Evidence for Informed Trading on 911

Just after September 11th 2001, many governments began investigations into possible insider trading related to the terrorist attacks of that day. Such investigations were initiated by the governments of Belgium, Cyprus, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Monte Carlo, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United States, and others. Although the investigators were clearly concerned about insider trading, and considerable evidence did exist, none of the investigations resulted in a single indictment. That’s because the people identified as having been involved in the suspicious trades were seen as unlikely to have been associated with those alleged to have committed the 9/11 crimes.

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

"This is an example of the circular logic often used by those who created the official explanations for 9/11. The reasoning goes like this: if we assume that we know who the perpetrators were (i.e. the popular version of “al Qaeda”) and those who were involved in the trades did not appear to be connected to those assumed perpetrators, then insider trading did not occur."

It’s the catch-22 rule – how do we know if we’re mad? By using these circular agruments, i.e. to bring peace and stability we must have war; they can justify anything even kidnapping, torture and mass murder. What stood out for me the most in this article is the statement about “not having ties to Al Qeida" ... What they should have used as the measurement was “US government officials or people stood to profit” as the yardstick.

a reply to: wasaka

The reason there were no indictments is the same reason we will never know the truth about what really transpired that day....the people that benefited the most are the same ones that control the investigations and the msm.

a reply to: wasaka

Easy way for them to avoid prosecution and say "Move along... nothing to see here."

Money rules the world - even if there are explicit laws against certain activities, there will always be "the exception", and individuals/groups that are immune simply because of who they are/who they know.

Just look at Hillary Clinton, her campaign very likely received donations from Iranian groups, which would totally go against U.S. sanctions, and yet that woman has a very strong chance of becoming our next President.

As things become more and more corrupted, we will see more white collar crime on a large scale, again without people being held accountable.

#GettheMoneyOutofPolitics !!!!!!!

a reply to: wasaka

extent of the 9/11-related informed trading was unprecedented. An ABC News Consultant, Jonathan Winer, said, “it’s absolutely unprecedented to see cases of insider trading covering the entire world from Japan to the US to North America to Europe.”

so how many knew something was up ? and why is that deemed not important information ?

One such suggestion was made by the former German Minister of Technology, Andreas von Buelow, who said that the value of the informed trades was on the order of $15 billion.

important information. Let's keep this in mind.

In December 2001, Reuters reported that “Convar has recovered information from 32 computers that support assumptions of dirty doomsday dealings.” Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert at Convar, testified that “There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million. They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed.” Director of Convar, Peter Henschel, said that it was “not only the volume, but the size of the transactions [that] was far higher than usual for a day like that.

I think foreknowledge is an understatement...the only one that didn't know anything was up...was poor old Georgy boy.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I think foreknowledge is an understatement…the only one that didn't know anything was up...was poor old Georgy boy.

The hell… he split town early that day, 'visiting' a classroom filled with little children. And there he sat, even as it was occurring.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I think foreknowledge is an understatement…the only one that didn't know anything was up...was poor old Georgy boy.

The hell… he split town early that day, 'visiting' a classroom filled with little children. And there he sat, even as it was occurring.

You are mistaken intrptr. I seem to remember that innocently surprised look on his face when he got the news. Pokahface...

Good call bro. Its the smoking gun.

Like any good detective will tell you, follow the money:

www.wanttoknow.info...

I agree OP. The suspicious trading was ignored in the official story, by spointing out that Al Qaeda was not behind the trading, so therefore it wasn't important. Classic case of circular logic.

Buzzy Krongard, high ranking CIA during 9/11, former senior executive at Deutschbank (a source of some of the suspicious trades). is a good name to start with. As someone already repeated in this thread, always follow the money.

Wouldnt they know that their trading would draw suspicion? If they started shorting airlines like crazy just before 911 it would be kinda obvious. It would be a clearcut case of greed eats brain though.

a reply to: Merinda

It is apparently a fact that a good portion of the "puts", guaranteed to make big money in the wake of 9/11, were never cashed in.

a reply to: Jchristopher5

And that tells you two things for certain:

1) Those who places the "bets" knew beforehand what was going down and

2) That it was guaranteed to be successful.

Why did they not collect? THAT is obvious.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I seem to remember that innocently surprised look on his face when he got the news.

That 'look' was one for the record books.

I thought he looked frightened and guilty all at once. Like when you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

Remember, they asked for the cameras to be turned off, he thought the cameras were off.

And he sat…

Further: His closed door session with the 911 commission at the White House tells me he knew way more than he was allowed to reveal. Chaney attended it with him to be sure he kept his mouth shut. Those records are sealed.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I think foreknowledge is an understatement…the only one that didn't know anything was up...was poor old Georgy boy.

The hell… he split town early that day, 'visiting' a classroom filled with little children. And there he sat, even as it was occurring.

And he has said publicly twice that he saw the 1st plane hit the North Tower (1st Tower hit) live on TV, nobody did and if they did they had to know it was going to happen.
Start at 27 seconds to avoid the suck up.

I think foreknowledge is an understatement...the only one that didn't know anything was up...was poor old Georgy boy.




Whaaaaaaaat? See who was in charge of "Security" and those buildings that were lost. (I can provide only 1 hint.. ready? Who is Marvin Bush..)

When the female end of the Clinton Cabal was the Head of State, they reported $6B "missing" then $2B shows up in the Clinton Foundation and then what is the big news? That She may have deleted some fart joke e-mails.. She had a Server in Her basement for crying out loud, I am a computer neophyte and even I KNOW that is "hinky" to type the least....

Wakie! Wakie!!

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I seem to remember that innocently surprised look on his face when he got the news.

That 'look' was one for the record books.

I thought he looked frightened and guilty all at once. Like when you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

Remember, they asked for the cameras to be turned off, he thought the cameras were off.

And he sat…

Further: His closed His closed door session with the 911 commission at the White House tells me he knew way more than he was allowed to reveal. Chaney attended it with him to be sure he kept his mouth shutords are sealed.

And if this fact alone does not tell us all that is needed to know well then America simply cannot handle the truth and it would go a log way to explain why the general public puts up with the steady diet of lies that it is fed.

a reply to: wasaka

Put options volume just before 9/11 was as big a smoking gun as building 7

Just that most people do t understand trading.

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
a reply to: Merinda

It is apparently a fact that a good portion of the "puts", guaranteed to make big money in the wake of 9/11, were never cashed in.

Why would somebody not claim his ill gotten gains. Only reason I can think of, is that somebody connected to the perps placed the puts rather than the perps themselves. The perps got wind of it and sternly warned their associate to cash in on the puts he placed livid he did so in the first place. If there was an significant uptick in volume, but in the end the gains to be made were just a couple of measily millions, then I think what I theorize was the case (insider trading by people connected to the perps, but not the perps themselves somebody further down the totem pole).

Or the person in question was just denied execution of his puts electronically. At any rate just by placing the puts it can be traced who placed them. Of course the person in question might have used surrogates for obvious reasons.



However a swelling of puts in the wake of 911 is admitted just in case somebody tries to make the case that never happened.


By the way whatever happened to the investigation of insider trading in the wake of 911? Did it go forward, were results publish? Were results suppressed? Did investigators complain about obstruction of their work?