“It is ironic that the U.S. would begin a devastating war, allegedly in search of weapons of mass destruction, when the most worrisome developments in this field are occurring in your own backyard. It is ironic that the U.S. should be fighting monstrously expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, allegedly to bring democracy to those countries, when it itself can no longer claim to be called a democracy, when trillions, and I mean thousands of billions of dollars have been spent on projects about which both the Congress and the Commander in Chief have been kept deliberately in the dark.” – Paul Hellyer (Former Canadian Defence Minister)
In was only three years ago (2013) that the Central Intelligence Agency finally admitted to the existence of Area 51. Although it didn’t ‘officially’ exist before the CIA made this admission, it was pretty clear that something secretive was going on in the Nevada desert. That secretive something would be the testing of secret aircraft and technology that the public has absolutely no idea about. Take for example the U.S. air strike against Libya in 1996. An f-111 jet was used, which had been operational since 1983, but its existence was still kept secret for a number of years after.
These programs are referred to as Special Access Programs (SAP), and they are funded from what’s known as the ‘Black Budget.‘ From these we have unacknowledged and waived SAPs. These programs do not exist publicly, but they do indeed exist. They are better known as ‘deep black programs.’ A 1997 US Senate report described them as “so sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting requirements to the Congress.”
It’s also important to mention that the United States has a history of government agencies existing in secret. The National Security Agency (NSA) was founded in 1952 but its existence was hidden until the mid 1960’s. Even more secretive is the National Reconnaissance Office, which was founded in 1960 but remained completely concealed for 30 years.
Research into and discussions of under-ocean and in-bottom military bases began decades ago. For example, in 1968 the Stanford Research Institute discussed the construction of dozens of undersea bases. The study was titled “Feasibility of Manned In-Botton Bases.” It’s important to show you the abstract here, because it clearly reveals what the military-industrial complex was considering, and what they could do within their technological reach at the time — more than four decades ago.
*I obtained this abstract from the source listed below, if you would like to see it yourself, you can find it HERE.
The construction of thirty manned in-bottom bases within the ocean floors is technically and economically feasible. However, it will be necessary to establish some successive types of experimental facilities before a full construction program can be started. This could take 15 years. The major technology for a land-linked station in-bottom is established now; only adaptations are needed. The remaining experimental phases will require further development of equipment and techniques applicable to remote sea access. There are useful assignments for a succession of three experimental stations other than advancing in-bottom construction techniques. Science and engineering concerned with the oceans and their resources will be furthered and military tests of undersea base functions complimenting deeper operations can be accomplished. The costs of the experimental phase, called here a demonstration program, can be surprisingly modest: approximately one half-billion dollars, spent over 15 years.
A distinction between in-bottom bases and on-bottom facilities is made in the numbers of men enclosed. and the depth of water, wherein areas of one-atmosphere space can be created in-bottom, and on-bottom facilities is made in the numbers of men enclosed and the depth of water, wherein areas of one atmosphere space can be created in-bottom at such low costs the ingress system can be amortized if the space required is reasonably large. Economics thus can dictate choice between the two types; even so, some on-bottom facilities will be needed to aid the construction of remote in-bottom facilities.
Presently, establishing an in-bottom facility and building upon this will present fewer technical difficulties that do the submersibles which would support it and use it. Subsequent to the completion of the third phase of a demonstration program, which would be a remote, deep water station, and the evaluation of it, a multiple base program, could be implemented. The cost of such a base program would be about $2.7 billion for construction of a number of bases (assumed at 30).
So, do these bases exist today without question? I think they do, just like Area 51 existed without question.
In 1987 Deputy Director of Engineering and Construction for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Lloyd A. Duscha, gave a speech at an engineering conference titled “Underground Facilities for Defense – Experience and Lessons.” In the first paragraph of his speech he states the following:
After World War II, political and economic factors changed the underground construction picture and caused a renewed interest to “think underground.” As a result of this interest, the Corps of Engineers became involved in the design and construction of some very complex and interesting military projects. Although the conference program indicates the topic to be “Underground Facilities for Defense – Experience and Lessons,” I must deviate a little because several of the most interesting facilities that have been designed and constructed by the Corps are classified. (Lloyd A. Duscha, “Underground Facilities for Defense – Experience and Lessons,” in Tunneling and Underground Transport: Future Developments in Technology. Economics and Policy, ed. F.P. Davidson (New York: Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc., 1987, pp. 109-113.)
He then went into a discussion of the Corps’ involvement in the 1960’s in the construction of the large and elaborate NORAD base buried deep beneath Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado. This is just a public statement, but you will not find a more significant public admission of secret, underground bases than this one. Such speeches are not the only evidence available, however. There also exist documents obtained by researchers through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that shed more light on the subject, and clearly outline plans for the contraction of underground facilities.
Another great example of in-bottom bases deep underneath the ocean floor comes from William B. McLean, who was the inventor of the Sidewinder air-to-air missile and former Technical Director of the China Lake Naval Naval Ordnance Test Center (NOTS). He was also the Technical Director of the U.S. Naval Undersea Warfare Center in San Diego. McLean made some comments to John Newbauer, who at the time was the Editor-in-Chief of Astronautics and Aeronautics, stating that these plants and projects were already in development. (“A Bedrock View of Ocean Engineering,” Interview of William B. Mclean by A/A Editor-in-Chief John Newbauer, Astronautics and Aeronautics (April 1969): 30-36.)
This was in 1969, but keep in mind that the abstract above is from 1968, meaning that these constructions could have been under development before, or shortly after this publication.
Walter Koerschner, who was an illustrator for the United States Navy’s Rock-site team during the 1960’s, contacted Richard Sauder, Ph.D, who has researched this topic extensively. This was at the time when the Navy had plans for technically complex and very large buried manned bases beneath the ocean floor.
His background is verified, documents like this, or a simple google search of Waters name along side “US Navy” or “US Navy Illustrator” would suffice.
He contacted Dr. Sauder to provide him with some of the original illustrations he had done for this project, and they are very telling. Dr. Sauder, in his book Hidden In Plain Sight, provides these illustrations and goes into detailing regarding the science and engineering behind these projects. It is quite fascinating and I recommend you check him out if you are interested in learning more.
Here is an excerpt and picture from the book:
This ‘racetrack’ facility – also called the ‘Nautilus Concept’ – that can dock three submarines at a time, with an adjoining sister facility that also can handle multiple submarines. The picture is virtually self-explanatory. Large submarines are hundreds of feet long, so the dimensions of a facility such as shown here would have to be very large. The central docking area might be more than a thousand feet long and easily more than a hundred feet in diameter. The living quarters would obviously have to accommodate hundreds of crew members in some degree of creature comfort.
The book has many other illustrations from Koerschner, but unfortunately I cannot seem to find any more online.
There are also known underground facilities in existence. Take for example the Swedish underground military facility at Musko. It’s a large naval base built underneath a mountain. The hospital alone within this facility holds over 1,000 beds. Musko engineers blasted out 1,500,000 cubic meters of stone in order to build it
The world’s most prominent researcher on Underground Military Facilities (in my opinion), Richard Sauder, Ph.D, told of an interesting story in his book Hidden In Plain Sight that I’d like to share with you:
As it happens, after giving a public talk a couple of years ago, I was approached by a man who had been a uniformed member of the United States Navy. We chatted for a while and when he mentioned that he had spent some time at China Lake my ears perked up. I asked him if there was an underground facility at China Lake. He said that indeed there is, and that it is impressively large and deep. I asked him if he had ever been in it, and he said that he had, though not to the deepest levels. I asked him how deep the deepest part extended. He looked at me soberly and said very quietly, “It goes one mile deep.” I then asked him what the underground base contains. He replied, ‘Weapons.’ I responded, “What sort of weaponry?” And he answered without pausing, “Weapons more powerful than nuclear weapons.”
There are documents available which expose a deep underground command center that was to be built far below regions such as Washington, D.C. and China Lake, California during the Cold War. Documents show that in 1964 the military was considering building a huge underground cavity 4,000 feet deep beneath China Lake, and it’s well known that the United States and the Soviet Union created a vast infrastructure to support a complex of offensive and defensive weapons during the Cold War. This infrastructure included sites and facilities for developing, testing, storing, and manufacturing weapons. There was also a host of communication and command centres.
The very first TOP SECRET memo on the subject was issued by Robert McNamara on November 7th, 1963 from the office of the Secretary of Defense. A second memo was issued on the same day concerning a proposed Deep Underground National Command Center that would be approximately 3,500 feet beneath Washington. The memo also mentioned elevator shafts below the State Department and White House that would descend to 3,500 feet, with high speed, horizontal tunnel transport to the main facility. And this was way back in the 60’s. Imagine what technological feats we are capable of now.
A World Of Transparency is required if our race is to evolve out of our infancy. Maybe one day, everything will come to light.
By Arjun Walia