What is speed dating???  Dating on speed ??
or is it a quick date, slam, bam, thank you mame?

Hanks is an imbecile but he’s a famous one so, unfortunately, people will take him seriously. I’ve studied the JFK assassination off an on for 30 years. You can often get lost in the details but in my “expert” opinion anyone who thinks Kennedy was killed by a lone assassin isn’t much brighter than a beverage coaster. The staggering number of coincidences and hard-to-believe facts you’d have to swallow would make you feel like one of those victims on “Punkd”. “Ha Ha!! He fell for it, loser!!!!”. Well Tom is one of those losers but he has a lot of muscle behind him. I just hope the screaming masses that still have common sense drown him out.

“Mr. Hanks has been disgusting from the moment he began attempting to assume
to speak for soldiers, veterans, and Americans.

“He should be met with protest at every turn.”—j tro

I completely agree with you! I tuned out on Tom Hanks years ago! In fact, I had
already tuned out—before he made the film, Saving Private Ryan.

that said, if Mr. Hanks puts out crap supporting the Warren Commission—or
Bugliosi—he’ll be laughed out of theaters.

I sure as hell wouldn’t waste my time or money seeing it.

Mo Rage
The blog

oh, please.  the mob did it.  Bobby and Jack were put in office with the direct
assistance from the mob.  then, once in office, Bobby, as AG, went after the
mob.

You just don’t do that.

So they took care of the betrayal.

Case closed.

Who else would have attempted such a hit?

No one.

Who else could have done such a clean hit?

Again, no one.

And as for Tom Hanks doing this? 

Good on ya’, Tom.  You do great work.  In spite of the snarky, nasty things said
above, we look forward to seeing what you do with it.  You do great work and
we enjoy and appreciate it.  (at least those of us who have some education and
aren’t jaded otherwise).

Mo Rage
The blog

Does anyone know anything about the lawyer

Mark Lane, I believe he was from Memphis,

that wrote Rush to Judgement.

I read a few of his books,  he and Dick Gregory
also wrote one on Dr. Kings murder.

Was he credible??/ I don’t know much about him.
Rush to Judgement was published I believe within
six months after the Warren Commission report.

I also agree with the reporter who posted this Truthdig item that Hanks tends to glorify the military which disturbs me somewhat as to his objectivity about the “history” of JFK’s murder considering a major alternative to Hanks’ Bugliosi/Warren Report belief posits a military-intelligence basis that he might not want to accept even if it were, ahem, the truth (which I am convinced by 40 years of research capped by Douglass’s book it is).

“JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters” (take a look at the reader comments on Amazon):
http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-Died-Matters/
dp/1570757550/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid;=
1263196127&sr=1-1

(PS: How do I do hyperlinks in comments? This is my first time and don’t see a hyperlink feature. Admin, please answer Q to my e-mail address. Thanks)

Mr. Hanks should do a film of James W. Douglass’s “JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters,” a far better source for “America’s History Teacher” to pin his JFK story on. I wrote Hanks this morning about this superb book. Bugliosi is barking up the wrong tree, rehashing the long-discredited Warren Report. Douglass documents the WHY of Kennedy’s murder, not just the “whodunnit.” His narrative is important for America to understand, given the fact JFK’s death was followed by Vietnam which JFK was trying to get out of; decades more of the Cold War JFK was trying to end, and ever-increasing investment in the MI complex. Bugliosi is a great prosecutor but he’s not a good historian on WHY JFK was killed (no, it wasn’t “because” there was a nut job named Oswald although it’s comforting to believe that compared to the alternative Douglass unfolds). Douglass doesn’t indulge in conspiracy theory, just history.

For example, Mr. Hanks might not have been aware of JFK’s extended correspondence with Khrushchev after the two of them looked into the nuclear abyss during the Cuban missile crisis. They were working toward ending the Cold War and, as such, were seen by their respective generals and intelligence agencies as “traitors.” Therewith a motive for the murder of either of them. Kennedy caught it first.

Check out the Douglass book—and tell Mr. Hanks to read it and sit down with Douglass if anyone here knows Hanks. Don’t let a man of Hanks’ stature be lead down the garden path and lead America there as well—all over again.

Link to Douglass book: http://www.amazon.com/
JFK-Unspeakable-Why-Died-Matters/dp/1570757550/
ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263196127&sr=1-1

Yep, bullets change direction in mid air all the time as in the “magic bullet” theory - which was the brainchild of Arlen Specter to try to make the pieces fit the BS conclusion they were peddling.

Everyone in Dealey Plaza that awful day immediately looked toward and began running to the grassy knoll area right after the shooting. That is where the shot came that blew JFK’s head apart.

This was a hit, not some lone nut. This was their 3rd try, two attempts in the preceding weeks were aborted in Chicago and as I recall Miami.

The Mob wad definitely involved but on top of that who knows? I do know the list of people who just happened to be in Dallas that day is odd and include Poppy Bush (a spook at one point), Nixon and Hoover.

In the end I’m not sure Oswald killed anyone,and I mean both him and his apparent double running around.

Warren Commission Report = Horseshit!

“Conspiracy theorists are only ‘kooks’ until the evidence comes out to vindicate them - even if that takes years, or decades.”  Anon.

I just hope Hanks pays some attention to the proven background of the JFK event. 

The “qui bono” motive.

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/
conspiracy/coverups/bronfmanbush.html

Like my dear old mother use to say “the truth will always come out in the wash”.

Thanks for the informative backgrounder GaryA.

There is less irony than one might suppose in the fact Tom Hanks is hanging the credibility of his JFK assassination project on the views of a famous prosecuting attorney, Vincent Bugliosi. [Word has it that Hanks is relying Bugliosi’s ~2500-page, poorly-selling book, “Reclaiming History,” which is a largely discredited defense of the Warren
Commission.]

This is scarcely a surprise, since Hanks’ starred in “Charlie Wilson’s War,” a book-based movie that,  while uber-“patriotic,” was so bereft of fact that it was mercilessly savaged by a former Navy officer and a highly respected academic,  Chalmers Johnson, a Univ. of California San Diego’s Professor. [See: “Imperialist Propaganda Second Thoughts on Charlie Wilson’s War” by Chalmers Johnson, on-line at:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/
174877/chalmers_johnson_an_imperialist_comedy]

As always happens when pro-govt. books or movies appear, they are warmly greeted in mainstream media outlets. Charlie Wilson’s War was.
[http://movies.nytimes.com/
2007/12/21/movies/21char.html]

And so was Bugliosi’s pro-Warren Commission “Reclaiming History.”
[See http://www.nytimes.com/
2007/05/20/books/review/Burrough-t.html]

However, none of the authors of those fawning reviews were expert enough on the subject of JFK’s death to be listed anywhere in the index of Bugliosi’s book, which is a veritable Who’s Who of authors on the JFK case if there ever was one.

Not that you’ll ever hear it from Hanks, a number of quite negative reviews *have been* published by people who Bugliosi lists.
[http://www.ctka.net/reclaim.html]

Among them is one I published in the Nov/Dec, 2007 issue of the official journal of the Federal Judiciary, “The Federal Lawyer.”

It is the longest review ever published in that respected, professional journal and is available, with copious footnotes, on line at:
http://www.ctka.net/bug_aguilar.html#N_24_

[His having frequently consulted me in writing his book, Bugliosi mentions me, and quotes me, several times in his book, often favorably.]

But when I, a physician, published this unflattering review in a law journal, the lawyer Bugliosi showed his true colors (or should I say fangs?): he sent me a 10-page, hand-written letter of threat and vituperation. It was just soooo Bugliosi!

I ignored it. He then asked me to entirely retract my review. I laughed, and ignored that, too. So he finally wrote a letter to the journal’s editor and I answered him in print, making a monkey of him for a second time.

But given Bugliosi’s “patriotic” spin on that dark day in Dallas, don’t expect Tom Hanks to fret much if his famous source stinks. For if Hanks didn’t care about the truth of Charlie Wilson and Afghanistan, why on earth would he care about the truth of the death of JFK?

Besides, who in Hollywood could resist the pull of the favorable reviews a Bugliosi-inspired fairy tale would draw?

Gary A

For me, the footage of L.H. Oswald’s face in captivity says it all. The guy looks furious almost biting his lip in anger, ready to start straightening out a few matters with some facts when he gets the right moment… too bad some mob “patriot” dying of cancer got to him first, eh?

It’s not the expression one would normally associate with some guy (however crazy) who just blew away the Prez, is it?

Hanks seems to be coming across as some sort of Republican-shill history straightener…

In addition to his knee-jerk nationalism, Hanks is being incredibly cynical here.  He knows that because of his “stature” and “reputation” among many (arguably most) Americans, he need only give his “imprimatur” to a project for that project to be more likely to be “accepted” by them.  One can only hope that this does not occur.

Correction:typo of word “visuals” in my comment.

From a movie point of view, “The DaVinci Code” was a perfect movie.  I ignored the content about the Church in the great viusals & mystery plot, and fast forwarded the violence.  I’ve seen it about 9 times.  The recent sequel is mediocre.  An aside, Bugliosi’s work on wanting to indict the US Supreme Court for their vote to end the 2000 election ballot/vote count in FL was great.  He made good points.  Is Tom Hanks going to be making a documentary on JFK?  If it’s fiction, then they can do what they want.  Are some people getting their history from fiction movies, which are entertainment.  Sanda

Hanks is a typical, right-wing nationalist. Just look at what he produces, he makes it seem as if WWII is the only war America has ever fought or at least the only war in the last 60 years worth exploring despite the overflow in WWII movies.

Hanks ,,,give it up pal,,, who gives a rats ass
right now about JFK,  Lee Harvey Oswald and
another JFK story… Lets see,  Damon does RFK,,,then
you doin a JFK….

You all really, really , bored in Hollywood ain’t
ya !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!