Sunday, March 07, 2010

Rather Mindless Sort

I want to point out that Dr. Yeagley is not an antisemite. He sometimes says very stupid things that could convince people otherwise. I have been gone from Bad Eagle for about a month. I do not regret this move. I consider Mark Winters and Amil who are still there friends. Winters, is wrong in his assessment that Amren conference was my line in the sand. I have been disillusioned with the Dr. for a while. However, I was too polite to be upfront about it.

The site I loved was brought together by Yeagley, but it really wasn't about Yeagley.
There were brilliant posts by Kidst, the Hun, Amil and Mac. There was lively humor by Winters and Gator. There was of course everyone's best friend Warren. Over time the racial goonery was a tad much for many. My friends were gone and it was myself, Winters and Batty Ann. There really wasn't a reason for me to remain.

I did see the quote by Yeagley where he sometimes thinks the media is a fight between liberal and Conservative Jews. This is the classic "Jews control the media" canard. He also continues to fail to grasp the ramifications of what a communist is.
Communism is a cult and a kook that calls himself a Maoist in this day and age is clearly deranged and looking to suck up to his Old Bolshevik masters in higher ed. Perhaps his studies in Divinity were too closely focused on Judeo Christianity to grasp other forms of religion.

I still consider Yeagley a friend with disgusting views. His views are pretty dreadful, but no worse than those of the communist Duck. Lets see so Yeagley is a bigot with a warped view of America and the Duck is an apologist for a system that has committed treason and terrorism in the USA and has killed 100,000,000. However, I refuse to spend my life being Yeagley's Jiminy Cricket.

I want to point out that much of the Ducks ire is raised by the Dr's views on gays.
The Dr. takes scripture literally and in many respects is not to different from Rav Roov. My younger brother would not marry a gay couple or officiate at a mixed religion ceremony. He takes his job very seriously. However, Rav Roov also does not advocate theocracy of any kind and takes a dim view of Kahanists. He wants Jews to be more Jewish, but grasps free will. He prefers that non Jews respect their own faiths and traditions. I am still pro-Civil union for gay people and in the insane world of Bad Eagle this makes me a gay activist.

The Duck is quite the hypocrite when it comes to gays and race. Last I checked Cuba's political prisoners are almost all Black. He turns a blind eye to human rights violations in Cuba while screaming about Gitmo. He also pretends that homophobia in states with religious law does not exist. As for what states are apartheid he backs the formation of Judenfrei Pseudostinian states.

I have left over a month ago and miss the old site. The new site is not a place where I wish to hang my hat with apologies to Mark Winters, Amil and a few others.

Yeagley's friend Ray Friggon is in many ways kookier than Yeagley and seems to be
more like Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. Sorry, but 9-11 Truthers are not Conservative or Patriotic and are almost always commies or antisemites. The Holocaust Museum and Pentagon Shooter were examples of the mix of insanity, bigotry of the conspiracy crew. As Mr. Beamish stated the Holocaust Museum shooter was closer to the politics of the Duck as an anticapitalist with the standard fixation on Jews and Israel than to a Rudy Republican.

As a public service I may do a review of the Communist Kook Shlomo Sands Invention of the Jewish People. Had this book been written by a person with a non- Jewish name this would have been grouped with Der Shturmer and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I may do so to further the stated view point that Communists are in fact members of a death cult and whose writings should never be taken seriously. I also picked up a copy of Robert Service's Trotsky. Any book that is likened to a second assassination of the insane cowardly war criminal is worth reading. Unlike a certain apologist for Hugo Chavez who calls himself a Maoist we read books before passing judgment. The cafeteria commissar objects to Service's view that Stalinism is the logical progression of communism. History, has proven that Marx=Death.


Anonymous said...

Beak, say for you and a few others, exonerating Yeagley from antisemitism doesn't really mean a whole lot. He is a white supremacist and holds severely hateful views of of blacks, women, Native peoples that don't think like him, gays, etc.. So, for myself, a non-Jew, whether or not he favors Israel or adores Judaism and Jews, means absolutely nothing in light of his views of non-whites. As a Jew, I do see why you would feel that his views of Jews would mean so much to the rest of us, however.

Yeagley's site was never and will never be a Native site, as it's been marketed as. He never has more than 1-2 Indian posters; the rest are mostly (not all) kooky Christian fundamentalist disspensationlists. As Mac and I have tried to point out to you, those that you coddled and called friends, were in fact just like Yeagley in his views. This includes Kidst and Winters.

You claim Winters is a stand-up fella. You obviously have a different criteria than I and others. As an Indian, I see him much differently than you do. If your first instinct is to see whether someone is anti-Jewish, mine is to see what their views over Native peoples are.

I've copied and pasted a little gem of Winter's that is emblematic of the ethnocentric b.s. that passes at a supposedly Native site. Mark began a discussion of a piece by Charles Dickens over Native peoples. When questioned of its merit at a Native site, here's what Marky said: "I wouldn't call what Dickens wrote ignorance. Maybe what I mimicked, but not what Dickens wrote. I call it perceptively telling it like it is and was. The Indian culture of today is a far cry from what it was before our times, thanks largely to the civilizing influence of Christianity."

You have to be a tribal member to become angry and to feel the chauvanistic assholness of a Mark Winters. With all due respect, Beak, you overlooked a ton of not only what Yeagley used to say that was blanket racism, but what his cabal of sycophantic ass-sucks have always said regarding Native peoples.


CM said...


The site "IS" about yeagley and HIS views only! Those who are still allowed to post parrot his views, such as Mark on Charles Dickens The "Noble Savage", these "ARE" yeagleys' views also, he let allowed Mark to rub salt into a wound. I don't understand Purples' views, she rides the fence, falling short of offending the white knight, and apologizing when she does.

He has listed his number for the Media project....last week I called, and twice he hung up when I told him who I was. I called a third time because I was persistant and his answering machine came on. I asked him to remove my name "Comanchemoon" and my actual name which betty ann keeps placing there, from his inflammatory, derogatory and vulgar forum...he did not remove my name as of today, only edited betty anns' vulgar remarks!

I was given permission to use "Comanchemoon" by a Comanche man, the leader of a well respected Drum group with the same name. I told yeagley this, yet "Comanchemoon" and my actual name still remains on his forum allowing vulgar comments beside it. I copied before his deletion of the blatant vulgar remarks by betty ann and handed them to the Tribal Chairman showing him what kind of people yeagly keeps company with and allows to denigrade the Comanche people, we read these un-edited statements together, he shook his head in amazement.

yeagley wants to work within the Nation on a Media Project, yet he can hang up on people??His site "IS" about the person...david anthony yeagley, not Badeagle the myth, there is NO BADEAGLE ITS ALL MADE UP, WITH THE HELP OF HIS FRIEND..POE!

He is a bomb ready to explode, his present views about the U.S. Government and Public Schools and Race and his open letter to Leaders are too similiar to these recent crazy people who attack and kill,, only difference is he uses WORDS! At this point in the autumn of his life, he has nothing to lose....Betty ann saw to this. People warned him, he did not listen.

Just my thoughts and opinions...., you are too kind to him.


beakerkin said...


I think Winters was responding to Betty Ann. This does not make his posting of the material acceptable. It is reflective of the arrogance at the time. I want to point out when viewing Dickens or Twain it is important to remember they are products of their time.

Winters typically responds to Batty Ann. Were I talk about her stupidity and low morals others are not able to show similar restraint. In general she has turned my disagreements with Yeagley into racial matters

Anonymous said...

Hey, I completely echo your thoughts on interpreting authors within the context of their times, Beak. I have no quarrel with Twain or Dickens. However, I do see Wizard of Oz author, Frank Baum's call for the extermination of the plains Native communities in a newspaper editorial, as disgusting. However, that's another issue.

No, rather, my issue is with Winter's agreement with Dicken's sentiment. It's simply an echo of the old "Native peoples lacked civilization and morals before Europeans came over and brought Christianity" crap that was used hundreds of years ago, and sadly, continues in some circles, as evidenced by Winters.

The era in which Mark is writing seems to be such that that sort of rhetoric would be anachronistic. Oh, and another thing he mistakes is that he said the "the Native American culture," as though the Americas were comprised of one single people and culture. Again, what one sees in someone is dependent on what one is looking for to begin with, I suppose.

Also, for the near future at least, whenever Yeagley mentions Jews this, or Jews that on his front page, I'd see it as an attempt to provoke YOU to come back. He's like that, as are some of his posters. Heck, I recall Mark crying around about Nora for months after she left!


CM said...

Winters displayed a long dusty page of a long by gone era from a man who visited America twice in his life time. How could this man describe the life of so many Indians scattered over the Continent, how could he understand their life?

He himself came from a dank dirty rat infested place with dirty pitiful orphans running around the streets in rags, plague infested people!

This man could make up stories but ignore what happened in his own lands.

1875) British soldiers were ordered to murder women and children, they refused. Hired butchers murdered women and children with cleavers, small children were buried alive in a heap on top of dead corpses. Horror stories of people cooked alive and forced to eat their own children. People
were mutilated, their noses and ears and eyes poped out and stipped naked and publicly raped.

Now if he can tell or make up stories, why did Dickens not tell of his own people? Why did Mark Winters not delve into it further and tell the other side?

Oh well, hell....whats the use, yeagley would not believe any of the negative side of the Whites.

Of course yeagley is never offended, why should he be? He is not Indian he knows it. The joke will alwlays be on the Indians in his Blog and Forums. betty ann uses Indian Humor to poke more fun and they both laugh!

yeagley ignores the obvious descriptive insults, dismisses the stated and goes into the music of the Indians, still not knowing anything about that either, making a stupid comment.

Of course yeagley likes Dickens, of course yeaagley never had a problem or is never offended. Everyone can comment on the Indians but Indians!

"The World will be a better place when his place knows him no more!" {Dickens} of the Indian, and of course yeagley is NOT offended, of course!

This is what yeagley wants, segregation, separation, divisive tactics is his agenda when he is working with his white people.

He wants his cake and eat it too...working both sides...he
can do it too, because he is enrolled, and he is White!

yeagleys' Blog today is about Foul language. Anyone who reads his Blog or Forum knows who the worst offender is there. Yet he is too chicken to confront her or say HER name or ask HER to just plain "Quit".
yeagley claims to Hate liars and now vularity, but he damn sure uses Proxy.


beamish said...

How many cars are in this train wreck?? Is the Beak Speaks becoming the anti-Yeagley blog?

I've never read much of anything at Yeagley's site, and never got into the forums there at all. I feel like I have to go back and read his site to know and judge for myself what you're saying about it, something I don't care to do or would have done all along.

Does Yeagley post about you, Beak?

What's the deal here?

Daffy said...

News Flash:

The Internet Thought Police (ITP) prevaricatingly attempt to marginalize provocative thoughts and provocative posts provoking provocative though harmless provocations by actually confronting said provocations with less than thought provoking rejoining prevarications.

It just goes to show you that all puppets are not necessarily socks.

Daffy said...

It is not accurate to call Dr. Yeagley a White supremacist. Nor Mark Winters a "stand-up fella" (You gay or somethin?). If anything Dr. Yeagley is a White separatist. And Mark Winters is a man's man? (Did I just say that?) To reiterate, the Dr. is a Indian separatist. And, a Black separatist. And may never the Twain beat the Dickens out of him. etc. etc. etc. I think we should give em the state some of "those people" have asked for, don't you? How's about Louisiana? Lincoln helped some of em to an Island off the coast of Haiti. And we all remember the resounding success of the Liberian "experiment", don't we? Why not the NW US for the Whites? I mean, after all of this blood, sweat, and tears spent on integration hows comes everybodys is still segregating themselves anyway? Some integrate and some don't. To each, his or her own. In the end, all we can ever be is ourselves. But, we can be critical of other people being themselves. The End.

beakerkin said...

Mr. B

I encourage you to look for yourself.
Unfortunately, I am somewhat associated with Yeagley as a former
poster. He actually does have a follower who does repost this stuff here and on

I am anti Yeagley for two basic reasons.

1) I believe in my heart in the big table of equals version of America. We do not have second class citizens of any sort Black or otherwise.

2) It is okay to criticize Obama on policy. Both you and I have done that. It is never okay to criticize Obama in racial terms. Doing so strengthens Obama and discredits his opponents.


Yealey has given up on me. I do not speak of private mails but he knows my time there is over. I was there for almost five years. It was mostly good except for the last year. I miss the friends more than anything else.

Mark is likely baiting Betty Ann.


I must digress here into the world of lit. Yeagley and myself to a lesser extent grasp the realities of lit. Dickens, Shakespeare and the Canterbury tales are filled with anti Jewish material. However, I do recall reading them in a Yeshiva. The message was they are part of the dominant culture and reflective of their times.

My parents are quite Jewish and do enjoy Shakespeare knowing he was not fond of Jews. It is part of our culture and I can live without it. I am more likely to see a play if a date is into that than to go on my own.

beamish said...


I think you've pretty much established that you and Yeagley don't share a mind. I'm just wondering how many more anti-Yeagley posts need to be made. I'm barely familiar with the guy save for old posts at Moonbat Central and don't really care about what he's doing now. But it's starting to look like an obsessive vendetta on your part with all these anti-Yeagley posts you do.

Sometimes the best way to stop being associated with something is to stop being associated with something.

Just a thought.

Alligator said...

Ray said,
"Also, for the near future at least, whenever Yeagley mentions Jews this, or Jews that on his front page, I'd see it as an attempt to provoke YOU to come back."

Ray, Mac and I noticed the same thing happening for quite awhile when it came to the Scots or Irish. A lot of "Celtic" stereotyping going on and provocative statements. We just ignored it.

The_Editrix said...

"You have to be a tribal member to become angry and to feel the chauvanistic assholness of a Mark Winters."

No Ray, you don't. I have exposed him as the shit he is in my "travesties" long ago. He is shallow, cynical and vulgar, no matter whether is is commenting on Indians or human life in general. I have taken down the Yeagley-posts from my blog because I didn't want them to be part of a moderate one-woman success anymore, but they are, albeit not visible anymore, still available including Winters' stunningly obscene comments. He is a misogynist as well, I guess that's what he and Yeagley have in common.

The_Editrix said...

"Also, for the near future at least, whenever Yeagley mentions Jews this, or Jews that on his front page, I'd see it as an attempt to provoke YOU to come back. He's like that, as are some of his posters. Heck, I recall Mark crying around about Nora for months after she left!"

BINGO, Ray! Yeagley posted outrageous lies about me and other provocative stuff to make me come back. He is still posting the odd strategical post to bring the Scots back. Because he doesn't have any backbone himself he can not understand people who have.

Winters is a swine, pure and simple.

Here are a couple of the odour marks he left at my blog:

Mark Hefenweisenburpen said...

You are so damn lonely over here that you have to resort to blowiing Roland's horn for him.

Even though I'm getting to you and you just hate it. I think we could be friends. In your dreams!

Why don't you do like you did before and just publish your driveling self loathing sulking pleas for help to those that you're really wanting to read them at Bad Eagle, Gretchen. No body is reading them here. Or responding for that matter. Are you lonely, Fraulein? Or is it Frau?

Interesting that we have virtually the same politics. Don't you agree? NEXT!
05 March, 2006 00:44

Mark Wineters said...

If you think you have deduced that Yeagley is morally lacking with his Feminism then why don't you call him on it at the time? You must have gone back and mulled over these things for hours/days/weeks to pick every nit you could possibly nitpick. And I assure you, it is nitpicking, even down to your admonitions to spell correctly, which I even find you lacking in occasionally, and don't say type O. And, taken in total, all of your nitpicking doesn't even make a very good case against the Warrior. Look, it's always been my view that maturation is a process, a life long one. So what if it is painful to watch a mind grappling with itself. Yeagley is working controversial issues out. These are issues that a lot of people grapple with. He happens to be open enough to expose himself and his process. That, to me, is exceptional. On the other hand, you have all the answers. You don't need to work anything out. You are too busy criticizing and belittling people anyway. Let me tell you something, Queen Mutter, you are not a smart as you think you are. Even I can see that and I'm just a hillbilly fresh off the farm.

But, I like you, Queen Mutter. I really do. And I almost agree with you about the need for some constructive criticism directed the Warrior's way, as I do that sometimes myself. But who am I to talk, right? I do think you are being a bit harsh however. It only makes you seem incapable of relating to the human condition, what ever that is. Lighten up just a skoash. You might be courting heath problems with all the vindictiveness. David Yeagley is not as bad as you make him out to be and you know it. After all, he is an Artist, and artists are known to be all over the map.

But the way, is that you in the picture with the English riding getup on? The picture were your boots aren't in the stirrups? Are those chaps on your balloon pants? Expecting a ride through brush? How's the gun lessons going? Killed a fox yet? Found where the safety is yet? I LIKE THAT HAT!! You are one ugly beautch, Beautch. Maybe it was a bad day for photogenics? We are all trying to be something that we are not, no? Getty up, Cowgirl!!


And, by the way, you misspelled unspeakable above. What happened to your perfection there, Beautch? Can't even measure up to your own standards?
11 May, 2006 00:16


The_Editrix said...

Marco Hefenweisenburpen said...

Out of respect of our Host I started posting at "Roland Land" again. Under the cleverly concealed names of Mark Wineters (her name for me), Mark Heinekenbelch and Markus Hefenweisenburpen. It is really getting good over there. Doc's new Allias is The Waffling Warrior. Wunderbar!!! She had the audacity to print only half of my post, above, concerning the other half of the history (the half she never read and is conveniently left out of the Catholic histories) that kept Europe free from Islam for TEN CENTURIES, stopping at the point where it says,"The Catholics helped the Orthodox". Very convenient, Gretchen! Convenient to your one sided version of history it seems. And what in the hell do you know about Goethe anyway, Martha!!! Let's hear it. You've played your card, now expound on the subject. "Mephistopheles decaf" my ass!! Or, to quote a well known line from "Gotz von Berlichingen","Er kann michim Arsche lecken". Sie ist gerichttet!!! Just stick to your dog gene manipulations, Frau Fumplish. And your stimulating equestrian saddle horn outings. And, make sure you figure out where the safety is on that gun you're trying to figure out. Remind me to not go hunting with you. How was hunting season by the way? What were you hunting for? Is your goose cooked yet? But I really must thank you for the fun. And I'll even thank you in your native tongue, with my own brand of dialectical idiosycracy. Donkey Shane, Nora!!! Let's not be bitter now.
05 March, 2006 02:49

Beak, do you really think that is "comedy"? That is debased, swinish sexual innuendo of the lowest imaginable sort and the rest is the hackneyed old Internet blurb about "You are old", "you are lonely", "you are ugly". At one point he even accused me of being a man hater. Well, if a sizeable percentage of men would be like this rotten corpse, I WOULD be a man hater. Thankfully, it isn't.

What do you think, Beak, keeps this vulgar, hatefilled punk at Yeagley's for years? He is nothing but the male version of Betty Ann. Yeagley THRIVES on those miscreants. They do the trashing so that he can keep up the appearance of "refined" non-vulgarity while he is the worst of them all.

By the way, what would YOU call a man who thinks that one of the redeeming qualities of the Holocaust was that is was "at least about race"?

The_Editrix said...

By the way, "Daffy" may be Winters.

Anonymous said...

Nora, I agree that "Daffy" is likely Mark. It's actually mind-numbing to contemplate how extraordinarily unfunny and irrelevant the man is.

I also in no way think that one has to be a tribal member to see what a scum-sucking punk he can be either, as evidenced by his tirades against you (Male Betty Ann Indeed)! Rather, I was referring to Winter's enthusiasm for Dicken's views that Native peoples pretty much lacked any degree of cultural or moral sophistication prior to the coming of Europeans and Christianity in its various guises.

I meant it more for Beak, a non-Indian that didn't seem to get why Winter's agreement with such views would be offensive to most Native persons. Mark's free to utter his views; others are just as free to call him out for what he is as well, all the while without engaging Yeagley's site or Mark directly. None of them are worth the time.

Gator, I also noticed his not-so subtle attempts to try and encourage Mac and the Celts to come back. It's typical of a narcissist to engage in such attempts at manipulation. Asking directly for people to come back would be seen as an admission of weakness on his part, something he'd rather die than admit.

Beamish hit the nail on the head, Beak. His words not only should be taken to heart by you, but by all of us here that have allowed ourselves to continue to discuss he and his cohorts at that wretchedly unimportant site.

I haven't posted there in years and am quite content to leave Yeagley and his lapdogs where they belong--in obscurity.


beakerkin said...


If you are Mark Winters just use your own name.

CM said...

My thoughts too.

I used to think Mark was a funny cutey until betty ann said he was a drunk, Indians don't like drunks ya know!


CM said...

Wow Editrix,

As usual like I eating my desert first.....I read the last entry! Then I read upwards, got to Editrixs'.

Editrix, how awful of Mark Weener to say those things to a woman. How DOES yeagley get people to do those things.... to watch his back?

Yeagley is NOT an artist, he is a jack of all trades and not good at any of them but fooling people with all his degrees until they drop off his list of friends after realizing how utterly unpatriotic and racist he actually is.

Look at betty ann, still drooling after the "virgin" for over 10 years. What exactly did she think she could change? She attacked me like I was his lover, she still wants us married she says in her "last" post "yet again" to mark, she gave up the site to mark! She is a nut case and like I said many times was used by yeagley. she attacked me just like mark attacked you, they had to get their orders from the man but "HOW" and "WHY"?

He has used everyone at one time or another, now all he has is "Q" whom he is using to get a foot in the door of the Comanche Media Project. Today I see the Comanche forums all lit up, but nothing there....its all pretense......


I'm sorry for what they did to you, and you took if for so long Editrix...what a waste of a friendship across the waters that could be still....for sure that is NOT the way of the Native American, no matter what anyone may say or think from long dusty yellow books of days gone by, yeagley does NOT speak for the Native American in any way shape or form.....


Anonymous said...

Beak, I apologize for posting this here, but I didn't know where else to post it so that the right people could see it. I don't know if it's possible to PM anyone.

Given the fact that several of us here have corresponded concerning Yeagley's possible personality disorder (narcissism or sociopathy), this was too rich an example, exemplifying those criteria, to pass up. The following monologue from David was posted on the Comanche forum recently (last 48 hours).

It's crucially important to notice his usage of quotes around his own tribe's college, as though it really didn't measure up to his own standards of higher education.

It's obvious he sees his own people and institutions as inferior to his own "experiences" in the world. What a complete ass, plain and simple. He has an ego nothing in his life warrants having. I'm sorry Beamish, this will be it on my part, I promise!

Ray (below is the "toughest Indian in the world's thoughts," Davey boy Yeagley, who ends with 'Amen').

"In case anyone is wondering, I did apply for a position at the "college" around 2002 or 2003. I can't remember exactly. It was when Kim Winkleman was president of the college.

I was recently told, by a former employee of the college, that he in fact wanted to hire me right away. However, due to the vehement protests of a certain female administrator, he was discouraged from hiring. This is all I know.

I say this, only to answer the obvious question, Why isn't someone of my superior education and accomplishments serving my own tribe in any capacity.

There are reasons, I'm sure. I'm not sure what they are. I know that female administrator seems a permanent fixture at the college.


The_Editrix said...

CM said: "Editrix, how awful of Mark Weener to say those things to a woman. How DOES yeagley get people to do those things.... to watch his back?"

CM, no I don't think so. I think he cultivates their obscenity for two reasons: First, he wants them to do the trashing while he can remain his "refined", "educated" self (as he perceives it), second (and that is the really offputting bit) I think he seriously enjoys it. He is a sexual pervert in more than one respect. It is quite obvious that he enjoys to see women insulted and humiliated. I could show you countless posts that are proof of that. A Mark Winters is just mirroring him.

"I'm sorry for what they did to you, and you took if for so long Editrix..."

That is my fault and my fault alone. I ought to have left before the "first BE revolt" even started, so I won't complain, however, it's difficult to forgive myself.

"what a waste of a friendship across the waters"

Well, I have met the Scots that way who have become real friends, then the Beak, and now you and Ray. We are all exchanging interesting thoughts here from very different perspectives across the waters and a huge landmass. I guess in a warped way I owe that to Yeagley.

Ray said: "Nora, I agree that "Daffy" is likely Mark. It's actually mind-numbing to contemplate how extraordinarily unfunny and irrelevant the man is."

You know, had it not been for those obscenities, I might even have responded to him. He was so obviously begging for attention that he struck my somewhat overdeveloped chord for pity. But how can a man seriously think that a woman will respond to him after THAT? But then, you said it. It's mind-numbing even to contemplate it.

"I also in no way think that one has to be a tribal member to see what a scum-sucking punk he can be either, as evidenced by his tirades against you (Male Betty Ann Indeed)! Rather, I was referring to Winter's enthusiasm for Dicken's views that Native peoples pretty much lacked any degree of cultural or moral sophistication prior to the coming of Europeans and Christianity in its various guises."

I think I understand that, Ray. What I was trying to say was that somebody can't be a partial scum-sucker. (I like that word!) Somebody with such abysmal views on women and how to treat them is BOUND to have not an ounce of decency in him and that applies to all other aspects of life as well. (Does that make sense?) Case in point Yeagley (and that's for you as well, Beak!): A man with such deep, putrid, pathological hatred for everybody who doesn't meet his approval, based on race, sex and political views, is BOUND to hate Jews as well. His wacko cult just forces him to disguise it. I admit one has to look a bit closer at and beyond the spoken word, but it's clearly there for everybody who WANTS to see it. Again, I could identify countless instances.

The_Editrix said...

"It's crucially important to notice his usage of quotes around his own tribe's college, as though it really didn't measure up to his own standards of higher education."

The Champion of Bilious Quotation Marks

beamish said...


No biggie. It's just I know Beak has and has had much more interesting things to talk about than to keep stoking the anti-Yeagley flame war for the people that have departed Yeagley's site.

By that I mean of interest to people who aren't interested in participating in the anti-Yeagley sentiments on Beak's blog which seems to have begun in September of 2009 and has intensified since to overshadow Beak's other subject matter.

I'd understand the enthusiasm for anti-Yeagleyness if Yeagley were a politician or public figure, but he's not.

I'm planting my flag on the mountain of apathy. ;)

CM said...

Mr. Beamish,

Of course you are right.

We are all right on the dime about him. He does not deserve apathy though. Many times I thought he could change, then I thought of his age, the length of his forum and his dialogue against women, blacks, Native American, America Government. No one has more reason to be anti-Government than the Native American, but we Love this Country, this Soil more than any other Race, there are not many of us left to do much, this is the fault of the original Christian Government!

yeagley should take all his Amren group back to Britian, stay there and be happy ever after......thats all.

Sorry Beak for digressing your Blog.


The_Editrix said...

CM, I don't think you have digressed it any more than all we ex-BE posters did. And while I agree with Mr. B. that Yeagley isn't worth the attention, it seems obvious that Beak needs his time to get over it. Ray put it very well. It hurts having been fooled by a sociopath. Furthermore, I think the importance Beak lends to the doubtful fact that Yeagley is no antisemite merits further discussion as well -- whether it's about Yeagley or not -- as long as Beak, as the host, is prepared to take the flak.

Just my two Eurocents!

The_Editrix said...

How Yeagley loves the Jews:

Certain Jews are not the only one who see the sexual promiscuity and exploration as a marketable item.
He brings up Jews all the time without any connection to the relevant topic, first, because he is, like any antisemite, creepily fascinated with them and second to provoke antisemitic reactions.

The Holocaust terror at least had a racial divide of some kind.
Anybody who commits genocide on racial grounds can't be ALL bad.

I was about to comment on how and why certain Jewish persons, particularly American Jewish persons, would want to trascend [sic!] the offense of Nazi Germany, and laud ad infinitum the virtue of Germany, period.
Is this greater forgiveness than I as an Indian show America? is this unprecedented aggression?
It is as if KPS [a poster supporting White supremacist positions suspected to be a Jewish woman] has a religious intensity focused on transcending Nazi Germany, of looking beyond, above, and through it all, and validating something she feels has been totally misrepresented and maligned.
It is unusual heroism, and self-trandscendence [sic!], if KPS is truly Jewish.

This insufferable bit of drivel translates to: A Jewess who supports White Supremacist positions and acts as an apologist for Nazis is a selfless heroine for the cause of the white race.

Today, we are all left with the impression that Hitler's rage was all about Jews. But we know Nazis hated a lot more people than just the Jews. Therefore, there are some critics who say that the modern image of the Jewish Holocaust is dominant simply because Jewish people today have made it such.
Thus spake David "Norm Finkelstein" Yeagley.

Then there is this observation: This is basically a Jewish situation [i.e. the Michael Richards 'nigger' gaffe]. Richards is Jewish, Allred is Jewish. This is Jew against Jew. Jews are quite willing to attack one another, over some completely non-Jewish issue. This is interesting. Jews cannot be accused of racist comradery [sic!] amongst themselves. I don't see that. I see one Jew quite willing to go after another Jew.
Another occasion to slobber and drool non-sequitorially over Jews.


The_Editrix said...

The Holocaust was simply a misconception. I don't think it was the original plan, anyway. I don't think love of one's race leads to something like the holocaust, either.
Six million murdered Jews will be interested in that neat little bit of philosophy from the whorehouse.

Perhaps the impetus of anti-Semitism could better be understood as a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories are no more than natural suspicion expressed on the grandest social scale, with all the complexities pertaining thereunto. It is a captivating condition of the mind...
It is too simplistic to write anti-Semitism off as a hate scheme. It is a giant conspiracy theory. Hate may be a differentiating factor, but this is only because the Jews are human. There is no "hate" involved in the UFO theories, for instance.

So antisemitism is a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories aren't hate schemes, therefore antisemitism is not hate-inspired. We are SO relieved! Aren't YOU, Jews?

About his not-so-secret hero Adolf Hitler: Is it anti-Semitic to see something pristine in the German warrior image?
No, not per se. But this is not about Arminius, Frederick the Great, Clausewitz or Scharnhorst, but about his one-handed reading material Hitler.

Yes, remember World War II. That was the last war in which the enemy had honor. That's right. The Nazis did not hide who they were. They were promoting who they were. Yes, they had spies, but those were special agents. Like the previous one, this is not an antisemitic statement per se, but to state that WWII-Germany led an honourable war, specifically at the eastern front, is outrageous. That war was mainly led to perform the Holocaust. Even German spies weren't just spies but something more noble. Does one HAVE to be an "American patriot" to utter drivel like that or does it just help?

Wake up Beak!

beamish said...

Well, my mountain of apathy is just a vote to change the channel to a different topic. Beak of course runs the TV here.

The_Editrix said...

This statement of mine needs clarification: "I think the importance Beak lends to the doubtful fact that Yeagley is no antisemite merits further discussion as well -- whether it's about Yeagley or not -- as long as Beak, as the host, is prepared to take the flak."

What I was trying to say is that the fact that Beak seem to see the (real or perceived) lack of antisemitism in a swinish person as a redeeming quality merits further discussion, independently from Yeagley's person.

Sorry, but as a non-native English speaker I am somewhat overstrained here.

Anonymous said...

Also CM, you have a personal stake with Yeagley, as his views and actions can potentially harm your community's image. In order for his views to receive any consideration within supposedly "conservative" corridors, he has to state ad nauseum his Comanche heritage and citizenship.

That's his foot in the door and he truly doesn't care what befalls the Comanche nation, so long as he receives attention and accolades for his disgusting views. He also sees himself as morally and intellectually superior to the people of your community, as evidenced by his latest postings.

I've said it before: his Comanche identity is being used as a mascot to have his otherwise straight-forward racism seen as offering something unique and original.

That's why he's written two letters crying about that conference being canceled. They apparently had it without telling him, but he's willing to overlook that little snafu. He's hoping that by being a good errand boy and all-around butt-lick, they'll invite him back for his unparalleled "Comanche" take on politics and race next years. Remember, this is a rather delusional man, one that truly felt that the President of the United States should give in to the 'birther movement' because he produced documentation of his own Comanche heritage. The fact that Yeagley appears to take this sort thing seriously (being seen as an important figure whose issues are on par with the President's) should be an indication to how malignantly narcissistic he is.


CM said...


Your right on spot, thats why I make it my business to read his site, I do take it quite personal! He is a complete embarrassment to our whole Nation. I got my letters out to the same people letting them know how I feel as a 4/4 Comanche and to reiterate that he does not represent the Comanche People in any way. I did send Mr. Holder copies of the Blogs/rants and how they mis-interpreted to fit his own racist views. I'm sure Mr. Holder is much too busy with REAL issues but it was worth the chance! Speaking about racial issues is the only way things will ever change. Not one sided secret meeting of whites only with a room full of American/Euro white like minds, how is that supposed to begin to solve the Racial issues with the supreme whites still thinking they are supreme. Mr. Holder had the right idea in mind and it was turned around to fit a disgruntled white indian.


The_Editrix said...

I still find it the most despicable aspect of this man's personality that he abuses what little Indian DNA he may have to diss and marginalize an already beleagered minority even further. The reasons are (I think) what Ray says, namely to get attention, but I seriously think that he further hates his non-white heritage so much that he is actively out to harm those people. Never forget, that is the man whose white father apologised to his children because they are not white.

Ray says: "Remember, this is a rather delusional man, one that truly felt that the President of the United States should give in to the 'birther movement' because he produced documentation of his own Comanche heritage."

Gosh, I missed that one! That is both, seriously funny and sad!

Anonymous said...

Yeah Nora, it was primarily in the way he was trying to couch the issue. As a narcissist, even his detractors serve the purpose of buoying his ego. The "birther movement" gave him the opportunity to rail against Obama, as well as cry around some more about his own adventure in documenting his tribal citizenship. It was meant to be viewed as a "challenge" to the President, as though since "I, enrolled Comanche juggernaut hero, David Yeagley, produced my papers, then why can't the President?"

Nora and Beak, I know you guys have had to read his latest seizure-inducing rant on his front page. The true depth of issues with race literally scream froth from this piece.


CM said...

You speakin of the "No More Nazies Please!, or "Let the Children Lead? Both very him!

Hitler sounds just like yeagley, with not many friends and why would anyone want to emulate him?
A virgin..and almost 60....must be a reason besides Religion.... hmmmmmm. He did say he once had a Jewish girlfriend!

I did not read all of "Let the
Children lead" I knew exactly where he was going....he has gone thru this before, talking of a study where babies prefer the white face! Where does he dig out these studies....of course racist or he would not bother with them.

My 4 mo. old Grandson loves my brown face. Of course he loves his Mothers' face too, she is a very pretty white. His toothless smile every morning shows me his love for mine! I bet a months' wage he never had a baby smile at him...he does not know what he is missing! He is such an A**!


The_Editrix said...

Ray, is it that the piece you mean? "Wykes believes Hitler suffered from syphilis, which he contracted in his early twenties–from a Jewish prositute, no less. It has become generally accepted in many circles, though Hitler carefully conceiled and/or destroyed all his personal records (much like the current president of the United States)." Can anbody tell me what the "fact" that it was a Jewish prostitute ("no less", I wonder whether men who patronize hookers ask for their religios affiliation first) has to do with anything?

Then I'd like to know what "personal records" the beloved F├╝hrer had destroyed. His family background and life is well documented and absurdly over-researched. It's just that a Hitler-adoring moron like Yeagley expects that something earth-shattering, grand, magnificent, about the housepainter is BOUND to be revealed one day and because it hasn't yet it must have been "destroyed". Not to speak of the swinish comparison to Obama. I guess he just needed an opportunity to post a couple of Hitler pickies over which to slobber and drool and therefore he digs up an old trashy ("popular") biography of Hitler, which he hasn't probably read, as usual, past the blurb and page one.

Otherwise, the piece is so full of non-sequiturs, truis- and banalisms, general crap and nutty racist "theories" that it defies belief. What conclusions can be drawn from the fact that Brauchitsch, this sad excuse for a man, and all his fellow drips and weenies in the German general staff observed that Hitler was a certified nutter but did nothing about it? THAT would be an interesting question.

Or do you mean the previous entry? Jihad Jane, the d*mb c*nt ... ooops ... the poor helpless victim of evil dark Middle Eastern male Muslims?

And yes CM, "Let the Children Lead" is probably one of his worst ever. It is another one of his attempts at coping with his non-white mother. Can you imagine the hatred in that family? A father who apologized that his children weren't white? Can you imagine what Yeagley did to those "mixed-race" children with whom he used to "work"?

And now excuse me, I have to take a long hot shower.

Anonymous said...

No, while that one just came out and is pure crap, I was in fact talking about the one right before it. His subject was how the "white race" is now lost completely because of Jihad Jane's antics. It was really disgusting. If you're looking for an emetic, you should check out!

However, he does have one poster that seems to love him. I don't feel like spelling his name out but it begins with something like Th... His comments are revealing as well, despite his trying to sound normal and un-bigoted.


The_Editrix said...

Yes, I agree. Basically, all his blog entries have emetic qualities, but you are right, that one is particularly effective.

For him, a "blonde white woman" is the epitome of America and neither your Constitution nor values like freedom, liberty and integrity of thought. Now with those bimboes, poor helpless victims all of them, it's not the abysmal stupidity of some pathetic attention whores, but the eternal abuse of (preferably blonde) white woman by evil dark Middle Eastern men. Cry me a river! To me, "Jihad Jane" looks like one of those women who've ended up marrying a deathrow inmate because they've discovered his inner goodness after exchanging a month's worth of e-mails with him. She doesn't look like a shrinking violet either. That is, like any sane and down-to-earth person would see it. To the moron, it's the downfall of the white race. Here some more female dealings with Mohammedans are discussed. Saving the white race my behind.

CM said...

"If I were a white man"

He has the gumption to say that, He is a White man. He grew up white, for all intents and purposes he is WHITE, his father was German, his mother was less than 1/2 Indian even less Comanche. He even states he grew up white. White is not a bad thing though, badeagle makes it look bad by his detrimental statments on other races Look in the mirror mr badeagle, quinna e-eshop!

I still believe he and his bestest friend were working against the Sioux Rez. and maybe got caught, just as jihad jane did....her(bestest friend) background is of abuse by men of all colors. Mot all Indians, though hungry and poor, will allow their lands to be taken over by foreigners least I hope for the Rez this is true!

Cateran said...

The_Editrix said...By the way, "Daffy" may be Winters.

And, I might add, an admirable choice of names is Daffy. Short, sweet, and emminently descriptive. What more could one ask for.

The only thing I'm curious about is whether Mark is a disciple of Bacchus or Ellen White.

Ray said...I also noticed his not-so subtle attempts to try and encourage Mac and the Celts to come back.

What a waste of time BE is. I spent over five years on BE and, Yeagley, whom everyone credits with an overabundance of intelligence, still hadn't learned the first thing about this "Celtic" culture he's so fond of chattering about. As a matter of fact, the dullard failed his final exam.

So, in the Doctor of Pianology's opinion, the Celts are the original Aryans? And here I'd say that the Celts aren't a race, they're a linguist group. And the Aryans, they aren't a race either. The Aryans, it turns out, are little more than an invention of half-pint Austrian house painter. The house painter borrowed the idea from a guy called Gustaf Kossinna.

Seems to me that Yeagley should keep his nose out of Mein Kampf and go back to composing epistiles to writhing earthworms. That is, as long as no earthworms are harmed in the process.

Anonymous said...

Cateran said...

The_Editrix said...By the way, "Daffy" may be Winters.

And, I might add, an admirable choice of names is Daffy. Short, sweet, and emminently descriptive. What more could one ask for.

(I thank your descriptive Eminence, Mac aka Cateran? Is thah some sorh of Sco-ish cah-ale rus-lin quar-her poond-har wih chaese?)

The only thing I'm curious about is whether Mark is a disciple of Bacchus or Ellen White.

(Suffice is to say, and I heard this from an impeccable source which is well nigh above reproach, he's some wheres ins betweens.

I remember the time you and Gator actually went back to BE for a 5 year reunion of sorts. Those were to good old days. No one seems to remember that.

You people can really nasty behind people's backs, can't you. I prefer getting nasty in person. And so does Mark. But of late he is exhibiting a modicum of the cultural decorums and semblances of the social graces. This is why he is now posting soberly anon. I kid you not.

Cheerio, old Chap Cateran!