Eric Allen Bell:

Typing in all bold and red seems a bit desperate and over the top.

And personal ad hominem attacks are not "brilliant" nor will they "change the world."

Obsessing on another person is not healthy.

*** REMOVED: by Eric Allen Bell ***



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 11:30PM by Eric Allen Bell.

Moderator:

For as long as this thread has been going, whenever you have shown up, you seem to immediately take sides in this debate. Never have you been willing to give any consideration to the possibility that perhaps I am being wrongly profiled, by someone with ulterior motives.

In fact, years ago when I went to great lengths to describe how having my name be the subject of a cult awareness site, you side that if I was not a cult leader then I have nothing to worry about.

However, any reasonable person would worry if they found that their name was being dragged through the mud in such a way.

This entire experience is extremely strange.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 11:38PM by Eric Allen Bell.

Moderator:

You said "Typing in all bold and red seems a bit desperate and over the top."

Yes, I agree. This is a desperate situation. These days, when children have a play date with a new friend, parents often Google the name of the other parents. It's a good idea actually. But if someone does not know me - and they read the false content that is hosted on this site, about me, it is potentially my children who suffer. If anyone actually believes this stuff, they would not be inclined to drop of their kids to play at the house of someone who is accused of being:

- A cult leader
- A con artist
- A hatemonger
- A CIA Propaganda Agent

... just to name a few of the outrageous claims made on this site, about me. How can this be just or fair? It is not.

Eric Allen Bell:

This is a public message board. People post their opinions here.

You have posted responses to the posts about you, which is your prerogative and offers balance to whatever criticism is here.

No need to post in huge bold colored text.

Rather than personally attack your critics it makes more sense and frankly seems more credible to respond directly to the criticism itself. When you attack your critics personally it comes across like you are attempting to avoid responding directly to the criticism.

A GENERAL STATEMENT:

Let's use some logic and reason:

1 - If I were a cult leader, a member of a cult or in any way involved with a cult (the very purpose of this site) wouldn't there be a name for the cult? Wouldn't the cult have an address? Wouldn't there be some sort of actual evidence that such a cult exists? And yet, without any evidence at all, I am accused of this, relentlessly, over and over on this site, over the course of many years, probably by one person: Lawrence Estavan.

2 - If it were true that I am a horrible person, a liar, a theif, a con artist, a Jew hater, a secret psychic, a secret member of the CIA for the purposes of Mind Control and Propaganda, and all the rest that Lawrence Estavan has accused me of, in multiple and repetitive posts here - is this the right place for such accusations in the first place; a cult awareness website? Also, assuming all of these accusations are true (none of them are) is allowing an obsessive person to keep posting the same thing, over and over, a responsible way to moderate such a site as this?

3 - If I really did work for the CIA, wouldn't it be kind of naive of me and unprofessional, to post on this site to defend myself? Wouldn't that agency have a protocol for a more sophisticated means of addressing such public accusations?

4 - Finally, just using a bit of common sense, doesn't this whole thing seem more than just a little bit crazy? I feel like I'm in an Orwell novel.

- Eric Bell



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 11:57PM by Eric Allen Bell.

rrmoderator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eric Allen Bell:
>
> This is a public message board. People post their
> opinions here.
>
> You have posted responses to the posts about you,
> which is your prerogative and offers balance to
> whatever criticism is here.
>
> No need to post in huge bold colored text.
>
> Rather than personally attack your critics it
> makes more sense and frankly seems more credible
> to respond directly to the criticism itself. When
> you attack your critics personally it comes across
> like you are attempting to avoid responding
> directly to the criticism.


I get what you are saying. And I will restrain myself from using huge bold colored text moving forward.

That said, the problem here is not just the criticism. It's that a mentally unstable person is obsessively posting this stuff, on multiple sites, and has been doing so since 2012. Now, that is not an insult or an attack against this person, whose name is Lawrence Estavan. This is, from my point of view, a statement of fact.

As for responding to the actual accusations, I have been pretty thorough in responding to nearly all of them. But if I keep responding to the same accusations, in detail, over and over, then I get swept up in the lunacy. And I don't see how that is productive.

Eric Allen Bell and 1984

Quote

“ I feel like I'm in an Orwell novel.” – Eric Allen Bell

I hope you will forgive me, but I feel compelled to ring the changes on Eric’s latest inversion of reality. Anyone who knows Eric Allen Bell will tell you he loves playing the victim. He seems to be identifying here with Winston Smith, the victim of torture by agent of the state, O’Brian in Orwell’s “1984”.

The purpose of the torture is to get Smith to see with all his being that 2+2=5. The purpose of the novel is not to tell you authoritarians will try to get you to see 2+2 as 5. It is to tell you that authoritarians want to tell you that 2+2 equals anything they say it does. Recall that Eric Allen Bell is the one who told people one quadrillion was ten million, and a lot of people took his word for it. So, is Eric really Winston Smith or is he O’Brian?

There is this tidbit from the Wikipedia article about “1984” --

Quote

“O’Brian tells Winston that he can "cure" himself of his "insanity"—his manifest hatred for the Party—through controlled manipulation of perception.”

Remember Eric Allen Bell was only just now giving me advice on how to cure my insanity by moving my perception onto Huma Abedin.

Is it necessary for Eric Allen Bell to attack me from behind his kids? Please notice that he is supposedly protecting his kids from my cruelty. Would it not be closer to the truth to say that he is trying to use his kids as an excuse for shutting down this thread of discussion? He is not protecting his kids; he is hiding behind them. I have noticed his tendency to invert the meaning of things before, but this is a new low.

Again, my apology in advance, but reversal of meaning was a central theme in Orwell’s novel.
the Ministry of Peace dealt with war and defence.
the Ministry of Plenty dealt with economic affairs (rationing and starvation).
the Ministry of Love dealt with law and order (torture and brainwashing).
the Ministry of Truth dealt with news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda).

I do not think I am stretching too far here.

Recall his response to my challenging him over the state of his IMDb page. He got angry, told me I was insane, and that somehow his IMDb page was my responsibility.

Of course, there is the Pamela Geller campaign where weeks of “pressure” to do what Eric Allen Bell wanted, turned into simply “warning” Pamela. When the whole thing ended, Eric was telling his Facebook audience that Pamela Geller was persecuting him. Typical.

And, how about telling people they are insane in giant red letters?

Eric has alternately said the bounty is real, then not real, then real again. How is this in any way answering questions in detail?

I think Eric Allen Bell is O’Brian. They both have a secret identity. They both tell other people what to think. They both used organized force to pressure, or persuade people to get their way.

I am not trying to show you how clever I am with this conceit about Eric Allen Bell and “1984” but to show case that EAB does this a lot. He flips things on their head. He talks backwards. Once you start looking for it, you see it all the time. He uses this tactic to great effect.

He is not a victim. He defrauded the Counter Jihad Movement. There is no persecution, no one his stalking him. Nihad Awad is not trying to kill him. His kids are not in danger. He is not a victim. He assaulted the Counter Jihad Movement.

Now he wants to shut down this discussion. He wants to control this discussion for the sake of his kids. This is straight out of “1984”, except you do not have to believe it.

The truth is right in front of us.

Let’s clear up the discrepancies with IMDB:

In the world of motion pictures, a “Ghost Writer” is a screenwriter who does not take a film credit. This could be for any number of reasons. In my personal experience, it is because either the original writer does not want to share credit and the production company is willing to pay a Ghost Writer more than usual, to basically sell them that screen credit. This typically means more money, less glory. And if the movie is crap, this arrangement is ideal.

The other common reason I have experienced for accepting a Ghost Writer arrangement is this; the Director wants to be perceived as something of an “auteur” and prefers that the screen credit reads something like, “Written and Directed” by so and so, or “A Film by” so and so. I’ve done a few of these and there is only one where I really wish I had taken the screen credit instead of the money.

Now, that said, “Bell Media” has never produced anything, ever. There are numerous companies called “Bell Media” so I am only referring to the one that I own bears my last name. When a motion picture is produced, one of the first thing that must happen is a “single purpose entity” must be formed, some kind of limited liability company, such as an LLC, or a Sub Chapter S Corporation. This way, if the movie is sued for some reason, the writer or studio or whomever is less likely to get sued.

If I were to write a screenplay I would send it to two places immediately: 1) I would register it with the Library of Congress to make sure I have copyrighted my material. I may or may not put that in the name of Bell Media, instead of my name, depending on several potential circumstances, and; 2) I would register my screenplay with the WGA, or the Writer’s Guild of America. Again, that intellectual property could belong to me personally, or could belong (at least temporarily) to Bell Media.

You average working screenwriter in Hollywood writes a lot of scripts, for which they are paid, that never see the light of day. This is of course disappointing and sort of soul crushing at times. However, it’s also a living. And if someone offers you a substantial amount more than you are used to being paid, to fix someone else’s work, or to work with a Director and give them all the credit, it’s kind of hard to say no, if the price is right.

The last time that I wrote a screenplay and received full screen credit was for “Bondage” in 2006. It’s been all Ghost Writing since then. As a Ghost Writer, you are in violation of a legal agreement if you go out and start boasting to people that you have a hand in writing something for which you are supposed to remain a Ghost Writer.

Therefore, I will handle this next part delicately…

I was never involved, in any capacity, with the production of the motion picture entitled, “Wonderland”. Here is why IMDB temporarily kept getting that wrong:

In 2001 I had adapted a novel by Danny Sugerman (best selling author) for John Battsek (Oscar winning producer) called “Wonderland Avenue”. This was so long ago, we were in talks with Toby McGuire to play the teenage lead. The studio that was involved was 20th Century Fox and the executive in charge of the project was Senior Vice President, Fred Chandler. IMDB showed me as the credited screenwriter and the project was shown, on their website, as “In Development” for a few years, as I recall. Anyway, the movie never got made. And, because I was not a Ghost Writer, I can post all of those names and details here, in a public forum.

As for the other motion pictures that Lawrence Estavan has mentioned here, questioning my involvement, all I can really legally say is this: IMDB should not be showing me as a credited or uncredited screenwriter. This means that I may have had nothing to do with any of those titles, or some, or all, or again none, I cannot and will not say. End of story.

With regard to television shows that my Bell Media has been wrongly credited as being attached to, in any capacity, again that Bell Media has never produced anything, including television shows.

Finally, as for the two documentaries, “Selling the Future” and “American Infidel” these are projects that are in production. That means, since documentaries often take years to produce, that a significant amount of footage has been shot, people have given permission to have their names listed as appearing in the projects, or some other criteria, that IMDB requires, has been satisfied to show these projects in their current status, “In Production”. If the status shows that they are already produced and distributed, that would be incorrect.

I think that should cover everything, with regard to IMDB, with the exception of my salary information. I will just say this, on that topic. Some of that is correct and some of what is listed is way, way off, as in way too high. As for which and how much – that is my personal business. I have let IMDB know, as I have a subscription to that service, but for whatever reason, they keep it up there, incorrect.

In conclusion, all of the accusations made against me, by Larry Estavan, whether he was using his real name or posting as someone else, are false.

With the exception of the obvious mix up regarding “Wonderland” and “Wonderland Avenue” I will not confirm nor deny my involvement in any motion picture that I am asked about. It’s bad enough trying to find work in Hollywood as a Trump supporter. I’m not going to shoot myself in the foot by breaking the number one cardinal rule of Ghost Writing, which is to be essentially a ghost.

I hope the above clears up all of the attempts to smear me as taking credit for work I did not do, or otherwise trying to game the system, when it comes to how IMDB works. However, given the obsessive-compulsive patterns demonstrated over many years by my accuser, Larry Etavan, I doubt this will be put an end to this. After all, he has posted hundreds of character assassination attempts, on multiple websites, about me, since 2012.

- Eric Allen Bell



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2018 08:02PM by Eric Allen Bell.

I tried to fix the many typos in the post above, but waited too long for the system to allow it. Perhaps this will become a new thing to attack me for.