T1B

So legal eagles does this guy have a case? Seems to me like he might. Not sure he will get that much and will probably settle but wondering about the legal aspect.......


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.

Damon, 33, claims that Moore never asked for his consent to use a clip from an interview Damon did with NBC's "Nightly News."

He lost his arms when a tire on a Black Hawk helicopter exploded while he and another reservist were servicing the aircraft on the ground. Another reservist was killed in the explosion.

In his interview with NBC, Damon was asked about a new painkiller the military was using on wounded veterans. He claims in his lawsuit that the way Moore used the film clip in "Fahrenheit 9/11" — Moore's scathing 2004 documentary criticizing the Bush administration and the war in Iraq — makes him appear to "voice a complaint about the war effort" when he was actually complaining about "the excruciating type of pain" that comes with the injury he suffered.

In the movie, Damon is shown lying on a gurney, with his wounds bandaged. He says he feels likes he's "being crushed in a vise."

"But they (the painkillers) do a lot to help it," he says. "And they take a lot of the edge off of it."

Damon is shown shortly after U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott (news, bio, voting record), D-Wash., is speaking about the Bush administration and says, "You know, they say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind."

Damon contends that Moore's positioning of the clip just after the congressman's comments makes him appear as if he feels like he was "left behind" by the Bush administration and the military.

In his lawsuit, Damon says he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind."

He said that, while at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center recovering from his wounds, he had surgery and physical therapy, learned to use prosthetics and live independently. He also said that Homes For Our Troops, a not-for-profit group, built him a house with handicapped accessibility.

"The work creates a substantially fictionalized and falsified implication as a wounded serviceman who was left behind when Plaintiff was not left behind but supported, financially and emotionally, by the active assistance of the President, the United States and his family, friends, acquaintances and community," Damon says in his lawsuit.

Moore did not immediately return calls seeking comment Wednesday. A message was left for Moore at a personal number in New York and with HarperCollins, publisher of Moore's 2002 book, "Stupid White Men...And Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation!"

A spokesman for Miramax Film Corp., also named as a defendant, did not immediately return a call.

Damon did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.

"It's upsetting to him because he's lived his life supportive of his government, he's been a patriot, he's been a soldier, and he's now being portrayed in a movie that is the antithesis of all of that," Damon's lawyer, Dennis Lynch, said.

Damon is seeking $75 million in damages for emotional distress and loss of reputation. His wife is suing for an additional $10 million in damages because of the mental distress caused to her husband, Lynch said.

From what is written there, I'd say no, he won't win his case.

Doesn't change the fact that Moore is a despicable dirtbag though.

They will end up settling.

The glass dick out front should have told you this was old news in the Spin Zone.

BSmack wrote:The glass dick out front should have told you this was old news in the Spin Zone.

Only dorks frequent that forum, dork. RACK Neely for resetting this in a forum where it might actually get some run...

Ucant#...??? wrote:

BSmack wrote:The glass dick out front should have told you this was old news in the Spin Zone.

Only dorks frequent that forum, dork. RACK Neely for resetting this in a forum where it might actually get some run...

ChargerMike
2005 playoff champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: So.Cal.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:56 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
..." uh dis looks like it could be gravy"

Michael Moore gets sued by war-vet
Send private message
BSmack
2005 Jackass FFL Champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: Lookin for tards

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:00 pm Reply with quoteEdit/Delete this postBack to top
Nothing more than a nuisance lawsuit. He's got a better chance of doing handsprings than winning this case.

_________________
Image

mvscal wrote:
The fact that we missed the target doesn't make it a "fiasco"
Send private message
Dinsdale
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 14 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:49 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
BSmack wrote:
Nothing more than a nuisance lawsuit.


I disagree.

I guess the guy has no choice but to kick his own ass, since he can't spank it anymore.

What a fucking idiot, and embaressment to our country.

Dude worked for the military, and gave an interview. That interview was approved by his employer. He has no claim to it whatsoever.

But aside from that...what was that douchebag think he was fighting for?

To listen to the warhawks, it was to "protect Americans' Freedoms"(which I find to be a leap of logic of the highest order, but it's the one they're selling).

You were fighting for everyone's Freedom, except for those who use their freedom of speech to say things you don't agree with...fucking brilliant, tard.

Absolute fucking tard. Darwin didn't finish the job on him.

Actually, tell me there's one person here who believes this guy to be anything more than a pubhound? Can't work, might as well gravytrain "the cause" for fame and a sympathy buck, right?


Pathetic, and every bit as "traitorous" as he accuses others of being. A soldier for the New Reich.

_________________
If you're a man and you love Jesus, does that make you gay?
Send private message
mvscal
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 17 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:57 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
So, it's OK to deliberately misstate someone's beliefs in order to produce propaganda? Got it.

Rolling Eyes

_________________
Dick Cheney wrote:
GO FUCK YOURSELF
Send private message
Dinsdale
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 14 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:12 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
mvscal wrote:
So, it's OK to deliberately misstate someone's beliefs in order to produce propaganda?



First off, I'll admit to not knowing which part of the movie dude is even talking about. I'll save my judgement until I review it.


But, this douche doesn't get to pick and choose which citizens get rights, and which ones don't, nor does he get to pick what rights are excercized in what manner.

If the dude isn't willing to take the bad with the good, he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed home.

Anyone who agrees to fight "for a cause," yet doesn't even know what the cause is, is a fucking moron.

He knew when he went that there wasn't unilateral support amongst Americans for the war, or any military policies of the last few decades. Yet, he signed on anyway -- he had a reasonable expectation(and yes, that's also an important legal term) that not everyone would portray him in a posotive light for his participation.

Deal with it, pussy. Easy to act tough when you sign a piece of paper...much tougher to do when you lose a couple of arms, then some fat guy hurts your widdle feelings. Easy to act tough when you mistakenly think the whole country is going to prop you up as some sort of hero, much harder when you don't get whatever it is you think you have coming to you.

I'd love to read a copy of the guarantee the DOD gave him when he signed up -- the one where it said nobody would ever hurt his feelings again.

What he has coming to him, is a check for a few bucks a month(nice policy, America). Too fucking bad if he wants to renegotiate that deal after-the-fact, and slice off a few extra dollars.

Even though pmsgal doesn't seem to believe me, one of my old buds is now a disabled veteran. Never heard him whine once about the way he' been portrayed. He knew that going in. Sure, he's complained about the way the USAF has treated him -- but would never be such a douchebag to complain about Americans excercising the "freedoms" he was allegedly "protecting." Because he "gets it." And he'd probably beat this dweeb over the head with his cane for being such a whiner(which sounds like the making of an awesome cripple fight-btw).

_________________
If you're a man and you love Jesus, does that make you gay?
Send private message
mvscal
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 17 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:21 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Dinsdale wrote:
I'll save my judgement until I review it.


Oooookay.

Quote:
But, this douche doesn't get to pick and choose which citizens get rights, and which ones don't, nor does he get to pick what rights are excercized in what manner.

If the dude isn't willing to take the bad with the good, he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed home.

Anyone who agrees to fight "for a cause," yet doesn't even know what the cause is, is a fucking moron.

He knew when he went that there wasn't unilateral support amongst Americans for the war, or any military policies of the last few decades. Yet, he signed on anyway -- he had a reasonable expectation(and yes, that's also an important legal term) that not everyone would portray him in a posotive light for his participation.

Deal with it, pussy. Easy to act tough when you sign a piece of paper...much tougher to do when you lose a couple of arms, then some fat guy hurts your widdle feelings. Easy to act tough when you mistakenly think the whole country is going to prop you up as some sort of hero, much harder when you don't get whatever it is you think you have coming to you.

I'd love to read a copy of the guarantee the DOD gave him when he signed up -- the one where it said nobody would ever hurt his feelings again.

What he has coming to him, is a check for a few bucks a month(nice policy, America). Too fucking bad if he wants to renegotiate that deal after-the-fact, and slice off a few extra dollars.

Even though pmsgal doesn't seem to believe me, one of my old buds is now a disabled veteran. Never heard him whine once about the way he' been portrayed. He knew that going in. Sure, he's complained about the way the USAF has treated him -- but would never be such a douchebag to complain about Americans excercising the "freedoms" he was allegedly "protecting." Because he "gets it." And he'd probably beat this dweeb over the head with his cane for being such a whiner(which sounds like the making of an awesome cripple fight-btw).


Thanks for "withholding judgement"...

_________________
Dick Cheney wrote:
GO FUCK YOURSELF
Send private message
Terry in Crapchester
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 20 Jan 2005
Location: LeRoy, NY

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:30 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Quote:
"It was kind of almost like the enemy was using me for propaganda.


If this line doesn't illustrate why the Bushies don't get it and never will, nothing can. No matter what you think of him, Michael Moore is not the enemy.

And while I haven't seen the film, from the news account the lawsuit would seem spurious, at best. Obviously, McDermott was in a different scene, and not necessarily speaking about him.

But even if that weren't the case, $85 million in damages is just plain ridiculous. It's not exactly as if Moore is the reason why he doesn't have his arms anymore.

_________________
Uncle Fester wrote:
I predicted civil war in Iraq a long time ago, but mvscal assurred me I was dead wrong and I think he called me a name as well.


Cicero wrote:
No 13 year old kid deserves to get raped unless its by a hot chick.


BSmack wrote:
Tom Delay calling someone out for hubris is like Barry Bonds calling out Sammy Sosa for steroids.
Send private message
Dinsdale
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 14 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:32 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
mvscal wrote:

Thanks for "withholding judgement"...


Bro...we've been posting together for a long time now...you know what happens when I "get all judgemental."

:faggywinky:

_________________
If you're a man and you love Jesus, does that make you gay?
Send private message
ChargerMike
2005 playoff champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: So.Cal.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:49 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
"But even if that weren't the case, $85 million in damages is just plain ridiculous"

TRUTH..

...I would project that $85 mill to end up settling out around...say $2 mill.
still it would be schweet if Moore had to dig because of his very loose use of the facts, and vivid imagination.
Send private message
Terry in Crapchester
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 20 Jan 2005
Location: LeRoy, NY

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:31 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Actually, looking at the article and thinking back to my Torts class from first year of law school, it doesn't seem to me that Damon has much of a case in any event. In a lawsuit for defamation, damages are a required element unless the communication is defamatory per se, which this is not. And there is case law stating that misrepresenting another's politics does not constitute damages within the course of a defamation action. So-called "false light" cases are similar to defamation in that regard. And intentional infliction of emotional distress is also very hard to prove -- he'll have to prove that Moore's actions were so extreme or outrageous that they would not be tolerated in a civilized society.

Nor do I think he has a cause of action for Moore using the interview without his permission. Once it was aired over NBC it had entered the public domain, so Moore didn't need his permission. Had Moore interviewed him privately, then failed to obtain his consent to use the interview in his movie, you might have a different result.

_________________
Uncle Fester wrote:
I predicted civil war in Iraq a long time ago, but mvscal assurred me I was dead wrong and I think he called me a name as well.


Cicero wrote:
No 13 year old kid deserves to get raped unless its by a hot chick.


BSmack wrote:
Tom Delay calling someone out for hubris is like Barry Bonds calling out Sammy Sosa for steroids.
Send private message
Martyred
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Location: Pepperland - Sea Of Time

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:22 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Looks like Darwin hit paydirt.

Image
"Send more dumbfucks..."

_________________
جرائم حرب امريكية
Image
Send private message
bbqjones
indian black betty

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:29 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
mvscal wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:
I'll save my judgement until I review it.


Oooookay.

Quote:
But, this douche doesn't get to pick and choose which citizens get rights, and which ones don't, nor does he get to pick what rights are excercized in what manner.

If the dude isn't willing to take the bad with the good, he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed home.

Anyone who agrees to fight "for a cause," yet doesn't even know what the cause is, is a fucking moron.

He knew when he went that there wasn't unilateral support amongst Americans for the war, or any military policies of the last few decades. Yet, he signed on anyway -- he had a reasonable expectation(and yes, that's also an important legal term) that not everyone would portray him in a posotive light for his participation.

Deal with it, pussy. Easy to act tough when you sign a piece of paper...much tougher to do when you lose a couple of arms, then some fat guy hurts your widdle feelings. Easy to act tough when you mistakenly think the whole country is going to prop you up as some sort of hero, much harder when you don't get whatever it is you think you have coming to you.

I'd love to read a copy of the guarantee the DOD gave him when he signed up -- the one where it said nobody would ever hurt his feelings again.

What he has coming to him, is a check for a few bucks a month(nice policy, America). Too fucking bad if he wants to renegotiate that deal after-the-fact, and slice off a few extra dollars.

Even though pmsgal doesn't seem to believe me, one of my old buds is now a disabled veteran. Never heard him whine once about the way he' been portrayed. He knew that going in. Sure, he's complained about the way the USAF has treated him -- but would never be such a douchebag to complain about Americans excercising the "freedoms" he was allegedly "protecting." Because he "gets it." And he'd probably beat this dweeb over the head with his cane for being such a whiner(which sounds like the making of an awesome cripple fight-btw).


Thanks for "withholding judgement"...


rack


btw, wtf is unilateral american support>? lol, bwahaha. gfy

_________________
help me scrape the mucus off my brain
Send private message
BSmack
2005 Jackass FFL Champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: Lookin for tards

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:35 pm Reply with quoteEdit/Delete this postBack to top
OK, I just watched the part of F-911 Damon complaining about. Moore will bury him if he so chooses. For starters, the article is misleading as the clip of Damon does not occur directly after Jim McDermott. There is a clip of another soldier in between McDermott and Damon. And in no way, shape or form can what Damon said be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement. This is a symbolic lawsuit designed purely to fire up the dittochimps.

_________________
Image

mvscal wrote:
The fact that we missed the target doesn't make it a "fiasco"
Send private message
ChargerMike
2005 playoff champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: So.Cal.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:09 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
BSmack wrote:
OK, I just watched the part of F-911 Damon complaining about. Moore will bury him if he so chooses. For starters, the article is misleading as the clip of Damon does not occur directly after Jim McDermott. There is a clip of another soldier in between McDermott and Damon. And in no way, shape or form can what Damon said be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement. This is a symbolic lawsuit designed purely to fire up the dittochimps.



...do not concur! Damon is suing Moore for using the clip without his permission, NOT because it could be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement. Although Damon supports the war and Bush, this lawsuit would not have a Chinaman's chance of helping a lame-duck President.

As for the Rightwing as a whole, I think most of us our counting the days
until we can get sombody in office with the balls to cut spending and close the borders.
Send private message
BSmack
2005 Jackass FFL Champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: Lookin for tards

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:43 pm Reply with quoteEdit/Delete this postBack to topDelete this post
ChargerMike wrote:
...do not concur! Damon is suing Moore for using the clip without his permission, NOT because it could be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement.


As Terry has already stated, that interview was not Damon's property. Therefore, he is doomed to lose on those grounds. In fact, his lawyer should be sued for malpractice for even going forward with this fool's errand.

Quote:
Although Damon supports the war and Bush, this lawsuit would not have a Chinaman's chance of helping a lame-duck President.


It's called firing up the base. Though at 29%, the base is about all the GOP has left.

Quote:
As for the Rightwing as a whole, I think most of us our counting the days until we can get sombody in office with the balls to cut spending and close the borders.


You've got a better chance buying lottery tickets. The trail of deficits the GOP has left since the days of Nixon should have told you that.

_________________
Image

mvscal wrote:
The fact that we missed the target doesn't make it a "fiasco"

Thanks for CTL-CUDAing all 14... replies the thread got. You sure showed me, BRI. That thread had some serious legs**...



** about as much as a marine standing on a roadside bomb upon detonation.

Ucant#...??? wrote:Thanks for CTL-CUDAing all 14... replies the thread got. You sure showed me, BRI. That thread had some serious legs**...

** about as much as a marine standing on a roadside bomb upon detonation.

Yea, well it's amazing how short threads get when they stick to the subject at hand.

Almost as short as the ones sans your 21 self-administered plunger suppositories/day?

Glass dick says what?


ChargerMike
2005 playoff champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: So.Cal.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:56 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
..." uh dis looks like it could be gravy"

Michael Moore gets sued by war-vet
Send private message
BSmack
2005 Jackass FFL Champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: Lookin for tards

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:00 pm Reply with quoteEdit/Delete this postBack to top
Nothing more than a nuisance lawsuit. He's got a better chance of doing handsprings than winning this case.

_________________
Image

mvscal wrote:
The fact that we missed the target doesn't make it a "fiasco"
Send private message
Dinsdale
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 14 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:49 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
BSmack wrote:
Nothing more than a nuisance lawsuit.


I disagree.

I guess the guy has no choice but to kick his own ass, since he can't spank it anymore.

What a fucking idiot, and embaressment to our country.

Dude worked for the military, and gave an interview. That interview was approved by his employer. He has no claim to it whatsoever.

But aside from that...what was that douchebag think he was fighting for?

To listen to the warhawks, it was to "protect Americans' Freedoms"(which I find to be a leap of logic of the highest order, but it's the one they're selling).

You were fighting for everyone's Freedom, except for those who use their freedom of speech to say things you don't agree with...fucking brilliant, tard.

Absolute fucking tard. Darwin didn't finish the job on him.

Actually, tell me there's one person here who believes this guy to be anything more than a pubhound? Can't work, might as well gravytrain "the cause" for fame and a sympathy buck, right?


Pathetic, and every bit as "traitorous" as he accuses others of being. A soldier for the New Reich.

_________________
If you're a man and you love Jesus, does that make you gay?
Send private message
mvscal
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 17 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:57 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
So, it's OK to deliberately misstate someone's beliefs in order to produce propaganda? Got it.

Rolling Eyes

_________________
Dick Cheney wrote:
GO FUCK YOURSELF
Send private message
Dinsdale
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 14 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:12 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
mvscal wrote:
So, it's OK to deliberately misstate someone's beliefs in order to produce propaganda?



First off, I'll admit to not knowing which part of the movie dude is even talking about. I'll save my judgement until I review it.


But, this douche doesn't get to pick and choose which citizens get rights, and which ones don't, nor does he get to pick what rights are excercized in what manner.

If the dude isn't willing to take the bad with the good, he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed home.

Anyone who agrees to fight "for a cause," yet doesn't even know what the cause is, is a fucking moron.

He knew when he went that there wasn't unilateral support amongst Americans for the war, or any military policies of the last few decades. Yet, he signed on anyway -- he had a reasonable expectation(and yes, that's also an important legal term) that not everyone would portray him in a posotive light for his participation.

Deal with it, pussy. Easy to act tough when you sign a piece of paper...much tougher to do when you lose a couple of arms, then some fat guy hurts your widdle feelings. Easy to act tough when you mistakenly think the whole country is going to prop you up as some sort of hero, much harder when you don't get whatever it is you think you have coming to you.

I'd love to read a copy of the guarantee the DOD gave him when he signed up -- the one where it said nobody would ever hurt his feelings again.

What he has coming to him, is a check for a few bucks a month(nice policy, America). Too fucking bad if he wants to renegotiate that deal after-the-fact, and slice off a few extra dollars.

Even though pmsgal doesn't seem to believe me, one of my old buds is now a disabled veteran. Never heard him whine once about the way he' been portrayed. He knew that going in. Sure, he's complained about the way the USAF has treated him -- but would never be such a douchebag to complain about Americans excercising the "freedoms" he was allegedly "protecting." Because he "gets it." And he'd probably beat this dweeb over the head with his cane for being such a whiner(which sounds like the making of an awesome cripple fight-btw).

_________________
If you're a man and you love Jesus, does that make you gay?
Send private message
mvscal
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 17 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:21 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Dinsdale wrote:
I'll save my judgement until I review it.


Oooookay.

Quote:
But, this douche doesn't get to pick and choose which citizens get rights, and which ones don't, nor does he get to pick what rights are excercized in what manner.

If the dude isn't willing to take the bad with the good, he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed home.

Anyone who agrees to fight "for a cause," yet doesn't even know what the cause is, is a fucking moron.

He knew when he went that there wasn't unilateral support amongst Americans for the war, or any military policies of the last few decades. Yet, he signed on anyway -- he had a reasonable expectation(and yes, that's also an important legal term) that not everyone would portray him in a posotive light for his participation.

Deal with it, pussy. Easy to act tough when you sign a piece of paper...much tougher to do when you lose a couple of arms, then some fat guy hurts your widdle feelings. Easy to act tough when you mistakenly think the whole country is going to prop you up as some sort of hero, much harder when you don't get whatever it is you think you have coming to you.

I'd love to read a copy of the guarantee the DOD gave him when he signed up -- the one where it said nobody would ever hurt his feelings again.

What he has coming to him, is a check for a few bucks a month(nice policy, America). Too fucking bad if he wants to renegotiate that deal after-the-fact, and slice off a few extra dollars.

Even though pmsgal doesn't seem to believe me, one of my old buds is now a disabled veteran. Never heard him whine once about the way he' been portrayed. He knew that going in. Sure, he's complained about the way the USAF has treated him -- but would never be such a douchebag to complain about Americans excercising the "freedoms" he was allegedly "protecting." Because he "gets it." And he'd probably beat this dweeb over the head with his cane for being such a whiner(which sounds like the making of an awesome cripple fight-btw).


Thanks for "withholding judgement"...

_________________
Dick Cheney wrote:
GO FUCK YOURSELF
Send private message
Terry in Crapchester
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 20 Jan 2005
Location: LeRoy, NY

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:30 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Quote:
"It was kind of almost like the enemy was using me for propaganda.


If this line doesn't illustrate why the Bushies don't get it and never will, nothing can. No matter what you think of him, Michael Moore is not the enemy.

And while I haven't seen the film, from the news account the lawsuit would seem spurious, at best. Obviously, McDermott was in a different scene, and not necessarily speaking about him.

But even if that weren't the case, $85 million in damages is just plain ridiculous. It's not exactly as if Moore is the reason why he doesn't have his arms anymore.

_________________
Uncle Fester wrote:
I predicted civil war in Iraq a long time ago, but mvscal assurred me I was dead wrong and I think he called me a name as well.


Cicero wrote:
No 13 year old kid deserves to get raped unless its by a hot chick.


BSmack wrote:
Tom Delay calling someone out for hubris is like Barry Bonds calling out Sammy Sosa for steroids.
Send private message
Dinsdale
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 14 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:32 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
mvscal wrote:

Thanks for "withholding judgement"...


Bro...we've been posting together for a long time now...you know what happens when I "get all judgemental."

:faggywinky:

_________________
If you're a man and you love Jesus, does that make you gay?
Send private message
ChargerMike
2005 playoff champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: So.Cal.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:49 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
"But even if that weren't the case, $85 million in damages is just plain ridiculous"

TRUTH..

...I would project that $85 mill to end up settling out around...say $2 mill.
still it would be schweet if Moore had to dig because of his very loose use of the facts, and vivid imagination.
Send private message
Terry in Crapchester
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 20 Jan 2005
Location: LeRoy, NY

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:31 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Actually, looking at the article and thinking back to my Torts class from first year of law school, it doesn't seem to me that Damon has much of a case in any event. In a lawsuit for defamation, damages are a required element unless the communication is defamatory per se, which this is not. And there is case law stating that misrepresenting another's politics does not constitute damages within the course of a defamation action. So-called "false light" cases are similar to defamation in that regard. And intentional infliction of emotional distress is also very hard to prove -- he'll have to prove that Moore's actions were so extreme or outrageous that they would not be tolerated in a civilized society.

Nor do I think he has a cause of action for Moore using the interview without his permission. Once it was aired over NBC it had entered the public domain, so Moore didn't need his permission. Had Moore interviewed him privately, then failed to obtain his consent to use the interview in his movie, you might have a different result.

_________________
Uncle Fester wrote:
I predicted civil war in Iraq a long time ago, but mvscal assurred me I was dead wrong and I think he called me a name as well.


Cicero wrote:
No 13 year old kid deserves to get raped unless its by a hot chick.


BSmack wrote:
Tom Delay calling someone out for hubris is like Barry Bonds calling out Sammy Sosa for steroids.
Send private message
Martyred
Eternal Scobode

View user's profile
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Location: Pepperland - Sea Of Time

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:22 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
Looks like Darwin hit paydirt.

Image
"Send more dumbfucks..."

_________________
جرائم حرب امريكية
Image
Send private message
bbqjones
indian black betty

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:29 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
mvscal wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:
I'll save my judgement until I review it.


Oooookay.

Quote:
But, this douche doesn't get to pick and choose which citizens get rights, and which ones don't, nor does he get to pick what rights are excercized in what manner.

If the dude isn't willing to take the bad with the good, he should have kept his mouth shut and stayed home.

Anyone who agrees to fight "for a cause," yet doesn't even know what the cause is, is a fucking moron.

He knew when he went that there wasn't unilateral support amongst Americans for the war, or any military policies of the last few decades. Yet, he signed on anyway -- he had a reasonable expectation(and yes, that's also an important legal term) that not everyone would portray him in a posotive light for his participation.

Deal with it, pussy. Easy to act tough when you sign a piece of paper...much tougher to do when you lose a couple of arms, then some fat guy hurts your widdle feelings. Easy to act tough when you mistakenly think the whole country is going to prop you up as some sort of hero, much harder when you don't get whatever it is you think you have coming to you.

I'd love to read a copy of the guarantee the DOD gave him when he signed up -- the one where it said nobody would ever hurt his feelings again.

What he has coming to him, is a check for a few bucks a month(nice policy, America). Too fucking bad if he wants to renegotiate that deal after-the-fact, and slice off a few extra dollars.

Even though pmsgal doesn't seem to believe me, one of my old buds is now a disabled veteran. Never heard him whine once about the way he' been portrayed. He knew that going in. Sure, he's complained about the way the USAF has treated him -- but would never be such a douchebag to complain about Americans excercising the "freedoms" he was allegedly "protecting." Because he "gets it." And he'd probably beat this dweeb over the head with his cane for being such a whiner(which sounds like the making of an awesome cripple fight-btw).


Thanks for "withholding judgement"...


rack


btw, wtf is unilateral american support>? lol, bwahaha. gfy

_________________
help me scrape the mucus off my brain
Send private message
BSmack
2005 Jackass FFL Champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: Lookin for tards

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:35 pm Reply with quoteEdit/Delete this postBack to top
OK, I just watched the part of F-911 Damon complaining about. Moore will bury him if he so chooses. For starters, the article is misleading as the clip of Damon does not occur directly after Jim McDermott. There is a clip of another soldier in between McDermott and Damon. And in no way, shape or form can what Damon said be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement. This is a symbolic lawsuit designed purely to fire up the dittochimps.

_________________
Image

mvscal wrote:
The fact that we missed the target doesn't make it a "fiasco"
Send private message
ChargerMike
2005 playoff champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: So.Cal.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:09 pm Reply with quoteBack to top
BSmack wrote:
OK, I just watched the part of F-911 Damon complaining about. Moore will bury him if he so chooses. For starters, the article is misleading as the clip of Damon does not occur directly after Jim McDermott. There is a clip of another soldier in between McDermott and Damon. And in no way, shape or form can what Damon said be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement. This is a symbolic lawsuit designed purely to fire up the dittochimps.



...do not concur! Damon is suing Moore for using the clip without his permission, NOT because it could be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement. Although Damon supports the war and Bush, this lawsuit would not have a Chinaman's chance of helping a lame-duck President.

As for the Rightwing as a whole, I think most of us our counting the days
until we can get sombody in office with the balls to cut spending and close the borders.
Send private message
BSmack
2005 Jackass FFL Champ

View user's profile
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Location: Lookin for tards

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:43 pm Reply with quoteEdit/Delete this postBack to topDelete this post
ChargerMike wrote:
...do not concur! Damon is suing Moore for using the clip without his permission, NOT because it could be construed as an anti-Bush or anti-war statement.


As Terry has already stated, that interview was not Damon's property. Therefore, he is doomed to lose on those grounds. In fact, his lawyer should be sued for malpractice for even going forward with this fool's errand.

Quote:
Although Damon supports the war and Bush, this lawsuit would not have a Chinaman's chance of helping a lame-duck President.


It's called firing up the base. Though at 29%, the base is about all the GOP has left.

Quote:
As for the Rightwing as a whole, I think most of us our counting the days until we can get sombody in office with the balls to cut spending and close the borders.


You've got a better chance buying lottery tickets. The trail of deficits the GOP has left since the days of Nixon should have told you that.

_________________
Image

mvscal wrote:
The fact that we missed the target doesn't make it a "fiasco"

I don't get you B-SMACKED... I feel like a necrophiliac must after every one of our exchanges.

You truly are devoid of anything resembling smack...

Yeah but the beauty of it is, as long as the press cooperates and follows the case .... Moore will just be more and more exposed as the CUNT he truly is.

88 wrote:

mvscal wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Yeah but the beauty of it is, as long as the press cooperates and follows the case .... Moore will just be more and more exposed as the CUNT he truly is.

Which is the entire point of the suit in the first place.

Gets it ^^^^^.

Oh c'mon Jerry, I deserved the "Gets It ^^^^^" first.

And there you go.

Tom In VA wrote:Yeah but the beauty of it is, as long as the press cooperates and follows the case .... Moore will just be more and more exposed as the CUNT he truly is.

Which goes to what I said back in the politics forum that this is a nuisance suit designed to rally the hard right faithful. This suit is not going to change anybody's mind, it is only designed to further harden the views of those who hate Moore already.