William Kelly Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 (edited) FYI, letter (hardcopy) to Tom Hanks about JFK: Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson Playtone Productions P.O. Box 7340 Santa Monica, CA 90406 Dear Mr. Hanks, I saw you on "Morning Joe" on Friday March 5 when you mentioned you might consider doing a film of Vincent Bugliosi's book about JFK's murder and Oswald as the lone assassin. I was shocked that a man of your sophistication, with a reputation as "America's History Teacher," would be tempted to cinematize such an inferior work about JFK as that of Mr. Bugliosi. He's a great prosecutor but he's no historian, and most reputable JFK researchers agree. "Helter Skelter" on his pursuit of Manson was brilliant; but his view of the JFK killing is more theory than history. Far superior in quality and truth is the extraordinary research of James W. Douglass whose book appeared in mid 2008, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters." From Douglass' perspective, Oswald was not the "lone assassin" (if a shooter at all) and not only JFK died in Dealey Plaza. Peace was murdered that day and that is not expressing it too dramatically. Douglass puts together the entire mystery of the JFK killing A to Z -- and most important he answers the question "Why?" He comes up with a work that is not a "conspiracy theory" but a remarkably rich history supported in nearly every paragraph by detailed documentation, much of it quite recently uncovered and not covered by the newsmedia. Yet the truth of the "why dunnit" is far more breathtaking than the "who dunnit" which is horrendous enough. The latter has been intuited by millions of Americans since 1963 but the former has been unknown until virtually now. For example, you might not have been aware of JFK's extended correspondence with Nikita 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. Kennedy pulled off the nuclear test ban treaty in record time during this correspondence period with Khrushchev, so we're not talking about flights of fancy here. He was on a roll to close down the Cold War up to hours before he died – and he was stopped. How he was stopped is the tale Douglass tells (setting up for you an extraordinary narrative for a film script), not from his own agenda (Douglass is admittedly a peace activist and devotee of Thomas Merton) but from the documents he cites at every turn. If you used Douglass as a kind of narrator, this has the makings of the "Titanic" of the JFK saga. Indeed, like the Titantic, the truth about what happened to JFK has been lying on the bottom of American historical consciousness for nearly fifty years waiting for Douglass -- and perhaps you -- to come down and tap its secrets. This is the book you should put to film, not another warmed-over "official story" descended from the long-discredited Warren Report to yet again delude the American public. This is the film that should come from "America's History Teacher." I suggest if you're serious about this JFK film that you 1) read "JFK and the Unspeakable" and 2) sit down with Mr. Douglass and talk to him. This is extremely important, Mr. Hanks. Our loss of Kennedy as a nation was one thing (he was a medium president, there was deep grief for one man) but our loss of the peace process Kennedy was working on (likely the end of the Cold War and no Vietnam, saving 58,000 Americans and thousands of Indonesians) and our continuation, therefore, of the military-industrial madness ever since are bad enough (and I'm no pacifist) without your making American history worse by not paying attention to the truth now that someone has done yeoman's work of digging it up and telling it with such depth and what can only be described as a kind of "national tenderness." I think it will change your life to read this book and talk to Mr. Douglass. Here's the Amazon link -- $20 bucks. Skim through reader comments: http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-...6127&sr=1-1 Sincerely, Jane W. Prettyman Honesdale PA Formerly at Esquire Magazine Edited March 6, 2010 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 Good of Bill to post a fine letter from Jane W. Prettyman to Tom Hanks. I returned to The Huffington Post and added a third comment: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...a_n_485418.html Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to View Comments: Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (10 pages total) - laocoon I'm a Fan of laocoon 43 fans permalink there are two real broad possibilities: 1) LHO acted alone 2) there was a conspiracy and like he said he was being framed. i think it is useful to ask what patterns of evidence would you expect if 1 were the case and what patterns if 2. in either case there is going to be evidence incriminating to LHO isnt there? in case one the evidence should mostly have good foundations, good chains of custody and not have a lot of divergences. if the second you would expect ballistics evidence that appears on floors when no one is looking, shell casings that lose their evidentiary markings without good explanation, conflicting patterns of wounds at dallas and washington, nitrate tests that are negative, a failure to test the murder weapon to see if it had been fired, the silencing of the patsy when normal security fails, missing brain of the victim, notes at autopsy that are not consistent with the final version on key locations of wounds, failures to probe wounds,destruction of the original notes, lack of a rational motive for the conduct of the patsy-- you know these sort of irregularities as a rule more than an exception. certainly some anomolies are understandable but step back and look at the forest and tell me which of the two possibilities does this case fit best? ( sometimes what you thought was a box of chocolates has so many pebbles in it you have to wonder if it was mislabled) Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:52 PM on 3/05/2010 - FZliveson I'm a Fan of FZliveson 156 fans permalink Damn you're good! Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:31 PM on 3/05/2010 - James Fetzer 12 fans permalink Nice points. Anyone who wants an overview of the assassination should visit the book site http://www.und.edu/org/jfkconference/ and download my chapter, "Dealey Plaza Revisited: What Happened to JFK?" That study and many others, such as several blogs about the research of Doug Horne, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009), may also be found on my blog at http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com. JFK was hit four times--once in the throat from in front, once in the back from behind, and twice in the head from behind and from in front--while John Connally was hit from one to three times and another shot missed and injured a distant bystander. At least two other shots missed, so there were eight, nine, or ten shots from six locations. By stealing the body in violation of state law, conducting a sham autopsy, altering the X-rays and creating phony autopsy photographs as well as recreating the Zapruder film, they were able to conceal the true causes of death for decades. On the Zapruder film, a good place to start is http://assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/ Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:54 AM on 3/06/2010 FYI, letter (hardcopy) to Tom Hanks about JFK:Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson Playtone Productions P.O. Box 7340 Santa Monica, CA 90406 Dear Mr. Hanks, I saw you on "Morning Joe" on Friday March 5 when you mentioned you might consider doing a film of Vincent Bugliosi's book about JFK's murder and Oswald as the lone assassin. I was shocked that a man of your sophistication, with a reputation as "America's History Teacher," would be tempted to cinematize such an inferior work about JFK as that of Mr. Bugliosi. He's a great prosecutor but he's no historian, and most reputable JFK researchers agree. "Helter Skelter" on his pursuit of Manson was brilliant; but his view of the JFK killing is more theory than history. Far superior in quality and truth is the extraordinary research of James W. Douglass whose book appeared in mid 2008, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters." From Douglass' perspective, Oswald was not the "lone assassin" (if a shooter at all) and not only JFK died in Dealey Plaza. Peace was murdered that day and that is not expressing it too dramatically. Douglass puts together the entire mystery of the JFK killing A to Z -- and most important he answers the question "Why?" He comes up with a work that is not a "conspiracy theory" but a remarkably rich history supported in nearly every paragraph by detailed documentation, much of it quite recently uncovered and not covered by the newsmedia. Yet the truth of the "why dunnit" is far more breathtaking than the "who dunnit" which is horrendous enough. The latter has been intuited by millions of Americans since 1963 but the former has been unknown until virtually now. For example, you might not have been aware of JFK's extended correspondence with Nikita 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. Kennedy pulled off the nuclear test ban treaty in record time during this correspondence period with Khrushchev, so we're not talking about flights of fancy here. He was on a roll to close down the Cold War up to hours before he died – and he was stopped. How he was stopped is the tale Douglass tells (setting up for you an extraordinary narrative for a film script), not from his own agenda (Douglass is admittedly a peace activist and devotee of Thomas Merton) but from the documents he cites at every turn. If you used Douglass as a kind of narrator, this has the makings of the "Titanic" of the JFK saga. Indeed, like the Titantic, the truth about what happened to JFK has been lying on the bottom of American historical consciousness for nearly fifty years waiting for Douglass -- and perhaps you -- to come down and tap its secrets. This is the book you should put to film, not another warmed-over "official story" descended from the long-discredited Warren Report to yet again delude the American public. This is the film that should come from "America's History Teacher." I suggest if you're serious about this JFK film that you 1) read "JFK and the Unspeakable" and 2) sit down with Mr. Douglass and talk to him. This is extremely important, Mr. Hanks. Our loss of Kennedy as a nation was one thing (he was a medium president, there was deep grief for one man) but our loss of the peace process Kennedy was working on (likely the end of the Cold War and no Vietnam, saving 58,000 Americans and thousands of Indonesians) and our continuation, therefore, of the military-industrial madness ever since are bad enough (and I'm no pacifist) without your making American history worse by not paying attention to the truth now that someone has done yeoman's work of digging it up and telling it with such depth and what can only be described as a kind of "national tenderness." I think it will change your life to read this book and talk to Mr. Douglass. Here's the Amazon link -- $20 bucks. Skim through reader comments: http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-...6127&sr=1-1 Sincerely, Jane W. Prettyman Honesdale PA Formerly at Esquire Magazine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 Check out http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...just_reloaded=1Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Nothing will convince the conspiracy nuts that they're wrong. It defies the very nature of why they believe what they believe. They want to feel as if they're privy to what others missed. It makes them feel superior. They want to believe they can't be fooled. To them, this would be just another "cover up" perpetuated by the media. And anyone who disagrees is a narrow-minded rube. It's as pathetic as it is perpetual. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 3/04/2010 - thebodyventura I'm a Fan of thebodyventura 11 fans permalink Do tell us master how LHO was able to call off the President's security in Dallas on Nov 22,1963. This is referenced in oliver Stone's JFK. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 3/04/2010 - Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Oh, well if it was in Oliver Stones movie, it must be true. See what I mean? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 3/04/2010 There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All -DG3 I'm a Fan of DG3 25 fans permalink Do tell us how old you are. Does it end with 'teen'? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 AM on 3/05/2010 - James Fetzer 10 fans permalink It would be great is Nelson actually knew what he was talking about for a change. By the simple expedient of determining where the bullet that struck JFK hit his back, it is possible refute--conclusively--the "magic bullet" theory. Michael Baden, M.D., has observed that, if the "magic bullet" theory is false, then there have to have been at least six shots from three directions. It is not only false but is not even anatomically possible. You can download the proof, which includes the shirt and jacket that he was wearing, autopsy and FBI diagrams, his personal physician's death certificate, and reenactment photographs, which is archived at http://www.assassinationscience.com/Reason...assinations.pdf I have been a fan of Tom Hanks, but in this case, he is on the wrong side of logic, evidence, and history. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:08 AM on 3/05/2010 - Joe Ryan I'm a Fan of Joe Ryan 2 fans permalink Someone should get him copies of Armstrong and Horne's books......http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...a_n_485418.html Maybe Bruce Willis as Fritz (in the white vest) and Charlie Sheen as Oswald and Rosie O'Donnell as Marina I am positive these tight lipped actors could stay within the script/! Rosie as MARINA? How about Judyth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hanks cannot possibly be doing this for the money. He has more than anyone could ever need. It's despicable that someone from my generation would not have bothered to look at all the widely available research that reveals the impossible nature of the official story. It's also laughable that he would pretend Bugliosi's magnus absurdus was so powerful it has persuaded him to produce a movie based upon it. This is one of his worst acting performances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hanks cannot possibly be doing this for the money. He has more than anyone could ever need. It's despicable that someone from my generation would not have bothered to look at all the widely available research that reveals the impossible nature of the official story. It's also laughable that he would pretend Bugliosi's magnus absurdus was so powerful it has persuaded him to produce a movie based upon it. This is one of his worst acting performances. perhaps Don this is really showing how really duh he is...if not for acting he would not be a success nor have his money...if he does not know by now at his age,within his generation he has chosen to live with blindfolderss on... i do not think any should hold out any hope for him, as he lives in his own cocoon and really does not comprehend what has and is going on in the real world...too much money can do that...i do believe...b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Kinaski Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Hanks cannot possibly be doing this for the money. He has more than anyone could ever need. It's despicable that someone from my generation would not have bothered to look at all the widely available research that reveals the impossible nature of the official story. It's also laughable that he would pretend Bugliosi's magnus absurdus was so powerful it has persuaded him to produce a movie based upon it. This is one of his worst acting performances. perhaps Don this is really showing how really duh he is...if not for acting he would not be a success nor have his money...if he does not know by now at his age,within his generation he has chosen to live with blindfolderss on... i do not think any should hold out any hope for him, as he lives in his own cocoon and really does not comprehend what has and is going on in the real world...too much money can do that...i do believe...b Hanks: "I am a distant relevant of Abe Lincoln, Kennedy was shot in a Lincoln, Lincoln was shot in the Ford theater, and they fired a shot at Ford too!!!!, and me I am a distant relevant of Lincoln, therefore..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Geraghty Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Perhaps someone could persuade John Armstrong to make the text available at a reasonable cost as a download. Good suggestion. Noel Twyman has one similarly recently. Jack, would you send a suggestion to John about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie Vegas Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Just wanted to post a quick note to let anyone who has Facebook know that I have started a letter writing, book sending, education giving campaign of sorts. Its directed at HBO and Hanks. Please feel free to join us! http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/gr...3858&ref=ts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Check out http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...just_reloaded=1Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Nothing will convince the conspiracy nuts that they're wrong. It defies the very nature of why they believe what they believe. They want to feel as if they're privy to what others missed. It makes them feel superior. They want to believe they can't be fooled. To them, this would be just another "cover up" perpetuated by the media. And anyone who disagrees is a narrow-minded rube. It's as pathetic as it is perpetual. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 3/04/2010 - thebodyventura I'm a Fan of thebodyventura 11 fans permalink Do tell us master how LHO was able to call off the President's security in Dallas on Nov 22,1963. This is referenced in oliver Stone's JFK. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 3/04/2010 - Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Oh, well if it was in Oliver Stones movie, it must be true. See what I mean? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 3/04/2010 There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All -DG3 I'm a Fan of DG3 25 fans permalink Do tell us how old you are. Does it end with 'teen'? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 AM on 3/05/2010 - James Fetzer 10 fans permalink It would be great is Nelson actually knew what he was talking about for a change. By the simple expedient of determining where the bullet that struck JFK hit his back, it is possible refute--conclusively--the "magic bullet" theory. Michael Baden, M.D., has observed that, if the "magic bullet" theory is false, then there have to have been at least six shots from three directions. It is not only false but is not even anatomically possible. You can download the proof, which includes the shirt and jacket that he was wearing, autopsy and FBI diagrams, his personal physician's death certificate, and reenactment photographs, which is archived at http://www.assassinationscience.com/Reason...assinations.pdf I have been a fan of Tom Hanks, but in this case, he is on the wrong side of logic, evidence, and history. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:08 AM on 3/05/2010 I actually posted two, but I didn't know that they had published both--typos and all!--until my webmaster send me this: Someone should get him copies of Armstrong and Horne's books......http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...a_n_485418.html Those are amazing replies Jim. Its amazing how you seemed to have made Montana's point better than he himself did. Montana hit the nail on the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Check out http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...just_reloaded=1Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Nothing will convince the conspiracy nuts that they're wrong. It defies the very nature of why they believe what they believe. They want to feel as if they're privy to what others missed. It makes them feel superior. They want to believe they can't be fooled. To them, this would be just another "cover up" perpetuated by the media. And anyone who disagrees is a narrow-minded rube. It's as pathetic as it is perpetual. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 3/04/2010 - thebodyventura I'm a Fan of thebodyventura 11 fans permalink Do tell us master how LHO was able to call off the President's security in Dallas on Nov 22,1963. This is referenced in oliver Stone's JFK. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 3/04/2010 - Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Oh, well if it was in Oliver Stones movie, it must be true. See what I mean? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 3/04/2010 There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All -DG3 I'm a Fan of DG3 25 fans permalink Do tell us how old you are. Does it end with 'teen'? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 AM on 3/05/2010 - James Fetzer 10 fans permalink It would be great is Nelson actually knew what he was talking about for a change. By the simple expedient of determining where the bullet that struck JFK hit his back, it is possible refute--conclusively--the "magic bullet" theory. Michael Baden, M.D., has observed that, if the "magic bullet" theory is false, then there have to have been at least six shots from three directions. It is not only false but is not even anatomically possible. You can download the proof, which includes the shirt and jacket that he was wearing, autopsy and FBI diagrams, his personal physician's death certificate, and reenactment photographs, which is archived at http://www.assassinationscience.com/Reason...assinations.pdf I have been a fan of Tom Hanks, but in this case, he is on the wrong side of logic, evidence, and history. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:08 AM on 3/05/2010 I actually posted two, but I didn't know that they had published both--typos and all!--until my webmaster send me this: Someone should get him copies of Armstrong and Horne's books......http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...a_n_485418.html Those are amazing replies Jim. Its amazing how you seemed to have made Montana's point better than he himself did. Montana hit the nail on the head. Hi Mike Can I ask for a favor on behalf of all the CT's on this forum please? Can you complete Gil Jesus' challenge that he set a week or so ago? Cheers Lee I would be happy to, but I deal in facts, and very much dislike speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Check out http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...just_reloaded=1Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Nothing will convince the conspiracy nuts that they're wrong. It defies the very nature of why they believe what they believe. They want to feel as if they're privy to what others missed. It makes them feel superior. They want to believe they can't be fooled. To them, this would be just another "cover up" perpetuated by the media. And anyone who disagrees is a narrow-minded rube. It's as pathetic as it is perpetual. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 3/04/2010 - thebodyventura I'm a Fan of thebodyventura 11 fans permalink Do tell us master how LHO was able to call off the President's security in Dallas on Nov 22,1963. This is referenced in oliver Stone's JFK. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 PM on 3/04/2010 - Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 206 fans permalink See Nelson Montana's Profile Oh, well if it was in Oliver Stones movie, it must be true. See what I mean? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 3/04/2010 There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All -DG3 I'm a Fan of DG3 25 fans permalink Do tell us how old you are. Does it end with 'teen'? Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 AM on 3/05/2010 - James Fetzer 10 fans permalink It would be great is Nelson actually knew what he was talking about for a change. By the simple expedient of determining where the bullet that struck JFK hit his back, it is possible refute--conclusively--the "magic bullet" theory. Michael Baden, M.D., has observed that, if the "magic bullet" theory is false, then there have to have been at least six shots from three directions. It is not only false but is not even anatomically possible. You can download the proof, which includes the shirt and jacket that he was wearing, autopsy and FBI diagrams, his personal physician's death certificate, and reenactment photographs, which is archived at http://www.assassinationscience.com/Reason...assinations.pdf I have been a fan of Tom Hanks, but in this case, he is on the wrong side of logic, evidence, and history. Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:08 AM on 3/05/2010 I actually posted two, but I didn't know that they had published both--typos and all!--until my webmaster send me this: Someone should get him copies of Armstrong and Horne's books......http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/04/t...a_n_485418.html Those are amazing replies Jim. Its amazing how you seemed to have made Montana's point better than he himself did. Montana hit the nail on the head. Hi Mike Can I ask for a favor on behalf of all the CT's on this forum please? Can you complete Gil Jesus' challenge that he set a week or so ago? Cheers Lee I would be happy to, but I deal in facts, and very much dislike speculation. Then you should enjoy the challenge because Gil is asking for evidence for his series of questions... ...just have a stab and see how you get on. Lee Lee, I just might. I just found that post and copied them, and am getting ready to go home after the graveyard shift! Get some rest and well see what I can do. Hope you have a good day! Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now