Until recently I’d never given the International Forest of Friendship (IFF) in Atchison, Kansas much thought, although I’ve long suspected that they’re no friends of the truth in the Earhart disappearance. The fact that Fred Goerner was never inducted into a membership that numbers nearly 1,700 probably says something about what this collection of disparate types believes about the fate of Amelia Earhart. A look at the list of IFF members brings one word immediately to my mind — establishment.
Still, I didn’t expect to receive a one-word “unsubscribe” message on Nov. 2 in reply to my latest email notifying select recipients of the publication of my latest blog post, “Amelia Earhart and the French Connection” from the office manager of the International Forest of Friendship, an addressee on my mailing list for several years. Her name is unimportant, but her attitude and actions are, and appear to represent the thinking of many at the IFF.
By way of introduction to the IFF, on its home page we find:
The Forest was established as a bicentennial project by the City of Atchison and The Ninety-Nines Inc., an international organization of women pilots. Each September, new honorees are inducted into the Forest with plaques embedded in the walkway that winds through trees representing all 50 states and over 35 countries.
On the Virtual Tour of the Forest video page, we have this:
A life-size bronze statue of Amelia Earhart gazes over the International Forest of Friendship, which is a living, growing memorial to those who have been involved in aviation and space exploration. . . . Each June, new honorees are inducted into the forest with plaques embedded in the walkway that winds through trees representing all 50 states and over 35 countries in which forest honorees reside. Several special trees include the “Moon Tree,” which was grown from a seed taken to the moon aboard Apollo 14. It is encircled by the Astronaut’s Memorial, which honors ten astronauts who lost their lives in space exploration.
From the IFF’s Wikipedia entry, we see: “A trail through the forest contains granite plaques with the names of over 1,200 aviation notables, including Charles Lindbergh, Jeana Yeager, Rajiv Gandhi, the Wright Brothers, Sally Ride, Chuck Yeager, Beryl Markham, General Jimmy Doolittle, President George H. W. Bush, General Colin Powell, and Lt. Col. Eileen M. Collins, Capt. Lynn Rippelm.”
Has even one of the above luminaries ever spoken on behalf of the facts in the Earhart matter, or even hinted at the age-old lie that has relegated the truth to sacred-cow status?
Now that you’re familiar enough with the IFF to understand why I might not be pleased when one of its public representatives deigns to tell me she no longer wants to receive this blog, here is my response to her unsubscribe request:
Why? Are you not interested in the truth about Amelia Earhart, or do you already know everything you need to know? If anyone should care, it’s supposed to be you. You should be the last ones to unsubscribe.
My good friend and mentor Bill Prymak was inducted in 1994 into the IFF, and he approved of everything I wrote about this travesty. My book Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Lasthas been among the top Earhart books on Amazon since its first edition was published in 2012. What do you have against the truth?
If you insist on unsubscribing, I would consider that to be newsworthy enough that I would have to inform our readers. This is reminiscent of my experience with the Admiral Nimitz Library in Texas, which went over to the dark side several years ago when they took down the famous quotation from Nimitz to Fred Goerner and refused to stock Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last in their book shop. Have you also sold out to our corrupt establishment? Are you now full-fledged members of the Earhart disinformation bureau?
As always, I want to be fair and accurate about this matter. Please provide your name and any statement you wish to make to justify your request to be unsubscribed from this blog. Perhaps you can explain precisely why you are no longer interested in the truth about the disappearance of Amelia Earhart. Nobody else out here is doing this work any more. They are all dead now, and I’m among their last voices.
My above message received no reply, so as a pro forma gesture, I sent the IFF operative this message on the morning of Nov. 3:
I didn’t initially see your name at the bottom of your “unsubscribe“ response, but did so after sending you the below. Although I’m nearly certain you did receive the message I sent you yesterday, I’m re-sending it to ensure you have it. I’m now working on a blog post about your decision to reject this blog, and will publish it in about a week.
I assume you were speaking for Forest of Friendship leadership when you chose to cancel future receipt of this blog, but you might want to check with others to make sure. Of course if I hear nothing more from you, which would be quite rude, I’ll proceed to publish my post about the IFF’s lack of concern about the Earhart matter.
This message also received no reply. Talk about rude and cold! To purposely ignore the two good-faith messages I sent the IFF requires a degree of hostility that I’ve rarely encountered in similar circumstances, and the office manager’s abject silence in the face of these appeals screams volumes about how she and her confreres feel about the truth.
I shouldn’t have been surprised by this development, however, given the IFF’s symbiotic relationship with the Ninety-Nines, which along with the City of Atchison established the IFF in 1976. I’ve had a few unpleasant exchanges with the so-called “leadership” of the Ninety-Nines, who almost exclusively parrot the phony establishment line in the Earhart matter and are no friends of the truth. The rare exception was the Kansas Chapter, represented by Kay Alley, who invited me to Wichita, Kansas in 2014 to do a presentation that was well received and among the most memorable moments of my Earhart work.
As always, the truth in the Earhart case is an orphan, despised and ignored whenever possible by virtually everyone who could do something to improve the status of this great 20th century lie, which has never been a “mystery” to the Deep State — and inform others about this great American myth, this sacred cow that our establishment refuses to stop protecting.
As far as the disappearance of Amelia Earhart is concerned, the Forest of Friendship has now shown that it’s joined the rest of the cowards and sellouts in the mainstream establishment, and is no friend of the truth, if it ever was.
Nov. 23 Update: Apparently one or more members of the Greater Kansas City 99s, North Central Section, have taken exception to the contents of this blog and today sent their own “unsubscribe” request, which of course will be immediately honored. I never go where I’m not wanted. I wasn’t exaggerating when I described my past problems with the Ninety-Nines, co-founded by Amelia herself, who, as we can see, are choosing the dark but comforting lies of the establishment rather than the light of truth in ever greater numbers.
This is a fascinating, complex (for me, at least) story that at least three Earhart researchers have researched and written about in their own unique styles. Retired Air Force Col. Rollin C. Reineck’s “Amelia Earhart and the French Connection” appeared in the March 1998 edition of the Amelia Earhart Society Newsletters.
Clearly the best, most exhaustively researched version of the “bottle message” story was written by AES member Dave Horner, who, in his fine 2013 book, The Earhart Enigma, presented a lengthy subsection, “Genevieve’s Discovery,” in which Bill Prymak concluded that “the message in the bottle is genuine.” In 2001, Daryll Bolinger, another AES figure, wrote “Two If By Air, Two If By Sea,” also longer and more detailed than Reineck’s, and presented it on the AES Forum. Last but maybe far from least, Polish author and publisher Sławomir M. Kozak is completing his Requiem for Amelia Earhart; he plans to release it soon, and tells me Requiem will include a chapter on the bottle message.
But for the purposes and format of this blog, I think Reineck’s “Amelia Earhart and the French Connection” is the best fit, though it’s far from the most exhaustive or accurate rendition of this story, which remains a strange and nearly inscrutable chapter in the Earhart saga. Today I present the first of two parts. Boldface emphasis mine throughout.
“AMELIA EARHART AND THE FRENCH CONNECTION”
by Rollin C. Reineck
(Bill Prymak note: This is an abbreviated account of Colonel Reineck’s story. Col. Reineck has complete copies of all reports, original letters, and memorandum from the French and U.S. Government. You may all plan to read the complete version in the Air Classics magazine.)
[Truth at Last editor’s note: I don’t have the unidentified Air Classics issue referenced by Prymak, have searched diligently for it and have been unable to even pinpoint its specific month and year. Anyone who might have it, please contact me via email or comment to this blog.] *See update below Part I.*
In October 1938, the search for Amelia Earhart was over, without success. Her name was no longer a headline, and her adoring public was gradually putting her out of their minds. But suddenly, evidence of her survival surfaced off the coast of France! Were the American people told this exciting news? NO — the U.S. State Dept. immediately classified it “Confidential” to protect the security of the United States. Without taking any action, the State Department sent it to the Navy Depsrtment, but without giving any orders or guidance concerning an investigation. The accompanying message read, “TAKE SUCH ACTION, IF ANY, AS YOU MAY DEEM DESIRABLE.” The Navy deemed only to keep the information classified from the public for 12 years. Were they trying to hide something? Does this ’action’ suggest a cover-up? Follow this story, and you decide . . . .
Almost 60 years ago in a small residential community along the French coast, a 37-year old housewife was walking along the beach, and spotted a sealed bottle floating on the waves close to shore. The lady’s name was Genevieve Barrat, place was Soulac-sur-Mer, France, and the date was 30 October 1938. Genevieve picked up the bottle, removed the wrapping that covered the cork, and opened the bottle. Inside were three sheets of paper, and a lock of hair. The writing on the paper was in both longhand and shorthand. Genevieve read the writing, which among other things directed the finder to turn the contents over to the police without delay. She did exactly that.
The French Gendarme made a complete report, and forwarded it on 18 Nov. 1938, to the District Attorney at the Prefect of Gironde. (Original reports in French were translated later at the American Embassy in Paris.) They first reiterated Genevieve’s story and her actions. They described the bottle (10 centilitres; bottom of the glass marked ’V.B.2.’; closed with a cork and covered with wax). They described the hair found in the bottle as light brown. The inscriptions on the documents were:
1. Further proof: a lock of hair.
2. “May God guide this bottle. I entrust to it my life and that of my companions in misery.”
3. In ordinary handwriting:
RECTO: Have been prisoner of Jalint (Jaluit, Marshall) of Japanese in a prison at Jalint. Have seen Amelia Earhart (aviatrix) and in another prison her mechanic (man), as well as other prisoners held for so-called espionage of the gigantic fortifications which are built at Atoll.
Earhart and her companion were picked up by a Japanese seaplane and will be
held as hostage, say the Japanese. I was a prisoner because I debarked at Mili Atoll. My yacht ’Viveo’ sunk, crew massacred (3 Maoris), the boat (26T) (sailing boat) was supplied with wireless.”
VERSO: “Having remained a long time at Jalint (Jaluit) as prisoner, was enrolled
by forces as bunker-hand, simple fed, on board ’Nippon NOM?’ going to Europe. Shall escape as soon as the boat is near the coast. Take this message immediately to the Gendarmerie in order to be saved. This message was probably thrown off Santander, and will surely arrive at the Vendee towards September or at the latest in October 1938, remainder in the bottle tied to this one, Message No. 6.”
In order to have more chance at freeing Miss Amelia Earhart and her companion, as well as the other prisoners, it would be preferable that policemen should arrive incognito at Jalint? I shall be with JO . . . . . eux [sic] and if I succeed in escaping . . . . . for if the Japanese are asked to free the prisoners they will say that they have no prisoners at Jalint. It will therefore be necessary to be crafty in order to send further messages to save the prisoners at Jalint. At the risk of my life, I shall send further messages.
This bottle serves as a float to a second bottle containing the story of my life and . . . . . . empty, and a few objects having belonged to Amelia Earhart. These documents prove the truth of the story in ordinary writing and shorthand and that I have approached Amelia Earhart . . . . . believed to be dead.
The second bottle doesn’t matter.
I am writing on my knees for I have very little paper, for finger prints taken by
police. Another with thumb.
Message written on cargo boat No. 6.
The report by the Gendarme at Soulac-sur-Mer was sent to the District Attorney at the Prefect of Gironde in Bordeaux on 18 Nov. 1938. From there it was sent to the Minister of the Interior in Paris.
In Paris. on 2 Dec. 1938, the Minister of the Interior sent the file to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. However, they added a note concerning a lecture given on 25 Nov.’38, by a well known navigator, Mr. Eric de Bisschop, at the Geographical Society. Mr. de Bisschop’s lecture was titled, “Six Years of Adventure in a Chinese Junk and a Polynesian Canoe.” In it, he told of his voyage taking him through the Marshall Islands. (The fact that his visit there was approximately a month after the bottle washed ashore in France, is probably coincidental.)
When Mr. de Bisschop stopped off in the Marshalls, he was very cordially received by
the local Japanese authorities, until he mentioned passing Mili Atoll. They then became distinctly hostile toward him. He was suspected of spying, and endured very close questioning, and his boat was subjected to a particularly severe inspection. When nothing was discovered, he was released.
The next day, Mr. de Bisschop received a beautiful basket of fruit from the Japanese
authorities. Being wary of “Greeks bearing gifts,” he did not touch the fruit, even though he could have used some fresh food after his tong voyage. A day later, suspicious brown spots appeared on the fruit, so he threw it all into the sea.
It appears the Japanese at that time were up to more than just increasing commerce with the Marshallese. It is difficult not to connect Mr. de Bisschop’s incident, and the details contained in the note in the bottle thrown overboard by an unknown sailor. A note that gives information concerning the disappearance of the American aviatrix Amelia Earhart, and her mechanic. Mr. de Bisschop did allude, in his lecture, to the passage of Amelia in the vicinity of the Marshall Islands during her attempted round-the-world flight.
[Editor’s Note: From Wikipedia, which cites Eric de Bisschop’s 1940 book, Voyage of the Kaimiloa, we learn that de Bisschop built a Chinese junk, the Fou Po and from 1932 to 1935 sailed with Joseph Tatibouet in the southwestern Pacific Ocean. Fou Po was destroyed in a hurricane on Formosa (modern day Taiwan), but de Bisschop quickly built a new, smaller junk, Fou Po II in 1933. In July 1935, they were detained for two weeks by the Japanese in Jaluit, under suspicion of being spies, and barely escaped, fleeing toward Hawaii. (Italic emphasis mine.) On Oct. 25, they reached, half starving, Molokai Island and were rescued at the Kalaupapa hospital. On the 27th, the Fou Po II was destroyed by a storm, along with all the scientific work done during these years of seafaring. After a while, they flew to Honolulu.]
On Jan. 3, 1939, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs handed all the documents to
Edwin C. Wilson, acting chargé d’affaires at the American Embassy in Paris. Mr. Wilson immediately classified the report “Confidential,“ and dispatched it on Jan. 4, 1939, to the Secretary of State in Washington, D.C. The cover letter noted there were only two pages of notes, whereas the police at Lesparre said the bottle contained three pages of notes. There was also no mention of the lock of hair that allegedly belonged to Amelia Earhart. (End of Reineck’s “AMELIA EARHART AND THE FRENCH CONNECTION” Part I.)
In The Earhart Enigma, Dave Horner notes that the top line of the “RECTO” message contains a series of numbers, 942 9652 9077 V 10 135 815613114 X 6 / 75 2865, that appears to be a code of some kind. If you look closely at the photo on this page, you can see small traces of this series of numbers, though it’s not easy to make out.
Horner looked deeply into this possible code, consulting with cipher specialist General Ribadeau-Dumas, then 93, former chief of the Cipher Section of the Deuxième Bureau of the [French] War Department, who Horner described as having a “clear mind and good memory.” Though the general believed the bottle message could be authentic, he couldn’t help with the string of numbers at the top of the message.
Later, French intelligence sources told Horner the code was “Marine Code RD,” widely used from 1937 to 1939. In spite of an intense search, Horner wrote, “no dictionary for Marine Code RD cold be found. The absolute rule of incineration had been accomplished,” and the code remains a mystery.
*Update Nov. 7: Longtime reader William Trail has found the original issue of Air Classic Magazine, its December 2000 edition, that published Rollin C. Reineck’s “Amelia Earhart and the French Connection,” and sent the cover, below. Thanks William!