IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Command Override, Freaking me out much

Travellerev
post Sep 15 2007, 11:06 PM
Post #1





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 82
Joined: 21-June 07
Member No.: 1,207



I found this via Veterans for 911 truth.
It is way out there but before you decide that it is nonsense bare with me and read the lot. My eyes started to cloud over with whoa this is too much around about the time the writer starts on about standing wave technology to change weather patterns, but my husband, who is an electrical engineer, an industrial electrician and a life long Tesla fan imideatly caught on and told me that Tesla had been experimenting with this technology. We googled a few links and lo and behold this stuff is really out there. So I submit this piece here, because even if this stuff is fifty percent true it freaks me out.

COMMAND OVERRIDE

How Chinese Military Hackers Took Over A Nuclear-Armed B52

By William Thomas

The story sounded like a sequel to “Dr. Strangelove”. Leaked by the Pentagon's news service, Military Affairs to quell scuttlebutt racing through the ranks-and perhaps warn the world-a U.S. Air Force B-52 strategic bomber “mistakenly” loaded with six nuclear cruise missiles took off from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota on August 30, 2007 and flew for more than three hours over at least five states, before landing at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.

The mistake was so egregious, the National Command Authority comprising President George BU.S.h and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates were quickly informed. The SecDef has since been assured that nuclear weapons “were part of a routine transfer between the two bases… at no time was the public in danger.”

Both statements are false.

Readmore
more
more
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chek
post Sep 16 2007, 03:54 AM
Post #2





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 187
Joined: 24-October 06
Member No.: 157



OK, I was kinda going along with it all - up until the USAF stand alone computers being hacked through the electricity network.

Yes, that is a viable method of networking, but you still need a filter and a modem to connect the PC to a network. And those, or anything like it, aren't built in - even covertly - to any PC power supply I've ever seen.

There may well be more giveaways to the more knowledgeable (the crew not aware that they were nuclear armed? Gimme a break!) but my overall verdict would be intricate though not terribly well constructed hooey.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lasthorseman
post Sep 16 2007, 08:18 AM
Post #3





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 848
Joined: 23-December 06
Member No.: 360



This Chinese hackers get into anything is obvious bullshit and perhaps even this flight of nuclear warheads too. Several times now, measure by measure "incidents" "happen" which do immeasurable damage to the US. Abu Grahib and the torture rendition flights......leaked information and photos. Now it's nuclear flights, which serves mostly to lower public opinion of the government. Are they working toward replacing our government with a world government? You bet.

Now Tesla.
As an engineer and long time Tesla fan I can relate to this story.
Tesla claimed to have found the secret of unlimited free energy. His problem was that to build and prove his theory funding had to be secured from some asshole named J.P Morgan. Being the ultimate capitalist J.P. was impressed with Tesla's work but was rumored to have said....
"That's all well and good Mr Tesla, but tell me where I install the meter".

Another subject related to HAARP.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5003186.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Travellerev
post Sep 16 2007, 09:30 AM
Post #4





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 82
Joined: 21-June 07
Member No.: 1,207



Added to my previous post, the mainstream newspapers from New Zealand have reported an attack on the Government computers this week.
it was also reported that the Chinese were involved. While I would be relieved to accept the nuclear hijack as a hoax it is now a fact that multiple countries including the US have reported attacks on government computers.

This post has been edited by Travellerev: Sep 16 2007, 09:36 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Travellerev
post Sep 16 2007, 09:39 AM
Post #5





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 82
Joined: 21-June 07
Member No.: 1,207



QUOTE (chek @ Sep 16 2007, 02:54 AM)
There may well be more giveaways to the more knowledgeable (the crew not aware that they were nuclear armed? Gimme a break!)

The way I read it the pilots thought they were following a legitimate order, and were fully aware they were carrying live nukes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Sep 16 2007, 11:04 AM
Post #6


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



This sounds like a cover story to me -- a far-fetched one at that. Whenever I come across a story that is based on an anonymous and unverifiable source, I place it in the 'hmmmm' category of my mind. All good disinfo has a high percentage of credibility -- and I'm not sure this even gets to that level. This is sort of like (but not as good as) the PROMIS software speculations and the whole PTEC scandal that Indera Singh blew the whistle on. The implications of these stories gets everyone off the hook -- the responsible parties are external threats, invisible (presumed in this instance to be Chinese) hackers who have infiltrated and can shut down or control our entire national security apparatus. Thus, no matter what happens, it can always be blamed on 'someone else'. It could just as easily be argued that 9/11 was orchestrated the same way -- by anonymousness orders emanating through secure channels. No one in the chain of command had a clue what was going on. And they all got promotions after the fact.

R i g h t.


doh1.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
André
post Sep 16 2007, 11:20 AM
Post #7





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,702
Joined: 22-October 06
From: Montreal
Member No.: 133



This belongs in the alternative theories forum.

Beware of outrageous conspiracy theories hat attempt to shift the blame away from the guilty... wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Sep 16 2007, 11:52 AM
Post #8





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,743
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



QUOTE (André @ Sep 16 2007, 05:20 PM)
This belongs in the alternative theories forum.

Beware of outrageous conspiracy theories hat attempt to shift the blame away from the guilty... wink.gif

Agreed, André!

moving
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
post Sep 16 2007, 01:59 PM
Post #9





Group:
Posts: 0
Joined: --
Member No.: 0



I will say that there is a new way to access the internet and it goes through the electricity lines and there are modems for this. It is not available everywhere and is being tested in certain places here in the U.S. If the government is using this type of internet access through the electric lines, then it could be possible, but if they were stand-alone computers with no modem access to any type of network, electric or cable, then it's not possible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Jun 12 2008, 04:32 AM
Post #10



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Lasthorseman @ Sep 16 2007, 06:18 AM) *
Now Tesla.
As an engineer and long time Tesla fan I can relate to this story.
Tesla claimed to have found the secret of unlimited free energy. His problem was that to build and prove his theory funding had to be secured from some asshole named J.P Morgan. Being the ultimate capitalist J.P. was impressed with Tesla's work but was rumored to have said....
"That's all well and good Mr Tesla, but tell me where I install the meter".

Another subject related to HAARP.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5003186.html

As a scientist/engineer and long time Tesla fan, let me say:

http://www.setileague.org/editor/bpl.htm
-----
Broadband Over Power Lines

Charles Osborne, K4CSO
President, Society of Amateur Radio Astronomers
cosborne AT pari DOTT edu

This month's hot topic is an FCC Notice of Inquiry called "Broadband Over Power Lines" [FCC ET Docket No.03-104]. Most of the time I ignore FCC NOI and NPRM (Notices of Proposed Rule Making) that are clearly going to generate a maelstrom of negative comments. They usually disappear for six months and get reintroduced after radical changes. But let's not trust that to happen in this case. See http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/04/30/2 for further info on how to file comments with the FCC electronically.

You see the FCC has touted BPL as a potential way to get high speed Internet to the masses. Cable-TV and DSL are only available to citizens located close to cities and high speed points of presence for the phone company. But everyone has AC power lines. So the FCC thinks this will be the answer to getting the Internet to more people who are still on slow speed dial-up. Politically this sounds great. Technically it has ominous implications. Early tests indicate it could raise the noise floor +30 dB above galactic background at HF. You won't be doing much JOVE / Solar 20MHz work, or even regular ham radio under those conditions. The chances for regular ham radio stations to interfere backwards into such a network is also enormous.

One overlooked problem is feeding the bandwidth into your area. Every transformer constitutes a block to high speed signals. So somewhere close to the end users, even higher bandwidth needs to be available to be divided out. Sounds like a job for fiber. Yet the locales that this is really targeting probably don't have fiber or they'd have DSL. This may be yet another idea that works at small scales, but becomes a real mess, system engineering wise, when widely deployed. Give it ten years, and 2.4 GHz wireless could also be an example of that.

Ever walked by your PC monitor and picked up buzzing interference on a ham handie talkie, scanner, or AM radio? Monitors have steadily become faster and higher bandwidth devices themselves. But as their bandwidths passed 100 MHz the SVGA cables started looking like good antennas. Ferrite beads on the cords today help make them pass FCC Part-15 emission specifications.

But what if the antennas become power lines, distributed over your whole neighborhood via everyone's AC wiring? The local pole to house wiring could look like a pretty good HF antenna. Anything more than a tenth wavelength or with significant VSWR will start to radiate signal. This is very obvious to those of us who have designed RF circuit boards, finding that compact circuits, matched impedances, and ground planes for shielding are needed to keep the signals from jumping from one trace to another or radiating. Aside from using all underground wiring to get to the house, there's very little we can do to stop a 1 MHz or 10 MHz signal from radiating from house wiring. In fact there are significant regulations on computers and appliances to keep them from radiating back out into that same AC wiring at low frequencies.

In an odd twist the FCC turned down a request to create a new ham band at 136 kHz due to pressure from the power utilities who already use VLF to send control and monitoring signals between high tension line substations over the powerlines. The utilities were afraid that a few hundred 50watt ham stations scattered across the country would interfere with their substation controls. Guess they weren't consulted about BPL. With millions of potential interferers coast to coast, once they figure this out the utilities will likely also be on the FCC's back for even proposing the idea.

Cable TV systems constantly fight broken shields, unterminated lines, or poorly crimped F connectors turning the cable into an antenna. When this happens, FAA airport approach frequencies, and local television stations are jammed by the cable system signals on those frequencies. With BPL the AM radio band could easily become unusable for over the air reception of all but the strongest signals.

Digital signals are insidious for making harmonics. A 48 MHz PC clock crystal can easily be received all the way to 10 GHz and beyond. So what's to make the BPL low frequency signals and all their harmonics stay on unshielded wire? There are products out there specifically made to use house wiring as a hidden ham HF antenna. In the case of BPL, by some mystery the FCC thinks it will not cause harmonics and excessive radiated interference. Tests show significant effects even in the 327 MHz radio astronomy frequencies.

The evaluation tests on typical house wiring indicate that one would have to be 219 km away to drop below the ITU-R RA769-1 recommended signal levels in the radio astronomy bands at HF. House wiring looks like a -30 dBi antenna. Worse, if everyone in your neighborhood is on this system, the noise power from many sources will add. The overall effect the FCC is shooting for is that everyone's noise floor gets degraded just a little. But with radio astronomy being down in the -200 dBm range, the desired to undesired signal to noise ratio will be at a disadvantage.

I'm hoping some of you will send comments to the FCC in response to this NOI. Do not call them idiots, or make irrational "You can't do this!" statements. They are the FCC. They can do it, with a simple stroke of the pen. Arguments saying it will violate Part-15 limits have been met with FCC comments like "Well, we'll change part 15." So expect anything that provides: "economic stimulus", "looks good politically" to the most constituents, and adds "competition" to the market place to get a speedy route through the regulatory process. We have until mid June for your well thought out, cleverly articulated comments to reach the FCC.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th January 2020 - 10:06 AM