It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

-TinFoil Contingency Plan-

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Greetings conspiracy buffs.

there has been growing concerns surrounding the "kill switch" that is being implemented to shut down our internets. it would be foolish for one to think they would go to all this trouble, and not use it. So at this point....after all the "maybes" and "what ifs"... i think its safe to say we need nothing short of a full scale backup plan.

Communications are a necessity. And now that our main means of long distance communication has been compromised, we need a new means of congregating ideas, and relaying information. This infrastructure will be crucial during a SHTF scenario, so it must be established beforehand.... and trust me when i say....they will shut the net down when we need it most...

Now then....the subject of Alternative communications has been discussed many times, and out of all the brainstorming there was one particular idea that stood out in my eyes as possibly viable. i would like to discuss specifically "Packet Radio".

in the early 80's there was a lesser known faction of the Amateur radio scene called "Packet Radio". PR was essentially the first "wireless internet", and worked by transmitting data packets over the air.

one would setup a special modem to their PC, and a transceiver (big walkie talkie) to the modem. with the necessary software, one could easily transmit HTTP data, FTP, email, etc... now-a-day they have whats called a TNC(terminal node controller) that does everything for you but its a little more costly @ around $100.

once transmitted, the signal is received by either another terminal or a repeater station. the signal is then repackaged and re-broadcast further down the network.each packet of data is simply relayed from terminal to terminal.

Short of a power failure, this cannot be "shut down". the infrastructure already exists throughout the Ham networks.With a few volunteers in key regional areas, one could easily set up a functioning network. a simple Bulliten Board System would suffice.

ideally, at the heart of this network would lie the main hub. Alex Jones and infowars is a perfect example of an ideal main hub, because they are located right in the center of the nation(austin) and they have the ability to broadcast via shortwave. one could broadcast instructions over shortwave, and reach everybody who knew to tune to that frequency in the event of a Net-Kill.

(PROS)
------------
-we would have our own internet that could not be shut down, whilest the rest of the nation sits in the dark.
-no service fees

(CONS)
--------------
-slow
-insecure
-takes logistical effort
-must purchase necessary equipment
-supposed to have callsign. im not sure how enforced that is or will be during a SHTF



to put it into perspective, the network as it stands right now is already vast. you can also access the real internet through a gateway at the university of california - san diego (although that would be inaccessible during a netkill). The point is the network already exists. we simply have to join it.

What say you ATS?

viable continuity of internet plan?

or overkill/lost cause?

keep in mind they can keep the internet down for i think up to 6 months

edit on 23-10-2010 by RelentlessLurker because: spellering



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
That sounds great. Do you have a website with all the info to set this up? If not that would be ideal.
What a fantastic idea. I'm totally going to follow up on this. Thanks for the thread!

Here is a link to gut a router to make a TNC(Terminal Node Controller)
Hack A router
edit on 23-10-2010 by Jumbocat because: added link

edit on 23-10-2010 by Jumbocat because: correction



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by RelentlessLurker
 


I ran a BBS many years ago. It was 'a way' of communicating before the NET became available to your average person and continued in more rural areas where it was difficult to gain NET access. I had fun with it but it was limited by telephone access. Needing multiple phone modems and lines - one for each connection got expensive. After some time I couldn't continue maintaining it as the phone bills simply sent me into poverty. But that was the days before cell phones, it was all land lines. I don't really see how setting it up using a cell phone connection would be any different. Using HAM radio, which I also dabbled in, would work, but how many would or could afford the equipment to set up a HAM setup and hook it into a PC with BBS software.

People ARE ingenious however, and will find a way to communicate. It is possible to set up HAM networks as a type of "backbone" and then use a second tier of BBS's to disseminate the data to a wider network.In the waining days of the BBS networks a lot of the data transfered did come from packet networks that had NET connections then fed it into the BBS network. It doesn't take a cutting edge PC to set up a box to do this. Even a basic DOS OS or Linux would run the box. Many of us geek wads have numerous old computers sitting in closets that would easily do the job. I cleaned out an old box of pack rat computer junk recently and had an old 1200 baud modem in the box LOL!) The stuff to do this IS available.
edit on 23-10-2010 by Emptiness Dancing because: 2



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:26 AM
link   
what about cb radios?? We could keep in contact with those right?! Do you know how pissed off everyone will be if the gov shuts down the net, I know my bro would probably go crazy!! We are the generation that grew up with the net!! I'll never forget my well to do friend and her family got the net when it was AOL 1.0 back in 1992!! I was 7!! My family didnt get the net till I was 11 because computers were very exspensive back then and the first service we had was netzero I believe then we upgraded to roadrunner in 1997... wow... I might have to research this more often how can you shut down the net? But cutting off the servers? Or the companies that service it?



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Introduction to Packet Radio this guy explains everything really simply.

Free Bulliten Board software for packet radio.

worldwide network gateways

Packet Radio training course a little more advanced but also more up-to-date

Equiptment





posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Emptiness Dancing
 



yes! the old dial-in style BBS's are exactly what we need to model this around.

actual BBS lines would work too, but its still up in the air whether the phonelines will be down or not. its my understanding that they can shutout all IP traffic and still keep the lines up, but dont quote me on that...



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
For whatever crazy reason (I am crazy) about a year or two ago I started looking at homing pidgeons.

What I found was that keepers of homing pidgeons were being victimized all over the world. They were finding their flocks dead, coops burned dead (and birds) ect.

I wasn't really posting on these boards then. I remember thinking at the time that someone is trying to destroy an potential for an alternative message network to be able to develop quickly.

I watched it in the news, searching every day on the topic, but then drifted away from it and put it in a back of my mind file. Then they start harping on getting the president a kill order for the internet and stuff, and I start thinking about all those burnt up birds.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by StarrGazer25
 


they will shut us out at the service provider level. you'll simply not be able to establish a connection. unless your dialing out of the country then you might.

CB's, HAMS, and other forms of DX, are fine at the local level. but what if you want to relay a message to somebody in a different state?

even if you have the means of doing it, theres no guarantee that there will be a person on the other end to receive your message. with a Bullitan board system, we could leave messages for anybody to view whenever they get the chance.

just like ATS. a BBS is no different from a msgboard/forum except that they are usually more simplistic.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by hadriana
 


wow, that sets off all kinds of tinfoil alarms in my mind.

it makes sense though...they cant wiretap pigeons...



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by RelentlessLurker
reply to post by Emptiness Dancing
 



yes! the old dial-in style BBS's are exactly what we need to model this around.

actual BBS lines would work too, but its still up in the air whether the phonelines will be down or not. its my understanding that they can shutout all IP traffic and still keep the lines up, but dont quote me on that...


Phone lines would be the weakest link. Easily controllable by TPTB. The network would have to be engineered in such a way that the average joe could connect and get a data transfer. Being able to connect with a cell phone would be a setup in the right direction. Use the cell phone to connect to the packet radio HAM backbone primary tier BBS's, download the data packets and transfer them to multiple PC's with BBS servers for secondary tier data dissemination - kinda like a router network. For the end user BBS client software terminal for your average joe to be able to access the data by connecting to the secondary tier network BBS's.

Just my thoughts off the top of my bald head.
edit on 23-10-2010 by Emptiness Dancing because: 2



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Communications are the most important thing.
They can easily jam radio communications.

They are so advanced they won't make it easy.
If the PTB really wanted to stop the public from communcating, the public would have to use very old methods.
Crazy Magicians and Wizards with the magickal alphabets to call the angels and numerology lists and singing bards might become common again. Eye of newt and toe of frog (Let's meet down by the old bog)



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
We'd need to decentralize it. Otherhow, the whole network could be cut in pieces just by shutting down one crucial station.
Is the technologoy capable of transmitting huge amounts of data?
And what about purposely interfering transmitters?



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Emptiness Dancing
 


interesting idea. i see a few pro's and cons right off the bat.

useing a cell in place of a modem, and cell towers/sites in place of repeater nodes would give you a wider range of connectivity.

however, you are then at the mercy of the carrier, and the congestion of the network. which takes you back to square 1. we need the control to be at the user level or TPTB will just keep shutting us out.

transceiver would have more stand-alone range than a cell phone. but the vast network of cell sites easily makes up for that.

good ideas.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
I like the HAM radio idea and also CB. Seems like they might want to kill cell phones, too if they really wanted to stop communication. I'm not really sure how much a HAM radio costs. My uncle has one. I'll ask.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by incarnating
We'd need to decentralize it. Otherhow, the whole network could be cut in pieces just by shutting down one crucial station.
Is the technologoy capable of transmitting huge amounts of data?
And what about purposely interfering transmitters?


If the primary tier packet radio HAM BBS's were multiple, global and set up ina RAID (i know wrong word) type setup mirroring each other there would be no centralization.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by hadriana
 


to effectively jam the entire network they would literally have to be transmitting at every single node site.

this would take way too much manpower, i dont even think its possible even if they wanted to.

on top of that, they would have to jam such a wide range of frequencies, they wouldnt have any bands left for their own use.

plus, the feds only have certain bands alloted for their own use. all local governments have their own bands, and while the FCC keeps tabs on everything, they cant shut down a towns only means of directing emergency services.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   
One if by land
two if by sea
The old ways are the only ways possible I see

The PTB will control all the technology if they want to. The only hope anyone would have if they did that would be if we really had a major split with at least some soliders/police/business owners taking a stand as well. OTherwise, any communication would have to be so covert - if if it was open, IE lights - that no one would notice it.

If TPTB turn off the net, because they don't want us communicating, I think they can handle cells and other systems as well. Not sure what use a Wildcat bbs will do then. Might have better luck with a secret telegraph system.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by RelentlessLurker
reply to post by Emptiness Dancing
 


interesting idea. i see a few pro's and cons right off the bat.

useing a cell in place of a modem, and cell towers/sites in place of repeater nodes would give you a wider range of connectivity.

however, you are then at the mercy of the carrier, and the congestion of the network. which takes you back to square 1. we need the control to be at the user level or TPTB will just keep shutting us out.

transceiver would have more stand-alone range than a cell phone. but the vast network of cell sites easily makes up for that.

good ideas.


True the cell networks would be under the control of TPTB. But it's also a technology that TPTB need and will maintain. It can be exploited to piggyback a communications network. ( like hacking their matrix)

My thinking is that to be successful, your average not so technically inclined persan would have to be able to access the data and and use it without huge investment or technicality.. There are a lot of good people out there that are, as I call it, mouse spastic. Gotta make it easy.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by RelentlessLurker
 


I see what you are saying. If you just want to communicate..yeah.
You could always bounce it around frequencies too, with a retrans system.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by incarnating
 


the beauty of packet radio is its decentralized. one of the main functions of the TNC is to find the best "data route" for transmission.

it piggybacks off other traffic kind of like how Bittorrent works. although thats a bad example because even bittorrent is centralized at the torrent tracker.


and yes ive heard they've got it up to 2mbps. although the high speed stuff is more costly, the technology is there.

by the way PR has its own ip range 44.0.0.1




top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join