BuffettNews.com

To those who support Michael Moore and think of him loving and supporting our troops....

Moore and MIRAMAX are now being sued for $85 MILLION by a troop that lost both arms in Iraq when a helicopter exploded.

Maybe the others who have proven their comments were taken out of context will sue him as well.

Be sure to read the whole article for more info.....


*************************************************************
Iraq Veteran Sues Moore Over 9/11 Film

http://wwwj.comcast.net/movies/news/ind ... 04065.html

BOSTON - A veteran who lost both arms in the war in Iraq is suing filmmaker Michael Moore for $85 million, alleging that Moore used snippets of a television interview without his permission to falsely portray him as anti-war in "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Sgt. Peter Damon, a National Guardsman from Middleborough, is asking for damages because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation," according to the lawsuit filed in Suffolk Superior Court last week.

....................

It will be interesting to see how this turns out, to put mildly. I have to admit that Moore's style of editing certainly takes a lot statements out of context or leaves out the complete statement. It reminds me of 60 minutes and other "news" programs and how they choose to edit interviews to slant the final product they way they want it. Creative news reporting is nothing new and is why I find that I always have to keep my salt handy so I can take a grain as needed.

The Lost Manatee wrote:It will be interesting to see how this turns out, to put mildly. I have to admit that Moore's style of editing certainly takes a lot statements out of context or leaves out the complete statement. It reminds me of 60 minutes and other "news" programs and how they choose to edit interviews to slant the final product they way they want it. Creative news reporting is nothing new and is why I find that I always have to keep my salt handy so I can take a grain as needed.

Michael Moore DID NOT use this for "News" he used it in an award winning documentary...which to me, says a lot about what and who wins an award.

I hope this soldier wins. The Sgt did serve and sacrifice so much and for Moore to use him in such a way istotally INEXCUSABLE!!!

Moore claims he loves and supports our troops, well we see just how much he cares and loves them, when he does this to them in such manner. DON'T WE?

Has anyone seen Farenhype-9/11 ? where the people tell about what more did to them and how his creative editing was not the TRUTH?

Michael Moore and Miramax won awards and made TONS of money off of their documentary from the pain and blood and suffering and loss of limbs.

May they not only pay that much and MORE, but may they have to issue and pay for it in a full page add in every major newspaper and on every major tv channel , as well as in theaters wear that so called documentary was shown, a FULL public apology and admit what they did, was just PLAIN WRONG!!! and give the awards back as they were made under false pretenses!

Flyboy,
Do you, still think Michael Moore is such a "HERO" and someone to respect??? Someone that would do this or such as this, to a wounded soldier is someone you would respect and honor???

I guess if he feels embarassed and misrepresented by the way his comments were used in Fahrenheit 911 he is entitled to take Michael Moore to court. Although $85Million seems a little steep for the damage done to his reputation more power to him - go big or go home as they say.

It must be expensive to sue someone for $85Million. I'm sure Michael Moore and Miramax can afford some expensive legal help to fight this thing. But I wonder who is paying Sgt. Peter Damon's legal fees? If this thing drags on long enough and he loses, he could be liable for court costs in the millions. He must have backers with lots of cash to lay on the table.

While some felt compelled to label Cindy Sheehan a "tool" of the left-wing liberal anti-Bush America haters, a similar line of thinking might lead some to think that Sgt. Damon is being used by the right-wing conservative pro-Bush Michael Moore haters. I don't know if I believe this, anymore than I believed it about Cindy Sheehan.

Makes you wonder, though, if Michael Moore is being "Swift Boated" by the backroom boys with an axe to grind.

flyboy55 wrote:I guess if he feels embarassed and misrepresented by the way his comments were used in Fahrenheit 911 he is entitled to take Michael Moore to court. Although $85Million seems a little steep for the damage done to his reputation more power to him - go big or go home as they say.

It must be expensive to sue someone for $85Million. I'm sure Michael Moore and Miramax can afford some expensive legal help to fight this thing. But I wonder who is paying Sgt. Peter Damon's legal fees? If this thing drags on long enough and he loses, he could be liable for court costs in the millions. He must have backers with lots of cash to lay on the table.

While some felt compelled to label Cindy Sheehan a "tool" of the left-wing liberal anti-Bush America haters, a similar line of thinking might lead some to think that Sgt. Damon is being used by the right-wing conservative pro-Bush Michael Moore haters. I don't know if I believe this, anymore than I believed it about Cindy Sheehan.

Makes you wonder, though, if Michael Moore is being "Swift Boated" by the backroom boys with an axe to grind.

Actually I don't think you are even close. No one is putting words in his mouth. Other than Michael Moore and Miramax.
I notice you did not say anything negative about Moore or Miramax for such conduct.

I am sure one can find a lawyer to sue anyone in such a case. for a percentage.... it happens all the time.

The only thing I wonder is WHY Moore and Miramax have gotten away with this for so long.....

AGAIN I ASK YOU ....is this a good and fair thing to do to a veteran that lost so much? ANd do you still consider Michael Moore (and Miramax) to be heroes and to be respected for doing such?
Simple answer...YES!!! or NO!!! ANSWER PLEASE!!! Cindy Sheehan and/or no one else has anything to do with this!!! Rven she has become to extreme vof a lot or at least some of the so called Peace Activist.

Michael Moore clearly has a biased attitude and biased opinion towards the war, and is known to edit what people say.

So unless you are calling Sgt Damon a liar or he is lying about what happened. No you have not xalled or referred to Sgt Damon was either one. YOU DID try to through the question off topic and change the direction.

I do doubt Fgt. Damon would risk honor and loss of limbs for such as you may have described.

However many people, have come forward about the highly proclaimed video Michael Moore and Miramax produced.
Have you bothered to watch or have you heard of FarenHYPE 9/11
It is in direct rebuttal to Moore and Miramax's award winning work.

No doubt you would believe those people to pawns too....The same people in Michael Moore and Miramax's documentary. Making the claims they made, that were ignored by the MSM,
Why are they telling the truth for the left and only a pawn or mouthpiece for the Right???

Which side of them do you believe? The one that suits Michael Moore ( and your ) cause? Or the one against Michael Moore and his cause and your "apparent" beliefs? Who is the liar?? Moore and Miramax or the people on the film/movie/documentary Moore and Miramax made???
Especially the way Moore and Miramax portrayed them and his creative editing?

Perhaps you best research Sgt Damon and what he will do with that $85 MILLION before you make up your mind about what you think about him and the lawsuit because it is against Michael Moore and your beliefs.

Michael Moore does not care who or how he uses them to get his way.
That is qutie clear.....

flyboy55 wrote:It must be expensive to sue someone for $85Million. I'm sure Michael Moore and Miramax can afford some expensive legal help to fight this thing. But I wonder who is paying Sgt. Peter Damon's legal fees? If this thing drags on long enough and he loses, he could be liable for court costs in the millions. He must have backers with lots of cash to lay on the table.

Some attorney will "gamble" on this and pick up the fees and such, then take a cut of the settlement/judgement amount, 10-25% of 85 Million would be a nice payday, even if they have to shell out 10-20 grand in fees...

It's how a lot of those "personal injury" attorneys work... You don't pay the fees, they just take a cut of your proceeds....

Sam, my point wasn't that Michael Moore was using this as news but rather that many "news" programs use similar editing styles to pitch their stories in such a way as to garner support for their editorial view. I know of several "stories" that air on 60 Minutes that resulted in lawsuits because quotes were taken out of context. When 60 Minutes wanted to do a story on Kerr Magee in the late 80's or early 90's KM said that they would agree to interviews only if they could have their own camera crew along side to record everything that was said done. 60 Minutes declined those terms. So what Michael Moore seems to specialize in is the same sort of loose editing, hence my taking a large grain of salt when I watch his works and those of much of the news media.

I have watched both FarenHype 9/11 and Farenheit 9/11 and I thought and still think that both are politically motivated and that both seemed to be pursuing a specific agenda.

As an aside, one of the attorneys that I work with pointed out that the interview that Michael Moore used was actually obtained from NBC and suspects that NBC obtained a release from Sgt. Damon. If that is the case then Sgt. Damon's case may be a very hard one to pursue against Michael Moore if it is a standard release which states that the person gives up all rights of ownership (and thus control) of the recording. If no release was signed then NBC is actually going to be the one held most responsible and they will be the ones paying out lots of money.

I suspect that if it isn't settled out of court this will be a most enlightening trial.

I've been doing a little research, actually a fair bit on Sgt. Peter Damon and I have yet to find anything specific about his intentions regarding the money should he win. I'm sure 1/3 will go to the lawyers and another 1/3 to taxes but I'm not finding any quotes or statements from Sgt. Damon indicating his intentions. Would you be kind enough to post that information?

The Lost Manatee wrote:Sam, my point wasn't that Michael Moore was using this as news but rather that many "news" programs use similar editing styles to pitch their stories in such a way as to garner support for their editorial view. I know of several "stories" that air on 60 Minutes that resulted in lawsuits because quotes were taken out of context. When 60 Minutes wanted to do a story on Kerr Magee in the late 80's or early 90's KM said that they would agree to interviews only if they could have their own camera crew along side to record everything that was said done. 60 Minutes declined those terms. So what Michael Moore seems to specialize in is the same sort of loose editing, hence my taking a large grain of salt when I watch his works and those of much of the news media.

I have watched both FarenHype 9/11 and Farenheit 9/11 and I thought and still think that both are politically motivated and that both seemed to be pursuing a specific agenda.

As an aside, one of the attorneys that I work with pointed out that the interview that Michael Moore used was actually obtained from NBC and suspects that NBC obtained a release from Sgt. Damon. If that is the case then Sgt. Damon's case may be a very hard one to pursue against Michael Moore if it is a standard release which states that the person gives up all rights of ownership (and thus control) of the recording. If no release was signed then NBC is actually going to be the one held most responsible and they will be the ones paying out lots of money.

I suspect that if it isn't settled out of court this will be a most enlightening trial.

I've been doing a little research, actually a fair bit on Sgt. Peter Damon and I have yet to find anything specific about his intentions regarding the money should he win. I'm sure 1/3 will go to the lawyers and another 1/3 to taxes but I'm not finding any quotes or statements from Sgt. Damon indicating his intentions. Would you be kind enough to post that information?

Point granted!
Sgt.Damon was on Fox News this morning in an interview. I will leave at the money is not for him.

Maybe both sides are politically motivated but it is hard to argue with people that say "That is NOT what I said or MENT and has been taken out of context!", when creative editing is involved in the statements they ACTUALLY made.
Moore nor Miramax are reporters! They made a supposedly true and ACCURATE documentary. They led people that watched it that all the people involved supported his side of the story. CLEARLY THEY DID NOT.

Knowing people who are there and have been there, I know full well the MSM nor Moore, nor Miramax have told us anything close to an unbiased truth.

I cannot speak for any or from, any sort of legal aspects about either side.
I know Sgt Damon has my full support.... and I hope he wins this case!
Perhaps others may go after Moore and others that do such and MAYBE (HOPEFULLY!!) we can get away from such.

Sam, Thank you for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to hear me out.

I agree that Michael Moore took great liberties with his editing. I don't expect him to tell me the truth anymore then I expect 60 minutes does. I recall right after Moore's movie came out Patrick Kennedy trashed Moore because he edited out the complete response to Moore's question about how many of Rep. Kennedy's children were serving in the military. Rep. Kennedy responded that none of his children were serving because none of them were old enough but he had several nephews and a niece serving in the military. The only part that made it into the movie was the "none".

To me this isn't honest but it's not exactly surprising given how much spin people put on the news and in the movies.

I guess I've become very cynical about the media and the ethics of a great many people.

Have a great weekend

The Lost Manatee wrote:Sam, Thank you for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to hear me out.

I agree that Michael Moore took great liberties with his editing. I don't expect him to tell me the truth anymore then I expect 60 minutes does. I recall right after Moore's movie came out Patrick Kennedy trashed Moore because he edited out the complete response to Moore's question about how many of Rep. Kennedy's children were serving in the military. Rep. Kennedy responded that none of his children were serving because none of them were old enough but he had several nephews and a niece serving in the military. The only part that made it into the movie was the "none".

To me this isn't honest but it's not exactly surprising given how much spin people put on the news and in the movies.

I guess I've become very cynical about the media and the ethics of a great many people.

Have a great weekend

You are more than welcome and most welcome. I do agree with what you have posted/said. I thank you for your response and replys.

My point is that people listen to the propaganda and continue to believe it.
No matter from Michael Moore or where or which side it comes from.
Do they not realize that such propaganda only ultimately hurts our troops?

We want and expect and deserve the truth, niether the bias of Michael Moore, 60 Minutes, nor any other type /such shows give us the truth and let us decide, because they tell us THEIR TRUTH. Either we believe that all of OUR TROOPS are screw ups and cannot do anything right or correctly , other than die and get wounded.......which considering how many troops we have in Iraq and elsewhere and how many Mission Completes and objectives they have overcome.........All the MSM and Moore and others are content in doing is bragging about and announcing the successes and Mission Completes of our enemy.

THEY ARE NOT TELLING US THE WHOLE PICTURE OF THE SITUATION, NOR are they apprently interested in doing so. All they care about is their political agenda and achieving such at any means,......even it it means OU TROOPS and Coalition Forces and others being murdered by terrorists.

If they want to tell us that X amount of troops were killed and announce it like a grand opening of a new store.......then why don't they bother to cshow us what Airman so-n-so or troop LCP whatever did?

Their agenda is quite clear..it is not about telling us the TRUTH....it is all about "IF IT BLEEDS IT LEADS" SCREW THE TRUTH!
Some reporters REFUSED to wear the AMerican Flag because it MIGHT show bias. We have natioal news agency that encouraged this policy. We also have National news agencies that said they will NO LONGER call the attackers "TERRORISTS" and now call them "INSURECTIONISTS" .

Whose side are they REALLY on? The "bad guys" are terrorists plain and simple.