Suppressed Details of 9/11 Insider Trading Leads to CIA's Highest Ranks

You may be right.

After the sTrange revelation of the insider trading surrounding 911, we now have a new mystery to ponder : why there is such an "official silence" about the final conclusion of the investigation lauched since 2001?

reply to post by MaxBlack


Do you, or do you not realize that quite a few investment advisors were telling their customers that played the option market to place options on United/American airlines the end of August beginning of September 2001?

Truly, there have been a lot of these players putting options on airlines stock, especially AMR and UA.
But some of these gambers also speculate on insurance companies and investment banks that have been impacted by 911?
So, what? Is it only a coincidence?

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by MaxBlack

 

Do you, or do you not realize that quite a few investment advisors were telling their customers that played the option market to place options on United/American airlines the end of August beginning of September 2001?

Hey Swampy, did these "investment advisors" also tell their customers not to collect the profits on their 9/11 options trades?

Swampy,
The fact that there was a bad context for airline stocks at that time doesn't explain such a disbalance between the put and call options related to UA and AMR.
You can use any kind of rationalization concerning 911 insider trading ; for some academics, and for many traders, there is no doubt.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Do you, or do you not realize that quite a few investment advisors were telling their customers that played the option market to place options on United/American airlines the end of August beginning of September 2001?

I would like to see a source for this information or is this another one of your opinions.
Because of your history towards people who question the truth I think you need to try to back up some of your claims if you want people to start believing in you.

Funny to see that 911 debunkers are quite silent about the real problem of the insider trading...

No doubt. I just read this thread from the first page. Hilarious how the ultra-"rational" skeptics just vanish.

Errr..could you elaborate, blogbuster?

so, to repEat my question, does anyone know any new development concerning 911 insider trading ?

reply to post by frenchyOO7

I guess Swampy has temporarily returned to his hobby of "fixing F-16s."

But since this is his profession, I'm sure he'll be back soon.

Let's pray for the return of Swampy !
This thread needs desperately a debunker, at least one.... ;-)

Here are some links that would dispel the "insider trading" notion from a sane individual living in reality.


911myths.com...


911myths.com...


911myths.com...

reply to post by GoldenFleece


As a matter of fact, today was my first day back at work, post deployment. Would you like to know what I worked on?

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999

Here are some links that would dispel the "insider trading" notion from a sane individual living in reality.

Yeah, we know, 911Myths.com. About as credible as Popular Mechanics. Instead of posting links from your pathetic government debunking website, why don't you explain why the profits from these 9/11 insider trading schemes were never collected?

If these were legitimate AA and UA put options, why were the profiteers (like the CIA's former Executive Director A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard) afraid to come forward?

How could anyone fail to collect the profits on their perfectly timed hunches that AA/UA stock was about to take a dive?

So tell us Swampy -- after consulting your all-omniscient 911Myths.com -- what are these "investors" afraid of?



[edit on 14-1-2010 by GoldenFleece]

reply to post by GoldenFleece


See the thing you dont understand, because of your hatred for the truth, is that 911myths is going to the trouble of getting the documents through FOIA and putting them online.

You would rather stick to your conspiracy sites and their lies.

Oh..So, if I understand you , Swampy, all the documents get through FOIA are telling the truth?

reply to post by frenchyOO7


The documents would be a lot more accurate than the ravings of the truth movement.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Here are some links that would dispel the "insider trading" notion from a sane individual living in reality.

LOL whats this?

911myths.com...

Where does it come from?? What document is this? If it is part of the 911 commission report then it is already a proven lie. the 911 commission report is not worth the paper it is printed on and is no longer held creditable by experts and scholars who have already rejected the report.


911myths.com...

LOL Please point out where this answers my question? Furthermore, were did this document come from?

911myths.com...

LOL this information is all the opinion of the editor! This well know disinformation website. Not one word in here can be believed nothing….


There is nothing remotely creditable from your website that you choose to use it is a well known disinformation website:

9/11 Myths has long been a favorite resource for skeptics and debunkers alike. Its author, Mike Williams, has compiled a collection of straw men, coupled with many distorted interpretations of valid claims. While many of Mike’s “takes” can be dismissed as patently absurd by most of us, his slimy nature and style of addressing these can be deceptive to those who are new to this material and haven’t had time to do their research.
Therefore, I think it’s important that we have a thread dedicated to debunking 9/11 Myths. It’s a huge website and so I don’t know if I will ever have the time to write an entire debunk, however, if we all work together on this we’ll have Mike’s site debunked in no time!

pilotsfor911truth.org...

"9/11 MYTHS DEBUNKED"


Having slain the conspiracy theory army's poison-spewing 16-headed dragon of 9/11 LIES -- PM declares the enemy vanquished, titling its final section "9/11 MYTHS DEBUNKED." On page 128, PM reveals its suit of armor -- a list of over 70 "experts" that it found "particularly helpful." The titles and names on this page are supposed to back the many assertions the article makes in the main section, but the article gives no indication of what experts or reports back up many of its key assertions.

911research.wtc7.net...

For us sane people who believe in staying in a real reality.
So much for your creditable sources swampy, perhaps if you start presenting your facts from reliable sources people might find you creditable.






[edit on 15-1-2010 by impressme]