9/11 - All the Proof You Need!

[veracity]

9/11 - ALL THE PROOF YOU NEED!
A 9/11 CHECKMATE
BY TvNewsLIES.ORG - April - 2004

Some things are so disturbing that they are almost impossible to believe. That is why, in the 9/11 enigma, less is more.

Until these questions are answered there is no need to establish more doubt. What we have here is solid undisputed evidence that we were never told the truth.

Before you read this article, conduct this test. Try to purchase some stock, or some futures, a mutual fund or some put options, without providing your identity. Go ahead and try it! See if you get anywhere. Find out what happens when you tell the investment firm that you want to make a huge investment anonymously. It can’t be done.

Then ask yourself this question: How could someone have placed anonymous put options on American Airlines and United Airlines just prior to the attacks of 9/11? Then ask yourself why no one has investigated this suspicious deal. Ask yourself why there has been no attempt by the US government to identify the person who anticipated huge profits from a disaster that was yet to occur. Perhaps it is because of the trail leading back to the CIA?

Then wonder about the collapse of Building 7 on the day of the attacks. Ask yourself why the owner of the building allowed the building to be pulled down (intentionally demolished) hours after the Twin Towers fell. Pulling down a building takes weeks of planning and preparation so that explosives can be safely positioned and wired. Not so in this case. Wonder why.

If you have any doubts at all about the official 9/11 story, then the answers to these questions are all the proof you need that something is very, very wrong!

Independent 9/11 researchers have worked nonstop since the events to examine the events of 9/11 and they have uncovered enough information to seriously challenge the official versions of what happened on that fateful day. But maybe, just maybe, the very fact that massive amounts of information are available is a problem in itself. There may be far too much evidence for most Americans to face.

The challenges to the official stories may be too devastating to be processed by the average American who has spent a lifetime believing in the system. Many people can deal with the minor violations that are part of the political scene, but cannot possibly fathom a government that might be complicit in an attack on its own people. They are not unlike the parents who eventually come to terms with a child’s shoplifting spree. The same parents would do anything to deny far more serious accusations. Imagine the response of parents whose son turns out to be a Timothy McVeigh.

Some things are so disturbing that they are almost impossible to believe. That is why, in the 9/11 enigma, less is more. There is a real danger of frightening everyone off by offering too much information. Therefore, if we think of the problem as a chess game, two strategic moves can lead to checkmate.

There are two pieces of the 9/11 puzzle that on their own expose the lies of the administration.

Two questions must be raised so that even the most diehard Bush supporters realize they have been deceived. These are issues that no one can debate or dismiss. These are not conspiracy theories. They are fact-based questions that can lead to exposing the deceptions in the official reports. The apologists have no way to explain these away or justify them. Basically, they offer clear evidence that the official explanations of 9/11 are meaningless.

TWO MOVES TO CHECKMATE:
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html

[megatherium]

1. weren't the airlines having problems before 9/11?

might that explain the ratio of put to call options on airline stocks before 9/11?

[libertypirate]

2. Your in left field....

the options were never cashed out...

[veracity]

12. even more suspicious...

Then why the anonymity? Why no cashout. Why the secrecy. And no, the airlines went nose down....no pun intended....immediately after the attacks.

[Jester_11218]

15. Sho what?

The point was that the order was placed and the identity of the person who placed the order is being kept from the public.

[John Doe II]

17. Source? n/t

[DulceDecorum]

5. The insurance companies were having trouble too

Warren Buffett is being questioned at this time.
Hank Greenberg of AIG has taken the Fifth and refuses to say if he ever even worked for AIG
(where he was CEO for the last 40 years.)

In August 2001, Bush pissed off the Saudis
who responded by withdrawing dollars from the NYSE,
changing it to euros and sending a lot of it to Lebanon
where billionaire Rafiq Hariri was rubbing his hands in glee.

Incidentally, one of the 911 transactions was a SINGLE FIVE BILLION DOLLAR TRADE.
Who the heck has FIVE BILLION DOLLARS lying around?
An investigation into this one single trade eliminates a very large chunk of the world population and most of its businesses.
Where did that money go?
In the US, any transaction of ten thousand or more is logged, recorded and checked into. But the FIVE BILLION just vanished?

And then on 911 itself,
ALL flights, -- INCLUDING MILITARY AND LAW-ENFORCEMENT FLIGHTS - were grounded
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=5346&forum=DCForumID43&archive=yes#22
while the US treasury moved 25 BILLION dollars.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=5354&forum=DCForumID43
Where to, we know not.
All we are told is that there were four planes guarding the US and that no fighter jets were available to escort Bush out of Florida and I think also Louisiana. If memory serves, Air Force One did not get any military escorts until after Bush left Offutt AFB.

Lots of questions, but no forthcoming answers.

[spooked911]

13. The key was the put options were only on the airlines that were

involved in the attacks-- American and United.

[captain crunch]

3. Checkmate?

I don't think so.

[stillcool]

4. Just a matter of time....

its the one thing we have going for us in the age of information. Because something is not openly spoken doesn't make it less true...quite the opposite. Too many minds have made the shift to keep the mask on much longer.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

6. Most trades done in Germany/Europe/Japan

Most of the suspicious trades were done in Germany, Europe, and Japan. These countries have different reporting requirements than the U.S. In addition, providing identities has tightened considerably post 9/11.

Further, this article seems to be saying that the PATRIOT act reporting requirements are a good thing. I'm not sure I agree.

I do remember that there was one trade in Germany that was so suspicious, authorities were waiting for the anonymous investor to come in and collect. As far as I'm aware, he never did.

Understand, there were plenty of people - Islamic theocrats - who were aware of the 9/11 plot. Where this article goes into tinfoil hat conspiracy mode is assuming that Bin Laden was somehow secretly cooperating with the U.S. President. Laughable.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[RedCloud]

8. Bin Laden was financed by Bush 1

CD

Bush's family dines with the bin Ladens.
The bin Ladens were allowed safe escort after 9/11.

Bin Laden was never captured and believed that a US operation close to cornering him was ordered to stand down from the White House.

Bin Laden was on the CIA payroll some time ago.

Notice the Saudis aren't getting bombed for financing one of Bush's alleged hijacking masterminds...

Laugh if you may, but I hope one day you laugh alone. Such is the stock of the ill-informed when presented with a new idea.

[Fire Walk With Me]

9. "Notice the Saudis aren't getting bombed.."

That's a very interesting point.

[Frederik]

10. Well

"Bin Laden was somehow secretly cooperating with the U.S. President"

That cooperation has never been particularly secret, as far as the Bush family goes. Uncle Prescott was happy to do business with Fritz Thyssen during WWII, so obviously these unsavoury business contacts run in the family.

Poppy attended the annual Carlyle investment group conference with Shafiq Bin Laden as the planes slammed into the WTC, George Jr was funded by Salim Bin Laden in his coke-snorting days and when he was selected president he made sure the FBI didn't investigate Osama's brothers Omar and Abdullah Bin Laden who ran the highly suspect WAMY (expelled from India and the Phillipines for funding terrorism). Omar and Abdullah lived just a couple of blocks down the street from two of the 9/11 hijackers in Fall's Church, Virginia, and were hastily flown out of the country on sept 13, 2001. Bush lifted the temporary ban on investigating Saudi links to terrorism the very same day. Omar and Abdullah are living happily in some desert palace.

According to Greg Palast, the "back off" order regarding Saudi terrorist financing had been imposed on intelligence and law enforcement agencies as soon as the Bush admin took office in jan 2001.

[spooked911]

14. I didn't read in the article anything about bin Laden cooperating

with Bush.

In any case, wouldn't it be nice to know who was doing those trades-- who had the inside info? Why the secrecy? Shouldn't we puruse those who knew about the attacks ahead of time?

[John Doe II]

20. Source

Do you have a source for this:

Most of the suspicious trades were done in Germany, Europe, and Japan. These countries have different reporting requirements than the U.S. In addition, providing identities has tightened considerably post 9/11.

[mikelewis]

30. The put options in question were placed in Chicago

Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines, but only 396 call options… Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these “insiders” would have profited by almost $5 million.

- On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Airlines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls. Again, there was no news at that point to justify this imbalance;… Again, assuming that 4,000 of these options trades represent “insiders,” they would represent a gain of about $4 million.

-

http://www.hereinreality.com/insidertrading.html

Why is it laughable to say that Bush and Bin Laden were in cahoots? We're not talking about six degrees of seperation when it comes to Bush and Bin Laden. Thier families were tight, very tight. The Bin Ladens and the Bushies have a long history together. At best, the degree of seperation is 2 and that's close enough to warrant an investigation.

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/041203metwithbinladen.html
"Despite studying September 11 for two years solid, one fact I only just discovered is that George W. Bush's father was meeting with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Washington, on the morning of 9/11. They were on Carlyle Group business just a few miles from where hijackers supposedly acting on behalf of Osama bin Laden would fly a plane into the Pentagon.

Recall that the chief financier of the so-called hijackers, Pakistan's Chief Spy General Mahmoud Ahmad, was meeting with Bush administration officials the week before 9/11. He also met with Bob Graham and Porter Goss on the morning of the attacks, who would later go on to head the first 9/11 investigative committee."

Is this laughable? Doesn't seem so funny to me.

[Bolo Boffin]

31. More facts have come to light

The United put options (all 4774 of them) were purchased by a single investment company, who on the same day purchased stock in United as well. In other words, it was an investment strategy - exercise the options if the stock drops, and write off the options if the stock rises.

Most of the American put options were bought because of a stock tip in an trading newsletter, by numerous investors. The 9/11 Commission's investigation showed that neither company (the investment company or the newletter company) had any ties to al-Qaeda.

In investigatory terms, the put options are a dead lead.

[John Doe II]

32. How many stocks were purchased?

Do you know by any chance, Bolo, how many stocks were purchased by the company.
The fact that the companys had no ties to Al Qaeda is sure not a sufficient proof of their innocence: Would yo refute the suspicion that 911 was an inside job with the remark that the US-government had no connection to al Qaeda??
;-)

[Bolo Boffin]

35. 115,000 shares

That's what the Commission report says.

There's a mountain of evidence that al-Qaeda carried out these attacks. There is zero evidence that the US government did. Zero. The post that started this thread is proof of that: all the writer had to go on was an outright lie (about Silverstein) and a select version of the other situation (the put options). Therefore, the company having no ties to al-Qaeda is part of the evidence for their innocence.

[spooked911]

34. Where did you get this info from, please?

"The United put options (all 4774 of them) were purchased by a single investment company, who on the same day purchased stock in United as well. In other words, it was an investment strategy - exercise the options if the stock drops, and write off the options if the stock rises."

Oh yeah, that's a real money maker. Brilliant.

"Most of the American put options were bought because of a stock tip in an trading newsletter, by numerous investors. The 9/11 Commission's investigation showed that neither company (the investment company or the newletter company) had any ties to al-Qaeda."

Well that settles that doesn't it? No ties to Al Qeada therefore no foreknowledge of 9/11.

Riiight.

[Bolo Boffin]

36. From the 9/11 Commission report.

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

[Make7]

37. RE: Brilliant

spooked911 wrote:

"The United put options (all 4774 of them) were purchased by a single investment company, who on the same day purchased stock in United as well. In other words, it was an investment strategy - exercise the options if the stock drops, and write off the options if the stock rises." - boloboffin?

Oh yeah, that's a real money maker. Brilliant.

There are people that do not agree with your assessment. (Note: The following excerpts are from NOVA: Trillion Dollar Bet)

NARRATOR: Using a series of equations, Bachelier created the first complete mathematical model of stock market fluctuations. He too believed stock prices moved at random and that it was impossible to make exact predictions about them. But then Bachelier said he had found a way to control risk, through an obscure financial contract called an option. He realized options could protect investors from market fluctuations and made the first attempt to figure out how to price them. But his superiors were unimpressed. His academic career faltered.

PAUL SAMUELSON: After the discovery of Bachelier's work there suddenly came to the mind of all the eager workers the notion of what the Holy Grail was. There was the next step needed. It was to get the perfect formula to evaluate and to price options.

NARRATOR: Economists returned eagerly to the markets to investigate this strange contract which had so intrigued Bachelier. They discovered options were a form of insurance that allowed investors to buy or sell stock for a specific amount, the strike price, by a specific date. For example, if you buy a stock today the price could drop in the future and you could lose money. But if you buy an option, you have the right to sell the stock at some agreed price in the future. If the stock drops, you have insurance. If it rises, you profit. Options can be an effective way to control risk. But how much should an investor pay for such absolute peace of mind? The value seemed to depend on each individual's level of confidence in the market. No one could agree on a standardized way to price options. It was a bewildering problem that the economists were determined to solve.

Who would be foolish enough to work on such an idea? Let's find out:

NARRATOR: In 1968 economist Myron Scholes and his colleague Fischer Black set out to tackle the problem of options.

MYRON SCHOLES: When I first discovered options, I became very excited about the possibilities that here was a contract that enabled you to only be able to take the upside of the returns and not the downside, and that being able to take the upside only had value and that was really exciting.

NARRATOR: It was a goal that had eluded the greatest minds in economics. They knew that every stock price constantly moved up and down. As it did so, the value of an option on a particular stock fluctuated too, but there was no predictable relationship. What they wanted was to find was a formula that would calculate the correct price of an option at any moment in time just by knowing the current price of the stock, but they couldn't see their way through the mass of equations they'd inherited.

Of course, they'll give these things out to just about anyone:

NARRATOR: The application of mathematics to risk management would lead to the creation of a multi-trillion dollar derivatives industry. Finally, 25 years after they came up with their formula, the architects of this revolution received the ultimate accolade.

MYRON SCHOLES: My first reaction on being awarded the Nobel Prize was, actually, I thought of Fischer Black, my colleague. He unfortunately had passed away. And there was no doubt in my mind that if he were still alive, he would have been a co-recipient of the Nobel Prize.

There's much, much more. The story of the company, Long Term Capital Management, is truly fascinating. Guess what their investment strategy was.

-Make7

[TomClash]

38. That's a good way of describing a form of hedging

But I'm still a bit skeptical, mainly because the investment company that held the options on United never put them - they have a fiduciary duty to do so. And I don't think the 9/11 report never identified the investment company, did it? That makes me suspicious. Maybe the investment company was A.B. Brown, long tied to the CIA through Buzzy Krongard and others and owned by Deutschebank. But wait! Deutschebank's NY building was across the street from the South Tower - they certainly wouldn't want to bring down their own building, would they? Hmm.

[Make7]

40. It worked really well for LTCM for a few years.

My post was just a response to what I took to be a sarcastic comment by spooked911 about using options to minimize risk when investing.

There is plenty of reason to be skeptical. There seems to be a lack information on this whole matter, to say the least, but I think that some people are reaching conclusions that can't be supported by what is known at this time. I really don't know that much about it but I think that it definitely should be looked at more thoroughly.

-Make7

[TomClash]

41. I agree

"There is plenty of reason to be skeptical. There seems to be a lack information on this whole matter, to say the least, but I think that some people are reaching conclusions that can't be supported by what is known at this time."

I think this is pretty accurate. I also think the 9/11 Commission should be ashamed of itself for not being comprehensive; its findings and analysis make the Warren Commission look thorough - look at all the questions they left open.

[RedCloud]

7. I never believed Bush, not even for 1 second!

He still hasn't proved his case. Because he marches off to undeclared war doesn't mean he proved his case. No matter how many third world people he kills, it doesn't prove his case.

The fact is he hid from public for three straight days after 9/11 and let Democratic voting New York suffer...
Just like he let Democratic voting California suffer earlier with energy problems...

I believe while he was hiding like a rat, he truly was afraid that the real truth would get out... that Americans are no longer that stupid... But yet we are. Many only talk about two towers going down, not four. Where was the engine of that fourth plane? Too far way from the crash site? And why did our Pentagon twiddle its thumbs while that was happening and then itself got hit?

I remember speaking to deafened ears that we ought not to be worshiping people simply because they have uniforms. That is what good little Nazi rat singers do. That we should not give megabuck raises to those who were supposed to defend us from this. Yet they did. My ding-a-lings (military intelligence neighbors) rejoiced Sept. 11th, 2001. They slurped beer like crazy and barbecued with abandon. Then their mega pay raises came. For what? For a job poorly done?

Think about it. A Republican president threw money at a problem and no one took him to task for it. He expanded government by creating a bullshit agency when there are already too many intelligence gathering agencies. Bigger government. Then he raided social security.

I truly feel that the Death Penalty is far too good for Bush. He should have to listen to the wails of the victims he has created through his evil financial, military, religious and political bullshit.

[Pockets]

33. Such a disgusting image:

"My ding-a-lings (military intelligence neighbors) rejoiced Sept. 11th, 2001. They slurped beer like crazy and barbecued with abandon. Then their mega pay raises came. For what? For a job poorly done?"

[Eloriel]

11. I think it's such a shame

that these posts get moved from the main forums, apparently now an "embarrassment" somehow.

That, of course, only helps to prop up the Official Story, doesn't it? Tsk, tsk. And there are people who actually think that real conspiracies have to involve very, very few people to be kept secret. Nah, there are SO many societal pressures against overturning any Official Mythology and Big Lies that conspiracies involving dozens, hundreds, maybe even thousands of people remain perfectly safe. As I said: even DU does its part.

[Bolo Boffin]

16. Got an issue?

When the original post contains flat out lies (the trades were done in countries with different reporting requirements, and Silverstein did NOT give permission to demolish WTC 7) and then calls it checkmate, why should anybody take the poster and the source seriously?

There's a clearly labeled place for discussion of this nature, the desires of the moderators and owners are clear, and yet people on the other side of this issue continue to bang your heads against the wall. Next time, when you try to scale the ingrained opposition against conspiracy theories involving thousands of people, try bringing some facts to the table.

[John Doe II]

18. Bolo

I'm not very firm with Insider trading therefore could you please give me a source for your statement that the trades were done in countries with differnt reporting requirements. I thought so far that especially the Chicago Board was a big center but I'm not very into this. Thanks.

[Bolo Boffin]

19. My source

was Conservative Democrat in the #6 post above.

The airline trades were done at Chicago, though. There's a little bit more info in the 9/11 Commission report:

Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation.

For example, the volume of put options—investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price—surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10—highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10.

Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday,September 9, which recommended these trades. These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous.

So the same company that bought ALL of the United put options also bought United stock on the same day. You buy the stock, then also a few put options. If the stock loses value, you exercise the put options and stave off the financial loss. If the stock gains in value, you write off the put options as a loss.

Now if this company is the one Ruppert found to have ties to the CIA, this still appears to be innocent, because the company bought stock at the same time it bought put options. Sometimes suspicious things turn out to be innocent, and innocent things turn out to be suspicious.

Most of the American put options have been linked to an online newsletter, which advocated buying the put options. So there we have numerous investors acting off a stock tip.

That's the Official Story, and it's a pretty good one. Of course, if you don't accept the 9/11 Commission, then you can't be convinced of this, but that's not something I feel I need to address.

[John Doe II]

21. Thanks

I didn't know that. Guess I need to have a closer look one day.

[JackRiddler]

22. Cheap cover-up

A "fax newsletter" was responsible for one set of the put options on airlines, eh? And where did THEY get the tip? Which newsletter? Is this of no further concern?

As for the other set of put options, this is said to be okay because the investor had "no conceivable ties to al Qaeda." Case closed, eh?

Why did Mayo Shattuck, head of the AB Brown bank division of Deutsche Bank, which transacted most of the airline put options in the US, resign suddenly on SEPTEMBER 12th?

NOTE: Previous head of A.B. Brown was "Buzzy" Krongard, who was the No. 3 man at the CIA as of 9/11.

Why didn't an as-yet unnamed investor collect $2.5 mil in put option earnings from the Chicago exchange after 9/11?

Why didn't the Kean Commission or the SEC mention suspicious trades in WTC tenants and reinsurance companies?

Why didn't the Keans and SEC mention anything about the concerns raised after 9/11 in Frankfurt (by the head of the Bundesbank, Ernst Welteke), Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore and London, all of them screaming about indications of a hot trail to people with foreknowledge of the attack?

All of these were later dropped from the media. Germany promised a report by October 2001, and never delivered it.

London traced its suspicious trades (airline put options!) to a "small airline" pursuing a hedging strategy. (IHT, Sept. 27, 2001). Which small airline? Was it by any chance owned by the largest owner of commercial aircraft in the world (the CIA)? Was it an airline based in the Middle East? Florida, perhaps?

What about reports that $100 million in sudden money transfers were accomplished from WTC-based entities immediately before and during the attacks? Convar, a German-based tech company, was going to reconstitute the hard-drive info and get to the bottom of this. No follow-up since.

On Sept. 10 SF mayor Willie Brown got a warning not to fly to New York the next day for a mayor's conference. (SF Chronicle, stood by the story again in 2004.) Newsweek reported twice that "Pentagon brass" were also warned on Sept. 10 to cancel their next day's travel plans.

Curiously, that evening the head of the NMCC (national war room at the Pentagon, responsible the next day for coordinating response), Gen. Montagu Winfield, arranged for his deputy, the rookie Capt. Leidig, to take over for him for two hours on his next shift, starting at 8:30 a.m. the next morning (i.e., nearly at the exact time when the Pentagon was first told about the ongoing attacks, Winfield went away for two hours, paralleling the do-nothing, "I'm outta here" behavior of Rumsfeld, Myers, and Bush during the actual attacks.)

"Warnings" had come from a dozen allied intel agencies. Jordan correctly named the coming operation ("Big Wedding"). Putin on MS-NBC said he had warned about exactly what was coming! In August the Mossad provided the names of the four ringleaders (Atta, Shehhi, Almidhar, Alhazmi) on a list of 19 possible terrorists planning an attack inside the US. A renegade Taliban official traveled to Pakistan and talked with US embassy officials about plans for a an attack on the US!

The question is not whether there was foreknowledge among elite circles. The question is where that foreknowledge came from, and how it got so widespread without triggering any reaction!

I haven't even touched:

- The ISI connection
- The Genoa Warning (combined with "no one could have imagined!"
- The 52 warnings circulated within FAA mentioning a possible Bin Ladin attack on aviation
- Surveillance of the alleged hijackers by CIA in Malaysia and Germany months and years in advance of the attacks
- Warnings by individuals (the Iranian held in a German prison, the much-maligned Vreeland matter, where the only thing that matters is not what a liar Vreeland is, but the fact that he wrote his notes BEFORE 9/11)
- The shutdown of the FBI field investigations as corroborated by a half-dozen whistleblowers consistently disciplined and mostly shut out of the press (Wright, Rowley, Edmonds, Sharshar, Powers)

I have all of this richly backed up, and so does anyone else who's looked at the matter seriously.

Want links, go to the 9/11 Timeline at cooperativeresearch.org, the largest and best archive of MSM reports on all of the above and much more, and look these topics up!

[Bolo Boffin]

23. No

A "fax newsletter" was responsible for one set of the put options on airlines, eh? And where did THEY get the tip? Which newsletter? Is this of no further concern?

As for the other set of put options, this is said to be okay because the investor had "no conceivable ties to al Qaeda." Case closed, eh?

It was of concern. The Commission says they spent a great deal of time tracking down every part of this story. I understand that you don't trust them in this. That's something I can't help.

Are you familiar with stock tips, JR? If so, you might be aware that the stock tip industry is a lot like the horse race tip industry. Many times people giving tips are pulling them right out of their arses. Sometimes, sometimes, there's genuine information behind the tip. But visit your local race track and look at all the people selling inside information about the day's races. Do they all have actual insider status? Is it possible that some of those tips might actually play out, being pulled out of arses or not?

As for the other set of options, it's not just said to be okay because of "no concievable ties". It's also due to the rest of the facts of the case, in which the exact same company that bought the put options also bought stock in the company they were shorting. On examination, the conclusion of conspiracy based on this set of put options is as rational as concluding conspiracy everytime somebody buys insurance at a blackjack table.

I have no time to respond to an offtopic data dump.

[JackRiddler]

24. ain't off-topic

Only by defining the corroborating evidence of foreknowledge as off-topic can you downplay the likely significance of the trades.

And please, no condescension about my familiarity with the markets. Cheap tactic.

And why wouldn't I trust the Kean Commission? Because they didn't bother with 95 percent of the anomalies? Because Zelikow was on the Bush transition team and, after accomplishing his mission with the Commission, went on to take a job under Rice at State?

I'm not writing for you, boloboffin. Those who can read, will see who is obfuscating and avoiding and resorting to irrelevant generalizations and where the evidence points.

[demodewd]

25. for the record

Just for the record Bolo believes the military coroners' report on the head injuries of JFK. There is no government agency based inquiry that he doesn't support. No exceptions.

[Bolo Boffin]

27. JFK?

What in Hades does that have to do with put options or Larry Silverstein?

(And just for the record: after reading Posner's book on the JFK assassination, I agree with his version of the bullet strikes, which disagrees with the Warren Commission's account. So there's your exception.)

[demodewd]

28. Photos don't lie...like Posner

http://www.celebritymorgue.com/jfk/jfk-autopsy.html

A large blasted out hole in the Occipital lobe. The bullet entered from the right temporal area.

[Bolo Boffin]

26. Yes, it is.

The article is Two Moves To Checkmate. It introduces two topics - the put options and Silverstein's "pull it" statement. Anything else is not discussing the article - and that makes it offtopic. Otherwise, if anything is allowable, the thread quickly becomes a hit-every-base shallow examination, which this particular forum is so quick to descend to. And since "changing the topic" is a legendary Truth Supression Method, we should eschew any appearance of evil and stick to the subject, yes?

Only by defining the corroborating evidence of foreknowledge as off-topic can you downplay the likely significance of the trades.

The likely significance of the trades is zero, once you actually look at the evidence. This is yet another example of shoddy evidence being used in an attempt to cloud the issues.

Do I blame anybody for looking at the put options at face value and saying, "What up?" Not at all. I did myself.

But once the evidence comes in and a rational innocent explanation is found, honest truth investigators will recognize that and move on to greener pastures.

Since you like to discuss where the evidence points, here's some evidence: The same company that purchased put options on United Airlines before 9/11 also bought stock in United on the same day. Where does that evidence point?

(BTW: My take on your knowledge of markets and investing was based on your apparent assumption that someone who offers a stock tip always has secret insider information behind that tip. My apologies if that assumption is held by you.)

[TomClash]

39. Actually Silverstein said he and the NYFD decided to pull 7

He said it in a PBS documentary in 2002.

The official story that the 7 WTC collapse was caused by the attacks is a little tough to believe. 7 WTC was fine until the 1 WTC collapse. That means they must believe 7 WTC's collapse was caused by the 1 WTC collapse. But the building next to 7 on the north side of Vesey Street - 140 West Street, is still there, and 7 is not, making this claim a little hard to believe.

7 will be completely rebuilt by the end of the year and the CIA can move back in.

[mikelewis]

29. The father of Timothy McVeigh understood what his son did...

He met with the father of one of the vitctims a few years after the fact and they both understood what happened.

Watch this excerpt...
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/19/1348214

I just wonder if they know what really happened.