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.

---

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.

---

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

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

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

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RiveR6213:
Sure the people that were hurt by this movie should sue, but $85 million dollars? I don't think so.

---

Quote:

---

Also, don't even get me started on what I think about your comment regarding the Democrat’s treatment of blacks in America.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
85 Million is WAAY to much.

Certainly when you consider what a war widow gets from the US Governmnet.

If she is lucky, she gets 250,000 for insurance, and then social security - OH and then she gets 2 weeks to vacate military housing if she is in it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
Gee, um as a Navy wife, your numbers are the ones that are off.

Having recently had friends that have had loved ones killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, I can tell you that what you have detailed is not happening.

The SGLI has only recently been increased to a maximum of $400,000. And not all service members carry that much. And Wowhee! A whole $700.00 for a death benefit! I guess that is to offset the overpayment you get charged if your spouse is killed after payday.

Have you actually looked at how much SSI (Social Security) you would get for a child. I did. About $211 per child. Thats a big help.

As for the access to housing and base access. Base commanders have always had the option to allow families to stay in housing for up to 6 months. It is very rarely used. All of the widows I know where given 2 weeks. In one instance, the moving truck showed up at the door before the widow got back from the funeral.

I suppose that the fact they can be buried in a national cemetary is a plus, although I don't know many people can afford the fare to get to one.

My insurance policy pays out $500,000 even in the case of a suicide. And I pay dearly for that.

All in all, the benefits offered to the military community in both death benefits as well as wage are criminal. Especially when counted against the wages of politicians.

If one wants to support the troops - be vocal on paying them a living wage.



I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:


Have you actually looked at how much SSI (Social Security) you would get for a child. I did. About $211 per child. Thats a big help.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:

Just cut him a check for $150K and everyone's happy (except for the lawyers - screw 'em).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
Gee, um as a Navy wife...

All in all, the benefits offered to the military community in both death benefits as well as wage are criminal. Especially when counted against the wages of politicians.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Did you marry for love or money?
De-lurking to stir stuff up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dc4bs:


Basicaly, if Moore told me the sky was blue, I'd want to check with at least 3 REPUTABLE scientists just to make sure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RiveR6213:
It’s not all B.S.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Yes, those good old boy republicans who put troops on black marchers were certianly WAAAYYY better than democrats.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Browncoats don't marry for money. They marry for love and figger out a way to get the money. Even legal ways.
What moon are you from?

---

Quote:

---

It's all propaganda. Right, Left. The truth is in the Center.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

I thought Browncoats were tricked into marriage by those trying to get their ship or perhaps their pants.

---

Quote:

---

"He was a specific individual being quoted in a way that misrepresented the context of what he was saying in that quote."
Was he? That part is very unclear. From the quotes I read, with the words he used, he was pretty obviously NOT talking about the war. That's what made me think he was, crudely said, background material. Simply a man in serious pain, portrayed BY THE FILMMAKER as being dumped by the system he served.

---

Quote:

---

"that *has* to be actionabale"
Ah, but the devil is in the details, which are lacking.

---

Quote:

---

"a *huge* percentage of the military ... were ready to crucify Michael Moore after they saw this movie"
Roughly 80% of the military currently in Iraq STILL thinks Hussein perpetrated 9/11. Could this (trivial) misconception have something to do with that?

---

Quote:

---

"I don't know many people that had any clue how far off the mark he was until the rebuttal documentaries came out"
Not sure where you're going with this. Are you trying to debate the lawsuit timing or Moore's claims?

---

Quote:

---

"it doesn't invalidate what is being said"
No, it doesn't and I hope I didn't imply that it did.
My interpretation of what little I learned from the article is that there's no basis for his claim. That would invalidate them.
My supposition about why, and when, he was making his claim was that it wasn't being resolved to his $$$atisfaction in a timely way. Not knowing how that particular court works I can only draw on my labor experience, and conclude that attempting informal resolution doesn't relieve time limits. Having said that, I think he saw his clock ticking down. And anyone can always sue. If it's something covered by insurance, it's usually for a minimal few thousand dollars to make them go away rather than fight in court. But if it's not covered, then you might as well sue for big bucks. So, simply filing a bloated lawsuit is a miniscule matter. As I said before, that someone chose to sue is not news.
It will only be news if he wins.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:
I'm a REALLY good old boy Republican, the kind who sent troops to break black chains.

---

Quote:

---

Party of TR

---

Quote:

---

, Reagan,

---

Quote:

---

Bush

---

Quote:

---

...all the same theme. Liberty, rugged individualism, American Manifest Destiny

---

Quote:

---

to bring the blessings of liberty to a dark and stormy world.

---

Quote:

---

Not to take away from the Democratic Presidents.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverman:
Did you ever think that maybe the rest of the world isn't sitting there saying to themselves "Damn, I wish the Americans would come over and impose their system on us, and blow up my home in the process." ? Did you ever think that maybe we dont have the right to tell the rest of the world what the best system is?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
My ire goes to only a very few people - I count, let me think ... Slick, Zero, Geezer2, Unwrapped, and Finn, who hasn't been christened yet.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:
[B American liberty are tyrants, despots, fanatics, those people who've never known better, and those people who should know better.

H

---

Quote:

---

Pres. Bush lies, twists facts, and takes things out of context, so he should be impeached and prosecuted.
Mr. Moore lies, twists facts, and takes things out of context, and should be praised for providing a valuable public service.
Why the difference?

---