On February 17th you will obey the NWO.

Well in the US, under Part 15 of the FCC rules, anyone can transmit a signal that is 100mv at 1 meter from the emitting antenna, on any frequency, and as long as it does not interfere with other signals.

Same is true with the digital standard.

Cheers!!!

reply to post by RFBurns


Do you know anything about blocking a digital signal.

If there is a law against it I reckon that there is cause for concern as they are using mobile phone signals in the UK to spy on citizens in their homes.
I also suspect that Digital television is part of this plan in the United Kingdom as well as mobile phones.

www.guardian.co.uk...




[edit on 10-11-2008 by XXXN3O]

reply to post by StargateSG7


Great explanation. Just don't get in the way of the thundering herds as they stampede towards conspiracy.

Blocking a digital transmission is even more easier than blocking an analog signal, simply because in the digital realm, the transmitting signal is at a lower power rate than the analog counterpart. The analog signal is linear, thus when you see a picture that goes from dark to light, the transmitting power output increases as the picture goes to black, and decreases as it goes to bright.

In the digital transmitted signal, the RF signal is constant, it does not change in power amplitude. Thus you can effectively interfere with it with less power.

But any RF signal can be intercepted or blocked, or even replaced.

Cheers!!!!

As far as monitoring goes with cell phones and the like, well that ability has been around since the first camera cell phones were introduced. Some may have wondered why their cell phone needs more than normal charging times often..well its because a cell phone, or any device that sends a signal, consumes more power transmitting than it does receiving.

I always keep my cell phone's camera blocked with a piece of tape unless I need to use the camera function. And I always have my web camera unplugged unless I need to use it. Yes..if they wanted to spy on anyone via the internet and your webcam, they can certianly do that too. But dont worry, they got other methods of spying that doesnt require a physical connection or tapping into your cell phone.

Cheers!!!!

this is not a big thing people, it just makes it easier for the govt to watch you when you turn on your tv. dont be paranoid here, its ok for big brother to watch you. he can see you better and understand the problem and take care of you. ok. dont you like to feel safe in your home. they have a method of plugging into your tv so it acts like a camera and makes a more clearer picture. every tv screen, labtop, phone. everyone who knows electronic signals knows this. you too know , that every time you plug in a camera on your tv and point the camera at yourself you can see and hear yourself. well , they developed a way to use the tv screen and speaker to hear and see you. this has been in effect already for 10 years now. people just finding out about it now. so get over it. big brother is already in your home. the govt has already made tvs equipped to do this, and this new system just makes it easier.

Heh! As I said, they got far better means of listening to you, watching you and even knowing if your toilet paper is wound upside or downside without tapping into your tv or cell phone.

Now for those who think their brand spanking new 50 inch widescreen digital tv is a covert government spy tool, there is a simple solution.

Keep it unplugged.

Cheers!!!

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Best thing to do would be just give up on the TV..nothing but complete garbage coming out of it now. With MST3K gone, there really is not reason to keep watching it.

no you're wrong .

there's the Kardashian ..person.. show.... thing..
don't you ever watch the Kardashian show to see what hijinx they're up to?
oh those meddling kids!


-

reply to post by estrip


Well as a Sony certified technician and degreed electronics engineer, I can tell you that there is no tv set, analog or digital, that is manufactured to allow government to monitor you through the screen and speaker.

And Ive worked on many brands of consumer electronics as well as professional and industrial electronic equipment.

As I said..government has far better methods in which to monitor anyone, anywhere, and at any time, with or without a tv set in front of you.

edit to add

For instance...an infrared laser beam can be used to listen to sound simply by bouncing it off a window, as well as used to penetrate solid objects to detect heat signatures, in effect "painting" a picture to display on a screen, hence "watch" you and "hear" you.

Just one example.


Cheers!!!!

[edit on 10-11-2008 by RFBurns]

Originally posted by RFBurns
reply to post by estrip

 

As I said..government has far better methods in which to monitor anyone, anywhere, and at any time, with or without a tv set in front of you.

using Sentinel Spheres right?


-

the only way this could really be considered a conspiracy is if they got rid of all channels and had just one "Government" channel. the DTV Transition is not something that they just decided to do yesterday, this has been almost 15 years in the making. For once the government might be on to something good. plus i thought everyone wanted Change...

God forbid we not have anything to complain about here...

[edit on 10-11-2008 by drsmooth23]

February 2009 will be the digital TV change-over. Why? It is a matter of control by the government. They want control over the airwaves: TV airwaves and Fairness Doctrine - control over the radio and TV and the internet. By the way, who will be the final say over what is right or wrong? As for the digital TV change: the government wants to have access to the switch. If there was a full gov. takeover and mass chaos with rioting, with bank closures and the credit were to totally freeze up, those of us who would go into survival mode would want to monitor the outside news from media sources we could somewhat trust (Red Dawn). Guess what!?!? Before the digital switch, in the past we could have taken our old hunting camp TV's, with a coat hanger as an antenna, and had the ability to pick up some signals. They also have weaned us off of shortwave radios into digital shortwave radios and other computer-based radios. We have also become dependent upon our internet news sources. Cell phones are also controlled by digital sources. Remember after 9-11 how hard it was to get through to anyone? We would have no way of receiving updates from reliable outside news sources. Since February seems to be an important date in the mind of many people concerning the USA's financial collapse and tremendous panic with riots, and there is a suggestion that the higher officials in the government know of it (Biden and Colin Powell), this would be a good time to have a deadline for updating all TV's so no one panics when their TV's are shut down from normal air wave reception. Then they have complete control over every means of communicating and we are left at the mercy of the Socialist Un-United States of Obama. Please respond to this. It is a thought that has been on my mind that simply coincides with other events that others on this site have mentioned concerning Feb. 2009.

reply to post by Survivorman1969


I still dont see it. this goes back about 15 years, and we are just trying to show our superiority over japans tech with the switch. also, you forget to account that not all stations are owned by the super elite.

I am second in command at a small INDEPENDENT infomercial TV station. I awnser to my boss, the general manager/ head engineer.

at no point has the FCC come to the transmitter site and installed any sort of gear that could control our signal. we sell our time to people, and then we display their program. we ultimately decide what gets played and what we pass on.

on top of all that NOT ONE FCC representative has visited the station in over two years. our license is good for another 4 years i believe, so i doubt they will be coming before 2009.

amateurishly broadcasting from your home is heavily frowned upon anyways, but youtube has stepped up for that market.

as far a SIT-X survival, if you need news from a TV in the wilderness, you probably wont do much surviving.

thats just my opinion, anyways.

reply to post by drsmooth23


The govt. already has their State ran cable , it's called MSNBCCNNABC

reply to post by drsmooth23


The govt. already has their State ran cable , it's called MSNBCCNNABC

Talking about recievers


The end goal is better wireless broadband access in America


and FCC certification of consumer-ready devices

These will all have an effect on the amount of time it takes for white space devices to reach consumers.
perhaps people are customers


FCC Unanimously Approves Use of Television "White Spaces"

www.eff.org...


These will all have an effect on the amount of time it takes for white space devices to reach consumers.


so does that meen tv or radio or ??

geo location possible rfid

www.networkworld.com...

White spaces round 2: Microsoft's smart radios vs. Motorola's geo-location


"As part of the FCC's decision, power limits have been imposed on TVWS devices to ensure there is no interference to television signals and other permitted users within the television band. In particular, the FCC is requiring the first group of approved devices to include geo-location technology. Geo-location devices provide extremely accurate protection by using a database to determine available channels based on the precise location of the device. Motorola has been a leader in successfully developing and implementing the geo-location technology approved by the FCC. During the FCC's eight-month laboratory and field testing, Motorola's device was 100 percent successful in identifying television signals and preventing interference."




[edit on 16/11/2008 by martrax40]

[edit on 16/11/2008 by martrax40]

sorry for the last post i originally posted it here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 16/11/2008 by martrax40]

Ok. I can understand the logic behind why the digital switch is better, how it's been in the works for years, how it could possibly be motivated by our need to flex our superior technology (lol) or how it's just all about money. And I can understand that the NWO isn't necessarily involved (I'm not sure I even believe in an NWO).

However, what I can't understand is the incessant advertising for the DTV switch. The commercials seriously run several times per hour, and some channels have taken to running banners beneath currently playing shows again informing you of the DTV switch (the banners they use for breaking news when they don't want to interrupt the show). Seriously, if you haven't seen the commercials or heard of the DTV switch by now, then you really don't watch TV (or listen to the radio, or read news of any kind). On top of it all, the government is actually issuing coupons - up to two per household - to offset the cost of buying the converter box. It feels almost desperate, like everything possible is being done to ensure that people willingly make the switch. That is the thing I do not get. It that seems a little bizarre.

This transition is supposed to be for freeing up the old frequencies for use with other applications. Earlier this year, cell phone service providers had a huge bidding war on some of those blocks of frequencies. The biggest "bidding war" was the one b/w Google and Verizon.

just to mention,
with digital signal its much easier to send submessages hiden in frames or some other more advanced way but still recognized by target person or population