Readers are familiar with David Martin, also known as “DC Dave,” (DCDave.com), the award-winning writer and insightful observer of the passing scene who reviewed both editions of Truth at Last, “Hillary Clinton and the Amelia Earhart Cover-up,” in August 2012 and “Amelia Earhart Truth Versus the Establishment” in May 2016.
Most recently Martin turned his lengthy, six-part 2003 presentation, “Who Killed James Forrestal?” into The Assassination of James Forrestal, published in May of this year, and selling very well despite the mainstream media’s near-total blackout of the book, which dismantles yet another of our nation’s historical sacred cows.
Those unfamiliar with the vast contents of Martin’s home page probably don’t know that he’s also an accomplished, witty and entertaining poet and lyricist. Yesterday (Oct. 11), he sent me the below, which I now present to you:
“THE BALLAD OF AMELIA EARHART”
(To the tune of…well, you know)
Amelia flew over the ocean;
Her plane “disappeared” in the sea.
We found it much later in Saipan.
Oh, move on, there’s nothing to see.
Hard facts, hard facts,
Hard facts are important to me, to me.
Hard facts, hard facts.
The truth is important to me.
The order came down to destroy it.
There are witnesses galore of the deed.
They come from that great generation,
But from the trough of the truth we don’t feed.
Hard facts, hard facts,
Hard facts are important to me, to me.
Hard facts, hard facts.
The truth is important to me
The U.S. and Japan are now allies,
In spite of that war’s genocide.
What happened to that famous woman
Is something they both want to hide.
Hard facts, hard facts,
Hard facts are important to me, to me.
Hard facts, hard facts.
The truth is important to me.
Not being the sharpest musical tool in the shed, initially I had no clue what Martin meant when he wrote, “To the tune of . . . well, you know.” The first song I thought of was Fess Parker’s 1955 popular hit, “The Ballad of Davy Crockett,” that was such a rage with the coonskin cap-wearing kids at that time, of whom I was one. When I tried to sing along with Martin’s words, however, it didn’t work at all.
Next, having spent most of my childhood in the Washington, D.C. area, well within listening range of the many great radio stations that played what’s now called “Doo-Wop” music, but then was more properly known as rhythm & blues, group harmony and even the more prosaic rock ‘n roll, I thought perhaps the tune Martin referenced might be the long forgotten “Ballad of a Girl and Boy” (1959), but upon further review, that was wrong too, though it was a pleasure to revisit.
Finally the answer popped into my thick skull, and I knew that Martin’s tune was “My Bonnie Lies Over the Ocean”; this version of the old Scottish folk song was produced in 2010 by a group under the direction of Mitch Miller, who died at age 99 in July 2010. The lyrics fit perfectly; try it!
Many thanks to Dave Martin for his unique contribution to the poetics of the Earhart saga.
Regular readers of this blog are familiar with David Martin (DCDave.com), the award-winning writer and retired federal economist who reviewed both editions of Truth at Last, “Hillary Clinton and the Amelia Earhart Cover-up,” in August 2012, and “Amelia Earhart Truth Versus the Establishment” in May 2016. (Boldface emphasis mine throughout.)
In summer 2017, Martin helped clear up the confused mess surrounding the media’s relationship to the bogus claims in the History Channel’s presentation of the 1930s-era Office of Naval Intelligence photo of the dock at Jaluit, in which Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan were mistakenly identified, writing three pieces focusing on “Amelia Earhart: The Lost Evidence,” the History Channel’s odious July 9, 2017 Earhart special — “Press Touts Dubious Earhart Photo,” “Earhart Photo Story Apparently Debunked,” and “ ‘Earhart Photo’ Debunker Debunked?”
In March 2018, Martin teamed with Hugh Turley to publish their groundbreaking book on the 1968 death of famed Catholic monk and mystic Thomas Merton, whose sudden demise in a Thailand hotel has been unanimously accepted as accidental electrocution by an electric fan. The Martyrdom of Thomas Merton: An Investigation claims that a “careful examination of the official record, including crime scene photographs that the authors have found that the investigating police in Thailand never saw, and from reading the letters of witnesses, they have discovered that the accidental electrocution conclusion is totally false,” and leaves no doubt that Merton was murdered, likely by an element of the U.S. deep state — another cover-up, another sacred cow exposed, another important book to which the establishment media will never direct the public.
Now, at last, Martin has turned his lengthy, six-part 2003 disquisition, “Who Killed James Forrestal?” into his long-awaited The Assassination of James Forrestal, published on May 21, just one day short of the 70th anniversary of Forrestal’s murder.
Forrestal’s shocking death in the early morning of May 22, 1949 at Bethesda Naval Hospital in Maryland was particularly disturbing to Thomas E. Devine, the late author of the 1987 classic, Eyewitness: The Amelia Earhart Incident, who was certain that Forrestal was on Saipan in July 1944 when Amelia Earhart’s Electra was burned and later buried along with hundreds of tons of other war refuse below Aslito Airfield, which is now Saipan International Airport.
Whether the Navy Secretary was actually on Saipan or not in July 1944 — and we’re virtually certain he was not physically there, as I discuss at length in Truth at Last (pages 72-75) — Forrestal was very close to the top of the chain of command that ordered and executed the burning beyond recognition of the Earhart Electra on Saipan.
Whether the first secretary of defense’s death was connected to his involvement in the Earhart case remains unknown, but his passing was a crushing blow to Devine’s hope that the truth would eventually be revealed. “However James Forrestal met his death,” Devine wrote, “he took with him what he knew about Amelia Earhart’s plane, which he examined and ordered burned on Saipan in July 1944.”
Navy hospital officials were quick to label Forrestal’s death a suicide, but “many question the theory that Forrestal entered a sixteenth-floor diet pantry, tied one end of his bathrobe sash to a radiator, looped the other end around his neck, and stepped out the pantry window,” Devine wrote. “Neither do skeptics believe that Forrestal deliberately leaped from the sixteenth-floor window to the third-floor bridge which connected the two wings of the hospital. The skeptics are convinced that Forrestal was murdered.”
Devine was unaware of The Death of James Forrestal, a virtually unknown 1966 book by Cornell Simpson (a pseudonym) that presented a compelling case for Forrestal’s murder and was entirely ignored by the American media, and before Martin’s “Who Killed James Forrestal?” in 2003, the only previous work of any significance to shine light on Forrestal’s murder.
Forced to resign by President Harry Truman in March 1949 after less than two years in office as the nation’s first secretary of defense, Forrestal was soon taken to Bethesda Naval Hospital to undergo treatment for operational fatigue, at the recommendation of noted psychiatrist Dr. William C. Menninger. Ten days after his admission, Captain B.W. Hogan, the hospital’s commandant, reported that Forrestal was “underweight, had low blood pressure, a secondary anemia and a neuromuscular weakness characteristically found in cases of exhaustion . . . [but] the only psychiatric symptoms present are those associated with a state of excessive fatigue.” Forrestal’s condition, Hogan said, was “directly the result of excessive work during the war and post-war years.”
Forrestal was held for seven weeks as a virtual prisoner in his sixteenth-floor room in the hospital’s tower. He was allowed visits only from his wife, two sons, Truman, and Louis Johnson, his successor as defense secretary. His attending physician, Dr. (Captain) George N. Raines, prohibited Forrestal from seeing four people he specifically wanted to see: his brother Henry; two priests, Monsignor Maurice S. Sheehy and Father Paul McNally, S.J.; and a friend whose name has never been disclosed. Sheehy, a former Navy chaplain and close friend, made seven trips to the hospital from nearby Catholic University in Washington, and each time was barred without explanation from seeing Forrestal. “His blood is on the hands of those who kept me from seeing him,” Sheehy wrote in the American Mercury after Forrestal’s death.
Henry Forrestal was finally allowed to see James after threatening to go public about his brother’s confinement and virtual isolation. At the hospital, Henry said James was “acting and talking as sanely and intelligently as any man I’ve ever known.” Johnson also found Forrestal “was like his old self and in good health” during an April 27 visit. When Raines admitted that James was “fundamentally all right,” Henry made train reservations for Washington and notified Raines that he intended to take James out of the hospital May 22 to complete his convalescence in the country, “where he would not be cooped up in a room with nothing to do and nobody to talk to,” according to Simpson. But at approximately 1:50 a.m. that very morning, James Forrestal was found dead.
At his Beacon, New York home, Henry told Simpson that James “positively did not kill himself. He said his brother was the last person in the world who would have committed suicide. . . . James was having a good time planning the things he would do following his discharge. Henry Forrestal recalled that Truman and Johnson agreed that his brother was in fine shape and that the hospital officials admitted that the patient would have been released soon.” Monsignor Sheehy also “seriously suspected that Forrestal had been murdered.”
The Death of James Forrestal presented a compelling case for the murder of the staunch anti-Communist, likely at the hands of Soviet operatives and spies within Washington’s heavily infiltrated establishment, including the Truman White House. “This outrageous treatment of the Forrestal case meshed perfectly into the standard Washington practice of concealing from the public Communist-connected scandals,” Simpson — whoever he was, and Martin has a very good idea — wrote.
Martin disagrees with Simpson’s verdict as to the killers’ identities and motivations, but I won’t spoil that aspect of The Assassination of James Forrestal by naming his most likely villains in this review. He draws from the Willcutts Report, likely made public and declassified in 2004 as a result of his third Freedom of Information Act request; key witness Edward Prise, the Navy hospital corpsman who was the last to admit seeing Forrestal alive; and many other sources to convincingly demonstrate the absurdity of the idea that Forrestal would throw himself out of a 16th floor window at Bethesda Naval Hospital to a death he most certainly did not desire.
No soothsayer is required to foresee that The Assassination of James Forrestal, because of its very nature as the slayer of yet another establishment sacred cow, will be ignored or dismissed by our esteemed national opinion molding apparatus (NOMA, a term Martin has coined, which he says is comprised to “various degrees by the GAME: government, academia, media, and entertainment”) in the coming months and years. Only the extent of the media blackout of this book, already under way, has yet to be determined.
The Assassination of James Forrestal begins with a poignant note of praise from Phillip F. Nelson, the eminent author of LBJ, the Mastermind of the JFK Assassination; LBJ, from Mastermind to “The Colossus”; Remember the Liberty; and Who Really Killed Martin Luther King, Jr.?
David Martin’s book The Assassination of James Forrestal focuses on the historic truths related to the systemic harassment and consequent death of James Forrestal in May, 1949, at the Bethesda Naval Hospital. It is a long-overdue, hugely important, work of “revisionist history.” The timeworn myths intended to support his “suicide” – which had originally been planted by such muckraking columnists as Drew Pearson and Walter Winchell, then repeated by the authors of several biographies of Forrestal – have been systematically deconstructed by Martin (a.k.a. “DCDave”).
This profoundly important book describes in detail one of the earliest plots of the “Deep State” as it was constituted post-WWII: The plot to remove all impediments to the creation and successful launch of the nation of Israel, through silencing the most influential and prescient voice cautioning his country, and the world, about the long and possibly endless tail of retaliations, recriminations and retributions that lay ahead. The history of that land, still resonating with the repercussions he predicted, proves James V. Forrestal’s legendary wisdom.
The findings of the still unknown Willcutts Report were presented in a brief summary released Oct. 11, 1949, stating Forrestal had died from his fall from the sixteenth story. Nothing was said about what could have caused it, except to make it clear that the Navy was in no way responsible. Suicide was not cited as a cause of death despite the original press reports and propaganda perpetuating the idea that the first secretary of defense killed himself, nor did the Willcutts Report, comprising hundreds of pages of witness interviews, conclude that Forrestal committed suicide.
In Chapter 1 of The Assassination of James Forrestal, “The Case for Assassination,” Martin discusses the shortcomings of the well-known 1992, 587-page Forrestal biography, Driven Patriot, the Life and Times of James Forrestal, by Townsend Hoopes and Douglas Brinkley. In concluding his “Secret Investigative Report” subsection, Martin tells us:
The willingness of the authorities to withstand the thoroughly justified charge of cover-up by not releasing the results of their investigation, including the transcripts of witness testimony, speaks volumes, as does the extraordinarily deceptive description of the case by the likes of such establishment figures as Townsend Hoopes and Douglas Brinkley. Their account is replete with deceptions, but there is none greater than this withholding of the information that all the key witness testimony has been kept secret, along with the results of the investigation itself, and that the investigation did not conclude that Forrestal committed suicide.
. . . By leaving out the vital information that the official record of the case has been suppressed, Hoopes and Brinkley, cobbling together an account based on a hodgepodge of dubious sources, leave the reader with the impression that we know more about what happened than we really do.
“From their Wikipedia pages we learn that Hoopes, a former Under Secretary of the Air Force, among many government positions he held, was a member of the Skull and Bones secret society at Yale University and that Brinkley, who is a commentator on CNN, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations,” Martin writes in a Chapter 1 footnote. “He was also the protégé of popular historian, Stephen E. Ambrose. As establishment historians, Hoopes and Brinkley’s credentials are impeccable.” Indeed, Hoopes, who died in 2004, and Brinkley, who continues to occasionally haunt cable news, were and are highly respected creatures of the establishment, and it is precisely therein that the problem lies.
Ironically — or coincidentally — I had my own experience with Hoopes, and it was anything but pleasant. Early in my Earhart education, in September 1992, I wrote to Hoopes. a former undersecretary of defense under Forrestal from 1948 to 1949, and then an international affairs executive at the University of Maryland, College Park. I described Thomas Devine’s work and asked Hoopes for his thoughts, naively figuring he must have known something, based on his close relationship to Forrestal. Hoopes feigned interest initially, but lost the first information package I sent, and after receiving another, he flatly and rudely rejected Devine’s account, telling me our “correspondence should end” and threatening legal action should I use anything he wrote to me without his permission. Nine years later, Hoopes ignored my request for permission to quote from his letter in the 2002 book I wrote with Devine, With Our Own Eyes: Eyewitnesses to the Final Days of Amelia Earhart. A real sweetheart and a class act, was Mr. Hoopes.
There’s far more in The Assassination of James Forrestal that will convince the reader that the universally accepted story that James V. Forrestal committed suicide is a blatant falsehood, thanks to David Martin’s singular perseverance in finding the truth. Martin, who has a doctorate degree and is a historian of the first rank, is also a gifted poet whose singular epigraphs flavor the beginning of each of his chapters and lend added depth to his already captivating narrative.
For example, here’s the one from Chapter 1, “The Case for Assassination”:
Not for Human Consumption?
The water from the well of truth
Is to most folks undrinkable.
That is because of their distaste
For things they find unthinkable
Or another, from Chapter 13, “Historians Unmoved”:
In the universities
You’ll find our finest minds.
The problem isn’t with their brains
Oh no, it’s with their spines.
The Assassination of James Forrestal is a 335-page masterpiece to which our feckless, corrupt media will not be directing the masses, a historical tour de force that only the scant few of our wise and enlightened will discover and enjoy. It’s a steal at an inexpensive price that I strongly encourage all who care about our nation’s history to purchase and read.
David Martin’s (DCDave.com) work is well-known to regular readers of this blog. The award-winning writer and retired federal economist reviewed both editions of The Truth at Last, “Hillary Clinton and the Amelia Earhart Cover-up,” in August 2012, and “Amelia Earhart Truth Versus the Establishment“ in May 2016.
Last summer, Martin helped clarify the confused mess surrounding the media’s relationship to the bogus claims that attached to the History Channel’s presentation of the 1930s-era Office of Naval Intelligence photo of the dock at Jaluit, in which Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan were mistakenly identified, writing three pieces focusing on the History Channel’s odious July 5 Earhart special,“Press Touts Dubious Earhart Photo,” “Earhart Photo Story Apparently Debunked,” and “’Earhart Photo’ Debunker Debunked?” On July 13 on this blog, I wrote, “As usual, Dave Martin sees the truth in Earhart story,” followed by “Martin’s analysis continues to bolster Earhart truth“ on Aug. 4.
Earlier this month, Martin teamed with Hugh Turley to publish their groundbreaking book on the 1968 death of the famed Catholic monk and mystic Thomas Merton, whose sudden demise in a Thailand hotel has been unanimously accepted as accidental electrocution by an electric fan. The Martyrdom of Thomas Merton: An Investigation claims that a “careful examination of the official record, including crime scene photographs that the authors have found that the investigating police in Thailand never saw, and from reading the letters of witnesses, they have discovered that the accidental electrocution conclusion is totally false,” and leaves no doubt that Merton was murdered, likely by an element of the U.S. deep state — another cover-up, another sacred cow exposed, another important book to which the establishment media will never direct the public.
Today we present Martin’s commentary on the most recent attempt by our trusted media to resurrect TIGHAR’s snake oil that recently made such distracting noise in all corners of our corrupt media establishment. An edited version of this piece was also published in the March 19 edition of the Marianas Variety. All boldface and shading is the editor’s.
“Propaganda Press Flailing over Amelia Earhart”
By David Martin
Here we go again. In what looks for all the world like desperation on the part of our national opinion molding apparatus, they’ve revived the story that some bones and parts of a skull found in 1940 on the small remote island of Nikumaroro (Gardner Island) belonged to the famous aviator, Amelia Earhart, who was lost in the Pacific, along with navigator Fred Noonan, on a trip around the world in 1937. Those bones had been examined long ago and it was determined that they belonged to a male who was shorter than Earhart and have long since been lost, but now, would you believe, through the miracle of modern computer techniques, a single professor emeritus “expert” is telling us that those lost bones were almost certainly Amelia Earhart’s. On top of that, this new “discovery” got saturation coverage right across the permitted political spectrum from Fox News to National Public Radio.
Just on the face of it, you might think that this was some kind of experiment to test the limits of the gullibility of the American public. Anyone with an ounce of gumption can see that what the guy is telling us is preposterous. What’s really happening is that the official story that Earhart and Noonan simply got lost and, running out of gas, either plunged into the ocean or got marooned on that island where they crash landed, is finally completely falling apart—thanks in large measure to the dogged work of Mike Campbell, author of Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last—and they’re now pulling out all the stops in a last-gasp effort to salvage it. The major precipitating event for this new story was likely the announcement coming out of Saipan, located very near to the U.S. territory of Guam, that plans are afoot to erect a monument there to Earhart, because that is where she died as a captive of the Japanese.
The biggest problem with that for the establishment protectors of the giant falsehood about Earhart’s demise is that the monument planners see the Earhart monument, to be located near their international airport, as a tourist attraction for the island. It would be sort of like the tourist attraction of the Anne Frank house in Amsterdam, with the big exception being that the Earhart monument would be based upon historical fact while the Anne Frank story is, from the best evidence, historical fiction. Imagine how effective such a monument would be for bypassing the establishment opinion molders over the long haul.
Starting on the left of the permitted political spectrum among the floggers of the incredible new story, we find National Public Radio. If you didn’t know before how thoroughly dishonest that news operation is, please notice that they make reference to the recent History Channel special [aired July 5, 2017] that featured a photograph that purported to show Earhart and Noonan on a dock on Jaluit Atoll in the Marshall Islands and link that to its supposed debunking by a Japanese blogger. What they don’t do is to make any mention of the subsequent debunking of the “debunker” by the Marshall Islands authorities, which is the subject of my article, “’Earhart Photo’ Debunker Debunked?” NPR, like the rest of the mainstream press, dummied up about that.
One example of the dummying up is particularly poignant to me since it has some connection to my own formal education. Back in March, my alma mater Davidson College (which also happens to be the alma mater of the late Clinton White House counsel, Vince Foster) offered a free online two-week course on the subject of fake news. One of their contributing “experts” was National Public Radio (NPR) reporter Camila Domonoske, also a Davidson graduate. Here we can watch one of her contributions to the course, explaining why the “fake news” term has almost lost all meaning.
She makes some good points, but I think we can agree, though, that if the Marshall Islands officials are correct, the widely disseminated report that the key photograph in the History Channel Earhart presentation had to have been made in 1935 or before is not true. That is to say, what was widely reported as news has turned out to be, in fact, fake news.
As it happens, the reporter who put out this fake news for NPR online very quickly in the wake of the story from The Guardian was young Camila Domonoske, herself. I can find no indication online that NPR or The Guardian or any other news organ has retracted its Japanese-debunker story or has clarified it in any way in light of the latest Marshall Islands revelations, so we may now accuse them all of trading in fake news on the disappearance of Amelia Earhart.
The Washington Post with its big Earhart story also made reference to the History Channel special and its supposed subsequent debunking, without mentioning the further revelations from the Marshall Islands. It should be clear at this point that the whole History Channel hullabaloo was a set-up and that they already had their “debunking” information in hand, or they would have never run the story about the photograph in the first place.
To read the rest of Martin’s piece on TIGHAR’s latest blather, please click here.
Early reports from Saipan are not encouraging regarding donations for the Earhart Memorial Monument. Please send any amount, large or small, to help support this important initiative. If you care about the truth, your help is desperately needed to make this dream a reality. I can’t address each one of you by name, but I always respond to every legitimate email you send. Without your help, the memorial’s failure is inevitable. Please make your check payable to: Amelia Earhart Memorial Monument, Inc., and send to AEMMI, c/o Marie S. Castro, P.O. Box 500213, Saipan MP 96950. All donors will receive a letter of appreciation from the Saipan Earhart Memorial Committee. Thank you.
The brilliant news analyst David Martin (www.DCDave.com) has been a friend of Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last since the early days after the first edition was published in June 2012. We first met about 2005, when I found his work on the James V. Forrestal case (“Who Killed James Forrestal?“) in an online search and was immediately hooked on the quality and quantity of the truth that Martin discerns and presents in his work.
Far more than this writer, the better-known Martin has a long history with the Washington establishment and is despised as a persistent pest by the herd journalists in the nation’s capitol, nearly all of whom have made their own little arrangements with evil and sold their souls for the coin of the realm, whether it be fame, status, money or influence. Martin is clearly his own man, a beast rarely encountered in this upside-down PC world, and his friendship and support are highly appreciated and never taken for granted.
Without further ado, here’s the start of Martin’s column of today, July 13, “Earhart Photo Story Collapses as Expected,“ which he later changed to “Earhart Photo Story Apparently Debunked.” (Boldface emphasis mine throughout.)
“Earhart Photo Story Collapses as Expected”
Well, that didn’t take long. Two days before the History Channel aired its two-hour special, “Amelia Earhart: The Lost Evidence,” clued in by the saturation promotion our propaganda was giving it, I smelled a rat. What I concluded in “Press Touts Dubious Earhart Photo” was that it was likely that these scoundrels were now steering us away from the truth through the use of #4 and #9 of the Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression. These are, respectively, “Knock down straw men” and “Come half clean.”
I might have gone further and noted that these two techniques were being wheeled up to the front to supplement the propaganda workhorse #1, which is “Dummy up” and a subcategory of #13, which is creating and publicizing distractions.
Up to the airing of this program, our press had virtually blacked out any news of the mountain of evidence that points to Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, having been captured by the Japanese. As author Mike Campbell points out in his review, which we shall get to later, the History Channel did present some quite solid evidence, never before aired by the national news media, that the unfortunate flyers did become prisoners of the Japanese and died at their hands. In effect, they came half clean. But they needed to fill up two hours, and like the “double agent” Christopher Ruddy in the Vince Foster death case, they had to supply a bit more than one questionable photograph to buy credibility with their viewers.
What good new information they offered, however, was overwhelmed by the phony photo straw man that got knocked down a lot faster than I thought that it would. And to show you how closely the press propagandists have conformed to the fourth truth-suppression technique, we repeat it here in full:
Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
What we have here is almost a textbook example of a planted false story. A photograph had been “discovered” in the U.S. National Archives, apparently misfiled, standing alone without any context, which one might interpret as showing Noonan and Earhart lolling around on a dock in Jaluit Harbor in the Marshall Islands. Within a couple of days, though, a mainstream left-wing publication in Britain, The Guardian, reported that a Japanese history enthusiast had discovered the identical photograph in an old Japanese travel book. One must wonder how such a travel-book photo came to be there all by its lonesome in the National Archives. The book was published in Palau, considerably to the west of the Marshall Islands, in 1935, two years before Earhart’s disappearance.
The remarkable work of David Martin — news analyst, commentator, poet and observer of the passing scene (not to be confused with the better-known but far-less accomplished CBS newsman of the same name) — is known to regular readers of this blog. On his website, DCDave.com, the erudite Martin educates his discerning audience about many things, including the sacred cows that the Washington establishment has protected for decades.
Nowhere else on the Web can one find such a vast collection of insight and truth, with myriad offerings that include such treasures as Who Killed James Forrestal?, Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh, and America’s Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster.
I contacted Martin about 11 years ago when I learned of his work on the James V. Forrestal case, when his third Freedom of Information Act request resulted in the 2004 declassification of the Willcutts Report, the full report of the investigative review board appointed the day after the first secretary of defense’s death and kept secret for 55 years. Basically, the Willcutts Report revealed that Forrestal almost certainly was murdered and did not commit suicide, a myth that has persisted since his bizarre death on Oct. 11, 1949 at the Bethesda, Md., Naval Hospital.
I told Martin of Thomas E. Devine’s claims of Forrestal’s presence on Saipan at the time of the discovery of the Earhart Electra, and Martin was naturally interested. We’ve kept in touch ever since, and I still cannot keep up with the depth and breadth of his incisive writings, focused as I’ve been on the Earhart case and as prolific as Martin’s output continues to be.
Following the June 2012 publication of Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last, Martin’s review, Hillary Clinton and the Amelia Earhart Cover-up set a standard that hadn’t been matched until today. As he wrote in closing his August 2012 piece, “Don’t expect any of our mainstream press to be directing you to Campbell’s book, though. If he is to be ignored, it will not be because the case he makes for the capture of Earhart and Noonan by the Japanese is too weak. It will be because it is too strong.”
Thus I was pleased when Martin agreed to review the Second Edition of The Truth at Last, and today he posted it on his site, as well as Rense.com, probably the busiest site on the Net, where a novice needs a road map to locate a columnist or story.
Without further introductory jabber, here is David Martin’s review of the Second Edition of Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last.
“Amelia Earhart Truth Versus the Establishment”
H.L. Mencken opens “The Champion,” one of his most memorable and entertaining essays, with this question: “Of the forty-eight sovereign States of this imperial Federation, which is the worst?” With his next sentence he clarifies his question: “In what one of them is a civilized man most uncomfortable?” The answer, as one who knows Mencken might expect, turns out to be that most thoroughly American of all the states, California.
Mencken was a journalist—albeit a truly great one—so he didn’t define “worst” like a person of higher values might have. As I was reading the new and improved second edition of Mike Campbell’s Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last, a superior way of clarifying the question, as it applies to the countries on this globe, came to my mind: “In what one of them is a virtuous, truth-telling man most unwelcome?”
Now anyone who knows anything about the human race and its history knows that such people tend not to be welcome anywhere, particularly among those who have a close hold on power over the fellow members of their group. If, as is often the case, their power is built upon a foundation of lies—sometimes known as myths—their hostility is likely to be particularly great. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Mike Campbell with his rock-solid story of pioneer aviator Amelia Earhart’s capture by the Japanese in 1937, and the 21st century ruling establishment of the United States of America.
An Important Myth
As we all know, the prevailing myth about the popular aviator’s disappearance in the South Pacific as she failed to reach tiny Howland Island is that it remains a big mystery that likely will never be solved. The really interesting thing is that our press increasingly feels the need, more than three-quarters of a century after the fact, to reinforce the myth with tales of efforts to locate traces of the lost airplane and its two occupants, Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan.
We detailed some of these myth-reinforcing efforts in our review of the first edition of Campbell’s book, “Hillary Clinton and the Amelia Earhart Cover-up,” published in 2012. It can be found in the concluding section entitled “Continued Media Misdirection.” We note in that section that right in the forefront of the myth reinforcement was no less an establishment figure than the Secretary of State at the time, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The essential outlines of the truth—as opposed to the myth—concerning what happened to Earhart, Noonan and their twin-engine Lockheed Electra are by now well established through the testimony of a large number of witnesses. The airplane went down on an island in the Japanese-controlled Marshall Islands to the north of Howland Island. Earhart and Noonan were taken prisoner by the Japanese and treated as spies. From there they were transferred to the Japanese headquarters for the region, the island of Saipan, for incarceration and interrogation, with a likely intermediate stop at Kwajalein Atoll.
There are a number of questions that remain open at this point, but most of them are minor. After Campbell’s latest effort, it’s probably correct to say that it’s no longer an open question that Earhart intentionally missed Howland Island. Uncle Sam was paying the piper and the tune he called was for her to “get lost” and to stumble into Japanese territory. The botched radio transmissions from Earhart’s airplane could not have been those of a person running out of fuel, desperate to save her life before going down in the vast Pacific, whose only lifeline was the radio.
President Franklin Roosevelt, a schemer of the highest order, we may safely speculate, was certain that the Japanese would treat the international celebrity Earhart well and would welcome the good publicity they would receive by rescuing her and then letting her go on her way. It was a very tragic miscalculation insofar as the fate of Earhart and Noonan was concerned. FDR had greatly underestimated the degree of suspicion and the level of barbarity of the Japanese militarists.
Our government certainly knew that Earhart and Noonan were in Japanese hands, but we couldn’t let them know that we knew without giving away the game, a large part of it being that we were listening to Japanese radio communications, having broken their codes. Comparing what our decodes said with what we likely knew of Earhart’s route would have been a good way to further nail down the code breaking.
We might have gained some valuable intelligence, intelligence that bears upon the question of our foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack, but in the process FDR had maneuvered himself into a position where his only political course of action was to abandon the fliers to their fate. From that time to the present it has been in the interests of the governments of the United States and of Japan to stick with the story that Earhart just got lost, ran out of fuel, and disappeared without a trace, or perhaps crash landed on tiny Gardner Island (now Nikumaroro) and survived there for a while.
Campbell doesn’t make the connection, but at this point we can’t help but notice the great similarities between the Earhart episode and our government’s abandonment of large numbers of POWs in North Vietnam and Laos after the Vietnam War. President Richard Nixon and his top adviser Henry Kissinger had painted themselves into a corner by making secret promises that were politically impossible for them to keep, so badly did they want a peace agreement with the North Vietnamese. Chief among them was a promise of reparations for the damage that we had done to the country in the war. The Communists held back prisoners as a sort of collateral, and we never paid up. The truth makes both the Communist governments and the U.S. look bad, so the politically expedient course of action has been to leave the POWs to their fate, just as Earhart and Noonan were left to theirs.
Another great parallel in the two abandonments is that on one side are the governments and their compliant press and on the other side are large numbers of witnesses, many of whom are American military veterans. In the Earhart case, Campbell reminds us, that latter category includes three high-ranking officers who might not have been eyewitnesses, but they have lent their authority to the story told by the many witnesses on Saipan and the Marshall Islands. They are Saipan veteran Marine General Graves Erskine, former Marine Commandant General Alexander A. Vandegrift, and the famous Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, who had been the commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Forces.
With the mention of those three illustrious military officers, we are reminded further of the Earhart parallels with another historical incident in which a famous military leader has taken strong issue with the position of the government and the press. The incident is the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty by Israel that left 34 American servicemen dead and 174 injured. The military officer who rejected the official story that it was an accident, a case of mistaken identity by the Israelis, was Admiral Thomas Moorer.
I am also reminded of my own experience in the U.S. Army that is recounted in my article, “A Condensation of Military Incompetence.” I was on mid-tour leave in Japan in early 1968 from the Eighth Army in Korea. A traveling companion, a soldier stationed on the DMZ, had told me about hearing a large number of infiltrators who had come through their lines at night, he and his fellow sentinels had fired in the direction of the noise, but had not hit any enemy soldiers. When a 31-man squad ended up in the heart of Seoul my companion was certain that it was the same group, and his story checks out with what I later learned from talking with my outfit’s inspectors from Eighth Army headquarters. Yet the official story from that day until now is that we knew nothing about any such infiltrators until a couple of Korean civilians many miles to the south encountered them, that is, we did not know of any such infiltrators who had come through our lines.
Preserving FDR’s Reputation
A major reason why our ruling establishment cannot admit the truth in the Earhart case is what it would do to the reputation of President Roosevelt. According to the dominant myth, he was the great, wise man who led us on to victory in the Good War, a war that was forced upon him by the unanticipated Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.
How great is the need to keep FDR’s reputation intact was brought home to this writer in his reading of three recent books that are generally scathing in their criticism of the wartime president’s policies, particularly with respect to the Communists. They are Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein, The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia by Tim Tzouliadis, and American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character by Diana West. The key action that each of these authors took to protect the Roosevelt myth is summed up in this passage from my review of the latter book:
West’s most obvious intentional weakening of her argument is her failure to mention the anti-Communist Jewish journalist Isaac Don Levine. In my essay, “FDR Winked at Soviet Espionage,” I fault another conservative journalist, Ann Coulter, when, in her book Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism she airbrushes Levine out of the picture as the man who set up and attended the fateful meeting in 1939 between Communist defector Whittaker Chambers and Roosevelt security chief Adolf Berle, in which Chambers revealed to Berle the existence of a Soviet spy cell that included State Department officials Alger and Donald Hiss, Treasury official Harry Dexter White, and even White House aide Lauchlin Currie. I further fault Tzouliadis and imminent Red exposer M. Stanton Evans for protecting FDR by falsely stating that Berle never informed Roosevelt of what Chambers had revealed. West goes them one better. She inexplicably leaves out any mention of the meeting itself.
These critics of Franklin Roosevelt surely knew that what they wrote about this episode was not true (or in West’s case, knew that it was much too important to be omitted). What this tells us is that preserving the reputation of FDR is such a big deal that even his putatively most severe critics would jeopardize their own reputations to cover up for the man.
That, in a nutshell, shows you what Mike Campbell is up against with his definitive books on the Earhart saga. I provided a sample of the establishment wall of rejection in my August 2015 article, “Wikipedia’s Greatest Misses:”
The Amelia Earhart Wikipedia page has a very extensive “Bibliography of cited sources” and “Further reading.” There is no trace of Campbell or his work there. One may survey the history of the site to see that references to Campbell and his work have been put up, but have been quickly taken down. It is obvious that the site is still closely policed and Amelia Earhart’s disappearance continues to be a very important historical hot potato. So what we have here is a brand new mystery to solve: Who is making Mike Campbell disappear from Wikipedia, and why is it so important that he be made to disappear?