kenpangborn@aol.com (Kenpangborn) wrote in message

From:

I guess Ken couldn't stand to look at this simple, straightforward,
"Yes or No" question about his beliefs, so he cut it out and replaced
it with:

1mb later:

Actually, my post was a couple of kilobytes that I'm sure Ken couldn't
manage to read, much less count. Ken and John Gault both mock the
length of my responses, instead preferring short, meaningless
responses such as, "NOBODY WILL PLAY WITH YOU!" or "Oh you are back
Hello NUTSO!" It's true, I usually have a lot to say in response to
Ken. He gives me so much fodder to disprove and mock, it's often
difficult to decide where to begin.

It is true that you and Gault (and all your other associates)
have given up on debating the issues.

No we are all being greatly amused watching you beat
the same old dead horse into dust EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK!

Well at least I'm amusing. Ken's preferred "dead horse" to beat is how
I'm "beating a dead horse". That's very postmodern, but still
intensely boring. If Ken actually answered the questions I posed
instead of whining and crying, we could move the discussion forward
together. Ken can pretend that he doesn't want to answer them all he
wants. Ken can continue to call me insane as he ducks the issues.
That's his prerogative. However, I think it's clear that there is only
one thing that keeps Ken from answering. He'd have to admit he was
wrong AGAIN, and that has become unconscionable after resisting this
long and this hard.

Are you MAD that Kenny (me) won't come out and PLAY with
you little boy?

This seems like a strange question, since Ken continues to "come out
and play" even though he once vowed to ignore my subsequent posts.
However, I'll interpret this as, "How do you (J. P.) feel about this
discussion and Ken's inability to address the logical issues." I feel
sadness that Ken is unable to face up to his inability to tell the
truth and start to get help. I feel pity that Ken is a habitual coward
and that he has no testicles. I feel regret that I have not managed to
help Ken face his fear of simple questions. I hope that Ken is
satisfied with my response to his simple question. It helps that the
truth is on my side and that I actually think about what I say. That a
big difference between me and Ken.

I'm not sure why you're so proud of your total and
complete capitulation after you originally proclaimed
that I was "so COMPLETELY full of *****"

Youg you ARE TOTALLY FOS,

Because I have proven Ken wrong and he fears to answer my questions, I
am FOS; more of his standard "ignorance is strength" argument.

your insane ranting and raving
MONTH after MONTH when nobody will PLAY with you any more
proves that beyond debate.

I guess that "beyond debate" is meant to hearken back to the last Ken
Pangborn and/or John Gault Untruth (#7) that I posted. There Ken had
"PROVED" that SCUD missiles were fired at Kuwait in the Second Gulf
War. Ken declared that there was "no question" that this was true. I
guess his standard for what is "proven" and "beyond debate" is very
low.
http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=2ac8b827.0310271535.c9d7cb7%40posting.google.com

Keep on, I am sure you will and AS you do, I will
continue to point out that you ARE certifiably INSANE!

Oh yes. I'm sure that Ken will continue to call me insane. It's the
only paltry defense he's got left. His last measurable standard for
judging insanity last one proved that Ken and John Gault were insane
and that I was not. Oops, another stupid mistake on Ken's part, I
guess (and another thing he'd rather forget about ever saying).

http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=2ac8b827.0310251258.3436964a%40posting.google.com

And, naturally, as Ken continues to simply say that I'm insane with no
reason or proof, I'll continue to post more Ken Pangborn/John Gault
Untruths and back them up with evidence. That's another difference
between the two of us.