Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Iraq War Amputee Sues Michael Moore for Misrepresenting Views

The New York Post reports on a double-amputee veteran from the Iraq war who is suing Michael Moore for $85 million for taking out of context a statement he made to NBC News. The clip was shown in the film "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 yesterday. "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."

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Its not like anything is going to come of this. He made a movie, and can say whatever he wants. This guy came out and argued against the conjecture. End of story. Trying to prove that it was malicious to the dude is not going to happen.

Jim said...

I think Michael Moore should counter sue the guy for appearing in "Michael Moore Hates America." Michael Moore has never said that he hates America, but that he is attempting to expose the policies of the current administration. To say that MM hates America shows a reckless disregard for the truth. MM should sue.

Neither case will go anywhere. Talk about your fivolous lawsuit tying up the courts, Game!!

The Game said...

Just putting the story out there, Moore's movies have been proven to be crap and lies, he is completely irrelevant to anyone who is not clouded by blind liberalism...

Anonymous said...

Yeah, all his bogus documenting in 'Roger And Me" and "Bowling For Columbine" is just rubbish, right? You have to be a total extremist liberal to value either one of those, I think....

The Game said...

Also, were this guys comments altered and edited in MMHA?

That is what is happening...MMHA is the name of a movie, if things MM has said are changed, then it is slander, otherwise he is simply making his own bed.

Anonymous said...

Its only slander if its meant to hurt the person(malicious), and was intentionally misquoted. Thats why jim says either has an equally non-viable means to argue for slander. Neither would win.

The Game said...

If this guy said something, and MM edited it to make it seem like he is saying something else, he would clearly win...its amazing common sense does not enter the comments on this blog very often

Jim said...

Starting from the top. :-)

Game, then every person or organization who made a politcal commercial would be subject to huge lawsuits for editing content to give it a certain slant.

There is no "clearly" anywhere in this except that there is no case.

Anonymous said...

Especially since you seem to be a common offender, game. Read the comment I posted right above yours....again, I guess.

The Game said...

I have talked to lawyers and rhyno is atleast partially right...
it might be hard to get a conviction if it can not be proved MM intentially tried to harm this guy...

public figures like politicians are not protected by slander and liable laws like average Americans are...otherwise every liberal MSM worker would be in jail for their stories about Bush

Jim said...

Please provide actual proof that any MSM worker has slandered or libeled George W. Bush. Please. I'll read it. I swear!

jhbowden said...

Jim--

'Michael Moore Hates America' actually is a balanced commentary on the shrillness of today's political discourse. You'll find it enjoyable despite the abrasive title; I highly recommend it.