Ken's Quackery

"The only thing worse than a liar is a liar that's also a hypocrite!"
Tennessee Williams, US dramatist.

"If it walks like a duck...."

Charges and accusations made by Ken Mitchell using one or more of his dozens of identities are SO easily refuted that often they are simply ignored by those familiar with his rants. Those regularly online in the alt.freemasonry newsgroup will have read the same rants so many times that his attempted message becomes stultifying and people become unresponsive to them. This can, of course, lead the first-time reader to think that the charges are being 'ducked' or avoided which is, in fact, FAR from the case. Because the 'regular' doesn't want to always be wasting time re-plowing old ground when it's abundantly clear the mind of the recipient is barren, the object of the charges as well as most other posters simply ignore them for the stupidity they are and move on. Failure to respond, however, leads invariably to their repetition again and again and again until Ken is finally rebuked with firmness. He then responds with anger or ignores the rebuke. His lies, like the priceless gems he seems to think they are, then get stored away until a later time until once again, they are hurled with seeming impunity.

In what is likely a futile attempt to alleviate this nonsense (but to document it for all to at least see), we're going to catalogue the many fallacious and often salacious charges Mr. Mitchell puts forth.

Is it worth spending time when someone is so obviously possessed with his own view of things that any rejoinder will be sneered at or ignored? We believe it is since it provides a historical record for others to see. We'll also explain our reasoning as we elaborate on some of the more ludicrous claims.

Another Lie - Another Ken! "The Man of Many Babbles"

Below we list a 'baker's dozen' of Ken's most common 'Babbles'. You can use this as a guide to find explanations of and answers to virtually every post he makes!

Babble #1 - "You can't prove it." This is the basis on which so very many of the Mitchell claims rest. Whether the object of this charge can or can't is of little consequence: the statement will be made regardless. Similar to the other babblings below, it's Ken's "Liar, liar: pants on fire." defense. When all else fails, claim your opponent can't prove things. Ken's 'spiritual advisor', Christian Identity Preacher Arnold Murray feels strongly about lies but when one gets their religion from satellite television, such trivialities are easy to ignore.

Babble #2 - 'All masons are liars' or 'Another mason, another lie' or 'lying master masons' or some variation on this theme. Despite the demands made by Ken to 'prove it' (Babble #1), he himself never provides proof of this bizarre claim. Curious how some 3-5 million men can all be labeled as liars....

Babble #3 - 'You promised to killfile me and didn't.' The basis for this claim stems directly from posts made by an individual that they would furthermore ignore Ken (or that particular Ken-identity). Later, they post to that identity (or another of Ken's) and they are then charged with being a liar. We've posed the question several times: "At what point can one resume communicating with you? Do they need your permission to do so if they've previously stated they would ignore you? If they do, how do they obtain it if they can't communicate with you?" and others have asked, "How does one avoid reading your posts if they're re-quoted by someone who is not killfiled?" but of course we've yet to receive an answer. Ken clearly has problems understanding what constitutes an actual "lie".

Babble #4 - 'I'm not Ken.' or similarly phrased arguments. This recent addition to the limited scope of Ken's responses is quite curious. Until late Fall, 1998, the various screen identities identified as Ken were easily spotted through message header information. Heading into the winter of 1998, however, Ken has felt that his current stable of hidden identity locations (primarily Talkaway, Deja-News, and nym.server) give him considerable protection from such tracing. During the spring and summer of 1998, repeated requests to these online identities were responded to with claims that they would not be answered for fear of revealing personal information. In October, 1998, however, Ken put forth a 'trial balloon in which he asserted that various on-screen identities were NOT the same as the physical being who typed them. A 'name' became different 'people' using that argument. As no one stepped forward to argue the point that a nickname was only that and not a real human, December of that year saw Ken sally forth with bold assertions that the screen identities were actually talking to and visiting with 'Ken'.

In February, 1999, Ken has begun signing some messages as "Doug". How bizarre!

SCREEN IDENTITIES

So what makes us think that these screen identities really are Ken? Well, there are at least a half-dozen reasons:

  1. Language forensics: Look at the writing and judge for yourself. It doesn't take much to see that the unique wording, logic, spelling, etc. is identical. Unable to create a difference 'voice', Ken is spotted as soon as he begins posting under a new nickname!
  2. Historical base: The items which Ken throws at those with whom he wishes to quarrel have a very clear and visible 'history', one which could not be obtainable from a mere reading of hundreds of thousands of past posts whether archived on Deja-News or on the computer of Ken Mitchell (as individual identities sometimes claim).
  3. Actual tracings: Despite the many attempts at disguise, Ken ultimately is not clever enough to sustain his ruse and a post with header information ultimately occurs through his ineptness. When this occurs, that identity quickly vanishes only to be replaced immediately by another which - strangely enough - writes just like its predecessor!
  4. Target of attack: Ken has certain 'targets' against whom he regularly launches his attacks. He only posts to others in a vain hope that he can incite them into intemperate posts to use at later times as additional examples. Observe the behavior and it's easy to discern. Ken clearly knows where the 'hot buttons' are - and despite his claims to Christian principles, doesn't hesitate to use them at every opportunity.
  5. No Ken: Herein lies the most salient proof of all. Now, having been removed from virtually every ISP in his area for his poor behavior and (currently) internet stalking activities, Ken needs to protect his service with the one provider he has left. Accordingly, he never posts on newsgroups. Isn't that peculiar? His various 'friends' who appear in twos or threes claiming to be in touch with him have commented that he has read the various posts and has provided them with information about an appropriate response. Yet he does not? Why? Perhaps it's because Ken is now down to one Internet Service Provider and if he loses that, he's gone! Thus, he can't afford a slip up and be 'tossed'. Ken's 'friends' will claim that's a lie but if Ken really did care as much about condemning Freemasonry as his prior couple of years of online activity seemed to indicate, how can he simply sit back now and allow others to carry forth his arguments? Where's Ken?
  6. Commonality of Internet Service Providers: - Now while large, national ISPs may have many people with differing views using their service, what do you suppose the odds are of several people who all write exactly like Ken and all use the same ISP? Well, it might be something in the water there....

Now is all this circumstantial and worthy of dismissal? Hardly. Consider the posts made by those identified by 'regulars' as being Ken and ask yourself: 'Which makes more sense? The argument made by this unidentified poster or the argument presented here. We believe the answer is clear.

Babble #5 - "Have you read the posts of...." (often included are the words 'lying' or 'evil' or 'hate' - but rarely words like 'blasphemous' which exceeds a half-dozen letters!). No matter what the issue and no matter how tortured the construction, Ken will sooner or later find a post for the occasion. With over two years of people losing patience with him, is it any wonder? And, of course, taken totally out of context, words can appear to mean something FAR different from the purpose in which they were written. It is important to note too that few people realize that a post, quickly written without much thought that someone will be researching them months/years later looking for ambiguity or supposed inappropriateness become grist for Ken's on-going campaign of hatred.

As just one example, Ken tried to claim that this site's owner had posted under multiple nicknames (using the signature - not the header - of a two year old message). Ken's claim, of course, a lie but it took the better part of three weeks of constant and persistent refutation before he stopped making that argument. Twisting the facts is something that Ken just loves to do - and no, we've NEVER posted as 'Elvis'! <sigh>

In addition, Ken now has decided (against internet conventions) that he has license to post private e-mail messages which were sent to him so that he can "prove" the evil of Masons. Of course, since they were e-mail, no one has any way of knowing the validity of his claim that they were sent to him in the form which he now regurgitates!

Babble #6 - 'It's on the anti-masonic newsgroup / mailing list / web site.' (Couldn't they decide which to use?) While there may be such entities, we suspect that none of the current users would allow Ken near them - probably because they consider his "Liar, liar...." approach so childish and his smear techniques/tactics actually do far more to show the good of Freemasonry by comparison to him. Ken is, in fact, a 'loose cannon' and one which could easily derail any meager chance an anti-Mason might have of convincing others that Freemasonry is wrong. When asked about these venues, Ken's identities make vague allusions and claim that Masons would be ineligible. Why so? Do anti-Masons really need to hatch plots in secret? What's wrong with simple truth? How do they get people to read about the supposed 'evils' of Freemasonry when their information is so well hidden? Well, we digress: this is, after all, just another Ken fantasy.

Babble #7 - 'It's on Ken's web site.' According to the hidden identities which sound just like Ken, Ken really wants others to know about his personal and political leanings. He has gone to several sites which host free web pages and posted virtually identical drivel in each (See Babble #1 also). When a Ken Mitchell home page was first observed, it was noted that he had links to racist David Duke there. Ken likes to pretend that Duke is 'just another local politician' but there are NO links to any other politicians on a Ken site. This argument held some slight credibility until the fall of 1998 when another Ken web site was seen with a lengthy and highly complimentary recommendation for the ideology of David Irving, a well-established Holocaust denier who is frequently charged with being a neo-Nazi and white supremacist. Arguing that Mr. Irving was 'just misunderstood' is - to anyone with a modicum of knowledge - laughable: to Ken, it's reality.

Babble #8 - 'Russ was removed from his ISP for forging posts.' This statement gives one pause but - as usual - the manner in which it's presented by Ken belies the actual facts. Russ (a Mason), acting impetuously as many others could have done, became frustrated and angry over racial slurs and inappropriate posts Ken had made. He determined to take action and went to the Deja News archives where - spoofing the address of the poster - he removed the defamatory material. In the cold hard light of day, this action was inappropriate and it would have been far better to let the world see Ken's 'true self'. It also gave Ken an immediate opportunity to file a complaint with Russ' ISP and they removed him for violating their terms of service. So is the charge what it seems? You decide!

Babble #9 - 'Many Masons have posted under a fake names': Because Ken's various screen identities are constantly chided for hiding behind a mask, his usual comeback is that other Masons have done so - with the consistent mention of Russ as the example. Out of the hundreds (thousands?) of individuals who've posted to alt.freemasonry over the past couple of years, a precious few have chosen to conceal their identity for reasons known only to themselves. Taking the approach of 'if a Mason can do it, so can I', the ruse continues.

Babble #10 - 'akma was identified as Ken' (and the newer version, 'Scotty thinks there are no Masons on alt.freemasonry'). For those unfamiliar with alt.freemasonry, this requires a bit of explanation.

akma is the screen identity for a Mason who is a long-time usenet poster. At one point during a period when Ken was appearing with multiple nicknames a week, akma posted a reply to someone in his short, often cryptic style. One Mason 'jumped the gun' and claimed that akma was another identity of Ken's. He was wrong and akma immediately provided a correction. Simultaneously, the Mason apologized publicly. Since then, however, Ken's various on-screen personas use this one mistake with monotonous regularity to 'prove' that claim that they're not Ken!

In February, 1999 some discussion occurred on another newsgroup about the sad state of affairs on alt.freemasonry and one of that newsgroup's moderators opined that he didn't think there were any Masons left posting there, that the signature lines were forged. It was a post which reverberated in a totally unexpected manner and anti-Masons have seized upon it with ferocity, despite the fact that it was a personal comment made by one person and quickly contested by many others. Needless to say, no amount of explanation of the actual meaning of the message will ever satisfy Ken so these become yet more of his babblings....

Does a misspoken word, quickly corrected by the parties involved, give Ken the right to perpetually use it in his campaign against Masons? Apparently....

Babble #11 - 'Bill Clinton'. This is the one in which Ken seeks to identify US President Bill Clinton, now the first elected US President who has ever been impeached, as related to Freemasonry because in his youth he was a Member of the Order of DeMolay (a youth group started in 1919 and supported by Masons). Ken conveniently ignores another U.S. President (Gerald Ford) who was both a DeMolay and Mason and who 'healed' the United States after a near impeachment and the resignation of his predecessor. What Ken also refuses to recognize is that Mr. Clinton was also a participant in the American Legion's Boys State program, that he's a life-long Southern Baptist, and more. We fail to find Ken condemning those organizations in his zeal to defame Freemasonry. Why? Because it's just another 'babble'....

(Although another US President was impeached, he was NOT elected to office as was Bill Clinton - lest there be any confusion!)

Babble #12 - 'Masons support/encourage pornography....': another seemingly serious charge but, in reality, reflects Ken's inability to differentiate between what is legal and what is appropriate. Ken found the private web site of a Mason which apparently had a link to an adult site on it. Another Mason tried to explain to Ken that there was nothing illegal in doing such a thing but Ken has interpreted that as being supportive of it. Basic concepts do not appear within the grasp of Ken Mitchell.

Babble #13 - "Read what the Bible says about Satan Masons in John 8:44." You may or may not have looked up this verse. It says (in the words of Jesus): "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh lie, he speaketh of : for he is a liar and the father of it." Now of course, Freemasonry didn't exist at the time the Book of John was written nor at the time Jesus was speaking these words to the Jews in the treasury of the Temple as he attempted to show them his righteousness. Arguing with Ken about the meaning of scripture, however, is less productive than banging one's head against the nearest brick wall. We also think that Ken's time might be better spent pondering the words of Jesus earlier in that same Book of the Gospel wherein Jesus said "For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved." (John 3:20) (Both KJV translations).

There are a few other variations on a theme but if you've read a Ken message, you'll find that it contains one or a multiple of the babbles listed above: beyond that, it has no relevant argument or information.

Ken's Stupid Tricks

In addition to his babbling, Ken also uses some 'stupid tricks'. He either (a) thinks they help make his point or (b) fails to recognize that they're demeaning to him and irrelevant to the poster.

Ken's Stupid Tricks

Stupid Trick #1 - Calling Names. Whether it's simply calling a person a name or the use of pejorative names/appellations, Ken knows he has lost before he starts so immediately goes to name calling. Particular favorites are "Russy" (which reflects Ken's hatred of Jews and is a 'Jew-baiting' technique used towards Russ and others), "Ku_t" (which is clearly an inappropriate reference designed - again - to inflame and is used instead of Kurt), 'fuehrer King' (used regularly to describe this site's owner without realizing that astute online users recognize 'The Hitler Card' as being a sure sign that the person first using it has no legitimate argument and only wants to inflame), and others. Does this silliness add to the validity of Ken's claims? Clearly he seems to think it does!

Stupid Trick #2 - Wasting others' time. Ken is never content with just newsgroup postings: he always wants to play games and waste other people's time. A recent example was when a Ken identity alerted readers of the alt.freemasonry and alt.demolay newsgroups to a Ken web site. On arriving there, one found a basically blank page with a hyperlinked 'Enter' and a hyperlinked 'mail to' address. Readers clicking on the word enter were asked for a password. Now doesn't it seem foolish to talk about one's web site if it's password protected and you want to keep people away? Well, yes: for most adults it does. When the entry of a simple guess at what a page might be named secured entrance, Ken became enraged (since everyone could once again see his David Duke and David Irving praise) and removed the site. There'll surely be more Stupid Tricks along these lines in the future!

In fact, we could list a whole litany of Stupid Ken Tricks but why bother? Ken is, in reality, one of the best recruiting tools Masonry could have. His proclivities provide a constant reinforcement of the differences between the many who belong to or support the fraternity and the few who despise it.

Say 'Goodnight', Ken!

What's in his head, anyway....

Haven't had enough of Ken? Try one of these....

Ken's Identities Ken's Beliefs Ken's Quackery

 

Search this Site

Related Topics:

In addition,
don't miss these:

Ken's Identities
Ken's Beliefs
Ken's Quackery

 

 

Prince, the Search DogJust click on "Prince, the Search Dog" to find things on our site. He's on every page and he'll take you directly to our search form where you can see if we've written about whatever it is you're interested in. Prince has a great memory; he always remembers where things are!

This site and its contents are (copyright) 1998-2014 by Edward L. King (Ed King). All rights reserved. All comments and opinions are mine personally.

Got some thoughts or reactions? We'd be interested in your comments - within reason of course.
If you want to contact us, see here to avoid spam filters!