The Revealing Truth of Ufos, Secret Aircraft, Cover-Ups & Conspiracies: Area 51
Although the story of Area 51 didn’t really take off big-time until 1989— which was when Bob Lazar entered the scene in controversial and eyebrow-raising fashion—significant indications occurred as far back as 1984 that something very weird and deeply conspiratorial was going down out in the heart of the Nevada desert. We know this thanks to a now declassified U.S. government document from 1987 on what are referred to in its pages as “military land withdrawals.” The title: “Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-Ninth Congress, Second Session.”
On March 11, 1986, beginning at 9:45 A.M. in room B-352 of the Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable John F. Seiberling made a notable statement on the U.S. Air Force’s plans to prevent American citizens from accessing massive slabs of land that, legally, the Air Force had no right to claim as its own. That land, of course, was—as the government saw things—way too close to Area 51 for comfort, but before we get to that, let’s take a look at a certain controversy that was going down in 1984. It provides us with a timeline that led directly to the events of March 11, 1986.
In his 1991 book Alien Liaison, British ufologist Timothy Good wrote: “In early 1984 the U.S. Air Force illegally seized 89,000 acres of public land, known as the Groom Range, in order to further restrict access to Area 51. The decision to control access was made after the consultation with local Bureau of Land Management officials and after USAF Headquarters had conferred with the Air Force Secretariat.” As a result of this controversial, land-grabbing operation, in August 1984, a hearing was held to specifically address this issue. It was held in the U.S. House of Representatives. The debate was between the Honorable John Rittenhouse— who was there to represent the interests of the Air Force—and the chairman, the Honorable John F. Seiberling. The debate went as follows: Seiberling: Is it true that Air Force has already acted to restrict public use of the Groom Range area?
Rittenhouse: Yes, sir, it is true. We have asserted the right to control the surface access and egress to the extent of requesting people not to go in and out. We have people posted to the roads and at certain times we do not. We ask their cooperation.
Seiberling: Under what legal authority was that done; that right asserted?
Rittenhouse: As far as I know, sir, there is none; except decisions were made at a much, much higher level than mine that that be done.
Seiberling: There is no higher level than the laws of the United States.
Rittenhouse: No, sir, I understand, and we can describe that further if you would like, sir.
Seiberling: I would like.
Rittenhouse: In closed briefing.
Seiberling: Why would that have to be in a closed briefing?
Rittenhouse: I can’t discuss it, sir.
Seiberling: Shades of Watergate. All I am asking you is under what legal authority this was done. I am not asking you the technical reasons. That certainly is not classified.
Rittenhouse: As I stated earlier, originally we had no legal authority but we asserted the right to request people not to enter that area.
Seiberling: How?
Rittenhouse: We legally did not have that authority.
In the Public Hearing for Renewal of Groom Lake Mountain Range Land Withdrawal on November 20, 1985, in Alamo, Nevada, numerous people had their say in relation to this highly controversial and charged issue. One of the irate locals stated—whose words have become a part of the official public record: “I’d like to know how the military can hide behind the guise of national security when you have broken all of the rules that’s supposed to ensure this country’s freedom, denying our access, holding us at gunpoint when you feel necessary, not telling people you’re withdrawing it for our own good. You can’t tell me why you’ve broken all the rules? And you say it’s national security.”
This was far from being the end of the matter, however. Now it’s time to take a look at the aforementioned and now declassified document of 1987 titled “Military Land Withdrawals.” Once again, we see the Honorable John F. Seiberling taking the lead. Such are their importance, his words are presented without interruption: “This morning we are resuming our hearings on H.R. 1790, introduced by our colleague from Maryland, Mrs. Byron. The bill is an omnibus measure, which would withdraw certain public lands in four different states for use by the Defense Department for military purposes.
Under the Eagle Act of 1958, such military withdrawals involving tracts of 5,000 acres or more can be done only through an act of Congress. “Our first hearing on this bill on November 14, 1985, focused on the so- called Bravo-20 range in northern Nevada, which the Navy has used for bombing practice and related training. Today’s hearing focuses on the other area in Nevada covered by H.R. 1790; namely, the Nellis Air Force Range complex in the southern part of the state. This is an area of more than 2.9 million acres divided into two portions, the north and south range, separated by lands which are now designated as the national test site and used primarily by the Department of Energy for underground nuclear testing and other purposes.
“The south range of the Nellis complex overlaps the western half of the Desert National Wildlife Refuge. That unit of the national wildlife refuge system is about 1.6 million acres in extent. “Since 1974 there has been pending before the Congress an administration proposal to designate about 1.4 million acres within this unit as wilderness.
Members of the subcommittee who served on the Public Lands and national Parks Subcommittee in the 98th Congress will recall that we considered the status of the Nellis range and related matters at a hearing on August 6, 1964. “By way of background let me recapitulate matters discussed at that hearing and some later developments. “At the 1984 hearing we were presented with the issue of what some witnesses described as the seizure by the Air Force of more than 89,000 acres of public lands outside but adjacent to the Nellis south range. In fact, I will go further and say the illegal seizure by the Air Force of these public lands and the illegal exclusion of the rightful owners of various properties that were located on them or within them.