It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Congressmen, Insider Trading and 9-11

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Hello all,

I rarely post outside of the religious or philosophy sections so I don't know if anyone has already asked this question. If someone has then I apologize.

Recently on 60 minutes it was pointed out that congress members were doing what would otherwise be called insider trading. That is that they were making investments and using knowledge they had about things that were going to happen. We know that there were a number of suspicious investments prior to 9-11. Investments that seemed to presume that airline stocks would go down and certain other stocks would go up. Here is my question, how many congress people's stock portfolios improved because of 9-11? How many of them invested in options trading that believed the price of stock for airlines would go down? Might be interesting to know which ones or maybe it would be refreshing to know that none of them made such bets. Just a thought. Peace.




posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:25 AM
link   




To the best of my knowledge, the put options have not been investigated.



edit on 5-1-2012 by comprehension because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by comprehension
 



To the best of my knowledge, the put options have not been investigated.

For your benefit:

www.sec.gov...

You are free to contact the SEC and ask if put options were included.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
It has been posted time after time on this site.

They have been investigated.

It's the six week rule.
Every six weeks new people join the site and ask the same questions as have been asked before.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
There has been a spike in trading before the attacks with regard to companies that lost and gained disproportionally in value after 911, yes. I am not sure to what degree information is avaiable, who exactly bought and sold. And even if it would be avaiable, most of those who took advantage of information avaiable to them of an impending flase flag information surely conducted their buisness through a front.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
There has been a spike in trading before the attacks with regard to companies that lost and gained disproportionally in value after 911, yes. I am not sure to what degree information is avaiable, who exactly bought and sold. And even if it would be avaiable, most of those who took advantage of information avaiable to them of an impending flase flag information surely conducted their buisness through a front.


So basically there is no evidence of any wrongdoing, which is evidence of wrongdoing. Can you substantiate the "spike" claim? Trading patterns are very, very, very complex and claims of "spikes" need to be substantiated.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
6 times average trading volume with regard to the aforementioned stocks, which returned to normal levels after the attacks. I never said that that it, by itself was proof, but it is what got many people suspicious, just like many people were suspicious about the Genovese or Gambino families based on what they knew and heared/read, but were not able to present any proof.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
It has been posted time after time on this site.

They have been investigated.

It's the six week rule.
Every six weeks new people join the site and ask the same questions as have been asked before.


Not only that, but the airline stocks went on a never ending downward spiral aftter 9/11, and in fact two months ago it's been announced the parent company of American Airlines went bankrupt and their stocks are no longer being traded on the NYSE.

So in short, the "secret conspiracy" was to stage a fake terrorist attack in order to buy airline stocks at a discounted price shortly before they became worthless. Only to the 9/11 conspiracy mongors does this make even a microbe of sense. Maybe losing your shirt in the stock market is sacred to the Illuminati.
edit on 5-1-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 


What happened to the options is human nature.

Very few people knew of the impending attacks, and a few that did couldn't resist the chance to make
money off the events of 911.

That's why the holder's of the option's were never investigated. I call BS on that. A quick look into the
holder's of the option's would have exposed some very prominent people.

Number 1 rule in Police Investigation is to follow the money. NUMBER 1 RULE

The Usual Suspects have arrived and will tell you nothing to see here more along.

Human Nature happened here .

Greed



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by samkent
It has been posted time after time on this site.

They have been investigated.

It's the six week rule.
Every six weeks new people join the site and ask the same questions as have been asked before.


Not only that, but the airline stocks went on a never ending downward spiral aftter 9/11, and in fact two months ago it's been announced the parent company of American Airlines went bankrupt and their stocks are no longer being traded on the NYSE.

So in short, the "secret conspiracy" was to stage a fake terrorist attack in order to buy airline stocks at a discounted price shortly before they became worthless. Only to the 9/11 conspiracy mongors does this make even a microbe of sense. Maybe losing your shirt in the stock market is sacred to the Illuminati.
edit on 5-1-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)


Obviously you are not versed in stock trading and I assume you have an expert handling your finances, which is the best thing to do in your situation. But look up short selling to learn how you profit if you expect a stock to decline in the long or short therm.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



6 times average trading volume with regard to the aforementioned stocks....

Sorry, you didn't mention any stocks and you'll have to be more specific as to what 6 times average means. You'll also have to contextualize that statement based on other financial news at the time and eliminate all other factors that may have contributed to any suspicious volume.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Obviously you are not versed in stock trading and I assume you have an expert handling your finances, which is the best thing to do in your situation. But look up short selling to learn how you profit if you expect a stock to decline in the long or short therm.


From Wikipedia:

"In finance, short selling (also known as shorting or going short) is the practice of selling assets, usually securities, that have been borrowed from a third party (usually a broker) with the intention of buying identical assets back at a later date to return to that third party. The short seller hopes to profit from a decline in the price of the assets between the sale and the repurchase, as the seller will pay less to buy the assets than it received on selling them."

So in other words, not only are you conspiracy people making up claims off the tops of your heads that insiders to the conspiracy were placing put options right before 9/11, you're now making up claims off the tops of your heads that these same insiders actually borrowed airline stocks from other shareholders, sold them, and then placed a put option just before the attack so they could buy them back to replace them at a cheaper price to make a profit. Is that really what you're saying?

Is there really no limit to just how unnecessarily complex and convoluted your conspriacy claims are becoming?



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I am not going to explain put options to you. You can just look it up its not complicated at all and I am sure you will understand how somebody who expects a stock to decline in value can make a profit using put options for short selling, or short selling a stock outright, which is way more risky than using a put option. You dont have to do both, you can do either or, but if you use a put option you just lose the money you spent after the put option if the value of the stock does not go your way and you dont exercise your put option obviously if the stock increased instead of declining.

If you sell a stock short, you have to buy the borrowed stock back to return it. If instead of declining in value the value goes up you run into an uncalculated risk for obvious reasons. Selling a stock short is not complicated at all, all you need is a broker that offers the desired stocks for short selling. With an online broker you can do it with 2 mouseclicks.

And as for ongoign discussion on the subject at hand, I am sure there is a thread about it, form which the OP can draw information and continue discussion there.
edit on 5-1-2012 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
It has been posted time after time on this site.

They have been investigated.

It's the six week rule.
Every six weeks new people join the site and ask the same questions as have been asked before.


My question was not about the stocks themselves; but, was about whether or not any of the politicians benefited from betting on certain stocks.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by AQuestion

Originally posted by samkent
It has been posted time after time on this site.

They have been investigated.

It's the six week rule.
Every six weeks new people join the site and ask the same questions as have been asked before.


My question was not about the stocks themselves; but, was about whether or not any of the politicians benefited from betting on certain stocks.


Here`s a good lead to follow
....

www.tomflocco.com...



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Dear Seventh,

Thanks for the link. Peace.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventh

Originally posted by AQuestion

Originally posted by samkent
It has been posted time after time on this site.

They have been investigated.

It's the six week rule.
Every six weeks new people join the site and ask the same questions as have been asked before.


My question was not about the stocks themselves; but, was about whether or not any of the politicians benefited from betting on certain stocks.


Here`s a good lead to follow
....

www.tomflocco.com...


I dont see any sources on how the author knows about those offshore accounts or that the mccains made those trades.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   
fraud by insider explosions:
www.youtube.com...=44s



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 



you're now making up claims off the tops of your heads that these same insiders actually borrowed airline stocks from other shareholders, sold them, and then placed a put option just before the attack so they could buy them back to replace them at a cheaper price to make a profit. Is that really what you're saying?

Is there really no limit to just how unnecessarily complex and convoluted your conspriacy claims are becoming?

For a liquid instrument this can be done more or less instantaneously through any decent brokerage. It is not complex or convoluted.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:23 AM
link   
reply to post by DrinkYourDrug
 





It is not complex or convoluted.

I think he means ALL the claims surrounding the 911 conspiracy theory not the trading itself.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join