Michael Moore sued over anti-gun movie

[dArKeR]

Detroit — James Nichols, the brother of Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols, says he was tricked into appearing in the anti-gun documentary Bowling for Columbine, according to a federal lawsuit filed against filmmaker Michael Moore.

Nichols also alleges in the lawsuit, filed in Detroit, that Moore libelled him by linking him to the terrorist act.

Nichols accuses Moore of libel, defamation of character, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. His lawyer is asking for a jury trial and damages ranging from $10-million to $20-million (U.S.) on each of nine counts, the Detroit Free Press reported.

http://theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20031029.wsuit1029/BNStory/Entertainment/

[rfranklin]

1. Nuisance suit...

Betcha he signed a release.

[mumon]

2. While I can take Michael Moore or leave him...

It's nice to say to his most vitriolic critics "What good company you have!"

[0007]

4. I think Michael Moore is excellent

....this will increase his book sale. Terry's brother doesn't stand a chance, it will cost him a hell of a lot money only to lose.

Who smells a right wing Paula Jones type rat? Maybe James A. Baker III will handle Nichols case? LOL!! Won't fly.

[Mel]

12. I wouldn't put anything

past them after what has happened and I agree with you after all it's a War on liberals.
I say we see how they run it their MO is pretty transparent after watching them go after Clinton for eight years we have the experience. {and yes, I know it's been going on longer than the Clinton years}<---I also, think {Clinton years} was the most shrill what I see now is outright stinking fascism from the right.

I ask who's going to look more foolish to a passer by not tuned into what's happening? The one's taking up for Terry's brother or Michael Moore? Let' em do it! I tell you this much their attackS on Clinton got my attention and gained them a foe that will fight back.

How the right went about gaining power is going to blow back on them and if more people don't engage they are going to learn what's happening from the right is going to turn on them too.

To all DUers if you haven't read David Brocks, 'Blinded by the Right' do so! :)

Did you see this, 0007? Author is- Must_B_Free
You've been indoctrinated into a Psychological Civil War
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=606496

[1songbird]

19. Good points!

I'm reading Blinded by the Right now as a matter of fact. It's pretty good. Michael Moore will be here in Cincy tomorrow and I can't wait to hear him. His new book Dude Where's My Country seeks to ask some very tough questions and I would strongly recommend it.

[0007]

30. Thank you for the tip Mel,

I'll ck. it out. In fact I have it bookmarked.

[wyldwolf]

3. Nichols didn't notice that big video camera in his house...

ummm hmmm.

[bleedingheart]

9. you would have thought that would have been a hint

[phillybri]

18. He definitely knew the cameras were there....

At one point, when they go into his bedroom and he puts the gun to his head, it says on the screen that he asked the cameraman not to come in with them...

Stupid asshole...

[Jivenwail]

5. He's a complete wacko

And he proved that during the movie. He hasn't a leg to stand on here. Who's next? Charleton Heston?

[GinaMaria]

6. Tricked into appearing in the film?

I can't wait to hear this one. Brought to you by the personal responsibility party :eyes:

The only thing I can think of is when they went into his (Nichols) bedroom to look at his gun. The camera was outside the room. I can't remember if he told MM that he didn't want the camera there at that point. I understood why MM brought the camera. I would have done the same. If that nut Nichols had shot MM, you'd want the evidence on tape.

Nichols came across as unbalanced. This is grasping at straws if they're trying to damage Moore, imo.

[CO Liberal]

14. Nichols Came Across As Unbalanced Because He IS Unbalanced

He and his brother were obviously from the shallow end of the gene pool.

[donotpassgo]

25. Personal responsibility party?

Personal comfort party is more like it.

[Gman]

7. Richard Melon Scaife or someone

is paying him to do this.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. A continuation of the Arkansas Project with new victims in mind.

[jiacinto]

27. Why would they get rid of Moore

After all his campainging for Nader made it possible in due part for Bush to win.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

33. Because Greens are more anti-Bush than Democrats are

That should be apparent by now.

[jiacinto]

37. But their voting booth behavior helps Republicans

Hell, if I were Scaife, I'd be giving billions to Moore.

[jiacinto]

28. Why would they want to get rid of someone who voted Green

and advocated for Nader nonstop?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

34. Maybe because he's advocating for a Democrat this time? n/t

[AWD]

10. Tricked him???

What, you didn't SEE those cameras??

You know, the cameras that YOU ordered to stay out of your bedroom when you went to show Michael you sleep with a gun under your pillow!

This moran is suing because he looked like an idiot....plain and simple. You knew DAMN well you were being filmed for a movie.

[underpants]

11. Remember that Nichols is a guy who didn't know who Ghandi was

If he had a brain in his head he would stay quiet as he is extremely lucky to not be doing life right now.

BTW- a classic moment in TV journalism was a Dateline interview of Nichols. My roomate at the time and I were watching it, almost verbatim this was said:

Stone Phillips (I think) "Why would someone need pallets and pallets of manure if you don't actually do any farming?"

Nichols (totally straight faced)"Becasue I sell it at gun shows"

[noonwitch]

13. Nichols is a nutcase

He looks and sounds crazy every time he's interviewed. He gave lots of interviews to the local media after the OKC bombing-he was initially arrested, then released. Is he going to sue everyone who interviewed him, or just Michael Moore? Everyone in Michigan who isn't in the militia or the klan thought he was crazy long before "Bowling for Columbine" came out.

[VermontDem2004]

15. First of all

I didn't bringing cameras inside someone's house was tricking him, second Michael Moore didn't link him to the terrorist attack, he did stat the facts which was he was in trial but was found innocent while Timothy and his brother were not. He came accross as a nutcase imo and I think this lawsuit just proves my point.

[gratuitous]

16. Wait until Nichols finds out . . .

Or rather, wait until Nichols' lawyers find out that being an independent film maker is not the ticket to vast wealth. Asking for damages of $20 million? Moore's probably not worth a tenth of that, or more likely a hundredth.

This lawsuit will quietly crawl away to where bad lawsuits go to die: the motion for summary judgment.

[number six]

17. Actually Moore's pretty loaded

he's a millionaire a few times over.

[jiacinto]

29. Yep

He sure is.

[LifeDuringWartime]

20. riight

:puke:

[slackmaster]

21. Er, Mr. Nichols DID volunteer to be interviewed, did he not?

This dog don't hunt.

[Frangible]

22. I don't like Moore or Bowling

But this suit is without merit.

[haymaker]

24. Why not?

Did you see the movie? Do you disagree with what Moore says?

Just curious.

[Love Bug]

23. Follow the money -- who is funding this?

I think this is a nuisance suit designed to keep Moore from completing his new movie (due right before the election next year) about the Bush family connection with Osama Bin Lauden.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32518

IMO, Nichols is being used, just like Paula Jones was.

If they can't get Moore into a small plane, what better way to get him then by draining off his energy and possibly intimidating Disney into removing their funding in an expensive lawsuit?

[jiacinto]

26. I am no fan of Moore

I make no secret the contempt I have for that man. However, this lawsuit seems bogus.

[Lisa]

31. I suppose he's going to claim that Moore brought that bunch of bananas ...

And positioned them strategically behind Nichols's head during the interview, as a "subliminable" mesage!

[0rganism]

32. Odd that it's called an "anti-gun" movie

Moore goes out of his way, right from the beginning, to show that ownership of firearms is NOT the sole cause of firearm violence. His entire point is there's an undercurrent of cultural paranoia and anger that gets ignored, surpressed, and exploited; occasionally that pot boils over into some violent incident which can, in turn, be exploited to reinforce the culture of paranoia and anger.

Oh well. Let no good deed go unpunished.

[Tuttle]

36. Exactly!

Anyone who calls this an anti-gun movie hasn't seen it - it is (by far) an anti-US-media film first and foremost! Secondarily, it is an anti-NRA movie.


And it is a great movie!

I can't wait to see the wing nuts line up behind Nichols!

Tut-tut

[Democat]

35. You're either with the terrorists or with America

Bush says it, and we know Michael Moore isn't with the terrorists. :)

It's funny that Nichols would try to sue for being linked with terrorists (as if his last name doesn't link him) when Bush and the right tries to link Democrats with terrorists all the time.