Michael Moore sued for Farenheit 9/11
POSTED BY: Amiton
UPDATED: Monday, June 5, 2006 03:06
VIEWED: 12492
PAGE 1 of 13
For my own personal feelings, I've never liked Michael Moore and he irritates me to no end. With that in mind, this makes me very happy.
From F*x News:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,197637,00.html
Quote:
Iraq Vet Sues Michael Moore for Misleading Interview in 'Fahrenheit 9/11'
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
By Jennifer Fermino
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. — A double-amputee Iraq-war vet is suing Michael Moore for $85 million, claiming he recycled an old interview and used it out of context to make him appear anti-war in "Fahrenheit 9/11."
Sgt. Peter Damon, 33, who strongly supports America's invasion of Iraq, said he never agreed to be in the 2004 movie, which trashes President Bush.
In the 2003 interview, which he did at Walter Reed Army Hospital for NBC News, he discussed only a new painkiller the military was using on wounded vets.
"They took the clip because it was a gut-wrenching scene," Damon said Tuesday. "They sandwiched it in. [Moore] was using me as ammunition."
Damon seems to "voice complaint about the war effort" in the movie, according to the lawsuit.
But what the father of two from Middleborough, Mass., was really talking about was the "excruciating" pain he felt after he lost his arms when a Black Hawk helicopter exploded in front of him.
Damon wasn't expressing any opinion about the war, the suit charges, but rather extolling the drug.
"I just want everybody to know what kind of a guy Michael Moore is, and what kind of film this is," said Damon. He has appeared in two films attacking "Fahrenheit" -- "Michael Moore Hates America" and "Fahrenhype 9/11."
In "Fahrenheit 9/11," the bandaged National Guardsman is shown laying on a gurney complaining that he feels like he's "being crushed in a vise. But they [the drugs] do a lot to help it and they take a lot of the edge off it."
His image appears seconds after Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) says, "You know, they say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind."
Damon -- the dad of an 8-year-old girl and a 4-year-old boy -- doesn't come close to feeling that way.
"He couldn't have picked the worst guy to say that about," he told The Post.
"I'm the most fortunate disabled guy. I've even had a house built for me [by a nonprofit group, Home for Our Troops]."
Particularly outrageous to Damon is the fact that Moore never interviewed him or asked his permission to use the old clip.
"I was complaining about the pain I would've been having [if it weren't for the painkiller]," he said.
NBC is named in the suit -- which was filed in Suffolk County, Mass., on Friday -- along with Harvey and Robert Weinstein, Miramax Corp., Lions Gate Films and other production companies involved with the picture.
Newsman Brian Williams ends the NBC clip by adding, "These men, with catastrophic wounds are ... completely behind the war effort," according to the lawsuit.
That part, which wasn't shown in the Moore movie, is a far more accurate depiction of Damon's feelings, he said.
Lawyer Dennis Lynch said he took the case last year and they held off filing the lawsuit in a bid to settle the matter.
"We attempted to resolve the situation amicably with Mr. Moore [for a year] but he refused," he said.
Damon is asking for up to $75 million because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation."
In addition, his wife is suing for another $10 million because of the "mental distress and anguish suffered by her spouse."
Spokeswomen for NBC and Harvey and Robert Weinstein would not comment because they haven't seen the suit. Lions Gate doesn't comment on pending litigation, a rep said.
Michael Moore and Miramax reps didn't return calls for comment.
Pros, cons, what have you. Please discuss
Amiton.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Damon is asking for up to $75 million because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation."
In addition, his wife is suing for another $10 million because of the "mental distress and anguish suffered by her spouse."
I don't think this is right.
River
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No, River. I think that's more than a little excessive as well. I'm not blindly happy about this all. For example, I know the current administration is out of line for a lot of their policies, especially foreign policy. At the same time, I wouldn't shed a tear if Michael Moore was completely discredited, bankrupted, and had to return every penny he's made off of this movie. $85M might be appropriate if this were somehow turned into a class-action kind of deal...wishful thinking, but it makes me feel better.
Amiton.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Michael Moore is irritates me, which is why I haven't seen any of his movies yet. Keep meaning to, but it just never happens.
I think this guy is suing for way way too much. I tend to think this entire country is lawsuit-happy. And that movie came out around 3 years ago? I know it was when I still lived in the dorms. It seems like his lawsuit filing is a little late if he really experienced that much anguish. Maybe he didn't see the movie until recently, but someone he knew must have seen it and should have told him. I kind of wonder about his actual motives in deciding to file the lawsuit now.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by RiveR6213:
Damon is asking for up to $75 million because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation."
In addition, his wife is suing for another $10 million because of the "mental distress and anguish suffered by her spouse."
I don't think this is right.
The damages in this case are directly related to the success of the movie. Moore made alot of money with this movie, so asking for alot of money is reasonable, especially if all the allegations contained in the news report are accurate.
In essense Moore took this man's likeness without his permission, then cropped it in such a way as to completely misrepresent this person's belief's. As a result the veteran has suffered damage to his reputation among his friends and been made the subject of international scrutiny he did not seek and would not have consented to. Further, it was done under the worst possible circumstances.
In essense Mr. Moore preyed upon an innocent and unknowing wounded soldier, suffering untold anguish and exploited him for political purposes and financial gain. But then Moore is just following the Democratic playbook. Look how they treat the blacks...
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'll agree that Moore has become pretty irritating, to the point of undermining the statements he makes. And this comes from someone who supports many of the same positions (gun control, Bush sucks, ect.)
But, if you want to check out one of his movies, I would recommend "Roger and Me", which was his first feature length doc, made before he became a media whore. It's about the economic crash his home town experienced after GM shut down the plant the town's economy revolved around. It's still political, but it's more grounded and believeable than the screeds he put forth in Bowling for Columbine and Farenheit 911.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I wonder if Damon was coming up to a statute of limitations for lawsuits. You know, strike while the iron's hot, make hay while the sun shines, get while the gettin's good, never let an opportunity pass you by.
There's a lot of details I'm hazy on. Did NBC broadcast it? Does that put it in the public domain? Does NBC have copyrights on it?
Then too, did Moore imply the vet himself felt left behind? (by the US, not by god). Or, in context, was he just an example of those Moore said were being left behind, but not implying any personal position on the part of the vet.
I can imagine a newscast like this: the NO Superdome crowds in the background of a news clip with one or to faces particularly visible. This clip being used later in a documentary where the filmmaker says "these people abandoned by government..."
Would one of those identifiable backdrop people used to illustrate the clip have the right to sue claiming they didn't FEEL abandoned?
Not defending either side (though the lawsuit does seem opportunistic), but these details bug me.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
[B
In essense Mr. Moore preyed upon an innocent and unknowing wounded soldier, suffering untold anguish and exploited him for political purposes and financial gain. But then Moore is just following the Democratic playbook. Look how they treat the blacks...
H
You're right. The Republicans are much better in that regard.
They manipulate and exploit everyone.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Isn't this an example of why Bush is so eager for tort reform?
heh heh heh
Yes, it seems VERY opportunistic. I doubt that this guy's reputation is really worth $75 million. But whoever "owns" the material, Michael Moore should have made sure to ask permission of the interviewee to use it in his film, not just of NBC.
---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ah Zero,
We must have cross-posted. I see you're posting your usual swill.
So, do you think you can answer any of my questions? Just curious, is all.
Edited to add - SignyM is right. Anyone can sue. And if you're going to sue, you might as well sue big. The fact that 'someone sued' isn't really news, b/c, I suspect, he was just getting his paperwork in before time ran out. Now, if he WINS, that WILL be a story. Assuming they don't toss it out as frivolous, see you in a couple of years on this.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME