The wacky Doc points out I do not understand Indians. The source of my conflict with the Dr is not about Indians. I do not write about that subject. My conflict with the Dr is about material he has written about Jews.
Some of the rhetoric from the Elmer Fudd types point out Yeagley has been beaten. One antisemitic lunatic compared my dispute with Yeagley to a crucifixion. His rabid mongrel acolyte described me as cutting down an Indian.
I want to point out some basic facts in a misquoted point. My credentials as a Jew are superior to Yeagley's credentials as an Indian. Yeagley is by his own admission 50% German and was not raised in the traditions of his people. I am 100% Jewish in both lines and was raised and educated within the Modern Orthodox Community. My younger brother Rav Roov is an actual pulpit Rabbi and my beloved Sunbeam is modern Orthodox.
Yeagley in a state of arrogance feels his studies and visits as an honored guest have given him a greater authority on Jewish subjects than the genuine article. Sorry Doc, our dispute was not about theology it was about posting stuff that offends Jews.
This is not new for Yeagley who quotes books he clearly has not read. Amazingly he accuses me of not reading a book that is actually reviewed in Chapter form on this blog. How I managed to review a book and do a chapter by chapter analysis remains a mystery.
Yeagley also feels he is an expert in law and document analysis. He has no credentials in either subject. Unlike the Dr I do have training in both areas. This is akin to lecturing a mechanic about a car and never having been in a car.
He is fighting a skilled oponent on the opponents turf. His efforts are clownlike and ham handed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Beak, why don't you give it a rest? You did an excellent job ripping Yeagley a new one, but enough is enough.
"But I’ll tell you what I hate: people who try to destroy other people’s race, and claim they themselves not racist. People who show total disrespect and disregard for their own race, claiming they themselves are not racist. People who work to dilute and dissolve other people’s race, through careless, mindless reproduction, mating like stray dogs, and claiming they themselves are not racist."
He is losing it. Don't you see that he is talking about HIMSELF, about HIS PARENTS here, and that he is comparing the way he and his siblings came into the world to the mating of stray dogs? His father apologized that his children are not white, remember? Can you imagine quite HOW dysfunctional that must render a child? Leave him alone.
Correction! He HAS already lost it:
"Also, there are black Confederates. And Dave Chappelle has already been in the KKK.
The Black White Supremacist"
He thinks that Dave Chappelle has really been a member of the KKK.
Beak, you are kicking a man who is down. No, you are kicking a corpse. You are not a cruel man. Please give it a rest.
Beak, why do you care what Gay Eagle thinks about your religious identity. Why do you bother getting into it with Betty Boop, a squaw who has obviously been into the firewater?
My own thoughts, because you miss the Orthodox Judaic community and are still fighting with you own identity. It has nothing to do with the morons at Gay Eagle.
Beak, I don't get it. You are obsessed with this clown. Do you know what you call somebody who is fifty percent German, fifty percent Indian who was never raised as an Indian. You call him someone who is fifty percent German and fifty percent Indian who was not raised as an Indian.
Do you know what you call somebody who is fifty percent German and fifty percent Indian and wasn't raised as an Indian but who puts himself across as an Indian authority?
You call him a fucking phony, that's what you call him. I know it's your blog and you have a right to write about what you want to write about on your own blog, but please, move on.
Let's have some more posts about how much you love Sunbeam or something.
The Beakster said:
The wacky Doc points out I do not understand Indians.
Yeagley has his own problems understanding Indians. On that PETA thread his outraged response to Newkirk's will is:
"I mean, clearly, this is more than an ethnic slur. This is an open and clear condemnation and denigration of American Indian culture."
Problem is, he's actually managed to mix up Hindus with Native Americans. The woman Newkirk’s “Unique Will” is referring to the Indian Leather Fair and has absolutely nothing to do with North American Indians.
How's that for top-drawer Conservative Punditry.
Beak, what was that you were saying about this guy being really clever?
Mac
He is a dope.He quotes books he didn't bother to read. Nothing he writes should be taken seriously.
The other day he was talking about ID documents. This is actually part of my job. Yeagley knows more about Jews than Jews themselves. He is an expert on law, a discipline he has never studied.
The man is a clown.
Ward Churchill made him semi famous and his 15 minutes are up.
Beak, I concur with the Hun (That's novel, a Scot and a Hun in agreement)
I would encourage you to back off from Yeagley, but I think I know what you feel right now.
Yeagley is not the person you thought him to be. Consequently you feel disappointment, maybe even a sense of betrayal. Perhaps you feel disappointed in yourself that you weren't able to pick up on his obsession with race and ethnicity earlier.
Been there done that. When I finally realized what was going on, that is when I quietly stepped away. I was disappointed, a bit angry and I thought, "Why didn't I see this racism earlier?"
But I didn't start my own blog and try to draw away BE posters - honest! Anyway laddie, I think you understand now and it just troubles you. You've made your points well, now I would encourage you to let it go.
(That's novel, a Scot and a Hun in agreement)
Actually, not true!
My tongue was planted firmly in cheek Frau Editrix :-) as it was the comment about my starting a blog (which I haven't). Everyone that I know who has their own blogs had them long before they got disgruntled with Dr. Yeagley.
Beakster says…
He quotes books he didn't bother to read.
He quotes a lot of things he hasn’t bothered to read, to wit, Newkirk’s will.
It seems to me that had Yeagley actually comprehended Newkirk's references, there would have been no confusion as to which “Indians” she was referring to:
1. ...where I was born, in India, my beloved childhood home...
b. ...and that some skin be tacked up outside the Indian Leather Fair...
c. ...offered for sale by merchants at Connaught Place in Delhi...
g. ...that the other ear be removed, preserved, and displayed outside the Deonar abattoir in Mumbai...
4. ...and to India, my beloved spiritual home...
Beakster said:
Nothing he writes should be taken seriously.
Exactly.
Beak, I saw what you wrote at Violent Hummingbird. Actually, Luther's heritage is rather not a mixed bag. Why the Danes resisted the Evil of antisemitism and refused to collaborate in the Holocaust, I don't know and I don't know either whether anybody has ever ventured on an explanation, but to draw conclusions from the fact that they were/are Lutheran Protestants is fallacious. Some Catholic people (the Italians and the Romanians come to mind) did as well, although none nearly as thoroughly as the Danes, whereas the Germans didn't establish their extermination camps in (Catholic) Poland for nothing. There was no *extermination* camp in Germany proper. I think it's too simplifying to draw definite conclusions from the denomination alone.
I always found this map that shows the different political leanings of Catholic and Protestant Germans enlightening.
(On a marginal note: Predictably, it hasn't made the headlines it ought to were the world decent and just, but it shouldn't be forgotten that Pope Pius XII's reputation as an enemy of the Jews ist due to a Communist plot. You'll find some information about that specific pope and the German variety of the Catholic faith here should you be interested.)
I don't know whether you have read "Ideology of Death: Why the Holocaust Happened in Germany" by John Weiss (by the way: not a Jew). It makes up for entire libraries of books covering the Holocaust. His judgement of Luther is pretty devastating, but I recommend the book anyway.
I forgot something that is conveniently overlooked as well: Deeply Catholic Franco-Spain didn't turn over one single Jew to their German allies. They even saved a lot of non-Spanish ones by issuing life-saving documents. That is something you'll hardly ever find mentioned anywhere.
Editrix, I'm sorry but I think you are gravely misinformed about the Romanians. They were allied with Hitler during World War II. Their leader during the war was a hardcore fascist by the name of Antonescu, a former general under King Carol II.
Prior to the war, there was a man named Corneliu Codreanu who led a very popular and powerful faction known as the Iron Guard, and who actually claimed to be an incarnation of the Archangel Michael. He and his main core of followers were murdered while imprisoned by Carol's regime, but Antonescu took up the slack. He overthrww Carol and established the fascist regime that allied itself with Hitler. He could not have done so without a strong base of support.
When the Soviet Union took over Romania, after the war's conclusion, they established SovRoms for the purpose of razing the Ploesti oil fields. This was excused on the grounds of war reparations the Soviets determined the Romanian nation owed them for the crime of siding with Hitler.
Are you sure you wasn't meaning another country besides Romania?
Actually I raised this point once or twice when the Duck grows nostalgic
for the traitors in the Abraham Lincoln brigade.
"Are you sure you wasn't meaning another country besides Romania?"
I must have been. Thank you for making me aware of that (indeed grave) mistake. I will check the figures again.
TPT, I couldn't find the figures I had read and falsely remembered. However, a brief Wiki-search confirmed that it must have been Bulgaria I confused woth Romania.
"Bulgaria became one of only three countries (along with Finland and Denmark) that saved its entire Jewish population (around 50,000 people) from the Nazi camps through different rationales and the continuous postponement of German demands."
The Wiki-entry about the Holocaust mentions 64,000 Jews, of which 22% (roughly 14,000) were murdered, which is still a relatively low number. However, almost the entire Jewish population of the Bulgarian-occupied Yugoslav and Greek territories were murdered. I guess that's were the contradicting numbers come from.
Thanks again for making me aware of my error.
Bulgaria was an Orthodox country, so religion is another non-explanation. I wonder whether there is a theory why some people remain decent and most don't.
Post a Comment