Daniel Wolff slams Michael Moore . . . hard . . .

[OneBlueSky]

seems that Daniel Wolff takes issue with Moore's decision not to release what he knew about torture and abuse in Iraq when he first found out about it . . . he has a good point, imo . . .

Why Iraqi Detainees Should Sue Michael Moore
By DANIEL WOLFF
http://www.counterpunch.org/wolff06162004.html

Last week, filmmaker Michael Moore admitted that he withheld footage documenting the abuse of Iraqi detainees by US troops. He explained his bizarre decision this way: "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.''

I'd like to make a stab at translating Michael Moore's statement back into English:

(snip)

"Now, with the movie about to open, I will almost concede that the right decision would have been to release the footage as soon as I obtained it. Although I'd like to keep a "maybe" in there because I still don't want to take a stand. I've made my reputation by appearing to take a stand, and I wouldn't want to actually take a stand because that my hurt my reputation.

"I hope you will understand from this statement that I, Michael Moore, am in the business of making money for me, Michael Moore, and my reputation as a "truth-teller" is more important than actually telling the truth.

(ouch . . .)

- more . . .

http://www.counterpunch.org/wolff06162004.html

[Jim Sagle]

1. Counterpunch ain't nuthin' but shit. For a so-called lefty pub, they slam

other lefties - as well as liberals and Democrats - AWFULLY hard. Fuck'm.

[trogdor]

6. Lots of lefties dislike Michael Moore.

I'm technically a centrist, but I must say Michael Moore isn't my favorite, either. I don't really dislike him, but that's the way I feel. People like him are the reason I consider myself a centrist.

[Generic Other]

15. People like him? You mean liberals? Including most DUers?

To me the center is way too close to Bush, Cheney and Rummy.

I fear it's people like you who win elections for the GOP by constantly criticizing the left. What's more you can't even articulate what it is that bothers you.

[Trajan]

25. Honestly ...

This seems a cheap shot ...

WHAT is a leftist ? .... what is a centrist ? ...

I mean: REALLY ? ....

According to 'Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld': Im a goddamned communist, even though I support regulated captialism, a reasonable defense posture, FAIR taxation and accountability of those who receive the public dole ...

Yet: I fully support free public schooling, college tuition, food stamps and welfare (applied wisely and sanely), public housing assistance, public works projects and demand side stimulus ...

So: ... am I 'centrist' ? ... or am I leftist ? ...

Heck: ... Am I goddamned a rightist ? ...

YOU tell me: ... and PLEASE do so in condescending and fallacious tones so I get the whole flavor of your derision ....

[bossfish]

2. Who?

Ooooooh....Daniel Wolff is on the prowl!

[LittleApple81]

3. Can you imagine if he had come out with the pictures? I can. He

would have been dragged through the mud because he was trying to publicize himself and diminish the army. Leave him alone! Actually, he should not have said anything about having taken those pictures, IMHO.

[I thought so.]

4. Counterpunch is the dead left.

R.I.P. It never did anything productive. Bitching is too much fun.

[ShaneGR]

5. Counterpunch would attack FDR... if he was still alive

Probably something about not supporting the handicapped.

[0007]

7. El Paso and sour grapes and a hack with an ego problem all

have much in common.

[OneBlueSky]

8. well, I guess no one wants to tackle the ethical dilemma here . . .

could Moore have prevented any subsequent torture by going public when he first learned what was happening? . . . did he have an ethical or moral obligation to do so? . . . did people who witnessed Nazi atrocities have an ethical or moral obligation to make them known, if they could? . . . if so, what's the difference? . . .

[ClassWarrior]

13. From what I understand...

...it was an incident. Not a pattern, but a single incident. And not at Abu Ghraib (sp?).

I'm sure Moore felt that putting it in the movie WOULD make it known - a lot better than if he handed over the footage to the Dept. of War.

[silverlib]

9. Torture has been in the news for months...

Just the average American has to see pictures. (Pictures speak louder than words)

Moore didn't withhold anything that hasn't been out there for a long time. He just had it in a different form.

[Make7]

10. The question is...

When did he know about this? Was it before the military investigations started at the beginning of the year? Was it before the ICRC had reported on the abuse problems? If not, I think they may have a difficult time making a case.

Should they also sue CBS for delaying the release of the story? Should they sue all the mainstream media for not reporting this with enough emphasis after the government announcement in January?

Should they sue the manufacturers of the cameras? And the hoods? And the electrodes? And on and on.....

Or maybe they should sue the people actually responsible. I feel just a little bit dumber after reading his article.

Make7

[newyawker99]

11. Hi Make7!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Make7]

16. Thanks

[redqueen]

17. Lovely post

Welcome to DU, Make7!

:hi:

[Make7]

24. Thank you

[ClassWarrior]

12. Lefties aiding and abetting the enemy by passing on RW talking points...

n/t

[Justice]

14. Anyone who thinks it is more important to slam Moore than

to discuss the Bush administration is frankly no worth reading. There are plenty of places to go for that - Faux, RW radio etc.

[progressivebydesign]

18. Who's Daniel Wolff? And why should I care? N/T

[BigMcLargehuge]

19. And you think these images would have garnered MORE attention

had Moore released them months ago? As if the RW wouldn't have used Moore's very existence as "proof" that the images were fake, lies, propaganda! The images from Abu Graib HAD to filter into the media the way they did, through what appeared to be a neutral source, rather than from someone KNOWN for controversial imagery.

He was right to hold them, and it has NOTHING to do with money.

[graham67]

26. I agree totally....

To which trustworthy people would he give them? Folks in the Pentagon? Well, we know they sat on information for quite some time. The media? The media had information that wasn't released to the public for weeks. Congress? We know that one of the abuser's parents gave information to elected officials who didn't even bother to respond! Michael Moore did the right thing.

[Delano]

20. Moore is not a reporter...

I don't think it's in his nature to try to "get things out first". Also, possible torture of detainees in Gitmo and elsewhere has been a big topic among the left since early 2002, but the mainstream media wanted no part of the discussion - Until, that is, the graphic photos of Abu Ghraib.

It could be that Moore just assumed people would be as indifferent about Abu Ghraid abuse as they were about the reports from Gitmo.

I honestly didn't think Americans would care as much as they apparently do...

[gratuitous]

21. Yeah, Moore should have released the footage, okay

I've sure seen a lot of balanced, fair, nuanced discussion so far about Farenheit 911, from Ray Bradbury's senile rantings that Moore should have asked his permission before using Professor Farenheit's name (or some such demented ranting) to Bill O'Reilly's deathless, in-depth review of the seeing 40 minutes of the film.

If Moore had only come out with his torture footage, why, the fair-minded, non-partisan, unbiased, objective reporters who exclusively populate our newspaper pages, television screens and radio dials would have gone right to the heart of the message and demanded explanations from the corrupt Bush administration. Nobody would have spent more than a passing moment on the fact that it was Michael Moore bringing these images before the public eye, because the images themselves would have been the story.

I suppose if monkeys are going to fly out of my butt, the least I could do is stand up.

[genius]

22. NO ONE WOULD HAVE WANTED TO HEAR IT

[Kazak]

23. Riiight...sue michael, not the torturers...

:crazy:

[BlueStateGirl]

27. For What? Not exposing the "fraternity pranks" going on in Iraq?

Why
would he? What was happening was no big deal. Right?

Just a few bad apples? Right?

Nothing to report.

You know....maybe he should have released the footage.
But, honestly, I think coming form him, the RW would have found a way to dismiss, or mininmize what was happening.