No Two-Way Communications Allowed During National Emergencies Except by Established Groups

a reply to: rickymouse

Remember Ricky, Obama made it so ALL COMMUNICATIONS can be restricted or banned in an emergency situation. This would mean private WiFi networks, including community mesh-nets. Land lines are also included.

a reply to: Irishhaf and whitewave

Yeah, stealth techniques. There are quite a few that would work. I've been posting many ideas on my MCBRN forum on Zetaboards. I'll be working more on that as well as putting this new information on there.

Double post! Darn it!

Oh well. Yeah, hide base antennas, use an antenna matcher on your car radio antenna, use low wattage output and horizontal line of sight directional antennas, change frequencies often and times of transmission, use common jargon and 10 codes with different meanings, etc. Encrypt messages and use Morse code, they have freeware programs that will make text into and out of Morse code signals. There are many ideas for stealth coms.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

That's cool.

I'm in Miami. And it's fairly rare that I see antennas. When I do it stick out.

I know very little about this subject, so please excuse if this question is dumb.

In a SHTF scenario, would it be possible for the gov. to effectively black out communications by hijacking every single frequency with a repeating message?

No matter what frequency you tune to, the message is the same. "Stay calm, help is coming, etc." Is there a way to bypass/override this situation?

originally posted by: seaswine
I know very little about this subject, so please excuse if this question is dumb.

In a SHTF scenario, would it be possible for the gov. to effectively black out communications by hijacking every single frequency with a repeating message?

No matter what frequency you tune to, the message is the same. "Stay calm, help is coming, etc." Is there a way to bypass/override this situation?

I imagine if the government had the foresight to install the right antennas on all the cell tower arrays, that they could get enough coverage to do just that. Of course, the same could be done with a network of communication satellites given enough output. Even with all that I doubt they could cover the entire U.S., leaving pockets where two-way communications is still possible. Also, many frequencies would be left open for emergency government uses, so ultimately, just certain frequencies would likely be disrupted.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I've never heard of any ruling that enforces an emergency all frequency radio silence law, esp. with regards to unlicensed radio frequencies (MURS, FRS, and CB). If such a law exists, likely this would include the WiFi frequencies as well.

They can write whatever they want to on a sheet of paper. In the end, what will physically prevent use of this equipment? They certainly can't jam the entire spectrum, unless they want to hardwire everything and shoot themselves in the foot (and risk someone with a pair of cutters thwarting them - you can't guard miles of cable)

Most likely, you can easily ignore their deluded mandates during such an emergency and communicate as your own personal needs dictate. I'd worry more about doing what you have to do and not what some moron in a suit and tie thinks you should do.

So, a few things to remember about various RF broadcast transmissions...

Lower frequencies have better propagation beyond line of sight. Some of them have over the horizon and even global capability, particularly those in the lower end of the Amateur band. These require expensive and big equipment to operate, but they are very difficult to 'triangulate' locations on.

Higher frequencies such as those in the UHF (some of the higher HAM bands) and 800MHz band (typically the ones used for Public Safety) all require repeaters for anything much beyond line of sight. Virtually everything in the 800MHz band are also strictly licensed, so operator locations are well known even before they even start transmitting (so no triangulation required).

Anything above this area of the spectrum is strictly line of sight.

Personal radios and walkie talkies have very limited range, usually not more than a few hundred feet. They also have very limited ERP (power).

Cell phones all require repeater towers (it's the very essence of 'cellular'). From a regulatory perspective these are easy to shut down.

Can the US (deep state, or whomever) actually "block" RF? Yes, the military does it all the time, it's called 'jamming' or electronic countermeasures. Russia has been doing it for decades as have other nations. Can they block it "all"? Theoretically, yes, but it would would be extremely difficult and require tremendous resources and is therefore unlikely. Plus, electronic jamming is directed at the receiver more so than the broadcaster, and all the same propagation rules above apply to jamming just like broadcasting because it's just another form of broadcasting.

So in summary, I think the OP's question really breaks down into two different categories fundamentally...

1. Preventing people from talking to one another, and ...

2. Preventing various sources of media from distributing any messages other than those strictly approved for distribution by a government authority.

I think in a true national emergency situation #1 above will really be a non-issue, at least by the hand of the government. There will already be significant RF communications degradation as a result of the disaster itself, so not much government action is required. The larger issue (in my mind anyway) is #2 the controlling of media and the narrative. While there are "some" credible reasons to do this, they are few, and it's a very slippery slope! This type of control can quickly fall into the realm of propaganda and control (i.e. a bad thing).

The other thing you have to consider is where (in the RF spectrum) 90% of the world communicates. With very few exceptions this is line of sight or very short range (in the case of WiFi). Most of the longer range mediums have fallen from favor due to their low data transmission rates / capabilities. (People just can't survive without their Fail-Book and texting).

Just thought I'd share.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I'd be willing to bet the gov. has had the foresight to install such counter-measures.

Yes, covering the entire US with a "blackout" would be nearly impossible, but if the only effective comms exist in bumflip nowhere Montana, us plebs would be pretty screwed.

Your post has really given me a lot to think about. I'm sure 98% of effective civilian electronic communications could be cut with the flip of a switch somewhere deep in the pentagon.

a reply to: seaswine

No, unless they intend to effectively jam their own communications. The only alternative would be hard-lines, which are vulnerable to attack/interception/deception/etc. Any frequency they leave "open" could be utilized by those they seek to silence.

Besides, in such a scenario, those of us carrying out our Constitutionally mandated duties would have no choice but to ignore any such laws and communicate as needed for the real/legal/Constitutional/actual national defense.

Make sure you don't give these bureaucratic boneheads too much credit. They're far from omnipotent, and are fairly incompetent on an individual level. The only thing that makes them half-way decent is the exorbitant amount of money they extort from Citizens on a regular basis (under threat of extreme violence, no less)

a reply to: seaswine

Remember, electronic countermeasures require lots of power (like LOTS). In order to be effective they have to have the same or greater signal to noise ratio as the broadcast they are trying to defeat, otherwise they are ineffective. When you start scaling this equation to include "all" forms of RF propagation it quickly becomes impossible. You can really only effectively target the most likely areas of the spectrum to be used for comms.

a reply to: JBurns

Good points. Id be right beside you and those "mandated duties" if such a situation were to arise.

You're right to not give too much credit to TPTB, but too little would result in dire consequences. Unlike us, their resources are nearly unlimited. They may leave some ground based channels open for their own emergencies, but main comms would take place via satellite, coupled with various encryption techniques.

Technology will quickly flip from best friend to worst enemy should something extreme were to occur.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

So with a more powerful transmitter, you could "drown out" the "noise"?

That does make a lot of sense now that I typed it out haha

a reply to: seaswine

Yes, they are just competing transmissions. Simplistically, just one person trying to scream over the top of another. Actual electronic countermeasures are far more sophisticated than this, but it serves to illustrate a basic point.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Big horkin novice here...

Is there any chance that the newer counter measures might not be as effective against the low tech side of comms?

since most military communication I am aware of curves up the band, versus what us lowly plebians can actually use.

a reply to: Irishhaf

Yes and no, the technology is certainly there, but the lower technologies would probably be left alone until they became a threat. There would be priorities based on threat level. Lower power / short distance comms would have a much lower priority than long range ones which reach much larger audiences (in the case of broadcasting).

Just look at the power generation equipment which has to be carried aboard combat electronic countermeasure / warfare aircraft. Just the generators alone create a huge weight penalty...and they're only targeting selected areas of the spectrum (guidance radars, tracking radars and selected comms, etc.)

I was going to mention that you can get over the top of a jamming signal, provided you have the power output or the jamming signal is weak enough. You could likely get a Morse code signal tone over a jamming signal and be able to decode it on the other end. It would be an interesting experiment you could perform with three stations, two trying to communicate and one used as a jamming device.

Of course, if you achieved that, your signal could be intercepted by other stations as well, so your Morse code would need to be encrypted. A Vigenere Table (an alternating substitution alphabet table) can be used to encrypt your message. There is freeware to do this for you, so you wouldn't need to go through the process one letter at a time manually.

originally posted by: MichiganSwampBuck
a reply to: rickymouse

Remember Ricky, Obama made it so ALL COMMUNICATIONS can be restricted or banned in an emergency situation. This would mean private WiFi networks, including community mesh-nets. Land lines are also included.

So, they used precedence from that event to make all communications restricted? Oh wow, how Democrat

But wait! All those calls trying to sell you a cruise or help you fix your compromised windows will still be coming in. It is impossible to get rid of those. I do not believe in miracles.

I wonder if the old G.W.E.N. towers could be accessed even though the air force modified them for gps capabilities? They were designed to withstand an EMP and to accept communications via low frequencies.

en.wikipedia.org...

Another newbie question.

How would they be able to triangulate a location of a cb communication, on a vehicle moving? Say a golf cart or other type of ATV?

Seems it would be more trouble than it was worth.