New revelations about 911 INSIDER TRADING

Hi guys,

There is a new report about 911 INSIDER TRADING, coming from France.

"The French webTv "La Télé Libre" will soon broadcast an exclusive documentary about the infamous put options surrounding 911 which have been made all around the world.
These transactions seem to prove that some people knew secretly about the impending attacks and decided to make money by using financially this information.

Here is the trailer of this report :



THE 911 INSIDERS ?
A key to decipher the mystery

Eight years after the attacks on the World Trade Center, the shadow of a massive insider trading still hangs over the event. Speculators, for the less informed, have made significant gains following the terrorist attacks, having bet luckily just before. Weird ...
Who knew what and when? Beyond the controversy over the causes of the collapse of the towers or the deficiencies of the formal investigation, the suspicion of insider trading relating to September 11 is also an inescapable conundrum about the attacks....

The full article is here : www.911blogger.com...

So they brought Ruppert out of hiding for this?

reply to post by frenchyOO7

Yes.

It seems that Ruppert has accepted to give his opinion on this matter, despite the fact that he decided in 2008 not to talk publicly anymore about 911.

The old saying, "Follow The Money" has been used in investigations for a long long time. If this is a true story and not some urban myth then why hasn't the FBI pursued this avenue? I have never heard the FBI following up on this.

[edit on 26-1-2010 by ViperFoxBat]

Awesome.

reply to post by frenchyOO7


Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 27/1/2010 by Sauron]

Originally posted by ViperFoxBat
The old saying, "Follow The Money" has been used in investigations for a long long time. If this is a true story and not some urban myth then why hasn't the FBI pursued this avenue? I have never heard the FBI following up on this.

[edit on 26-1-2010 by ViperFoxBat]

Are you for real?

1. Yes these are real facts. Not an urban legend. There were tons of profits made on put options on 9/11.

2. If it was an inside job, why would the FBI incriminate the own country that they protect?

Use your noodle. If you look conspiracy up in the dictionary it simply says 9/11 (not literally). A conspiracy means people conspire. When people conspire that's what happens, no real investigation is made.

The FBI and the SEC have made an investigation in 2002 and 2003.

Their conclusion : there was no insider trading because the people suspected of dealing suspicious transactions have no link with al qaida.

yep....what a demonstration, isn't it?

Who are those people? See Buzzy Krongard and Deutsche bank, wanna place bets?

I find this quite telling of how thing work, If any one in the general public we to do this they would have all of the government agencies working over time to nail the people behind this, as they that with other people.

When it comes to something like being connected to 9/11 there is no action taken by any agencies as to why, other than who ever they catch would lead them back to the people who put this hole thing together.

No action speaks volumes as to why they would let some people profit from other peoples deaths.

[edit on 27-1-2010 by jsettica]

Originally posted by frenchyOO7
The FBI and the SEC have made an investigation in 2002 and 2003.

Their conclusion : there was no insider trading because the people suspected of dealing suspicious transactions have no link with al qaida.

yep....what a demonstration, isn't it?

Have you read the report? Because their conclusions are a lot more sophisticated than that.

I ask because although 9/11 insider trading is a favourite hobby horse of yours, I see no evidence that you have read anything beyond the most cursory accounts of it. And I'm also not sure that you possess more than a rudimentary understanding of financial markets.

Yes, I read the official explanations .

You suggest that there are "more sophisticated"...

You must be kidding, right?

Or are you ready to elaborate on this point?

Always a strange silence on this matter....

Originally posted by frenchyOO7
Yes, I read the official explanations .

You suggest that there are "more sophisticated"...

You must be kidding, right?

Not at all. You say that their conclusion is merely that because the suspicious trading is not linked to al-qaeda, it is not suspicious.

This is incorrect, because it doesn't even form a part of their conclusion wrt whether the trading is actually suspicious or not. It's offered as a side note (one that is also corroborated by Poteshman by the way)

I have to say, I still doubt that you've read either of the reports. I think you are relying on TM sites for skewed information. Have you read them?

Or are you ready to elaborate on this point?

I'm absolutely ready. But I'm not going to walk you through the reports line by line. If you can't be bothered to read them it's not up to me to disabuse you of notions picked up from websites designed to mislead you.