Kenneth Pangborn's Harassment of Michael Newton

Defamation of character--Michael Newton

Michael Newton is another person whom Pangborn attacked for months, after Mr. Newton called Ken on several of his lies.

Following is a chronology of a series of malicious lies concerning Mr. Newton. As you can see, Ken demonstrates the same pattern... telling several different lies about a particular subject, often contradictory to one another, then attempting to "backpedal" and change history when he is caught in his lies.

DAY 1: The original lie:

Re: Moore is back - POOL - Place your bets
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>
Date:1998/08/03
Forums: soc.men, alt.psychology, sci.psychology., psychotherapy,
alt.abuse.recovery

Mikey, why don't you tell the folks about yourself? The organizations
you support, the HYSTERIA about chidl [sic] abuse, that you consider
yourself to be a "SURVIVOR" and how you rant and rave on the net
about it?

********

SAME DAY: The still-unanswered challenge:

Re: Moore is back - POOL - Place your bets
Author: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>
Date:1998/08/03
Forums: soc.men, alt.psychology, sci.psychology., psychotherapy,
alt.abuse.recovery

As far as "chidl abuse," assuming that the illiterate Kenman means
"child abuse," the only "HYSTERIA" I'm aware of is the bizarre and
unfounded claim of a vast, conspiratorial "witch hunt" propagated
(but never documented) by professional liars like Kenny. I have never
at any time claimed to be a "survivor" of child abuse or anything
else (except, so far, of life itself), and I defy the all-knowing
Pangman to support this lie with one iota of evidence.

********

DAY 2: The $5,000 reward offer:

Re: Kenny's classics, back by popular demand
Author: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>
Date:1998/08/04
Forums: alt.psychology, soc.men, alt.abuse.recovery,
sci.psychology.psychotherapy

Speaking of credibility, Kenny, are you ready to produce one tiny
shred of documentation for your bizarre, demented statement here that
I have claimed to be a child-abuse survivor? One little quote from any
forum, Pangster, and I will be out of your hair forever, with a nice
fat donation to FRONT on my way out the door. Shall we say $5,000?
Good. I'll even throw in an apology for pointing out the obvious: that
you're an illiterate, dishonest windbag.

Of course, the proof will have to be a verifiable quote from Yours
Truly, not some tricked-up bullshit from the falsie rumor mill, or
some weird fantasy plucked from your anus. Should be no problem,
right, Kenny? I mean, you claim to be an expert on the content of my
published writings; every speech I've ever made on child abuse (or any
other topic) is available on tape; my posts on this (and any other
subject) can be found by checking out my loginid on dejanews.

So, how about it Kenny? The ball's in your court, and we all know how
you love to dribble. Is there anything behind all that hot, rancid air
you keep spewing out, or are you ready to admit the kind of low-life,
malicious, dim-witted weasel that you are?

Last chance, Pangkake. Your boyfriends want to believe in you. They
*need* to believe in you. Come on and show us what an honest, upright,
macho man you are.

It's funny, though: from where I sit, you still look like fifty pounds
of bullshit in a leaky ten-pound bag.

Your public's waiting, Kenny. Time to show your cards or fold.

********

DAY 3: Idiot Kenny plays dumb:

Re: Stacy WILL IGNORE Kenny's spelling, if she's merciful
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>
Date: 1998/08/05
Forum: alt.psychology

>From: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>

>And speaking of lies, you miserable weasel, where's the proof for your false
> claim that I claim to be a victim of child abuse?
> Five grand not enough to get you off your flabby rump?

Send me the $5 grand....................... I'll move off my butt.
What are you talking about?

********

DAY 5: The biggest lie ever & the challenge repeated:

Re: "Lis" of a 9-year old
Author: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>
Date:1998/08/07
Forums: milw.general, soc.men

Pangk wrote:

> I may have made errors of fact, which I usually admit when shown I was wrong.

Now there's a whopper with extra cheese! Once again, Kenny, the $5,000
question: When will we see the documentation for your lies about my
alleged claims of child abuse? I'm guessing it's around the twelfth of
never.

********

DAY 8: Idiot Kenny cites anonymous, invisible sources, still without
proof:

Re: Pangk's cowardly hypocrisy
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>
Date:1998/08/10
Forum: alt.psychology

> From: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>

>> Newton, I have been asked to stop responding to your hysteria.

>Asked by whom, Kenny? Mighty convenient of "them" to silence you before you are forced to admit one of your malicious lies.

Sorry Michael, I have been reminded of something very valuable, when I
stop to go into the mud and wrestle with a pig, *I* get coveed [sic]
in mud and the PIG loves it. Since you so DESPERATELY seem to need the
attention, you'll just have to find it elsewhere. Sadly none of the
other folks who recall you voicifeous [sic] claims about your status
as a "SURVIVOR" want to jump in the mud either since they have all
noticed that you seem to OBSESS and post dozens of your ATTACK posts a
day in a bunch of newsgroups.

********

DAY 17: More phony sources; WITCHHNT mentioned for the first time:

Re: none
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>
Date:1998/08/19
Forum: alt.mens-rights

Michael SEVERAL people have FORWARDED your posts from Witchunt [sic]
to me. Now, perhaps you have enemies there like I have here who feel
justified in altering your posts.

********

DAY 20: Idiot Kenny tries to weasel out, still citing mythical
sources:

Subject: Re: Hugh Blodget (was SPECIAL REPORT)
Date:1998/08/22
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>

>From: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>

>"Honorable" and "real," Ken? With those words in mind, I'm tempted
> to ask, once again, when you are going to document your various
> flagrant and contradictory lies about me...but of course, we both known
> the answer to that one: on the twelfth of never.

Newton, other people who saw the insinuations from you on WH long ago
decline to come forward and be deluged in your hate campaign. They
see your crap with me and say "NO THANKS!"

>When you discuss honor and truth, you are *truly* speaking from ignorance.

Even IF we assume, for discussion that I was wrong about you claiming
or suggesting at one point to be a survivor of abuse, your recation
[sic] has been over the top. Reminds me of the story of a man in group
therapy, and the facilitator saying.. "Michael, you sound angery
[sic]." And Michael responding.. " I AM NOT ANGRY!" Pounding his fist
through the glass table. Coulda [sic] fooled me Mikey! What is the
huge deal of being or not being an abuse survivor? Would you be
ashamed if you were?

**********

DAY 24: Idiot Kenny alters his lie and shifts the burden of proof to
Dean Tong, as usual:

Re: Hugh Blodget (was SPECIAL REPORT)
Author: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>
Date: 1998/08/26
Forum: alt.psychology

Now let's see, MY "lies" about you...

1. That you said you were either a "survivor" of childhood abuse or
affiliated with a "survivor organization."

Okay you want specific [sic]... Dean Tong copied me on YOUR WH post to
Eileen King as I recall.

********

DAY 129: Idiot Kenny tries to excuse his lie, then repeats it:

Michael newton [sic] FICTION author!!!!!! (and a BAD one at that)
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>
Date: 1998/12/14
Forum: alt.psychology

Michael Newton wrote:

>For those of you arriving late at the scene of the crime, some of his other whoppers with cheese, directed specifically to me over the past six months, include:

>1) His claim that I consider myself "a chidl abuse SURVIVOR!!!" and have "raved about it all over the web."

A little hyperbole there Mikey, I said you made that claim on the
Witchunt [sic] list.

********

DAY 167: Idiot Kenny reposts the original lie yet again:

Subject: Re: Kenny Pangborn, New Age mystic....
Date: 21 Jan 1999 17:26:40 GMT
From: pangk@aol.com (PangK)
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: soc.men

And then tell us all again how you were ABUSED as a child!!!!!!!!!!

********
DAY 379: Idiot Kenny staggers back to his lying revision of history:

Subject: Re: Stacy's dead "rape" horse
Date: 21 Aug 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: wi.general
X-Admin: news@aol.com

As to Newton, I said and stand by the fact [sic] that HE [sic] had
posted on
the old witchhnt [sic] list that he was EITHER a survivor or a member
of a survivor
group.

*******

DAY 457: Idiot Kenny rewrites history again with a fabricated quote:

Subject: Re: WAR DECLARED I'll admit the truth
Date: 07 Nov 1999 13:12:58 GMT
From: pangk@aol.com (PangK)
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy

>From: Michael Newton eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net

>Would that be anything like the still-missing "many posts" where I
>allegedly claim to be a "chidl abuse SURVIVOR," Cyberscum?

NO It would NOT Mikey. Since that statement is also one of your
alterations. You OMIT the parts you can't answer. Which is because you
are fundamentally dishonest,.

That satatement [sic] said; [sic] "Mikey why don't you tell the people
who you are, that you have claimed to be EITHER (emphasis added) a
child abuse survivor OR a member of a survivor group."

********

But, as we saw on DAY 1, his actual statement was:

Re: Moore is back - POOL - Place your bets
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>
Date:1998/08/03
Forums: soc.men, alt.psychology, sci.psychology., psychotherapy,
alt.abuse.recovery

*******

DAY 509: Idiot Kenny fumbles an attempt to modify and mitigate his
lie, quibbling over different kinds of abuse as if his original
fabrication had any validity.

Subject: Re: The AMAZING Mikey Newton
Date:1999/12/29
Author: PangK <pangk@aol.com>
Newsgroups: wi.general, soc.men, alt.mens-rights, alt.usenet.kooks

You lying piece of SHIT! A sad sack FORMER, couldn't cut it JUNIOR
HIGH SCHOOL GRAMMAR TEACHER now HACK writer of dime crime novels! I
never said SHIT about your parents committing INCEST! I merely said
that you could come forward about your OWN claims about "CHILD
ABUSE" [sic] Maybe CLHID [sic] would make you HAPPY Captain
SPELLPECKER? Or is incest the
ONLY form of child abuse? Come on Mikey. Your hyperbole and VICTIM
role after TWO YEARS is wearing thin pansyboy [sic]. POOR MIKEY! Can't
handle it, eh?

Following is a great post which sums up Ken Pangborn rather nicely.

Path: dialsprint.net!sprintlink.com!mci.com!newsadm
From: Michael Newton <eyeofnewt@worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: soc.men, alt.psychology, milw.general
Subject: Will the REAL Kenneth Pangborn please stand up?
Date: 8 Aug 1998 19:38:49 GMT
Lines: 139
Message-ID: <35CC653F.697D@worldnet.att.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.66.6.78
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Macintosh; I; PPC)
Xref: dialsprint.net soc.men:284852 alt.psychology:24200 milw.general:35713

Kenneth Pangborn of Milwaukee is, by his own account, a courageous man devoted to an endless quest for justice, a champion of truth who values masculine honor above all else. His word is his bond. He is an expert on the law, on psychology, on marriage, and sundry other weighty matters, whose pronouncements must not be questioned. More than anything, however, he will have no truck with lies (though "viscious" lies are often told about him, normally by raving, ranting psychopaths who masturbate around the clock in murky dungeons). He is legendary for his messages demanding that his critics PROVE!!!! each
statement with supporting footnotes, professional credentials, and personal histories dating back to the womb. We are assured by Pangborn, in no uncertain terms, that each and every statement made by his opponents constitute a pack of RAVING PSYCHOPATHIC LIES!!!, while he in turn speaks nothing but the TRUTH!!!

If Kenneth Pangborn ever makes an error, he assures us, he will be the first one to admit it, instantly and proudly. Such is manhood. Anyone who fails to follow his sterling example in that regard is, once again, a masturbating "sociopath" or "psycho-pup" who is under strict orders (from Kenneth) to HANG YOUR HEAD IN SHAME!!!!

So far, so good. If all of that were true, I'd want him on my side, regardless of the issue under discussion. But what becomes of Pangborn's image when we judge him by his own exacting standards? How does he measure up beside his own "yardstcik"?

I'm glad you asked.

Roughly one week ago, Pangborn posted an allegation that I have claimed to be a "SURVIVOR!!!" of childhood sexual abuse--presumably by my parents, although he was vague on the details. Nor did I simply make this claim on one occasion, Kenneth says: in fact, he assured his audience that I have RANTED AND RAVED!!! the claim "all over usenet," in my various books ... who knows where all, in fact? (Again, he was a trifle vague.)

With that post, Pangborn made two separate but equally deadly mistakes: he not only lied _about_ me (and, presumably, my deceased parents), but, witless idiot that he is, he also directed the lie directly _to_ me, with a challenge to explain myself.

The rest is history (or "hysturie," in Ken-Speak). I responded to Pangborn and called him on his lie, offering $5,000 tax-free dollars to his favorite charity (himself) in exchange for one legitimate, independently verifiable quotation of mine from any source on earth, spanning my 47 years of existence, that would support his claim. It sounded like a pretty good deal to me ... assuming Pangborn wasn't lying through his teeth.

But there's the rub.

How did the man of HONOR!!! and champion of TRUTH!!! respond? Thus far, Pangborn has--

1) Ignored my demand for documentation of his claim while posting on various irrelevant matters (mostly misspelled);

2) Denounced me as (you guessed it!) a "sociopath" and "psycho-pup" for daring to question his veracity;

3) Inquired repeatedly about the size of my "weenie";

4) Asked (again, repeatedly and with great interest) about my masturbatory habits;

5) Suggested that I seek a sex-change operation, since anyone who questions Ken "hates being a man";

6) Attempted to involve third parties, urging them to "dig up a post" that will prove his case (since he, himself, has no time for such trifles as obeying his own rules of conduct); and

7) Finally, when all else fails, compounded his lie by posting a bizarre response that he "doesn't keep" my "little posts," and
therefore cannot document his claim. I should, apparently, accept his unsupported word--and thus, ironically, adopt one of the very "false memories" Pangborn claims to despise.

Along the way, of course, this paragon of TRUTH!!! and HONOR!!! fabricated yet another lie, more preposterous than the first ... and again, abject moron that he is, served it up to me with a challenge to respond. (Apparently, from his treatment of others I've witnessed, this isn't simply foolishness; it's standard Pangborn procedure.) The new lie: that I am (or once was) somehow allied with VOCAL and the FMSF in defense of accused child molesters on the WITCHHNT listserv, but was thrown off by my "good friend" Jonathan Harris because--that's right, folks--I was "too abusive" in _support_ of pedophiles, against the evil CHILD SAVERS!!!! (who, in Pangborn's topsy-turvy mind, somehow control the FMSF listserv: _deeply_ strange).

The word "delusional" comes to mind. Of course, Pangborn can't spell it, so let's move on.

Kenneth likes to have it both ways, you see, two-faced weasel that he is. One drooling mouth tells you I "villify" champions of justice like the VOCAL/FMSF crowd and condemns me for attacking them with "scorrilus" and "viscious" posts; the other blow-hole insists that I _support_ the same people so ardently that they simply can't stand to have me around. (Again, deeply strange ... but that's Pangborn for you: living proof of Dan Quayle's malapropism that "It's terrible when you lose your mind.")

And through it all, of course, Pangborn is simultaneously challenging other contestants to PROVE!!! their every critical statement, calling them PSYCHOPATHIC LIARS!!! and asking if they HAVE NO SHAME????? etc., etc., ad nauseum.

And I have to ask myself: If I've caught Pangborn lying about me, to my face, several times in the space of one week ... what has he been lying to the rest of you about for lo, these many, dreary years? His legal expertise? His "90% ass-kicking" record in court? The nonprofit status of FRONT? His commitment to justice? His attitude on child molestation? Indeed, can anyone trust _anything_ he says?

We see him attack Anastasia Alexander's college degree with claims that "dozens of (unnamed, absent, silent) people" have called Tulane University and questioned the "registrat." Kenneth even provides the dialogue, complete with "registrat" laugh track. Is he telling the truth? Beats hell out of me, but I wouldn't trust him if he told me two plus two equals four. (Besides, he'd misspell it.)

Kenneth attacks David Moore, POSTING!!!! at length about some military discharge, telling anyone who'll listen: "I HAVE THE DIVORCE PAPERS!!!!! DON'T MAKE ME USE THEM!!!!" Maybe. Of course, Joe McCarthy had a list of names in his hand, too ... or was a blank piece of paper? One thing is certain: Pangborn had nothing to back up the lies he told about me, in this same forum ... so, I'm inclined to think he just may, possibly, be lying again...and again...and again.

Don't get me wrong. I couldn't care less who went to Tulane or joined the Marine Corps. The bottom line, for me, is this: Ken Pangborn lies. He lies habitually, maliciously, continually, abusively. He lies like other people breathe...and much more often, I suspect, than he bathes.

Kenneth Pangborn, ladies and gentlemen: hypocrite, malicious liar, and deliberate fraud. Coming soon to a sewer near you, with more of the same old crap.