Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Taking a break from the political to discuss other topics

I will be continuing to discuss Through the Howling Wilderness over the next few days. I also will be discussing the history of the Oneida and the shameful way America treated its allies. I have read
several accounts of the Battle of Oriskany. Most of them deal with the Oneidas tangentially. They were key participants in the battle.

I will be doing some posts on Forgotten Allies by Glatthaar and Martin at some point. I will also be picking up the biography of Joseph Brandt and a book or two on the French and Indian War.


Anonymous said...

Hey Beak, I enjoyed Fred Anderson's "The Crucible of War." It's around 700 pages but the best study I've come across of showing the world-wide dimension to the Great War for Empire/French Indian War.


The_Editrix said...

Off topic: Beak didn't you say that Amil is younger than you? And did I get that right that you are 43?

Now this is the oldest looking man under 43 I've ever seen:


CM said...


I read that blog. I had pictured Amil as a skinny minnie me of yeagley! Actually he is handsome, while looking quite well fed, whereas yeagley looks malnourished and sickly.

Some Muslims live in the U.S. for years learning everything, looking ordinary yet studying everything about the U.S. gaining trust.... then they do what they do best...Blow up humans, even their own if need be!

It amazes me that they can live here in our freedom to enjoy and wonder and the women can let their hair flow and wear western clothes without fear of being stoned. Living in Freedom yet some still retain their hair wraps and tunnics, acting holier and better than thou. A lot own hotels and such with the Blond woman behind the counter as they stay hidden in the backroom, knowing we would not stay there if we knew they owned the establishment. I just don't believe these Muslims are in danger of their lives as they say....they are getting educated in our ways and gaining the trust of people such as yeagley who has always embraced Amil and given him freedom on his site while he condemed and banned several Comanches and other Tribal people who had the nerve to speak out against him. yeagley is no Patriot....he is a Traitor against the first ever Black Unites States President, as he claims he has no Government for the next four years.


Alligator said...

The Iroquois League of Six Nations was founded around 1550. By 1680, they dominated an area that extended from Chesapeake Bay, west along the Ohio valley to the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers, then north to the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. Benjamin Franklin had been inspired by this allegiance and believed that if Indians could achieve such a strong union, it was possible for the colonies to do the same.

At the Battle of Oriskany August 6, 1777, for the first time you have Iroquois fighting each other, the Oneida for the Americans and the Mohawk and Seneca for the British. It was the beginning of a civil war and an unraveling of their 225 year old alliance.

This rift continued to deepen and following the American Revolution, the pro-British Iroquois moved to Canada with the promise of their own reserve (never fulfilled by the Crown), while their brethren remained in upstate New York. Tensions grew as a result of the War of 1812 as both factions of Iroquois were again drawn into war.

On July 5, 1814 the British Iroquois under John Norton (The Snipe)and the American Iroquois under Red Jacket met each other on the field at the Battle of Chippawa. About 80 Indians were killed and the survivors recognized the fallen as their friends and blood relations. The sight so disheartened and grieved them that both factions withdrew from the rest of the war. The seeds sown at Oriskany had borne their full fruit, but it was the last time the Iroquois shed Iroquois blood.

Someone should do a major motion picture on the League from Oriskany to Chippawa. It would be powerful. I'd write the script.

beakerkin said...


I thought Amil was much younger than me. I am close to 44.


The sad part about the Indian story is that both sides should have left them alone. However, the simple Marxist version does have some problems.

While it is true that there were inexcusable crimes committed against the Indians. There is also some evidence that on some occasions tribes also had settlers
act in their rivalries as well.

We all know about inexcusable massacres of Indians. Indians did torture captives and practice slavery. There were peaceful tribes, but no tribe lived like depictions in Mazzola commercials.

While it is true that members of the Oneidas fought other members of the confederation. It should be added that the former were committing massacres of settlers.
Brandt while brave was getting compensated handsomely and his sister was married to a British officer.

In truth we have no difficulty saying German Hessians were mercenaries for fighting for the crown. Yet to a lesser degree the same can be said about Pulaski. Lafayette is somewhat more complex as there was idealism in his service.

Brandt was promised land for his role in the war and for scalps.
Still placing the term mercenary on Native Americans just seems wrong.

The_Editrix said...

"I thought Amil was much younger than me. I am close to 44."

That is because the "Amil Imani" who haunted BE wasn't the real Amil Imani. You may have noticed that Yeagley doesn't refer anymore to him as a contributor to BE.

Seriously, can you imagine that middle-aged, portly, sober-looking gent in conservative suit and tie, who writes those excellent articles at ff.org, exchanging insults with Betty Ann at BE and calling a woman "grandma" (meant as an invective)?

Now WHO always said so?

The_Editrix said...

Ooops Beak, my previous comment was inaccurate. Frankly, reading Yeagley nauseates me so much that I tend to skip over things. My fault! Further down in the article he says: "Imani, a native born Iranian from Tehran, began commenting on the Bad Eagle forums in 2002, and soon created his own web site, Amil Imani."

My theory is that the "Amil Imani" at BE was somehow connected to the real Amil Imani, standing in for him because he wanted to remain anonymous. I wonder, too, why Yeagley doesn't mention the internationally acclaimed website faithfreedom.org for which Imani writes, but that rather obscure and juvenile "own web site". But then, maybe he is just once again too goofy to grasp the whole picture.

I wonder why it was never questioned, too, why a man who writes those excellent articles was only semi-literate, if that, when he posted impromptu entries at the BE forum. Or why he needed to post there under several aliases. Or, again, why he resorted to childish flames like "grandma" for the Indian women. Or "Nazi" for me on the strength that I am German. Pretty racist, don't you think? I wonder, too, why (apart from me) nobody, you included, ever objected to the epithet "Aryan" which he applied so liberally to the Iranians (Ooops, "Persians"!) to Yeagley's enthusiastic acclaim.

All that makes it pretty improbable that the gent in the suit is identical with the troll at BE.

beakerkin said...

In general when people write formal articles they are more circumspect in their verbiage than in blog comments. When I am drafting a legal decision at work I am very careful to place in the most neutral of phrases.On my blog my writing style and persona are much different.

For example at work way back I wrote a line about the credentials of an internet University being unclear in a final draft. My boss at the time was able to see the earlier drafts and convinced me that a more stern sentence was warranted rather than dancing to be polite.

I have come to know Amil off line and he just is not the way you describe. He reacted poorly to what he correctly thought was a series of people ganging up on him.
Your comments do accurately describe the comments he made and they were wrong. I think he called Mac a Scottish gangster.

I have no idea where he got those remarks.

Over time I reached out and befriended Amil. He is a decent guy
who is very bright and is more American in his heart than Yeagley.

In general I see the best in people
and seldom look at things the others see. Many of you see Kidst in a negative light. I always enjoyed her friendship and remembered her message as trying to explain that the Amhara were more closely associated with Jews and Arabs than West Africans.

Similarly, I viewed Winters as a decent sort with an irreverent sense of humor. On occasion I was the target but I do not take such matters seriously. I enjoyed being Leakerkin and laughed at the comments about my skin tone. They were usually directed at Neonazi white power types who claim I am not white. In fact I am whiter than Yeagley, but it is not something I care about.

Amil was trying to refine himself as a person and as a writer. Perhaps it is a sign of my unusual
nature in that I have stayed in the same political spot most of my life. I am forever the Cold Warrior who loves my spirit of big table Americanism. I see governments job to regulate and intervene in exceptional circumstances.

Many people change over time. Richard Poe changed my views on gun control with his brilliant book. My views on gay issues were altered by arguments about individual rights, not privacy.

Imani has grown as a person and as a writer over the time I have known him. I am proud of all my friends, but there is a special respect for his growth and humility which people seldom see in his on line communication.

The_Editrix said...

"In general when people write formal articles they are more circumspect in their verbiage than in blog comments."

While this is true, the gap between Amil Imani's articles and the BE troll is far beyond what you describe.

I remain adamant. That man in the suit hasn't called the Indian women "grandma", me a Nazi or Mac (you remember correctly) a "Scottish gangster". But it isn't just the verbiage. Grammar, syntax, spelling, the lot, was just not anything near the level of the real Amil Imani. And don't give me again that crap about formal articles. I am, like Imani, not a native English speaker and while I wouldn't use the word "crap" or the epithet "tits on two legs" or the term "you are a moron" in formal writing, my comments are, even when I'm flaming, grammatically, syntactically and spellingwise as accurate as my formal writing, as it would be the case with ANY *EDUCATED* non-native speaker. Maybe we'll know one day, maybe we'll never know, but I am sure that the troll is NOT the Amil Imani in the picture.

The_Editrix said...

"I enjoyed being Leakerkin and laughed at the comments about my skin tone."

Leakerkin wasn't Winters' but MY quip, as well as the "alabasser skinn with green ice" (or something like that). I thought it was brilliant. (I STILL think it's brilliant!) And hey! -- you took it with good grace. Yeagley waxing lyrically about Michael Jackson's eyes wasn't bad either.

Cateran said...

Speaking of amusing BE moments, I see the Kidist has returned to BE bringing tall tales, epic stories of her legendary verbal bravado, and, general hilarity for all.

Recently spotted on that veritable hotbed of self-styled American Indian Patriotism:

"Just Kidding" says...I had to laugh because you're absolutely right that I started my blog after your Indian women ganged up on me! They used the n---- word, which I am not (ethnically speaking). But I forgave them, since "they know not what they're doing." But not your former German poster, who used them to the last drop - I mean the Indian women - calling me the name by proxy quoting Sheila and Betty Ann. That was clever and malicious.

Nora, she's lying through her fangs, isn't she?

The_Editrix said...

Mac said: "Nora, she's lying through her fangs, isn't she?"

I can definitely say that I didn't bother with the non-n..... (ethnically speaking) much at all, in spite of her best efforts. Why on earth should I have?

Now if "his" Indian women ganged up on her, why doesn't she reproach "him" for letting them? They ganged up on me as well, so what? As she so much yearns to be white and "Westernized", she'd better start seriously assimilating by showing a little bit of spunk and stop whining. Hydroquinone ought to be applied only later.

"It was my talent," snivelled she,
"Who put the Hun to rout;
But what we fought each other for,
I could not well make out.
But everybody said," quoth she,
"That 'twas a famous victory.

In apologetic memory of Robert Southey.

Marcus Hefeweizenburpen said...

I'll translate The_Aviatrix for you, Mac. That's a mealy mouthed weasel worded "No", to be terse. She, Kidist, wasn't lying.

Personally, I much prefer the brilliance of Lord Byron over the mediocrity of a Southey, however you choose to take his poesy out of context.

Mac just had to return to his old BE haunts to see if his backstabbing had been outed. That thread title "In The Blogs" you just had to read, didn't you? Much to tempting, I'm sure. You actually thought, for a minute there, that the Dr. was actually wasting his time reading this tripe? Or, better yet, that I had reprinted selected nefarious quotes from the Beak Speaks on BE? Don't call me a moron, you two faced backstabbing Dipstick! Nora also, just can't help but visit too, this time to check up on Amil, for example, and comes up with a stupid lame brained theory about his doppelgangbanging ghost writer. Even Beakerkin says he doesn't visit anymore, but I know better. Even Ducky asked for an audience but was roundly refused one. Talk about patterns, huh Mac! I definitely see one here! It's rather obvious, your fixations. Go ahead and say you ignore any and all you want. Actions speak louder than bold faced Balderdash.

(Don't worry Mac. I haven't reprinted any of your disparagements directed at the Dr. for him to read. ... Yet.)

And as to the quasi-homeopathic nurse practitioner's prescription of the application of Hydroquinone, is she aware that blue-black cancerous lesions can result? Not the resultant benefit you intended?

All your stuffy elitism doesn't faze a person you can't intimidate, even with words, as you comfortably hide behind cyberspace.

Hey, Mac. Did you hear the Scots have come up with a new high potency beer? It's called Tactical Nuclear Penguin (32% ethanol). Leave it to the Scots to come up with such a stupid name for a beer. A couple of weeks later the Krauts upped the anti with one called Schorschbock (40% ethanol)but the Scot boys at Brewdog did them Krauts one better with one called Sink the Bismarck (41% ethanol). There method to get such high percentages of alcohol? Use the time tested Hillbilly method of repeatedly freezing the apple wine, in this case malted barley/wheat wine(beer), and lifting off the alcohol free ice cap on top until the desired ethanol level is reached. It's the recipe for Hillbilly Apple Jack, Dipstick!

beakerkin said...

Who the Hell cares about Yeagley? I apologized for wishing him dead and that is it.

I have said this before and I will repeat it again.

Yeagley is a small man. He is hateful and deluded and has no grasp of patriotism.

I am an American. I do not do his non white white supreacist crap. For the record I am factually whiter than Yeagley, but abhor such idiocy.

One does not grasp patriotism of Christianity while spouting goofy theories of racial arson.

Kidst and Amil remain my friends.

Don't waste your time on Mac, Ray, Gator or the Editrix. If you want anti Yeagley material I will provide it in quantity.

Let the fake Cold Warrior lecture the real article about Communists.
Let the fake patriot lecture the real article about patriotism. I left and wished him well. Where he goes now I refuse to follow.

Do you think I care if you post this on his insignificant site. Let him rally the Stormfronters and mentally ill while I hold the Constitution.

While Yeagley can talk about Mac and the Editrix as foreigners he can not bandy patriotism with me for seconds. When I deal with his idiocy it is a different story. He can dismiss the Duck as a commie.
He has zero credentials as an American Patriot, Conservative or Christian.

If you wish to comment on posts be my guest. My time at Bad Eagle was over and I left because Yeagley disgusts me. Patriotism is too important for me to allow a disturbed circus clown like Yeagley to make a mockery of the concept.

Yeagley wants nothing to do with me and we agree. Let him preach to imbeciles, the disturbed and those
full of hate.

If you wish to create locker room anti Yeagley posts take my quotes.

I will also remind you that I have
defended your questionable antics until now. There are limits to my

This is not Bad Eagle East. I grow
tired of talking of a failed pundit.

Winters said...

You posted it, Editor Host. And, thank you for that. Of course, you didn't have to but chose to.

The_Editrix said...

Mac, I don't know whether it is feasible to descend lower than rock bottom and even if it is, I doubt it will help, but to at least attempt a retard-proof reply to your question ["Nora, she's lying through her fangs, isn't she?"], let me put it like that: Yes.

It may be still too involved, but I haven't yet learned how to communicate in grunts.

Winters said...

You're pretty good at communicating in obscene pictures though, for a good Catholic girl, that is.

Winters said...

What's the matter, Aviatrix? Can't hang with the big boys?

Mac can't help you.