Eric Allen Bell is a counter-jihadist film maker, a liberal, who went to Murfreesboro, Tennessee to make a sympathetic documentary on the effort to build a mega-mosque there. When he learned the troubling connections of the people behind the mosque project, he turned his views around completely. Bell is now a member of the counter-jihad movement.
When the controversial video came out that was blamed for the rioting in the Middle East and the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Bell was wrongfully accused as being involved in that film. This forced him to go into hiding after numerous death threats.
In this clip, Bell is interviewed by Scott Jacobs of Democracy Broadcasting. Bell explains how being anti-jihad or even having objections to Islamic doctrine is not being anti-Muslim.
* In the interest of full disclosure, this video was sent to me by Bell, with whom I am acquainted. I am also acquainted with Scott Jacobs, who has interviewed me as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Allen Bell interviewed at an AFDI (American Freedom Defense Initiative) event, on the Counter Jihad, by Democracy Broadcasting News (Scott Jacobs at http://www.democracybroadcasting.com/ aka "Demo Cast" ). "No one is more victimized by Islam than Muslims" says Bell. Also, "You cannot be a true liberal without being against Islam, because nothing is more xenophobic and anti-human rights than Islam".
25 comments:
Thanks Gary,
It appears that Eric Allen Bell has a good understanding of Islam. The more devoted to Islam one becomes, the more that person can become a follower of the teachings of Islam and possibly engage in jihad.
Squid
The "bounty" that EAB has referenced hundreds of times online is for one quadrillion rupees, or roughly 19 trillion dollars.
EAB WANTED to be associated with the "Innocence of Muslims" YouTube video. He told the Israel National radio audience that four Pakistani newspapers had called for his death - that is a lie.
EAB received over a hundred death threats on Facebook, but did not mention those in his appeals for money. Instead, he made up lies about himself, upstaging the murder of Chris Stevens, and just stinking up the joint.
I really don't know what you are trying to do posting his videos, and I think it you look bad, and uninformed.
Anonymous,
That is your opinion. I am satisfied that he was wrongfully accused of involvement in the video and that he was the subject of many death threats.
Living Engine,
I recognize that not everybody in the counter jihad movement agrees with Bell. I am not aware of the anti-Semitic charges you raise, but would be open to seeing them. One of my causes is fighting anti-Semitism. I know that Bell proclaims to have no faith and I don't agree with all of his statements about religion in general.
It is also unfortunate that in-fighting sometimes results within our ranks. (I am not completely innocent in that regard.) We have many different ideas on how to fight this battle and how not to. Our occasional squabbles are unfortunate and only help the other side.
I am not up to speed on the divisions that may exist between Bell and Geller and Spencer, so I
can't comment on that.
As for making a fool of myself by posting things about him last year, and "promoting him", I don't think I did. That's your opinion. I felt that he had an important message to spread with his knowledge and experience with the Murfreesboro mosque. In addition, I was concerned that he was wrongfully accused of being linked with the infamous video and that he received death threats.
I hope I have explained my position.
For what he said on this video, I agree with him. I don't know what else he may have said that offends some people.
I particularly like his comment on the more devout you are the more dangerous you... it is the same point I've made a couple of times on this site.
Unless and until I see something that offends me or I think is way off base, I would give him a "LIKE" or whatever it is you do on Facebook when you approve.
.
Larry Estavan (Livingengine):
I have never made anti-semitic comments. I simply said stated I object to the theology of Judaism and that the tribalism, in some circles, is elitist. Sue me. The vast majority of Jewish people do not engage in the tribal elitism I have described. But the concept of "God's chosen people" is the height of arrogance. Criticizing Judaism is not off limits and it is not synonymous with antisemitism. I object to Christianity. Does that mean I must therefore hate Christians? Your logic is flawed.
I have never been in an FBI safehouse. I was in something of a safehouse, and the FBI was involved, but that does not add up to "FBI Safehouse". There were death threats, but to the best of my knowledge no formal "Fatwa"' as such. The money I collected for my movie and safety was around $2,000 and fell way short of what I personally I have spent on these items. Absolutely no one has asked for a refund of their donation or accused me of fraud. Your allegations are baseless.
The fact is, you post comments on every single Counter Jihad blog out there, repeating the same obsessive compulsive drivel about me, constantly, and have done so for over a year now. Please go back on your meds.
- Eric Allen Bell
Mr Estavan,
Now that Mr Bell has put a name to your identity, I feel that your comment was a bit misleading.
My question to you now is where are you coming from? Are you supportive of the counter-jihadist movement or against it? Quoting Spencer gives one the impression you favor the counter-jihadist movement but that Bell is a detriment to it.
Just what is your position here?
As to Bell's comment, disagreeing with Judaic theology is hardly what today's anti-Semitism is all about just as religion had nothing to do with Hitler's anti-Semitism. I am no fan of the Catholic church, but that doesn't mean I have anything against Catholics. I am married to one.
I would like you to clarify just what your position is on counter-jihad itself.
That said, I don't intend to let you use this blog as a platform to wage your campaign against Mr Bell as you have done at others.
Eric Bell repeats one of the canards that atheists ( and antisemites) have used for centuries. Most people who are not familiar with the Bible feel that this designation makes Jews "arrogant" because they were "chosen."
Believers know this designation is really a charge to the Jewish people to bring ethical monotheism to the world. That's it! There is one God and you should behave ethically. This has been too restrictive for many people over the centuries who want to do whatever they want for some justification.
The Jews have suffered inordinately because of this as any student of history knows full well. Their country is vilified for what all countries are allowed to do. This chosen people have been slaughtered by the millions because of some government policy. There are annual Hate Weeks in our colleges against only one people. Jews top th FBI list of victims of hate crimes year after year, far ahead of anyone ele. In no other people is anyone who is actually arrogant ever thought to be that way because of his religion. I have never in my life, and I doubt if Eric Bell has either, ever heard a Jew brag ( or even comment) about his being "chosen."
In fact, I wish God would give this obligation to some other people for a while and see how they like it.
.
Part one.
I had the misfortune of debating Eric Allen Bell on his channel yesterday.
He clearly only have a rudimentary and flawed understanding of Christianity, do it is very easy to debunk his vile and rather hate-filled accusations Christians and Christianity.
Knowing his history of mass-banning people and deleting comments on his Facebook page, I was, sadly, not surprised at all when I found out this morning that he had deleted nearly all my comments during the night. In itself this means nothing, but I will use these data later to make a case on a macro level.
Part two:
Not once did he complain about my comments not being factual, ad hominem attacks etc. You can see for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr0u491Pg_U
That a prominent, so-called free speech advocate and human rights activist deliberately deletes factual and logical comments on his own channel is pretty much unheard of on YouTube.
Combine that with his usual vicious attack on Christians here, that dared to thumb his comments down:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y40UxWFSajo
I have sporadically followed Eric Allen Bell and I truly believe that he has a pathological personality disorder that could be dangerous for our efforts to inform the public about Islam.
Part three:
When Eric Allen Bell had a hard time the Christian community took him in and genuinely cared for him and gave him money. To later see how these kind people and supporters of him, were viciously trashed with such an open and blunt disdain for their views and personality, was really disturbing. I sincerely believe only a sociopath would have the stomach to do it and especially in the way and manner it was done.
Eric Allen Bell has several times openly stated that his strategy is to trash and force Evangelical Christians out of the counter-Jihadi movement, so mainstream liberals can join.
He sincerely believe that liberals will not join the fight against Islam as long as they are in any danger of being associated with human garbage like Evangelical Christians.
This "analysis" is clearly not based on facts and logic. Here in Europe we have no Evangelical Christians, and unlike in the US, we have no real opposition to an Islamic take-over. The liberals (US meaning of the term) is nowhere to be found. They could not care less and most of them openly support the destruction of our Western Civilization and Judeo-Christian heritage. Clearly Eric Allen Bell's excuse for trashing ALL non-liberal, non atheist/pantheist anti-Jihadis is based solely bases on his own myths and fantasy world. Not on facts and logic. These and many comments like them were of course deleted in a rage by Eric Allen Bell. He is demonstrably NOT an advocate for free speech common values of the Western Civilization. He thus does not oppose Islam on any real principle ground. His opposition to Islam is fragile and not supported by any well founded and, for him, important world- and moral system. This makes him prone to change his position very easily and then start to attack us. Combine that with his new age lack of clear moral standards and you have a potential disaster.
As a sidenote, it is clear that Bell manipulates his viewer data on his videos.
Eric Allen Bell on the Counter Jihad:
Within a few days: Close to 300 000 views, more than 1 000 thumbs up, ONE thumbs down. Only 6 people commenting
Meditation on Being - by Eric Allen Bell
First virtually no views. Then suddenly more than 250 000 within a few days. More than 1 000 thumbs up and only thumbs down. Four people commenting.
Normally I have no problem with people manipulating their YT data. But as we all know, we within the counter-Jihadi movement is under such a tough scrutiny that we can not afford any dodgy methods in our movement. It will be relentlessly used against us, instead of debating the real issues in an academic manner.
I believe Eric Allen Bell is very dangerous for counter-Jihadi movement. He has a proven record of viciously backstabbing former friends and supporters. And more disturbingly, there is no other causality to his vile attacks than that he dislikes their opinions. He clearly adhere to moral relativism and is driven by openly hedonism and nihilism. If he crushed the whole counter-Jihadi movement I sincerely believe he would not care at all. His whole moral universe is centered around him and his narcissism.
I believe he is by far more dangerous than Charles Johnson. He could really harm our combined efforts against Islam in a very profound way.
Euro Dude,
Since you debated Bell on the radio, I assume you have a name?
Gary Fouse.
I have debated Eric Allen Bell on the comment section of his videos on his YouTube channel and briefly on his Facebook page before I was blocked and my comments deleted. This is his modus operandi.
With your background it should be obvious why I can not give you my name. How is that relevant anyway.
As long as you support this destructive fraud, you must share the blame if/when he turns on the whole counter-Jihadi community. For the time being you must share the blame for his vile and vicious trashing of the vast majority of the present counter-Jihadis, - as long as you promote him.
Other than that, it looks like you have a good and informative blog.
Blessings.
Hi, me again -
After securing more backing for my project, I was able to run paid ads on YouTube and dramatically drive up the metrics. I don't apologize for that. Actually, I think it's an effective way of reaching people. Much of this was done immediately after the news broke that the Boston Bombers were in fact Islamists.
There are many people who are furious with me for my comments regarding Christianity - to the point of being nearly psychotic about it. They feel they are owed something for reading my blogs, following me on Facebook or sending in a donation towards the film.
I was useful, coming from the Left, as someone who saw the light when it came to Islam. But as soon as the truth became known, that I find fault with religion in general, many people felt betrayed and said I was "not to be trusted". From a logical perspective, this simply makes no sense. It's irrational.
CAIR (LoonWatch) is trying to smear me by saying I am "antisemitic" and the rapture-ready crowd, within Counter Jihad, have accepted this as fact and used it to attack me.
It's quite simple. I'm being attacked because I have criticized Christianity and Judaism. This has triggered an irrational response in some, but certainly not most, religious people within Counter Jihad.
When I said that a huge chunk of the Counter Jihad movement is comprised of people who are actually on a religious crusade, the honeymoon was over. I went from poster boy to outcast in a heartbeat.
I'm not asking for donations, selling a book, running for office, etc. I'm indifferent to how the Religious Right perceives me.
I continue to stand behind what I said however - that so long as our movement has the flavor of the rapture-ready religious right, we will never be taken seriously by the general public. We cannot blame the "Liberal Media" for this, as they allow Bill Maher and Sam Harris to speak freely, often and at length, criticizing Islam, on major news networks. If we are aligned with the likes of Pat Robertson, if Eric Stackelback cannot find a way to get the word out without that CBN logo at the bottom of the screen, we will always be seen as religious zealots, engaged in a contest of religions.
Our own lunatic fringe is what damages our credibility. And ironically, it is that same lunatic fringe which accuses me of being crazy and a liability.
Well, we have no "rapture-ready religious right" in Europe, so if Eric Allen Bell's hypothesis were true, there would have been no problem for critics of Islam to be "seriously by the general public".
Anyone with the slightest knowledge of Europe know that this is simply not the truth. Far from it. Our situation is much, much worse than in the USA and Eric Allen Bell's fantasy based and illogical hypothesis is demonstrably false. The atheists in the European counter-Jihadi movement is fully aware of the fact that if we lose the Christians in the USA in our struggle against Islam, Western Civilization is doomed.
This is why this hate-filled and surrealistic strategy of Bell to trash Christians out of the movement is not only wildly absurd, but also extremely dangerous.
Why don't you come to Europe, ignorant Bell, and see for yourself how fantastic it is in Europe without the devout Christians that you hate so much. We desperately need people that are willing to stand up against Islam and risk their jobs, families and reputation.
A couple of millions of devout Christians marching in the streets of Europe against Islamic take-over, unafraid of the secular elites in media and academia, would have totally changed the situation.
Eric Allen Bell claims that Christians are on a crusade and want to compete with another religion. As usual he provide no facts and/or logic to support his laughable claim. As long as Jesus Christ was sinless and Islam's most perfect man, Muhammed, one of the most evil men in the recorded history of man, broke ALL the then commandments, it is clear for Christians that this is a struggle between good and evil. As a moral relativist and advocate of subjective morality, Eric Allen Bell is clearly unable to fathom this. But he clearly don't care about the truth and just continue to smear Christians as much as he can.
I challenge Bell to find ONE nation in Europe where Islam can be openly discussed in media and academia.
Eric Allen Bell is delusional and dangerously wrong. Reality proves him wrong and his cognitive reasoning is mostly based on hate and not logic.
by the way, the fraud Eric Allen Bell has clearly not been "able to run paid ads on YouTube and dramatically drive up the metrics".
If this was the case one would have seen some comments and under no circumstances would one have seen 1 178 thumbs up against one.
This traffic is not generated by humans and has no mission outside fueling Mr Bell's unhealthy narcissism. If Pat Condell ever get claims that he should not be taken seriously, since his view counts are most likely all fraud, with reference to the practice of Eric Allen Bell, everyone supported MR. Bell is to blame.
Euro Dude and Eric,
Now that I have figured out who Euro Dude is, I would like to address this response to both of you since I feel a bit caught in the middle.
Euro Dude
I am not familiar with the details of your debate or what was said. I assume you object to Bell's critical comments about religion in general including specific criticisms of Christianity and Judaism as religions.
I became acquainted with Eric after his work on the Murfreesboro mosque expose and when he was under threat for being falsely linked to the video "Innocence of Muslims". As one of those who reached out to help, I can say that those who also did were a combination of Christians, Jews and possibly others, all with varying degrees of religious conviction. I am a Protestant who is hardly an Evangelical Christian. I don't go to church nearly as much as I should. Though my wife is Catholic, I stopped attending church with her over the pedophilia scandal. While I criticize many aspects of the Catholic church, I am hardly against Catholic people. As a matter of fact, my own counter-jihad activity and writings do not translate into hating Muslims as people. In that vein, I don''t think that Eric,as an atheist, hates people who are Christian or Jew.
I should also point out that I have also supported you on occasion on this blog. I still do.
Eric,
I do disagree with you on one point. It is not just evangelical Christians and Pat Robertson types who are involved in the counter-jihad movement. I certainly don't fit into that category. I have read some of the back and forth between you and others I know on this issue. I find the whole discussion counterproductive. The point is that this is a battle in which, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Baha'i no matter how strong their religious beliefs, as well as women, gays, and anyone who cares about freedom and human rights must join together and work together. That also includes atheists. We should not be squabbling about our own religions or lack thereof, and I do not care if you are atheist. We are all under threat from the same source.
To both of you,
I myself have gotten involved in a little internecine squabbling on a couple of occasions, so I am not completely innocent. It happens, and it is unfortunate. The point is we should not be eating our own. One lesson I learned from my career in federal law enforcement is that when law enforcement agencies spend their time competing with each other and fighting with each other, the only winners are the bad guys. It is the same thing here.
I hope this clarifies my position on this issue. I don't have to agree with every single thing either of you say or write, but I still support both of you in your efforts to educate the public about this threat.
Living engine,
I have relegated the dozen or so messages you sent today to the spam box.
Your comments are no longer welcome on this site. They will not be read or posted.
My sense was, and remains, that Bell is a rather unstable individual, who got into the pro-mosque project more as a device for attention than sincere concern or sober analysis, and flipped the other way more or less by the same twisted mental process. He reminds me a bit of Whittaker Chambers, whose initial commitment to communism and later commitment to anti-communism were both indulgences of his inner psychic torment and egoism, rather than matters of principle. In short, Bell was crazy all along, no matter who he sided with or what he said.
Siarlys,
You missed your calling. Instead of driving a bus, you should have been a psychiatrist.
On the other hand, based on what I know about these mosque organizers, I side with Bell.
That's a bit like siding with the Marquis de Sade because Napoleon was a jerk.
This squabbling in the counter-jihad camp is a pity. I guess it's the product of the liberty in our society.
I guess I'm a natheist, though I don't like to define myself by something I do not believe in. The mistake that's being made in the ongoing discussion on this thread is that Islam is a religion. I find it a culural thing, a socio-political entity and yes, a totalitarian ideology. When the West fought Communism we didn't squabble about attacking this and also other religions.
Islam is Communism with a God. It's not attacking a "religion," but a "clash of civilisation." Islam has been hostile to everything not islam throughout history (although I don't think the West is so innocent either).
The western way of life is heavily influenced by Christianity (good things and bad things). I side with Christians anyday, because it's our way of life that's at stake (our freedoms, our equality of gender and race etc and our education). I don't agree with Christians on specific points, but we have way more in common than we do with muslims. No, certainly not all muslims are fundamental, but they are potential prey for the fundamentalists. It's the premise of the ideology that we must root out. The negative and deragotive elements. That means that the core of Islam, the teachings themselves should be altered or better, many elements should be thrown out.
I don't know much about Eric Allen Bell exept I've seen his presentation on Youtube and his apearance on the Glazov Gang. I can relate to him in some extent in the way that I too was somewhat of a liberal in my teens. I wasn't active, but that was just the way my surroundings was. It was normal until I started to actually read and think for myself. I guess you can call me an atheistic conservative now.
I hope we can set our differences aside and realy tackle this problem head on.
Bart,
I think you put it in very good perspective except that to alter the basics of Islam is to repudiate the Koran and the life of the Prophet in major portions. How can that be done? Luther in the Reformation did not rebel against the Bible or Christ rather than corruption of the Vatican.
At any rate, Islam aside from a religion, is indeed a totalitarian political ideology with a legal code called sharia, portions of which call for the death penalty for things we don't even consider crimes. It is a matter of us educating the public and that is being done each day, so the numbers of informed people can only grow and not diminish.
As you said, it is unfortunate that we squabble amongst ourselves. I have been guilty7 of it myself. I guess it is the nature of the beast as soon as one person disagrees with the tactics of another in fighting this ideology. It is the same as when I was in law enforcement. When police agencies engage in in-fighting, the bad guys win.
Thanks for your comment.
Hi Gary,
I agree with you that it will be difficult if not right down impossible to change Islam the way Christianity has changed in the West. Our blindness to the dangers and indeed depraved morality of it (treatment of women, gays, Jews, Christians, heck everything nonmuslim along with the prevailing principles) is mainly due to the resurgence of extreem leftwing views, which is taught in schools. I guess the sixties do have a great influence on our way of life after all.
Its not only the core of Islam that we are fighting, is's also that damn political correctness. When I first heard the term (about ten years ago) I realy thought it was a joke. I couldn't imagine what was meant by it. Well, as I discovered: it's just towing the line of the people with the loudest mouths. Or creeping statism, like in the Soviet Union.
How is it that especially liberals can't seem to grasp the idea that battling (fundamental) islam is helping well meaning and in essence secular muslims? How is it that liberals think not offending a group of people is more important than to guarantee the rights of every person, especially minorities (women, gays, apostates)?
I guess for some it is because they think it's the right thing to do, others are afraid and still others use it as a political weapon. When we look throughout history, everywhere here the muslim population grows, there's trouble. Just some recent exemples: Indonesia, Birma, Thailand, Sudan, Bangladesh, Georgia. The point is: there's no way (a mojority of) muslims can live with non-muslims (let alone with women and gays) without there being trouble, oppression and violence.
We, that is the socialist elites, in Europe believe that islam is just another religion, basically just misunderstood. How come there has always been war at the borders of Islam? Of course, ideoloque leftists are masters in revisionism and so the European youth is getting a sugar coated history of Islam. In some ways, Nazism did start the same way. People thought it could do no harm or were indeed afraid.
Marie Le Pen has been recently accused of offending muslims and abshing a religion by comparing the occupation of France by the Nazi's to the influx en spreading of Islam in France now. When you are being accused of a crime by saying something that is demonstrabely true, our society is in deep trouble.
Bart,
You are correct and identify the problem. This has to be attacked from a human rights perspective. We are tolerating intolerance in the very name of tolerance. Meanwhile, Europe is back in the 1930s. A new form of Nazism is on the march. When will Europeans wake up-when uniformed Islamists are dragging them out of their own homes and putting them in camps?
Post a Comment