If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
Who is this ""Coalition"" really?
Is it one guy pretending to be many? On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On 17 Feb 2007 08:27:32 -0800, "Greegor" wrote:
Who is this ""Coalition"" really? Is it one guy pretending to be many? Dennis Deakin? Michael? On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. Looks like your puppy is taking a whippin' Greg. Think he'll thank you for your introduction to me? R R R RRR R R R RR R He's the same kind of fool and liar you are, Greg. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
"Greegor" wrote in message oups.com... Who is this ""Coalition"" really? Is it one guy pretending to be many? Does it really matter gregg? We ran that pathetic dolt kenny out of here, and the news group is the better for it. If he feels the need to sneak back in under another name that's up to him, but at least he will know that we exposed him for the fraud he is the first time and that we can do it again. My guess, if I were forced to give one, is that they are a coalition of individuals that have been subjected to kenny's inept posts before, and have no wish to be forced to deal with him again. Ron On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 0:- wrote:
On 17 Feb 2007 08:27:32 -0800, "Greegor" wrote: Who is this ""Coalition"" really? Is it one guy pretending to be many? Dennis Deakin? Michael? On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. Looks like your puppy is taking a whippin' Greg. Think he'll thank you for your introduction to me? R R R RRR R R R RR R He's the same kind of fool and liar you are, Greg. Hihihi! Still foaming at the mouth, Kane? He whipped your ass at debating so bad you had to concede! Doan |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:56:11 -0800, Doan wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 0:- wrote: On 17 Feb 2007 08:27:32 -0800, "Greegor" wrote: Who is this ""Coalition"" really? Is it one guy pretending to be many? Dennis Deakin? Michael? On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. Looks like your puppy is taking a whippin' Greg. Think he'll thank you for your introduction to me? R R R RRR R R R RR R He's the same kind of fool and liar you are, Greg. Hihihi! Still foaming at the mouth, Kane? Foaming? That's your game, monkeyboy. He whipped your ass at debating so bad you had to concede! R R R R R post the proof, dummy. It got tired of him dodging the study by refusing to debate anything but the title of a REVIEW, and conceded....rrrrr..just what I had said in the first place. That the title was not consistent with the study OR even the article. I'm still waiting for him to answer my challenge....what about the study, Doan? He ran. I asked him to provide proof for his claim that there was scientific evidence that children that are not spanked are at a higher risk of developing "sociopathy." HE RAN. I later asked YOU to then defend his claim if you think he won. AND DOAN........YOU RAN FASTER THAN HIM. Doan If anyone has missed what a liar, a proven liar you are, and have read the exchange between you pet dog Ken, this would end any doubts of theirs you ARE a liar. 0;] |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:56:11 -0800, Doan wrote: On Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 0:- wrote: On 17 Feb 2007 08:27:32 -0800, "Greegor" wrote: Who is this ""Coalition"" really? Is it one guy pretending to be many? Dennis Deakin? Michael? On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. Looks like your puppy is taking a whippin' Greg. Think he'll thank you for your introduction to me? R R R RRR R R R RR R He's the same kind of fool and liar you are, Greg. Hihihi! Still foaming at the mouth, Kane? Foaming? That's your game, monkeyboy. Hihihi! He whipped your ass at debating so bad you had to concede! R R R R R post the proof, dummy. It got tired of him dodging the study by refusing to debate anything but the title of a REVIEW, and conceded....rrrrr..just what I had said in the first place. That the title was not consistent with the study OR even the article. Hihihi! You CONCEDED! You LOST! I'm still waiting for him to answer my challenge....what about the study, Doan? He ran. Hihihi! You lost! End of story. I asked him to provide proof for his claim that there was scientific evidence that children that are not spanked are at a higher risk of developing "sociopathy." HE RAN. I later asked YOU to then defend his claim if you think he won. AND DOAN........YOU RAN FASTER THAN HIM. Hihihi! He whipped your ass. You lost! Doan If anyone has missed what a liar, a proven liar you are, and have read the exchange between you pet dog Ken, this would end any doubts of theirs you ARE a liar. Hihihi! You are a LOSER! 0;] |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:22:18 -0800, Doan wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:56:11 -0800, Doan wrote: On Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 0:- wrote: On 17 Feb 2007 08:27:32 -0800, "Greegor" wrote: Who is this ""Coalition"" really? Is it one guy pretending to be many? Dennis Deakin? Michael? On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. Looks like your puppy is taking a whippin' Greg. Think he'll thank you for your introduction to me? R R R RRR R R R RR R He's the same kind of fool and liar you are, Greg. Hihihi! Still foaming at the mouth, Kane? Foaming? That's your game, monkeyboy. Hihihi! He whipped your ass at debating so bad you had to concede! R R R R R post the proof, dummy. It got tired of him dodging the study by refusing to debate anything but the title of a REVIEW, and conceded....rrrrr..just what I had said in the first place. That the title was not consistent with the study OR even the article. Hihihi! You CONCEDED! What did I "CONCEDED," Doan? You LOST! Show your proof. Don't leave out the link and the full quote, monkeyboy. I'm still waiting for him to answer my challenge....what about the study, Doan? He ran. Hihihi! You lost! End of story. Well it's the end of the story all right, as Ken ran, and so did YOU when I asked YOU to defend HIS claim about non-spanked children, coward. I asked him to provide proof for his claim that there was scientific evidence that children that are not spanked are at a higher risk of developing "sociopathy." HE RAN. I later asked YOU to then defend his claim if you think he won. AND DOAN........YOU RAN FASTER THAN HIM. Hihihi! He whipped your ass. You lost! You are lying again, little coward. Doan If anyone has missed what a liar, a proven liar you are, and have read the exchange between you pet dog Ken, this would end any doubts of theirs you ARE a liar. Hihihi! You are a LOSER! You are the loser because you are a coward. Show what he won, Doan. Go ahead, provide something besides your usual hysterical screeching and dancing monkeyboy act. R R R R R RRR 0;] 0;-] |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:22:18 -0800, Doan wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:56:11 -0800, Doan wrote: On Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 0:- wrote: On 17 Feb 2007 08:27:32 -0800, "Greegor" wrote: Who is this ""Coalition"" really? Is it one guy pretending to be many? Dennis Deakin? Michael? On Feb 16, 3:47 pm, Anonyma wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm). Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. On Feb 16, 3:52 pm, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 23, 3:52 pm) Last month Ken Pangborn approached a member of the Coalition and basically begged us to stop humiliating him on usenet. He agreed to privately retract some of his lies about others, and to cease his usenet activity. On the first item, he has only partially complied....sending out a couple of e-mails with vague "my source may have lied to me" excuses. On the second, he is now breaking his vow of silence in soc.culture.cuba. Looks like your puppy is taking a whippin' Greg. Think he'll thank you for your introduction to me? R R R RRR R R R RR R He's the same kind of fool and liar you are, Greg. Hihihi! Still foaming at the mouth, Kane? Foaming? That's your game, monkeyboy. Hihihi! He whipped your ass at debating so bad you had to concede! R R R R R post the proof, dummy. It got tired of him dodging the study by refusing to debate anything but the title of a REVIEW, and conceded....rrrrr..just what I had said in the first place. That the title was not consistent with the study OR even the article. Hihihi! You CONCEDED! What did I "CONCEDED," Doan? The causal claim, STUPID! You LOST! Show your proof. Don't leave out the link and the full quote, monkeyboy. Hihihi! It's in the "archive", "never-spanked" Kane9! I'm still waiting for him to answer my challenge....what about the study, Doan? He ran. Hihihi! You lost! End of story. Well it's the end of the story all right, as Ken ran, and so did YOU when I asked YOU to defend HIS claim about non-spanked children, coward. Hihihi! LOSER! I asked him to provide proof for his claim that there was scientific evidence that children that are not spanked are at a higher risk of developing "sociopathy." HE RAN. I later asked YOU to then defend his claim if you think he won. AND DOAN........YOU RAN FASTER THAN HIM. Hihihi! He whipped your ass. You lost! You are lying again, little coward. The proven LIAR is You. Hihihi! Doan If anyone has missed what a liar, a proven liar you are, and have read the exchange between you pet dog Ken, this would end any doubts of theirs you ARE a liar. Hihihi! You are a LOSER! You are the loser because you are a coward. You are the coward that hide behind a nym! Show what he won, Doan. Go ahead, provide something besides your usual hysterical screeching and dancing monkeyboy act. R R R R R RRR You CONCEDED! End of STORY, STUPID! 0;] 0;-] |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On Feb 20, 4:14 pm, Doan wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote: ....snip... responded to in another post... You are the loser because you are a coward. You are the coward that hide behind a nym! What is your full name, 'Doan?' Fern? Observer? And now many others? R R R R R R R You are still a coward, a liar, and a cheat, Doan. Everyone can see it plainly and the ONLY support you get is from other liars like yourself, Ken Pangborn, Greg Hansen and similar lowlifes. You are a joke, Doan. Your family would puke if they could see what you do here with your lies and dodges. Tsk. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Pangborn reneges on word
On Feb 21, 2:09 am, " KRP" wrote:
"0:-]" wrote in message ... Well it's the end of the story all right, as Ken ran, and so did YOU when I asked YOU to defend HIS claim about non-spanked children, coward. Man - you are a real badass behind people's backs aren't ya Kane? "Behind people's backs?" What a weird claim or accusation to make in a public forum, Kennyboy. What precisely did I say or do "behind" your "back?"" You were the one forced to concede, Forced? R R RR R after a few months of insisting on arguing the title of the article with you BY YOU, and refusing to move on, BY YOU, I simply restated what I already had, that the title did NOT reflect the article content, nor that of the study it was about. I "conceded" what I had already agreed to, liar. not just that the title was misleading I had been saying that for some time before I "conceded." but that your "study" wasn't really a "study" as such. Oh? I said that, did I? Where, exactly? You are really incapable of admitting you have been wrong. About? There's always a catch, isn't there? In Kennyworld? Always an out by which you can claim victory! Well, it's hard to admit defeat when one has not been defeated, but you go ahead and try to claim you won something, Kennyboy. Just because I backed off You ran from your own claims when I confronted you with them and asked you to provide proof. Usenet participation (largely with my psycho stalker and your HERO) doesn't mean I surrendered to a buffoon blow hard like you. Get over yourself and your megalomania. Projection, Kennyboy. You are blowing hard NOW, instead of answering the challenges YOU created with your buffoon claims about the internation STUDY, which is exactly what it was, and your bull**** claim that you knew of evidence, scientific evidence, that children that are not spanked are at risk of developmental "sociopathy." And you are still blowing hard, stupid. I note the first thing you did was remove ALL relevant addressed, Kennyboy. Why is that I wonder? You stripped the spanking, foster parent, and dad's rights....tsk. Why am I not surprized. R R R R R R You have no honor. No ethics. Nothing but bull****. And everyone can see it. So then. You were going to show us how and what I conceded, Kenny? And that there still is evidence of this sociopathy in unspanked children? We are waiting. Kane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
reading | Stephanie | General | 65 | November 28th 05 07:23 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | November 18th 05 05:35 AM |
Teaching a 5 yo to read | Jim | General | 42 | May 2nd 05 02:59 AM |
A praise report. PRAISE GOD!!! | [email protected] | Solutions | 8 | April 23rd 05 02:44 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | September 29th 04 05:17 AM |