Saturday, July 24, 2010

The Beakerkin Group

The brilliant detective work of Dr. Yeagley has alerted the world to the secret agenda of The Beakerkin Group. Our goal to destroy the White race via miscegenation and the promotion of homosexuality has been revealed to the masses.

Obviously, the Dr has been spending way too much time with the Stormfront crew who believe that Jews have a diabolical plan to promote miscegenation and homosexuality. Obviously, the Dr.
who brags about being a sexual zero has way too much free time on his hands.

Of course the notion of people being free to decide who to love and have children with is considered a basic freedom by most of us. I do not care what goes on in the bedrooms of consenting adults. Obviously, the Dr. has mistaken the USA for the current regime of of Iran. He is now working on a comedy central TV show Yeagley Sexual Morals Police.

Amusingly, Dr. Yeagley has decided I am not a Conservative. No since the inception of this blog I have described myself as a Rudy Republican. I have many friends who are Conservative, but I am to their left. However, I want to point out the difference between a true Conservative like Mark Levin and Moonbat Yeagley. Levin is a Reaganite as well as a genuine Constitutional Scholar who grasps the concept of freedom of association in addition to the pursuit of happiness.
What Yeagley advocates is Statist sex police to prevent miscegnation and control sexual behavior. Yeagley's twisted values are not American in any description.

He is so consumed by his hatred of Blacks he is beyond reason, redemption or salvation.

27 comments:

The_Editrix said...

Oh for Heaven's Sake, Beak! Analysing Yeagley's drivel is pointless and will fuel his egomania. Get a recording of the noises in a pigsty and analyze them. They will be more meaningful. All you are doing with your talk about bi-racial unions is providing him with jerk-off material. Yikes!

beakerkin said...

Editrix

You have a point but I am amused at how clueless he is. Of course a product of a mixed race union talking about the evils of mixed race unions is almost Shakespearean.

beamish said...

Are you saying his sexual activities gives him carpal tunnel syndrome?

CM said...

Losing out to Google and Amazon didn't help his ego. Especially when it was dismissed without Prejudice and both stricken as MOOT!

Did anyone notice how much he and Edgar Allen Poe resemble each other on his previous Blog, both with big heads.

Don't forget to mention David Anthony Yeagley....he uses a wordpress thingy which alerts him as to when he is mentioned, maybe he gets a penny too when david anthony yeagley is mentioned, I'll donate two cents to his counter suit. I hope Al Carroll, Cindy Hughes and Michael Brent Davids see the same results in his suit against them.......just imagin how much dirt he dishes out out, yet he can't take it.

Sioux, I mean sue for reddress..he's stated the same and worse with the help of his sioux friend, then goes to court like a whimpy burger for redress. How utterly contemptable.

The_Editrix said...

The point is, his objection to mixed race marriage is not just objection to mixed race marriage. I could tell you many valid reasons that speak against mixed race marriage as well without having any personal interest in that matter. He is talking, as usual, about himself. He wants to save others the misery he is experiencing every awake moment and probably in his sleep as well. In that, he is genuine. He doesn't put up so many pictures of his handsome parents because he loves them, but because he hates them. He hates them because they brought him into this world with all his woes and miseries. Of course, he can't even begin to relate to what might have brought together his parents, because you could as well ask a blind man to appreciate the beauty of a sunset in the mountains and to him, the love of his parents is racial defilement. That is sad beyond belief. Obviously, his mother had very little Indian blood and he himself looked in his old photos he is so fond of posting like a white man, wavy hair and all, and that he could have remained. But no, his self-loathing is so overwhelmimg that he has turned himself from a nice looking, dapper white man into a cartoon character that looks like a decrepit old bag lady who is into ethnic garb. He is a sad, sexually extremely confused individual without any genuine emotions. Shakespearean? Maybe. Shakespeare wrote a lot about basket cases. Leave him alone.

Cateran said...

Beak, just which white race are you out to destroy? Contrary to the autoerotic meanderings of he that equates race with colour, there are many different white races to choose from.

So, tell me it's the ASPs you're out to destroy and I'll be a very happy duine ban.

Anonymous said...

could IT be that dr jackboot is trying again to seig hell the view of what the hell ever, hey dont hate yoogles just think he is serving Two masters as in fronts a CON-job with shock jock tactics of bullshyt or maybe he and his cashcow are just talking out their AZZ oh well the duo of lunacy are pizzants who in their demented and delusional state of azzclown want to show their degrees are the extent of their bullshyt or again from the book of cheech and chong look like bullshyt, smells like bullshyt IT is bullshyt, or their words speak volumes of the LUNACY or caca but I am sure they are great in their own minds yep dimwit and halfwit, oh yeah viva Israel and peeps with common sense that know LOVE knows no color race just emotion BOND or shyt maybe dr jackboot best practice his own dogma degree or like the other dimwit 'I love JC but hate jews' real real solid oh well again the bruce lives xxxx the shadow

Alligator said...

Beak, is the "Beakerkin Group" akin to the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Knights Templar, or just maybe, you are actually the Illuminati? :-)

Have a good laugh over it and let the doctor go. It's not worth it. Although I will say, TPT you did score some good points.

beakerkin said...

Gator

We are the first secret group whose leader did not know of its own existence,

The Pagan Temple said...

Alligator-

As Doctor Yeagley explained to Monica Crowley, "The Beakerkin Group" is, among other things, a "cadre of anti-Yeagleyists" devoted to making sure, to the best of our ability, that Doctor Yeagley is not allowed to express his views around the Internet, where he might find allies to his cause-the promotion of the true conservative American values of segregation and racial purity.

Our sinister goal is to make sure his freedom of speech and expression is stifled anywhere we can find evidence that he has tried to exercise these odious rights, by way of a malicious and deceptive leftist liberal tactic known as "disagreement".

The Unforgettable Grunting Moron said...

Disagreement is fine. That usually occurs with the subject readily available to make a rebuttal, in defense of his self. Cutting him off at the pass--talking (stabbing) behind his back while yucking it up--before he has had an opportunity to actually answer the charges personally at other conservative web sites via bold faced character assassination is definitively a Leftist tactic. Wouldn't you agree? It seems that sexual liberals have more in common with Liberal liberals than they even realize.

Yeeeehaaaw!

(I, for one, am not proud of the sexual libertine I was in the past. And hope to avoid any tendencies toward libertinism that may cross my path in the future. But it was fun while it lasted!)

According the Rusty Humphries, Elena Kagan is a Lesbertarian. Would a Lesbertarian world view qualify her for membership in THE Beakerkin Group?

Ride me, Cowgirl!

I backslide alot.

The_Editrix said...

"As Doctor Yeagley explained to Monica Crowley ..."

Where where??????????

Anonymous said...

Or the fact of Warrior societies which ae made up of VETs of combat who see the 'injun' azzclowns making out like he knows 'what' he serves two masters he himself states his pappy hated groups, thus some here have IT rite on the sob hates himself or again he is his own enemy, while a old hefer pizz and moans how this or that yet gets banned from a real indian site for being a bigot, dam a bigot and is mixed breed yep along with the half wit, hey MONEY is the game, and like other 'media; oriley the fool keith the dumazz, and the blonde expert on injuns ann coltex, yep real experts on indian issues and then says the 'secret group' of the beakster, ok beak I am doing the 'covert ops for the group' Or how many warriors of any race have died defending these two wittless Fools the right to be the duo of lunacy yep rite on Beak seems we have been outed in the pursuit of showing folks with common sense the types of degreed mongrels breed bigots LOL, Major Bruce signing off or the shadow warrior and CM no matter what they say their own words speaks volumes of the LUNACY but again dimwitt and halfwitt one aint had no puzzy and the otehr is krazy about the stuff

CM said...

He does express his beliefs on his Badeagle "flog" and "borum" but if you disagree, YOU can't express them there for long. On his Blog, he has only Thras and PK, now who are starting to fight over his affections...so funny. Thras told PK that he will not talk to her anymore....

David Anthony Yeagley does not have to express much, his dirt bag goes around to Loonwath, Monicas, Indianz.com and now she claims shes been accepted as a member of Comanche Discussion and will expose ME!!!I'm a shaken in my mocassins. Yeagley will never shake this crazy stalker, she will ruin him there as well. Not too many Comanche are fond of him anyway, can't wait to see how she handles herself on this new site.

The Pagan Temple said...

Mark Winters-

I think DJ was a stalking horse, trying to pave the way for Yeagley to make his triumphal entrance onto MonicaMemo. Maybe I overreacted, but Yeagley should thank me, if anything. If it wasn't for his wacko views on race, he would have an interesting story to tell. He makes a lot of sense about a lot of things.

But when it comes to the subject of race relations, he is marginalizing himself. He doesn't need my assistance for that.

Ask any conservative if we had to kick any one man out between Dr. Alan Keyes, Clarence Thomas, and David Yeagley, I think you'd be sorely shocked at who would be getting the boot.

Cateran said...

Randy says, (I, for one, am not proud of the sexual libertine I was in the past. And hope to avoid any tendencies toward libertinism that may cross my path in the future. But it was fun while it lasted!)

Who cares what you're proud of? I'll go one further, I couldn't care less if your sexual escapades crossed gender boundaries either. Even though I wouldn't be all that surprised if they did.

Hopefully, you'll keep those YouTube videos to yourself.

Randall Patrick McMurphy said...

IF my former escapades, or present ones, did cross gender boundaries, as you suspect, I'd fit right in here. I could be a card carrying member of The Beakerkin Group. However, it's not me that's proud of being a libertine, as I've said, and to which you could care less. Nevertheless, it was the Beak that originally recounted the uncountable times he's miscegenized, seemingly proud of every encounter. Therefore, maybe if I WAS proud of it, too, I'd fit right in even more, that is, if I wanted to fit in at all, here. Do I detect that you are getting hot under the collar there, Mac? I mean, calling another man gay must be, to you, the ultimate disparagement, right? Maybe it's you that doesn't fit in here. I mean, by all appearances, one that uses an accusation of gaiety as a disparagement couldn't, by definition, become a member of The Beakerkin Group, now could one?

Cateran said...

Randy...IF my former escapades, or present ones, did cross gender boundaries, as you suspect, I'd fit right in here.

Hey, Randy, you're the only one bragging about your sexual escapades. If you don't like the way the conversation is going for you, then you should think twice before bringing your personal life into your comments.

Now, as to you fitting in here, I don't think so. Trolls and cyber-stalkers are pariahs on any sort of discussion board. And you've done your level best to prove you're both.

BTW, I didn't call you gay, I simply said it wouldn't surprise me. You being such a self-admitted sexual libertine and all.

Like anyone gives a shit where you point your weenie.

Randall Patrick McMurphy said...

Oh, I have no problem with the way the conversation is going. None whatsoever. I rather like seeing you hot under the paternal collar. And here, under The Beakerkin Group big tent, my weenie could point anywhere, even in your direction, and it would be perfectly acceptable, as long as you didn't object.

I'll give you the last word. After you, Sir, and I'll not follow up in the rear.

Is it insults that make the troll? If I've proven myself as a troll, as you say, how is it that I am still here, after all this time?

Beak, how it is?

Dolt!

Did you look again, Beak?

Cateran said...

Randy sez...I rather like seeing you hot under the paternal collar.

Randy, as usual, you're giving yourself far more credit than you're due.

Sez Randy...Is it insults that make the troll? If I've proven myself as a troll, as you say, how is it that I am still here, after all this time?

I'd guess you're still here because Beak likes to brag that he's never had to ban anyone from his Blog.

Or perhaps he's as amused as I am that you're playing champion for another man.

BTW, here's the definiton of a Troll. I daresay even you should be able to sort out why I refer to you as one.

You know, I've never studied psychology, but it seems to me that there's something almost Freudian about you choosing McMurphy as one of your many monikers.

McMurphy had an Indian friend, too, didn't he?

Randall Patrick McMurphy said...

Yes, McMurphy did. Remember, Juicyfruit?

I think Mac Coinneach had one, once, too.

Cateran said...

Actually Randy, I have quite a few Indian friends. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if I've spent more time on the Rez than your Indian pal.

No argument about being a troll, eh.

Randall Patrick McMurphy said...

You know which "former" friend I'm talking about. It's interesting how he still has nothing but the best to say about you, but you have no problem with yucking it up behind his back. At least Beak told him what he thinks of him, even though he is mistaken in his interpretation of his views, in my opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion about whether I'm a troll or not. I happen to think I just liven things up a bit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muddler_Minnow

What I prefer to troll, I mean, cast with.

Randy said...

I also bring you out of the woodwork, so we can all be edified by your worthy and educational contributions (Please overlook his habitual temperamentallity.).

You can all thank me now.

Cateran said...

Randy said...You know which "former" friend I'm talking about. It's interesting how he still has nothing but the best to say about you,...

I suppose it's the definition of friend we're having a problem with. In my old-fashioned way of thinking, one doesn't ban a friend who's in the process of helping him out. Nor does he follow up by lying through his teeth about why he banned him.

If he'd have asked me to give up my Admin privileges on his board, I have willingly removed them at the same time that I fixed the problem he was having with his board. At that point, as his "webmaster", I was sick and tired of having my good name dragged through the mud because of his obsession with colour. And that's without mentioning his religious bigotry - something, due to my own experiences in life, I happen to find particularly noisome.

But instead, he opted for banning me while I was fixing the settings for him, and then turned around and lied about deleting a profile being the only way of removing privileges.

Strange as it may seem, though, he solved a problem for him. As I just mentioned, one of the major issues I had at that time was my name being associated with his bigotry. When he deleted my profile in his haste to get rid of me and whatever threat he felt I was to him, he also deleted my name from his forum.

Problem solved.

As the saying goes, the Lord works in mysterious ways, eh.

Now, even though you're incorrect in your assessment that he's only said the kindest of things about me, of course you'd say that. That way you can play the injured party and bemoan how everyone turned against him.

Messiah complex, anyone?

Truth of the matter is, it's his own words or actions that have caused people to take issue with him.

Randy said...but you have no problem with yucking it up behind his back.

What little I've said about Yeagley here isn't really what I'd call "behind his back", is it.

Randy said...At least Beak told him what he thinks of him, even though he is mistaken in his interpretation of his views, in my opinion.

I had pretty well told Yeagley what I thought of him before he deleted my profile. Or are you foolish enough to think that's an innocent coincidence.

And no, I'm not interested in returning to BE. I'm done hanging out with white "nationalist" mixed breeds whose only claim to fame is the colour of their skin.

Cateran said...

Randy said...You know which "former" friend I'm talking about. It's interesting how he still has nothing but the best to say about you,...

I suppose it's the definition of friend we're having a problem with. In my old-fashioned way of thinking, one doesn't ban a friend who's in the process of helping him out. Nor does he follow up by lying through his teeth about why he banned him.

If he'd have asked me to give up my Admin privileges on his board, I have willingly removed them at the same time that I fixed the problem he was having with his board. At that point, as his "webmaster", I was sick and tired of having my good name dragged through the mud because of his obsession with colour. And that's without mentioning his religious bigotry - something, due to my own experiences in life, I happen to find particularly noisome.

But instead, he opted for banning me while I was fixing the settings for him, and then turned around and lied about deleting a profile being the only way of removing privileges.

Strange as it may seem, though, he solved a problem for him. As I just mentioned, one of the major issues I had at that time was my name being associated with his bigotry. When he deleted my profile in his haste to get rid of me and whatever threat he felt I was to him - he also deleted my name from his forum.

Problem solved.

As the saying goes, the Lord works in mysterious ways, eh.

Now, even though you're incorrect in your assessment that he's only said the kindest of things about me, of course you'd say that. That way you can play the injured party and bemoan how everyone turned against him.

Messiah complex, anyone?

Truth of the matter is, it's his own words or actions that have caused people to take issue with him.

Randy said...but you have no problem with yucking it up behind his back.

What little I've said about Yeagley here isn't really what I'd call "behind his back", is it.

Randy said...At least Beak told him what he thinks of him, even though he is mistaken in his interpretation of his views, in my opinion.

I had pretty well told Yeagley what I thought of him before he deleted my profile. Or are you foolish enough to think that's an innocent coincidence.

And no, I'm not interested in returning to BE. I'm done hanging out with white "nationalist" mixed breeds whose only claim to fame is the colour of their skin.

Universal Randy said...

Well, that's the end of that!