Anonymous ID: 36462c Oct. 26, 2021, 9:42 a.m. No.14861308   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Federal Emergency Plan D / Presidential Emergency Action Documents (PEADs)

 

Federal Emergency Plan D-Minus was a plan developed by the United States in the 1950s to guide the federal government in the immediate aftermath of a catastrophic nuclear attack. Plan D-Minus was part of the National Plan for Emergency Preparedness, which also included Mobilization Plan C (providing direction for federal planning in the three weeks prior to a global nuclear war).

 

Federal Emergency Plan D-Minus was designed for activation in the aftermath of either an anticipated or surprise attack of a “devastating” nature. It envisioned a scenario based on what was described as a major attack against the mainland United States involving the near-simultaneous, or closely sequential, detonation of several hundred nuclear warheads.

 

Plan D-Minus assumed a nuclear attack against the continental United States resulting in 48 million immediate fatalities and a significant number of non-fatal casualties. Primary government command and control facilities, such as the White House and the Pentagon, would be destroyed and emergency relocation facilities would be rendered minimally operable as a result of physical damage and the effects of radiation sickness on staff. At the same time, nothing but critical communications would survive and even those would be crippled due to action by enemy saboteurs. Industrial and agricultural production would be severely disrupted, society would fragment into local gangs, and the financial system would completely collapse.

 

Immediately following an attack under D-Minus conditions, the National Security Council’s Office of Emergency Planning would initiate and then decentralize its primary post-attack programs, including anti-hoarding and resource conservation measures, to those state and local governments that remained functioning. Meanwhile, emergency federal departments responsible for the most critical aspects of recovery would be formed and staffed from the “Executive Reserve,” a 1,700-person group of public sector employees who had previously received specialized management training. Heads of emergency departments were private sector subject-matter specialists who had been chosen in advance. A series of pre-drafted executive orders would be immediately signed by the President of the United States authorizing extraordinary measures, including preventative detention of persons on the FBI Security Index and suspension of publication of the Federal Register.

 

https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/federal-emergency-plan-d-presidential-emergency-action-documents-peads/

 

https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/fbifiles/66-HQ-19016a.pdf

Anonymous ID: 36462c Oct. 26, 2021, 10:13 a.m. No.14861481   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1588 >>1598 >>1599 >>1613 >>1629 >>1733

>>14861367

 

-1 Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression Anonymous 02/04/15 (Wed) 00:26:34 ID: 78be3a No. 1125527

 

Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The

success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

 

  1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.

  2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.

  3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through

"rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")

  1. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them

lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.

  1. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and

adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people

you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.

  1. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out

to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).

  1. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.

  2. Dismiss the charges as "old news."

  3. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only

to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage

control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.

  1. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.

  2. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If

evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves

the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.

  1. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?

  2. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.

  3. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.

  4. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.

  5. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football.

A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.

  1. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government

and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical

letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

 

Post last edited at 2015-02-04 06:27:07