14 incredible facts about 9/11

[Peter Lemkin]

The 'confusion' [deliberate?] about the boarding gate is also another of many interesting features. Switched planes are usually thought of as being switched in flight [and there is reason to believe one or more such in-flight 'switch' took place...but it can be done at [before] take off too. The problem has always been to explain what was done with the 'people' said to have been on the 'flight'...and while this is a 'problem' to explain, it may not be an insurmountable problem. I don't plan to propose an answer...only do some thought experiments on that. It has long been noted that more than the usual number of defense/intelligence-related persons or their family members were on these flights and that planes were less full than would be expected statistically. While the hardest 'place' to go is the 'disposal' of the persons [they were in some way done away with], what if they needed or were rewarded to live on, but under new identities - perhaps even not in the US where they could be recognized. On the other hand, they could have been done away with...as 911 was a 'wet job' for sure...and what is a few more bodies to be done away with...even if they are from the same general side of the political team....it would not be the first time in history such was done. As for the switching of planes being possible in flight, it has long been noted that most of the 'hijacked planes' made their major diversion in direction at a radar blind spot, where clarity is minimal; ambiguity maximal - where two or more radar zones touch - and there would have to be a hand-off from one radar tracking zone to another. I believe there is quite a lot of detail on this on the 911 pilots for truth site, as well as elsewhere. I'll try to find some documentation.

I'm always saddened that so many are interested in JFK's assassination [and related]; but seem uninterested or daunted by 911. Yes, it was more complex [by an order of magnitude], but it is just as false and impossible according to the official scenario; both were, IMO, done for very similar reasons, by very similar types and form a Deep Political pattern from WWII to the day after tomorrow and beyond. There are even certain 'features' and 'entities' used in both - patsies, false-trails, disaster actors, planted 'evidence', doubles, standard magic tricks, misdirection of attention, controlled 'investigations' with pre-planned conclusions, denial of documents and evidence, testimony taken without being sworn in, post-event elimination or threatening of witnesses and those in the know, media control and spin, diversion with wars, use of secret communication channels, use of intelligence/military/financially-to-gain operatives and scenario directors, cover simulations, issuance of false cover stories from on 'high', COG to name just a few. Both were only fig-leaf covered Coup d'etats further consolidating the power of the Secret/Deep State, diminishing the rights and freedoms of the general public, and the touchstone for wars.