It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Moore had footage of abuse in Iraq months before media.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   
www.sfgate.com.../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.''

----------
No doubt was told he did not see anything and figured out it was ok to come forward now since it is mainstream. Just a thought.

NeedTruth




posted on Jun, 14 2004 @ 02:04 PM
link   
I'm sure he's announcing it now just to get popularity for his movie. Which he said wasn't his plan, but I doubt it. He said he had it months before the story broke, why didn't he release it then? The mainstream popular culture had no idea he was making a new movie back then, but now Fahrenheit 9/11 is all over the media.

He releases this information now just as his movie is picking up momentum? He didn't want to be accused of putting it out for popularity for his movie? Oh, please.

Shame on you, Mr. Moore. Shame on you.



posted on Jun, 14 2004 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I use to like Moore, now he is just some pudgy buttknocker sticking his fiscial fingers into anything that'll generate the slightlest bit of coin.

all imo of course.


Atleast he beat others to the punch and got the jump on himself. Since he already pointed it out does it make him immune to others pointing it out? G'luck saving the world from behind that hoagie.

[edit on 14-6-2004 by Lysergic]



posted on Jun, 14 2004 @ 02:17 PM
link   
So now Moore is being criticised for honesty? I'm sure it would be a tough choice to make at the time. Damned if you do damned if you don't I suppose.



posted on Jun, 14 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Moore has everything on film. Supposedly he or one of his staff interviewed Nick Berg before he left for Iraq. However, Moore decided it to be in bad taste to include it in his film.

Bad taste? That would be very important footage to an anti-Bush film. If what Berg said was anti-Bush. Or if it even ever really happened.

I don't know about Moore. He knows too much for a pudgy white dude.



Nutzo



posted on Jun, 14 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Perhaps not criticized for honesty so much as his timing.

If you have footage of people being "tortured" or abused, you hand it over to someone who can stop it. Didn't have to be public or given to the media... he should have given it to someone in charge with the understanding that if he felt it was buried, he'd go public. It's no different than if someone making a movie about child abuse withheld footage of said abuse. I'd think the key is to make it stop, not to worry about image. I think he's full of..... himself.


Q

posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Lysergic, your "pudgy buttknocker" analysis is dead-on, not to mention quite eloquent.

Let's look at this rationally...Mr. Moore (hereinafter referred to only as "Pudgy Buttknocker") claims to have had proof and/or footage of prisoner abuse in Iraq months ahead of everyone else...and kept a lid on it...so he could use it in his new Bush-bashing flick.

Nearly everything I read on this site in regards to this Pudgy Buttknocker tells me how great he is for showing everyone "the real story" of how our president is so evil, our government so bad. Well, here's some real insight for everyone on how much this Pudgy Buttknocker really cares for people. Instead of trying to use this evidence to put a stop to what would become a worldwide embarassment, he decided to hold onto it so that he could use it to make another buck at the expense of the prisoners, who were the target of exactly what he is professing to be fighting against.

Ecce homo, liberals. Here is a shining example of the true character of your beloved Pudgy Buttknocker.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Micahel Moore Hates America

Michael Moore Hates America is a feature-length documentary that takes you across the country -- From Moore's "hometown" of Flint to Washington, DC to LA -- in search of the American Dream and holds Michael Moore's filmmaking tactics up to the light.
...
We'll deconstruct the genre of documentary film to show you how filmmakers can manipulate interviews and statistics to communicate a desired message, and then how the media runs with that message.
...
While it has its serious side,
Michael Moore Hates America is a hilarious romp through the myths about American life. It reduces silly conspiracy theories to rubble, challenges populist ideologies by putting them through uproarious tests and gets to the truth about Michael Moore's background, and his evolution into one of today's most prominent propagandists.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 02:18 AM
link   
Do you all think that the issue would have been taken as seriously if the original footage seen by the public had come from Michael Moore instead of the Wash Times... Think about it.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Yes, I think it would have been taken seriously. It's a case of the message far outweighing the messenger. Krusty the Klown could have coughed up that footage and been taken seriously. Especially if done via the media instead of privately to any government organization.

Again, if he really cared at all about the situation, he would have either gone public with it or gone through channels with the threat of public exposure if no action was taken. He does not care about anything but furthering himself and being the darling of the liberal set.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Michael Moore is a hypocrite! He says things like the war was started so companies like Haliburton would profit from the war. If anyone is profiting from the war, it Michael Moore.

Also, he says that he didn't use the footage of the Nick Berg interview out of respect to his family. Lies! This movie was finished and in the can when Nick Berg was beheaded. He didn't use the Nick Berg footage because Nick was for the war. He couldn't have possibly had something like that in his movie.

I thought Bowling for Columbine was pretty funny, but I don't think I will watch this one. He barely grazes the facts and twists the truth to get his message accross.



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 08:48 AM
link   
I'm sure alot of reporters had taken/had leaked to them footage of the US abuses, but they simply were too afraid to show it.



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   
It not the fact if the people would believer it more if he reported it or if the washington times or 60 minutes did. He is a greedy greedy man. He claims the horrors of this war and all the abuse. But it is just as bad to know someone is doin it and turn a blind eye as doin the act itself. Oh and turning the blind where your movie doesnt suffer is even worse.

Moore was once a edgyjournalist even thou i didnt agree with him he had a unique view and i could respect him for that.But now he seems to grow more and more fanatical yes fanatical. He is set in his ways to crush any and ever consevative view where it is almost scary. He is not out to expose the truth anymore his goal are to make cash and crush conservative views even if they are true.



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   
To me, Michael Moore is like the little boy that cried Wolf. Since his views are so far left and most of his films are crockumentaries, no one would have believed him in the first place.

By not talking about it also worked out better for his movie. If he would have mentioned that he had pictures of abuse, the Military might have cleaned up their act and when the investigation came around, nothing would have been found.



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 06:52 PM
link   
right...i doubt he did, i dont see how, the pics were given to the military by a soldier, the military released them to the press, no way he couldve gotten a pic before them, hes lying through his teeth.



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 07:11 PM
link   
My god people in the States need to get their collective heads out of their arses. What was so unfactual about "Bowling for Columbine". Is it not true that gun violence is out of control in the states? Is it not true that pass U.S. action abroad has killed millions of innocent civilains?

I saw Moore on Dave Letterman last night and he said the main reason for not wanting to release the footage earlier was to protect the troops from the repercusions.

Why are you all blaming Micheal Moore for wanting to get something out in the open that he feels is worth the American people to see. Even if it's not all true, at least it will get people asking questions about Bush and the behind the scenes stuff. There is no doubt that the Bush family, Halliburton(Cheney) and the others are making a fortune off of this war. Halliburton might be investigated for "War Profiting".

If you don't like Micheal Moore or his views then I have a suggestion for you............DON'T SEE THE MOVIE



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
Why are you all blaming Micheal Moore for wanting to get something out in the open that he feels is worth the American people to see. Even if it's not all true, at least it will get people asking questions about Bush and the behind the scenes stuff. There is no doubt that the Bush family, Halliburton(Cheney) and the others are making a fortune off of this war. Halliburton might be investigated for "War Profiting".

If you don't like Micheal Moore or his views then I have a suggestion for you............DON'T SEE THE MOVIE


Are you kidding me? Michael Moore stands to make more money on the war than just about anyone. Do you think Michael Moore cares about the repurcussions on the troops? Ha, the only two things that Michael Moore cares about is making money, and where to find the next all you can eat buffet.



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 07:59 PM
link   


pudgy buttknocker



pudgy white dude.



and where to find the next all you can eat buffet.


Some things the posters have missed. He's short. He wears glasses. He is not clean shaven. His fashion sense if horrible. Just wanted to add to such intelligent arguments.



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
My god people in the States need to get their collective heads out of their arses. What was so unfactual about "Bowling for Columbine". Is it not true that gun violence is out of control in the states?


umm everything and no, infact violent crimes have been going down every year since the mid 90's and violent crimes have increased in europe and canada- so many studies(not just american ones) i've read have shown that as fact, violent crimes havent been so low in decades, that move is full of false information that gives a false picture of america, so my head isnt in my butt, i have bothered to read and search things instead of going by biased false information from a movie.

www.ojp.usdoj.gov...
www.ojp.usdoj.gov...
www.ojp.usdoj.gov...



[edit on 19-6-2004 by namehere]



posted on Jun, 19 2004 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Well here we have old Michael Moore ready to cash in wherevere he can. How does this creep keep appealing to the masses? I'm no Bush fan but this guy is a creep!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join