Turns out Hanks is just another Hollywood douche.
Via John Nolte at Big Hollywood.
Over the weekend, Time Magazine published a long, glowing profile of Tom Hanks to help promote his upcoming HBO miniseries “The Pacific.” And as with all things entertainment media, the subject is never challenged or even made to shift uncomfortably in his seat. The push to ascend Hanks to “national treasure” status is clearly on.
Hanks does seem to be a genuinely nice man and the work he’s done to bring American history to life on film is impressive, especially during a time when the singling out of America’s exceptionalism is more and more frowned upon in artistic and academic circles. ”From the Earth to the Moon,” “Band of Brothers,” and “John Adams” are not only artistic achievements, but in this MTV-addled culture, might be the best hope of teaching America’s youth about the unique history and greatness of this nation. And I suspect ”The Pacific,” the 10-part miniseries premiering this Sunday on HBO (which Big Hollywood’s Michael Broderick will cover extensively) will be a worthy addition to what came before.
But when it comes to leftist Hollywood, whenever Tinseltown and America meet, you have to brace yourself for it — and by “it” I mean the leftist sucker punch. Throughout, Hanks sounds perfectly reasonable, intelligent and even patriotic for a couple of thousand words. But of course that’s just the lure to get us on his side before we’re walloped with this left cross:
“[Hanks] doesn’t see the series as simply eye-opening history. He hopes it offers Americans a chance to ponder the sacrifices of our current soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. “From the outset, we wanted to make people wonder how our troops can re-enter society in the first place,” Hanks says. “How could they just pick up their lives and get on with the rest of us? Back in World War II, we viewed the Japanese as ‘yellow, slant-eyed dogs’ that believed in different gods. They were out to kill us because our way of living was different. We, in turn, wanted to annihilate them because they were different. Does that sound familiar, by any chance, to what’s going on today?”
There’s no such thing as a definitive history. But what was once a passing interest for Hanks has become an obsession. He’s a man on a mission to make our back pages come alive, to keep overhauling the history we know and, in the process, get us to understand not just the past but the choices we make today.”
No matter how many times you read this passage the context is clear. By “different” Hanks is clearly referring to race, culture and religion, not ideology.
Really, we wanted to annihilate the Japanese because they were different, because we saw them as “yellow, slant-eyed dogs that believed in different gods?” I thought it was due to the fact that “we viewed them” as barbaric imperialists who had attacked us first and wanted to enslave the world.
But there’s no reason to speculate about America’s motivations during WWII because history has proven Hanks wrong. We had every opportunity to annihilate these “different” people. Instead we chose, at great expense, to rebuild Japan and return the sovereignty of that nation over to the “yellow, slant-eyed dogs who believed in different gods.” Or, as most people prefer to call them: our newly liberated allies.
And to answer Hanks’s question: No — annihilating people who are different sounds NOTHING like what’s going on today.
……The irony is that as Hanks spoke those slanderous words, the American Military remains in the middle of two conflicts that have cost us thousands of precious lives and hundreds of billions of dollars all towards the noble goal of liberating 50 million “different” people in Iraq and Afghanistan. And we all know that had we practiced a more selfish and barbaric form of war the enemy would’ve been destroyed faster, American lives would’ve been saved, and the financial cost would not have been nearly as high.
That last sentence is a summary of exactly what I’d have done. We should have neutron-bombed a good portion of the Middle East on 12 September, 2001. If Islamofascist swine want a jihad, then by god, let’s give ’em one. I was deployed to Iraq twice, and I never agreed with this piecemeal war. When you fight back against an enemy that attacked you and took so many lives, you reciprocate swiftly and with as much brutality as it takes to defeat them. That means you annihilate them.
We’re fighting muslims who not only hate Jews, Christians, and “unbelievers”, but who want a world Caliphate. Hanks just thinks they’re “different”.
“Stupid is as stupid does”.
4 thoughts on “Tom Hanks: ‘We Annihilate Muslim Terrorists Because They’re Different’”
what a shame, cos i really liked him! I thought he was more intelligent than that and more worldly. Muslims don’t hate Jews or Christians. we want world peace. im a Muslim and i have many Jews and christian friends. please learn more about the world you live in!
Oh yeah, there’s so much ‘peace’ in a violent, brutal theocracy that spreads carnage in the name of your ‘allah’.
Try your taqiyya somewhere else.
Allah U Fuckbar,
Would that include all Iraqis?
If I had my way, along with the rest of the Islamic nation-states in the Middle East, they would have been eradicated in a scorched earth policy on 12 September 2001.