(Moore) Documentarian kept quiet after filming U.S. soldiers abusing Iraqi

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

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.

<snip>

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.

Although if he had released the film, the US media may well have ignored it, just as they ignored continual warnings from the Red Cross and the military concerning abuses since 2002...

...about the moral responsiblity of the soldiers engaging in the torture and their superiors who ordered it.

When should they have told the public?

His logic is understandable, but he should have made some effort to keep his name from it, and released it that way

I mean, just look at what Drudge did re: the Berg interview, broadcasting the great skepticism by Berg's sister over it. Once the girl started saying Moore had been a class act, Drudge never reported that or changed his link. (I checked at the time.)

Moore's not Sy Hersh.

Before Moore is criticized, let us remember who the demons are.

I believe it was your namesake who said "Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do."

Of course, Burke and Niemoller also come to mind on the subject of not speaking up against evil.

I'm also reminded of the slogan AIDS activists made famous in the '80s: Silence = Death

Looks like a lot of posters are willing to cut MM slack, ostensibly because he neither participated, as the "bad apples" did, nor condoned it as part of the Chain of Command... or maybe just because he's one of "ours." I'm not. He should have spoken out. Maybe he would have been blown off but I find it hard to believe that, especially with footage in hand. Frankly, I don't see it as the either/or proposition which is being, uh, proposed here; tho some are clearly more culpable than others. There's plenty of criticism to go around, and that includes criticism for those who saw and said nothing.

As I mentioned in another post, ask the family of Kitty Genovese.

The hypocrisy is selectively criticizing Moore. He's not the only witness. And he's not staying silient. There were others who are lying and denying torture even happened. Moore is doing everything he can to stop torture by making a movie about this administration.


And if it's bad to witness torture and remain silent about it, it's 100 times worse to committ acts of torture. It's just ridiculous for RW'ers to criticize Moore when they're not even willing to admit there was something wrong with torturing people.

Using the RW defense of the AG torture- that what "they" did was 10x worse, therefore, what "we" did (or in this case, didn't do) is trivial. I don't buy it. Additionally, I believe that it IS "bad to witness torture & remain silent about it"- no if's about it.

I also don't accept that he's "doing everything he can to..."- how long would he have had to sit on the info before you'd consider him to be part of the problem? another 6 mos, a year? It's a strawman to state that he "isn't staying silent." Fact is, for several MONTHS, he did. And I believe that he shares responsibility (we can quibble over the degree) for every act of torture that occurred between the time he witnessed/documented them and the time they allegedly stopped after *someone else* went public w/the info. I can't fathom how anyone can argue that knowledge of these events and not calling 'em out equates to anything other than tacit support.

I do agree, tho, that selectively criticizing anyone for this is disingenuous at best. As I said above, there's plenty of guilt to go around. Unfortunately for "our side", that includes witnesses who remain silent.


ON EDIT: @#$% HTML tags...

What about the responsibility of those who ordered this? Why should it HAVE to be Moore's moral dilemma when Rumsfeld, Bush and Cambone were the original planners of this?

And I guarantee this will come up. I think Fahrenheit 9/11 is schedule to be relased in the theaters on June 25 (I for one will go see it). Once the film comes out, there will be discussions going on at the dinner table, in the office, in the WHITE HOUSE, everywhere.

Up to this point, I believe the nation has been divided on many of the issues we are dealing with. After people get a chance to see with their own eyes the indisputability of what's been going on over there, it will be hard for them to justify their "principles" of fighting the enemy, fighting the war against terror, looking for WMD's, looking for Osama, etc etc.

I think Moore's film is going to be a very powerful catalyst for a unified opinion of where we are, and what we need to do next.

.....and afterwords I agree it will be hard for those folks that wanted this war to justify their "principles" in fact it will be a time for deep introspection.

I have to rearrange my appointment book

That eliminates 95% of the Republican Party. I could see MM having one though.

One can only imagine if they learned this type of reasoning growing up or were just born with it.

"To affirm that the Sun is at the centre of the universe and only rotates on its axis without going from east to west, is a very dangerous attitude and one calculated not only to arouse all Scholastic philosophers and theologians but also to injure our holy faith by contradicting the Scriptures -Cardinal Robert Bellarmino, 17th Century Church Master Collegio Romano, who imprisoned and tortured Galileo for his astronomical works"

"It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people. -Giordano Bruno (1548-burned at the stake,1600)"

"Science is like sex: Sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it. (Feynman)"

http://www.miniluv.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=471

who is the fighter with the hand-wraps?

Ali
http://masters-of-photography.com/P/parks/parks_ali.html

Here's Ali training in Miami.

When the debates start, maybe I'll switch it to pictures of Ali in the ring.

On the first Wed of Nov, I will change it to the picture of Ali after knocking Liston down. However, I think it would be unfair to Liston to equate him with W.

and about your footage... without Richard Clarke's testimony turning around coverage of Junior and his cabal... you would have been silenced one way or other.

since Moore is such a polarizing force...in the long run, it would have probably had the public dismiss it thereby leading to more abuse....one recalls Gary Webb's experience with the drugs for weapons deal..even though the circumstances are not a direct fit.

You know I love ya but I can't agree with your take on this... it seems you're saying that

a) the film footage would have been laughed of the 60 Minutes set, had he taken it to them (or any other reputable news org)

or

b) if one anticipates being dismissed by the general public, then he should just say nothing


IIUC, in criminal procedings, having knowledge of a crime and failing to come forward can result in one being named as an accessory.

Sure, sometimes it happens, but one also recalls Cynthia Cooper, Coleen Rowley, and Sherron Watkins as Time's 2002 "Persons of the Year.", Richard Clarke, Bev Harris...

Sorry, that's bull- pls scroll back up to #27- too much to repeat here. Readers' Digest version: knowledge + silence = shared responsibility


Or even more simply, two words: Kitty Genovese

that the story broke through 60 minutes and Sy Hersh. People who are known for putting in the shoe leather.

Moore would have been dismissed as a partisan crackpot, not a newstory breaker.

Now, he can come in with F911 and provide what he does so well, which is context.

self-promotion, which, last time I checked was how biz was done, but that is another story.
Even if he gave the footage to CBS or Sy Hersh or whoever... they would have to out the source, and lots of people would know from where it came anyway.
Then he would have looked worse.

No, I think he played it right.

And, yes, the soldiers had a duty to report such behavior. Up to Congress if neccessary.

he would have been discredited and dismissed as unpatriotic. Then a clamp-down on loose lips and those pesky digital cameras would have prevented the eventual disclosure of prisoner torture.
He definitely did the right thing by waiting.

The American Red Cross or the International groups. Why would they have listened to Moore. They already had the pictures and knew what was going on. They paint Moore as a crackpot every chance they get. It would not have made a difference. CBS didn't release it right away either at the Govt's request. Guess he is patriotic for not doing it too.

Had Moore come out with the abuse footage he would have reduced its impact. It would have been painted as mere partisanship, and Moore would have been accused of deliberately finding bad apples and encouraging them to misbehave.

On the other hand, Moore could have tipped off other media, and maybe he did.

no idea? Please.

We Joes and Janes sitting here in front of our computers all across America knew that soldiers were putting hoods on prisoners. WE SAW THE PICTURES. We knew that prisoners were being stripped and forced to walk naked. We saw pictures.

We knew what was happening at Guantanamo. We knew what was happening in Iraq.

And yet we're supposed to believe that the President* didn't know.

frustrated the soldiers are and were with the Iraq war. I really hope he does.

if someone else (Mel Gibson for example) had been in this situation, and had known about the abuse for months, and done nothing, I'd be pissed. Especially if he had a movie comming out using the footage. Moore made F911, I think, because he wants to show people what's going on so they'll do something about it. It seems like he had a chance to do something about the abuses months ago but chose not to speak up. Now I don't know if he tried to leak the information to keep his name out of it, and I don't know if he leaked footage anonymously, if he did, then I apologize. But if he truly kept quiet and made no attempt at all to bring these abuses to light, then shame on him.

It's good that the photos came out first. This way, the administration has had a chance to lie about them and say it's just a few bad apples. Now Moore will be showing not only widespread abuse, but widespread abuse that Bush had already starting claiming doesn't exist.

They will blame Moore for the abuses.

I know it doesn't make any sense - it's just the way they think.

Honesty. It shows just how polar Bush and Moore are, and not just on policy, but in character.

You can't tell me that he's the only journalist who got film like this. That's what boggles my mind. There must be dozens of journalists and organizations who sat on footage like this. Who are still sitting on it. Why? What is their excuse?

Looks more like his big dilema was between doing the right thing and releasing his evidence or waiting and making his movie look better and making more money for himself.

How is he "making more money for himself"?

he was afraid he'd be accused of seeking publicity for his movie is weak.

It's what my government is still keeping to itself that matters.

Please remember: Moore didn't abuse the Iraqis. He isn't stonewalling an investigation. He didn't write the memo permitting torture. He didn't request a memo from his lawyer justifying the use of torture.


I'm not about to allow the media to distract me from the real culprits....and the real story of abuse in ABu Ghraib.

If he wants to stop the most torture, he's doing the right thing.

If i were making a documentary and happened to come across, say...children being abused...but instead of reporting it, i just held on to the footage because i knew i would be releasing it eventually, would i be getting the same amount of "oh yes, he made the right decision" reactions that Moore is getting?

he made a horrid decision. he put his film profits over the lives of those being tortured. disgusting.

You're right, you don't understand. Michael Moore is accused of treason on a regular basis by the rightwingnuts. Anything out of his mouth is typically given the "yeah, right" treatment by corporate newsmedia. If he had reported this earlier, the entire issue would have been dismissed out of hand, as more liberal muckraking to undermine support for the troops. Especially if he knew other "mainstream" sources were going to be addressing the matter presently, he was (IMHO) wise to keep quiet about it. But it would be, as he says, quite the difficult decision to make.

Now, whatever you may say about his motivations, at least you won't be questioning his veracity.