admitted to calling in a child abuse report?
Or is this just like the way you ""know"" that the fake posts are from
him?
> Ken could be a clone of so many others who have
> posted here, he is like watching someone looking
> at their own reflections in multiple mirrors.
> Once again my apologies to the individual(s) who
> followed mr pangborn into
> this news group. You were right, I was wrong.
Clearly the fact that Ken asserted strong opposition to Ron
made Ron decide that any slander of Ken is deserved.
Like I said earlier in this post, it's an elaborate form of ad hominem.
> No problem...it's not a bad trait to not assume the worst about someone.
> It is an admirable trait, however, when one is open-minded and can admit
> that they were in error. This is the very kind of integrity which Ken
> Pangborn lacks...otherwise, there would not be a need for
> http://www.aboutken[] at all.
Admitting to an error?
More like Ron was hoping to coopt Ken to his CAUSE and
when Ken tore into him Ron rolls out the usual puke bucket.
> I first created the site in response to a number of lies Ken was publishing
> about me on usenet: specifically, that I had been discharged from the
> Marine Corps under other than honorable circumstances, that I had had a
> "1000 mile restraining order" issued against me, that I "blackmailed women
> into having sex with me" (a lie which he has repeated as recently as today)
> and many others. The lies were ludicrous on their face and obviously
> untrue, but I felt the need to set the record straight. Basically I
> started out by archiving his falsehoods about my military service record,
> pointing out his several claims and how he contradicted himself with them
> (in one post he said I had been kicked out for "section 8", another it was
> "running from the enemy" and yet another time he invented the "spouse
> abuse" story.) I also added a bit of his own history, such as his threat
> to arrange for a woman's rape on a rape support newsgroup when she wouldn't
> "shut up".
It's a good thing he didn't mention your small penis!
> To keep it somewhat brief, though: I offered to remove
> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web, in exchange for Ken
> apologizing and admitting his error. All he had to do was to admit that he
> had lied...mostly, on issues which he had already been thoroughly exposed
> on. He lacked the integrity to do so....as a result,
> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com is now the #1 return in any search engine
> in response to a query on "ken pangborn" or "kenneth pangborn". A couple
> years ago, he went from 90k annually to 30k, and I like to think that
> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com had something to do with that.
To anybody not absorbed in your feud, this stuff reads as
so egotistical and self serving it's hilarious.
By the way, Ron, my name is NOT spelled gregg.
Please have the common decency to refer to me as Greg.
I have not referred to you as Ronaldo for many weeks now.
The beginning of wisdom is getting things by their right name. -
Confucious
Dan Sullivan
Greegor wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, "Ron" wrote
> > >After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
> > >have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
> > >ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
> > >
> > >One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
> > >themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
> >
> freedom wrote
> > That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't remain
> > openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when the
> > proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
> > black and white.
>
> You believe everything in print???
Wait a second, we're not supposed to believe everything in print... but
we're supposed to believe what YOU post, Greg?
Freakin HILARIOUS!!!!
0:->
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, "Ron" wrote
>>> After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>>> have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
>>> ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>>>
>>> One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
>>> themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
> freedom wrote
>> That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't remain
>> openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when the
>> proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
>> black and white.
>
> You believe everything in print???
> Your proof that Ken is the "false flag" operator is that one of
> the false flag posts included Ken's ""Signature""??
> You DO realize how (falling off a log) easy it is to cut and paste
> text, right?
Is this a direction you really want to go?
> freedom wrote
>> I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com, and I am glad that
>> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
>> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
>> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's abuse
>> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
>> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
>> "altered" his words.
>>
>> A good example of this is http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html,
>> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
>> alt.atheism regulars.
>
>> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
>> forgeries of [people] here...
>
> And you know this because the forger cloned Ken's ""signature"" on a
> message?
You have it the other way around.
> Golly, NOBODY can figure out how a forger could forge a signature??
> Do you think cut and paste is BEYOND the "false flag" forger?
Why would it be beyond krp's ability?
>> .and, now that you have spoken out against him,
>> you'll likely be added to the list of his "marks" or targets.
>
> Well, the supposed ""third party"" who is forging would
> likely see this comment as an opportunity now wouldn't they?
Sure would. But how do we know there IS a third party? There's other
proof of who it is, Greg. And you just watched him lie about job
requirements cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
Are you this bereft of morals and ethics?
> Wouldn't a ""third party forger"" be motivated enough to do
> all of the other posts yet miss the opportunity to fulfill this
> prophecy??
If there was one.
> Fulfilling your ""prophecy"" would of course be imperative
> to a "false flag" operation.
Could be. Which evidence on the website he supports would you say is
proven false?
What-ifs tend to run out of steam eventually. Yours are half flat now.
>
> You do know what a "false flag" operation is don't you?
You seem to. And you seem to be defending a clown that attacks people in
all sorts of ways.
>> He'll also likely accuse that you must be me
>> posting under another address, or that we are
>> somehow associated with one another.
>
> This would be Ken falling prey to a "false flag" operation.
Could be. Your proof would be? I could find none that supported such
claims from him.
>
> He has reason to suspect you, of course.
Just like you 'suspecting' Dan or myself?
>
> But a ""third party"" running a "false flag" would
> be absolutely overjoyed about this all around!
You seem to be happy as a tic at all the interference being run for you.
>
> Your comment would of course also be a good
> strategy if you are yourself the "false flag" operator.
Lots of innuendo supposition there, Greg. Proof?
I don't see any so far. Surely you'll come up with some.
>>> In this case the
>>> individual that wrote and maintains the "aboutkenpangborn" site seems to
>>> have kens number quite clearly.
>
> Ron only says this because Ken and him strongly disagreed.
No, Ron was lied to and about. He posted what he posted. It was what he
claimed. Then it was lied about by Ken. Real simple.
> It's a structural and elaborate form of ad hominem.
> Ron's wish to vilify an opponent is blatantly obvious.
He has simply identified someone very like you, with a different MO in
some respects but some characteristics that lend themselves to your use.
>> I do...unfortunately, it's because my children and I have been harassed and
>> stalked by Pangborn, going on nine years now. This has included both
>> online and offline harassment.....including a bogus report to CPS by Ken in
>> 2001.
>
> And you can prove this how?
> The people in the ascps newsgroup can confirm that it
> it almost impossible to expose who reported abuse to CPS.
> The "vested interest" in supporting and encouraging false reports
> at the agencies is well understood.
It's not almost impossible. Depends on one's sources.
>> And, before anyone gives me the speech about "turn off your computer"....I
>> did. On some occasions, I was off usenet literally for months....then
>> would return and browse the newsgroups, and find Ken still mentioning me in
>> nearly every single post, arguing with others whom he has falsely
>> identified as me, etc. Go look in alt.dads-rights.unmoderated on any given
>> day, and 90% of his posts will usually be about me. On rare occasions, one
>> or two of them are actually in response to a comment I made.
>
> Look up comments Kane has made about Fern, and she has been
> gone for like a year.
That has what to do with this issue?
> Kane drove the grandmother away using the c-word obscenity and
> lies he has since been caught at about abuse she "supported".
Show one lie. She was "outraged" that a known confessed child beater
hadn't gotten, according to SOME claims, his constitutional rights. She
was wrong, thus voicing an opinion. And it constituted a defense of the
child abuser....a confessed one at that.
See, you are Ken's little brother.
>>> Nearly everything said on that site about
>>> mr pangborn was proven by ken himself, here in this news group, before I
>>> took the time to visit that web site. It was like reading a good novel for
>>> the second time, one already knows the plot and the characters, but missed
>>> some of the subtle interplay of the characters the first time through. It
>>> was both interesting and entertaining.
>> It's good entertainment value....but at the same time, it's difficult to
>> laugh too hard at him. Ken Pangborn is harming people who are in bad
>> situations. He represents himself as someone he clearly is not (fake
>> college degrees as well as his general lack of knowledge) and relies upon
>> pressure "used car" sales techniques to get his victims' money. As one
>> former client put it, "once he had my money he turned ugly and abusive."
>>
>> I'm glad the word is out in this newsgroup. It could lead to a situation
>> such as "you're planning to hire Ken Pangborn to help you with your CPS
>> case? Ok...but hey, go read http://www.aboutken[] first." If
>> this saves one family, it's worth it.
>
> Most of the people coming here needing help can't afford Ken or his
> associates.
He wasn't referring to most...just the few that might bite.
> You forget of course that Ken as a consultant would only be a PART
> of any dream team that a more affluent family would hire.
> CPS agencies rarely attack families with even moderate wealth,
Absolute nonsense.
> although since more and more people in blue collar neighborhoods
> are successfully fending off CPS, the agencies seem to be trying
> to make more cases with naive middle class families.
Nearly everyone now posting here that have beaten CPS are NOT poor
people, Greg.
> Family Rights people LOVE this because middle class families
> can politically destroy CPS once their naivety is punctured.
> A few of them might hire a "dream team" even if they have to
> take out loans or seek financial help from more affluent relatives.
Well, we should be able to see a few of these high profile cases,
shouldn't we? From your big brother?
> The political forces on the side of the Child Protection INDUSTRY
> have actually taken note of the threat to their industry presented
> by Family Rights groups after some of them have actually
> gotten laws passed to declaw the abusive CPS monster.
"Taken note?" Who, specifically, and note of what specifically? Name the
laws, and show that they were taken note of.
> The Child Protection INDUSTRY is scared shitless because
> in some places their most common and aggregious ABUSES
> absolutely will not be tolerated anymore and Family Rights
> is just warming up for more.
More nonsense. They have lost nearly all their early energy and drive by
attracting such as you, Greg. You are a destroyer. Even of what you
proclaim you stand for.
> Ronald Van Dyne of Nebraska is a Foster Contractor, a person
> who is a "beneficiary" of the crappy status quo system.
A beneficiary that is reimbursed from the foster child subsidy at about
10-20% each month? Yeah, sure Greg. He's riding high on that huge income.
>
> Ken seems to be diametrically opposed to the status quo system.
>
If it was candy coated you'd eat shit, Greg.
Was he not once a member of NOW, an organization opposed to custody
rights for fathers?
>>> As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
>>> individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only conclusion
>>> that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by the
>>> other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as a
>>> professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the substance of
>>> facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg didn't
>>> research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone who
>>> was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than gregg
>>> is.
>
> This sounds good but if you look at the archive of posts you
> will see that Dan began calling me turdbrain repeatedly and
> that brought up a resemblance to Ken Pangborn.
>
> You will then see that I did research fake degrees and posted
> about the government coverup of employees in all branches
> of government who used phoney degrees to get their cushy jobs.
Proof?
> Many even got phoney degrees paid for BY the government
> so they could advance in position and pay grade.
Proof?
> A Judge in a Federal Court is preventing this DISGRACE
> from being investigated name by name by the public.
>
> LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
Really?
>
> But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
>
Sure you did.
> His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
What part didn't? You didn't actually look up the issuer of the degree
to see if it's legitimate?
>
> There is NO QUESTION Mr. Moore, that you would use
> any such openness as a means to another attack.
Well, since we are what-iffing here, and I can't find any possibly
fiduciary motive for the poster's expose' I suggest this: what if he's
telling the truth?
> I conceded that we don't know the exact details of
> your education, or Dan's or Don's, etc.
>
> I cannot give testament to Ken's credentials, that is true.
> But Ken has STILL been more open than the various
> other posters in the newsgroups really.
R R R R R...candy coated?
You buy his degrees?
>> I don't know Gregg, but that pretty much sums up Ken Pangborn.
>
> This "simily" tactic was not exactly high ethical concept.
What's a "simily?"
If you meant, "similarly" he just put the likeness aside and said he
agreed with the description.
How many times did your mom admit to dropping you on your head when you
were a baby? 0;-]
>>> That is a situation that usually I would find irritating, but in this case
>>> it is amusing to me. The humor I find in this is that just like every other
>>> member of what I call the Anti-CPS mob, mr pangborn uses misdirection,
>>> deception, and outright lies as the basis of his posting style. Just as
>>> claimed in the "aboutkenpangborn" site. That of course begs the question
>>> "Why is it that those who oppose the CPS system here are never able to
>>> support their claims?".
>
> This is like a determined religious fanatic asking why it is that the
> Nietzschean atheists can't disprove God's existance to their
> satisfaction!
No it isn't. Not even close analogy.
It's more like you rarely responding with proof when asked for it.
But you make all kinds of wild claims and accusations, mostly by stupid
childish school yard teener girls clique methods.
> Or like Nietzschean atheists asking why the religionists can prove
> God's existance to the Nietzschean atheists satisfaction.
Nope. You'd like to think that make you appear erudite, but to anyone
that's actually studied and also understands English, and metaphor, it
just looks affected and childish.
Perhaps you can look at the paragraph of Ron's and explain the connects
to your chosen analogy?
>> Well, all I can tell you is that he wasn't "opposing" it when he was using
>> it as a tool to harass my children!
>
> Has Ken admitted to calling in a child abuse report?
Have you?
Has the perpetrator in this newsgroup admitted to calling in the
information that someone currently fighting CPS is posting to this ng?
> Or is this just like the way you ""know"" that the fake posts are from
> him?
There were slips that revealed it.
>> Ken could be a clone of so many others who have
>> posted here, he is like watching someone looking
>> at their own reflections in multiple mirrors.
>
>> Once again my apologies to the individual(s) who
>> followed mr pangborn into
>> this news group. You were right, I was wrong.
>
> Clearly the fact that Ken asserted strong opposition to Ron
> made Ron decide that any slander of Ken is deserved.
Slander? Kind of a strong word coming from you who deals in it on a
daily basis, boy.
> Like I said earlier in this post, it's an elaborate form of ad hominem.
Ad Hom is common here. The question is, is it warranted.
If you unfairly and falsely attacked your response might well be
justified in fighting back with ad hom.
Problem is, YOU, Greg, are NOT unfairly and falsely attacked here. I
suspect from what I've researched, the poster is not unfairly attacking
either.
>> No problem...it's not a bad trait to not assume the worst about someone.
>> It is an admirable trait, however, when one is open-minded and can admit
>> that they were in error. This is the very kind of integrity which Ken
>> Pangborn lacks...otherwise, there would not be a need for
>> http://www.aboutken[] at all.
>
> Admitting to an error?
Yep. He said he misjudged Ken. Admitted and apologized for it.
> More like Ron was hoping to coopt Ken to his CAUSE and
R R R R ...you saw Ron's commentary, challenges, and questions as
trying to bring Ken over to Ron's cause? One, what's Ron's cause?
And two, are you that language disabled?
You might as well claim I'm trying to bring you over to MY cause, Greg.
Ron was doing the same thing I do (we've both done it for a long time
here) and that is try to get the opponent to be honest.
What a couple of naive klutzes Ron and I are to think that's possible.
> when Ken tore into him Ron rolls out the usual puke bucket.
You mean Ron refused to be lied to?
Your hero flat out lied, Greg. It's in plain view. All you need to is
take off your shit colored glasses and read.
>
>> I first created the site in response to a number of lies Ken was publishing
>> about me on usenet: specifically, that I had been discharged from the
>> Marine Corps under other than honorable circumstances, that I had had a
>> "1000 mile restraining order" issued against me, that I "blackmailed women
>> into having sex with me" (a lie which he has repeated as recently as today)
>> and many others. The lies were ludicrous on their face and obviously
>> untrue, but I felt the need to set the record straight. Basically I
>> started out by archiving his falsehoods about my military service record,
>> pointing out his several claims and how he contradicted himself with them
>> (in one post he said I had been kicked out for "section 8", another it was
>> "running from the enemy" and yet another time he invented the "spouse
>> abuse" story.) I also added a bit of his own history, such as his threat
>> to arrange for a woman's rape on a rape support newsgroup when she wouldn't
>> "shut up".
>
> It's a good thing he didn't mention your small penis!
Oh, that will boost your credibility.
Have you read Ken's post to the woman?
>> To keep it somewhat brief, though: I offered to remove
>> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web, in exchange for Ken
>> apologizing and admitting his error. All he had to do was to admit that he
>> had lied...mostly, on issues which he had already been thoroughly exposed
>> on. He lacked the integrity to do so....as a result,
>> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com is now the #1 return in any search engine
>> in response to a query on "ken pangborn" or "kenneth pangborn". A couple
>> years ago, he went from 90k annually to 30k, and I like to think that
>> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com had something to do with that.
>
> To anybody not absorbed in your feud, this stuff reads as
> so egotistical and self serving it's hilarious.
How does the poster gain..in a self serving way, by exposing someone he
claims he was attacked by?
Whose payroll would he be on?
And if his comments are false, how is it Pangborn hasn't been able to
stop him with legal action? Could it be because the truth is an absolute
defense in slander.
> By the way, Ron, my name is NOT spelled gregg.
> Please have the common decency to refer to me as Greg.
> I have not referred to you as Ronaldo for many weeks now.
R R R R ....oh, good one. You wish to insult then run.
No, gregg, when you insult and run like you do, you once more show how
morally deficient you are.
Greg, grow up.
>
> The beginning of wisdom is getting things by their right name. -
> Confucious
How childish. They believed back then that everything was named
according to it's OWN naming of itself.
And in Chinese too. R R R R R R R R
If I call you Stupid, I have named you correctly.
Does that make me wise?
0:->
>
freedom
On 7 Jan 2007, "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, "Ron" wrote
>> >After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>> >have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
>> >ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>> >
>> >One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
>> >themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
>>
>freedom wrote
>> That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't remain
>> openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when the
>> proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
>> black and white.
>
>You believe everything in print???
No, but I believe the things which I've witnessed firsthand, with regard to
Pangborn's fraud, forgeries and stalking.
>Your proof that Ken is the "false flag" operator is that one of
>the false flag posts included Ken's ""Signature""??
>You DO realize how (falling off a log) easy it is to cut and paste
>text, right?
Not sure what you're talking about here?
>
>freedom wrote
>> I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com, and I am glad that
>> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
>> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
>> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's abuse
>> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
>> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
>> "altered" his words.
>>
>> A good example of this is http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html,
>> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
>> alt.atheism regulars.
>
>> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
>> forgeries of [people] here...
>
>And you know this because the forger cloned Ken's ""signature"" on a
>message?
>Golly, NOBODY can figure out how a forger could forge a signature??
>Do you think cut and paste is BEYOND the "false flag" forger?
No, I know it because he's been caught in the act of forging in other
newsgroups.
>
>>.and, now that you have spoken out against him,
>> you'll likely be added to the list of his "marks" or targets.
>
>Well, the supposed ""third party"" who is forging would
>likely see this comment as an opportunity now wouldn't they?
>Wouldn't a ""third party forger"" be motivated enough to do
>all of the other posts yet miss the opportunity to fulfill this
>prophecy??
>Fulfilling your ""prophecy"" would of course be imperative
>to a "false flag" operation.
>
>You do know what a "false flag" operation is don't you?
>
>> He'll also likely accuse that you must be me
>> posting under another address, or that we are
>> somehow associated with one another.
>
>This would be Ken falling prey to a "false flag" operation.
>
>He has reason to suspect you, of course.
>
>But a ""third party"" running a "false flag" would
>be absolutely overjoyed about this all around!
>
>Your comment would of course also be a good
>strategy if you are yourself the "false flag" operator.
While that's true...Pangborn has already been caught in the act of these
forgeries. See http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html for
yourself. The evidence is conclusive....either Ken authored the forged
post, or the forger somehow knew what Ken was going to post, verbatim, 8
hours before he posted it. Also note the fact that Ken tried to weasel his
way out of it with excuse after excuse, which were shot down almost as
quickly as he posted them. Then, he came up with the weak excuse that
"it's difficult to keep my story straight, because I didn't make the
forgery".
>
>> > In this case the
>> >individual that wrote and maintains the "aboutkenpangborn" site seems to
>> >have kens number quite clearly.
>
>Ron only says this because Ken and him strongly disagreed.
>It's a structural and elaborate form of ad hominem.
>Ron's wish to vilify an opponent is blatantly obvious.
In this case it's well-placed. Ken is a troll and a harasser, with no real
credentials.
>
>> I do...unfortunately, it's because my children and I have been harassed and
>> stalked by Pangborn, going on nine years now. This has included both
>> online and offline harassment.....including a bogus report to CPS by Ken in
>> 2001.
>
>And you can prove this how?
>The people in the ascps newsgroup can confirm that it
>it almost impossible to expose who reported abuse to CPS.
>The "vested interest" in supporting and encouraging false reports
>at the agencies is well understood.
He was openly bragging about having done so on his listserv.
"Dream"? It would have to be of the sort which would involve Freddy
Krueger.
>CPS agencies rarely attack families with even moderate wealth,
>although since more and more people in blue collar neighborhoods
>are successfully fending off CPS, the agencies seem to be trying
>to make more cases with naive middle class families.
>
>Family Rights people LOVE this because middle class families
>can politically destroy CPS once their naivety is punctured.
>A few of them might hire a "dream team" even if they have to
>take out loans or seek financial help from more affluent relatives.
>
>The political forces on the side of the Child Protection INDUSTRY
>have actually taken note of the threat to their industry presented
>by Family Rights groups after some of them have actually
>gotten laws passed to declaw the abusive CPS monster.
>The Child Protection INDUSTRY is scared shitless because
>in some places their most common and aggregious ABUSES
>absolutely will not be tolerated anymore and Family Rights
>is just warming up for more.
>
>Ronald Van Dyne of Nebraska is a Foster Contractor, a person
>who is a "beneficiary" of the crappy status quo system.
>
>Ken seems to be diametrically opposed to the status quo system.
Ken's only interest is in finding people who are gullible enough to send
him money.
>
>> >As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
>> >individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only conclusion
>> >that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by the
>> >other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as a
>> >professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the substance of
>> >facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg didn't
>> >research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone who
>> >was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than gregg
>> >is.
>
>This sounds good but if you look at the archive of posts you
>will see that Dan began calling me turdbrain repeatedly and
>that brought up a resemblance to Ken Pangborn.
>
>You will then see that I did research fake degrees and posted
>about the government coverup of employees in all branches
>of government who used phoney degrees to get their cushy jobs.
>Many even got phoney degrees paid for BY the government
>so they could advance in position and pay grade.
>A Judge in a Federal Court is preventing this DISGRACE
>from being investigated name by name by the public.
>
>LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
>
>But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
>
>His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
Really? And what was that?
Have you seen his CV, as it appears on the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers
Association website?
http://www.tcdla.com/secure/experts/bios/k_pangborn.pdf
Do you buy his explanation that some third party fabricated his CV and
convinced the TCDLA to add it to their secure site? Or his explanation
that he purposely put false information into the CV to throw off his
so-called "stalkers"?
>
>There is NO QUESTION Mr. Moore, that you would use
>any such openness as a means to another attack.
So he claims. However, he makes many claims regarding things which I've
supposedly done, statements I've supposedly made and names I've supposedly
posted under....none of which are true. You might want to ask him to
actually provide proof for some of his statements sometime. See how
quickly he changes the subject.
>
>I conceded that we don't know the exact details of
>your education, or Dan's or Don's, etc.
My education isn't at issue, nor do I know anything about Dan's or Don's.
My issue is that Ken Pangborn is falsely representing himself as possessing
a college degree, which he does not, and is soliciting business based upon
this falsehood.
>
>I cannot give testament to Ken's credentials, that is true.
>But Ken has STILL been more open than the various
>other posters in the newsgroups really.
Sure, if you consider lying as "openness".
>
>> I don't know Gregg, but that pretty much sums up Ken Pangborn.
>
>This "simily" tactic was not exactly high ethical concept.
>
>> >That is a situation that usually I would find irritating, but in this case
>> >it is amusing to me. The humor I find in this is that just like every other
>> >member of what I call the Anti-CPS mob, mr pangborn uses misdirection,
>> >deception, and outright lies as the basis of his posting style. Just as
>> >claimed in the "aboutkenpangborn" site. That of course begs the question
>> >"Why is it that those who oppose the CPS system here are never able to
>> >support their claims?".
>
>This is like a determined religious fanatic asking why it is that the
>Nietzschean atheists can't disprove God's existance to their
>satisfaction!
>
>Or like Nietzschean atheists asking why the religionists can prove
>God's existance to the Nietzschean atheists satisfaction.
>
>> Well, all I can tell you is that he wasn't "opposing" it when he was using
>> it as a tool to harass my children!
>
>Has Ken admitted to calling in a child abuse report?
Yes, he has.
>Or is this just like the way you ""know"" that the fake posts are from
>him?
No. See http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html to see how one
"knows" that Ken has forged posts. Or just visit
alt.dads-rights.unmoderated, where he replies to posts by other people and
adds my name into the quoted reply, to make it appear that I was the
original author. That's a form of forgery as well, in my opinion.
>
>> Ken could be a clone of so many others who have
>> posted here, he is like watching someone looking
>> at their own reflections in multiple mirrors.
>
>> Once again my apologies to the individual(s) who
>> followed mr pangborn into
>> this news group. You were right, I was wrong.
>
>Clearly the fact that Ken asserted strong opposition to Ron
>made Ron decide that any slander of Ken is deserved.
Except that no "slander" has occurred. Slander applies (1) to verbal
speech and (2) the speech has to be untrue. Everything which has been
written regarding Ken has been true and factual.
Tell that to the fathers who were tricked into sending money to Ken, and
got nothing in return. I doubt they find it amusing.
>
>By the way, Ron, my name is NOT spelled gregg.
>Please have the common decency to refer to me as Greg.
>I have not referred to you as Ronaldo for many weeks now.
I'll note this for my own reference in any future exchanges.
>The beginning of wisdom is getting things by their right name. -
>Confucious
We'd like to arrange for YOUR rape. -
Ken Pangborn
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaGbuwu6zDezw650EQKsrgCg4w23hsoRzAQCvxZ9wgdqUlTSSWwAn3SP
UBeVUwQfaaB1RDO/lhnfbSrd
=LUqp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
0:->
An appropriate response from Greg would be "ouch," but you aren't going
to get it. He's hung his hopes on the presence of others, trolls, liars,
duplicitous forgers, to keep the focus off him and his nutso bs, bad
advice...dangerous in fact...and general tendency to make claims and
refuse to back them with facts as evidence.
Ken Jr.
0:->
Greegor
> And you just watched him lie about job
> requirements cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
You mean when Ron kept switching BETWEEN two or
three different job classifications and pretending that
is legit?
Do you think Ron is the false flag forger?
Then again, Ron is an online Role Playing Games fan.
The beginning of wisdom is getting things by their right name. -
Confucious
K: How childish. They believed back then that everything
K: was named according to it's OWN naming of itself.
K: And in Chinese too. R R R R R R R R
K: If I call you Stupid, I have named you correctly.
K: Does that make me wise?
I am certain that you would think so.
0:->
> Kane wrote
>> And you just watched him lie about job
>> requirements cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
>
> You mean when Ron kept switching BETWEEN two or
> three different job classifications and pretending that
> is legit?
Nope. I looked up his reference. It said exactly what he claimed. He
posted and said he posted both entry level and supervisor level hiring
criteria.
That's what he claimed he did, and that is what he did.
He left OUT, from both entries on the list (it was a hiring solicitation
page from the STATE of Nebraska, not just child protection) the
introduction to each listing because they were not directly in response
to the issue....college degree requirements.
Then the poster, Ken, claimed they were for (because the URL had the
word 'counselor' in it) that he had put up the criteria for counselors.
That simply was not true.
I searched on the phrases from Ron's original post to find the listings.
NO OTHER LISTINGS APPEARED with those phrases in them.
The job descriptions were clearly for child protection positions obvious
from the other requirements and job responsibilities. No counselor is
asked to do the things listed, but caseworkers and their supervisors
routinely ARE.
I then listed both the quotes from Ron and the matching entries, but
with the full listing included, of each position in question.
They matched.
Perfectly.
Now prove otherwise.
I'll be most happy to repost my post if you wish.
> Do you think Ron is the false flag forger?
I have never seen Ron do a single thing other than express his opinions
and factual information he's found. As part of his opinions and support
of his facts he's asked questions of the one claiming he is incorrect.
When he's found to be wrong he says so.
When he's right folks like you run.
> Then again, Ron is an online Role Playing Games fan.
That may be. Does he do it by forging?
> The beginning of wisdom is getting things by their right name. -
> Confucious
>
> K: How childish. They believed back then that everything
> K: was named according to it's OWN naming of itself.
> K: And in Chinese too. R R R R R R R R
> K: If I call you Stupid, I have named you correctly.
> K: Does that make me wise?
>
> I am certain that you would think so.
Like Ron, I too can be wrong, but I expect it to be proven to me unless
I discover it myself.
Prove you aren't stupid.
Do something smart. Admit you and your cronies do NOT know how to fight
CPS successfully for the return of children, and that you never intended
for the child to come home because you see possible greater profit in
suing the state.
Honesty would turn you instantly credible. We could forgive some of your
errors out of ignorance.
But until YOU get honest, Greg, you will continue to hang with the likes
of Dennis, Neal, Ken and similar.
Losers all. And proven liars.
0:->
>
0:->
> Kane wrote
>> And you just watched him lie about job
>> requirements cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
>
> You mean when Ron kept switching BETWEEN two or
> three different job classifications and pretending that
> is legit?
Nope. You are turning your back on the truth again, assuming your
source, Ken in this case, is telling the truth.
Why did you not go and look at the actual exchange and then check, as I
did, the commentary against the source cited?
Here is how it developed.
In an exchange about workers Ken made a comment and Ron responded with
factual information that refuted his claim, clearly. Here is the exchange:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/5aee3fb35cc0fb2b?hl=en&
... [[[ Ken opens with: ]]]
> No I believe that for the most part CPS is the blind trying to lead the
> > blind. When you have "caseworkers" with a BA in "Bible Studies" and a
> > grand total of 15 MINUTES of "in-service training" before they go
out and
> > pass judgment on abuse cases I think they do more harm than good.
15 minutes. Hmmm, interesting. Unfortunately, again, this is not
supported
by the facts.
Here is some of the job requirements from the state of Nebraska for the
jobs
you are concerned about.
"REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree required; prefer Bachelors degree in
social work, psychology, sociology, counseling, human development,
mental health care, education, or closely related area."
http://www.das.state.ne.us/personnel/nejobs/pro.htm#counseling
Of course thats just for the entry level positions. Supervisors have
the following requirements:
"REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree in social work, psychology, sociology,
counseling, human development, mental health care, education, or closely
related academic area, AND experience performing casework activities in
counseling, protective services, alcohol/drug abuse, juvenile justice
probation or social services delivery; prefer Masters degree. Previous
Protection and Safety experience required."
http://www.das.state.ne.us/personnel/nejobs/pro.htm#counseling ...
As I pointed out in my prior reply, Greg, Ron labeled the positions, and
he quoted from the page at the URL, the LINK, he included.
Ken came back with a claim that he was misleading and posting the
requirements for "counselors."
As you can see, even in the limited piece that Ron posted, those are NOT
typical job description items for a counselor.
I went there and checked, and here is what I found in the entries for
the two positions Ron had referred to -- I am going to insert in
[[[brackets as usual, the entry from above that was Ron's intro to what
I replied to Ken as below in the post linked to by:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/17b2bad2907bb6a0?hl=en&
Protection & Safety Worker/Trainee; $2277-$2631/mo; Available in the
following locations:
* #25-31172-1, Gering. CLOSING DATE: OPEN.
* #25-35732-10, Fremont. CLOSING DATE: 1/3/07.
* #25-32172-1, McCook. CLOSING DATE: 1/9/07.
* #25-32101, North Platte. CLOSING DATE: 1/9/07.
* #25-38999-12, Omaha/Papillion. Filling multiple positions.
CLOSING DATE: 2/20/07.
Promotion to Protection & Safety Worker will typically occur at six
months; required training will continue as will probationary status for
total of one year. Investigate allegations of abuse/neglect. Visit
homes, conduct family assessments, establish safety plans, and initiate
court interventions. Develop, implement, and evaluate treatment plans;
authorize, coordinate, and provide family services. Prepare cases with
appropriate legal staff and testify in court. Develop community
resources; work with schools, law enforcement, and mental health
providers; inform the public of protection and safety services. Perform
crisis intervention. Prepare documentation, correspondence, and court
reports. Casework may be with children/juveniles who have been
adjudicated as delinquent or status offenders. REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors
degree required; prefer Bachelors degree in social work, psychology,
sociology, counseling, human development, mental health care, education,
or closely related area.
[[["REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree required; prefer Bachelors degree in
social work, psychology, sociology, counseling, human development,
mental health care, education, or closely related area." notice the
perfect match to the above? Hence Ron told the truth, and Ken LIED LIED
LIED...to him, and then to me. Read on.]]]
After hire, must be certified in training which de-escalates and manages
communication and physical interactions (MANDT). Valid driver's license
required. REQUIRES COMPLETION OF SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE.
"REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree required; prefer Bachelors degree in
social work, psychology, sociology, counseling, human development,
mental health care, education, or closely related area."
Protection and Safety Supervisor #25-37159R-4; $3269/mo;
Lincoln-Gold's Building. Schedule: Days/Monday - Friday, plus some
additional hours. Provide supervision, direction, support, etc. for OJS,
Status Offense, 3(a), and Dual Adjudicated protective services for
Southeast Service Area. Perform full range of supervisory duties such as
hiring, evaluating staff performance, staff development, etc. Work with
community in developing relationships and partnerships to enhance
protective services for children and families. Community contacts could
be with schools, courts, law enforcement personnel, county attorneys,
and over available resources. REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree in social
work, psychology, sociology, counseling, human development, mental
health care, education, or closely related academic area, AND experience
performing casework activities in counseling, protective services,
alcohol/drug abuse, juvenile justice probation or social services
delivery; prefer Masters degree. Previous Protection and Safety
experience required.
[[[ "REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree in social work, psychology,
sociology, counseling, human development, mental health care, education,
or closely related academic area, AND experience performing casework
activities in counseling, protective services, alcohol/drug abuse,
juvenile justice probation or social services delivery; prefer Masters
degree. Previous Protection and Safety experience required." See? Yet
another perfect match. Now of course, being Greg, you will require proof
that YOU never give yourself...and I will oblige. Two links follow. ]]]
Must have strong organizational skills. Desire experience as a
supervisor or assisting a supervisor within a protective services/case
management function or program. CLOSING DATE: 1/3/07.
The URL name does not represent everything that is on the page.
Ron's quotes are not inclusive of the full entry for the position, but
they are most certainly from it, and no "counselor's" job description
would include those items listed in the quoted descriptions of the jobs
above.
Here is what Ron copied from each of them.
You'll see they are duplicates...obviously from the same material as above:
REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree required; prefer Bachelors degree in
social work, psychology, sociology, counseling, human development,
mental health care, education, or closely related area."
http://www.das.state.ne.us/personnel/nejobs/pro.htm#counseling
Of course thats just for the entry level positions. Supervisors have
the following requirements:
"REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree in social work, psychology, sociology,
counseling, human development, mental health care, education, or closely
related academic area, AND experience performing casework activities in
counseling, protective services, alcohol/drug abuse, juvenile justice
probation or social services delivery; prefer Masters degree. Previous
Protection and Safety experience required." ...
Will you read them and apologize? Fat puckering chance. You NEED Ken far
too much to get honest now, right?
Here is the first post by Ron, responding to Ken's claim that
caseworkers can get the job with a BA in bible studies (attributed to
Ken) and 15 minutes of training.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/5aee3fb35cc0fb2b?hl=en&
...he refers in this post to his source for the hiring posting with job
requirements;
http://www.das.state.ne.us/personnel/nejobs/pro.htm#counseling
... you must search on the position...'Protection & Safety Worker/Trainee'.
My response establishing that indeed Ron told the truth, and Ken was
lying is at:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/17b2bad2907bb6a0?hl=en&
From that point onward Ken continued to lie in the most outlandish
fashion, simply claiming what YOU are parroting, even after I had
provided the citation quotation, and the LINK to the page.
As it is a hiring page those positions may not still be open, but I've
no reason to create such an elaborate description of a position.
The worker one will take longer to fill so may still be there. The
supervisor one may be gone, because it would be for fewer positions to
fill.
Are you NOW going to grow up, Greg?
The rest of your crap below doesn't deserve any more attention than I've
given it already.
Ken lied. You repeat his lie.
Ron offered nothing but a response to Ken's bullshit about training and
education for workers.
He pasted directly from a source that Ken claims didn't have worker and
supervisor positions but "counseling" positions.
And Ken kept on lying when he knew better.
JUST LIKE YOU DO, GREG.
Aren't you proud you've found your big brother?
0:->
0:->
Greegor wrote:
> Kane wrote
> > And you just watched him lie about job
> > requirements cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
>
> You mean when Ron kept switching BETWEEN two or
> three different job classifications and pretending that
> is legit?
He did no such thing.
He provided a quote and a link to the job that is still there.
Protection & Safety Worker/Trainee; $2277 - $2631/mo; Available in the
following locations:
* #25-31172-1, Gering. CLOSING DATE: OPEN.
* #25-32172-1, McCook. CLOSING DATE: 1/9/07.
* #25-32101, North Platte. CLOSING DATE: 1/9/07.
* #25-38999-12, Omaha/Papillion. Filling multiple positions.
CLOSING DATE: 2/20/07.
* #25-37000-15, Lincoln. Multiple positions. CLOSING DATE: OPEN.
Promotion to Protection & Safety Worker will typically occur at six
months; required training will continue as will probationary status for
total of one year. Investigate allegations of abuse/neglect. Visit
homes, conduct family assessments, establish safety plans, and initiate
court interventions. Develop, implement, and evaluate treatment plans;
authorize, coordinate, and provide family services. Prepare cases with
appropriate legal staff and testify in court. Develop community
resources; work with schools, law enforcement, and mental health
providers; inform the public of protection and safety services. Perform
crisis intervention. Prepare documentation, correspondence, and court
reports. Casework may be with children/juveniles who have been
adjudicated as delinquent or status offenders. REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors
degree required; prefer Bachelors degree in social work, psychology,
sociology, counseling, human development, mental health care,
education, or closely related area. After hire, must be certified in
training which de-escalates and manages communication and physical
interactions (MANDT). Valid driver's license required. REQUIRES
COMPLETION OF SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE.
He quoted just this portion, as I recall:
"REQUIREMENTS: Bachelors degree required; prefer Bachelors degree in
social work, psychology, sociology, counseling, human development,
mental health care, education, or closely related area. After hire,
must be certified in training which de-escalates and manages
communication and physical interactions (MANDT). "
Ken lied, and you are lying for him.
Go read the page and get back to us, liar.
http://www.das.state.ne.us/personnel/nejobs/pro.htm#counseling
Ron
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1168223711.0...@s80g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Kane wrote
>> And you just watched him lie about job
>> requirements cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
>
> You mean when Ron kept switching BETWEEN two or
> three different job classifications and pretending that
> is legit?
Obviously gregg you have the same reading issues that ken does. Neither of
you can.
There were no switches, the links remained the same throughout. The data
remained the same as well, one only had to actually read the data provided
on the page the link takes one to to have see the facts. Take the blinders
off gregg, you are making yourself look stupid again.
> Do you think Ron is the false flag forger?
Interesting. Have you ever known me to forge anything gregg? Try being
honest.
> Then again, Ron is an online Role Playing Games fan.
Online role playing fan? Me? No, not at all gregg. The type of game I
prefer is called a "First Person Shooter", or FPS game. Look it up, educate
yourself. There is a world of difference between the two.
> The beginning of wisdom is getting things by their right name. -
> Confucious
I intentionally get your name spelled wrong gregg. Its INTENTIONAL! Get
it? So far its the only thing I have ever gotten wrong about you, so
consider it a gift.
> K: How childish. They believed back then that everything
> K: was named according to it's OWN naming of itself.
> K: And in Chinese too. R R R R R R R R
> K: If I call you Stupid, I have named you correctly.
> K: Does that make me wise?
>
> I am certain that you would think so.
And now to the question you have dodged today gregg. "Gregg
brought you here for some reason, one that I have yet to come to understand.
Maybe you can try and make that clear. Its obvious that despite your claims
of 30+ years in the field that your knowledge is sorely lacking, which of
course brings into question the entire claim." Why did you do this gregg?
Once again, try being honest.
Ron
krp
> After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
> have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers
> that ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
I am in no way surprised at this. There are fools in this world, and
there are folks with agendas. And in some small number of situations we can
have both factors in play at the same thime. On one had we have a
witchhunter and a fool.
> Nearly everything said on that site about mr pangborn was proven by ken
> himself, here in this news group, before I took the time to visit that web
> site. It was like reading a good novel for the second time, one already
> knows the plot and the characters, but missed some of the subtle interplay
> of the characters the first time through. It was both interesting and
> entertaining.
Really did I "prove" that people such as Will Rainey existed? By the way
Ron, if you want to look it up you'll find that Will Rainey is a fictional
character your new BUDDY Moore invented. What is more interesting if you do
just a little "factual" research, Will Rainey is charcter Mr. Moore created
from the Willial Rainey Harper College just a few miles from where he lived
at the time. Rob Wedlock? Another inveted character. We could also go to
ATTORNEY Kosivlotisky supposedly a lawyer from Baltimore, Maryland. No such
attorney in Baltimore, in Maryland, ot any state in the region.
Go to the messages he quotes from me. Like the "DISGRACE TO ALL
MANKIND." If you do a complete Google search on it you will see it never
existed, at least not from me. The first time it appears is in quotes from
David Moore. The message ID he uses does not trace to that post. Moore's
explanation? He says that I "had the message NUKED."
> As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
> individual and asked him to begin participating here.
Gregg did no such thing. I was blissfully unaware of this group. I was
dragged in here because of Mr. Moore's forgeries that appeared here and some
of the responses that people (you among others) posted in response.
Ron - what is clear to me is that you are so wrapped up in your ideology
that you just don't think. You grasp at anything that seems to support your
beliefs even when it doesn't. You NEED to discredit me because you have had
your hat handed to you on the issues several times now. So - I must be the
demon from hell, and Moore's website seems to lend you support on that. Are
you aware that that website was thrown off a dozen or so ISP's in the United
States because it was found to be libelous bullshit? One host (Skyport)
removed it and placed a disclaimer in its place announcing it was a fraud.
Then he took it off shore to places that would ignore any conventions on
content being accurate or truthful.
Now, Ron, a reasonable person would look at some of Moore's global
allegations about me. Such as his whining claims that I am stalking him. Yet
HE has a photo on his website of MY hope. He has content directed at MY
wife. He has made frantic, near hysterical attempts to contact my wife. He
also has personal content on that site he managed to obtain from "public
records." Do I have anything similar on him? Do I have an ABOUTDAVIDMOORE
website with photos of his house? Do I make threats to his wife's safety?
No - he threatens his ex wife himself.
He has claimed that I am a "registered sex offender" in both Wisconsin
and Florida, yet I am not listed in either state's registry both of which
are on-line and accurate. Mr. Moore explains this with the claim that I had
the listings "nuked." Flattering that he says I'd have that power, but as
you SHOULD know that is laughable bullshit.
Ron I write you off as a poor strident fool who has fallen victim to his
own wishful thinking. Believing Moore means that you don't have to face the
possibility that some of your core beliefs are bullshit. Your "god" is
safe.....
krp
> After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
> have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers
> that ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
As you chew on your new Gospel according to Moore - READ THIS said by
others:
==========================================
"Introduction - Who David D. Moore is and who we are
The David D. Moore we are speaking of is an ex-Marine currently living in
the Chicago, Illinois area. He posts on a regular basis to
alt.child-support. Please click here for a list of his current and past
screen names. My name is Joe O'Connor and my associate's name is John
Reinhagen. We both are or have been moderately frequent posters to men's
rights/father's rights-related newsgroups. We've put together this web site
to showcase Moore's abusive behavior on the newsgroups we post to and on the
Internet in general.
A bit of history
About two years ago we witnessed a bizarre Usenet episode where an alleged
NOW rep calling herself "a...@infinity.net" started making ominous threats
to
self-styled fathers-rights advocate David Moore (he was calling himself
"Jeff Johnson" back then) on several of those newsgroups and demanded that
he take down his web pages. There was just one little problem; a comparison
of the subject headers of "Johnson's" posts with those of "ara" showed that
they were coming from the same computer. We both concluded that "ara" was a
sock-puppet cooked up by Moore to get hits on his web-counter and told him
he wasn't going to get any sympathy from us. Moore was quite angry with our
judgement and accused me of betraying him. I suppose he felt that the
pro-father's rights stance that we shared exempted him from critical
scrutiny. A few days later, he lost his Worldnet account (I wonder why).
Moore insisted that he was innocent and blamed his sudden departure from
Worldnet on a cabal of NOW feminists (he posted this on Usenet); although an
independent investigation proved otherwise. I finally got sick of his lying
and exposed him on his pet newsgroup alt.child-support. He didn't take too
kindly to this and a few months later retaliated by taking an old post of
mine and forging in an anti-Semitic comment. Unfortunately for him the
forgery was traced back to his workplace at Sara Lee and he lost his temp
job there. Again he was quite angry and made several posts that looked like
veiled threats of retaliation.
Ever since then, we have both had the displeasure of being treated to the
following:
a.. Repeated complaints to our ISPs.
b.. A mysterious anonymous remailer chorus that loves to post in Moore's
defense and seems excessively interested in his reputation and well-being.
c.. Virulent racist and ethnic forgeries under our screen names.
d.. Anonymous threats of violence.
e.. Anonymous posts begging for personal information about us.
Unfortunately, we're far from the only people who this has happened to, nor
do we claim to be his worst victims . It seems that whoever dares to speak
out against Moore's bizarre online behavior stands a good chance of getting
the same or worse directed against them. This is especially true for his
female 'marks'; Moore's ravings show a singular hatred of women.
About a year ago I put these pages at Geocities; it was taken down shortly
afterwards due to the sheer offensiveness of its content (Geocities didn't
seem to care that I wasn't the author of the crap that I was showcasing).
John generously offered to host the pages and and they've been here ever
since.
We'll be adding to this archive as time permits. Unfortunately keeping up
with Moore is a full-time occupation which neither of us really has time
for, so they will probably always be somewhat out of date.Please email me at
jmo...@snet.net or John at welcomer...@savageoasis.fc.net if you have any
questions or concerns.
This page ©1999 Joseph M. O'Connor and John Reinhagen."
================================
You might want to reflect on your statements for a moment, , but, probably
not.
donkeysbabe
>
> Are you this bereft of morals and ethics?
Don,
Speaking of morals and ethics -
Did any of the vulnerable children you spammed to usenet get raped and
murdered by the perverts who found them for sale on alt.adoption?
You're a real piece of work.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
krp
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1168215056....@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>> >After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>> >have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers
>> >that
>> >ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>> >
>> >One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
>> >themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
> freedom wrote
>> That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't
>> remain
>> openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when
>> the
>> proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
>> black and white.
Open minded? Ye=ou meal gullible enough to believe your bullshit without
using their brain.
> freedom wrote
>> I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutken and I am glad that
>> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
>> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
>> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's
>> abuse
>> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
>> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
>> "altered" his words.
Yeah, nice to suggest that Davey. Why is it that some of those things
aren't in Google at all? Oh you try to explain it by claiming I had them
"nuked." Yeah right. You also claim to have proof that I am a "registered
sex offender" but you also claim I had those "nuked" as well. Of course all
those claims are false. You claim that I stalk you - with a straight face
while the index page of your website has a photo of MY house, and you have
text where you prove your FRANTIC attampts to harass MY wife leaps off the
page.
You don't tell people that your website was thrown off almost a dozen
American ISP's because it was libelous bullshit, and that ONE of them was
so moved to irritation that they put up a diclaimer in place of your site.,
I refer to Skyport. But you don't tell people that or tha many FICTIONAL
characters and former clients you make up. As to the posts you reference
of mine, there is a few facts Moore. The first is that the text that appears
on YOUR site and that which appears in Google differ, sometimes very
subtlely.
>> A good example of this is http://www.aboutken
>> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
>> alt.atheism regulars.
Actually Davey it does NOT. It is a clever bit of your work. Some folks
don't realize that you generally do barrages of your forgeries. Meaning that
you use many different anonymous remailers and the posts appear over time.
Since some are in Austria, others in Italy or Africa, they appear at
different times. I replied to the first one that appeared. Then YOU used one
of the verions that appeared later to try to prove it was me. At first I
couldn't explain it because it even looked bad to me. I knew that I didn't
do the forgeries, but the FACT didn't come up until somebody else noticed
that the post I replied to and the example YOU sed were not the same, I wa
responding to DIFFERENT remailer version. It's only a good example of
misdirection Davey.
>> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
>> forgeries of [people] here...
No I have not. WHY would I? Use your head folks. WHY would I do that
KNOWING the shit it would bring down on me? WHO has a rather OBVIOUS agenda
here.
Yeah - IF that had a SHRED of truth to it wouldn't I be thew one with
the ABOUTDAVIDMOORE content having a photo of his house on it? Wouldn't *I*
be the one with his divorce records on it? This is USE YOUR HEADS FOLKS...
Look at what Moore complains about and then look at what he DOES. Plase DO
look at his website. Lool at WHO has a photo of WHO on it and whose house
and FRANTIC efforts to contact who's wife. Use your head for something more
than a hatrack.
> And you can prove this how?
> The people in the ascps newsgroup can confirm that it
> it almost impossible to expose who reported abuse to CPS.
> The "vested interest" in supporting and encouraging false reports
> at the agencies is well understood.
>> And, before anyone gives me the speech about "turn off your
>> computer"....I
>> did. On some occasions, I was off usenet literally for months....then
>> would return and browse the newsgroups, and find Ken still mentioning me
>> in
>> nearly every single post, arguing with others whom he has falsely
>> identified as me, etc. Go look in alt.dads-rights.unmoderated on any
>> given
>> day, and 90% of his posts will usually be about me. On rare occasions,
>> one
>> or two of them are actually in response to a comment I made.
David has NEVER turned off his computer, he just uses different
ANONYMOUS ID's. Including Justice23, Liberty45 and the like. He uses an
anonymous remailer, I use a legit ISP. Ask yourself WHY. Often the SAME
remailer the forgeries originate from.
> Look up comments Kane has made about Fern, and she has been
> gone for like a year.
>
> Kane drove the grandmother away using the c-word obscenity and
> lies he has since been caught at about abuse she "supported".
> Most of the people coming here needing help can't afford Ken or his
> associates.
> You forget of course that Ken as a consultant would only be a PART
> of any dream team that a more affluent family would hire.
> CPS agencies rarely attack families with even moderate wealth,
> although since more and more people in blue collar neighborhoods
> are successfully fending off CPS, the agencies seem to be trying
> to make more cases with naive middle class families.
Yet even though NOBODY here could afford the A-Team (so you admit) I am
here to offer what I can FREE.
>
>> >As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted
>> >this
>> >individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only
>> >conclusion
>> >that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by
>> >the
>> >other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as
>> >a
>> >professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the
>> >substance of
>> >facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg
>> >didn't
>> >research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone
>> >who
>> >was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than
>> >gregg
>> >is.
>
> This sounds good but if you look at the archive of posts you
> will see that Dan began calling me turdbrain repeatedly and
> that brought up a resemblance to Ken Pangborn.
You all are wrong. I came in here only AFTER a forgery appeared and it
drew responses from this newsgroup.
> LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
> But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
> His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
Yesh - I'd day it was "hostile."
> There is NO QUESTION Mr. Moore, that you would use any such openness as a
> means to another attack.
As he has in the past. He USES anything he can get his hands on. Like
calling the utility companies getting my phone, electricity and water shut
off with his anonymous impersonations.
>> Well, all I can tell you is that he wasn't "opposing" it when he was
>> using it as a tool to harass my children!
> Has Ken admitted to calling in a child abuse report? Or is this just like
> the way you ""know"" that the fake posts are from
> him?
No I do NOT admit to that at all. I know who did and why. But Moore has
made MANY false reports about me, in fact just Saturday he mad an "anonymous
tip" to Florida law enforcement that I had kidnapped a child and was holding
her in my house for sexual purposes. As to the report made about Mr. Moore,
he had been harassing several members of my list, including, oddly, a
Nebraska woman. Moore had sent many forged e-mails to the CPS agency in an
effort to punish her for supporting me. Some of those messages contained
some of Moore's signature graphic sexual violence. He did the same to a
Texas woman. The woman admitted to me in an e-mail that she had made a
report on Moore because of her anger at him for causing her so many problems
with her case. She also was NOT a client, but a user of the free listserv.
Also two of the brothers of the Texas woman went to look for Moore to
"confront" him. I made the mistake of warning David on the newsgroup that
two men were coming.
>> I first created the site in response to a number of lies Ken was
>> publishing
>> about me on usenet: specifically, that I had been discharged from the
>> Marine Corps under other than honorable circumstances, that I had had a
>> "1000 mile restraining order" issued against me, that I "blackmailed
>> women
>> into having sex with me" (a lie which he has repeated as recently as
>> today)
>> and many others. The lies were ludicrous on their face and obviously
>> untrue, but I felt the need to set the record straight. Basically I
>> started out by archiving his falsehoods about my military service record,
>> pointing out his several claims and how he contradicted himself with them
>> (in one post he said I had been kicked out for "section 8", another it
>> was
>> "running from the enemy" and yet another time he invented the "spouse
>> abuse" story.) I also added a bit of his own history, such as his threat
>> to arrange for a woman's rape on a rape support newsgroup when she
>> wouldn't
>> "shut up".
But David those things are confirmned by BOTH your former wives.
Logic should have people actually LOOK at who is doing what. WHO has the
website attacking the other? Does Moore explain WHY he posted my social
security number and checking account information soliciting people to
"withdraw" electronically from them? The photos on the website. The frantic
attempts to harass my wife. Does David admit that back some years ago he was
harassing my youngest daughter at the stable where she rode her horse? That
Moore called repeatedly "DEMANDING" to speak to my daughter telling the poor
bookkeeper who answered the phone that it was his "RIGHT" to speak to her
and that he'd have her arrested for violating his "free speech rights" if
she didn't. Does he say anything about his efforts along with some of his
"coalition" to harass the registrar's office at a University he KNOWS I
attended? What does he say of his harassment of my professional
organizations?
MESSAGE TO RON: Get the hell over yourself. What the hell do you think you
are to me? Some little flea spec asshole full of himself on Usenet. Do you
think I would REALLY deliberately sabotage myself with that INFANTILE
bullshit just to get to the GREAT - VERY IMPORTANT Ron?????? Let some of
the air out Ron before you explode. Neither you nor Kane are that important
to me. Nor am I stupid enough to take a crap where I eat. Look at MOTIVES
Ron...
NAW you can't!
krp
"0:->" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:YZ6dnbWHsJC1CzzY...@scnresearch.com...
>>>> After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly,
>>>> I
>>>> have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers
>>>> that
>>>> ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>>>>
>>>> One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
>>>> themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
>> freedom wrote
>>> That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't
>>> remain
>>> openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when
>>> the
>>> proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
>>> black and white.
>>
>> You believe everything in print???
>> Your proof that Ken is the "false flag" operator is that one of
>> the false flag posts included Ken's ""Signature""??
>> You DO realize how (falling off a log) easy it is to cut and paste
>> text, right?
> Is this a direction you really want to go?
Is this the direction YOU want to go?
>> freedom wrote
>>> I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutken and I am glad that
>>> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
>>> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
>>> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's
>>> abuse
>>> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
>>> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
>>> "altered" his words.
>>>
>>> A good example of this is http://www.aboutken
>>> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
>>> alt.atheism regulars.
>>
>>> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
>>> forgeries of [people] here...
>> And you know this because the forger cloned Ken's ""signature"" on a
>> message?
> You have it the other way around.
I didn't forge anythign and have NEVER used an anonymous remailer - yet
you seem to ignore that Moore DOES.
>> Golly, NOBODY can figure out how a forger could forge a signature??
>> Do you think cut and paste is BEYOND the "false flag" forger?
> Why would it be beyond krp's ability?
But WHY would I do it?
>>> .and, now that you have spoken out against him,
>>> you'll likely be added to the list of his "marks" or targets.
>
>> Well, the supposed ""third party"" who is forging would
>> likely see this comment as an opportunity now wouldn't they?
> Sure would. But how do we know there IS a third party? There's other proof
> of who it is, Greg. And you just watched him lie about job requirements
> cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
No I nailed your ass on it.
> Could be. Which evidence on the website he supports would you say is
> proven false?
Oh how about the alleged former client "Will Rainey?" Start here:
http://www.harpercollege.edu/
Then realize that at the time this "Will Rainey" character was created,
Moore lived in Bolingbrook, Illinois. William Rainey Harper College is in
Palatine, Illinois just a few miles away and who advertized heavily on local
TV. It is also a damn good university. Moore has a habid of doing that. For
a time he appeared as "Jeff Johnson" who was a neighbor of his. He has made
people up named after other landmarks in his area. Recently, David as "PERCY
MINCER" claimed to have gotten the real LOWDOWN about me from a man named
"Richard Holkade." Claiming I was using a false name of "PL" on the Cuba
newsgroup. Moore's problem is that Richard Holkade is the dame of a STREET
in Holland. The "Percy" namer has pretty much disappeared after being so
thoughtly discredited and laughed off the net. Moore just uses the other
ID's such as freedom or TIP..
krp
> Greegor wrote:
>> Kane wrote
>>> And you just watched him lie about job
>>> requirements cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
>>
>> You mean when Ron kept switching BETWEEN two or
>> three different job classifications and pretending that
>> is legit?
>
> Nope. You are turning your back on the truth again, assuming your source,
> Ken in this case, is telling the truth.
>
> Why did you not go and look at the actual exchange and then check, as I
> did, the commentary against the source cited?
>
> Here is how it developed.
>
> In an exchange about workers Ken made a comment and Ron responded with
> factual information that refuted his claim, clearly. Here is the exchange:
Oh cut the shit. The subject was "caseworkers" at the entry level. here are
the FACTS:
1. My original statement was that "caseworkers" almost never had a degree in
any mental health field that while they had to have a degree it could be in
ANYTHING!
2. Both you and Ron disputed that.
3. Ron gave the Nebraska site as a proof that they HAD to have a DEGREE in
social work, psychology etc.... The MAIN link did not give that, you had to
follow it to a different part. He could have used the text he later used.
4. The TEXT he used confirmed what *I* said - that while they "prefer" a
degree in a mental health field ANY degree would work.
5. Then in an EXTREMELY disingenuous attempt to retort me rather than admit
I was right, he came back with the specification for SUPERVISORS..
6. When I shot that one down point that it only applied to supervisors, he
then tried to retort me with a paragraph ON TRAINING.........
It all goes back to the original issue that caused the flap. MY
statement that "caseworkers" SELDOM have a degree in ANYTHING that could
even remotely qualify them to make life and death decisions regarding the
welfare of children! I was 100% right on that and neither of you two can
handle it.
Now - IF, Kane, you actually believe you can PROVE that "caseworkers"
MUST have a Master's or PHD in Psychology, MD in Psychiatry or Social Work<
I invite you to keep trying. OR you can just admit that my original point
that entry level hires - ANY degree works!
krp
> There were no switches, the links remained the same throughout. The data
> remained the same as well, one only had to actually read the data provided
> on the page the link takes one to to have see the facts. Take the
> blinders off gregg, you are making yourself look stupid again.
Yeah you did "switch" Ron. Or TRIED to. My original statement that you
disputed and were attempting to DISPROVE as a "LIE" was that "caseworkers"
being hired could have a degree in anything and not in a field related to
making such assessments. Both of you claimed that I "LIED" and that they
"MUST" have a degree in Social Work etc. None of your sources disprove what
I said as you said it would. Again the text says that while a degree in
social work etc is "PREFERRED" actually "ANY" degree in ANYTHING works.
I could go on to note that it doesn't even specify a "BACHELOR'S"
degree - presumably reading it an Associate's degree would also work.
But keep trying to prove my original statement to be work. And you TRIED
to run past me the specs for a "SUPERVISOR" when the subject was "CASEWORKER
NEW HIRES."
Then you went into another brown fog with the training crap.
krp
> freedom wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Let the bullshit flow:
>>>> I do...unfortunately, it's because my children and I have been harassed
>>>> and
>>>> stalked by Pangborn, going on nine years now. This has included both
>>>> online and offline harassment.....including a bogus report to CPS by
>>>> Ken in 2001.
>>> And you can prove this how?
>>> The people in the ascps newsgroup can confirm that it
>>> it almost impossible to expose who reported abuse to CPS.
>>> The "vested interest" in supporting and encouraging false reports
>>> at the agencies is well understood.
>> He was openly bragging about having done so on his listserv.
That claim is false. Of course he exposes that he ahs used a false name
to access my list.
>>> You forget of course that Ken as a consultant would only be a PART
>>> of any dream team that a more affluent family would hire.
>> "Dream"? It would have to be of the sort which would involve Freddy
>> Krueger.
Open mind?
>>> His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
>> Really? And what was that?
>
>> Have you seen his CV, as it appears on the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers
>> Association website?
That was NOT placed there by ME..
>> Do you buy his explanation that some third party fabricated his CV and
>> convinced the TCDLA to add it to their secure site? Or his explanation
>> that he purposely put false information into the CV to throw off his
>> so-called "stalkers"?
Somebody other than I put it there. Somebody with an agenda. Either
somebody who wanted to embarass me or soebody who thought they were helping
me.
>>> Has Ken admitted to calling in a child abuse report?
>> Yes, he has.
NO I HAVE NOT!
>> Except that no "slander" has occurred. Slander applies (1) to verbal
>> speech and (2) the speech has to be untrue. Everything which has been
>> written regarding Ken has been true and factual.
Not that written by David Moore- almost NONE of it is factal or true
which is why that website was thrown off every AMERICAN ISP it was hosted on
and MUST be kept off shore in a place that doesn'tr honor American lebel
laws.
>> We'd like to arrange for YOUR rape. - Ken Pangborn
Which did no come from me. Moore TRIES to explain the absence of that
post with the LAME excuse that I must have "had it nuked!" Nope, it is a cut
and paste from several posts I made with a few editorial additions by DAVID
MOORE.
> An appropriate response from Greg would be "ouch," but you aren't going to
> get it. He's hung his hopes on the presence of others, trolls, liars,
> duplicitous forgers, to keep the focus off him and his nutso bs, bad
> advice...dangerous in fact...and general tendency to make claims and
> refuse to back them with facts as evidence.
Ha ha. You want to rely on Moore's website. When IF you looked at it,
you see his claims about me, such as that I stalk him, yet HE has my photo
on his site, do I have his up? He has a photo on MY house on his index
page. Do I have a photo of HIS house up anywhere? He claims I have harassed
his wife and children, yet has NO proof of it, AND he has right there
documentation of HIS frantic attempts to harass MY wife. It's right there
for you to see, but will you see it or are you so blind that you'll refuse
to see what is right in front of you?
Ron
" krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ugooh.986$Cn3.233@trnddc02...
>
> "Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:b08oh.78$uL1...@newsfe22.lga...
>
>> After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>> have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers
>> that ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>
> As you chew on your new Gospel according to Moore - READ THIS said by
> others:
>
Read it, without a referring link?
Mr. Moore and his "freedom" ID are on my plonk list ken, unless someone
responds to his posts I don't see what he writes. I suppose he is one of
those I apologized to for being incorrect about you.
But I did do some research on both of you through google. You started
posting to ASCPS on "Sunday, December 17, 2006 1:20 PM" in the thread you
started called "SINCE I WAS DRAGGED IN HERE". His first post was in the
same thread, but on "Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:20:52" according to google. Nearly
12 hours after your first post.
> You might want to reflect on your statements for a moment, , but, probably
> not.
Oh, I have. The reflections I made determined that he is just about 100%
accurate about you. You are a liar. From the word go. He followed you
here, not the other way around. The proof of that is available for anyone
to see in the google archives.
Personally, I think both of you are obsessed with the other, and neither is
healthy. The two of you have been harassing each other for more than 10
years now, apparently both on and off the internet. Just how sick can you
get?
Here are some more facts about the two of you, again information that is
available in the google archives for anyone who cares to look.
Freedom, total posts: 1569, beginning from October 2006
krp, total posts: 34,683, beginning from December 2003
I quite honestly don't give a dam about any other ID's he may have been
using prior to the "Freedom" ID, the fact is that the spamming from the
anonymous remailers began after your first post, nearly a full day after
your first post here. Given that the "aboutkenpangborn" web pages were
written before your first post to ASCPS, and that they accurately foretold
the next few days worth of activity in ASCPS, I'd say that it certainly was
like reading that novel again.
Do I think everything in the "aboutkenpangborn" pages is a "gospel"? No,
not really, I'm fairly sure that it is colored by his perceptions and
emotions about you. But it is kind of amazing that what he wrote about your
posting style in other news groups was an accurate representation of what
occurred in ASCPS after your arrival.
So, in the end analysis ken, he is accurate in what he writes about you.
You proved that, not him. You followed the line he set for you on his web
site, one step at a time, just as if he had a real and accurate crystal
ball. That is beyond coincidence.
He says that you are a liar, and that has been proven here quite a few times
since 12/17/06. He said that the attacks from sock-puppets through
anonymous remailers would start almost immediately after someone disagreed
with you, or proved you a liar, and they did. That also is beyond
coincidence.
Fact is ken, you have proven yourself to be an idiot here. Dragging
yourself from the position of ignorant new-comer to pathetic moron in record
time. Congratulations, I appreciate it when someone clearly defines their
position quickly and concisely. It makes life here all that much easier.
Ron
freedom
Gee, now why did you alter the URL to http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com?
Something there you don't want people to see? Such as your track record of
lying and harassing others?
>>>> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
>>>> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
>>>> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's
>>>> abuse
>>>> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
>>>> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
>>>> "altered" his words.
>>>>
>>>> A good example of this is http://www.aboutken
You did it again! Here's the full URL: http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
>>>> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
>>>> alt.atheism regulars.
>>>
>>>> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
>>>> forgeries of [people] here...
>
>>> And you know this because the forger cloned Ken's ""signature"" on a
>>> message?
>
>> You have it the other way around.
>
> I didn't forge anythign and have NEVER used an anonymous remailer - yet
>you seem to ignore that Moore DOES.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com contains proof that you have used remailers
to forge others.
>
>>> Golly, NOBODY can figure out how a forger could forge a signature??
>>> Do you think cut and paste is BEYOND the "false flag" forger?
>
>> Why would it be beyond krp's ability?
>
> But WHY would I do it?
You have a long, established history of harassing others.
>
>>>> .and, now that you have spoken out against him,
>>>> you'll likely be added to the list of his "marks" or targets.
>>
>>> Well, the supposed ""third party"" who is forging would
>>> likely see this comment as an opportunity now wouldn't they?
>
>> Sure would. But how do we know there IS a third party? There's other proof
>> of who it is, Greg. And you just watched him lie about job requirements
>> cited, linked, and quoted here correctly.
>
> No I nailed your ass on it.
>
>> Could be. Which evidence on the website he supports would you say is
>> proven false?
>
> Oh how about the alleged former client "Will Rainey?"
Nothing regarding a Will Rainey appears anywhere on
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com.
>people up named after other landmarks in his area. Recently, David as "PERCY
>MINCER" claimed to have gotten the real LOWDOWN about me from a man named
I've never posted as "PERCY MINCER". Produce proof to the contrary, and
I'll immediately remove http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web and
leave usenet forever.
>thoughtly discredited and laughed off the net. Moore just uses the other
>ID's such as freedom or TIP..
That's a lie. I only use "freedom", and I always sign my posts with PGP.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaJfQwu6zDezw650EQIz+gCdFX+lheOvg7tfMRp7/6y/Aab8IWEAoM86
Yt+Kpg7vayv8GZhXni5SGLMc
=kEz/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Replying to Greg as a vehicle to answer David Moore -
>
>"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1168215056....@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
>>> >After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>>> >have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers
>>> >that
>>> >ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>>> >
>>> >One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
>>> >themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
>
>> freedom wrote
>>> That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't
>>> remain
>>> openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when
>>> the
>>> proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
>>> black and white.
>
> Open minded? Ye=ou meal gullible enough to believe your bullshit without
>using their brain.
>
>> freedom wrote
>>> I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com and I am glad that
>>> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
>>> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
>>> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's
>>> abuse
>>> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
>>> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
>>> "altered" his words.
>
> Yeah, nice to suggest that Davey. Why is it that some of those things
>aren't in Google at all? Oh you try to explain it by claiming I had them
>"nuked." Yeah right. You also claim to have proof that I am a "registered
>sex offender" but you also claim I had those "nuked" as well. Of course all
>those claims are false. You claim that I stalk you - with a straight face
>while the index page of your website has a photo of MY house, and you have
>text where you prove your FRANTIC attampts to harass MY wife leaps off the
>page.
>
> You don't tell people that your website was thrown off almost a dozen
>American ISP's because it was libelous bullshit, and that ONE of them was
>so moved to irritation that they put up a diclaimer in place of your site.,
>I refer to Skyport.
And why would they have to take it off, unless you complained about it?
But you don't tell people that or tha many FICTIONAL
>characters and former clients you make up. As to the posts you reference
>of mine, there is a few facts Moore. The first is that the text that appears
>on YOUR site and that which appears in Google differ, sometimes very
>subtlely.
Show a single example of a post which "differs" between
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com and Google, and I'll immediately remove
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web and leave usenet forever.
>
>>> A good example of this is http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
>>> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
>>> alt.atheism regulars.
>
> Actually Davey it does NOT. It is a clever bit of your work. Some folks
>don't realize that you generally do barrages of your forgeries. Meaning that
>you use many different anonymous remailers and the posts appear over time.
>Since some are in Austria, others in Italy or Africa, they appear at
>different times. I replied to the first one that appeared. Then YOU used one
Oh, are you now going to argue about the "international date line" again?
Good, we nailed your fat ass on it so well last time.
>of the verions that appeared later to try to prove it was me. At first I
>couldn't explain it because it even looked bad to me. I knew that I didn't
>do the forgeries, but the FACT didn't come up until somebody else noticed
>that the post I replied to and the example YOU sed were not the same, I wa
>responding to DIFFERENT remailer version. It's only a good example of
>misdirection Davey.
The "fact" was that you responded to a post, not realizing that you were
still in "forgery" mode. You then compounded your mistake by sending the
very same post 8 hours later from your known Verizon account.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com contains proof of this, as well as
documentation of your numerous attempts to lie your way out of it. Capped
off by your incredulous statement that it was difficult to keep your story
straight because of your innocence.
>
>
>>> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
>>> forgeries of [people] here...
>
>No I have not. WHY would I? Use your head folks. WHY would I do that
>KNOWING the shit it would bring down on me? WHO has a rather OBVIOUS agenda
>here.
Because you have a long and documented history of forging others, as
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com documents.
I've never used an "anonymous" ID. I sign each and every post with PGP,
accepting full accountability for my posts. You, on the other hand, often
invent other personas for the purpose of agreeing with yourself.
Including Justice23, Liberty45 and the like. He uses an
>anonymous remailer, I use a legit ISP. Ask yourself WHY. Often the SAME
>remailer the forgeries originate from.
Because of your track record of barraging my ISP with complaints, in an
effort to silence me. As you admit to above, with regard to your attempts
to get http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com pulled from servers.
>
>> Look up comments Kane has made about Fern, and she has been
>> gone for like a year.
>>
>> Kane drove the grandmother away using the c-word obscenity and
>> lies he has since been caught at about abuse she "supported".
>
>
>> Most of the people coming here needing help can't afford Ken or his
>> associates.
>> You forget of course that Ken as a consultant would only be a PART
>> of any dream team that a more affluent family would hire.
>> CPS agencies rarely attack families with even moderate wealth,
>> although since more and more people in blue collar neighborhoods
>> are successfully fending off CPS, the agencies seem to be trying
>> to make more cases with naive middle class families.
>
> Yet even though NOBODY here could afford the A-Team (so you admit) I am
>here to offer what I can FREE.
And why would anyone want advice from someone who lies about his
credentials?
Never did any such thing. Perhaps if you actually paid your bills rather
than obsessing over me on usenet 24/7, your utilities would be running.
>
>>> Well, all I can tell you is that he wasn't "opposing" it when he was
>>> using it as a tool to harass my children!
>
>> Has Ken admitted to calling in a child abuse report? Or is this just like
>> the way you ""know"" that the fake posts are from
>> him?
>
> No I do NOT admit to that at all. I know who did and why.
Really? Who did you then contact at CPS to inform them that the said
complaint was fake? As this would constitute harassment, what law
enforcement agency did you then report the fraudulent complaint to?
But Moore has
>made MANY false reports about me, in fact just Saturday he mad an "anonymous
>tip" to Florida law enforcement that I had kidnapped a child and was holding
>her in my house for sexual purposes. As to the report made about Mr. Moore,
No, I didn't. Post proof to the contrary, and I'll immediately remove
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web and leave usenet forever.
>he had been harassing several members of my list, including, oddly, a
>Nebraska woman. Moore had sent many forged e-mails to the CPS agency in an
>effort to punish her for supporting me. Some of those messages contained
>some of Moore's signature graphic sexual violence. He did the same to a
>Texas woman. The woman admitted to me in an e-mail that she had made a
>report on Moore because of her anger at him for causing her so many problems
>with her case. She also was NOT a client, but a user of the free listserv.
>Also two of the brothers of the Texas woman went to look for Moore to
>"confront" him. I made the mistake of warning David on the newsgroup that
>two men were coming.
And the "two men" were figments of your imagination. Sort of like "John
Gault" and Kaiserdrvr and Sebring021.
>
>
>>> I first created the site in response to a number of lies Ken was
>>> publishing
>>> about me on usenet: specifically, that I had been discharged from the
>>> Marine Corps under other than honorable circumstances, that I had had a
>>> "1000 mile restraining order" issued against me, that I "blackmailed
>>> women
>>> into having sex with me" (a lie which he has repeated as recently as
>>> today)
>>> and many others. The lies were ludicrous on their face and obviously
>>> untrue, but I felt the need to set the record straight. Basically I
>>> started out by archiving his falsehoods about my military service record,
>>> pointing out his several claims and how he contradicted himself with them
>>> (in one post he said I had been kicked out for "section 8", another it
>>> was
>>> "running from the enemy" and yet another time he invented the "spouse
>>> abuse" story.) I also added a bit of his own history, such as his threat
>>> to arrange for a woman's rape on a rape support newsgroup when she
>>> wouldn't
>>> "shut up".
>
> But David those things are confirmned by BOTH your former wives.
I don't have two "former wives", nor has anyone "confirmned" anything of
the sort.
>
> Logic should have people actually LOOK at who is doing what. WHO has the
>website attacking the other? Does Moore explain WHY he posted my social
>security number and checking account information soliciting people to
>"withdraw" electronically from them?
I've never done anything of the sort. Post proof to the contrary, and I'll
immediately remove http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web and leave
usenet forever.
> The photos on the website. The frantic
>attempts to harass my wife. Does David admit that back some years ago he was
>harassing my youngest daughter at the stable where she rode her horse? That
>Moore called repeatedly "DEMANDING" to speak to my daughter telling the poor
This never happened. Megan herself confirmed that you are lying about
this.
>bookkeeper who answered the phone that it was his "RIGHT" to speak to her
>and that he'd have her arrested for violating his "free speech rights" if
>she didn't. Does he say anything about his efforts along with some of his
>"coalition" to harass the registrar's office at a University he KNOWS I
>attended? What does he say of his harassment of my professional
>organizations?
Pointing out that you falsified your credentials is not "harassment".
>
>MESSAGE TO RON: Get the hell over yourself. What the hell do you think you
>are to me? Some little flea spec asshole full of himself on Usenet. Do you
>think I would REALLY deliberately sabotage myself with that INFANTILE
>bullshit just to get to the GREAT - VERY IMPORTANT Ron?????? Let some of
>the air out Ron before you explode. Neither you nor Kane are that important
>to me. Nor am I stupid enough to take a crap where I eat. Look at MOTIVES
>Ron...
>
>NAW you can't!
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaJd2gu6zDezw650EQLkKACg39bEwfgtEbVvqdAbXzV8/I9vhEwAnjWl
8Z96M57QHxb3PlwQb6BzW+Du
=/pJe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>"Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:b08oh.78$uL1...@newsfe22.lga...
>
>> After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>> have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers
>> that ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>
> I am in no way surprised at this. There are fools in this world, and
>there are folks with agendas. And in some small number of situations we can
>have both factors in play at the same thime. On one had we have a
>witchhunter and a fool.
>
>> Nearly everything said on that site about mr pangborn was proven by ken
>> himself, here in this news group, before I took the time to visit that web
>> site. It was like reading a good novel for the second time, one already
>> knows the plot and the characters, but missed some of the subtle interplay
>> of the characters the first time through. It was both interesting and
>> entertaining.
>
> Really did I "prove" that people such as Will Rainey existed? By the way
>Ron, if you want to look it up you'll find that Will Rainey is a fictional
>character your new BUDDY Moore invented.
No, I didn't. Rainey was a real person whom you even had discussions with
and about on usenet. Nor is Mr. Rainey mentioned anywhere at
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com, which makes this argument irrelevant.
>What is more interesting if you do
>just a little "factual" research, Will Rainey is charcter Mr. Moore created
>from the Willial Rainey Harper College just a few miles from where he lived
>at the time. Rob Wedlock? Another inveted character. We could also go to
>ATTORNEY Kosivlotisky supposedly a lawyer from Baltimore, Maryland. No such
>attorney in Baltimore, in Maryland, ot any state in the region.
Nor does http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com claim that he is. It merely
reproduces a post which appeared on usenet, from someone signing their name
that way.
>
> Go to the messages he quotes from me. Like the "DISGRACE TO ALL
>MANKIND." If you do a complete Google search on it you will see it never
>existed, at least not from me. The first time it appears is in quotes from
>David Moore. The message ID he uses does not trace to that post. Moore's
>explanation? He says that I "had the message NUKED."
Yes, you did. Further proof of this is offered at
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com. Specifically, several times when your
tasteless rape post was being discussed, you tried to defend it. You
didn't start denying authorship of it until after you nuked it from the
then-Dejanews archives.
>
>> As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
>> individual and asked him to begin participating here.
>
> Gregg did no such thing. I was blissfully unaware of this group. I was
>dragged in here because of Mr. Moore's forgeries that appeared here and some
>of the responses that people (you among others) posted in response.
I've never made a forgery anywhere. Post proof to the contrary, and I'll
immediately remove http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com from the web and leave
usenet forever.
You, not I, initially began crossposting into ascps.
>
> Ron - what is clear to me is that you are so wrapped up in your ideology
>that you just don't think. You grasp at anything that seems to support your
>beliefs even when it doesn't. You NEED to discredit me because you have had
>your hat handed to you on the issues several times now. So - I must be the
>demon from hell, and Moore's website seems to lend you support on that. Are
>you aware that that website was thrown off a dozen or so ISP's in the United
>States because it was found to be libelous bullshit? One host (Skyport)
>removed it and placed a disclaimer in its place announcing it was a fraud.
>Then he took it off shore to places that would ignore any conventions on
>content being accurate or truthful.
To a smart person, the question would be, why would they have to "throw it
off" unless you had made a complaint? And thus, why would you have the
need to complain about http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com, unless there were
something there you didn't want people to see?
>
> Now, Ron, a reasonable person would look at some of Moore's global
>allegations about me. Such as his whining claims that I am stalking him. Yet
>HE has a photo on his website of MY hope. He has content directed at MY
>wife. He has made frantic, near hysterical attempts to contact my wife.
No I didn't. I forwarded her the URL for http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com.
Which she then visited :)
He
>also has personal content on that site he managed to obtain from "public
>records."
So? You opened that door when you began claiming (falsely) to have similar
information on me. The bottom line is that http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
could have come down years ago, if you had complied with simple terms. You
whine about it, but it's 100% your own doing.
Do I have anything similar on him? Do I have an ABOUTDAVIDMOORE
>website with photos of his house? Do I make threats to his wife's safety?
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com contains archived e-mails of threats you
have made to me and my wife. You've also threatened my children, in the
form of bogus CPS complaints and other means of endangering them.
>No - he threatens his ex wife himself.
No, I don't.
> He has claimed that I am a "registered sex offender" in both Wisconsin
>and Florida, yet I am not listed in either state's registry both of which
>are on-line and accurate. Mr. Moore explains this with the claim that I had
>the listings "nuked." Flattering that he says I'd have that power, but as
>you SHOULD know that is laughable bullshit.
I haven't made such a claim. Please point out the page of
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com which makes this claim.
>
> Ron I write you off as a poor strident fool who has fallen victim to his
>own wishful thinking. Believing Moore means that you don't have to face the
>possibility that some of your core beliefs are bullshit. Your "god" is
>safe.....
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaJY4Au6zDezw650EQLyEgCbB8FztETOUSzqtXWfbLhDM0qw2E8An04f
W+Nhco5MRIdpGq/TbCsY3eAb
=F9NN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
t...@cotse.net
> "0:->" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:YZ6dnbWHsJC1CzzY...@scnresearch.com...
>
> Oh how about the alleged former client "Will Rainey?" Start here:
> http://www.harpercollege.edu/
Should we hold our breath for Idiot Kenny to accurately
document any of his countless malicious lies? Not unless we want to die
from asphyxiation.
>
> Then realize that at the time this "Will Rainey" character was created,
> Moore lived in Bolingbrook, Illinois. William Rainey Harper College is in
> Palatine, Illinois just a few miles away and who advertized heavily on local
> TV. It is also a damn good university.
Nice try, flake. Searching for "Will Rainey" in any white
pages of any online phone book of any major city in any state yields
dozens of people with that name.
Moore has a habid of doing that. For
> a time he appeared as "Jeff Johnson" who was a neighbor of his.
Naturally, you omit proof for this and an explanation for how you
would know who Moore's neighbors were if you weren't the stalker
yourself.
He has made people up named after other landmarks in his area.
Recently, David as "PERCY
> MINCER" claimed to have gotten the real LOWDOWN about me from a man named
> "Richard Holkade."
You must be talking about the Percy Mincer Memorial Park in
Chicago. <snicker> WHAT local landmark does Mincer's name come from,
Kakes?
Claiming I was using a false name of "PL" on the Cuba
> newsgroup. Moore's problem is that Richard Holkade is the dame of a STREET
> in Holland. The "Percy" namer has pretty much disappeared after being so
> thoughtly discredited and laughed off the net. Moore just uses the other
> ID's such as freedom or TIP..
Mincer posted yesterday, liar and do you want to show us, say, 5
examples of anyone besides you "laughing" at him? Mincer is an
attorney pal of a former associate of yours, Kakes. He is also a pilot.
You have named four different people whom you claim are all Mincer and
you are wrong on all counts but if you want to show even one example of
what you claim is proof to the contrary, have at it. <snicker> Mincer
made a phone call and spoke to someone named "Richard". When it was
explaned that Holkade was a street, Mincer digressed and said that the
Holkade part was an assumption but he still maintained that he had
spoken with a person named Richard. It is you, Kenny, who has drummed
Mincer's mistake into the ground and who got your Cuban buddy to upload
a web site that leaves this part out, you disingenuous illiterate.
Have you ever gone through a whole day without lying?
As usual, readers, if you want the truth on any subject you must
tune Kenny's drunken ravings out and check google archives.
t...@cotse.net
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, "Ron" wrote
LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
>
But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
>
His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
Take it another step. Ask Kenny to give you contact info for one
person who ever received a harassing phone call at any university he
claims he graduated from. Ask Kenny the illiterate to give you even an
ounce of proof that the harassing events ever took place at all. He
should have a name, an office, a phone number, some kind of records of
it, someone you can talk to about it, but he doesn't. The events never
happened. If you do ask him this simple question you will immediately
be met with stammering, evasion, lies, dancing around the issue but I
can guarantee that you will not be given one single contact for ANYONE
in ANY college in this country or in England or anywhere else who
withstood harassment by Moore or by anyone else for giving Kenny a
diploma. That is a lie that Kenny cooked up all by himself. Ken
Pangborn did not go to college. You can contact his daughter through
her blog and she will tell you point blank. He never went to college a
day in his miserable life. (She tells people her father is dead.) His
two degrees are fake ones from Shaftesbury University. He didn't
"plant" false information on the Texas expert witness site to throw his
"stalker" off because he doesn't have a stalker. Kenny is the stalker.
Ask the folks who run the site where that CV appeared, if you don't
believe me. If you want proof that he bought the diplomas from
Shaftesbury, contact Shaftesbury and tell them he has applied for a job
with your firm. They can't give you info about him personally, but they
can confirm that he has diplomas from there and they will. Don't take
my word for it. The obese illiterate is lying to you.
Greegor
> He says that you are a liar, and that has been proven here quite a few times
> since 12/17/06. He said that the attacks from sock-puppets through
> anonymous remailers would start almost immediately after someone disagreed
> with you, or proved you a liar, and they did. That also is beyond
> coincidence.
To you the accurate prophecy proves Moore is an oracle??
What if Moore (or a buddy) IS the forger?
Don't you think they saw that opportunity?
Seriously Ron, the mental lapse on your part must be deliberate.
Tell us with your Role Playing game interest that you
don't know what a "false flag" operation is.
krp
<t...@cotse.net> wrote in message
news:1168273021....@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
> LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
> But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
> His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
> Take it another step. Ask Kenny to give you contact info for one
> person who ever received a harassing phone call at any university he
> claims he graduated from.
DONE.
> Ken Pangborn did not go to college. You can contact his daughter through
> her blog and she will tell you point blank. He never went to college a
> day in his miserable life. (She tells people her father is dead.)
Bullshit.
> He didn't "plant" false information on the Texas expert witness site to
> throw his
> "stalker" off because he doesn't have a stalker.
First I didn't "plant" it there somebody else did from where it was
planted Davey.
> Kenny is the stalker.
Yeah why is it then Davey, that YOU have photos of me, my house, your
frantic attempts to reach my wife etc, plus all sorts of personal info from
public records
on YOUR website and I don't have ANY website about you? Got a smart assed
answer for that one Davey? Seems that the REAL stalker would have a website
attacking their "mark." Your website stands as towering testimony that YOU
are the psycho stalker and not me. Add to that your bragging that you have
it indexed in every search engine #1.... Either you are the stalker or you
have a very interesting definition of stalking.
krp
>>> After taking the time to read the "aboutken" site, thoroughly, I have
>>> come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
>>> ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>>
>> As you chew on your new Gospel according to Moore - READ THIS said by
>> others:
> (snip)
> Read it, without a referring link?
Read what?
> Mr. Moore and his "freedom" ID are on my plonk list ken, unless someone
> responds to his posts I don't see what he writes. I suppose he is one of
> those I apologized to for being incorrect about you.
> But I did do some research on both of you through google. You started
> posting to ASCPS on "Sunday, December 17, 2006 1:20 PM" in the thread you
> started called "SINCE I WAS DRAGGED IN HERE". His first post was in the
> same thread, but on "Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:20:52" according to google.
> Nearly 12 hours after your first post.
No I posred before that, in reply to a crosspost.
>> You might want to reflect on your statements for a moment, , but,
>> probably not.
> Oh, I have. The reflections I made determined that he is just about 100%
> accurate about you. You are a liar. From the word go. He followed you
> here, not the other way around. The proof of that is available for anyone
> to see in the google archives.
No Ron Freedom followed me now look at tip@cotse and you'll see some
things.
> Freedom, total posts: 1569, beginning from October 2006
> krp, total posts: 34,683, beginning from December 2003
Yes now add the posts from tip@cotse, percy mincer posts and the
anonymous posts and see what the number is. Also look that MOST of MY posts
are ON topic in the dozen or so newsgroups I participate in. NONE not even
ONE of HIS ARE! 100% of HIS posts are about me. I am posiutive that tells
you NOTHING Ron!
> I quite honestly don't give a dam about any other ID's he may have been
> using prior to the "Freedom" ID, the fact is that the spamming from the
> anonymous remailers began after your first post, nearly a full day after
> your first post here. Given that the "aboutkenpangborn" web pages were
> written before your first post to ASCPS, and that they accurately foretold
> the next few days worth of activity in ASCPS, I'd say that it certainly
> was like reading that novel again.
Rpn you're not a real bright guy. What a better predicter of behavior
than the stalker himself.
krp
<t...@cotse.net> wrote in message
news:1168272177....@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Oh how about the alleged former client "Will Rainey?" Start here:
>> http://www.harpercollege.edu/
> Should we hold our breath for Idiot Kenny to accurately document
> any of his countless malicious lies? Not unless we want to die
> from asphyxiation.
That was a Starft Davey, not RATIONALIZE the WIll Rainey YOU claim was a
former client of mine and WIlliam Rainey Harper CVollege a few miles from
where you lived at the time you created this person on your website?
>> Then realize that at the time this "Will Rainey" character was
>> created,
>> Moore lived in Bolingbrook, Illinois. William Rainey Harper College is in
>> Palatine, Illinois just a few miles away and who advertized heavily on
>> local
>> TV. It is also a damn good university.
> Nice try, flake. Searching for "Will Rainey" in any white pages of
> any online phone book of any major city in any state yields
> dozens of people with that name.
Nice dodge Moore. Now explain the sudden appearance of WIll Rainey
as a "client" of mine and William Rainey Harper College just a few miles
from the house where you lived at the time. Go ahead and claim it is "JUST A
COINCIDENCE!" Any moron will believe you.
>> Moore has a habid of doing that. For a time he appeared as "Jeff
>> Johnson" who was a neighbor of his.
> Naturally, you omit proof for this and an explanation for how you would
> know who Moore's neighbors were if you weren't the stalker
> yourself.
That oen was exposed by Joe O'Connor Davey. And before you shoot your
mouth off too much, remember Joe is still around.
>> He has made people up named after other landmarks in his area.
>> Recently, David as "PERCY
>> MINCER" claimed to have gotten the real LOWDOWN about me from a man named
>> "Richard Holkade."
> You must be talking about the Percy Mincer Memorial Park in Chicago.
> <snicker> WHAT local landmark does Mincer's name come from, Kakes?
Is there such a park? "Percy Mincer" as we both know doesn't really
exist as a person with that name. NOR does "Richard Holkade.:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/exposing_the_lies_of_percy.htm
>> Claiming I was using a false name of "PL" on the Cuba newsgroup. Moore's
>> problem is that Richard Holkade is the dame of a STREET
>> in Holland. The "Percy" namer has pretty much disappeared after being so
>> thoughtly discredited and laughed off the net. Moore just uses the other
>> ID's such as freedom or TIP..
> Mincer posted yesterday, liar and do you want to show us, say, 5
> examples of anyone besides you "laughing" at him?
But he was posting 20 to 50 messages a day with outlandish claims Davey.
> Mincer is an attorney pal of a former associate of yours, Kakes. He is
> also a pilot.
No he is NEITHER. He's you sometimes and some opf your coalition members
on others.
> You have named four different people whom you claim are all Mincer and
> you are wrong on all counts but if you want to show even one example of
> what you claim is proof to the contrary, have at it. <snicker>
I have claimed that 4 different people were writing as Percy.If you are
not one of the "Percy" folks how do you know I was wrong?
> Mincer> made a phone call and spoke to someone named "Richard".
No he didn't.
>When it was explaned that Holkade was a street, Mincer digressed and said
>that the
> Holkade part was an assumption but he still maintained that he had
> spoken with a person named Richard
No Davey the entire thread is archived and he tried (unsuccessfully) to
LIE his way out of his original claim and he kept getting caught in one life
after another.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/exposing_the_lies_of_percy.htm
> It is you, Kenny, who has drummed Mincer's mistake into the ground and
> who got your Cuban buddy to upload
> a web site that leaves this part out, you disingenuous illiterate. Have
> you ever gone through a whole day without lying?
> As usual, readers, if you want the truth on any subject you must tune
> Kenny's drunken ravings out and check google archives.
The site lists the archives Davey, not to flattering to you and your
Percy persona. How do you answer the material from O'Connor and Reiinhagen?
Did you forget you have references on your website about me attacking them?
Can't say I made up that material can you!? It is also in the archives of
Google from soc.men
t...@cotse.net
KEN PANGBORN of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com INTERNET STALKER
> <t...@cotse.net> wrote in message
> news:1168273021....@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
>
> > LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
>
> > But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
>
> > His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
>
>
Take it another step. Ask Kenny to give you contact info for one
person who ever received a harassing phone call at any university he
claims he graduated from.
>
DONE.
roflmao. You fucking liar. It never happened. You claimed that
Moore and his coherts called the university that you graduated from and
hounded them day and night demanding that they retract your degree.
YOU DON'T HAVE A DEGREE, you senile old sap. You did NOT go to
college. You BOUGHT two degrees from Shaftesbury University that you
use on your web site to rake in hapless innocents who think you might
really be educated, and any person within reading range of this can
call up Shaftesbury University, say that you have applied for a job
with them and ask them to confirm your "diplomas" with them. THEY
confirm that you did that, you lying prick.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
freedom
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>"Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:zBsoh.25263$Dy2....@newsfe20.lga...
>
>>>> After taking the time to read the "aboutken" site, thoroughly, I have
>>>> come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
>>>> ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>>>
>>> As you chew on your new Gospel according to Moore - READ THIS said by
>>> others:
>
>> (snip)
>
>> Read it, without a referring link?
>
> Read what?
I think he was referring to the several paragraphs of irrelevant
information you posted, regarding someone bearing a similar name as mine,
and perhaps questioning why it doesn't appear anywhere on the internet
other than within your posts.
>
>> Mr. Moore and his "freedom" ID are on my plonk list ken, unless someone
>> responds to his posts I don't see what he writes. I suppose he is one of
>> those I apologized to for being incorrect about you.
>
>> But I did do some research on both of you through google. You started
>> posting to ASCPS on "Sunday, December 17, 2006 1:20 PM" in the thread you
>> started called "SINCE I WAS DRAGGED IN HERE". His first post was in the
>> same thread, but on "Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:20:52" according to google.
>> Nearly 12 hours after your first post.
>
>No I posred before that, in reply to a crosspost.
>
>>> You might want to reflect on your statements for a moment, , but,
>>> probably not.
>
>> Oh, I have. The reflections I made determined that he is just about 100%
>> accurate about you. You are a liar. From the word go. He followed you
>> here, not the other way around. The proof of that is available for anyone
>> to see in the google archives.
>
> No Ron Freedom followed me now look at tip@cotse and you'll see some
>things.
Which is irrelevant to the discussion at hand, of whether you posted before
I did.
>
>> Freedom, total posts: 1569, beginning from October 2006
>> krp, total posts: 34,683, beginning from December 2003
>
> Yes now add the posts from tip@cotse, percy mincer posts and the
>anonymous posts
None of which are from me, as I post only from this address.
>and see what the number is. Also look that MOST of MY posts
>are ON topic in the dozen or so newsgroups I participate in.
Great idea. Let's jump over to alt.dads-rights.unmoderated and see what
you've posted there today:
#1: "Re: => SACK OF $HIT CHUCKLES NEMO USENET CLOWN <=" A post ranting
#about whether someone owns land in Cuba. Great dads' rights material there.
#2: "Re: INSTRUCTIONS TO DAVID MOORE" A post ranting about the make and
#model of a Corvette, and also obsessively mentioning me in a discussion
#which I wasn't involved in. I'm sure that information on the Corvette
#Stingray is of utmost important to fathers in the midst of custody battles...
#3: "Re: Kenny's new book "The Tampa Beach Witght Loss and How to Be An
#Obese Illiterate Guide" Re: Cuba's Las Tunas Province: Lowest Infant
#Mortality Rate" A post containing only the word "SPELLTARD!" That must
#be the name of a relevant custody ruling, I guess? Oh, and a forged
#misattribution to me at the opening of the post.
#4: "Re: Women Don't Want Marriage Anymore... Say's A Woman?" You
#accusing t...@cotse.com of mailbombing some woman...and, of course, falsely
#accusing him of being me.
#5: "Re: =======> LYING SACK OF $HIT KENTARD PANGBORN JUST WON'T CONFESS
#EVEN AFTER TOTAL EXPOSURE! <=======" A rant of yours regarding "Dick
#Holkade". I guess he must be some sort of father's rights activist? And,
#surprise, a URL which has nothing to do with dads' rights.
#6: "Re: MISS BETTY'S ROMPER ROOM" You arguing about why you're infesting
#asCPS. Oddly enough, out of your posts for the day, this one is probably
#the closest you came to being on topic.
#7: "Re: => "OPULENT" NEMO AND HIS GRAND CVUBAN PLANTATION! <======="
#More argument about the "opulent hacienda". I assume that FRONT is
#holding their annual conference there?
#8: "Re: => CHUCKLES NEMO INSANE OREGON WOODS HIPPIE HERMIT <=" More
#argument about the usage of the word "hacienda" in Cuba.
#9: "Re: INSTRUCTIONS TO DAVID MOORE" Another post obsessing over me, and
#ranting about Corvettes.
Nine posts...not one of which had anything to do with "discussion of the
rights of dads". However, accolades are in order...of the nine posts, only
four of those related directly to your obsession with me.
So, you were saying, regarding "MOST" of your posts being on topic? Can
you provide a single example?
>NONE not even
>ONE of HIS ARE! 100% of HIS posts are about me. I am posiutive that tells
>you NOTHING Ron!
My posts relate to the fact that you are unqualified to discuss, or give
any sort of advice on, family law, children or psychology issues, due to
the fact that you have a phony degree. Therefore, my posts are arguably
on-topic for the most part.
>
>> I quite honestly don't give a dam about any other ID's he may have been
>> using prior to the "Freedom" ID, the fact is that the spamming from the
>> anonymous remailers began after your first post, nearly a full day after
>> your first post here. Given that the "aboutkenpangborn" web pages were
>> written before your first post to ASCPS, and that they accurately foretold
>> the next few days worth of activity in ASCPS, I'd say that it certainly
>> was like reading that novel again.
>
> Rpn you're not a real bright guy. What a better predicter of behavior
>than the stalker himself.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaLRVQu6zDezw650EQK4wQCdF259MFIgYESf6XUoHTpIENj9ISoAnjs1
buCdI4GvQ5HUeIO1TjmebjHI
=oSJS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
On 8 Jan 2007, "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Ron wrote regarding Moore:
Actually, he wrote that regarding and in response to Ken Pangborn.
>> He says that you are a liar, and that has been proven here quite a few times
>> since 12/17/06. He said that the attacks from sock-puppets through
>> anonymous remailers would start almost immediately after someone disagreed
>> with you, or proved you a liar, and they did. That also is beyond
>> coincidence.
>
>To you the accurate prophecy proves Moore is an oracle??
>What if Moore (or a buddy) IS the forger?
>Don't you think they saw that opportunity?
I'll concede that by the nature of anonymous remailers, it's possible that
anyone, including me, could have made the posts in question.
However, I would also offer up the fact that, although Ken has accused me
of it many times, he's never offered a shred of proof when challenged to do
so. On the other hand, Ken has been caught in the act and proven to have
authored forgeries in the past:
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaLL0wu6zDezw650EQLuNQCdHfPMTw0GLRdhh6ATdsT/BHV+W9MAniWZ
aKxMx5QEgdQEWrG8kl8k5gmC
=wfJq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Ron
> Ron wrote regarding Moore:
>> He says that you are a liar, and that has been proven here quite a few
>> times
>> since 12/17/06. He said that the attacks from sock-puppets through
>> anonymous remailers would start almost immediately after someone
>> disagreed
>> with you, or proved you a liar, and they did. That also is beyond
>> coincidence.
>
> To you the accurate prophecy proves Moore is an oracle??
Moore an oracle? Not hardly gregg, just one of a sick pair of individuals
who cannot get over each other. But he was right about certain things, and
that makes him .... right. Get it gregg? But hey, if that is their own
personal form of entertainment then more power to them, I just wish they
would take it elsewhere.
> What if Moore (or a buddy) IS the forger?
> Don't you think they saw that opportunity?
I'm sure they did gregg, but after 10 years of the two of them spamming,
harassing, and generally stalking each other its kind of hard to tell where
one idiot ends and the other begins.
> Seriously Ron, the mental lapse on your part must be deliberate.
Not one bit gregg. Exasperation maybe. Exasperation with the fact that you
brought into the news group a total waste of time. With the fact that just
like every other member of the Anti-CPS mob, this guy cant tell his truth
from his fiction either. Exasperation with you gregg, for supporting
someone who obviously has even less of a grip on reality than you do, and
you know that.
> Tell us with your Role Playing game interest that you
> don't know what a "false flag" operation is.
Capture the flag yes, but false flag? That's a new one on me. Why don't
you take the time to explain it to me gregg, here is your one opportunity to
say that you have actually helped educate me. But somehow I don't think you
are going to take me up on that, explanations seem to be beyond you, giving
or receiving.
Ron
krp
<t...@cotse.net> wrote in message
news:1168295700....@s80g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
>>
>> > But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
>>
>> > His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
>>
>>
> Take it another step. Ask Kenny to give you contact info for one
> person who ever received a harassing phone call at any university he
> claims he graduated from.
>>
> DONE.
>
> roflmao. You fucking liar. It never happened. You claimed that
> Moore and his coherts called the university that you graduated from and
> hounded them day and night demanding that they retract your degree.
Nice TRY Davey. You lose again.
freedom
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>DAVID MOORE (Freedom) AS:
><t...@cotse.net> wrote in message
A false attribution...I didn't author the message in question.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaOUjwu6zDezw650EQKltQCfbxhRfFTFdgMIZFui2anF5R3RUFUAoM4X
FgMYbOQt8JsfXLsLv23jBP+O
=iYHK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Greegor
http://news.google.com/news?q=false%20flag%20operation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
Background on false flag operations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
Political Campaigning
In 2006, individuals practicing false flag behavior were discovered and
"outed" in New Hampshire[2][3] and New Jersey[4] after blog comments
claiming to be from supporters of a political candidate were traced to
the IP address of paid staffers for that candidate's opponent.
freedom
On 7 Jan 2007, "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, "Ron" wrote
>> >After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
>> >have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
>> >ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
>> >
>> >One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
>> >themselves, despite what is said by others about them.
>>
>freedom wrote
>> That's not a fault at all. It only becomes a fault when one doesn't remain
>> openminded....for instance, those who continue to follow Ken even when the
>> proof of his fraud, forgeries and stalking is right in front of them in
>> black and white.
>
>You believe everything in print???
>Your proof that Ken is the "false flag" operator is that one of
>the false flag posts included Ken's ""Signature""??
>You DO realize how (falling off a log) easy it is to cut and paste
>text, right?
>
>freedom wrote
>> I'm the custodian of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com, and I am glad that
>> you were openminded enough to actually read the facts presented on the
>> site, and presumably to research some of the items further, through
>> independent means. For this reason, several of the examples of Ken's abuse
>> and fraud are followed by links to corresponding articles in the Google
>> archives, a neutral resource which Ken cannot claim has "forged" or
>> "altered" his words.
>>
>> A good example of this is http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html,
>> which contains proof that Ken was guilty of forging racist posts to the
>> alt.atheism regulars.
>
>> I also bring this up because he has now made a few
>> forgeries of [people] here...
>
>And you can prove this how?
>The people in the ascps newsgroup can confirm that it
>it almost impossible to expose who reported abuse to CPS.
>The "vested interest" in supporting and encouraging false reports
>at the agencies is well understood.
>
>> And, before anyone gives me the speech about "turn off your computer"....I
>> did. On some occasions, I was off usenet literally for months....then
>> would return and browse the newsgroups, and find Ken still mentioning me in
>> nearly every single post, arguing with others whom he has falsely
>> identified as me, etc. Go look in alt.dads-rights.unmoderated on any given
>> day, and 90% of his posts will usually be about me. On rare occasions, one
>> or two of them are actually in response to a comment I made.
>
>Look up comments Kane has made about Fern, and she has been
>gone for like a year.
>
>Kane drove the grandmother away using the c-word obscenity and
>lies he has since been caught at about abuse she "supported".
>
>> > Nearly everything said on that site about
>> >mr pangborn was proven by ken himself, here in this news group, before I
>> >took the time to visit that web site. It was like reading a good novel for
>> >the second time, one already knows the plot and the characters, but missed
>> >some of the subtle interplay of the characters the first time through. It
>> >was both interesting and entertaining.
>>
>> It's good entertainment value....but at the same time, it's difficult to
>> laugh too hard at him. Ken Pangborn is harming people who are in bad
>> situations. He represents himself as someone he clearly is not (fake
>> college degrees as well as his general lack of knowledge) and relies upon
>> pressure "used car" sales techniques to get his victims' money. As one
>> former client put it, "once he had my money he turned ugly and abusive."
>>
>> I'm glad the word is out in this newsgroup. It could lead to a situation
>> such as "you're planning to hire Ken Pangborn to help you with your CPS
>> case? Ok...but hey, go read http://www.aboutken[] first." If
>> this saves one family, it's worth it.
>
>Most of the people coming here needing help can't afford Ken or his
>associates.
>You forget of course that Ken as a consultant would only be a PART
>of any dream team that a more affluent family would hire.
>CPS agencies rarely attack families with even moderate wealth,
>although since more and more people in blue collar neighborhoods
>are successfully fending off CPS, the agencies seem to be trying
>to make more cases with naive middle class families.
>
>Family Rights people LOVE this because middle class families
>can politically destroy CPS once their naivety is punctured.
>A few of them might hire a "dream team" even if they have to
>take out loans or seek financial help from more affluent relatives.
>
>The political forces on the side of the Child Protection INDUSTRY
>have actually taken note of the threat to their industry presented
>by Family Rights groups after some of them have actually
>gotten laws passed to declaw the abusive CPS monster.
>The Child Protection INDUSTRY is scared shitless because
>in some places their most common and aggregious ABUSES
>absolutely will not be tolerated anymore and Family Rights
>is just warming up for more.
>
>Ronald Van Dyne of Nebraska is a Foster Contractor, a person
>who is a "beneficiary" of the crappy status quo system.
>
>Ken seems to be diametrically opposed to the status quo system.
>
>> >As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
>> >individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only conclusion
>> >that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by the
>> >other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as a
>> >professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the substance of
>> >facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg didn't
>> >research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone who
>> >was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than gregg
>> >is.
>
>This sounds good but if you look at the archive of posts you
>will see that Dan began calling me turdbrain repeatedly and
>that brought up a resemblance to Ken Pangborn.
>
>You will then see that I did research fake degrees and posted
>about the government coverup of employees in all branches
>of government who used phoney degrees to get their cushy jobs.
>Many even got phoney degrees paid for BY the government
>so they could advance in position and pay grade.
>A Judge in a Federal Court is preventing this DISGRACE
>from being investigated name by name by the public.
>
>LATER I was actually hostile to Ken Pangborn.
>
>But I telephoned him to ask him point blank.
>
>His reason for privacy regarding the degree partly satisfied me.
Hi....I don't think you ever clarified this. What was the "reason", and
which "part" didn't satisfy you?
Suppose you were about to undergo surgery for a brain tumor, and it was
known that the surgeon was being secretive about where he had gone to
medical school, and about whether his degree was valid at all. Would you
settle for an explanation which "partly" satisfied you?
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaRDeAu6zDezw650EQIAlgCgldRd75haRMX10oIHbF90WuNo5pQAn0HU
suJUv2JajblthrcB1JgbrMwK
=pwT+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
In other words, a shill? Ken Pangborn has done that in the past as well,
and been caught in the act. A couple years back, he had about three other
internet accounts which he pretended were other individuals. All of them
vouched for his "work" as a consultant, and all of them shared the same
agenda. Unfortunately, he'd often forget which ID he was posting from, and
would refer to himself in the first person from one of the shills, or in
the third person from his "Ken" persona. http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
contains conclusive proof of this, including several examples which can be
found in Google.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaRFUgu6zDezw650EQJBQgCdFO2rRinJXky0HTemF4yEZd1t600An1Oy
PpgeH153I/kZTOInhcArTi26
=zaa6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Ron
Please excuse me while I fall out of my chair. Gregg actually provided a
link to something relevant!
I have never engaged in such an operation gregg, I've never had the urge. I
am about as up front a person as you will ever (given the opportunity) meet.
And in the games I enjoy, its not an option. One is either on one side or
the other, and its pretty clear who is who.
Now, my question to you is why did you again feel the need to spam your
reply to 3 unassociated news groups? Not getting enough attention in ASCPS?
Ron
Greegor
> Suppose you were about to undergo surgery for a brain tumor, and it was
> known that the surgeon was being secretive about where he had gone to
> medical school, and about whether his degree was valid at all. Would you
> settle for an explanation which "partly" satisfied you?
Dave, Your own OBSESSION with Ken provides an explanation by itself.
krp
>
> "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1168392037.5...@i56g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> Google of NEWS MEDIA stories about false flag operations
>>
>> http://news.google.com/news?q=false%20flag%20operation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
>>
>> Background on false flag operations
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
>> Political Campaigning
>> In 2006, individuals practicing false flag behavior were discovered and
>> "outed" in New Hampshire[2][3] and New Jersey[4] after blog comments
>> claiming to be from supporters of a political candidate were traced to
>> the IP address of paid staffers for that candidate's opponent.
>
> Please excuse me while I fall out of my chair. Gregg actually provided a
> link to something relevant!
>
> I have never engaged in such an operation gregg, I've never had the urge.
> I am about as up front a person as you will ever (given the opportunity)
> meet. And in the games I enjoy, its not an option. One is either on one
> side or the other, and its pretty clear who is who.
Up font?? That means you are gullible as hell, at least guilty as hell
of wishful thinking with regard to Moore's website.
You may wish to check just a LITTLE FURTHER. Check the archives in
Google for the moderation of Milwaukee General. First look at Moore's
website to see HIS VERSION.... Where POOR POOR POOR VICTIM David Moore
claims that *I* was the "sole reason" for the retro moderation of the group.
Look at the messages of Mr. Greco and Mr. Ritz the moderators and see WHO
they actually blamed. (HINT FOR RETARDS - DAVID MOORE AND STACY ALEXANDER)
Then note that MY posts continued after moderation.
Tell me Ron and the GENIUS of Usenet how do you explain that your HERO -
DAVID MOORE in ANY of his ID's "Freedom" Tip@cotse or as Percy have NEVER
posted ON TOPIC on ANY newsgroup? If you look at any of them, soc.men,
ascps, soc.culture.cuba, adru etc not even ONE POST in the past years ON
TOPIC! How do you explain that 100% of the posts are attacks on me and
NEVER on topic????? Oh I await the rationalization on that one with baited
breath.
krp
Usually Doctors hang their diplomas on the walls of their offices (as I
do) and NOT on the internet especially when dealing with a PSYCHO STALKER!
freedom
Maybe because two of those three aren't my addresses, and I've never posted
as them?
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaUkqgu6zDezw650EQJSiwCdFyKJ6+ly2f4FdzqIdZobCPHAQ+AAoNNW
jap2c4+m9sf0B7o+xrWsw2lP
=oa90
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Greegor
> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
That doesn't prove it IS you, but clearly you ARE obsessed
enough to BE the false flag operator. You are a very likely suspect
Dave.
The one person who hasn't been impersonated over
your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
Ponderable wouldn't you say?
0:->
> freedom wrote:
>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
>
> And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
> If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
> The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
>
> There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
An no way for the other person to prove it's not him, stupid.
> That doesn't prove it IS you, but clearly you ARE obsessed
> enough to BE the false flag operator. You are a very likely suspect
> Dave.
So is his opponent, Greg.
You have repeatedly posted that CPS vendors, for instance, and CPS
workers, and CPS foster parents (this ones a laugh) have a financial
interest in the Child Abuse Industry.
You use this to justify all kinds of illogical attacks on those people
and professions.
Yet here, you have a poster that DOES have a financial interest, and
admits to it, and another that does not.
So, using YOUR logic, Greg, just who is a 'very likely suspect?"
> The one person who hasn't been impersonated over
> your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
Your proof would be?
> If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
>
> Ponderable wouldn't you say?
Only if you are a hibernating weasel, Greg.
Greegor
G > your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
K > Your proof would be?
G > If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
G > Ponderable wouldn't you say?
K > Only if you are a hibernating weasel, Greg.
Nice to see you're taking the intellectual high road Kane.
0:->
Nice to see you using the Doan Dodge, Greg. But at least he's just
honest enough, or lazy enough, to leave the attributions so people can
see easily that he weaseled.
You used my pithy little ad hom, Greg, to avoid answering the issues
YOU brought up and I challenged you about.
You are, just as Doan is, unethical and dishonest.
Here's the post you cut and you may now answer yet another challenge,
outside of my ad hom what do you find not "taking the," "high road,"
Greg?
Please answer especially the double standard question. The one about
branding those that are paid for their work as questionable, dishonest
liars because it would be in their best interests to lie to improve or
keep their income, and how this would NOT apply in this case when we
have a paid consulting and someone named Dave in conflict...and YOU
wish to believe the one that appears to have NO fiduciary interest in
the issue at all.
There's a good boy.
Here's the referenced post for easy use, weaselboy. 0:->
Greegor wrote:
> freedom wrote:
>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
> And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
> If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
> The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
> There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
An no way for the other person to prove it's not him, stupid.
> That doesn't prove it IS you, but clearly you ARE obsessed
> enough to BE the false flag operator. You are a very likely suspect
> Dave.
So is his opponent, Greg.
You have repeatedly posted that CPS vendors, for instance, and CPS
workers, and CPS foster parents (this ones a laugh) have a financial
interest in the Child Abuse Industry.
You use this to justify all kinds of illogical attacks on those people
and professions.
Yet here, you have a poster that DOES have a financial interest, and
admits to it, and another that does not.
So, using YOUR logic, Greg, just who is a 'very likely suspect?"
> The one person who hasn't been impersonated over
> your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
Your proof would be?
> If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
> Ponderable wouldn't you say?
Only if you are a hibernating weasel, Greg.
Reply
freedom
On 10 Jan 2007, "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>freedom wrote:
>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
>
>And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
>If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
>The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
There's also a concept of "innocent until proved guilty". Pangborn made
the claim, but has never backed it up.
>
>There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however, show
numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of other
IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong to
someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
documented history of creating ficticious identities.
>
>That doesn't prove it IS you, but clearly you ARE obsessed
>enough to BE the false flag operator. You are a very likely suspect
>Dave.
>
>The one person who hasn't been impersonated over
>your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
I've been forged before. Ken and his friends have also in the past created
AOL accounts where they pretended to be my wife or my ex-wife. As far as a
"ten year history"....you've witnessed what...ten days of it?
>
>If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
Ken has been proven to have been the author of at least some of the
forgeries in the past. http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html
proves this. With the forgeries in question, his motive seemed to be to
appear moments later to blame me. (in the example cited at the URL, this
is exactly what he did...except that he forgot which address he was posting
from.)
He couldn't forge me and then show up to argue that I had forged myself,
now could he? Besides, I sign all my posts with PGP, which is impossible
to forge.
>
>Ponderable wouldn't you say?
Anything is ponderable. As I said in an earlier post, by the very nature
of remailers, anyone including myself could have been the author of many of
the forged posts. However, there is that one post referenced in the URL
above, and still available in Google, which I could NOT have forged unless
I had time travel capabilities. :) You seem to be conveniently
overlooking that. In my opinion the burden of proof is on the person who
made the accusation...and who has been caught in the act of doing this
stuff several times.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaWGHQu6zDezw650EQLONQCgvLIfVdxIxoCKUwIBSPKaIsqobf0AniLA
tzKYulv5FhrMbpsyO5//xuse
=lB48
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Greegor
> concept of "innocent until proved guilty"
In ascps, as in Juvenile Courts throughout the USA, there
are NO SUCH PROTECTIONS. I asked a Judge if the Constitution
applies in this courtroom, and they said "That is for another court.".
Both unmoderated newsgroups and Juvenile Courts are DIRTY environments.
How could you be around TEN YEARS and be so naive?
> Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however, show
> numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of other
> IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong to
> someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
> documented history of creating ficticious identities.
Perfect cover for a "false flag" operation wouldn't you say?
> >That doesn't prove it IS you, but clearly you ARE obsessed
> >enough to BE the false flag operator. You are a very likely suspect
> >Dave.
> >
> >The one person who hasn't been impersonated over
> >your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
>
> I've been forged before. Ken and his friends
He has friends? I haven't seen his "pack".
> have also in the past created AOL accounts where they
> pretended to be my wife or my ex-wife.
And you filed criminal charges based on your evidence?
The phone company handed over the trace information to the Police
right?
> As far as a "ten year history"....you've witnessed what...ten days of it?
Is it possible that ANYBODY but you two has seen the entire ten years?
> >If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
>
> Ken has been proven to have been the author of at least some of the
> forgeries in the past.
Where are the criminal charges?
That's a FELONY after about two years ago.
> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html
> proves this. With the forgeries in question, his motive seemed to be to
> appear moments later to blame me. (in the example cited at the URL, this
> is exactly what he did...except that he forgot which address he was posting
> from.)
>
> He couldn't forge me and then show up to argue that I had forged myself,
> now could he? Besides, I sign all my posts with PGP, which is impossible
> to forge.
>
> >
> >Ponderable wouldn't you say?
>
> Anything is ponderable. As I said in an earlier post, by the very nature
> of remailers, anyone including myself could have been the author of many of
> the forged posts.
This seems to escape the system suck pack in ascps.
> However, there is that one post referenced in the URL
> above, and still available in Google, which I could NOT have forged unless
> I had time travel capabilities. :)
> You seem to be conveniently overlooking that.
> In my opinion the burden of proof is on the person who
> made the accusation...
I thought you BOTH were!
> and who has been caught in the act of doing this
> stuff several times.
Convict him or set him free.
Ten years of harassment is just not right.
Even if Ken was guilty as hell, your obsession has become stalking.
0:->
> freedom wrote:
>> concept of "innocent until proved guilty"
>
> In ascps, as in Juvenile Courts throughout the USA, there
> are NO SUCH PROTECTIONS. I asked a Judge if the Constitution
> applies in this courtroom, and they said "That is for another court.".
Because if you wish to argue constitutional issues you do it more
appropriately on appeal. Judges are presumed to understand and support
the Constitution in their court rooms. When they DON'T you go to appeal.
You don't benefit by arguing with the judge...that's suppose to be with
the opponent. Judges aren't opponents, UNTIL You take a case to appeal,
stupid. That's all the judge was telling you.
> Both unmoderated newsgroups and Juvenile Courts are DIRTY environments.
Yes, you do filth things up.
> How could you be around TEN YEARS and be so naive?
Naive about what, Greg?
You've used the same argument, stupid. Now someone else is naive and you
weren't?
>> Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however, show
>> numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of other
>> IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong to
>> someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
>> documented history of creating ficticious identities.
>
> Perfect cover for a "false flag" operation wouldn't you say?
Yep. And again, as the poster said, it would be true for anyone who it
was demanded of to prove a negative.
You haven't shown the poster is not providing accurate information Greg,
and going over his website I'd say he has, when one follows up sources
HE CANNOT CONTROL, very strong argument for his opponent being a pissant
bullshitter small little turn such as you.
>>> That doesn't prove it IS you, but clearly you ARE obsessed
>>> enough to BE the false flag operator. You are a very likely suspect
>>> Dave.
>>>
>>> The one person who hasn't been impersonated over
>>> your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
>> I've been forged before. Ken and his friends
>
> He has friends? I haven't seen his "pack".
No, and yes you have, in that order. "Friends" should have been in
quotes, for irony, Greg.
>> have also in the past created AOL accounts where they
>> pretended to be my wife or my ex-wife.
>
> And you filed criminal charges based on your evidence?
> The phone company handed over the trace information to the Police
> right?
Why would he do that?
>> As far as a "ten year history"....you've witnessed what...ten days of it?
>
> Is it possible that ANYBODY but you two has seen the entire ten years?
Irresponsible and evasive answer to a perfectly credible question. You
are famous here in this ng for making judgments off the top of your
head, with little or no information to support your judgment.
>>> If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
>> Ken has been proven to have been the author of at least some of the
>> forgeries in the past.
>
> Where are the criminal charges?
What criminal charges?
> That's a FELONY after about two years ago.
Is it? Provide evidence that forging a post on Usenet is a felony, Greg,
or a crime of any kind.
You are just a teensy tiny little fleck of pig shit in a great big real
world you don't understand, Greg, and you thus make it up as you go along.
Show us where a forged post is a FELONY. Come on, prove me wrong.
>> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html
>> proves this. With the forgeries in question, his motive seemed to be to
>> appear moments later to blame me. (in the example cited at the URL, this
>> is exactly what he did...except that he forgot which address he was posting
>> from.)
>>
>> He couldn't forge me and then show up to argue that I had forged myself,
>> now could he? Besides, I sign all my posts with PGP, which is impossible
>> to forge.
>>
>>> Ponderable wouldn't you say?
>> Anything is ponderable. As I said in an earlier post, by the very nature
>> of remailers, anyone including myself could have been the author of many of
>> the forged posts.
>
> This seems to escape the system suck pack in ascps.
ON the contrary I've made a similar argument myself. You are lying again.
>> However, there is that one post referenced in the URL
>> above, and still available in Google, which I could NOT have forged unless
>> I had time travel capabilities. :)
>
>> You seem to be conveniently overlooking that.
>
>> In my opinion the burden of proof is on the person who
>> made the accusation...
>
> I thought you BOTH were!
>
>> and who has been caught in the act of doing this
>> stuff several times.
>
> Convict him or set him free.
Convict him of what?
Has he done something illegal?
> Ten years of harassment is just not right.
How about 10 years of fighting back?
> Even if Ken was guilty as hell, your obsession has become stalking.
6 years of you posting your attacks against parents here is not stalking?
Kane
freedom
On 10 Jan 2007, "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>freedom wrote:
>> concept of "innocent until proved guilty"
>
>In ascps, as in Juvenile Courts throughout the USA, there
>are NO SUCH PROTECTIONS. I asked a Judge if the Constitution
>applies in this courtroom, and they said "That is for another court.".
>Both unmoderated newsgroups and Juvenile Courts are DIRTY environments.
>How could you be around TEN YEARS and be so naive?
I haven't been around "ten years". That's Pangborn's claim.
>
>> Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however, show
>> numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of other
>> IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong to
>> someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
>> documented history of creating ficticious identities.
>
>Perfect cover for a "false flag" operation wouldn't you say?
>
Sure, if you're as paranoid as Pangborn.
>> >That doesn't prove it IS you, but clearly you ARE obsessed
>> >enough to BE the false flag operator. You are a very likely suspect
>> >Dave.
>> >
>> >The one person who hasn't been impersonated over
>> >your ten year history of this is ... Dave Moore.
>>
>> I've been forged before. Ken and his friends
>
>He has friends? I haven't seen his "pack".
>
>> have also in the past created AOL accounts where they
>> pretended to be my wife or my ex-wife.
>
>And you filed criminal charges based on your evidence?
>The phone company handed over the trace information to the Police
>right?
Yeah. Sure. They'll get right on it. (sarcasm off)
>
>> As far as a "ten year history"....you've witnessed what...ten days of it?
>
>Is it possible that ANYBODY but you two has seen the entire ten years?
>
>> >If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
>>
>> Ken has been proven to have been the author of at least some of the
>> forgeries in the past.
>
>Where are the criminal charges?
>That's a FELONY after about two years ago.
I seriously doubt that. And, you'd have to talk to the alt.atheism
members...they are the main "marks" of Ken's forgeries.
>
>> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/altatheism.html
>> proves this. With the forgeries in question, his motive seemed to be to
>> appear moments later to blame me. (in the example cited at the URL, this
>> is exactly what he did...except that he forgot which address he was posting
>> from.)
>>
>> He couldn't forge me and then show up to argue that I had forged myself,
>> now could he? Besides, I sign all my posts with PGP, which is impossible
>> to forge.
>>
>> >
>> >Ponderable wouldn't you say?
>>
>> Anything is ponderable. As I said in an earlier post, by the very nature
>> of remailers, anyone including myself could have been the author of many of
>> the forged posts.
>
>This seems to escape the system suck pack in ascps.
>
>> However, there is that one post referenced in the URL
>> above, and still available in Google, which I could NOT have forged unless
>> I had time travel capabilities. :)
>
>> You seem to be conveniently overlooking that.
>
>> In my opinion the burden of proof is on the person who
>> made the accusation...
>
>I thought you BOTH were!
The accusations I make, I back up with proof. Ken makes accusations
routinely, and runs the other way like a coward when asked for proof.
>
>> and who has been caught in the act of doing this
>> stuff several times.
>
>Convict him or set him free.
>Ten years of harassment is just not right.
>Even if Ken was guilty as hell, your obsession has become stalking.
I'm not harassing or stalking anyone. I don't even post all that
much....compare my posts to the volume of his posts, and I guarantee you
it's running about 30 to 1.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaWsxQu6zDezw650EQIiIQCfYcqfe6UcMt+TiIxtPH/16jKdP1gAn0w0
ubs9kCFXYJsSSI6KCRkjjAeY
=/pxw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
krp
> freedom wrote:
>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
> And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
> If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
> The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
But they ARE his addresses. Same target, same behavior, same denials,
same syntax. Same Stalking.
krp
"0:->" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:VJ-dndzzhs4B0jjY...@scnresearch.com...
> Greegor wrote:
>> freedom wrote:
>>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
>>
>> And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
>> If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
>> The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
>>
>> There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
>
> An no way for the other person to prove it's not him, stupid.
>
Sure there is. The forgeries intensified at one point when I was in Cuba
with NO internet access. That's proof.
krp
> Please answer especially the double standard question. The one about
> branding those that are paid for their work as questionable, dishonest
> liars because it would be in their best interests to lie to improve or
> keep their income, and how this would NOT apply in this case when we
> have a paid consulting and someone named Dave in conflict...and YOU
> wish to believe the one that appears to have NO fiduciary interest in
> the issue at all.
Okay let ME answer. Yes I have such an interest. Kane - use your head
for a change, would there be ANY logic - ANY AT ALL for me to create such a
stir knowing it would discredit me and hurt my business?????? WHO would
have the greater interest to attack me and make me look like the bad guy?
ME, or somebody opposed to me like Moore and people beholding to the CPS
SYSTEM?
krp
> freedom wrote:
> Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however, show
> numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of
> other
> IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong to
> someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
> documented history of creating ficticious identities.
Which ID's turned out to be somebody else? Documentation please Davey.
Your claims that I use MANY MANY MAN Y MANY different ID's is based and
supported ONLY by your claims. ALL of the ID's I have used have been
derivatives of my names, ie in the present case initials. My AOL mast
account was kenpa...@aol.com and pa...@aol.com. Similarly at one time I
had a compuserve account again using my name but NEVER posting to Usenet
from it. And I had an Earthlink account and Atlantic account both using my
own name. I have my A-Team account that has NO usenet access.
Now Moore - let's look at you. You post ONLY through Anonymous
remailers. Why? Because you have NO choice. NONE! No regular ISP would
tolerate your behavior for long. In fact many didn't. But that is only part
of the story. The rest of the story is that you have been so badly
discredited on the men's forums you never post anything other than your
constant drivel about me. 100% of your posts for the past 8 years have been
about me. Not ONE post on topic for any of the newsgroups in question.
You do a good job of bullshitting. You found willing dupes in the
Atheism group and a couple here who NEED to believe you. They will ignore
that I am only ONE of your "marks." You don't say much of your harasdsment
of Judith McLinn, Karen Anderson, Stacy Rupp-Anderson, Joe O'connor, John
Reinhagen just to name a few of the other people you harass. Of course you
don't say that you are presently pulling the same shit on your ex-wife that
you are on me. Yes, Davey, I hear about it. NOT from her, at least not
directly. I wonder IF Ron and Kane REALLY new about you how they'd feel
knowing of your previous involvement with Aryan groups while you were
stationed in North Carolina? I can only wonder what they would think if they
could read your threats to women on the net with graphic sexual violence?
Yeah Ron and Kane THAT is who you are supporting. Hope you like a racist
biggot and want to CLOLSELY identify yourself with him.
Now let me tell YOU TWO morons in on something. Moore is the real author
of that Anti-Semitic FILTH. Where do I sit? One of my life long best
friends is a Jewish Attorney in Milwaukee. My high school sweetheart was
Jewish and we'd have married if her mother hadn't stopped it. He dad was all
for it. I spent lots of time with that family. And IF you wanted to do some
research back to 1997 you'd see that the fight between Moore and I started
when he forged an Anti-Semitic rant (Jews and ovens) to a friend Joe
O'Connor. Joe is also not a racist. I was very angry at his vile
Anti-Semitism. My high school sweetheart's family lost many members in the
holocaust including her paternal grandparents. Oh and - I seriously
considered converting to Judaism if her mother would have accepted me as he
daughter's husband. They were conservative Jews. Not Orthodox but strictly
observant. A 100% Kosher home except for me.
IF you knew anything about me you might know that as a young man I
supported many civil rights causes. Marched on occasion. Look up civil
rights in Milwaukee and search for Father Jim Groppi. No you'll likely NOT
find my name anywhere, I was just a participant not a leader. But I do have
my name on a plaque in Montgomery, Alabama. David Moore does NOT!
My wife is hispanic. (Cuban) you might want to read some of Moore racist
ranting about my wife.
>> >If the false flag operator was Ken, How could that be?
>
>> Ken has been proven to have been the author of at least some of the
>> forgeries in the past.
NOPE. I have only been ACCUSED by David Moore and accepeted by mindless
dupes.
>> However, there is that one post referenced in the URL
>> above, and still available in Google, which I could NOT have forged
>> unless
>> I had time travel capabilities. :)
>
>> You seem to be conveniently overlooking that.
What YOU are overlooking Davey, as I did, and as you hope everyone will
is that when you post a forgery, you almost never do just ONE copy. You send
out a slug of them, typically 4 or more. They appear at different times. If
you look CLOSELY at my post you see it QUOTES a specific message (and it
contains the date and time stamp) in your EXAMPLE you reference MY post and
its ITS date and time stamp, then you use the date and time stamp from a
different posting that came much later. You HOPE that nobody knows that
multiple posts from remailers are often delayed in posting to Usenet. And
you hope people miss seeing that you almost always post several of your
signature forgeries. What you count on Moore is IDIOTS who can't read
header information or understand it/
freedom
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> freedom wrote:
>
>> Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however, show
>> numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of
>> other
>> IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong to
>> someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
>> documented history of creating ficticious identities.
>
> Which ID's turned out to be somebody else? Documentation please Davey.
Sure, as always I'm happy to nail your fat ass with documentation of your
lies:
This is just one example...you falsely alleged that this person was me,
when he clearly was not. This was proven when he even took your side later
in the discussion.
You've accused many people of being me, including Rob Gautier, tip@cotse,
Will Rainey, etc.
>Your claims that I use MANY MANY MAN Y MANY different ID's is based and
>supported ONLY by your claims. ALL of the ID's I have used have been
>derivatives of my names, ie in the present case initials.
Except for kaise...@cs.com, bulld...@aol.com, judge...@ij.net. All
of which are proved to be you at http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com. Sorry,
Ken, but you slipped up too many times, posting AS Ken Pangborn from those
accounts. Not to mention the time you screwed up and forgot to take your
"computername" out of the headers of your Judgedredd posts :) Remember
when Terri nailed your fat ass on that one in front of everyone? That was
one of the stupidest things you've ever done....other than sending out that
alt.atheism forgery and forgetting what name you were sending it under!
My AOL mast
>account was kenpa...@aol.com and pa...@aol.com.
And Sebri...@aol.com, which was another pretend alias...which disappeared
the same day that AOL terminated your pa...@aol.com account for abuse.
(Which you also lie about to this day.)
Similarly at one time I
>had a compuserve account again using my name but NEVER posting to Usenet
>from it. And I had an Earthlink account and Atlantic account both using my
>own name. I have my A-Team account that has NO usenet access.
>
> Now Moore - let's look at you. You post ONLY through Anonymous
>remailers. Why? Because you have NO choice. NONE! No regular ISP would
>tolerate your behavior for long.
In other words, you would frequently complain about my postings in an
effort to deny my right to free speech. Says a lot about you....
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaZHQgu6zDezw650EQI1MwCgjJWwlmRervrB0GDq5Hs48/Kj8+0AoI57
YswI8p4GbQUt+VtDaUJcSLgN
=O2BW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Dan Sullivan
Please remove this discussion from the asCPS ng.
Ron
" krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Kq8ph.6840$%Q4.2408@trnddc06...
(snip)
>> Please excuse me while I fall out of my chair. Gregg actually provided a
>> link to something relevant!
>>
>> I have never engaged in such an operation gregg, I've never had the urge.
>> I am about as up front a person as you will ever (given the opportunity)
>> meet. And in the games I enjoy, its not an option. One is either on one
>> side or the other, and its pretty clear who is who.
>
> Up font?? That means you are gullible as hell, at least guilty as hell
> of wishful thinking with regard to Moore's website.
Up front ken, me, honest, no guile. Get it?
That does not mean that I believe others are like myself. I know the depths
to which mankind can sink. Both from my experience as a Law Enforcement
Officer and as a Foster Parent. Which of course leads me to the conclusion
that you are not up front, not honest, and full of guile. IOW ken, you are
a liar. YOU have proven that here in this news group, not mr moore. YOU
ken. All mr moore has done, IMO, is provide historical information on you
that may or may not be true. But given what he has provided on his web site
and your actions in this news group, I am FAR more apt to take what he says
as truthful than any claims you have or may make.
(snip)
> Tell me Ron and the GENIUS of Usenet how do you explain that your
> HERO - DAVID MOORE in ANY of his ID's "Freedom" Tip@cotse or as Percy
> have NEVER posted ON TOPIC on ANY newsgroup? If you look at any of them,
> soc.men, ascps, soc.culture.cuba, adru etc not even ONE POST in the past
> years ON TOPIC! How do you explain that 100% of the posts are attacks on
> me and NEVER on topic????? Oh I await the rationalization on that one with
> baited breath.
I wouldn't know ken, I don't see his posts unless I go through google
groups. While his posts may not have been on topic, as you claim, his web
site has been quite accurate about you. Your posts on the other hand, while
on topic at times, have been filled with misdirection and un-truths, just as
his web site claims is your style. I have seen this for myself, long before
I ever visited his web site. So, its not rationalization in any way ken,
its observed fact. I know that its hard for you to deal with someone who
verifies the facts as I have, but life is made up of these little
disappointments.
The two of you have been hacking at each other for years now. Stalking,
both on and off the internet, and you have gotten absolutely no where.
Given that alone, as I said in another thread, its now kind of difficult to
tell where one idiot starts and the other ends.
I don't see why the two of you don't meet somewhere at dawn, with pistols
drawn, and just shoot it out. Neither of you is EVER going to see the
others side of things, and the ongoing infantile pissing contest I'm sure is
getting a bit old. I know it is for the rest of the internet community.
Ron
freedom
.......or what?
I responded to a message in the groups it was posted in. Talk to the
person who started the thread.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaZ5lwu6zDezw650EQKe6ACg735PDpVYWc+69rtTjbO+FQ8a64gAn1D4
uSjCBjLlAnCnYPCMlx97KpWP
=PODU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
Never happened. During the time frame when you claimed to have gone to
Cuba to purchase your wife, your postings continued unabated, both from
your regular account and your now-defunct Internet Junction account.
You also at one time tried to claim that you had made a trip to Cuba, and
as "evidence" you posted a Photoshopped boarding pass. You then
crossposted into the Photoshop newsgroup to ask for an "expert" opinion on
this, and the regulars there nailed your fat ass on this as well.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaZ7/Qu6zDezw650EQLwJwCfUspo6XuFE6ZV8TK9SD7P/FJNO0wAn1Pn
dyALXX2qb0TOvy1kvYB894wz
=RSn0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
And by the way...I note several posts by you which consist only of the text
"zzzzzzzzzzz", and which don't even indicate which posts or threads you're
responding to. How are those relevant to asCPS?
My postings serve to warn people about a consultant who claims to assist
people against CPS claims, but who has phony credentials, a laundry list of
dissatisfied clients and a track record of lying. Arguably, that's
relevant to a discussion group regarding CPS.
How is "zzzzzzzzz" relevant and my posts aren't? What gives you authority
to dictate this?
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaZ+bgu6zDezw650EQLNlgCgofAeype9Y0fZtwQhrDtZ946QehQAoMz8
FOk5KKVe1xmh7N+2qJ9x1W5+
=fqrA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
krp
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> >> Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however,
>> >> show
>> >> numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of
>> >> other
>> >> IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong
>> >> to
>> >> someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
>> >> documented history of creating ficticious identities.
>> > Which ID's turned out to be somebody else? Documentation please
>> > Davey.
>> Sure, as always I'm happy to nail your fat ass with documentation of your
>> lies:
And you claim it was proved it was not you, WHERE????
>> This is just one example...you falsely alleged that this person was me,
>> when he clearly was not. This was proven when he even took your side
>> later
>> in the discussion.
>> You've accused many people of being me, including Rob Gautier, tip@cotse,
>> Will Rainey, etc.
But you have been. WIll Rainey is a name you made up named after WILLIAM
RAINEY HARPER COLLEGE that was in your area.
>> >Your claims that I use MANY MANY MAN Y MANY different ID's is based and
>> >supported ONLY by your claims. ALL of the ID's I have used have been
>> >derivatives of my names, ie in the present case initials.
>
>> Except for kaise...@cs.com, bulld...@aol.com, judge...@ij.net. All
>> of which are proved to be you at http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com. Sorry,
>> Ken, but you slipped up too many times, posting AS Ken Pangborn from
>> those
>> accounts. Not to mention the time you screwed up and forgot to take your
>> "computername" out of the headers of your Judgedredd posts :) Remember
>> when Terri nailed your fat ass on that one in front of everyone? That
>> was
>> one of the stupidest things you've ever done....other than sending out
>> that
>> alt.atheism forgery and forgetting what name you were sending it under!
None of which are "PROVED" to be me only allegations on YOUR website
with evidence created by you! NONE of which were me.
>
>> My AOL master>account was kenpa...@aol.com and pa...@aol.com.
>> And Sebri...@aol.com, which was another pretend alias...which
>> disappeared
>> the same day that AOL terminated your pa...@aol.com account for abuse.
>> (Which you also lie about to this day.)
Amazing I kept those right up to a couple years ago at AOL. Sebring was
NOT mine.
>> Similarly at one time I>had a compuserve account again using my name but
>> NEVER posting to Usenet
>> >from it. And I had an Earthlink account and Atlantic account both using
>> >my
>> >own name. I have my A-Team account that has NO usenet access.
>> > Now Moore - let's look at you. You post ONLY through Anonymous
>> >remailers. Why? Because you have NO choice. NONE! No regular ISP would
>> >tolerate your behavior for long.
> In other words, you would frequently complain about my postings in an
> effort to deny my right to free speech. Says a lot about you....
No Davey that isn't the reason. What's funny is that you complained
constantly to MY ISP.... And still do. The REAL reason you don't post as
yourself any more and NEVER on topic in a newsgroup is because you have shot
yourself so badly you know you have no credibility. Your ONE use of the
internet today is to STALK ME... You CANNOT post normally or ON TOPIC any
more. I can post as myself and do, while you CANNOT! You must have
deniability, I don't need it.
0:->
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> "0:->" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:VJ-dndzzhs4B0jjY...@scnresearch.com...
>>> Greegor wrote:
>>>> freedom wrote:
>>>>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>>>>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
>>>> And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
>>>> If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
>>>> The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
>>>>
>>>> There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
>>> An no way for the other person to prove it's not him, stupid.
>>>
>> Sure there is. The forgeries intensified at one point when I was in Cuba
>> with NO internet access. That's proof.
>
> Never happened. During the time frame when you claimed to have gone to
> Cuba to purchase your wife, your postings continued unabated, both from
> your regular account and your now-defunct Internet Junction account.
>
> You also at one time tried to claim that you had made a trip to Cuba, and
> as "evidence" you posted a Photoshopped boarding pass. You then
> crossposted into the Photoshop newsgroup to ask for an "expert" opinion on
> this, and the regulars there nailed your fat ass on this as well.
Are you and Ken able to read and respond to each other's posts on other
more appropriate newsgroups?
Please drop ascps from you address block.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kane
freedom
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
Would there be any logic for you to threaten to have women raped? To refer
to them as "despicable cunts" in newsgroup discussions? To wake up at 4am
and post dozens of rants, singularly obsessing over me daily, even in
newsgroups I've never heard of? Nevertheless, you create "stirs" like this
daily.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaZ85Qu6zDezw650EQIulQCbBkVoyufROETuBDQ8zjjD5V4MBqYAoPmm
wTc0pNp9ePkQTO8AxqOpWpy3
=wfIB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
krp
> (snip no surprises)
>>> Please excuse me while I fall out of my chair. Gregg actually provided
>>> a link to something relevant!
>>> I have never engaged in such an operation gregg, I've never had the
>>> urge. I am about as up front a person as you will ever (given the
>>> opportunity) meet. And in the games I enjoy, its not an option. One is
>>> either on one side or the other, and its pretty clear who is who.
>> Up font?? That means you are gullible as hell, at least guilty as hell
>> of wishful thinking with regard to Moore's website.
> Up front ken, me, honest, no guile. Get it?
HA! You have a vested interest here, cut the shit.
> That does not mean that I believe others are like myself. I know the
> depths to which mankind can sink. Both from my experience as a Law
> Enforcement Officer and as a Foster Parent. Which of course leads me to
> the conclusion that you are not up front, not honest, and full of guile.
> IOW ken, you are a liar. YOU have proven that here in this news group,
> not mr moore. YOU ken. All mr moore has done, IMO, is provide historical
> information on you that may or may not be true. But given what he has
> provided on his web site and your actions in this news group, I am FAR
> more apt to take what he says as truthful than any claims you have or may
> make.
Your problem Ron is that you are a hard liner. What we call a "WITCH
HUNTER." Backing off your claims that Moore's stuff is 100% accurate about
me?
Feeling just a little shakey about it Ron? Np you NEED to believe he is
right about me or come face to face with the terrifying thought that your
emporer has NO clothing at all! Ron it takes somebody either fundamentally
stupid or fundamentally dishonest to hold up Moore's BULLSHIT as the truth.
He WHINES to you with claims that I "stalk" him - yet HE has photos of MY
house on his website. HE has a photo of ME on his website. HE has frantic
information trying to reach MY wife on his website, while claiming I am
doing that to him. Now Ron, baby, most "NORMAL" people would look at his
allegations about what I supposedly have done to HIM, and thenlook at the
things he has about ME on his website and conclude that he does EVERYTHING
he accuses me of doing. Most "normal" people also can see that he NEVER
posts anything ON TOPIC in ANY newsgroup he posts in. Not here in ASCPS, not
in ADRU, not in soc.men, not in the Cuba newsgroup NOWHERE! Ask him WHY he
posts in the Cuba newsgroup. What is HIS connection to Cuba. My wife is
from Cuba. I have been to Cuba, his ONLY interest in it is to stalk and
harass me. BUT see what answer you get.
> (snip)
>> Tell me Ron and the GENIUS of Usenet how do you explain that your
>> HERO - DAVID MOORE in ANY of his ID's "Freedom" Tip@cotse or as Percy
>> have NEVER posted ON TOPIC on ANY newsgroup? If you look at any of them,
>> soc.men, ascps, soc.culture.cuba, adru etc not even ONE POST in the past
>> years ON TOPIC! How do you explain that 100% of the posts are attacks
>> on me and NEVER on topic????? Oh I await the rationalization on that one
>> with baited breath.
> I wouldn't know ken, I don't see his posts unless I go through google
> groups. While his posts may not have been on topic, as you claim, his web
> site has been quite accurate about you. Your posts on the other hand,
> while on topic at times, have been filled with misdirection and un-truths,
> just as his web site claims is your style. I have seen this for myself,
> long before I ever visited his web site. So, its not rationalization in
> any way ken, its observed fact. I know that its hard for you to deal with
> someone who verifies the facts as I have, but life is made up of these
> little disappointments.
His website is BULLHIT! Ron I could say (and HAVE said) that YOUIR posts
have been fileld with untruths, such as the discussion on Nebraska's hiring
policies on CASEWORKERS... The first post cited the section on counsellors,
you had to click on a link at the bottom of the page to get to caseworkers,
you could have done that and provided that link as you later did. THEN when
confronted that the section you quoted supported what *I* originally said
and NOT what you said, you quoted a different section, the one related to
SUPERVISIORS and TRIED to claim THAT proved I was wrong. My original claim
was about case workers NOT supervisors. Then getting your ass kicked on that
you came back with TRAINING provisions that are NOT routinely followed. When
I asked you to show us that they DO actually do the training you abruptly
refused to continue. So NO - Ron it is YOU with the integrity problem, and
suppoerting Moore and his website just cooks your goose even worse. I have
already shown the FALSE names on his site. Go head TRY to track down that
Baltimore lawyer. I have you the links on William Rainey.
> The two of you have been hacking at each other for years now. Stalking,
> both on and off the internet, and you have gotten absolutely no where.
> Given that alone, as I said in another thread, its now kind of difficult
> to tell where one idiot starts and the other ends.
I have NEVER "stalked" the asshole on OR off the net. HE follows me, NOT
the reverse!
> I don't see why the two of you don't meet somewhere at dawn, with pistols
> drawn, and just shoot it out.
Because Mr. Moore the ANONYMOUS is a "COWARD!" Let me give you an example
to prove that statement. Some years ago I was scheduled to make a
presentation at a conference in Chicago. Moore announced that he was going
to make me eat my "lunch through a straw." He had believed that his
blackmail and threats would scare me off from speaking. When he learned I
actually CAME to speak, he began a series of FRANTIC (hysterical) phone
calls to the Police in the city where he lived (Bolingbrook) demanding 24
hour police protection crying like a baby that I was going to "get him." He
really had the whole department in stitches. The really FUNNY part is that
while he was complaining about me being near his house, I was meeting with a
detective about him at the hotel.
Or we can talk about the forgeries to a newsgroup that Davey claims
PROVE that I was doing the forgeries, at a time I was IN Cuba. His answer to
that? He claims the travel documents were "PHOTOSHOPPED." You can see they
were NOT!
krp
> freedom wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Greegor wrote:
>>>>> freedom wrote:
>>>>>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>>>>>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
>>>>> And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
>>>>> If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
>>>>> The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
>>>> An no way for the other person to prove it's not him, stupid.
>>>>
>>> Sure there is. The forgeries intensified at one point when I was in Cuba
>>> with NO internet access. That's proof.
>> Never happened. During the time frame when you claimed to have gone to
>> Cuba to purchase your wife, your postings continued unabated, both from
>> your regular account and your now-defunct Internet Junction account.
The posts continued from the Internet Junction accpount because THAT WAS
NOT ME. My regular accoun was silent and only your FORGERIES to it
appeared. Just like ALL of the posts to usenet from my business account are
YOUR FORGERIES because it has NO Usenet access!
>> You also at one time tried to claim that you had made a trip to Cuba, and
>> as "evidence" you posted a Photoshopped boarding pass. You then
>> crossposted into the Photoshop newsgroup to ask for an "expert" opinion
>> on
>> this, and the regulars there nailed your fat ass on this as well.
That "regular" claimed as his ONLY basis for saying it was faked was
because he knew an "executive" with American Airlines who he claims told him
they have NEVER flown to Cuba. He never found ANY specific law in the
documents which are still up on my website. In answer to his bullshit that
American Airlines doesn't fly to Cuba - let's start at:
http://www.abc-charters.com/pages/aboutus.htm And then proceed to:
http://www.abc-charters.com/pages/aboutus.htm
where you will see that INDEED the flights are on AMERICAN AIRLINES..
> Are you and Ken able to read and respond to each other's posts on other
> more appropriate newsgroups?
For some reason I am not seeing any of his posts.
0:->
They indicate irrelevance. Surely you are smart enough to get the point.
And you have a newsreader that has a feature that displays a sort by
thread output?
> My postings serve to warn people about a consultant who claims to assist
> people against CPS claims, but who has phony credentials, a laundry list of
> dissatisfied clients and a track record of lying. Arguably, that's
> relevant to a discussion group regarding CPS.
We are adequately warned, Dave. You are not in a group of neophytes to
Usenet, or child and family issues here. We've known Ken for a very long
time. Usually we ignore him.
Greg, out of desperation and despite Ken's lie, did everything he could
to engage Ken HERE, so as to throw shit up to block people from seeing
his lies, deceit, and dangerous attacks on parents.
You are, and I apologize in advance if I'm being offensive, lending
yourself to Greg's effort to clutter up this newsgroup with diversions
and misdirection.
>
> How is "zzzzzzzzz" relevant and my posts aren't? What gives you authority
> to dictate this?
Dave, your posts are relevant.
They become irrelevant when you have repeated yourself say for the third
or forth time TO THE SAME PEOPLE.
See any new posters here?
Do you suppose we haven't gotten your message?
Trust me, we have. Now if you have something to contribute that is about
the child protection system, either it's failings or usefulness, or
about how to help families engaged with child protection, feel free to
join right in, speak right up, and rock our world.
But Ken is old news just about everywhere that matters.
Thank you for your contribution to this point.
We get your point. None of us are about to engage Ken for anything, not
even the pissants that called him here.
Even they know better.
May I bid you a kind farewell now?
0:->
krp
>> My postings serve to warn people about a consultant who claims to assist
>> people against CPS claims, but who has phony credentials, a laundry list
>> of
>> dissatisfied clients and a track record of lying. Arguably, that's
>> relevant to a discussion group regarding CPS.
>
> We are adequately warned, Dave. You are not in a group of neophytes to
> Usenet, or child and family issues here. We've known Ken for a very long
> time. Usually we ignore him.
A laundry list of FAKE dissatisfied clients and manufactured information.
Kane you don't know jack about me. Much less for a long time.
My first post here was only in December.
0:->
>
>
Greegor
>Please remove this discussion from the asCPS ng.
freedom wrote:
> And by the way...I note several posts by you which consist only of the text
> "zzzzzzzzzzz", and which don't even indicate which posts or threads you're
> responding to. How are those relevant to asCPS?
NOW you're catching on!
> My postings serve to warn people about a consultant who claims to assist
> people against CPS claims,
Dan Sullivan, blatantly so.
Anonymous, Not for profit, biggest reference is a lobbyist FOR CPS
itself!
Makes lots of "sock" claims of his own success..
Gives advice that is BLATANTLY sabotage of families and works FOR
agencies.
> but who has phony credentials, a laundry list of
> dissatisfied clients and a track record of lying. Arguably, that's
> relevant to a discussion group regarding CPS.
Exactly what Dan and Kane do, and you're interfering with this intent.
> How is "zzzzzzzzz" relevant and my posts aren't?
> What gives you authority to dictate this?
If you ever had to deal with a CPS caseworker you
would more readily recognize the Megalomania.
The "aire of superiority" just oozes from them.
It would just absolutely FLOOR Dan/Kane and their pack
if you and Ken both asserted that CPS agencies are
a menace to our society.
Maybe you could take a few moments out to stop
your feud and announce your feelings for CPS agencies.
Remember that Dan and Kane are actually system sucks
who POSE as Family Rights people in order to steer
people into SUBMITTING to the agencies false accusations!
If your motivation in attacking Ken is to help people avoid
bad advice, then perhaps you should take a deeper look
at Dan and Kane's advice and positions!
I realize this might scare you Dave, but if you look
at some of the clashes between Dan and Ken in
regard to advice, and look at the actual advice
given (and giant catches) you might be forced to
defend (shudder) Ken in a few instant cases.
I realize that with your feud this is a huge challenge,
but truthfully, I think you and Ken probably AGREE
that CPS agencies have become more evil than the
problems they were originally supposed to stop.
If you check up on their egos you might indeed find
that Dan/Kane and their loyal "pack" of system sucks
want to go back to their OWN brand of "false flag"
with ""references"" and ""testimonials"" to prop up
Dan Sullivan even after he has been kicked out of
four different Family Rights groups and even LIED about it.
The phonomenon of remailers and relays to fake IP's
have moved into a "pack" behavior where they actually
operate much like a pack of hyenas, all nipping at the
prey's heels just enough to confuse their prey about
where the real attack will come from.
What do you think Dave, can you stop the feud just
long enough to agree with Ken on ONE THING??
I met a person once who said that as long as the
government can keep us citizens all feuding among
our various factions, the government has no fear
of THE PEOPLE working together to "rectify" major
problems in our government.
Dan and Kane have concluded that you will
not come over to join their puke brigade so
now they want you to take your feud elsewhere.
Please set aside your differences with Ken long
enough to send these "system suck" nitwits
a message.
Dan Sullivan, anonymous, Long Island
Kane , Donald L. Fisher, retired Oregon CPS caseworker, current
LOBBYIST for them
Dragons Girl, Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen, Gem rescued from manure pit
family by CPS
Ron, Ronald Van Dyne, Former cop, Nebraska Foster
lostintranslation, Kim Olsen/Olson, cares for 30 year old autistic
daughter, beholden to CPS
Firemonkey, probably one of the above in drag
I know you have seen some of the puke these "system sucks"
have been spewing, so are you going to speak up about it
or are you going to keep doing nothing but your usual
attacks on Ken?
When the head nitwit Dan posted my Traffic tickets,
Ken spoke up. Why didn't you?
Surely you and your ""arch enemy"" must agree on something!
0:->
You only met him once? And you'd take his word?
> who said that as long as the
> government can keep us citizens all feuding among
> our various factions, the government has no fear
> of THE PEOPLE working together to "rectify" major
> problems in our government.
Gee, who profound. I believe, in fact, the founders themselves may have
alluded to such considerations.
> Dan and Kane have concluded that you will
> not come over to join their puke brigade so
> now they want you to take your feud elsewhere.
Unh...we didn't invite Dave here ourselves, Greg. This started because
you invited Ken.
And I can't recall ever trying to recruit Dave for anything. Though now
that you are so frantically trying, I don't mind presenting a little
reason into the debate.
I've a hunch Dave can think for himself.
> Please set aside your differences with Ken long
> enough to send these "system suck" nitwits
> a message.
Would it be fair of me to not respond to Ken, and respond to Dave?
I don't think so. You can keep your little fogging routine to yourself,
Greg. Your desperation is too obvious.
>
> Dan Sullivan, anonymous, Long Island
I found "anonymous Dan" in two or three phone calls with nothing but his
general location, and the phone book. He's still as easy to find.
He was one of the principals in VOCAL at one time, and left because they
went gregorian cuckoo.
> Kane , Donald L. Fisher, retired Oregon CPS caseworker, current
> LOBBYIST for them
Ask for proof, Dave. I was never a CPS caseworker, but did a year as a
student intern on a government work study grant, part time. And I
lobbied for KIN, that is relatives trying to keep children OUT of the
CPS system and with their families. I have not lobbied for years.
> Dragons Girl, Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen, Gem rescued from manure pit
> family by CPS
Notice the insult, Dave?
Read a few of Betty's discussions of how she fought CPS to get her
grandson. And a few of Greg's mindless attacks on this winner against CPS.
> Ron, Ronald Van Dyne, Former cop, Nebraska Foster
If I wanted to understand the Nebraska CPS system, one of my first stops
would be Ron.
> lostintranslation, Kim Olsen/Olson, cares for 30 year old autistic
> daughter, beholden to CPS
"Beholden?" I thought she had to get her kids out of CPS clutches. Did I
miss something? And it can't be about the daughter Greg so honorably
wishes to use to discredit Kim as she would not be a CPS client. Not at 30.
> Firemonkey, probably one of the above in drag
Unlikely, given her posting history, but ask for proof, Dave.
> I know you have seen some of the puke these "system sucks"
> have been spewing,
Pray, Greg. Pray he doesn't have time to read your long posting history
and search on terms such as "pleading," "shower" "towel" "HW&MC"
"testimony" from you posting history.
> so are you going to speak up about it
> or are you going to keep doing nothing but your usual
> attacks on Ken?
You can't see how desperate you appear trying to recruit help with your
little personal war? R R R R R R R
> When the head nitwit Dan posted my Traffic tickets,
> Ken spoke up. Why didn't you?
Ken owes you?
Dave likely don't give a pucking mound of shit for your issues, little man.
By the way, I can't remember the context of where 'Dan posted' your
'Traffic tickets.'
And I can't seem to find the post. You would be more familiar with it
than me. Please point me to it in google groups. Thanks.
freedom
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
Well...it's a website ABOUT you. Duh! Who am I gonna put a picture
of....Willie Nelson?
>HE has frantic
>information trying to reach MY wife on his website,
Not "trying"....I DID reach her with the URL for
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com. Which she then visited, according to my
logs :)
>while claiming I am doing that to him.
You claimed it yourself. Earlier this week, you were making false
statements that "both my ex-wives" were telling you about my supposed
physical abuse.
>Now Ron, baby, most "NORMAL" people would look at his
>allegations about what I supposedly have done to HIM, and thenlook at the
>things he has about ME on his website and conclude that he does EVERYTHING
>he accuses me of doing. Most "normal" people also can see that he NEVER
>posts anything ON TOPIC in ANY newsgroup he posts in. Not here in ASCPS, not
>in ADRU, not in soc.men,
I'm warning people about a "trial consultant" who misrepresents himself
with bogus credentials. That's topical for those newsgroups.
>not in the Cuba newsgroup NOWHERE! Ask him WHY he
>posts in the Cuba newsgroup. What is HIS connection to Cuba. My wife is
>from Cuba. I have been to Cuba, his ONLY interest in it is to stalk and
>harass me. BUT see what answer you get.
In most cases, it's in response to you, or to a post which is crossposted
there. I rarely post in that group.
>
>> (snip)
>
>>> Tell me Ron and the GENIUS of Usenet how do you explain that your
>>> HERO - DAVID MOORE in ANY of his ID's "Freedom" Tip@cotse or as Percy
>>> have NEVER posted ON TOPIC on ANY newsgroup? If you look at any of them,
>>> soc.men, ascps, soc.culture.cuba, adru etc not even ONE POST in the past
>>> years ON TOPIC! How do you explain that 100% of the posts are attacks
>>> on me and NEVER on topic????? Oh I await the rationalization on that one
>>> with baited breath.
>
>> I wouldn't know ken, I don't see his posts unless I go through google
>> groups. While his posts may not have been on topic, as you claim, his web
>> site has been quite accurate about you. Your posts on the other hand,
>> while on topic at times, have been filled with misdirection and un-truths,
>> just as his web site claims is your style. I have seen this for myself,
>> long before I ever visited his web site. So, its not rationalization in
>> any way ken, its observed fact. I know that its hard for you to deal with
>> someone who verifies the facts as I have, but life is made up of these
>> little disappointments.
>
> His website is BULLHIT!
No, it's the truth about you. In most cases, the items at
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com can be independently verified in Google.
In fact, I've posted a couple of those today...such as, the proof that you
owned the kaiserdrvr account, and proof that you accused others of being me
when they clearly were not.
Ron I could say (and HAVE said) that YOUIR posts
>have been fileld with untruths, such as the discussion on Nebraska's hiring
>policies on CASEWORKERS... The first post cited the section on counsellors,
>you had to click on a link at the bottom of the page to get to caseworkers,
>you could have done that and provided that link as you later did. THEN when
>confronted that the section you quoted supported what *I* originally said
>and NOT what you said, you quoted a different section, the one related to
>SUPERVISIORS and TRIED to claim THAT proved I was wrong. My original claim
>was about case workers NOT supervisors. Then getting your ass kicked on that
>you came back with TRAINING provisions that are NOT routinely followed. When
>I asked you to show us that they DO actually do the training you abruptly
>refused to continue. So NO - Ron it is YOU with the integrity problem, and
>suppoerting Moore and his website just cooks your goose even worse. I have
>already shown the FALSE names on his site. Go head TRY to track down that
>Baltimore lawyer. I have you the links on William Rainey.
Nobody by the name of William Rainey appears anywhere on
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com. Nor does http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
claim that the Baltimore lawyer is legitimate....just that the post in
question appeared on usenet.
>
>> The two of you have been hacking at each other for years now. Stalking,
>> both on and off the internet, and you have gotten absolutely no where.
>> Given that alone, as I said in another thread, its now kind of difficult
>> to tell where one idiot starts and the other ends.
>
> I have NEVER "stalked" the asshole on OR off the net. HE follows me, NOT
>the reverse!
Are you now going to deny that you've made hundreds of posts, attempting to
expose what you believe to be my middle name, my address and my place of
employment?
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaajbQu6zDezw650EQKeSQCg88R3//UnDTVSzQJnoW851FgfLLAAn3s+
97fUS98C7PwVcvtlqQEOSfkO
=Mapr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Greegor
freedom
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> freedom wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>>> >> Of course not, because you can't prove a negative. I can, however,
>>> >> show
>>> >> numerous instances where Ken falsely accused me of being the owner of
>>> >> other
>>> >> IDs, even claiming to have "proof", and the IDs turned out to belong
>>> >> to
>>> >> someone else. And I can also show proof that Ken, himself, has a
>>> >> documented history of creating ficticious identities.
>
>>> > Which ID's turned out to be somebody else? Documentation please
>>> > Davey.
>
>>> Sure, as always I'm happy to nail your fat ass with documentation of your
>>> lies:
>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/ylunlk
>
> And you claim it was proved it was not you, WHERE????
When he began attacking me, a few threads later?
>
>>> This is just one example...you falsely alleged that this person was me,
>>> when he clearly was not. This was proven when he even took your side
>>> later
>>> in the discussion.
>
>>> You've accused many people of being me, including Rob Gautier, tip@cotse,
>>> Will Rainey, etc.
>
> But you have been. WIll Rainey is a name you made up named after WILLIAM
>RAINEY HARPER COLLEGE that was in your area.
No I didn't. Your proof of this is where?
>>> >Your claims that I use MANY MANY MAN Y MANY different ID's is based and
>>> >supported ONLY by your claims. ALL of the ID's I have used have been
>>> >derivatives of my names, ie in the present case initials.
>>
>>> Except for kaise...@cs.com, bulld...@aol.com, judge...@ij.net. All
>>> of which are proved to be you at http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com. Sorry,
>>> Ken, but you slipped up too many times, posting AS Ken Pangborn from
>>> those
>>> accounts. Not to mention the time you screwed up and forgot to take your
>>> "computername" out of the headers of your Judgedredd posts :) Remember
>>> when Terri nailed your fat ass on that one in front of everyone? That
>>> was
>>> one of the stupidest things you've ever done....other than sending out
>>> that
>>> alt.atheism forgery and forgetting what name you were sending it under!
>
> None of which are "PROVED" to be me only allegations on YOUR website
>with evidence created by you! NONE of which were me.
Here's a post where you slipped up, posting as you while forgetting that
you were logged in as Kaise...@cs.com:
And, this is in Google...entirely independent of
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com. Next lie, please?
>>
>>> My AOL master>account was kenpa...@aol.com and pa...@aol.com.
>
>>> And Sebri...@aol.com, which was another pretend alias...which
>>> disappeared
>>> the same day that AOL terminated your pa...@aol.com account for abuse.
>>> (Which you also lie about to this day.)
>
> Amazing I kept those right up to a couple years ago at AOL. Sebring was
>NOT mine.
Yes, it was. Your stepdaughter Megan even confirmed that you used to name
your screen names after cars. And, no, you didn't keep the pangk
account...it was terminated for abuse. You spent several days whining
about it immediately after it happened.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaadVwu6zDezw650EQK1WQCfQRvLZNnyUw+U8+FNCb8xOD2PTXAAnA91
uRhDEEbVT2OpDd5zcfS8O201
=zlRg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> freedom wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>>>>> Greegor wrote:
>>>>>> freedom wrote:
>>>>>>> Maybe because two of those three aren't my
>>>>>>> addresses, and I've never posted as them?
>>>>>> And everybody's supposed to believe that because you SAID so??
>>>>>> If you ARE, wouldn't you deny it?
>>>>>> The "shadow of doubt" in this case works against you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is NO WAY for you to prove that it is NOT you.
>>>>> An no way for the other person to prove it's not him, stupid.
>>>>>
>>>> Sure there is. The forgeries intensified at one point when I was in Cuba
>>>> with NO internet access. That's proof.
>
>>> Never happened. During the time frame when you claimed to have gone to
>>> Cuba to purchase your wife, your postings continued unabated, both from
>>> your regular account and your now-defunct Internet Junction account.
>
> The posts continued from the Internet Junction accpount because THAT WAS
>NOT ME. My regular accoun was silent and only your FORGERIES to it
>appeared. Just like ALL of the posts to usenet from my business account are
>YOUR FORGERIES because it has NO Usenet access!
Oh, goody. I get the pleasure of using Google to nail your fat ass to the
wall on one of your lies, yet again today. Yes, the IJ account was you:
A post from a third party whom you e-mailed as judge...@ij.net, and left
your computername in the headers.
And, http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com/judgedredd.html contains an e-mail
message which you sent to me from that address, with the same incriminating
evidence in the headers. Not to mention the fact that you were speaking AS
Ken Pangborn, completely forgetting that you were supposed to be someone
else.
Next lie, please?
>
>>> You also at one time tried to claim that you had made a trip to Cuba, and
>>> as "evidence" you posted a Photoshopped boarding pass. You then
>>> crossposted into the Photoshop newsgroup to ask for an "expert" opinion
>>> on
>>> this, and the regulars there nailed your fat ass on this as well.
>
> That "regular" claimed as his ONLY basis for saying it was faked was
>because he knew an "executive" with American Airlines who he claims told him
No, they didn't. You posted the scanned image, and several of them
concluded that it was obviously doctored. The discussion about American
Airlines came later.
Do I need to open up Google again, and embarrass your fat ass yet again?
Haven't you had enough humiliation for one day?
(snipped remainder of Ken's feeble attempt at a smokescreen)
>
>> Are you and Ken able to read and respond to each other's posts on other
>> more appropriate newsgroups?
>
> For some reason I am not seeing any of his posts.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaanEwu6zDezw650EQJZBACgpLG+sjDuuxUrQBwVCVKEC8PJpEAAn2hL
RD24u25XxmGwXk2gnEFUDPAy
=36rL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, " krp" <web2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>"0:->" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:TN6dncRUb8SKCjvY...@scnresearch.com...
>
>>> My postings serve to warn people about a consultant who claims to assist
>>> people against CPS claims, but who has phony credentials, a laundry list
>>> of
>>> dissatisfied clients and a track record of lying. Arguably, that's
>>> relevant to a discussion group regarding CPS.
>>
>> We are adequately warned, Dave. You are not in a group of neophytes to
>> Usenet, or child and family issues here. We've known Ken for a very long
>> time. Usually we ignore him.
>
>
>A laundry list of FAKE dissatisfied clients and manufactured information.
That portion of http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com deals mainly with two
former clients of yours: Steven Leuck and Thomas Walsh. You acknowledged
both of them, in usenet postings, as actual former clients of yours. You
even discussed confidential information about their cases.
If you'd like to deny this, I will be happy to go back to Google and find
the relevant posts, and humiliate your pudgy ass yet again. It would be,
what, the fifth time today?
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaap/Au6zDezw650EQKFMwCg++yGF2YeV+6ucUIiEBDzbAUyS7EAn2n3
Z2mPbkVgFO3qicwfxIdAwjJ8
=Li5K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
freedom
Yeah, but I typically sort by date.
Well, I should point out that some of the discussions, such as this one,
are crossposted across several newsgroups. I generally just reply, and
don't really add or subtract groups, so my responses go wherever the
original post went. Besides, in the past when newsgroups have been
trimmed, Ken usually adds them back, and sometimes even adds other
irrelevant newsgroups to the list. And, even if new people are not coming
to asCPS, this might not be true of the other groups such as adru, etc.
I will agree not to start new threads in asCPS, or to reply to threads
which appear only in asCPS, unless I have something new to contribute.
Will this be a fair compromise?
>
>0:->
>
>
>>
>> http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
>>
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: N/A
>>
>> iQA/AwUBRaZ+bgu6zDezw650EQLNlgCgofAeype9Y0fZtwQhrDtZ946QehQAoMz8
>> FOk5KKVe1xmh7N+2qJ9x1W5+
>> =fqrA
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBRaaolQu6zDezw650EQLOiwCgxXCl+/LBk2euU7/8J6WUSHnipBAAoNtM
GR3yKP8e4jdXGIRkVuCIsW7k
=mf25
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
0:->
Yes, I'm aware of the problem of post origins and picking up new groups
to crosspost out to. I don't expect you to police others.
> I will agree not to start new threads in asCPS, or to reply to threads
> which appear only in asCPS, unless I have something new to contribute.
> Will this be a fair compromise?
Thank you, and of course it is. I apologize if I inadvertently appeared
to accuse you of being the violator of these simple netiquette protocols.
Now if only I had the same from Ken. Ah well. I'm not going there. He'd
use it to babble yet more bs.
krp
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1168549101.5...@77g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> Greegor wrote:
>> Kane and Dan both said
>> >Please remove this discussion from the asCPS ng.
Let's see I had a traffic accident today. Any bets on how long it takes
Moore to post the details?
(The other guy got the tickets.) 4
Ron
Another lie ken? I never said he was 100% accurate about you. At least
make an attempt to get within range of the truth ken.
> Feeling just a little shakey about it Ron? Np you NEED to believe he is
Not one bit.
> right about me or come face to face with the terrifying thought that your
> emporer has NO clothing at all! Ron it takes somebody either fundamentally
> stupid or fundamentally dishonest to hold up Moore's BULLSHIT as the
> truth.
Some of what he says is OBVIOUSLY accurate, proven so by you ken. As for
the rest, I dont give enough of a dam about either of you to invest the time
and energy necessary to research it all.
> He WHINES to you with claims that I "stalk" him - yet HE has photos of MY
> house on his website. HE has a photo of ME on his website. HE has frantic
If he ever said one thing to me ken I never saw it. What part of 'PLONK
LIST' are you failing to understand?
> information trying to reach MY wife on his website, while claiming I am
> doing that to him. Now Ron, baby, most "NORMAL" people would look at his
> allegations about what I supposedly have done to HIM, and thenlook at the
> things he has about ME on his website and conclude that he does EVERYTHING
After the less than a month you have been hanging around this news group
kenny, its obvious that NEITHER of you is anything anywhere near normal.
> he accuses me of doing. Most "normal" people also can see that he NEVER
> posts anything ON TOPIC in ANY newsgroup he posts in. Not here in ASCPS,
> not in ADRU, not in soc.men, not in the Cuba newsgroup NOWHERE! Ask him
> WHY he posts in the Cuba newsgroup. What is HIS connection to Cuba. My
> wife is from Cuba. I have been to Cuba, his ONLY interest in it is to
> stalk and harass me. BUT see what answer you get.
I dont give a dam ken. What he writes about you on his web site, as far as
I chose to read, was accurate. I know thats a crushing blow to your fragile
ego ken, but the facts are even more plain than the nose on your face.
>> (snip)
>
>>> Tell me Ron and the GENIUS of Usenet how do you explain that your
>>> HERO - DAVID MOORE in ANY of his ID's "Freedom" Tip@cotse or as Percy
>>> have NEVER posted ON TOPIC on ANY newsgroup? If you look at any of
>>> them, soc.men, ascps, soc.culture.cuba, adru etc not even ONE POST in
>>> the past years ON TOPIC! How do you explain that 100% of the posts are
>>> attacks on me and NEVER on topic????? Oh I await the rationalization on
>>> that one with baited breath.
>
>> I wouldn't know ken, I don't see his posts unless I go through google
>> groups. While his posts may not have been on topic, as you claim, his
>> web site has been quite accurate about you. Your posts on the other
>> hand, while on topic at times, have been filled with misdirection and
>> un-truths, just as his web site claims is your style. I have seen this
>> for myself, long before I ever visited his web site. So, its not
>> rationalization in any way ken, its observed fact. I know that its hard
>> for you to deal with someone who verifies the facts as I have, but life
>> is made up of these little disappointments.
>
> His website is BULLHIT! Ron I could say (and HAVE said) that YOUIR
> posts
Says you. Fact is ken, he's right about you in many ways. Sorry again for
that crushing blow to your fragile ego, but there we have it. Are you right
about him? Could be! Fact here is that I am sick of both of you, you are
two of the most pathetic people I have ever heard of, and if I never see you
post another message to any news group anywhere it will be just 15 seconds
to dam soon.
> have been fileld with untruths, such as the discussion on Nebraska's
> hiring policies on CASEWORKERS... The first post cited the section on
> counsellors,
I have pretty much been civil with you so far ken. That stops. You are an
idiot if you think anyone who can actually read is going to fail to see
through your lies any longer.
> you had to click on a link at the bottom of the page to get to
> caseworkers, you could have done that and provided that link as you later
> did. THEN when
Maybe you had to, but my computer actually works quite well ken, and I dont
have to. Maybe its time to upgrade that POS you use.
> confronted that the section you quoted supported what *I* originally said
> and NOT what you said, you quoted a different section, the one related to
> SUPERVISIORS and TRIED to claim THAT proved I was wrong. My original claim
Didnt claim anything ken, showed the facts. You cant deal with that,
obviously, so please feel free to leave your head up you ass. After all
this time you seem to have worn a space for it in your colon.
> was about case workers NOT supervisors. Then getting your ass kicked on
> that you came back with TRAINING provisions that are NOT routinely
> followed. When
"NOT routinely followed", which of course is a belief you once again failed
to support. Congratulations ken, you did that with the style and flair of a
true feldman.
> I asked you to show us that they DO actually do the training you abruptly
> refused to continue. So NO - Ron it is YOU with the integrity problem,
> and
My integrity is just fine ken. Undamaged, flourishing in fact. And every
time I point out your falsehoods it gets even better.
> suppoerting Moore and his website just cooks your goose even worse. I have
> already shown the FALSE names on his site. Go head TRY to track down that
> Baltimore lawyer. I have you the links on William Rainey.
You aint shown shit. All you have said is prove he exists, or words to that
effect. Try actually supporting a statement you make kenny, you might find
it to be a refreshing change.
>> The two of you have been hacking at each other for years now. Stalking,
>> both on and off the internet, and you have gotten absolutely no where.
>> Given that alone, as I said in another thread, its now kind of difficult
>> to tell where one idiot starts and the other ends.
>
> I have NEVER "stalked" the asshole on OR off the net. HE follows me,
> NOT the reverse!
Opinions are like assholes....
>
>> I don't see why the two of you don't meet somewhere at dawn, with pistols
>> drawn, and just shoot it out.
>
>
> Because Mr. Moore the ANONYMOUS is a "COWARD!" Let me give you an
> example
(snip)
Thanks, no.
Even if you claimed it was covered in 24k gold you wouldn't support it.
>
> Or we can talk about the forgeries to a newsgroup that Davey claims
> PROVE that I was doing the forgeries, at a time I was IN Cuba. His answer
> to that? He claims the travel documents were "PHOTOSHOPPED." You can see
> they were NOT!
Quite frankly kenny, I don't give a shit. You have proven yourself to be a
liar here in record time, now you are showing us just how pathetic you truly
are.
The only thing about you that even comes close to interesting me is that I
was the one that has shown the news group just who you are. A liar,
pathetic, troll. For that I can take a few moments of pleasure, and then go
on to the next idiot who shows up.
Ron
krp
Uh yeah you kind of did. But what percentage would you give him now?
>> Feeling just a little shakey about it Ron? No you NEED to believe he is
> Not one bit.
Surte Ron, you have a visceral NEED to believe Moore is right about me.
If he isn't your world starts to collapse.
>> right about me or come face to face with the terrifying thought that your
>> emporer has NO clothing at all! Ron it takes somebody either
>> fundamentally stupid or fundamentally dishonest to hold up Moore's
>> BULLSHIT as the truth.
> Some of what he says is OBVIOUSLY accurate, proven so by you ken. As for
> the rest, I dont give enough of a dam about either of you to invest the
> time and energy necessary to research it all.
Like what?
>> He WHINES to you with claims that I "stalk" him - yet HE has photos of MY
>> house on his website. HE has a photo of ME on his website. HE has frantic
> If he ever said one thing to me ken I never saw it. What part of 'PLONK
> LIST' are you failing to understand?
Look at his website Ron. It stares right at you.
>> information trying to reach MY wife on his website, while claiming I am
>> doing that to him. Now Ron, baby, most "NORMAL" people would look at his
>> allegations about what I supposedly have done to HIM, and thenlook at the
>> things he has about ME on his website and conclude that he does
>> EVERYTHING
> After the less than a month you have been hanging around this news group
> kenny, its obvious that NEITHER of you is anything anywhere near normal.
I could say the same about you.
>> he accuses me of doing. Most "normal" people also can see that he NEVER
>> posts anything ON TOPIC in ANY newsgroup he posts in. Not here in ASCPS,
>> not in ADRU, not in soc.men, not in the Cuba newsgroup NOWHERE! Ask him
>> WHY he posts in the Cuba newsgroup. What is HIS connection to Cuba. My
>> wife is from Cuba. I have been to Cuba, his ONLY interest in it is to
>> stalk and harass me. BUT see what answer you get.
> I dont give a dam ken. What he writes about you on his web site, as far
> as I chose to read, was accurate. I know thats a crushing blow to your
> fragile ego ken, but the facts are even more plain than the nose on your
> face.
You just denied you said his stuff was accuirate and not you do it
again. What % is accurate and what is bullshit?
>>> (snip)
>>
>>>> Tell me Ron and the GENIUS of Usenet how do you explain that your
>>>> HERO - DAVID MOORE in ANY of his ID's "Freedom" Tip@cotse or as Percy
>>>> have NEVER posted ON TOPIC on ANY newsgroup? If you look at any of
>>>> them, soc.men, ascps, soc.culture.cuba, adru etc not even ONE POST in
>>>> the past years ON TOPIC! How do you explain that 100% of the posts
>>>> are attacks on me and NEVER on topic????? Oh I await the
>>>> rationalization on that one with baited breath.
>>
>>> I wouldn't know ken, I don't see his posts unless I go through google
>>> groups. While his posts may not have been on topic, as you claim, his
>>> web site has been quite accurate about you. Your posts on the other
>>> hand, while on topic at times, have been filled with misdirection and
>>> un-truths, just as his web site claims is your style. I have seen this
>>> for myself, long before I ever visited his web site. So, its not
>>> rationalization in any way ken, its observed fact. I know that its hard
>>> for you to deal with someone who verifies the facts as I have, but life
>>> is made up of these little disappointments.
>> His website is BULLSHIT! Ron I could say (and HAVE said) that YOUIR
>> posts
> Says you. Fact is ken, he's right about you in many ways. Sorry again
> for that crushing blow to your fragile ego, but there we have it. Are you
> right about him? Could be! Fact here is that I am sick of both of you,
> you are two of the most pathetic people I have ever heard of, and if I
> never see you post another message to any news group anywhere it will be
> just 15 seconds to dam soon.
Fine then quit answering both of us about each other. Deal with the
ISSUE of the charter for this group.
>> have been fileld with untruths, such as the discussion on Nebraska's
>> hiring policies on CASEWORKERS... The first post cited the section on
>> counsellors,
> I have pretty much been civil with you so far ken. That stops. You are
> an idiot if you think anyone who can actually read is going to fail to see
> through your lies any longer.
Calling somebody a "liar" and an "idiot" is NOT being civil Ron. You
have called me names from the start. I have yet to reciprocate.
>> you had to click on a link at the bottom of the page to get to
>> caseworkers, you could have done that and provided that link as you later
>> did. THEN when
> Maybe you had to, but my computer actually works quite well ken, and I
> dont have to. Maybe its time to upgrade that POS you use.
I didn't say yours didn't. I said YOU could have posed the actual link.
You posted a link that required clicking on a secondary link, you could have
posted that one and avoided the whole mess but you didn't. Given your
behavior since, I conclude it was deliberate and that you are a drama queen.
That you did it deliberately to create conflict.
The simple FACT is that my original point; "that case workers being
hired are not required to have a degree in any subject that prepares them to
perform abuse assessments" was met with your allegation that I was "lying"
about that. Regardless of how you attempt to tap dance when I finally shoook
the real link out of you, it said EXACTLY what I said it would. That while
they would "prefer" a degree in a mental health field ANY degree works.
When you saw my original point proven by YOUR OWN SOURCE you quickly went to
the listing for supervisors and tried to claim THAT covered case workers.
When I corrected you on that, again you called me a liar, and then quoted
part of the specs on training to further obfuscate the original issue. When
I called you on that you went balistic and then allied yourself with Mr.
Moore with your "REFLECTIONS."
>> confronted that the section you quoted supported what *I* originally said
>> and NOT what you said, you quoted a different section, the one related to
>> SUPERVISIORS and TRIED to claim THAT proved I was wrong. My original
>> claim
> Didnt claim anything ken, showed the facts. You cant deal with that,
> obviously, so please feel free to leave your head up you ass. After all
> this time you seem to have worn a space for it in your colon.
I can deal with the facts. The FACT is that my original point that new
hired for caseworkers can have a degree in ANYTHING, you claimed I was
lying, YOUR OWN SOURCE backs me NOt you!
>> was about case workers NOT supervisors. Then getting your ass kicked on
>> that you came back with TRAINING provisions that are NOT routinely
>> followed. When
> "NOT routinely followed", which of course is a belief you once again
> failed to support. Congratulations ken, you did that with the style and
> flair of a true feldman.
Prove that it IS routinely followed. You are making that claim. PROVE
IT.
>> I asked you to show us that they DO actually do the training you abruptly
>> refused to continue. So NO - Ron it is YOU with the integrity problem,
>> and
> My integrity is just fine ken. Undamaged, flourishing in fact. And every
> time I point out your falsehoods it gets even better.
Not with me and some others it is not Ron, and you are digging a deeper
hole for yourself.
>> suppoerting Moore and his website just cooks your goose even worse. I
>> have already shown the FALSE names on his site. Go head TRY to track down
>> that Baltimore lawyer. I have you the links on William Rainey.
> You aint shown shit. All you have said is prove he exists, or words to
> that effect. Try actually supporting a statement you make kenny, you
> might find it to be a refreshing change.
Prove the negative? More reasonable people would see the Will Rainey"
name and see the WIlliam Rainey Harper College just a few miles down the
road from where Moore lived and at least give reasonable doubnt in my favor.
Checking on whether somebody is a member of the Bar is easy. In this case a
simpel call to the Baltimore Bar association will show you if they have EVER
had an attorney by that name. Just incase he might be in some other county
in Maryland, a call to the Maryland Bar would answer it. I am saying that NO
SUCH PERSON has EVER been an attorney anwyhere in Maryland as far back as
records go. (About 200 years)
That you want to argue points so easily proved is beyond me Ron.
>>> The two of you have been hacking at each other for years now. Stalking,
>>> both on and off the internet, and you have gotten absolutely no where.
>>> Given that alone, as I said in another thread, its now kind of difficult
>>> to tell where one idiot starts and the other ends.
>> I have NEVER "stalked" the asshole on OR off the net. HE follows me,
>> NOT the reverse!
> Opinions are like assholes....
Ron everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are NOT
entitled to their own FACTS. It again is easy to see who posted first in
newsgroups like the Cuba group, or the Milwaukee group. He makes claims that
I was "SOLELY RESPONSIBLE" for the retromoderation of the Milwaukee
newsgroup, but not only do the archives posts of the moderators Ritz and
Greco lay the cause on MOORE and a couple of his cohorts, but MOORE formed
the MGLF. Milwaukee General Liberation Front to try to overcome the
moderation, which cost him an ISP who finally got fed up with his bullying.
It's all there and both Ritz and Greco are around somewhere to ask as is Mr.
O'COnnor and other victims of Moore.
>>> I don't see why the two of you don't meet somewhere at dawn, with
>>> pistols drawn, and just shoot it out.
>> Because Mr. Moore the ANONYMOUS is a "COWARD!" Let me give you an
>> example
> (snip)
>
> Thanks, no.
I see, your mind is made up and you refuse to be confused with the
facts.
> Even if you claimed it was covered in 24k gold you wouldn't support it.
>
>> Or we can talk about the forgeries to a newsgroup that Davey claims
>> PROVE that I was doing the forgeries, at a time I was IN Cuba. His answer
>> to that? He claims the travel documents were "PHOTOSHOPPED." You can see
>> they were NOT!
> Quite frankly kenny, I don't give a shit. You have proven yourself to be
> a liar here in record time, now you are showing us just how pathetic you
> truly are.
I'd say you are the liar here Ron.
> The only thing about you that even comes close to interesting me is that I
> was the one that has shown the news group just who you are. A liar,
> pathetic, troll. For that I can take a few moments of pleasure, and then
> go on to the next idiot who shows up.
A man who is truly a legend in his own mind. Would you think other more
neutral people might disagree and suggest that you proved more negative
about yourself?
Greegor
> [ ] Ron, you have a visceral NEED to believe Moore
> is right about me. If he isn't your world starts to collapse.
Yep.
But just wait dill the other hyenas start
to dance around you nipping at your heels.
krp wrote
> Deal with the ISSUE of the charter for this group.
Why would any of the system sucks want real reform?
They're all beneficiaries of the crappy status quo.
Greegor
Is his only issue Ken?
krp
> Why isn't Dave Moore commenting on the issues?
> Is his only issue Ken?
Greg you can track a dozen newsgroups for the past 8 years. In ALL of
that time, on ALL of the newsgroups not even ONE post having to do with the
chartered purpose of the group. 100% of his posts were accusations about me
or attacks on me. I post mostly on topic except when responding to Moore or
crap he's initiated.
krp
Well Greg as we can see they just believe Moore. It is apparent that
they blindly do that because they NEED to. It's very simple. Moore claims I
am a registered sex offender in both Florida and Wisconsin. To TOTALLY
destroy my credibility would only take seconds to check and then post a link
or information from the registry of either state. But both Ron and Kane are
going to RUN like a gazelle from that one. They KNOW the allegations are
bullshit and they do not want to see that there Emperor has NO clothing.
Don't expect a response in this lifetime.
Ron
You just don't get it do you ken.
All mr moore has done is provide information, YOU are the one that has
proven that information accurate. Not him.
I have not chosen to believe his word, I have observed that what he says
about you, in certain areas, is accurate. Not because of what he wrote
about you, but because of your own actions. YOU ken. Not moore.
Is moore a stalker? A space cadet? A monster from 20,000 fathoms? Maybe,
could be, possibly. I have not observed it, but I keep an open mind about
it. You on the other hand have taken the time and effort to PROVE what he
says about you. Not all for sure, but enough to make me sure that what he
has written about you is far more likely to be accurate than what you have
written about him.
Mr Moore is not to blame for your actions ken, you are. If you don't want
others taking what he says for truth then stop proving it IS truth.
Ron
krp
>> Well Greg as we can see they just believe Moore. It is apparent that
>> they blindly do that because they NEED to. It's very simple. Moore claims
>> I am a registered sex offender in both Florida and Wisconsin. To TOTALLY
>> destroy my credibility would only take seconds to check and then post a
>> link or information from the registry of either state. But both Ron and
>> Kane are going to RUN like a gazelle from that one. They KNOW the
>> allegations are bullshit and they do not want to see that there Emperor
>> has NO clothing. Don't expect a response in this lifetime.
>
> You just don't get it do you ken.
>
> All mr moore has done is provide information, YOU are the one that has
> proven that information accurate. Not him.
Glad to see you NOW claim Moore's claims about me being a registered sex
offender are "100% accurate" and you stake your credibility on the claims..
HAVE FUN Ron!
Ron
PLEASE! Show me where I said that his claims of you being a "registered sex
offender are "100% accurate"!
Christ ken, aren't the lies you have told already enough? Why add one more
to the pile? Just to make it smell even more than you have already have?
Ron
Ron
From: pang...@a-team.org
You are a TWIT sir!
Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Someone else sees your true colors!!!!!!
I think I'm going to CELEBRATE by sending people to your house to get a
free COMPUTER. Expect them SOON.
David Moore
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, "Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote:
After taking the time to read the "aboutkenpangborn" site, thoroughly, I
have come to the conclusion that I was indeed wrong about the spammers that
ken brought with him to the news group. My apologies to them.
One of my faults is that I am always willing to allow someone to prove
themselves, despite what is said by others about them. In this case the
individual that wrote and maintains the "aboutkenpangborn" site seems to
have kens number quite clearly. Nearly everything said on that site about
mr pangborn was proven by ken himself, here in this news group, before I
took the time to visit that web site. It was like reading a good novel for
the second time, one already knows the plot and the characters, but missed
some of the subtle interplay of the characters the first time through. It
was both interesting and entertaining.
As I said in another thread, it makes one wonder why gregg contacted this
individual and asked him to begin participating here. The only conclusion
that seems to make sense to me is that gregg was feeling overwhelmed by the
other posters here and decided to seek assistance from someone he saw as a
professional in the field, someone able to provide him with the substance of
facts that he was unable to provide for himself. Unfortunately gregg didn't
research this person very well, and brought into the news group someone who
was and is unable to support his claims and belief's any better than gregg
is.
That is a situation that usually I would find irritating, but in this case
it is amusing to me. The humor I find in this is that just like every other
member of what I call the Anti-CPS mob, mr pangborn uses misdirection,
deception, and outright lies as the basis of his posting style. Just as
claimed in the "aboutkenpangborn" site. That of course begs the question
"Why is it that those who oppose the CPS system here are never able to
support their claims?". Ken could be a clone of so many others who have
posted here, he is like watching someone looking at their own reflections in
multiple mirrors.
Once again my apologies to the individual(s) who followed mr pangborn into
this news group. You were right, I was wrong. I find it amazing that
people with ken's and greggs type of personality flaw find their way into
Usenet where those flaws can grow and flourish like flowers in a greenhouse.
I guess that even nuts need an outlet for their emotions.
RonLame, but you might find it interesting.Ron
Greegor
http://www.newsoftheweird.com/archive/nw061029.html
After a reporter for the Rochester (Minn.) Post-Bulletin noticed
similarities in expression between mayoral candidate Pat Carr and an
pseudonymous supporter who posted message after message of praise of
Carr on the newspaper's web site, Carr admitted that the "supporter"
was actually he, himself. Said Carr, "I stand by what I (wrote)."
[Washington Post, 10-4-06] [Star Tribune (Minneapolis)-AP, 8-29-06]
Greegor wrote:
> Google of NEWS MEDIA stories about false flag operations
>
> http://news.google.com/news?q=false%20flag%20operation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
>
> Background on false flag operations
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
> Political Campaigning
> In 2006, individuals practicing false flag behavior were discovered and
> "outed" in New Hampshire[2][3] and New Jersey[4] after blog comments
> claiming to be from supporters of a political candidate were traced to
> the IP address of paid staffers for that candidate's opponent.
krp
>>>> Well Greg as we can see they just believe Moore. It is apparent that
>>>> they blindly do that because they NEED to. It's very simple. Moore
>>>> claims I am a registered sex offender in both Florida and Wisconsin. To
>>>> TOTALLY destroy my credibility would only take seconds to check and
>>>> then post a link or information from the registry of either state. But
>>>> both Ron and Kane are going to RUN like a gazelle from that one. They
>>>> KNOW the allegations are bullshit and they do not want to see that
>>>> there Emperor has NO clothing. Don't expect a response in this
>>>> lifetime.
>>>
>>> You just don't get it do you ken.
>>>
>>> All mr moore has done is provide information, YOU are the one that has
>>> proven that information accurate. Not him.
>>
>> Glad to see you NOW claim Moore's claims about me being a registered sex
>> offender are "100% accurate" and you stake your credibility on the
>> claims..
>> HAVE FUN Ron!
> PLEASE! Show me where I said that his claims of you being a "registered
> sex offender are "100% accurate"!
You have FULLY endorsed Moore as 100% credible, Ron, that means 100% of his
allegations. Trying now to wiggle out of it? Maybe he's only 99.9999% right
in his allegations about me? You ignore the OBVIOUS bullshit. The "Will
Rainey" character, the FAKE lawyer who was supposed to be one of my
associates who became disgruntled with me. HOW MANY of his LIES do I have to
nail before you have ANY questions of his credibility Ron????
You know Ron, I have concluded that you either have the IQ of a Begonia or
you are malicious. Moore claims to be MY victim. He has made specific posts
in THIS newsgroup that I have "stalked" him the POOR POOR POOR POOR INNOCENT
VICTIM.. (DEEP CRYING HERE) That I have allegedly taken photos of HIS house
and harassed HIS WIFE and Children. YET, right in front of you on the index
page of his website, is a photo of MY house, and there are references of his
own HYSTERICAL attempts to reach MY wife with his shit. He CLAIMS to be in
regular contact with BOTH my ex wives (including the DEAD one) and ALL of my
children, especially my youngest.
Ron part of the REAL FACTS here is that Moore several years ago when my
youngest daughter was just 14 and riding horses competitively, tracked down
the barn where my daughter rode and stabled her horse. Moore called that bar
and "DEMANDED" to speak to my daughter, and claimed it was his "RIGHT" to do
so to "WARN" her about her father. Just as he claims it is his RIGHT and
DUTY to "WARN" people about me in every newsgroup in which I participate! I
think GOD has called him to this HOLY MISSION. Some Chicago kind of FATWAH!
He also has determined that it is his MISSION to WARN the Cuban government
about ME and my relations!
But Ron you have attached yourself to Moore! HAVE FUN!
krp
> Received today in my mailbox:
>
> From: pang...@a-team.org
>
> You are a TWIT sir!
>
> Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Someone else sees your true colors!!!!!!
>
> I think I'm going to CELEBRATE by sending people to your house to get a
> free COMPUTER. Expect them SOON.
>
> David Moore
Well Ron - like the MORONS in Alt. Atheism apparently you lack the
intelligence to spot a FORGERY . NO such message came from me OR,. from
that address. But thanks for proving what I had thought about you. You just
ain't the sharpest tack in the box. You're a FOOL!
Ron
>
> "Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:HxVph.175771$gl2.1...@newsfe16.lga...
>
>>>>> Well Greg as we can see they just believe Moore. It is apparent
>>>>> that they blindly do that because they NEED to. It's very simple.
>>>>> Moore claims I am a registered sex offender in both Florida and
>>>>> Wisconsin. To TOTALLY destroy my credibility would only take seconds
>>>>> to check and then post a link or information from the registry of
>>>>> either state. But both Ron and Kane are going to RUN like a gazelle
>>>>> from that one. They KNOW the allegations are bullshit and they do not
>>>>> want to see that there Emperor has NO clothing. Don't expect a
>>>>> response in this lifetime.
>>>>
>>>> You just don't get it do you ken.
>>>>
>>>> All mr moore has done is provide information, YOU are the one that has
>>>> proven that information accurate. Not him.
>>>
>>> Glad to see you NOW claim Moore's claims about me being a registered sex
>>> offender are "100% accurate" and you stake your credibility on the
>>> claims..
>>> HAVE FUN Ron!
>
>> PLEASE! Show me where I said that his claims of you being a "registered
>> sex offender are "100% accurate"!
>
> You have FULLY endorsed Moore as 100% credible, Ron,
(snip the stupidity)
Another lie kenny? Can you stop? Is it an uncontrollable impulse you
suffer with? Ya know, there are treatments and therapists for this problem,
maybe you should look into them. Compulsive lying is a serious mental
disease ken, one that without serious treatment will only get you into
equally serious trouble.
Ron
krp
The water is over your head Ron. Do you REALLY think you are scoring points
with anyone not on one side or the other here??
0:->
So which poster are you suggesting uses such tactics, Greg, Michael, or
Ken?
0:-]
krp
DAVID MOORE!
And he finds IDIOTS who will swallow his shit whole and think it is STEAK!
0:->
Your proof being?
Moore has shown your posts, they are accessible. You did in fact do as
he accused in some instances. I cannot check them all, but I do use your
posting here and now to these groups as evidence of why I think you are
a fraud and liar.
> And he finds IDIOTS who will swallow his shit whole and think it is STEAK!
Nope. Some of what he posted is provable, and I did so to my
satisfaction. Some is borderline, some there is no way to insure it
isn't faked. YOUR behavior is more what I am looking at, Ken...here and
now.
I find it odd that both Ron and I have expressed our limitation and
reservations concerning Moore's material.
And you chose to ignore that and make ranting claims we are fully
accepting Moore's claims. Prove it.
We simply haven't fully rejected it, and Ron stated, and I concur, that
your posting, your behavior here, your lying over the stupidest
things...like claim we are "100%" accepting of him and rejecting of you,
based solely on Moore's posts, proves your lack of credibility.
Don't lie, and that won't happen. Don't claim we did something we didn't.
Answer questions as they are asked without reworking them into something
we did not say.
It's really easy. All you have to do is stop lying yourself.
Or we can presume Moore is correct to some degree, and sufficiently
about matters that are significant to trust issues.
0:->
Greegor
> The water is over your head Ron. Do you
> REALLY think you are scoring points with
> anyone not on one side or the other here??
Ron, you posted that Ken was a liar, but you
did not say specifically about what.
Just because you don't LIKE something somebody
says does not make them a liar, and your
lack of specifics would indicate you know that.
Why keep throwing around vague assertions
that somebody is a liar? Why aren't you
pointing out the lie specifically?