Tom Hanks is going ahead with his JFK assassination project

[turtleman]

I wish Hanks had not been so ostracized by this thread guys. I haven't seen that much evidence pointing to his slanted views on JFK. I thought he was a typical Hollywood liberal and always backed the Dems. Until his positions are more transparent I think it would be better to finesse the situation rather than pound him between the eyes. He may be impressionable and he may talk to Oliver Stone regarding the project. If he comes across this thread he may consider this a hostile bunch. When we start to demonize before the fact we aren't any better than the other side.

[tom jeffers]

turtlethere is a difference between acting a part that you disagree with like playing a killer or rapist, than it is to do a documentary. your motivations are different. Hanks has chosen to bow to a different god. it hurts me because i have loved just about everything the guy has done since busom buddies. tom

[turtleman]

I really like his acting too Tom and almost all his movies. He is a superb actor. I guess I just haven't seen evidence that he is a schill for the disinfo campaign. I know one of the main guys (producer/director) is a right wing hack. Does that mean Hanks is too? If I am out of line I stand corrected but why are we even writing letters if this is a foregone conclusion?

[Bob]

T-Man, I appreciate your stance on this subject. It would hurt me as well, because I do appreciate Hank's work as an actor AND as a producer. We shall see what happens, but he has been quoted nationally about this subject, and it doesn't look good up to this point. As the saying goes, everyone is considered innocent until proven guilty. The same should go for Hanks. But in the same token, we should let Hanks know there are two sides to this story, as he seems affiliated with the dark side based on what I have read. That's why we should send him letters about what we believe. Then...it is up to him.

[Pennyworth]

Look here to when his plan was first hatched...can we see a slow lagging of time to its debut ????http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... tml?cat=38

[Bob]

Pennyworth wrote:Look here to when his plan was first hatched...can we see a slow lagging of time to its debut ????http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... cat=38Paul, that is why myself and others are hoping that there is a glimmer of hope that Hanks won't actually take part in this project doomed for failure.But then again LBJ escalated things in Vietnam after 11/22/1963. At least the U.S. didn't attack Cuba.

[David Octopus]

Some interesting comments in this thread, however I'm afraid you lost the track here, Hanks appeared in several movie projects with his strong input and distinct overall social-political commentary so to speak. In my view the Forrest Gump flic is a subtle but direct attack on the counter-culture ethos of the 1960s (the sub plot of his love destroyed by hanging around with "these types") and the final part with this sort of Reaganesque smalltown capitalism paradiso propaganda was just beyond.. Add to the mix recent Charlie Wilson's War, which has been openly staffed with Langley advisors and screams out ahistorical nonsense, some would even add the Nasa apologetic movie to this list as well.In short I think there is a pattern, that he is sort of a closet rightwinger or shall we say nationalist in the pejorative sense on some issues (favouring authoritarian "dady told you so - don't question it" type of government). These people are just internally irked to only think about government crimes/conspiracies, it's more like psychological condition than rational decision, which could be abused from the outside. Personal political affiliation of members of this forum aside, you students of history should know better, that to support Dem or Rep is in reality just choosing the other head of the same hydra. So, if Mr. Hanks donated funds to the Dem party, for me that only means in the final analysis, he defacto supports the neo-nazi types like the senatorial-person Joe Lieberman..You also raised interesting speculation that he might recently got wind of factual problems of his JFK project, so he might have second thoughts about own monies invested into it. Well, the fact of the matter is that the Langley guys can always easily reimburse him by putting preasure on some buddies in /Bolly/-wood to secure for their dear friend Tom Hanks a sure winner script of the decade. Actually, to arrange this - they would need just a few phone calls and as we know their coffers are not excatly empty to smooth out the process anyway. So, I don't put much into this -Hanks trying to quit and is afraid of his money- theory without further evidence on the table..PS I'm not discouraging the attempts to mail him some info and quality books, it just might work..

[Dealey Joe]

In my opinion all these actors, producers, writers all want to look small town, main stream average Joe's.After all the people who pay to see their movies are just that.try hard most of them to cover up their homosexuality, some don't even try nowadays.The big boys, high ups, Rockefellers, ect. do not pay to see movies.I think you are correct about the money, it is imaterial. What is importantis ratings and having the highest dollar first day, first week and overall gross income.It is a contest amoung them to see who can motivate the most people.To look good and maintain there star status profiles so they can strut down the red carpetin front of their peers.Hell look what we do, we make kings and idols out of the stars of entertainment, sports, media ect.pay them ultra amounts of money.I think they all stit around in the dugouts and dressing rooms laughing their asses of at the fools whoplay their game.Demoocrat - Republican? hell they are all in the same boat. I think they to set in their little offices, smokin big cigarslaughing their asses of at us, why not, we keep playing their game too.I think the only people making any statement at all are the ones who don't vote.i would be embarrased to be elected when only 10% voted.I guess politicians have sank so low that they overlook the obviouse.

[Bob]

Good discussion there fellas. The CIA has an endless supply of money to use at their whim, thanks to their associations with the Military Industrial Complex and big banking. Those same associations are used to buy off politicians as well, along with big insurance, big pharma and others. Add to that, the MSM is in bed with the power elite, protecting their sordid secrets.

[Phil Dragoo]

Perhaps the black funds of Langley can buy all the tickets for Tom's turkey.He's dead wrong--and with Douglass and Horne et al (you people know who you are) nine of ten Americans will scoff at any Oswald-did-it plot----which is all the Boogli-Woogli-Vincent Boy of Company C can offer.He may very well allow his mind to be McAdamized, allowing Panetta to pee on his leg and convince him it's raining----in which case, we'll hear his shoes squeaking when he walks across the stage on Oscar night.