Silent Coup

How the CIA is Welcoming Itself Back Onto American University Campuses

Silent Coup

by DAVID PRICE

 

Throughout the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s, independent grassroots movements to keep the Central Intelligence Agency off American university campuses were broadly supported by students, professors and community members. The ethos of this movement was captured in Ami Chen Mills’ 1990 book, C.I.A. Off Campus. Mills’ book gave voice to the multiple reasons why so many academics opposed the presence of the CIA on university campuses: reasons that ranged from the recognition of secrecy’s antithetical relationship to academic freedom, to political objections to the CIA’s use of torture and assassination, to efforts on campuses to recruit professors and students, and the CIA’s longstanding role in undermining democratic movements around the world. 

For those who lived through the dramatic revelations of the congressional inquiries in the 1970s, documenting the CIA’s routine involvement in global and domestic atrocities, it made sense to construct institutional firewalls between an agency so deeply linked with these actions and educational institutions dedicated to at least the promise of free inquiry and truth. But the last dozen years have seen retirements and deaths among academics who had lived through this history and had been vigilant about keeping the CIA off campus; furthermore, with the attacks of 9/11 came new campaigns to bring the CIA back onto American campuses.

Henry Giroux’s 2007 book, The University in Chains: Confronting the Military-Industrial Academic Complex, details how two decades of shifts in university funding brought increased intrusions by corporate and military forces onto university. After 9/11, the intelligence agencies pushed campuses to see the CIA and campus secrecy in a new light, and, as traditional funding sources for social science research declined, the intelligence community gained footholds on campuses.

Post-9/11 scholarship programs like the Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program (PRISP) and the Intelligence Community Scholarship Programs today sneak unidentified students with undisclosed links to intelligence agencies into university classrooms (both were first exposed by this author here in CounterPunch in 2005). A new generation of so-called flagship programs have quietly taken root on campuses, and, with each new flagship, our universities are transformed into vessels of the mi­tarized state, as academics learn to sub­limate unease. 

The programs most significantly linking the CIA with university campuses are the “Intelligence Community Centers of Academic Excellence” (ICCAE, pro­nounced “Icky”) and the “Intelligence Advance Research Projects Activity”. Both programs use universities to train intelligence personnel by piggybacking onto existing educational programs. Campuses that agree to see these outsourced programs as nonthreatening to their open educational and research missions are rewarded with funds and useful contacts with the intelligence agencies and other less tangible benefits.

Even amid the militarization prevailing in America today, the silence surrounding this quiet installation and spread of programs like ICCAE is extraordinary. In the last four years, ICCAE has gone further in bringing government intelligence organizations openly to American university campuses than any previous intelligence initiative since World War Two. Yet, the program spreads with little public notice, media coverage, or coordinated multi-campus resistance. 

When the New Infiltration Began

In 2004, a $250,000 grant was awarded to Trinity Washington University by the Intelligence Community for the establishment of a pilot “Intelligence Community Center of Academic Excellence” program. Trinity was, in many ways, an ideal campus for a pilot program. For a vulnerable, tuition-driven, struggling financial institution in the D.C. area, the promise of desperately needed funds and a regionally assured potential student base, linked with or seeking connections to the D.C. intel­ligence world, made the program financially attractive.

In 2005, the first ICCAE centers were installed at ten campuses: California State University San Bernardino, Clark Atlanta University, Florida International University, Norfolk State University, Tennessee State University, Trinity Washington University, University of Texas El Paso, University of Texas-Pan American, University of Washington, and Wayne State University. Between 2008-2010, a second wave of expansion brought ICCAE programs to another twelve campuses: Carnegie Mellon, Clemson, North Carolina A&T State, University of North Carolina-Wilmington, Florida A&M, Miles College, University of Maryland, College Park, University of Nebraska, University of New Mexico, Pennsylvania State University, and Virginia Polytechnic Institute. 

But the CIA and FBI aren’t the only agencies from the Intelligence Community that ICCAE brings to American university campuses. ICCAE also quietly imports a smorgasbord of fifteen agencies – including the National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, and Homeland Security. 

ICCAE’s stated goals are to develop a “systematic long-term program at universities and colleges to recruit and hire eligible talent for IC [Intelligence Community] agencies and components,” and to “increase the [intelligence recruit­ing] pipeline of students … with emphasis on women and ethnic minorities in critical skill areas.” Specifically, ICCAE seeks to “provide internships, co-ops, graduate fellowships and other related opportunities across IC agencies to eli­gible students and faculty for intelligence studies immersion,” and to “support selective international study and regional and overseas travel opportunities to enhance cultural and language immer­sion.” ICCAE’s aim is to shower with fellowships, scholarships and grants those universities that are adapting their curricula to align with the political agenda of American intelligence agencies; also to install a portal connecting ICCAE cam­puses with intelligence agencies, through which students, faculty, students studying abroad, and unknown others will pass. While ICCAE claims to train analysts, rather than members of the clandestine service, the CIA historically has not observed such boundaries.

ICCAE-funded centers have different names at different universities. For example, at the University of Washington (UW), ICCAE funds established the new Institute for National Security Education and Research (INSER), Wayne State University’s center is called the Center for Academic Excellence in National Security Intelligence Studies, and Clark Atlantic University’s program is the Center for Academic Excellence in National Security Studies.

With the economic downturn, university layoffs became a common ocurrence. Need breeds opportunism, as scarcity of funds leads scholars to shift the academic questions they are willing to pursue and suspend ethical and political concerns about funding sources. Other scholars unwilling to set aside ethical and political concerns are keenly aware of institutional pressures to keep their outrage and protests in-house.

Covering Up Dissent

Despite a lack of critical media cov­erage of ICCAE programs, traces of campus dissent can be found online in faculty senate records. When Dean Van Reidhead at the University of Texas-Pan American (UTPA) brought a proposal for ICCAE to establish a center on cam­pus, some faculty and graduate students spoke out against the damage to academic freedom that the program would likely bring. Senate minutes record that faculty “representatives spoke against and for UTPA submitting a proposal to compete for federal money to establish an Intelligence Community Center for Academic Excellence.” At this meeting, graduate students “listed the following demands: 1) inform the community via press release about the possible ICCAE proposal, 2) release the proposal draft for public review, 3) establish a commu­nity forum on ICCAE, and 4) abolish the process of applying for ICCAE funds.” At Texas-Pan American, as at other ICCAE campuses, administrators noted these concerns but continued with plans to bring the intelligence agencies to campus, as if hearing and ignoring concerns constituted shared governance.

The minutes of the University of Washington’s Faculty Senate and Faculty Council on Research record shadows of dissent that are so vaguely referenced that they are easily missed. The minutes for the December 4, 2008, meeting gloss over the issues raised when the American Association of University Professors, University of Washington chapter, had issued a strongly worded statement by Executive Board representative Christoph Giebel, requesting information concerning UW’s INSER contacts with the Intelligence Community. The minutes simply read: “… both Giebel and Jeffry Kim [INSER director] answered a series of good questions that resulted in a fair, tough and serious conversation.” What these “good questions” were and the nature of this “tough and serious conversation” are not mentioned in the minutes, as if “good questions” were not important enough to enter into a public record. Similarly, the nature of faculty objections to INSER are glossed over in the 1/29/09 UW Senate minutes, which simply listed the findings of the Faculty Council on Research that “a number of email communications have come through the faculty senate that reflect a range in attitude toward the INSER program.”

In fact, a significant portion of this faculty “range in attitudes toward the INSER program” is most accurately characterized as outraged. I have heard from faculty at other ICCAE flagship campuses that some form of internal dissent has occurred on each of their campuses, and professors at UW have sent me documents, quoted below, clarifying the extent of the campus’s disquiet over the intelligence agencies insertion into their campus; an insertion whose success should be described as a silent coup.

Faculty and students’ public silence at ICCAE universities over these developments needs some comment. The post-9/11 political climate casts a pall of orthodoxy over critical discussions of militarization and national security, and the rise of anti-intellectual media pundits attacking those who question increasing American militarization adds pressure to muzzle dissent. Faculty at public universities often feel these pressures more than their colleagues at private institutions. There are also natural inclinations to try and keep elements of workplace dissent internal, but two factors argue against this public silence. First, most of the ICCAE institutions are publicly funded universities drawing state taxes; the state citizens funding these universities deserve to be alerted to concerns over the ways these programs can damage public institutions. Second, university administrators have been free to ignore faculty’s harsh, publicly silent, internal dissent. Keeping dissent internal has not been an effective resistance tactic.

Inaudible Uproar at UW

In a step moving beyond internal private critiques of ICCAE programs, multiple professors at the University of Washington have provided me internal memos sent by professors to administrators. These memos document the breadth of internal faculty dissent over administrators’ October 2006 decisions to bring the CIA and other intelligence  agencies to the UW campus. 

Initially, the UW administration appeared to appreciate faculty concerns. In October 2005, David Hodge, UW dean of Arts and Sciences, met with School of International Studies faculty to discuss proposals to establish affiliations with U.S. intelligence agencies, after International Studies faculty wrote the administration, expressing opposition to any affiliation linking them with the CIA and other intelligence agencies. This group of faculty wrote that such developments would “jeopardize the abilities of faculty and students to gain and maintain foreign research and study permits, visas, and open access to and unfettered interaction with international research hosts, partners, and counterpart institutions,” and they worried that any such relation­ships would “endanger the safety and security of faculty and students studying and conducting research abroad as well as their foreign hosts.” One participant in these meetings told me that the administration initially acknowledged that there were serious risks that students and faculty working abroad could lose research opportunities because of the CIA-linked program on campus, and that these concerns led the administration initially to decline any affiliation with these intelligence agency-linked programs. 

But these concerns did not derail the administration’s interest in bringing the Intelligence Community on campus, and the following year the administration of UW decided to establish the ICCAE-funded Institute for National Security Education and Research. But after INSER’s launch, concerned internal memos continued to come from faculty across the campus. In the past year and a half, letters voicing strong protest from at least five academic units have been sent by groups of faculty to deans. 

In October 2008, anthropology professors Bettina Shell-Duncan and Janelle Taylor drafted a critical memo that was voted on and approved by the anthropology faculty and then sent to Dean Howard, Dean Cauce, and Provost Wise, raising fears about the damage INSER could bring to the University:

“As anthropologists, we also have more specific concerns relating to the nature of our research, which involves long-term in-depth studies of communities, the majority of which are located outside the United States. Some of these communi­ties are very poor, some face repressive governments, and some are on the receiving end of U.S. projections of military power … our profession’s Code of Ethics requires first and foremost that we cause no harm to the people among whom we conduct research.”

Shell-Duncan and Taylor tied disc­plinary concerns to anthropology’s core ethical principles and raised apprehen­sions that INSER funding could convert the university into a hosting facil­ity for “military intelligence-gathering efforts.”

They pointed to:

“1) the reports that students are required to submit to INSER at the end of their studies, and 2) the debriefing that they are required to undergo upon their return. Although our faculty have already been asked [to be] academic advisors for students with INSER funding, we have never been given any information on the guidelines for the reports, or the nature, scope or purpose of the debriefing process. This is of particular concern given that National Security is not an academic field of study but a military and government effort. Unless and until we are provided with clear and compelling information that proves otherwise, we must infer that these reports and debriefings are, in fact, military intelligence-gathering efforts.”

They cited a 2007 report (of which I am a co-author) written by an American Anthropological Association (AAA) commission, evaluating a variety of engagements between anthropologists and the military and intelligence agencies. The anthropologists argued that this AAA report found that while,
“…some forms of engagement with these agencies might be laudable, the Commission also issued cautions about situations likely to entail violations of the ethical principles of our profession. In particular, the members of the Commission expressed serious concern about ‘a situation in which anthropologists would be performing fieldwork on behalf of a military or intelligence program, among a local population, for the purpose of supporting operations on the ground.’” 

Other academic departments wrote the UW administration expressing concerns. In November 2008, members of the Latin American Studies division in the Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies complained to the administration in a memo that

“in light of the U.S. Intelligence Community’s extensive track-record of undermining democracies and involvement in human rights violations in Latin America and elsewhere, we find it unconscionable that the UW would have formal ties with the newly created Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), let alone involve our students in an exercise of gathering intelligence information and assist it with its public relations campaign among children in our local schools. The most recent examples of the U.S. Intelligence Community’s inexcusable behavior in Latin America are torture at Guantanamo detention centers, collaboration with the infamous School of the Americas, the backing of paramilitary forces as part of the ‘drug war,’ … and support for the failed coup in Venezuela…

“…Some would argue that UW should engage the Intelligence Community as a method of constructively influencing or reforming it. To our mind, this argument is naïve and misguided at best. The training we provide is unlikely to change the deeply entrenched institutional cultures among the various entities, such as the CIA, which form a part of ODNI. In effect, then, we would be enabling the Intelligence Community to be more effective at carrying out their indefensible activities … We realize that the UW faces a number of financial constraints, perhaps now more than ever, but the needs for monies can never justify collaboration with an Intelligence Community, which is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths and immeasurable human suffering throughout the world.”

Also at UW a group of Southeast Asian Studies Center faculty and members of the History Department questioned whether the administration had considered how the presence of INSER on campus would taint professors and students because, in the words of the group in the History Department, “The professional bodies of many disciplines and professional programs have barred members from participating in programs funded by groups like the CIA due to the ethical conflicts such a relationship would involve. Did the administration take this into account in the process of creating INSER? Are there steps taken in the administration of funds from INSER to prevent faculty from unknowingly compromising their professional and ethical obligations?”

Among the problems facing the UW administration in creating INSER was finding an academic structure to administer such a stigmatized program. Because the social sciences represented hostile territory, administrators looked to the Information School. But many Information School faculty weren’t happy about having to house INSER. A letter signed by a dozen faculty from the International Studies Fund Group Librarians expressed deep concerns that that housing “a CIA Officer in Residence” would pollute perceptions of them in ways that could “damage our ability to serve the [other campus constituencies],” arguing that their long standing “strategy of impartial professionalism” across the campus “has enabled us to create collections of such depth over the years. It is also this professional indepen­dence that has in the past protected us from undue scrutiny by the governments of the countries that we visit and from which we solicit information sources – sometimes of the most sensitive nature – for our scholarly collections.”  

While it is encouraging to find UW faculty raising ethical, historical, and political objections, it’s far from clear that these private critiques had any measurable effect, precisely because they remained private.

Today, INSER hosts at least one CIA funded post-doc on the UW campus. It is unknown how many CIA-linked employees or CIA-linked students are now on the UW’s campus. We don’t know what all members of the intelligence agencies on campus are doing, but scholars who study the history of the agency know that in the past CIA campus operatives have performed a range of activities that included using funding fronts to get unwitting social scientists to conduct pieces of research that were used to construct an interrogation and torture manual; to establish contacts used to recruit for­eign students to collect intelligence for the CIA; and debriefing of graduate students upon return from foreign travel of research. We know historically that the CIA has cultivated relationships with professors in order to recruit students. When universities import ICCAE programs, they bring this history with them, and, as students from ICCAE universities travel abroad, suspicions of CIA activity will travel with them and undermine the safety and opportunities to work and study abroad for all.

There are many good reasons to keep the CIA off campus, the most obvious ones stress the reprehensible deeds of the agency’s past (and present). For me one good reason is that this Intelligence Community invasion diminishes America’s intelligence capacity while damaging academia. As the Intelligence Community’s “institutional culture” seeps into ICCAE universities, we can foresee a deadening of intellect, weakening American universities and intelligence capacities as scholars learn to think in increasingly narrow ways, described by President Eisenhower half a century ago in his farewell address’s warning that “a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.”

If the United States wants intelligence reform, it needs to fund independent scholarship, not narrow the range of discourse on our campuses by paying cash-strapped universities to house revolving doors between the academy and the CIA. 

Universities need to be places where people can freely explore ideas, but ICCAE inevitably brings chills to open classrooms. How long will it take until students at ICCAE universities start to wonder about who’s reporting on free-flowing discussions in classes? With cadres of future FBI and CIA employees on campus, those who develop dissident political critiques will find themselves opting for a choice between speaking their mind, or keeping silent, or softening harsh honest critiques. As ICCAE students graduate and begin careers requiring security clearances, accounts of academic discussions stand to make their way into intelligence files, as clearance background checks ask for accounts of known “subversive” acquaintances encountered during university years.

These are foreseeable consequences. Now, that the Patriot Act removed legal firewalls prohibiting these forms of political surveillance, the stage has been set for a dark renaissance of the fifties to begin.

Ending the Silence

If students, faculty and citizens are concerned about ICCAE’s impact on our universities, then breaking the silence is the most effective opposition tactic available. Anyone who wants specific information on contacts between university administrators and ICCAE officials and the intelligence community can use state public records laws and federal Freedom of Information laws to request records. Given university administrators’ claims that everything is above board, these records should not be blocked by national security exemptions; if they are, this would be useful to know. Concerned members of individual campuses can use these tools to access correspondence and verify claims by university administrators about the nature of their contact with ICCAE.

Faculty, staff, students, alumni and community members concerned about ICCAE’s presence on university campuses should form consortia online to share information from various campuses and make common cause. ICCAE has made rapid headway because of the internal campus-specific, isolated nature of resistance to ICCAE. Something like an “ICCAE Watch” or “CIA Campus Watch” website could be started by a faculty member or grad student on an ICCAE campus, providing forums to collect documents, stories and resistance tactics from across the country.

Finally, tenured professors on ICCAE campuses, or on campuses contemplating ICCAE programs, need to use their tenure and speak out, on the record, in public: the threats presented by these developments are exactly why tenure exists. If professors like the idea of bringing the CIA on campus, they can publicly express these views, but the split between the public and private reactions to ICCAE helped usher the CIA silently back onto American university campuses. The intelligence agencies thrive on silence. If this move is to be countered, academic voices must publicly demand that the CIA and the Intelligence Community explain themselves and their history in public. 

DAVID PRICE is a member of the Network of Concerned Anthropologist.  He is the author of Anthropological Intelligence: The Deployment and Neglect of American Anthropology in the Second World War, published by Duke University Press. He can be reached at dprice@stmartin.edu

Underground Bases and Tunnels

Underground Bases and Tunnels

_____________________________

The first section of this page was written by Phil Schneider:

Photo of United States Air Force tunnel boring machine at Little Skull Mountain, Nevada, USA, December 1982. There are many rumors of secret military tunnels in the United States. If the rumors are true, machines such as the one shown here are used to make the tunnels. (Source: U.S. Department of Energy.)

This is a $13 million tunnel boring machine (TBM) used for tunneling at the Nevada Test Site. (Remember that Area 51 is part of the test site.) Many other types of TBMs are used by many government agencies, including the 'nuclear powered TBM' [NTBM] that melts solid rock and leaves behind glass-like walls.

Most tunneling activity is under military installations and all information is highly restricted. Former employees of said facilities have surfaced over the years to talk of massive underground installations in places like Area 51, the Northrop facility in Antelope Valley, California (rumored to have 42 levels), and the Lockheed installation near Edwards, California.

The 'Black Budget' currently consumes $1.25 trillion per year. At least this amount is used in black programs, like those concerned with deep underground military bases. Presently, there are 129 deep underground military bases in the United States. They have been building these 129 bases day and night, unceasingly, since the early 1940's. Some of them were built even earlier than that. These bases are basically large cities underground connected by high-speed magneto-leviton trains that have speeds up to Mach 2. Several books have been written about this activity.

The average depth of these bases is over a mile, and they again are basically whole cities underground. They all are between 2.66 and 4.25 cubic miles in size. They have laser-drilling machines that can drill a tunnel seven miles long in one day. I was involved in building an addition to the deep underground military base at Dulce, which is probably the deepest base. It goes down seven levels and over 2.5 miles deep. I helped hollow out more than 13 deep underground military bases in the United States.

_____________________________

More thought-provoking images of tunnel boring equipment:













_____________________________

From Dr Bill Deagle's December 2006 Granada Forum Lecture:

I took care of John Fialla, who was best friends with Phil Schneider. How many people know about Phil Schneider? Well, they were using tunneling machines back in the mid-90s that could tunnel through a rock face at seven miles per day, that could cut through a rock face with high-energy impact lasers that could blow the nano-sized particles of rock so that there was no debris left, forming an obsidian-like core, and laying an inner core for unidirectional maglev trains that travel at Mach 2 to 2.8 underground between these very very powerful and organized cities.

There's 132 under the United States, an average of 5.36 to 7.24 cubic miles in size at an average of 1.5 to 4.5 miles underground, built, by and large, most of them in areas away from geotectonic areas - but there's going to be lots of new geotectonic faults established when you have force 11, 12, 13, 14 earthquakes hit the Earth.
Why are they rushing to do this? Because they know that catastrophe is coming. And where's this money coming from? It's not coming from our regular Black Op budget. It's coming from the illegal sale of drugs. In the United States there's at least, by conservative estimates, a quarter of a trillion to a half a trillion of illegal drugs just sold in the United States that goes directly into underground budgets, and 90-95% goes to the DUMBs [Deep Underground Military Bases].

_____________________________

The following was written by Richard Sauder, PhD, adapted from his book Underground Bases and Tunnels:

The nuclear subterrene (rhymes with 'submarine') was designed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, in New Mexico. A number of patents were filed by scientists at Los Alamos, a few federal technical documents were written - and then the whole thing just sort of faded away.

Or did it?

Nuclear subterrenes work by melting their way through the rock and soil, actually vitrifying it as they go, and leaving a neat, solidly glass-lined tunnel behind them.

The heat is supplied by a compact nuclear reactor that circulates liquid lithium from the reactor core to the tunnel face, where it melts the rock. In the process of melting the rock the lithium loses some of its heat. It is then circulated back along the exterior of the tunneling machine to help cool the vitrified rock as the tunneling machine forces its way forward. The cooled lithium then circulates back to the reactor where the whole cycle starts over. In this way the nuclear subterrene slices through the rock like a nuclear powered, 2,000 degree Fahrenheit (1,100 Celsius) earthworm, boring its way deep underground.

The United States Atomic Energy Commission and the United States Energy Research and Development Administration took out Patents in the 1970s for nuclear subterrenes. The first patent, in 1972 went to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.

The nuclear subterrene has an advantage over mechanical TBMs in that it produces no muck that must be disposed of by conveyors, trains, trucks, etc. This greatly simplifies tunneling. If nuclear subterrenes actually exist (and I do not know if they do) their presence, and the tunnels they make, could be very hard to detect, for the simple reason that there would not be the tell-tale muck piles or tailings dumps that are associated with the conventional tunneling activities.

The 1972 patent makes this clear. It states:

"... (D)ebris may be disposed of as melted rock both as a lining for the hole and as a dispersal in cracks produced in the surrounding rock. The rock-melting drill is of a shape and is propelled under sufficient pressure to produce and extend cracks in solid rock radially around the bore by means of hydrostatic pressure developed in the molten rock ahead of the advancing rock drill penetrator. All melt not used in glass-lining the bore is forced into the cracks where it freezes and remains ...

"... Such a (vitreous) lining eliminates, in most cases, the expensive and cumbersome problem of debris elimination and at the same time achieves the advantage of a casing type of bore hole liner."

(U.S. Patent No. 3,693,731 dated Sept. 26, 1972)

There you have it: a tunneling machine that creates no muck, and leaves a smooth, vitreous (glassy) tunnel lining behind.

Another patent three years later was for:

A tunneling machine for producing large tunnels in soft rock or wet, clayey, unconsolidated or bouldery earth by simultaneously detaching the tunnel core by thermal melting a boundary kerf into the tunnel face and forming a supporting excavation wall liner by deflecting the molten materials against the excavation walls to provide, when solidified, a continuous wall supporting liner, and detaching the tunnel face circumscribed by the kerf with powered mechanical earth detachment means and in which the heat required for melting the kerf and liner material is provided by a compact nuclear reactor.

This 1975 patent further specifies that the machine is intended to excavate tunnels up to 12 meters in diameter or more. This means tunnels of 40 ft. or more in diameter. The kerf is the outside boundary of the tunnel wall that a boring machine gouges out as it bores through the ground or rock. So, in ordinary English, this machine will melt a circular boundary into the tunnel face. The melted rock will be forced to the outside of the tunnel by the tunnel machine, where it will form a hard, glassy tunnel lining (see the appropriate detail in the patent itself, as shown in Illustration 41). At the same time, mechanical tunnel boring equipment will grind up the rock and soil detached by the melted kerf and pass it to the rear of the machine for disposal by conveyor, slurry pipeline, etc.

And yet a third patent was issued to the United States Energy Research and Development Administration just 21 days later, on 27 May 1975 for a machine remarkably similar to the machine patented on 6 May 1975. The abstract describes:

A tunneling machine for producing large tunnels in rock by progressive detachment of the tunnel core by thermal melting a boundary kerf into the tunnel face and simultaneously forming an initial tunnel wall support by deflecting the molten materials against the tunnel walls to provide, when solidified, a continuous liner; and fragmenting the tunnel core circumscribed by the kerf by thermal stress fracturing and in which the heat required for such operations is supplied by a compact nuclear reactor.

This machine would also be capable of making a glass-lined tunnel of 40 ft. in diameter or more.

Perhaps some of my readers have heard the same rumors that I have heard swirling in the UFO literature and on the UFO grapevine: stories of deep, secret, glass-walled tunnels excavated by laser powered tunneling machines. I do not know if these stories are true. If they are, however, it may be that the glass-walled tunnels are made by the nuclear subterrenes described in these patents. The careful reader will note that all of these patents were obtained by agencies of the United States government. Further, all but one of the inventors are from Los Alamos, New Mexico. Of course, Los Alamos National Lab is itself the subject of considerable rumors about underground tunnels and chambers, Little Greys or "EBEs", and various other covert goings-on.

A 1973 Los Alamos study entitled Systems and Cost Analysis for a Nuclear Subterrene Tunneling Machine: A Preliminary Study, concluded that nuclear subterrene tunneling machines (NSTMs) would be very cost effective, compared to conventional TBMs.

It stated:

Tunneling costs for NSTMs are very close to those for TBMs, if operating conditions for TBMs are favorable. However, for variable formations and unfavorable conditions such as soft, wet, bouldery ground or very hard rock, the NSTMs are far more effective. Estimates of cost and percentage use of NSTMs to satisfy U.S. transportation tunnel demands indicate a potential cost savings of 850 million dollars (1969 dollars) throughout 1990. An estimated NSTM prototype demonstration cost of $100 million over an eight-year period results in a favorable benefit-to-cost ratio of 8.5.

...Was the 1973 feasibility study only idle speculation, and is the astonishingly similar patent two years later only a wild coincidence? As many a frustrated inventor will tell you, the U.S. Patent Office only issues the paperwork when it's satisfied that the thing in question actually works!

In 1975 the National Science Foundation commissioned another cost analysis of the nuclear subterrene. The A.A. Mathews Construction and Engineering Company of Rockville, Maryland produced a comprehensive report with two, separate, lengthy appendices, one 235 and the other 328 pages.

A.A. Mathews calculated costs for constructing three different sized tunnels in the Southern California area in 1974. The three tunnel diameters were:

a) 3.05 meters (10 ft.)
b) 4.73 meters (15.5 ft.)

c) 6.25 meters (20.5 ft.)

Comparing the cost of using NSTMs to the cost of mechanical TBMs, A.A. Mathews determined:

Savings of 12 percent for the 4.73 meter (15.5 ft.) tunnel and 6 percent for the 6.25 meter (20.5 foot) tunnel were found to be possible using the NSTM as compared to current methods. A penalty of 30 percent was found for the 3.05 meter (10 foot) tunnel using the NSTM. The cost advantage for the NSTM results from the combination of,

(a) a capital rather than labor intensive system,

(b) formation of both initial support and final lining in conjunction with the excavation process.

This report has a number of interesting features. It is noteworthy in the first place that the government commissioned such a lengthy and detailed analysis of the cost of operating a nuclear subterrenes. Just as intriguing is the fact that the study found that the tunnels in the 15 ft. to 20 ft. diameter range can be more economically excavated by NSTMs than by conventional TBMs.

Finally, the southern California location that was chosen for tunneling cost analysis is thought provoking. This is precisely one of the regions of the West where there is rumored to be a secret tunnel system. Did the A.A. Mathews study represent part of the planning for an actual covert tunneling project that was subsequently carried out, when it was determined that it was more cost effective to use NSTMs than mechanical TBMs?

Whether or not nuclear subterrene tunneling machines have been used, or are being used, for subterranean tunneling is a question I cannot presently answer.

__________________________

Support Project Camelot - make a donation: Donations are not tax deductible for U.S. citizens Thank you for your help. Your generosity enables us to continue our work.	Bill Ryan and Kerry Cassidy kerry@projectcamelot.org bill@projectcamelot.org

The Intel Hub

L.A. to N.Y. in Half an Hour: 10,000 Plus M.P.H. Tunnel Train Used for Underground Bases?

The Intel Hub

By Shepard Ambellas & Avalon

April 12, 2012

Note: This article is an add-on to our ongoing series, in conjunction with Dr. Richard Sauder, on the existence of a vast network of underground bases throughout the country.
Read part 1 of the series: “Nazi Engineers, Secret U.S. Military Bases, and Elevators To The Subterranean and Submarine Depths.”

The Vary High Speed Transit System (VHST) was a Rand Corporation concept that was presented to the military industrial complex in the 1970′s.
The concept was way ahead of it’s time, exactly what the secret sinister government needed to connect their vast expansions of underground bases throughout the United States and in various regions worldwide.

This could offer an explanation for some of the recent strange sounds and booms across the country.

The late (and presumably murdered) Phil Schneider spoke about what he called an Electro Magneto Leviton Train System that traveled at speeds in excess of Mach 2.

The VHST and its proposed routes, (vast advanced tunnel systems) at the time of it’s conception in the early 1970′s, fit and follow other underground base researchers findings as well as some of my own.

An interesting aspect within the Rand Corp. document is the fact that the tunnels are way to expansive to pump all of the air out at once to create the frictionless environment needed travel at speeds in excess of 10,000+ MPH.

The air has to be evacuated from the tunnel system in segments with large crucially timed mechanized door systems as the train passes through each vapor locked section.

Electrical and mechanical noises would ensue from such operation of massive airlock doors throughout the tunnel system once the underground bases or VHST were fully operational.

During this process strange air like sounds, hums, and mechanized sounds would persist especially if the tunnels were at a depth of 400 – 800 feet (semi shallow in underground base terms). Energy is also returned into the system as the trains decelerate.

The recent Clintonville booms might also be explained as underground sonic booms.

As the trains reach the speed of sound, a sonic boom could be heard and felt. Multiple booms could persist in one area as the train reaches the speed of sound at the same point in the tunnel system every trip.

The following article entitled ‘L.A. to N.Y. in Half an Hour? 10,000 – M.P.H. Tunnel Train Plan Developed’, was first published in the year 1972 by the LA Times;

LA Times
June 11, 1972
A Rand corporation physicist has devised a rapid transit system to get you from Los Angeles to NY in half an hour for a $50 fare. He said existing technology made such a system feasible and so does a cost analysis. The essence of the idea is to dig a tunnel more or less along the present routes of U.S. highways 66 and thirty. The tunnel would contain several large tubes for East West travel of trains that float on magnetic fields, moving at top speeds of 10,000 mph.

Passengers would faced forwarded during acceleration, backward during deceleration.

According to R. M. Salter Jr. head of the physical sciences department at Rand, the idea of high-speed train travel using electromagnetic suspension was first put forward in 1905 and actually patented in 1912. The trains he suggested now would be single cars rather than actual trains, and would be big enough to carry both passengers and freight, including large containers and automobiles.

The cars, or gondolas, would leave the New York and Los Angeles terminals at one minute or even 30-second intervals. On the main line thereA would be intermediate stops at Amarillo and Chicago. Feeder lines would meet the main lines at both locations.

There would also be subsidiary lines coming into the two main terminals from such cities as San Francisco, Boston and Washington. The main idea of VHST, or Very High Speed Transit, developed originally in thinking about the satellite program and hyper sonic aircraft speeds.” Salter said in an interview at Rand.

“The underground tubes were for suggested as alternatives, perhaps not quite seriously, but it was soon apparent that the idea of a tunnel containing such tubes had a lot of real advantages.” he said.

In the first place, he explained there is the extremely important matter of the use and conservation of immense amounts of energy needed to move the vehicles at such great speed. “An airplane that travels faster than sound uses up a large part of its available energy supply just in climbing to an altitude where the speeds for which it is designed are possible.” Salter said. “That’s true of rockets to. Much of their energy is spent and lost forever and getting above the atmosphere.”

This would not be true for the VHST gondolas traveling on their electromagnetic rail beds, according to Salter. The tubes would be emptied of air, almost to the point of vacuum, so the trains would not need much power to overcome air resistance. They would not even have to be streamlined. In addition to an electromagnetic roadbeds, the opposing electromagnetic loops of wires in the floors of the gondolas would be super cooled with liquid Helium to further eliminate electrical resistance.

Just as important, the gondolas would, like old-fashioned trolley cars, generate power as they break to a stop. “Since the trains would be leaving New York and Los Angeles simultaneously every minute, the power generated by cars breaking coming into the terminal would be transferred to the power lines propelling the cars going the other way.”

“For example, there will be halfway points between each stop. Trains would use power and getting to that halfway point, and generate power going the other half of the way to the stop. Each would use power generated by trains going in the other direction.” That is the way trolley cars have operated for eighty years – taking power from the overhead lines while accelerating or running along at a steady speed, and putting power back into the lines while breaking or coasting.

The big drawback to the Salter scheme is the cost of tunneling across the nation. He admitted that it would be expensive but it does not daunt him. “After the tunneling was finished, everything else would be practically free.” He said. Even at the low fair he proposes, the enormous debt created by the tunneling would be amortized within a reasonable period if the number of passengers and the amount of freight came up to Salter’s expectations.

He figures the tunnel’s would carry seven or 8 million tons of freight a day and that passengers would take to traveling back and forth between the Eastern West Coast has readily as they now fly between San Francisco and Los Angeles. “The technology of this is much easier than was developed for the space program.”Salter said. And tunnels, he added, need not be so expensive to dig is people think.

The most expensive thing about surface routes is the acquiring right-of-way and removing buildings that stand on the chosen route. The tunnel would not incur this expense. The tunnel, besides carrying tubes for passenger and freight gondolas, would carry many of the utilities now strung across the countryside on high wires. Salter said these underground power “lines” could be super-cooled with helium, like the electromagnetic loops in the floors of the gondolas. He said this would so reduce resistance that power could be transferred from one end of the country to the other without appreciable loss.

At the present time long distance transportation of power is difficult because of the amount of energy wasted. He said laser beams could be carried in the tunnel for the instantaneous transmission of messages. Even the mail could go cross-country in pneumatic tubes carried in the tunnel. All this would save money and speed amortization, thus cutting the overall cost of tunneling. Salter said approximately 8000 miles of tunnel were dug in America and Western Europe in the 1960s.

That includes mine shafts. But he said existing tunneling technology could be vastly improved. Salter said many tunnels are dug nowadays almost as they would have been in the dark ages. Drilling holes in tunnel faces, and using machines with rotary bits are methods of tunneling that can be improved, according to him. He said the tunnel could be worked on from a great many “faces,” for instance. Salter suggested, too, that electronic beams or even water be used to drill holes for blasting. The high-powered electrons would drill blasting holes almost instantaneously.

Projections of future airplane and automobile travels in the United States, and the future train and truck transfer of freight, show that Salter’s tunnel idea is not a science fiction fantasy.

There will be more room in the tunnels for all the necessary transport than there will be over any feasible number of Airways and freeways and tracks. Salter’s suggestion, according to the experts who have had a look at it, is an eminently practical one for handling all the necessary traffic cleanly and without clogging up the air and surface pathways. But it will such a system ever be developed? Salter himself is not optimistic.

“Perhaps” is how he puts it. “I am not nearly so optimistic about the political aspects of the problem as I am about our technical capability of doing the job.” He said. “History shows that some obviously feasible and practical projects, such as the tunnel proposed over and over again for connecting England and France under the English channel, can be put off for centuries because of political pressure.

On the other hand, societies with relatively primitive technology can perform such engineering feats as the erection of impairments.” Is the VHS T too far out? Salter suggested that to get the right perspective we should look back 100 years.

By comparing transportation a century ago and transportation today, one gets a better feel for just how practical VHST is. It appears to be a logical next step, and much more practical than its alternatives of filling the highways and Airways with more and more individually guided vehicles. “This alone is a compelling reason for the high-speed system.” Salter said.

There are others, according to him. “We can’t afford any longer to continue indefinitely to pollute the skies with heat, chemicals, not to mention noise, or to carve up the land with pavement.” He said. “We also need to get the trucks and many of the cars off the highway to make the roads available to drivers who drive the family car for fun and convenience.”

As the former official host of The Intel Hub Radio Show, I have to admit I have interviewed some interesting people. However, one interview in particular has always stood out to me.

The interview was with the owner of a private underground base construction company with military ties. During the interview it was stated that for some reason the people in the know are indeed gearing up at a rapid rate for some event that is to occur in the not so distant future.

What might this event be?

Why are the bases activating?

This technology is 100% real and fully functional in the present day.

Screen shot of the original article
Silver is the Achilles Heel to the Elite Financial Vampires – Outstanding Prices on Silver from LibertyCPM (Ad)

The Intel Hub

Nazi Engineers, Secret U.S. Military Bases, and Elevators To The Subterranean and Submarine Depths (Part 1)

The Intel Hub

By Dr. Richard Sauder
With Commentary By Shepard Ambellas & Alex Thomas

April 10, 2012

(The following is Part 1 of an exclusive underground base series brought to you by The Intel Hub with excerpts from the book Hidden in Plain Sight: Beyond the X-Files, written by acclaimed underground base researcher and author, Dr. Richard Sauder.)

Hidden in Plain Sight: Beyond the X-Files

In the preliminary stages of my research in the early 1990s, I had no informed idea of how deep below the surface underground bases could reach. By chance I had gone to hear a public talk by a man I did not know, on a topic that had nothing whatsoever to do with underground bases.

However, during the talk he unexpectedly made an offhand comment that caused me to think that he knew something about secret underground facilities. A few days later, I telephoned him and asked if I could come by his office to speak with him.

He consented to give me a little of his time, so I went by and asked him some questions, including about a specific location where I believed there was a secret underground base. He verified that there was a base there and told me that it was one mile deep.

At the time, that seemed improbably deep to me. I now understand, however, that it is well within the state of the art of the underground excavation and construction industries to build facilities one mile deep. In fact, facilities can be even deeper than that.

Other information that has since been given to me has raised the question of facilities possibly as deep as 12 to 14 miles. Frankly, I do not know what the technological limits are in the super-secret, black budget realm of compartmentalized programs.

But I can make some fairly well educated deductions based on what I have been told and information gleaned from the open engineering and industrial literature.

At a minimum, my investigation suggests that depths up to three miles are feasible, and that conclusion is based on a careful reading of the open scientific, mining and civil engineering literature.

At one time I considered greater depths than that as unattainable, but no longer. While I don’t know the limitations of the technology in the clandestine realm, based on everything I have heard over the years it must surpass the limits found in the open technical literature.

It could be that with classified improvements in material science and mining engineering that bases can be sited many miles beneath the surface of the land or the seafloor. Frankly, I now surmise that we are dealing with a science-fiction-like reality that has been held back from public knowledge.

In that regard, it is clear to me that there are power structures on this planet that closely interface with, and yet remain separate from, the official power establishment of any nation as publicly presented in the mainstream news media.

The sum total of all the many years of reading and research I have done, coupled with the myriad conversations I have had with an extremely eclectic selection of individuals, even raises the question as to whether some control structures and agencies for this planet may possibly extend off-planet.
But even if that is not the case, we are certainly dealing at the least with trillions of dollars of off-the-books money, very advance technology, an incredible infrastructure of secrecy, thousands and thousands of people who are in the know but say little or nothing about what they know, all of which revolves around projects of tremendous scope and complexity, carried out over a long period of time, and about which there is almost zero public knowledge.

Alex Thomas: “The trillions of dollars off the books, advanced technology, and the infrastructure of secrecy have all been brought about by numerous globalist organizations such as the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group as well as many other even more secretive groups that are not even known by name. Those involved with underground bases may literally know that they will be immediately killed if they speak out about what they know.”


I don’t know how many secret underground bases there are, but they surely do exist, there is no question of that.

In 1987, Lloyd A. Duscha, the then-Deputy Director of Engineering and Construction for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, gave a talk at an engineering conference entitled “Underground Facilities for Defense – Experience and Lessons.” In the first paragraph of his talk he stated that:

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. [1]

A little further on he said:

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. [2]

Subsequently Mr. Duscha went into a discussion of the Corps’ involvement in the 1960s in the construction of the large and elaborate NORAD base buried deep beneath Cheyenne Mountain, in Colorado. And then he said:

As stated earlier, there are other projects of similar scope, which I cannot identify, but which included multiple chambers up to 50 feet wide and 100 feet high using the same excavation procedures mentioned for the NORAD facility. [3]

You will not find a franker public admission of the existence of secret, underground bases than that.
It carries all the more weight coming from Lloyd Duscha, given his high position in the military-industrial complex.

Shepard: “I myself have conducted an interview with the owner of a major private underground base & shelter construction firm. What he told Bob Tuskin and myself off air during a commercial break was absolutely mind-blowing. 

He literally admitted that most of his clientele is Illuminati affiliated, including politicians, movie stars, and more. He maintained that client confidentiality was a factor, claiming that half of the business is reinforced homes. Leaving the other 50% up to speculation. 

The company has even built 3 massive arks for a doomsday scenario just like you see in the movie 2012. This was covered by CNN.” 

The Project Paperclip, Nazi Connection

It is not accidental that Lloyd Duscha mentioned the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ increased interest in underground bases and construction in the post-World War II period.

In the closing stages of WW II, the U.S. military overran the Third Reich and confiscated a treasure trove of Nazi technology, engineering facilities and research laboratories.

The American military also apprehended and detained large numbers of Nazi scientists, engineers and technicians, many of whom were brought to the United States under the auspices of the infamous “Project Paperclip” and integrated into American industry, research institutes and into the military and other official agencies.

• Read Project Paperclip File 1
• Read Project Paperclip File 2
• Read Project Paperclip File 3

The cases of such Project Paperclip notables as Wernher von Braun, and other “ex”-Nazis who were put to work building rockets and missiles for the military and NASA, are well known.

The American political and military establishments were very impressed with Nazi V-2 and buzz bomb missile technology, and brought Von Braun and his team to the USA at war’s end to continue and advance the research and design they had done under Hitler’s Third Reich.

The development of the manned space program, satellite technology, deep space probes, intercontinental nuclear missiles and cruise missiles are all fruits of their work.

But Project Paperclip had another aspect which has received almost no publicity. And that aspect had to do with the underground facilities that the American military discovered when they entered the remnants of the Third Reich in the concluding stages of open military hostilities between the Allied and Axis powers in the European theater.

I have two declassified Project Paperclip memoranda in my files that specifically request four men with expertise in underground construction, one of whom is Xaver Dorsch.

Project Paperclip File Xaver Dorsch File

The other men are not known to me, but Xaver Dorsch is. He was the director of the so-called Todt Organization in the closing phase of WW II.

The Todt Organization was originally headed by Fritz Todt, whence the name. Fritz Todt was the designer and creator of the well-known German autobahn system of highways.

The Todt organization served a somewhat analogous function in the Third Reich to that of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the U.S. Navy Seabees in the present American military system.

In other words, it was a civil engineering agency that supported the operations of the German military, though, unlike the case of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the U.S. Navy Seabees in the American system, the Todt Organization was not a formal part of the German military structure.

However, it did play a crucial role in the Nazi war effort and constructed many facilities for use by the German military and industry. Some of the underground structures that it built were impressively large and sophisticated.

In 1942 Fritz Todt was killed in an airplane crash and by war’s end control of the agency had effectively passed to Xaver Dorsch. In the closing stages of the war, Hitler specifically tasked Dorsch with developing a series of huge, underground, industrial manufacturing facilities.

Allied bombing raids were shredding German manufacturing and the Nazi command wanted to shift production underground, out of reach of American and British bombs. The collapse of the Third Reich ultimately put an end to those plans.

I remain persuaded, however, that a great deal of what the Allies found when they went into Germany remains classified to the present day, and that includes the full extent of the underground facilities built by the Todt Organization.

Xaver Dorsch was taken prisoner by the American military on 7 May 1945. I have two moderately lengthy documents that he wrote for the Americans, evidently as part of his debriefing by them.4 One was produced in 1946, the other in 1949-1950.

The documents deal with the administrative structure and operational activities of the Todt Organization during the war. I strongly suspect that Dorsch supplied a great deal more information to his American captors during that period that has yet publicly to see the light of day.

Xaver Dorsch may even have worked directly for the American military on the construction of secret, underground bases in the USA, just as he had done for the Nazis during the Third Reich.

It is a fact that he was in American military captivity and was requested specifically by Project Paperclip.
During the course of my research I spoke with an expert who is personally familiar with some of the Nazi underground constructions in Europe and his observation to me was that they were very well made facilities.
One of the best accounts of such facilities that I have found in the open literature is the anecdotal history related by Colonel Robert S. Allen that details what General Patton’s army discovered when it entered Germany in the closing stage of World War II.
Col. Allen revealed that Patton’s forces found four large underground bases in the vicinity of the grim Nazi concentration camp near Ohrdruf, Germany; other underground facilities were reported in nearby towns. Col. Allen provided the following description:

The underground installations were amazing. They were literally subterranean towns. There were four in and around Ohrdruf…. None were natural caverns or mines. All were man-made military installations. The horror camp had provided the labor. An interesting feature of the construction was the absence of any spoil. It had been carefully scattered in hills miles away.
Over 50 feet underground, the installations consisted of two and three stories, several miles in length and extending like the spokes of a wheel. The entire hull structure was of massive, reinforced concrete. Purpose of the installations was to house the High Command after it was bombed out of Berlin. The Ohrdruf installations were to have been used by the Signal Communications Section.

One, near the horror camp, was a huge telephone exchange equipped with the latest and finest apparatus. Signal Corps experts estimated their cost at $10,000,000.

This place also had paneled and carpeted offices, scores of large work and store rooms, tiled bathrooms with both tubs and showers, flush toilets, electrically equipped kitchens, decorated dining rooms and mess halls, giant refrigerators, extensive sleeping quarters, recreation rooms, separate bars for officers and enlisted personnel, a moving-picture theater, and air-conditioning and sewage systems. Begun in 1944, the installations had been completed but never occupied. [5]

The Regenwurmlager in Poland

Another spectacular example of Nazi underground engineering prowess was the subterranean Regenwurmlager complex that still sprawls for many miles deep beneath the countryside of western Poland. Several years ago Paul Stonehill wrote an eye-opening article about this site, replete with color photos, in FATE magazine. [6]

The Regenwurmlager was an obvious Nazi analog on the eastern German border region to the well-known Maginot Line that the French had built in their eastern border region, in that it also, like the Maginot Line, was comprised of many miles of underground tunnels and electric train lines connecting bunkers, fortifications and other critical military facilities.

Amazingly, the full extent of the huge complex is not known, even today. It is not known if either the Poles or the Russians have ever fully explored the many miles of tunnels and underground emplacements.

According to Stonehill, the facility has many secret or hidden entrances, and an underground subway system with an electric train on rails that ran through a tunnel approximately 100 to 165 feet below the surface.
On the surface, there were numerous military fortifications and bunkers crammed with weaponry, connected by secret passages to a sprawling labyrinth of tunnels below ground, said to be 30 miles or more in length.
Stonehill reports that Adolf Hitler is alleged to have visited the Regenwurmlager in 1937, riding in on the underground subway train. [7]

It happens that the Regenwurmlager complex of military bunkers and underground tunnels and subway trains was located in territory that was overrun by Soviet troops in the closing stages of World War II, so the American military may never have examined the facility.

However, I consider it very likely that Xaver Dorsch would have had personal knowledge of this facility, and it is quite likely that he extensively briefed his American captors on the large Regenwurmlager system of underground tunnels and bunkers.

This book cannot provide an exhaustive treatment of Nazi underground facilities, but the examples provided suffice to demonstrate that 65 to 75 years ago, Nazi engineers already had a sophisticated capability to construct elaborate, large facilities underground.

The American military understood this clearly at war’s end, and urgently wanted to bring Nazi experts to the USA to build underground facilities here also.

By the time you finish this book, you should understand that this mission was accomplished.

While we still do not know the full scope of what the Nazis did underground decades ago, we also still do not know the full extent of what the American military, and other agencies and corporations, have built underground right here in the USA, and elsewhere in the world.

What can be said with certainty is that an extensive program of secret underground construction began in earnest in the years following WW II and that program continues in effect to this day.

In part 2 of this exclusive series we will be discussing known locations of underground bases as well as areas believed to house the bigger, more secretive ones. At the conclusion of this 5 part series we will be conducting a major roundtable discussion on the the topic. Please spread this article and the entire series to your friends and family!

Silver: The Achilles Heal – Physical Silver is a Stake in the Heart of the Financial Vampires (Ad)

Sources

1.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.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Xaver Dorsch, Diplomingenieur, Former Head of the Chief Office of the Organisation Todt, The Organization Todt in France and Germany, Steinlager Allendorf, 1 September 1946. Also, Xaver Dorsch, Organization Todt (Dorsch Project), MS # P-037, English Copy, translated by G. Weber, edited by J.B. Robinson, reviewed by Capt. W.F. Ross, Foreign Military Studies Branch, Historical Division, Headquarters United States Army Europe, 1949-1950.
5. Colonel Robert S. Allen, Lucky Forward: The History of Patton’s Third Army (New York: The Vanguard Press, Inc., 1947).
6. Paul Stonehill, “Secrets of the Regenwurmlager,” FATE vol. 55 no. 10 issue 631 (November 2002): 28-33.
7. Ibid.
8. “From Zero To 300 In 60 Seconds Otis High-Speed Elevator Systems Selected For Landmark 88-story Melbourne Tower,” http://www.otis.com/news/newsdetail/0,1368,CLI23_NID11699_RES1,00.html, 2002.
9. “Micro Craft Does Major Business,” http://www.microcraft.com/InsideOutlook/WN_tenn.htm, 2002.
10. “World’s Fastest Elevator,” http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/extreme_machines/2004/3/elevator/print.phtml, 2004.
11. Jason Goodwin, Otis: Giving Rise to the Modern City (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2001).
12. Timothy Good, Alien Contact: Top-Secret UFO Files Revealed (New York: Quill, William
Morrow, 1993).

Where Are All the Deep Underground Military Bases? (Part 2)

theintelhub.com

Where Are All the Deep Underground Military Bases? (Part 2)

By Dr. Richard Sauder
With Commentary By Shepard Ambellas & Alex Thomas

theintelhub.com

April 17, 2012

(This is Part 2 of an ongoing and exclusive underground base series with excerpts from the book Hidden in Plain Sight provided to theintelhub.com by the publisher, including commentary by Shepard Ambellas and Alex Thomas.)

Read part 1,“Nazi Engineers, Secret U.S. Military Bases, and Elevators To The Subterranean and Submarine Depths.”

In the continental USA there are numerous underground bases. I will briefly list just some of the bases that my research has uncovered over the last 17 years. There are assuredly many more than those listed here.
Maryland

■ Camp David, the Presidential retreat, is immediately adjacent to Catoctin Mountain Park. On the surface there are some cabins and lodges, and conference rooms for Presidential use. But most of this facility runs like a labyrinthine anthill under Catoctin Mountain, just west of Thurmont, Maryland, along Rte. 15 between Frederick, Maryland and Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.

The facility is operated and maintained by the U.S. Navy Seabees. The U.S. Marines provide military security. I have spoken to an individual who used to work there on a classified maintenance contract.

My source informed me that the underground portions of Camp David are so extensive and elaborate, and there are so many miles of secret tunnels, that it is doubtful that any one person would have a complete map of the facility in his or her mind.

In other words, we hear or read the words, Camp David, in the mainstream news media, but understand virtually nothing of what really happens there, or what the full nature of the installation really is.

Commentary from Alex Thomas: The fact that they have moved the G8 meetings to Camp David indicates that G8 nations may be actually doing their most important meetings within the underground base near Camp David.

■ Fort Meade, near Laurel, Maryland, midway between Washington, D.C. and Baltimore, Maryland. My research, from a variety of sources, indicates that there is a huge underground maze beneath Fort Meade.

Fort Meade is operated by the U.S. Army, but the National Security Agency (NSA) has its largest, publicly known operations center there. The NSA has literally acres upon acres of super computers underground at Fort Meade, stacked level upon level, going down and down and down, like a gargantuan subterranean stack of hi-tech digital pancakes.
The NSA is notorious for the ECHELON spying program and other unconstitutional spying activities. It is something like a high-tech KGB or Stasi surveillance agency, spying on the American population’s electronic and digital communications.

■ FEMA alternate underground command center, off of Riggs Road, not far from Olney, Maryland, to the north of Washington, D.C. When I visited the place back in the 1990s, only a few shabby, almost dilapidated looking buildings were visible through the security fence.
A few vent pipes poked above the ground here and there. There were a few largish antennae and radio masts visible. The casual onlooker would probably just drive right by, unaware that the real activity was taking place below ground.

I spoke with one man who had been in the facility and he described a multi-level base crammed full of sophisticated electronic gear. He had been to level seven underground, but did not know if the base extended deeper than that, or whether it was connected via deep tunnels with other underground bases in the region.

■ Site R, also known as Raven Rock or the Underground Pentagon, is about 6 miles north-northeast of the Camp David facility, not far from the Maryland-Pennsylvania state line. This enormous facility is the alternate underground command center for the Pentagon.

In recent years Dick Cheney reportedly spent a lot of time underground at Site R. I have heard that Site R and Camp David are connected by underground tunnels, and I am inclined to believe the rumors are true.

Site R is now under the command of Fort Detrick, in Frederick, Maryland, to the northwest of Washington, D.C.. Fort Detrick is the U.S. Army’s infamous biological warfare research facility.

Virginia

■ Mount Weather, near Bluemont, Virginia on Rte. 601, is the major underground command center for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA has a 400 acre complex on the surface of the mountain. The underground base is very large, and actually qualifies as a high-tech, subterranean town. This base dates to the 1950s.

■ The Pentagon, in northern Virginia, the national military command center, across the Potomac River from Washington, D.C.. The Pentagon was built directly on the site of Robert E. Lee’s former plantation.

I have been told that there are multiple underground levels beneath the Pentagon. I don’t know how deep the complex goes, but elsewhere in this book I discuss plans dating to the 1960s to build a very deep base at the 3,500 foot level. I consider it likely that something like this has been done.

■ U.S. Army Warrenton Training Stations A and B, in the near vicinity of Warrenton, Virginia are ostensibly U.S. Army facilities. But in reality, my research showed that there is a CIA presence there. As for what sorts of operations take place there – who knows? I visited these places in June of 1992 and found Station A on Rte. 802; Station B is on Bear Wallow Road.

There are also Stations C and D elsewhere in the region, which I did not visit. In the course of my research, I called up Col. Fletcher Prouty, the well-known author of the book, The Secret Team.

For many years, at the height of the Cold War, Prouty was a liaison officer for the Air Force, helping the CIA with its clandestine activities worldwide. I surmised that if anyone ought to know something about what was going on at Warrenton it should be Fletcher Prouty.

So I put the question to him point blank, and asked him what the CIA was doing underground at a U.S. Army training installation in Warrenton, Virginia. To begin with, he confirmed that the CIA was indeed present in Warrenton, and was using the U.S. Army as a cover.

I asked him what was going on underground. He responded, “Well, you have to understand that that gets into the realm of Special Operations and that’s classified.” And that was all that I could pry out of him. I suspect the entire locale is tunneled out underground.

The palpable Alice in Wonderland aura exuded by the Warrenton U.S. “Army” Training Stations continues to linger in my memory, even with the passage of 17 years.

■ Before leaving Virginia, I also want to say something about another low profile CIA facility. Camp Peary is located just a few miles from Colonial Williamsburg. It is sometimes referred to as “The Farm” in popular parlance.

Though it is hard to find out much about the base, enough is known to say with confidence that Camp Peary is the CIA’s main training and operations base in the USA. As with the Warrenton Training Stations, the CIA uses a thin U.S. military cover at Camp Peary; in this case, maps indicate that Camp Peary is a U.S. Navy Reservation.

I am a native Virginian, from the Tidewater region, and spent my early childhood in a community just 20 miles away from Camp Peary. In the 1970s I attended the College Of William & Mary, in Colonial Williamsburg. Camp Peary lies just to the east of the town of Williamsburg, on the northern side of Interstate Highway 64. I have driven past the place numerous times over the years and it has always seemed darkly brooding to me.

Camp Peary lies on the York River; immediately to the southeast lies the U.S. Navy’s Cheatham Annex, a major weapons supply depot for the U.S. Navy’s Atlantic Fleet, part of the Yorktown Naval Weapons Station. This interests me, because many years ago I spoke with a woman whose father worked at the Cheatham Annex/Yorktown Naval Weapons Station complex in the years after World War II.

He was a construction worker, and at that time, about 60 years ago, the U.S. Navy was building a facility deep below the water line. The whole site lies only a few feet above sea level, so the water table is very close to the surface. The Navy used high powered water pumps to instantly pump out the brackish ground water that was rushing in, to keep the excavation from filling with water.

My acquaintance told me that her father said they used a fast setting concrete. She did not know the purpose of the facility. The instructive part of the story is that even then, 60 years ago, military engineers had the capability to construct facilities below the water line, using high powered pumps and quick setting concrete.

Moreover, the Navy’s Cheatham Annex lies immediately adjacent to the CIA’s secretive Camp Peary base, nominally administered by the U.S. Navy. Considering the Navy’s construction activities 60 years ago, and recalling that the Camp David Presidential retreat in Maryland is also administered by the U.S. Navy and lies above a major underground base hidden beneath it, I conclude that there is a high probability that the Camp Peary/Cheatham Annex area along the York River is underlain by an underground complex, too.

Washington, D.C.

■ The White House has a very large, deeply buried facility underneath it. One of my close friends was taken down into this facility during the Lyndon B. Johnson administration in the 1960s. She entered an elevator in the White House and was escorted straight down.
She believes that the elevator went down 17 levels. When the door opened underground she was escorted down a corridor that appeared to disappear to the vanishing point in the distance. Other doors and corridors opened off of that corridor. That was what Washington, D.C. was really like underground almost half a century ago.

■ My research indicates that Washington, D.C. has a veritable labyrinth of tunnels beneath it. Some of the tunnels are publicly known, such as the Metro tunnels and the underground train tunnels that members of Congress use to travel from their office buildings to the Capitol building.

As I discuss elsewhere in this book, I have been told and read stories of other tunnels that are more secret. In light of the available evidence, I incline to the view that these stories contain an appreciable degree of truth.

Texas

■ Medina Annex, at Lackland Air Force Base, in San Antonio. This facility lies in southwest San Antonio, on the south side of Rte. 90, immediately west of the junction of Interstate 410 and Rte. 90. This is one of the original Q Areas built by the Pentagon back in the late 1940s and 1950s for the storage and assembly of nuclear weapons.

Local lore has it that the underground portion is very large. I have been told that the underground base is very deep and cold, for whatever reason. The National Security Agency (NSA) also has a major presence at the Medina Annex with thousands of personnel. I have on occasion driven by the Medina Annex on Rte. 90 and the base has a very dark, ominous presence.

■ Camp Bullis, in northwest San Antonio, Texas, not too far from Interstate Highway 10. This is an Army training base, immediately adjacent to neighboring Camp Stewart, another Army base that keeps a much lower profile. I have been told that the Camp Bullis/Camp Stewart reservation is the site of an underground base.

■ Fort Hood, near Killeen, Texas, 70 miles north of Austin. This was also the site of one of the original Q Areas. I have been told that the area of Fort Hood, and the former Killeen and Gray Air Force Bases, are the site of a secret underground complex. I communicated with one ex-Fort Hood soldier whose duty area was at a checkpoint two miles inside a tunnel leading to an underground area, near the former Gray Air Force Base.

Nebraska

■ Offutt Air Force Base has had a major underground facility for decades. During the Cold War it was the underground command center for the Strategic Air Command. George Bush flew there for protection on Air Force One during the 9/11 attacks.

New Mexico

■ Since the late 1940s there has been a major underground base at Kirtland Air Force Base. The base is beneath a foothill of the Manzano Mountains. It was originally constructed as a super-secure nuclear weapons assembly and storage facility for the military.

Today the base is used by other agencies. The Air Force has built another, state of the art, facility for nuclear weapons storage at another location at Kirtland AFB. The Department of Energy’s Sandia National Laboratory is immediately adjacent to Kirtland Air Force Base, on the southeast border of Albuquerque.

I talked with one of the men who helped to build the Manzano base in the years after World War II. He spent his entire career as a hard rock miner for federal agencies, working on underground projects all over the western USA. While excavating the Manzano base, security was extreme.

The miners were blindfolded when they were transported to and from their work site. When they were taken from the area where they were working to another part of the facility they were always blindfolded. The practical result of this procedure was that not even the miners who built the underground base knew its layout.

All they ever saw was the immediate chamber or tunnel section they were currently working on. It was a strictly compartmentalized project in every sense of the word. I suspect that this facility has been expanded over the years.

Los Alamos is one of the U.S. Department of Energy’s national research laboratories, to the west of the state capitol of Santa Fe. I have been informed that the underground work space beneath Los Alamos is even greater in extent than the sprawling surface facility, reaching as much as one mile deep in its farthest reaches.

Two of the main missions of Los Alamos are nuclear and genetic research. Presumably classified projects related to these fields are among the secret activities carried out underground.

■ White Sands Missile Range, in south-central New Mexico, is the largest military base in the USA. It was the site of the first test explosion of an atomic bomb in 1945. White Sands was the launch site for test firing of captured Nazi V-2 rockets after the military defeat of the Third Reich.

Today it is still an operational military missile range, and also serves as an alternate space shuttle landing site for NASA. Underground facilities beneath White Sands are reportedly devoted to cutting edge research in lasers and conscious super-computing. The sum of my research strongly indicates a major underground component at White Sands. Nothing would surprise me where White Sands is concerned. Nothing whatsoever.

Nevada

■ The notorious Area 51 of UFO fame and the Tonopah Test Range/Nevada Test Site/S-4/Nellis Air Force Base reservations in southern Nevada are all in relatively close proximity to each other.
My research and sources point to major, massive underground facilities in this region. A great deal of ultra-sensitive military R&D takes place here. Much popular lore has arisen around the theme of captured UFOs held in secret by the American military at Area 51.

In my estimation, these stories are probably true. Ryan Wood and other researchers have accumulated a great deal of evidence over the years that indicates that American military agencies are lying and that they do have captured UFOs. Area 51 is reportedly one of the places where this sort of technology is sequestered and studied. It is my informed guess that White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico is another site for the study and R&D of exotic technologies.

Colorado

■ Cheyenne Mountain, near Colorado Springs, was the major underground command center for NORAD during the Cold War. It is a very deep, highly secure base.

While Cheyenne Mountain is still in use, most of NORAD’s daily operations have now been switched to Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado. This underground base has been featured in many motion pictures and television programs.

■ The Denver Federal Center, on the western edge of the Denver metropolitan area is the location of a FEMA underground command center. Many people are concerned about the Denver airport as being the site of an alleged underground base, but for my money the Denver Federal Center installation is more important.

Tennessee

■ Naval Support Activity Mid-South is a huge U.S. Navy base, in Millington, Tennessee just 21 miles north of Memphis. It is an enormous facility, covering thousands of acres. I have been told that there is a deep underground facility beneath this base.
Remember that the U.S. Navy operates and maintains Camp David, which is also the site of a major underground facility.

California

■ China Lake is a massive U.S. Navy R&D reservation in eastern California that has long been rumored to be the site of a major underground base.

While I can offer no direct proof, short of taking a live video crew underground to take a look around, the bulk of my research comes down on the side of a massive complex beneath the China Lake Naval Weapons Center, along Rte. 395, in the general vicinity of the town of Ridgecrest.

■ Reported massive, very deep underground installations are said to run out of Nevada and into eastern California. So much of the region is controlled by Federal departments and agencies, whether the Pentagon, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, or unknown agencies, as in the case of Area 51, that that entire area of the country is essentially one large Federal Government Multi-Agency Reservation.
Numerous military bases sprawl across the landscape, and then there are National Forests, National Monuments, and other lands under Federal control. This provides the Feds with the opportunity to move almost any necessary personnel and equipment around without attracting undue attention.

Commentary from Shepard Ambellas: The  very idea of underground bases has fascinated me ever since I was a kid. In fact, I lived near an area in which I believe a deep underground/undersea base is located.

My general consensus is not based off speculation, rather it is backed by major observation and collaborating encounters of others in the area.
Many close friends and local people in the area including myself had experienced strange phenomenon.

On several occasions I, and others I know, witnessed (what I believe to be) possible secret government “Black Craft” technology (as mentioned by the late Phil Schneider during presentations he gave exposing the New World Order’s covert activities before he was allegedly murdered), such as the TR-3B triangle craft.

At this time I will not go into detail of an extremely close encounter myself and others had with a massive craft, but I will divulge the location.

Naval Submarine Base Bangor, Washington State in my opinion serves as a massive underground/undersea hub for black bag projects.

An excerpt from global security.org reads;

In June 2004, SUBASE Bangor merged with Naval Station Bremerton. The new command was named Naval Base Kitsap.

The U.S. Naval Submarine Base (SUBASE), Bangor is located on the east shore of Hood Canal. The pier facilities of the base are located along two nmi of waterfront. The primary berthing facilities at SUBASE Bangor consist of four separate pier complexes: “KB” Docks, Delta Pier, Marginal Pier, and Explosive’s Handling Wharf. Trident submarines berth at Marginal Pier South and at Delta Pier North and South. They also use the Explosives Handling Wharf and the drydock on Delta Pier. According to harbor authorities, submarines are rarely nested, and when they do, are nested only for a day or two. Pier decks have a nominal height of 20 ft above mean lower low water. Alongside water depths vary from 45 ft at Marginal Wharves North and South, to 60 to 115 ft at the Delta Piers.

The primary berthing facilities at SUBASE Bangor consist of four separate pier complexes: “KB” Docks, Delta Pier, Marginal Pier, and Explosive’s Handling Wharf. Trident submarines berth at Marginal Pier South and at Delta Pier North and South. They also use the Explosives Handling Wharf and the drydock on Delta Pier. According to harbor authorities, submarines are rarely nested, and when they do, are nested only for a day or two. Pier decks have a nominal height of 20 ft above mean lower low water. Alongside water depths vary from 45 ft at Marginal Wharves North and South, to 60 to 115 ft at the Delta Piers.

No anchorages exist at SUBASE Bangor. Mooring buoys for barges are available near the KB docks. SUBASE Bangor has a complement of three 2,000 hp YTB tugboats and a twin-screw 1,600 hp commercial tug. Local authorities state that pilots are used for all submarine arrivals at Bangor. Pilots can be picked up at any point in the area from Foul Weather bluff at the entrance to Hood Canal southward to off Bangor, as requested. If a submarine commanding officer has passed through the Hood Canal Bridge once, a pilot is optional on departures. If tug assistance is required, pilotage is mandatory

Southwesterly winds directly impact Bangor’s dock facilities due to the orientation of Hood Canal. Winds are amplified as they are funneled northeastward through the canal by the orientation of the canal with respect to the adjacent topography. Operations at the Explosives Handling Wharf, Delta Drydock, and the Magnetic Silencing Facility will cease if wind velocities reach 25 kt. Wind alone is not a problem for moored submarines, but it does cause waves to wash over their hulls.

The KB Docks are used by small craft from the Naval Undersea Weapons Engineering Station (NUWES) at Keyport. Bangor harbor pilots state that lines are doubled and dead-man lines and buoys are used to prevent excessive motion of moored vessels during periods of strong southwesterly winds. Most vessels are moored on the inboard side of the piers, but YTT’s (torpedo recovery boats – 135-140 ft long/1,600 tons) moor to the outside of the piers and are exposed to whatever conditions exist in Hood Canal.

The only identified hazard at SUBASE Bangor is a strong southwesterly wind funneling through Hood Canal. Because of their low hull profile, wind does not pose a direct hazard to submarines. It can, however, impact the ability of tugs to work alongside submarines. It would also affect the operations of small craft and YTT’s from NUWES Keyport utilizing the KB Dock complex. Anytime winds approach 50 kt, the Hood Canal Bridge is closed to auto traffic and kept in an open position to reduce wind stress on the bridge structure. The floating bridge was partially destroyed by winds/waves on February 13, 1979 during an extremely strong wind storm.

The southwest berth of Delta Pier and the KB docks experience four to six ft swell during periods of strong (up to 60 kt) winds. As long as access hatches on submarine hulls are closed, the waves do not pose a direct problem to submarines. However, if tugs are alongside a submarine, wave motion may cause the tugs to pitch up and down with potential damage to the submarine hull. To preclude such damage, normal tug operations are suspended in strong wind situations.

I will be doing a massive in depth article on this base and some of the phenomenon in the area as an addition to this exclusive underground base series provided by Dr. Richard Sauder.
I encourage anyone to comment regarding the locations provided in the article (in the comments section).

*  *  *

This list should give you a brief idea of what is under our feet. I am sure that there are many more facilities than those I have just discussed above.

Please take due notice that many of these installations are gargantuan. An expert source once described to me an excavated underground space he was familiar with that was inside a mountain: it was approximately 1,000 feet high, 600 feet wide and 1,000 feet long.

He wanted to give me an idea of the state of the art in hard rock, underground excavation. I was impressed, as I suspect you would be too.

We are faced with a global system that is so secretive and so wildly out of control that the vast majority of us have no earthly clue as to what is going on, on this, the planet that we inhabit.

The Elevator to the Sub-basement

During the course of my research I have spoken to several people who allege to have been escorted down into secret or highly secure underground facilities. A long, deep elevator ride is a common feature of their accounts.

Right about here, I imagine you are thinking to yourself: “How deep do the elevators go?”

The short answer is that the documentation in the open literature suggests that the answer would be anywhere from hundreds to thousands of feet, based on the capabilities of high-rise elevators built by companies such as Otis and ThyssenKrupp.

The testimony of the people I have spoken with comports well with that information. I have also run across softer, undocumented information from time to time that suggests that some facilities go even deeper, several or even many miles deep.

I have little interest in doing an exhaustive survey of the elevator literature, but let me provide you just a few brief ideas of the state of the art in that industry.

Keep in mind that an elevator system that is installed in an interior elevator well and goes to the top of a high building could just as easily be installed in a vertical shaft that goes straight down underground. Multiple elevators could be staggered on multiple levels to go down and down, as deeply as you desire. The same technology can be used in either case, whether you are going up, or down.

Otis Elevator Co. announced plans in 2002 to install high speed Skyway elevators in the new 880 foot tall Eureka Tower in Melbourne, Australia, that rise at 1,800 feet per minute.

Otis also planned to install its innovative Gen2 flat belted elevator hoist system on the same project, that utilizes a permanent magnet machine, which is quieter and takes up less space than the traditional elevator machine room.⁸

Another article I encountered referred to a “mile-high, multidirectional elevator being developed for Otis Elevator Co. for use in extremely tall buildings of the future.”⁹ Obviously, if a company can develop a mile-high elevator, it can also develop a mile-deep elevator. Toshiba /G.F.C. Elevator installed two high-speed elevator cars in the Taipei 101 tower that zoom up to the 89^th floor observation deck at an ear-popping 3314 feet per minute.¹⁰

That will give you a little idea from the open literature of how fast and how high modern elevators can go – very high and very fast!

As I dug into the elevator literature a little more I happened to read a book by Jason Goodwin about the Otis Elevator Company. The book is entitled, Otis: Giving Rise to the Modern City.

I did not know who Mr. Goodwin was until I read his book, but I quickly came to understand that he is an extremely knowledgeable man in the field, having worked for Otis in a variety of important positions for 37 years, and then having formed his own elevator consulting company after his retirement form Otis.

I read the book carefully and I found out a few interesting things for my research:¹¹

1.         Elevators can be located in, and I quote verbatim: “…the legs of a deep-sea oil production or oil production platforms, and in many other extraordinary locations.”

2.         There are very large platform “lifts for extremely special applications” that may use a variety of lifting technologies, including “screw jacks.”

3.         And in a very brief summary at the conclusion of his most informative book, Mr. Goodwin briefly mentions the elevators “that are never mentioned but are needed to service the extensive infrastructures that make the cities run – the power plants, refineries, factories, and underground facilities (my emphasis).
Amen brother, underground facilities and the elevators that service them. That is what this book is about. Mr. Goodwin doesn’t really elaborate about that topic to any appreciable extent. But to his credit he does indeed mention elevators that service underground facilities beneath the nation’s cities.

His mention of the “extremely special applications” that require large platform lifts instantly caused me to reflect on David Adair’s description (elsewhere in this book) of a mammoth, football-field-sized platform elevator supported by huge screws the size of giant sequoia tree trunks that took him underground at Area-51 in Nevada.

As for the mention of elevators in the legs of giant oil production platforms, and in “many other extraordinary locations,” the implications for access to manned undersea bases is clear. The Gulf of Mexico and North Sea are dotted with myriad oil production platforms, with their legs sunk into the seabed.
Any of those platforms could potentially serve as an entry point to the sub-seafloor environment via elevators in their legs, which would permit personnel to travel to the platform and then travel down below the seafloor. I strongly suspect this is the case in some instances.

In his book, Alien Contact, Timothy Good mentions a NORAD offshore platform in the Gulf of Mexico that superficially resembles an oil production platform, but is not in reality an oil platform. The mission of the strange platform seems to be to serve as a sort of monitoring station to watch the air space of the USA for UFO activity.¹²

Of course, this begs the question as to how many ostensible offshore petroleum production platforms are not really oil rigs at all, but only resemble oil platforms as they perform other functions entirely? How many such cases are there? Only the oil companies and major governments would know the answer to that.

The average person absolutely lacks the means to ascertain those facts. But thanks to Jason Goodwin’s book, we know that oil platforms have elevators in their legs. Please note that Mr. Goodwin is not alleging that elevators in oil platform legs can go below the seafloor and access undersea, manned installations.
That is a conclusion that I am drawing from the available evidence. I am not saying that every offshore oil production platform has elevators in its legs that access the sub-seafloor environment. However, it is clear that some platforms certainly could serve in this way as entry points to manned, undersea installations.

---

8. “From Zero To 300 In 60 Seconds Otis High-Speed Elevator Systems Selected For Landmark 88-story Melbourne Tower,” http://www.otis.com/ news/newsdetail/0,1368,CLI23_NID11699_RES1,00.html, 2002.

9. “Micro Craft Does Major Business,” http://www.microcraft.com/Inside Outlook/WN_tenn.htm, 2002.

10. “World’s Fastest Elevator,” http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/ extreme_machines/2004/3/elevator/print.phtml, 2004.

11. Jason Goodwin, Otis: Giving Rise to the Modern City (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2001).

12. Timothy Good, Alien Contact: Top-Secret UFO Files Revealed (New York: Quill, William Morrow, 1993).