Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Michael Moore sued over anti-gun movie

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
dArKeR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:10 AM
Original message
Michael Moore sued over anti-gun movie
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...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
1. Nuisance suit...
Betcha he signed a release.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mumon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
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!"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #4
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.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1songbird Donating Member (642 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #12
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #12
30. Thank you for the tip Mel,
I'll ck. it out. In fact I have it bookmarked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:26 AM
Response to Original message
3. Nichols didn't notice that big video camera in his house...
ummm hmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleedingheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. you would have thought that would have been a hint
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phillybri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
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...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jivenwail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:42 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CO Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Nichols Came Across As Unbalanced Because He IS Unbalanced
He and his brother were obviously from the shallow end of the gene pool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donotpassgo Donating Member (867 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. Personal responsibility party?
Personal comfort party is more like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
7. Richard Melon Scaife or someone
is paying him to do this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. A continuation of the Arkansas Project with new victims in mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jiacinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #8
27. Why would they get rid of Moore
After all his campainging for Nader made it possible in due part for Bush to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DisgustipatedinCA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Because Greens are more anti-Bush than Democrats are
That should be apparent by now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jiacinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. But their voting booth behavior helps Republicans
Hell, if I were Scaife, I'd be giving billions to Moore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jiacinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
28. Why would they want to get rid of someone who voted Green
and advocated for Nader nonstop?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DisgustipatedinCA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. Maybe because he's advocating for a Democrat this time? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AWD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #10
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"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noonwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VermontDem2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 09:26 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
number six Donating Member (244 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Actually Moore's pretty loaded
he's a millionaire a few times over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jiacinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
29. Yep
He sure is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LifeDuringWartime Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
20. riight
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
21. Er, Mr. Nichols DID volunteer to be interviewed, did he not?
This dog don't hunt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frangible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
22. I don't like Moore or Bowling
But this suit is without merit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
haymaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Why not?
Did you see the movie? Do you disagree with what Moore says?

Just curious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Love Bug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
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_I...

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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jiacinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
26. I am no fan of Moore
I make no secret the contempt I have for that man. However, this lawsuit seems bogus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
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!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0rganism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuttle Donating Member (919 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #32
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
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-03 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Feb 22nd 2018, 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC