More evidence of Pre-9/11 Inside Trading: Follow the Money? God forbid

More evidence of Pre-9/11 Inside Trading: Follow the Money? God forbid
Why was the cashing out of billions of dollars just before 9/11 never investigated?

by Jim Hogue

Baltimore Chronicle/Global Research, February 10, 2008

Had an investigation been done into the crime of failing to file the “currency transaction reports” in August 2001, then we would know who made the cash withdrawals in $100 bills amounting to the $5 billion surge.

When reviewing the record of July and August of 2001, Bill Bergman noticed a $5 billion surge in the currency component of the M1 money supply—the third largest such increase since 1947. Bergman asked about this anomaly—and was removed from his investigative duties.

It’s been over six years since 9/11, but U.S. regulatory entities have been slow to follow through with reports about the complex financial transactions that occurred just prior to and following the attacks. Such research could shed light on such questions as who was behind them—and who benefited—and could help lay to rest the rumors that have been festering.

(…)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8046

9/11-forhåndskunnskap: Litt om innsidehandel

Hva Allen M. Poteshman (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) sier om den mistenkelige innsidehandelen som fant sted i dagene før 11/9-01:

Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001

After September 11, 2001, there was a great deal of speculation that the terrorists or their associates had traded in the option market on advanced knowledge of the impending attacks. This paper generates systematic information about option market activity that can be used to assess the option trading that precedes any event of interest. Examination of the option trading leading up to September 11 reveals that there was an unusually high level of put buying. This finding is consistent with informed investors having traded options in advance of the attacks.
Consequently, the paper concludes that there is evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks.
http://www.business.uiuc.edu/poteshma/research/poteshman2006.pdf

***

9/11-kommisjonens forklaring:

“… 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 …” - 9/11-kommisjonens rapport

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html

Forutbestemte konklusjoner? Neppe.

Cover-up? Absolutt neppe.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justices kommentar til kommisjonens forklaring:

“This explanation is partial and circular. It is partial because it mentions only “trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted in the attacks” and fails to specify which activity it did examine. It is circular because it claims it traced much of the activity to a US investor with “no conceivable ties to al Qaeda” and thereby concludes that the trades were “innocuous”.”


http://stj911.org/hypotheses/official.html#commission_insider

***

Jan Haugland i sitt stykke “Bedrag, eller selvbedrag? …”:

“Igjen har ikke akkurat KT-bevegelsen svømmet over av finansanalytikere, så det kunne være interessant å se belegget for denne påstanden. Rapportene om “innside-handel” er som vanlig basert på tidlige presseoppslag, og har en helt naturlig forklaring.”

Kanskje ikke bare på “tidlige presseoppslag”, eller…?

Er Jans “helt naturlige forklaring” også at “the investor had no conceivable ties to al Qaeda”?

En helt naturlig (og syltynn ikke-)forklaring.

***

Arkiv med mange relevante nyhetsartikler fra perioden 2001 - 2003:

The Yirmeyahu Review: 9/11 and Insider Trading

URL:
http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/archive/911/insider_trading.htm