MICHAEL MOORE KEPT IRAQI ABUSE QUIET TO MAKE A PROFIT

[Ronnie Raygun]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/06/13/MNG2K75D7S1.DTL&type=printable

Filmmaker Michael Moore said Friday he wasn't sure he did the right thing by saving footage of U.S. American soldiers' cruelty toward Iraqis for his controversial documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11,'' instead of releasing the evidence earlier when it might have helped halt such abuse.

"I had it months before the story broke on '60 Minutes,' and I really struggled with what to do with it,'' Moore said in a telephone interview with The Chronicle. "I wanted to come out with it sooner, but I thought I'd be accused of just putting this out for publicity for my movie. That prevented me from making maybe the right decision.''

The footage, eerily similar to film of the atrocities at Abu Ghraib prison, shows GIs laughing as they snap photos of each other putting hoods over Iraqi detainees.

In the same scene from "Fahrenheit 9/11,'' which opens Friday at Bay Area theaters, an American soldier fondles a prisoner's genitals through a blanket.

"The stuff with the detainees in my movie is even more shocking than what we saw in that prison because it happens outdoors and is more commonplace,'' Moore said.

The documentary links President Bush to the family of Osama bin Laden and other oil-rich Saudis and takes the president to task for his response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The film, which won the top prize at the Cannes Film Festival last month, became the center of a corporate spat between Disney and its subsidiary Miramax when Disney Chairman Michael Eisner said he wouldn't allow the film to be distributed. Later, Disney sold the film to Miramax co-Chairmen Harvey and Bob Weinstein. The film is now being distributed by Lions Gate Films, IFC Films and the Fellowship Adventure Group, the latter specifically set up by the Weinsteins to handle Moore's documentary.

Had Miramax released the film as originally planned, it most likely would have played in art houses, the traditional home of documentaries. But because of the intense interest in "Fahrenheit'' fueled by the distribution controversy, the film will now open simultaneously at multiplexes around the country.

"It will be in 700 theaters," Moore said. "It's the largest opening I've had, four times the number of screens that 'Columbine,' was on." Moore won the Oscar for best documentary for his 2002 "Bowling for Columbine."

"Fahrenheit'' comes down hard on Bush for starting a war the filmmaker clearly sees as folly. But the most disturbing images are of America's fighting forces in Iraq appearing as dazed and confused as soldiers portrayed in the Vietnam movie, "Platoon.''

"The situation is like Vietnam. The conditions in Iraq are just terrible, '' Moore said. "The soldiers know they are over there for a bull -- reason. .. . Bush has created an atmosphere for those who serve under him to also behave in immoral ways.''

Moore said he has received more than 1,500 letters from American soldiers expressing opposition to the war and said he is considering compiling the letters into a book.

E-mail Ruthe Stein at rstein@sfchronicle.com.

[ziggytrix]

WINNER: CAPITOLISM!

[sspadowsky]

WINNER: CAPITOLISM!

:lol

[Ronnie Raygun]

The winner is Michael Moore at the expense of dead and tortured Iraqis.

Not capitalism.

[sspadowsky]

Oh, I see, so now you're deeply concerned for the tortured and dead now that Michael Moore is involved. That's the only reason you give a shit, Ronnie.

[ScruU2wice]

WINNER: SSPADOWSKY

[mew barios]

so would you say this makes moore just as bad or perhaps worse :o than the administration that said torture is aok to begin with?

[ranxer]

i'm interested to see what moore does with his 'profits'.. i think ronnie might be a little disappointed to find out that his motives aren't all about limo rides and plush country clubs.

that aside, i find it ludicris that moore is somehow responsible for exposing the wrong doings of this government when he doesn't work for any news agencies or the government.. as a watchdog he does what he can and as he admits its not a perfect job..

bush on the other hand is responsible for tens of thousands of dead and tortured souls and is gleefully getting away with it!

moore profiting on war and torture? LOL, what a joke.. lets talk about haliburton, brown & root and the dozens of other contractors.. moore's trying to help stop this stuff, jeeze

[davinxtk]

Yeah, wait, why is the burden all of a sudden on Moore? Shouldn't the administration have gotten ahold of the Taguba report and done something about it?

The only reason the administration even flinched is because this shit hit the presses. You'll reach for fucking anything, won't you?

[Ronnie Raygun]

"Oh, I see, so now you're deeply concerned for the tortured and dead now that Michael Moore is involved. That's the only reason you give a shit, Ronnie." - Spad

My point is your sudden lack of concern and the fact that you didn't condemn this man for his absolute hypocrisy.

[Drew Katsikas]

Who likes the Ramones?

[AChimp]

MICHAEL MOORE KEPT IRAQI ABUSE QUIET TO MAKE A PROFIT

"I had it months before the story broke on '60 Minutes,' and I really struggled with what to do with it,'' Moore said in a telephone interview with The Chronicle. ["I wanted to come out with it sooner, but I thought I'd be accused of just putting this out for publicity for my movie. That prevented me from making maybe the right decision.''

Do you ever read the articles that you post, Ronnie? I mean, aside from the headlines, that is.

If Moore found out about it months before it showed up in the media, then you can be sure that the government new about it even earlier. I mean, if the government doesn't know what it's own military is doing, it must be pretty incompetent, huh?

Extra footage of naked Iraqis isn't going to make thousands more people flock to see Moore's movie, because A) naked Iraqis aren't at the top of most peoples' must-see list, and B) it is sooooo last month.

At least Moore is coming forward and admitting that he didn't make a good decision. When is Bush going to come forward and say that invading Iraq wasn't a good decision, that the intelligence was wrong?

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Ronnie, it was the BUSH administration that was responsible for this, not Moore. Moore may have known, but that doesn't mean it's not the BUSH admin's fault. So are you voting for Kerry now? Because, if you're going to get so upset about this, you fucking better.

[sspadowsky]

"Oh, I see, so now you're deeply concerned for the tortured and dead now that Michael Moore is involved. That's the only reason you give a shit, Ronnie." - Spad

My point is your sudden lack of concern and the fact that you didn't condemn this man for his absolute hypocrisy.

Whether he's a hypocrite remains to be seen. The fact of the matter is that this behavior was approved by top administration officials, up to and including your beloved president. Those are the guys you should be pissed at. If Moore can be found at fault for sitting on this, that doesn't change the fact that the top brass (A) knew about and (B) condoned the torture and abuse. You're getting mad at the wrong people, Ronnie. It's not even debatable at this point.

EDIT: BTW, I've already expressed my outrage over this- and the funny thing is, Ronnie, it was directed at the people who were actually at fault. The important thing to remember here is that you only posted this because you thought it would make Moore look bad. You give less than a shit about the torture scandal. It shows.

[Ronnie Raygun]

You could care less. All you care about is using it as an issue to bash Bush over when it really has nothing to do with Bush.

For more than a month you've been screaming about coverups and now that your personal Jesus, Michael Moore, is involved in a coverup....you refuse to condemn his actions....

I'm just exposing you for what you are...

[AChimp]

Yes, yes, Ronnie, we're all hypocrites and you are a blind sheep. :blah

[Ronnie Raygun]

Whatever.....just keep supporting Michael Moore and proving my point.

[AChimp]

And you can keep worshipping W's shit and proving ours.

[Ronnie Raygun]

I don't worship W....never have. But if I found out that he personally attempted to cover up Iraqi abuse instead of trying to do something about it I would say that it was an incredibly shite thing to do.

The fact that you can't shows that you don't really care and that it only matters if it suits your political agenda.

[AChimp]

You're right. I don't need to care because it wasn't my country's soldiers doing the torturing.

You've only brought this up because, *gasp!* there was someone on the left who didn't run screaming to the "liberal" media when they found out.

You still haven't explained how Moore did this to score more money, which WAS the original intent of this thread, wasn't it? Or did you mean to type "Moore is a hypocrite" rather than "MICHAEL MOORE KEPT IRAQI ABUSE QUIET TO MAKE A PROFIT"? That's rather Vinthian of you, Ronnie, but when have we ever been able to expect anything else?

The article makes no mention of him doing this for extra money; in fact, he claims to have done it to avoid being perceived as only seeking attention. Had Moore exposed this himself, rather than letting a reliable news outlet do it, it's quite likely that the whole issue would have been whitewashed as exaggeration because Mooer "lies."

[ranxer]

the bush administration takes the cake in coverups.

starting with the election, on to 9/11, support and use of known felons, corporate preferential treatment, reasons to go to war and on and on.

there's more than a few previous administration officials talking about it as well as several dozen books and hundreds of articles, but i guess their hard to find :/

[ScruU2wice]

Well with any luck Moore won't profit at all from this movie and it'll go down the tube, but we can only hope... :/

[sspadowsky]

You could care less. All you care about is using it as an issue to bash Bush over when it really has nothing to do with Bush.

For more than a month you've been screaming about coverups and now that your personal Jesus, Michael Moore, is involved in a coverup....you refuse to condemn his actions....

I'm just exposing you for what you are...

Let me explain something to you, jerky: I know jack shit about Michael Moore. I've never read any of his books or seen any of his movies. I may have read an op-ed somewhere along the way, and I think I saw his TV Nation show once or twice. Got it? While I'm sure he's much more in the neighborhood of my political views than, say, Bush, I really know very little about the guy. I also said that exactly to what extent he is a hypocrite, or is at fault, remains to be seen.

But I'll bet you that he DIDN'T know about it as early as the administration did, because, again, the administration approved and condoned the tactics that are the focus of this scandal. You're not exposing anything other than your typical partisan jackassery.

[CaptainBubba]

I saw a black child getting beaten today in the middle of the street by police officers for no reason, but yunno, really, honestly, thats none of my business. As a citizen I really don't have to report stuff like that, because, heck, I wasn't the one beating him and really the police shouldnt have been doin it in the first place! I'm in the right guys, aren't I? I'm still a morally sound and ethical individual right?

For the love of fuck you assholes will do anything to dissagree with Ronnie, or for others, agree with Moore. This was a very very bad thing he did. He had information that probably could've led to earlier action in fixing the situation in Iraqi prisons and he didn't for reasons concerning public fucking opinion on him. Thats horrible. Hes a horrible person, and you cannot dodge that.

And I'm extremely anti-war and anti-bush, as most libertarians are, so alliegances to politcal agendas and the like have no bias on my opinion in this matter. Moore is a douchebag no matter what case hes fighting for.

[ranxer]

hey bubba, if moore is a very very bad person why would he struggle on the issue of forwarding the footage? wouldnt he just hide it and make up some story about how he couldnt release the footage?
why would he admit his faults if he were so bad?

plus the stories that came out about abuse BEFORE moore had his footage were being met with accusations of anti-americanism and were being blacklisted from the mainstream. i read many reports just a couple months after the war started but only in the alternative media, and those media outlets were often severely attacked or ignored.

[ScruU2wice]

hey bubba, if moore is a very very bad person why would he struggle on the issue of forwarding the footage? wouldnt he just hide it and make up some story about how he couldnt release the footage?
why would he admit his faults if he were so bad?

Just because you admit you're wrong doesn't make you a good person. Just because he struggled with a decision doesn't make his choice anymore right or wrong. Hiding the footage would just make even more of a douschebag than he already is >:

I despise anyone who is either completely Liberal or completely conservative. Hence I despise Micheal Moore, because since his one tooled out acceptance speech about bush. He's perhaps the most whiny person ever.

[mburbank]

I think Moore should have reported this stuff right away, and simply eaten whatever criticsim came with it.

Of course, the red cross already reported it to the administration, and the first guy they sent out to 'investigate' said nothing out of the ordinary was going on.

Nalds posted this not because of hat he thinks of Moore, (A given) but to reinforce his belief that we'd all leap to Moores defense. I think he did the wrong thing, I wish he'd done otherwise, but I don't think he needs defending in any case. He's not in the military, he didn't commit these crimes, he didn't ask lawyers to lay legal groundwork for commiting these crimes, etc, etc, etc.

Again, I think he had a moral obligation to turn this stuff over immediately. I think he failed. That his mortvation was profit is speculation, and no more justified by the article than my theory that W's motivation for invading Iraq is his twisted relationship with his father. My point is, the number of people on the list above Moore who need defending for their actions in this situation is really, really long before you get to Moore. Mayeb at some future point it will be worth spending time on Moores culpability for abuse that took place during the months he knew and the time 60 minutes first publicly aired the photos. But before we get there, a whole lot of actively involved parties need to be... examined. Maybe if we hooded them, stripped them and set dogs on them the process would go quickly enough that we might get to Moore in the next decade.

[CaptainBubba]

Max and Scru pretty much said my response Ranx.

Moore did a bad thing. Bush did worse. Does it make it ok that Moore did a bad thing? No. We all understand that the actual acts taking place were horrible. Moore had a personal moral responsibility to report them. Not a professional one. Although considering he is a figurehead of the compasionate liberal demographic it does seem rather odd that he would decide to withhold information on the suffering of others till he could use it in his little "documentary".

[Ronnie Raygun]

"Moore did a bad thing. Bush did worse." - cap. bub.

hold on there! This has nothing to do with Bush....other than that you are on the right track...

[Drew Katsikas]

Sure it does. Two people covered up one thing that needed to be known. One runs the country, the other is a fat jackass. The one who runs the country is dutifully obligated to report this, the sensationalist retard, only morally. Therefore, the president has failed to do his job, whereas the "documentary maker," is merely a sack of shit citizen. He shouldn't be under 1/100 of the bad press that Bush should get. No argument.

[Ronnie Raygun]

"Two people covered up one thing that needed to be known."

prove it.

[ScruU2wice]

Google search Shows:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.powell12may12,0,2804533.story?coll=bal-news-nation


Secondly, No matter how much you argue over this, you have to admit that the prisoner abuse videos would have a different impact, if it came from Moore. :/

[Drew Katsikas]

"Two people covered up one thing that needed to be known."

prove it.

Do you really think Moore knew before Bush? If so, isn't that complete ineptitude?

[AChimp]

If Bush didn't know about it, he's an incompetent head of state for not knowing what his military is doing, either by sheer ignorance or through the choice of people that he has working for him. If he did know about it, he's an asshole for not ordering an end to it right away.

Both are bad for him. :)

And he rapes babies.

[ziggytrix]

Like Bush gives a damn what them good ol boys in the Pentagon do, as long as he gets results.

[Ronnie Raygun]

Prisoner abuse happens on some level all the time everywhere.

Bush wasn't notified of the full scope of this issue. And the abuse that was happening he said to "take care of it" and deal with it and have the situation rectified.

Moore had direct knowledge and did nothing so that he might make a buck and win a few awards from some euro elitists.

[Dole]

'euro elitists' :lol

[mburbank]

Ronnie, as to Moore's motivation, 'prove it'.

You're like a guy about to be run over by a truck who's so busy complaining about the gum someone spit out in the crosswalk he won't get out of the way.

Moore did a bad thing. We agree. But he's a film maker. Crimes of omission happen all the time at some level.

You go right ahead nd focus your laser like intelligence on this tiny fraction of the world scene.

[ScruU2wice]

Bush wasn't notified of the full scope of this issue. And the abuse that was happening he said to "take care of it" and deal with it and have the situation rectified.

prove it :lol