911 주식 넣기 옵션
9/11 주식 넣기 옵션
& quot; 풋 옵션 & quot; 미국 항공사와 유나이티드 항공은 9/11 직전에 이것들은 효과적으로 주식 가격이 하락할 도박이었고, 일단 공격이 일어 났을 때 일어난 일입니다. 이것은 상인들이 9/11에 대한 사전 지식을 가지고 있었음을 보여줍니다.
이것은 복잡한 이야기이지만 주장은 현실과 항상 일치하지 않습니다.
알 카에다와 상상도 못할 단일 미국 기관 투자가는 9 월 6 일 UAL의 95 %를 9 월 10 일에 115,000 주를 사는 거래 전략의 일환으로 구입했다.
아마도이 결론에 대한 가장 큰 도전은 일리노이 대학의 어 바나 샴페인 (Allan M Poteshman) 교수에게서 비롯된 것입니다. 그는 이것을 더 조사하고, 시장 데이터를 통계적으로 분석하여 거래를 시도하고 평가하기로 결정했습니다. 의미. Poteshman 교수는 예고에 대한 논쟁에 몇 가지 이유를 지적했다.
대중 매체, 학자 및 옵션 시장 전문가들에 의해 표현 된 견해에도 불구하고 9.11 테러를 앞두고 테러리스트들이 옵션 시장에서 거래한다는 증거의 결 정성에 의문을 제기하는 이유가 있습니다. 증거에 의문을 제기하는 한 가지 사건은 11 월 12 일 뉴욕시에있는 아메리칸 항공기 추락 사고입니다. OCC 웹 사이트에 따르면 11 월 7 일 3 거래일 전에 AMR 주식 옵션에 대한 Put-Call 비율 7.74였다. 9 월 11 일 직후의 옵션 시장 활동과 테러 사이의 연결에 대한 진술을 토대로 테러가 아마도 11 월 12 일의 충돌의 원인이었을 가능성이 있음을 유추 할 수 있었다. 그러나 이후 테러는 모두 배제되었다. 비정상적으로 큰 AMR 풋 - 콜 비율이 11 월 7 일에 우연히 관찰 된 경우일지도 모르지만, 이 이벤트는 분명히 7.74만큼 큰 풋 - 콜 비율이 사실은 아닌지에 대한 의문을 제기합니다. 11 월 12 일 비행기 추락을 넘어, Barron의 10 월 8 일 발간 된 기사 (Arvedlund 2001)는 테러리스트 또는 그 동료들이 AMR 및 UAL 옵션을 거래 한 것으로 보이는 주장에 대해 회의적 일 수있는 몇 가지 추가 근거를 제공합니다. 9 월 11 일 공격. 우선, 이 기사는 AMR 옵션 중 가장 많은 거래가 가장 싼, 가장 짧은 일자의 풋에서 발생하지 않았다고 말합니다. 이 팟은 오는 공격을 알고있는 사람에게 가장 큰 이익을 제공했을 것입니다. 또한 한 분석가가 판매 & # 8221; 지난주 AMR에 대한 권고로 인해 투자자들은 AMR 풋을 구입할 수있었습니다. 마찬가지로, UAL의 주가는 최근에 풋 매입을 늘릴 수있는 기술 거래자에 대한 관심이 충분히 줄어들었고, UAL 옵션은 주식 포지션을 헤지하는 기관에 의해 많이 거래된다. 마지막으로, 옵션에 시장을 만드는 상인은 주문이 불리한 비공개 정보를 기반으로한다고 생각하면 주문이 도착했을 때 부탁 가격을 인상하지 않았습니다. 시장 제작자는 거래를 알지 못했을 것입니다 그것이 일어 났을 때 보통의
그러나 그는 통계 모델을 고안합니다. 이 모델은 결국 예지력과 일치합니다.
옵션 거래자, 기업 관리자, 보안 분석가, 교환 임원, 규제 기관, 검사, 정책 결정자, 그리고 때로는 대중이 특정 사건 주변에서 비정상적인 옵션 거래가 발생했는지 여부를 파악하는 데 관심이 있습니다. 그러한 사건의 가장 대표적인 사례는 9/11 테러 공격이며, 9 월 11 일까지 테러 분자들과 그 동료들이 테러 분자들에 대한 사전 지식을 가지고 거래 된 것을 옵션 시장 활동이 나타 냈는지에 대한 많은 추측이있었습니다 임박한 공격. 그러나이 추측은 옵션 시장 거래의 관련 특성을 이해하지 못했기 때문에 발생했습니다.
가장 큰 거래가 발생한 9 월 10 일 전날 인 9 월 7 일 아메리칸 항공이 제공 한 나쁜 소식을 분석하지 못한 점이 문제입니다. Poteshman 교수는 우리에게 다음과 같이 말했다.
나의 연구는 특정 주식에 대한 시장 조건을 설명하는 분위수 회귀 분석을 포함한다. 따라서 AMR에 대한 9 월 7 일에 나온 부정적인 뉴스에 대한 1 차 수정이 적어도 있습니다.
하지만 정말로 뉴스를 그렇게 쉽게 대할 수 있습니까? Paul Zarembka 교수는 주장을지지하면서 이렇게 말합니다.
Poteshman이 찾는다. 이 구매는 [미국 항공 주식에 선택권의]. 단순히 임의로 발생하는 확률은 1 %에 불과했습니다.
그러나 우리는 그들이 무작위 적이라는 것을 말하지 않고 오히려 전날 전달 된 중대한 나쁜 소식에 대해 합리적으로 대응했을 수도 있습니다. Poteshman은 본질적으로 (AMR과 관련하여) 사람들이 9/7 뉴스로 설명하기에는 너무 많은 돈을 썼다는 것이므로 다른 설명이 필요하지만 뉴스 자체를 분석하지 않고 어떻게 말할 수 있습니까? 결국, 만약 그 뉴스가 6 개월 만에 파산하게된다면 & # 8221; Put Ratio는 아마 더 중요했을 것이며, Poteshman의 모델은 비정상적인 옵션 시장 활동에 대한 더 많은 확신을 주었지만 예지력에 대한 아이디어를 더 쉽게 만들었을 것인가? 우리는 그렇게 생각하지 않습니다. 분명히 AMR 뉴스는 그다지 중요하지 않았지만 우리는 여전히 당신이 이것을 고려할 때까지 이러한 거래의 중요성을 정확하게 판단 할 수 없다고 말할 것입니다.
알 카에다와 상상할 수없는 단일 미국 기관 투자가는 9 월 6 일 UAL의 95 %를 9 월 10 일에 115,000 주를 사는 거래 전략의 일환으로 구입했다. 마찬가지로 의심스러운 거래 9 월 10 일 미국인들은 9 월 9 일 일요일 가입자에게 팩스로 보내지는 특정 미국 기반 옵션 거래 뉴스 레터를 추적했다.
9 월 6 일 UAL은 자동적으로 중요하게 보일 것입니다. 하지만 실제로 이것은 투자자가 당시의 다른 시장 조건과 정보를 고려하지 않고도 9/11에 대한 예지력을 가졌음을 수학적으로 나타낼 수 있음을 의미합니까?
9 월 11 일 전화 걸기.
9/11 직전에 여러 항공사의 주식이 매도 되었습니까?
청구 : 2001 년 9 월 11 일 직전에 유나이티드 항공과 아메리칸 항공에 대량의 주식이 다가오는 9/11 공격에 대한 예견을 가진 사람들에 의해 거래되었습니다.
기원 : 2001 년 9 월 11 일에 4 대의 비행기가 납치되어 미국의 공격에 사용되었습니다. 아메리칸 항공 11 호기는 로스 앤젤레스로, 보스턴은 로스 엔젤레스로, 아메리칸 항공은 77 호선으로 로스 앤젤레스 행, 유나이티드 항공 175 호선은 로스로 향하게됩니다. 앤젤레스, 유나이티드 항공 93 편이 샌프란시스코로 향하는 뉴 어크를 출발합니다. 이 비행기의 각각은 의도적으로 추락 해, 모두를 죽였다. 2 명은 세계 무역 센터 탑에, 1 명은 펜타곤에, 그리고 1 명은 펜실베니아에있는 들판으로. (UA Flight 93의 이륙 지연과 기내에서 경고 된 승객의 행동으로 인해 다른 파괴 장비가되어 더 큰 생명을 잃을 수 없었습니다.)
수술은 수 년이 걸렸지 만 가해자들은 어떤 항공사가 영향을 받을지 미리 잘 알고있었습니다.
2001 년 9 월 11 일 세계 무역 센터 (World Trade Center)와 펜타곤 (Pentagon)에 대한 공격 이전에 미국과 유나이티드 항공의 주식 거래와 관련한 비정상적인 거래 활동은 시장 분석가들에 의해 기록되었다. 걸기 및 통화 비율의 격렬한 비정상적인 차이. 25 ~ 100 배 정상 & mdash; 2 개의 항공의 주식 선택권에서 소문에 의하면 관찰되었다. Bloomberg의 Trade Book 전자 거래 시스템은 2001 년 8 월 16 일 평상시보다 36 배 높은 UAL (유나이티드 항공의 모회사)의 옵션 거래량을 확인했습니다.
(특정 주식의 100 주 블록 가격이 특정 날짜까지 상승하거나 하락할 수있는 내기가 옵션입니다. & # 8220;는 주식을 베팅합니다. & # 8220; 특정 기업이 엄청난 양의 재산 상환을 겪고 있다고 믿을만한 이유가있는 사람은 해당 기업에 대해 구매할 것이고, # 8217;의 주식).
그러나 활동의 가장 흔치 않은 차이가 발생한 것은 최후의 몇 거래 일 (주말에는 시장 마감)이었습니다. 블룸버그 데이터에 따르면 지난 2001 년 9 월 6 일 목요일 블랙 프라이데이 이전에 UAL 주식의 풋 옵션 매수는 정상보다 거의 100 배 높았다.
2001 년 9 월 6 일과 7 일, 시카고 보드 옵션 거래소는 유나이티드 항공에 대해 4,744 개의 풋 옵션을 처리했습니다. 474,000 주에 번역, 396 통화 옵션, 또는 39,600 주에 비해. put-to-call 비율은 일반적으로 약 1 : 1이 될 것으로 예상되었지만 (United에 대한 부정적인 뉴스는 없었 음) 대신 12 : 1이었다.
2001 년 9 월 10 일 또 다른 사건이 발생한 뉴스 데이, American Airlines & # 8217; 옵션 부피는 4,516 풋과 748 콜이었는데, 권리에 의해이 옵션이 거래되어야하는 또 다른 날에는 6 : 1의 비율로 나타났습니다. 다른 항공사 주가는 영향을받지 않았습니다. 유나이티드와 아메리칸 만이 이런 방식으로 단락되었습니다.
Morgan Stanley와 Merrill Lynch (세계 무역 센터 공격으로 심하게 손상된 뉴욕 투자 회사 2 곳)의 가치 하락을 추측하는 투자가 가속화되었습니다.
미국의 테러리스트 공격에 관한 국가위원회 (9/11위원회라고도 함)는 이러한 소문에 대해 조사한 결과, 이전과는 다른 비정상적인 (그리고 초기에는 의심스러운) 거래 활동이 있었지만, 9 월 11 일까지, 그것은 우연히 모두 무의미했으며 9/11 공격에 대한 예지력이있는 당사자들에 의한 내부자 거래의 결과가 아니 었습니다.
9/11 이전의 내부자 거래에 대한 선전 된 주장은 일반적으로 공격 후 주가가 급락 한 회사의 비정상적인 9/11 이전 거래에 대한보고에 의존하고 있습니다. 일부 비정상적인 거래가 실제로 발생했지만 각각의 거래는 해로운 설명이있는 것으로 판명되었습니다. 예를 들어 풋 옵션의 양은 & mdash; 재고가 가격에 떨어질 때만 갚을 수있는 수단. 9 월 6 일에 유나이티드 항공 (United Airlines)의 모회사와 9 월 10 일에 아메리칸 항공으로 급증했다. 그 얼굴에 매우 의심스러운 거래. 그러나이 거래가 9/11과 관련이 없다는 추가 조사가 나왔다. 알 카에다와 상상할 수없는 단일 미국 기관 투자가는 9 월 6 일 UAL의 95 %를 9 월 10 일에 115,000 주를 사는 거래 전략의 일환으로 구입했다. 마찬가지로 의심스러운 거래 9 월 10 일 미국인들은 9 월 9 일 일요일 가입자에게 팩스로 보내지는 특정 미국 기반 옵션 거래 뉴스 레터를 추적했다. 다른 기관 및 증권 업계의 도움을 받아 SEC 및 FBI는 많은 외국 정부의 협력을 확보하는 것을 포함하여이 문제를 조사하는 데 막대한 자원을 투입했습니다. 이 수사관들은 분명히 의심 스럽지만 일관되게 무해한 것으로 판명되었습니다.
최종 업데이트 : 2005 년 12 월 11 일
카펜터, 데이브. & # 8220; 옵션 Exchange는 공격 전 비정상적인 거래에 대한 보고서를 조사합니다. & # 8221;
AP 통신 2001 년 9 월 18 일
학교생, 주디스. 테러에 휩싸인 주식 시장의 야생 시장 스윙에 대한 조사. & # 8221;
[뉴욕] 데일리 뉴스. 2001 년 9 월 20 일 (6 쪽).
Toedtman, James 및 Charles Zehren. & # 8220; 테러로부터 이익을 얻으시겠습니까? & # 8221;
뉴스 데이. 2001 년 9 월 19 일 (p39).
팁이나 소문있어? 여기에 문의하십시오.
스누피가받은 편지함에 배달 됨 :
게시 날짜 : 2008 년 4 월 24 일
Snopes Facebook Group.
최다 검색.
트럼프 행정부는 CDC 관계자가 특정 단어를 사용하는 것을 금지합니까?
2017 년 12 월 15 일 정책 분석가들은 "태아 (fetus)"와 "트랜스젠더 (transgender)"를 포함하는 예산 정책 문서에서 7 단어의 사용을 피하도록 지시받을 것이라고 보고서는 말합니다.
FCC는 순 중립을 반복합니다.
2017 년 12 월 14 일 공화당 대다수의 FCC 위원들은 개방 인터넷 접속을 보장하는 오바마 시대의 규제를 제거하기로 결정했다. 여기 평균 사용자가 의미하는 바가 있습니다.
이 & # 8216; 보이지 않는 외투 & # 8217; 비디오 리얼?
2017 년 12 월 11 일 디지털 비디오 편집 소프트웨어로 "보이지 않는 외투"를 보여주는 영상이 만들어졌습니다.
힐러리 클린턴 (Hillary Clinton)은 미국의 20 %를 얻었다. 클린턴 재단 기부를위한 우라늄 교류
러시아가 클린턴 파운데이션에 1 억 4500 만 달러를 기부 한 대가로 미국 우라늄 매장량의 5 분의 1을 소유하고있는 "quid pro quo"거래에 대한 주장은 입증되지 않았다.
도널드 트럼프는 공화당이 "유권자 그룹"이라고 말 했나요?
2015 년 10 월 16 일 Donald Trump는 1998 년 People '잡지 인터뷰에서 공화당이 "멍청한 유권자 집단"이라고 선언하지 않았습니다.
대부분의 공유.
스타 벅스가 이라크에서 해병대 원에게 무료 제품을 거부 했습니까?
스타 벅스가 무료 제품을 이라크에서 해병대 원에게 거절했다는 소문은 회사가 전쟁이나 그곳에 가담하는 사람들을지지하지 않는다고 말하는 것이 낡고 틀렸다.
허리케인 카트리나에서 대통령 버락 오바마 대통령 이었습니까?
2001 년 8 월 30 일 트위터 사용자는 오바마 대통령에 대한 카트리나 구호 문제에 대한 비난을 피하려했으나 대통령이 뉴 올리언즈를 강타했을 때조차 대통령이 아니 었습니다.
안티파 회원은 경찰을 때리는 사진을 찍었습니까?
2017 년 8 월 14 일 경찰관을 때리는 안티파 회원을 보여주는 사진이 디지털 방식으로 조작되었습니다.
운전자가 가스 펌프 핸들에서 HIV에 감염된 바늘을 찾는가?
서비스 스테이션 고객이 가스 펌프 핸들에 부착 된 HIV 주입 주사기로 인해 달라 붙는 업데이트 된 소문은 날조입니다.
텍사스 교회 사수가 남북 전쟁을 시작하겠다고 단언 한 안티파 회원 이었습니까?
2017 년 11 월 5 일 범법자가 앤티 파 깃발을 들고 교회 교인들에게 "이것은 공산주의 혁명이다"고 가짜 뉴스라고 보도합니다.
내부자 거래.
공격으로 상처를 입은 회사에 대한 9/11 이전 옵션은 예지력을 나타냅니다.
공격 전날의 금융 거래는 엄청난 이익을 거두기 위해 공격에 대한 예지력을 사용하는 특정 개인을 암시합니다. 1 내부자 거래의 증거는 다음과 같습니다.
유나이티드 항공사와 아메리칸 항공의 공격에 사용 된 두 항공사의 주식에 대한 Put 옵션 구매의 큰 폭증 - 공격으로부터 손실을 충당하기 위해 수십억 달러를 지불 할 것으로 예상되는 재보험 회사의 주식에 대한 Put 옵션 구매로 급증 - Munich Re 그리고 AXA 그룹은 공격으로 상처를 입은 금융 서비스 회사의 주식에 풋 옵션을 매입하고 있습니다. - Merrill Lynch & amp; 주식 및 Morgan Stanley와 Bank of America 공격으로 얻을 것으로 예상되는 무기 제조업체의 주식에 대한 콜 옵션 매입이 크게 증가했습니다. - Raytheon 5 년 만기 미 재무 성 채권 매수가 크게 늘었습니다.
각각의 경우에 주식 시장이 공격 후 일주일 만에 열리 자마자 큰 이윤을 얻은 비정상적인 구매 : 공격에 의해 상처를 입을 주식에 풋 옵션이 사용되고 이익을 얻는 주식에 콜 옵션이 사용되었습니다.
풋 및 콜 옵션은 보유자가 특정 날짜까지 지정된 가격으로 자산을 매매 할 수 있도록하는 계약입니다. Put 옵션은 주식을 시가로 매수하고 더 높은 옵션 가격으로 팔 수 있기 때문에 주식 보유자가 주식 가치 하락으로 이익을 얻을 수있게합니다. 옵션 계약을 체결하기위한 풋 옵션 계약의 비율을 풋 / 콜 비율이라고합니다. 비율은 보통 1보다 작으며 약 0.8의 값은 정상으로 간주됩니다. 2.
아메리칸 항공과 유나이티드 항공, 그리고 여러 보험 회사와 은행은 9 월 17 일에 시장이 개장했을 때 주식 가치가 크게 하락했다. 투자자가 주식 가치 하락으로 이익을 얻을 수있는 금융 상품 - 공격하기 1 주일 전에 대량으로이 회사의 주식.
유나이티드 항공 및 아메리칸 항공.
이 공격으로 가장 많은 피해를 입은 기업 중 두 개는 Flight 11과 Flight 77의 운항 업체 인 American Airlines (AMR)과 175 대의 Flight와 93의 운항 업체 인 United Airlines (UAL)이었습니다. CBS News에 따르면 이전 주 공격, 아메리칸 항공의 입 / 통화 비율은 4였습니다. 3 United Airlines의 Put / Call 비율은 9 월 6 일 정상보다 25 배 높았습니다. 4.
풋 옵션의 급등은 항공사 및 주가에 문제가없는 날에 발생했습니다.
블룸버그 통신에 따르면 항공사의 풋 옵션은 평균 285 배의 놀라운 최고치를 기록했다.
유나이티드 항공의 주가는 공격 후 시장이 재개되면서 주당 30.82 달러에서 17.50 달러로 42 % 하락했으며 아메리칸 항공 주식은 주당 29.70 달러에서 18.00 달러로 39 퍼센트 하락했다. 7.
재보험 회사.
재보험 사업의 여러 회사는 독일의 뮌헨 재보험과 세계에서 가장 큰 재보험업자 인 스위스의 스위스 재보험과 프랑스의 AXA 그룹과 같은 대규모 손실을 입을 것으로 예상됩니다. 2001 년 9 월, 샌프란시스코 크로니클은 뮌헨 재보험에 대해 15 억 달러, AXA 그룹에 0.55 억 달러의 부채를 추정했으며 telegraph. co. uk는 뮌헨 재보험에 대해 12 억 달러, 스위스 재보험에 8 억 3 천만 달러의 부채를 추정했습니다. 8 9.
뮌헨 Re의 주식 거래는 9 월 6 일과 7 일에 거의 정상 수준의 두 배가되었고 스위스 Re 주식은 9 월 7 일 정상 수준의 두 배 이상이었다.
금융 서비스 회사.
메릴린치 및 Morgan Stanley Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & amp; Co. 와 Merrill Lynch & amp; Co. 는 공격 당시 맨해튼에 본사를두고있었습니다. Morgan Stanley는 북쪽 타워 22 층을 점거했으며 Merrill Lynch는 Twin Towers 근처에 본사를두고있었습니다. 모건 스탠리 (Morgan Stanley)는 9 월 6 일 이전에 하루 평균 27 개 종목을 매입했다. 공격 전 3 거래일 동안 2,157 종목을 매수했다. 메릴린치는 9 월 5 일 이전에 하루 평균 252 종의 옵션을 매입 한 결과, 공격 전 4 거래일 동안 12,215 풋 옵션을 매수했다. 시장이 재개되면 Morgan Stanley의 주식은 13 % 하락했고 Merrill Lynch의 주식은 11.5 % 하락했다. 11.
뱅크 오브 아메리카 (Bank of America)는 공격 전 목요일과 금요일에 풋 옵션 거래가 5 배 증가했다고 밝혔다.
대부분의 회사는 공격에 따라 주가가 하락하는 것을 볼 수 있지만, 군대에 공급하는 사업에 종사하는 사람들은 새로운 사업을 반영하여 극적인 증가를 보게됩니다.
애국자와 토마 호크 미사일 제조사 인 레이 시온 (Raytheon)은 공격 직후에 그 주식이 급격히 증가하는 것을 보았다. Raytheon 주식에 대한 콜 옵션 매입은 공격 전날 6 배 증가했습니다.
Raytheon은 수백만 달러에 벌금을 부과하여 미군을 판매하는 장비 비용을 부풀렸다. Raytheon은 고객이 CIA와 NSA를 포함하고있는 비밀 자회사 인 E-Systems를 보유하고 있습니다. 14.
미국 재무 성 노트.
5 년 만기 미 재무부 채권은 공격 이전에 비정상적으로 대량 구매되었으며, 구매자는 공격에 따라 가치가 급격하게 상승했다.
SEC의 조사.
공격 직후 SEC는 전 세계의 증권 회사에 주식 목록을 배포하여 정보를 수집했습니다. 16 미국의 항공, 유나이티드 항공, 콘티넨탈 항공, 노스 웨스트 항공, 사우스 웨스트 항공, US 에어웨이, 마틴, 보잉, 록히드 마틴사, AIG 등의 회사가 증권 거래소에 신고했다. 아메리칸 익스프레스 코퍼레이션, 아메리칸 인터내셔널 그룹, AMR 코퍼레이션, AXA SA, 뱅크 오브 아메리카 코포레이션, 뱅크 원 코포레이션, Cigna 그룹, CNA 파이낸셜, Carnival Corp, Chubb Group, John Hancock Financial Services, Hercules Inc., L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc., LTV Corporation, Marsh & amp; McLennan Cos Inc., MetLife, Progressive Corp., General Motors, Raytheon, W. R. Grace, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Lone Star Technologies, American Express, Citigroup Inc., Royal & Sun Alliance, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Vornado Reality Trust, Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter & amp; Co., XL Capital Ltd., Bear Stearns 등이있다.
샌프란시스코 크로니클 (San Francisco Chronicle)에 실린 10 월 19 일자 기사에 따르면, SEC는 침묵의시기를 맞아 수 백명의 민간 공무원을 조사하는 전례없는 행동을 취했다.
전국의 모든 증권 관련 단체에 발행 된 2 쪽짜리 성명서에서 SEC는 기업들에게 사건의 "민감한 성격"에 감사하는 고위 인사를 지명하고 "적절한 재량권 행사"를 "요점"으로 삼을 수 있다고 회사에 요청했다. 정부 수사관과 업계를 연결하는 사람들. 17.
전 LAPD 장교였던 Michael Ruppert는이 행동의 결과를 설명합니다.
데이터 해석 및 재 해석.
공격과 관련된 명백한 내부자 거래의 주제에 대한 언론 보도의 분석은 이례적으로 강조하는 초기 보고서와 함께 추세를 보여 주며 나중에 변명을 보도합니다. Crossing the Rubicon 마이클 C. 루퍼트 (Michael C. Ruppert)는 그의 책 "Crossing the Rubicon"에서 공격 직후 발간 된 여러 보고서를 발췌하여이 점을 보여줍니다.
UAL (유나이티드 에어 라인)에서의 점프는 9 월 6 일과 9 월 10 일 사이에 평상시보다 90 배 (90 %가 아닌)의 옵션을두고 공격 전 목요일에 평균보다 285 배 높은 옵션을 둡니다.
- CBS News, September 26 아메리칸 항공의 급증으로 공격 전날 정상보다 60 배 (60 %가 아닌)의 옵션을 둡니다.
- CBS News, 9 월 26 일 다른 항공사와 비슷한 거래가 발생하지 않았습니다.
- 블룸버그 비즈니스 보고서, ICT, 이스라엘 헤르츠 리야 [CBOE의 자료 인용] 3 모건 스탠리 (Morgan Stanley)는 9 월 7 일과 9 월 10 일 사이에 27 회 (27 %가 아님) 그것의 몫에 선택권을 두십시오. 4.
3. 2001 년 9 월 22 일 Herzlyya 국제 테러 방지 정책 연구소 (ICT)의 빈 라덴 내부자 거래 사기의 역학. Michael C. Ruppert, "9-11 공격에 대한 부시 행정부 사전 지식의 사례" The Wilderness April 22, 2002. 연구 및 세계화 센터 에 게시 됨.
4. ICT, op. 시카고의 옵션 거래소 (CBOE)의 데이터를 인용하여 인용했다. [. ] "CBPE에서 훈련 된 테러범들." 시카고 일 - 타임즈, 2001 년 9 월 20 일, & lt; suntimes / terror / stories / cst-nws-trade20.html & gt; "확인 된 공격에 대한 옵션 거래 링크 조사"[. 2001 년 9 월 21 일 시카고 일 - 타임즈, .
Ruppert는 그 이야기를 특이한 것으로 설명함으로써 묻어 버리려는 명백한 시도를 보여줍니다. 9 월 30 일자 뉴욕 타임스 기사에 따르면 SEC의 조사에서 "양성적인 설명이 나오고있다"고 주장하고있다. 이 기사는 "시장 비관론"에 대해 정량화되지 않은 풋 옵션의 활동을 비난하지만 항공사 주가가 동일한 시장 비관론을 반영하지 않는 이유를 설명하지 못한다.
250 만 달러의 풋 옵션이 청구되지 않은 채로 남아 있다는 사실은 시장 비관론에 의해 전혀 설명되지 않고 풋 옵션 구매자가 범죄 음모의 일부라는 증거입니다. 21.
옵션 넣기.
9/11 전에 유나이티드 항공과 아메리칸 항공에 내기를 걸었습니다.
9/11 스캔들 중 하나는 & quot; 풋 옵션 & quot; 9/11 테러 직전에 유나이티드 항공의 미국 주식 가치에 비극을 빚은 사람이있다.
오사마 현이 역사상 가장 아프간 주식 거래를 한 것으로 추측하는 주류 언론의 기사가 많아 공격 후 몇 주 만에 세계 금융계에서 큰 뉴스가되었습니다. 그러나 대부분의 기사에서는 주식 시장이 실시간으로 모니터링되고 있다고 언급하지 않았습니다 (다른 이유로도 이러한 유형의 위협에 대한 정보를 제공 할 수 있습니다). 9/11과 같은 주요 범죄를 저지른 사람이 유나이티드 항공과 미국 항공사의 주식 거래와 같은 계획에 대한 증거를 제공하지는 않을 것입니다. 왜냐하면 심각한 감시를 받고 아마도 잔학 행위에 대한 계획을 혼란시킬 것이기 때문입니다 (잔학 행위가 ' 국토 보안 경찰국과 중동 유전의 압수에 대한 구실을 제공하기 위해 녹색 빛을 암묵적으로 제공했다.
몇 주 후 마이클 루 퍼트 (Michael Ruppert)에 의해 발행 된 Wilderness에서, 영향을받은 항공사 (타워에 위치한 다른 몇몇 회사)의 Put 옵션을 이전에 CIA 사무 총장이 이끄는 AB Brown 3 번 위치).
풋 옵션에 관한 이야기가 갑자기 미디어에서 사라졌고 이제는 주로 웹을 통해 보도되는 지하 언론 만이 이야기를 나눕니다. 현재까지 주식 거래를 한 정부에 대한 공개 조사는 없었습니다. (A B 브라운은 단순히 사용 된 회사 중 하나였으며 상인의 신원은 공개적으로 알려지지 않았습니다).
2004 년 9/11위원회 보고서가 발표되었을 때 PDF 다운로드가 가능했습니다. 제가 찾은 첫 번째 일은 유나이티드 항공과 아메리칸 항공의 9/11 이전 주식 거래에 대한 언급이었습니다. 위원회 보고서는 상인들이 알 카에다와 관련이 없기 때문에 중요하지 않다고 설명했다. 이 보고서는 상인들이 CIA와 관련이 있는지를 논의하지 않았다.
Lars Schall.
9/11 내부자 거래의 세부 사항을 추적하는 독립적 인 독일 언론인.
아시아는 온라인 독점 조사를 시작합니다.
내부자 거래 9/11. 사실은 벌거 벗었다.
2001 년 9 월 11 일경에 주식이 갑자기 하락할 것이라는 베팅 옵션에 대한 투기 거래는 미국 증권 거래위원회 (SEC)와 9/11위원회가 그렇게 말하지 마라. 소수의 사람들이 테러 공격에 대한 사전 경고가 있었음에 틀림이 없으며 수백만 달러에 현금을 지불했습니다.
특수 작업 이해.
비밀 팀 이해.
Fletcher Prouty와의 인터뷰.
주식 중개인은 돼지의만이 열리기 시작하기 며칠 전에 워싱톤에서 나에게 전화를 걸었다. "Prouty 대령 - 방금 나를 알기 위해 일어났던 일이다, 그는 나의 직업을 알지 않았다. 그러나 그는 말했다 - 대령 갑자기 펜타곤 사람들이 설탕 재고를 사라고 부르는 이유를 설명해 주시겠습니까? " 카스트로는 미국의 설탕을 보이콧하고 기업들은 많은 돈을 잃어 버렸기 때문에 설탕은 페니로 떨어졌다. 그러나 갑자기 침략의 전망을 알고 있던 사람들은 한 번에 1 만 달러, 2 만 달러의 사탕 스톡을 사려고했고 돼지 사냥 베이가 상륙하기 전에는 설탕 재고량이 많이 올라갔습니다. 그들은 상업적 벤처 기업으로 운영하고있었습니다.
돈 따라와? 신 금지.
9.11 테러가 조사되기 바로 전에 수십억 달러의 현금화가 왜 발생 했습니까?
그들은 살인을했다.
CIA가 주도한 쿠데타에 관한 비밀을 아는 사람들이 그 정보를 사용하여 주식 시장을 게임 했습니까?
2008 년 10 월 28 일 화요일 게시 됨.
테러의 수수께끼 '내부자 상인'
Chris Blackhurst, The Independent, 2001 년 10 월 14 일
주식 투기꾼들은 9 월 11 일 세계 무역 센터 (World Trade Center) 공격 이후 유나이티드 항공의 주가 하락으로 생긴 이윤에서 2.5 백만 달러 ($ 1.7m)를 모으지 못했다.
한 달이 넘게 돈이 청구되지 않았다는 사실은 우연의 일치로 기각 된 이야기에 대한 수사관들의 관심을 다시 불러 일으켰다.
주식 가격의 추락을 예견 할 수있는 투자자가 너무 비관적으로 비극적 인 이익을 보는 것을 꺼려 할 수도 있습니다. 그러나 수사관들은 더 불길한 설명이 있는지 궁금해합니다.
당국은 규제 당국이 사기 가능성을 깨기 전에 상인들이 무슨 일이 일어날지를 알면 즉시 이익을 얻으려는 의도가 있는지를 조사하고있다. 그러나 투자자들은 재앙에 대한 미국 주식 시장의 첫 번째 반응은 4 일 동안 모든 거래를 중단하여 이익을 얻는 기회가 없다고 예측하지 못했다.
납치 사건으로 큰 이득을 얻은 선물 거래에 대한 자세한 내용이 공개되었습니다. 조사관의 당혹감에 따라, 회사가 많은 "put"상품을 구매할 때 사용되는 것으로 나타났습니다. 옵션 - 사실 상인이 주가 하락에 베팅하는 유나이티드 항공 주식은 1998 년까지 "Buzzy"에 의해 이끌 렸습니다. Krongard, 지금 CIA의 전무 이사.
1997 년까지 Krongard는 미국에서 가장 오래된 투자 은행 회사 인 Alex Brown Inc의 회장이었습니다. Alex Brown은 Bankers Trust에 인수되었으며, Deutsche Bank가 인수했습니다. CIA에서 수석 역할을 맡기 위해 사직하기 전의 그의 마지막 직책은 Alex Brown의 개인 고객 비즈니스 인 Bankers Trust를 이끌고 전세계의 부유 한 고객들에 대한 투자와 투자를 다루는 것이 었습니다.
Krongard가 공격에 대한 사전 지식을 갖고 있었다는 어떠한 제안도 없습니다.
9 월 6 일에서 7 일 사이에 시카고 보드 옵션 거래소 (Chicago Board Options Exchange)는 4,744 "put & quot; UAL의 옵션 계약 대 396 통화 옵션 - 투기자가 가격 상승에 대해 베팅하는 경우. 풋 옵션 보유자는 9 월 11 일 이후 항공사 주가가 급등하면 5 백만 달러 (3.3m)의 이익을 얻었을 것이다. 9 월 10 일, 시카고에서 더 많은 거래가 이루어지면서 아메리칸 항공 (American Airlines)에 4,516 개의 풋 옵션이 매입되었습니다. 이것은 그 날 구매 한 미국인의 748 통화 옵션과 비교됩니다. 수사관들은 다른 항공사가 풋 옵션에서 그러한 거래를 보지 못했다는 것을 알 수는 없습니다.
그것은 현저하게 영리한 투자자에 의해 표적으로 한 항공이 아니었다. 세계 무역 센터의 가장 큰 거주자 중 하나는 투자 은행 인 Morgan Stanley입니다. 9 월 첫 주에 평균 27 개의 풋 옵션 계약이 매일 주식에 매입되었습니다. 공격 전 3 일 동안의 총계는 2,157이었다. anotherWTC 세입자 인 Merrill Lynch는 공격 전날 4 일 동안 하루에 252 계약의 평균을 보았을 때 12,215 풋 옵션을 구매했다.
저작권 및 사본; 2001 독립 디지털 (UK) Ltd.
공정한 사용만을 위해 증쇄.
9/11위원회의 설명
뉴욕의 닉 출신 :
내부자 거래에서 알리바이는
알 카에다와 상상할 수없는 단일 미국 기관 투자가는 9 월 6 일 UAL의 95 %를 9 월 10 일에 미국 주식 115,000 주를 인수하는 거래 전략의 일환으로 구매했다.
아. "알 카에다와 상상할 수없는 관계" "사전 지식 없음"으로 간주된다.
알 카에다 연결을 통해서만 예지를 얻을 수 있다고 가정합니다.
런던, 프랑크푸르트, 도쿄 외에서의 이야기에 대한 언급 없음. 또는 UAL 및 AAR 풋 옵션 (WTC 세입자, 재 투자자) 이외의 거래.
What about the uncollected $2.5 million? Who was the "small airline" responsible for the puts purchased in London?
Al Qaeda has been alleged to have used a variety of illegitimate means, particularly drug trafficking and conflict diamonds, to finance itself. While the drug trade was a source of income for the Taliban, it did not serve the same purpose for al Qaeda, and there is no reliable evidence that Bin Ladin was involved in or made his money through drug trafficking.128 Similarly, we have seen no persuasive evidence that al Qaeda funded itself by trading in African conflict diamonds.129 There also have been claims that al Qaeda financed itself through manipulation of the stock market based on its advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Exhaustive investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, FBI, and other agencies have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions.130. 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. Joseph Cella interview (Sept. 16,2003; May 7,2004; May 10-11,2004); FBI briefing (Aug.15,2003); SEC memo, Division of Enforcement to SEC Chair and Commissioners,"Pre-September 11,2001 Trading Review," May 15,2002; Ken Breen interview (Apr.23,2004); Ed G. interview (Feb.3,2004).
Mike Ruppert describes 9/11 insider trading.
several articles on the insider trading scandals.
SUPPRESSED DETAILS OF CRIMINAL INSIDER TRADING LEAD DIRECTLY INTO THE CIA's HIGHEST RANKS.
CIA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR "BUZZY" KRONGARD MANAGED FIRM THAT HANDLED "PUT" OPTIONS ON UAL.
Michael C. Ruppert.
FTW, October 9, 2001 - Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U. S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the "put options" on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency. Until 1997 A. B. "Buzzy" Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A. B. Brown. A. B. Brown was acquired by Banker's Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U. S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard's last position at Banker's Trust (BT) was to oversee "private client relations." In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U. S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
Krongard (re?) joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined firm is the single largest bank in Europe. And, as we shall see, Deutsche Bank played several key roles in events connected to the September 11 attacks. .
(note: most publications refuse to touch this material, one need not defend Larry Flynt's other publications to understand the importance of this interview - no nudity on that page, it is "G" rated)
Krongard and Blackwater.
This story was on the New York Times website on Saturday, November 17, 2007:
State IG's Brother Quits Blackwater.
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS.
Published: November 17, 2007.
Filed at 5:34 a. m. ET.
WASHINGTON (AP)-- The brother of embattled State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard quit as an adviser to Blackwater Worldwide on Friday, two days after the relationship with the security contractor was sharply criticized by a congressional oversight committee.
Erik Prince, Blackwater's top executive, said the conflict-of-interest questions raised by the connection prompted Alvin ''Buzzy'' Krongard to submit his resignation.
''I have reluctantly accepted it,'' Prince said in a statement.
It's unclear whether the move will salvage Howard Krongard's damaged credibility and career, however. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee plans to meet in December to determine if Howard Krongard testified truthfully about his brother.
Alvin Krongard never received any payment for his work on Blackwater's advisory board, which only met once, Prince said.
Prince said there are no allegations of impropriety against Alvin Krongard for his membership on Blackwater's board, a group recently created to help the North Carolina-based security company plan future business activities.
Blackwater is a major State Department contractor and the subject of ongoing federal investigations. One of those is examining whether Blackwater guards violated use-of-force rules during a Sept. 16 shooting in Baghdad that left 17 Iraqis dead.
Prince said there is no evidence that Howard Krongard's ability to perform his oversight duties was compromised by Alvin Krongard's relationship with Blackwater.
''The publicized allegation of an 'apparent conflict of interest' against his brother Howard, with whom Buzzy has not been close for years, is just that, an allegation,'' Prince's statement said.
Alvin Krongard's departure from Blackwater's board comes two days after the connection was made public during a hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. In sworn testimony Wednesday, Howard Krongard was asked by Democratic members of the committee about his brother's ties to Blackwater, and he angrily said there weren't any.
But when confronted by committee members with evidence Alvin Krongard had joined the board, Howard Krongard called his brother during a hearing break and was told he attended a Blackwater advisory board meeting in Williamsburg, Va., on Monday and Tuesday. Before that conversation, Howard Krongard said he was not aware of the link.
Howard Krongard then told the committee he was recusing himself from any inquires related to Blackwater.
On Thursday, however, Alvin Krongard challenged Howard Krongard's version of events. According to the oversight committee's chairman, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., Alvin Krongard called the committee and said he had told his brother well before Wednesday's hearing about his decision to become a strategic adviser to Blackwater.
In a move that further escalated the differences, Howard Krongard's attorney on Friday sent Waxman a copy of notes she said Howard Krongard took during an Oct. 31 conversation with his brother. The call was initiated by Howard Krongard and lasted 10 minutes, said attorney Barbara Van Gelder.
''No financial interest whatsoever,'' the notes read, referring to Alvin Krongard's explanation of his status with Blackwater. ''Was on short list for advisory board but not taking it.''
In a side note to himself on the same page, Howard Krongard wrote, ''Why would anybody go on the board now?''
Asked to reconcile the conflicting versions, Van Gelder called the situation ''he said, he said.''
''These discrepancies between the testimony of Howard Krongard and the information from Buzzy Krongard raise questions about the truthfulness of Howard Krongard's testimony,'' Waxman said in a memo delivered Friday to committee members.
The union that represents U. S. diplomats on Friday repeated its call for Krongard to step down.
''We still believe he should step aside temporarily until this issue has been fully resolved by the appropriate bodies,'' said John Naland, president of the American Foreign Service Association.
Waxman said he plans to invite the Krongard brothers to testify at the December hearing.
If both appear, it's likely to be a chilly reunion. They speak rarely.
Alvin Krongard contacted the committee after receiving a letter from Waxman seeking information about his connections to Blackwater and any communication he may have had with Howard Krongard about the company.
Alvin Krongard said he was watching his brother testify on television and heard him say there was no Blackwater connection.
''You could have blown me over,'' Alvin Krongard told the committee, according to Waxman's memo.
Alvin Krongard recounted for the committee the conversation he had with his brother prior to the hearing.
'''He asked me whether I had any financial interest or any ties to Blackwater, and so I told him 'I'm going on their board,''' Alvin Krongard told the committee, according to Waxman's memo. ''He responded by saying, 'Why would you do that?' and 'Are you sure that's a good idea?'''
It was his decision to make, Alvin Krongard told his brother, and ''we just differed on that,'' according to Waxman's memo.
Van Gelder, Howard Krongard's attorney, asked Waxman not to hold the December hearing.
''There is no legitimate legislative purpose to be gained by publicly pitting two brothers against each other,'' she said in a letter to Waxman.
The role of the advisory board is to offer ''leadership advice'' on the paths Blackwater should take to expand its business, according to the company. Prince invited Alvin Krongard to join the board in July.
Expenses for attending board meetings would be covered and board members would receive a $3,500 honorarium for each meeting attended. The money could be paid to them or to a charity of their choice.
In addition to recusing himself from matters related to Blackwater, Howard Krongard also said he is no longer involved in corruption investigations related to the flawed construction of the U. S. Embassy in Baghdad, a $600 million project that is beset by logistical delays and security concerns.
Associated Press writer Matthew Lee contributed to this report.
U. S. Suggests, Without Proof, Stock Adviser Knew of 9/11.
By ALEX BERENSON.
Published: May 25, 2002.
A San Diego stock adviser who is accused of bribing an F. B.I. agent to give him confidential government information may have had prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks, a federal prosecutor said yesterday. But a judge disregarded that contention and the adviser's lawyer called the allegation ludicrous.
In a court hearing in San Diego, Kenneth Breen, an assistant United States attorney, said the adviser, Amr Ibrahim Elgindy, tried to sell $300,000 in stock on the afternoon of Sept. 10 and told his broker that the stock market would soon plunge. ''Perhaps Mr. Elgindy had preknowledge of Sept. 11, and rather than report it he attempted to profit from it,'' Mr. Breen said.
Mr. Breen, coordinator of the stock market unit of a government task force set up to investigate financing for terrorist groups, offered no other evidence that Mr. Elgindy had prior knowledge of the attacks.
A lawyer for Mr. Elgindy said the allegation appeared to be motivated by the fact that Mr. Elgindy is Muslim and was born in Egypt. Senior F. B.I. officials also said they had no evidence that Mr. Elgindy had prior knowledge of the attacks.
In the hearing yesterday, Mr. Breen asked Judge John A. Houston of Federal District Court in San Diego to hold Mr. Elgindy without bond. Mr. Elgindy, also known as Tony Elgindy and Anthony Pacific, recently moved $700,000 to Lebanon and is a serious flight risk, Mr. Breen said.
Judge Houston disregarded Mr. Breen's claims about Mr. Elgindy and Sept. 11. But the judge said there was enough other evidence that Mr. Elgindy might flee to justify detaining him at least until a June 6 hearing to determine whether he should be moved to New York for a trial.
Jeanne Geren Knight, a lawyer for Mr. Elgindy, said after the hearing that Mr. Breen's allegations were ludicrous and untrue. ''The government, for lack of factual evidence, has decided to smear my client with terrorist innuendoes,'' Ms. Knight said. ''This is smacking of racial profiling.''
Mr. Elgindy and four other people, including one current and one former F. B.I. agent, were charged Wednesday with using confidential government information to manipulate stock prices and extort money from companies. Jeffrey A. Royer, who was an F. B.I. agent before joining Mr. Elgindy's stock advisory firm in December, accepted $30,000 from a partner of Mr. Elgindy's in exchange for providing Mr. Elgindy with information about current criminal investigations of companies, prosecutors allege.
Mr. Elgindy and his partner, Derrick W. Cleveland, sold short the shares of companies that they learned were under investigation, according to the indictment. (Short sellers borrow shares and sell them, hoping to buy them back later at a lower price and pocket the difference.) Then Mr. Elgindy publicized the negative information on two Web sites he ran, hoping that the companies' stocks would fall, prosecutors say.
At the hearing yesterday, Mr. Breen said that on the afternoon of Sept. 10, Mr. Elgindy contacted his broker at Salomon Smith Barney and asked him to sell $300,000 in stock in his children's trust funds. During the Sept. 10 conversation, Mr. Elgindy predicted that the Dow Jones industrial average, which at the time stood at about 9,600, would soon crash to below 3,000, Mr. Breen said. Mr. Elgindy was unable to sell the stock before markets closed Sept. 10, and it was instead sold Sept. 18, the first day that markets reopened for trading after the attacks, Mr. Breen said.
The Salomon Smith Barney broker contacted the F. B.I. after the attacks to report the conversation, Mr. Breen said. He did not identify the broker. A spokesman for Salomon Smith Barney confirmed that Mr. Elgindy was a client but said that Salomon did not comment on matters relating to its clients.
Mr. Elgindy also transferred more than $700,000 to Lebanon in the months after the attacks, Mr. Breen said. When F. B.I. agents raided Mr. Elgindy's home outside San Diego on Wednesday, Mr. Breen said, they found $43,000 in cash, as well as a loose diamond and faxes indicating that Mr. Elgindy had been tipped about the raid and had given his wife a power of attorney to liquidate his assets.
Ms. Knight, Mr. Elgindy's lawyer, denied that Mr. Elgindy had any prior knowledge of the attacks.
Mr. Elgindy's wife is from Louisiana, Ms. Knight said, adding that his mother was a pediatrician and his father a professor. ''Tony isn't political at all,'' she said. ''He's a capitalist. He's not going to move to a third world country.''
Senior law enforcement officials said yesterday that investigators had no hard evidence that Mr. Elgindy had advance information about the Sept. 11 attacks. So far, they have not found anyone who had prior knowledge of the attacks, they said. But they said the investigation into why Mr. Elgindy tried to sell the shares in his children's trust accounts before Sept. 11 had raised questions that had not been fully answered.
Mr. Elgindy has been an active supporter of Muslim causes. In 1999, he arranged to bring 30 Muslim refugees from Kosovo to the United States, according to The Daily Herald of Chicago.
Mr. Elgindy said the violence in Kosovo, Serbia's southern province, appalled him, comparing it to the shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado. ''Take Columbine, have it occur five times a day for a year, and that's Kosovo,'' Mr. Elgindy told The Daily Herald.
Mr. Elgindy's father and brother are also active in Arab and Muslim causes. His father, Ibrahim Elgindy, founded an umbrella group of Muslim organizations in Chicago and led a 1998 protest on behalf of Muhammad A. Salah, whose assets were seized that year after the United States government linked Mr. Salah to Hamas, the radical Palestinian group. Mr. Elgindy's brother, Khaled, has worked for several Arab political groups.
Neither Ibrahim Elgindy nor Khaled Elgindy has ever been linked to terrorism. Khaled Elgindy did not return calls yesterday. Ibrahim Elgindy could not be reached for comment.
Mr. Elgindy himself publicly criticized the Sept. 11 attacks. In a press release that day, his company, Pacific Equity Investigations, said, ''We must seek, find, apprehend and destroy those who are responsible for this terrorist attack.''
Two days later, Mr. Elgindy put out another press release, saying that he had forwarded to the F. B.I. and the Securities and Exchange Commission ''many Internet posts and messages that may have relevance on this tragedy and the capture of the responsible parties behind it.'' He also asked that investors refrain from selling short the stocks of any United States companies or the United States dollar.
Mr. Elgindy sold the shares in his children's trusts five days later.
911 stock put options
There was very high trading in "put options" on American Airline and United Airlines, immediately before 9/11. These were effectively gambles that their share prices would fall, which of course is what happened once the attacks took place. This shows the traders must have had advance knowledge of 9/11.
This is a complex story, but the claims don’t always match the reality.
"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.
Perhaps the strongest challenge to this conclusion comes from Professor Allen M Poteshman from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He decided to investigate this further, analysing market data statistically to try and assess the trades’ significance. Professor Poteshman points out several reasons to question the foreknowledge argument:
Despite the views expressed by the popular media, leading academics, and option market professionals, there is reason to question the decisiveness of the evidence that terrorists traded in the option market ahead of the September 11 attacks. One event that casts doubt on the evidence is the crash of an American Airlines plane in New York City on November 12. According to the OCC Web site, three trading days before, on November 7, the put-call ratio for options on AMR stock was 7.74. On the basis of the statements made about the links between option market activity and terrorism shortly after September 11, it would have been tempting to infer from this put-call ratio that terrorism probably was the cause of the November 12 crash. Subsequently, however, terrorism was all but ruled out. While it might be the case that an abnormally large AMR put-call ratio was observed by chance on November 7, this event certainly raises the question of whether put-call ratios as large as 7.74 are, in fact, unusual. Beyond the November 12 plane crash, an article published in Barron’s on October 8 (Arvedlund 2001) offers several additional grounds for being skeptical about the claims that it is likely that terrorists or their associates traded AMR and UAL options ahead of the September 11 attacks. For starters, the article notes that the heaviest trading in the AMR options did not occur in the cheapest, shortest-dated puts, which would have provided the largest profits to someone who knew of the coming attacks. Furthermore, an analyst had issued a “sell” recommendation on AMR during the previous week, which may have led investors to buy AMR puts. Similarly, the stock price of UAL had recently declined enough to concern technical traders who may have increased their put buying, and UAL options are heavily traded by institutions hedging their stock positions. Finally, traders making markets in the options did not raise the ask price at the time the orders arrived as they would have if they believed that the orders were based on adverse nonpublic information: the market makers did not appear to find the trading to be out of the ordinary at the time that it occurred.
However, he then devises a statistical model, which he suggests is consistent with foreknowledge after all:
Options traders, corporate managers, security analysts, exchange officials, regulators, prosecutors, policy makers, and—at times—the public at large have an interest in knowing whether unusual option trading has occurred around certain events. A prime example of such an event is the September 11 terrorist attacks, and there was indeed a great deal of speculation about whether option market activity indicated that the terrorists or their associates had traded in the days leading up to September 11 on advance knowledge of the impending attacks. This speculation, however, took place in the absence of an understanding of the relevant characteristics of option market trading.
One issue that troubles us about this is the lack of analysis of the string of bad news delivered by American Airlines on September 7th, the trading day before September 10th, when the most significant trading occurred. Professor Poteshman told us via :
My study does include quantile regressions that account for the market conditions on particular stocks. Hence, there is at least a first order correction for the negative news that was coming out on Sept. 7 on AMR.
But can you really treat the news so simply? Professor Paul Zarembka supports the claims, saying:
Poteshman finds . these purchases [of options on American Airline stock] . had only 1 percent probability of occurring simply randomly.
But we’re not saying they were random, rather that they may have been a rational response to significant bad news delivered the day before. Poteshman is essentially saying (with regard to AMR) is that people bought too many puts for that to be explained by the 9/7 news, therefore another explanation is required, but how can you say that without analysing the news itself? After all, if that news had been “we’ll probably be bankrupt in six months” then the put ratios would probably have been even more significant, and Poteshman’s model given even more confirmation of “unusual option market activity”, but would that have made the idea of foreknowledge more likely? We don’t think so. Obviously the AMR news was less significant, but we would still say that you cannot accurately judge the significance of these trades until you take it into consideration.
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.
The September 6th UAL puts would automatically appear significant, then, even though only one investor was reportedly behind them. But does that really mean you can mathematically indicate it’s likely that investor had foreknowledge of 9/11, without considering the other market conditions and information available at the time?
911 stock put options
Options The Days Prior To 911?
Can You Amplify On This Comment, Please?
By Walter J. Burien, Jr.
12-30-3 Gentlemen: Can we all unite on a single task: finding out who placed the orders for the "put" options in the days immediately before 9/11? Discussions I've had in the enclosed e-mail seem to indicate this information is available and not protected by financial disclosure restrictions. Please examine the enclosed and brainstorm how we can get this information into the public sphere. It could be the thread to unravel the mystery. Discovering the names of those who apparently had prior knowledge of 9/11 as indicated by their "savvy" bets on the fortunes of United and American airlines are a necessary first step toward interrogating these individuals to find out where they got their information, something the law enforcement community should be doing but obviously isn't. Best wishes, John Kaminski REPLY FROM.
911 stock put options
Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading Lead Directly into the CIA’s Highest Ranks.
FTW - October 9, 2001 – Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U. S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency.
Until 1997 A. B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A. B. Brown. A. B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U. S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U. S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
THE SCOPE OF KNOWN INSIDER TRADING.
Before looking further into these relationships it is necessary to look at the insider trading information that is being ignored by Reuters, The New York Times and other mass media. It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades – in real time – as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U. S. interests. Previous stories in FTW have specifically highlighted the use of Promis software to monitor such trades.
It is necessary to understand only two key financial terms to understand the significance of these trades, “selling short” and “put options”.
“Selling Short” is the borrowing of stock, selling it at current market prices, but not being required to actually produce the stock for some time. If the stock falls precipitously after the short contract is entered, the seller can then fulfill the contract by buying the stock after the price has fallen and complete the contract at the pre-crash price. These contracts often have a window of as long as four months.
“Put Options,” are contracts giving the buyer the option to sell stocks at a later date. Purchased at nominal prices of, for example, $1.00 per share, they are sold in blocks of 100 shares. If exercised, they give the holder the option of selling selected stocks at a future date at a price set when the contract is issued. Thus, for an investment of $10,000 it might be possible to tie up 10,000 shares of United or American Airlines at $100 per share, and the seller of the option is then obligated to buy them if the option is executed. If the stock has fallen to $50 when the contract matures, the holder of the option can purchase the shares for $50 and immediately sell them for $100 – regardless of where the market then stands. A call option is the reverse of a put option, which is, in effect, a derivatives bet that the stock price will go up.
A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism, entitled “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” documented the following trades connected to the September 11 attacks:
- 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.
- [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]
- No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.
- Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley’s share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million. Merrill Lynch & Co., with headquarters near the Twin Towers, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill’s shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by “insiders,” their profit would have been about $5.5 million.
- European regulators are examining trades in Germany’s Munich Re, Switzerland’s Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [ FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a “double whammy” for them.]
On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data.
“The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors – whose identities and nationalities have not been made public – had advance knowledge of the strikes.” They don’t dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.
“… October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called “put” options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearinghouse Corp.”
“…The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options…” This was the operation managed by Krongard until as recently as 1998.
As reported in other news stories, Deutsche Bank was also the hub of insider trading activity connected to Munich Re. just before the attacks.
CIA, THE BANKS AND THE BROKERS.
Understanding the interrelationships between CIA and the banking and brokerage world is critical to grasping the already frightening implications of the above revelations. Let’s look at the history of CIA, Wall Street and the big banks by looking at some of the key players in CIA’s history.
Clark Clifford – The National Security Act of 1947 was written by Clark Clifford, a Democratic Party powerhouse, former Secretary of Defense, and one-time advisor to President Harry Truman. In the 1980s, as Chairman of First American Bancshares, Clifford was instrumental in getting the corrupt CIA drug bank BCCI a license to operate on American shores. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and banker.
John Foster and Allen Dulles – These two brothers “designed” the CIA for Clifford. Both were active in intelligence operations during WW II. Allen Dulles was the U. S. Ambassador to Switzerland where he met frequently with Nazi leaders and looked after U. S. investments in Germany. John Foster went on to become Secretary of State under Dwight Eisenhower and Allen went on to serve as CIA Director under Eisenhower and was later fired by JFK. Their professions: partners in the most powerful - to this day - Wall Street law firm of Sullivan, Cromwell.
Bill Casey – Ronald Reagan’s CIA Director and OSS veteran who served as chief wrangler during the Iran-Contra years was, under President Richard Nixon, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and stockbroker.
David Doherty - The current Vice President of the New York Stock Exchange for enforcement is the retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.
George Herbert Walker Bush – President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11 th largest defense contractor in the nation, which also shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.
A. B. “Buzzy” Krongard – The current Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency is the former Chairman of the investment bank A. B. Brown and former Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust.
John Deutch - This retired CIA Director from the Clinton Administration currently sits on the board at Citigroup, the nation’s second largest bank, which has been repeatedly and overtly involved in the documented laundering of drug money. This includes Citigroup’s 2001 purchase of a Mexican bank known to launder drug money, Banamex.
Nora Slatkin – This retired CIA Executive Director also sits on Citibank’s board.
Maurice “Hank” Greenburg – The CEO of AIG insurance, manager of the third largest capital investment pool in the world, was floated as a possible CIA Director in 1995. FTW exposed Greenberg’s and AIG’s long connection to CIA drug trafficking and covert operations in a two-part series that was interrupted just prior to the attacks of September 11. AIG’s stock has bounced back remarkably well since the attacks. To read that story, please go to copvcia/stories/part_2.html .
One wonders how much damning evidence is necessary to respond to what is now irrefutable proof that CIA knew about the attacks and did not stop them. Whatever our government is doing, whatever the CIA is doing, it is clearly NOT in the interests of the American people, especially those who died on September 11.
[© COPYRIGHT, 2001, Michael C. Ruppert and FTW Publications, copvcia . 판권 소유. – May be reprinted or distributed for non-profit purposes only.]
Commander in Chief.
Back Off Bin Ladens.
The Bushes and the Carlyle Group.
How Bush and other ex-politic os profit from connections and access.
What doesn't he want Americans to know?
The sanctions have loopholes our vice president made millions from.
September 11 Put Call.
were the stocks of various airlines shorted just before 9/11?
Claim: In the days just prior to the 11 September 2001, large quantities of stock in United and American Airlines were traded by persons with foreknowledge of the upcoming 9/11 attacks.
Origins: On 11 September 2001, four planes were hijacked and used in the Attack on America: American Airlines Flight 11 leaving Boston bound for Los Angeles, American Airlines Flight 77 leaving Washington bound for Los Angeles, United Airlines Flight 175 leaving Boston bound for Los Angeles, and United Airlines Flight 93 leaving Newark bound for San Francisco. Each of these planes was deliberately crashed, killing all on board — two into the World Trade Center towers, one into the Pentagon, and one into a field in Pennsylvania. (Only the delay in takeoff of UA Flight 93 and the actions of the alerted passengers on board prevented it from becoming yet another instrument of destruction resulting in an even greater loss of life.)
The operation had taken years to plan, and the perpetrators knew well in advance which airlines would be affected.
In the month prior to the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, unusual trading activity involving American and United Airlines stock was noted by market analysts who at the time had no idea what to make of it. Wildly unusual discrepancies in the put and call ratio — 25 to 100 times normal — were reportedly observed in stock options of the two airlines. In one case, Bloomberg’s Trade Book electronic trading system identified option volume in UAL (parent of United Airlines) on 16 August 2001 that was 36 times higher than usual.
(Options are wagers that the price of a 100-share block of a particular stock will rise or fall by a certain date. “Puts” are “shorts” — bets the stock price will fall. “Calls” are bets the price will rise. Thus, one who has reason to believe a particular company is about to suffer a terrible reversal of fortune would purchase “puts” against that entity’s stock.)
But it was during the final few trading days (the market closes on weekends) that the most unusual variances in activity occurred. Bloomberg data showed that on 6 September 2001, the Thursday before that black Tuesday, put-option volume in UAL stock was nearly 100 times higher than normal: 2,000 options versus 27 on the previous.
On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines’ stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.
On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines’ option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.
Accelerated investments speculating a downturn in the value of Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch (two New York investment firms severely damaged by the World Trade Center attack) were also observed.
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the “9/11 Commission”) investigated these rumors and found that although some unusual (and initially seemingly suspicious) trading activity did occur in the days prior to September 11, it was all coincidentally innocuous and not the result of insider trading by parties with foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks:
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 — instruments 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. The SEC and 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.
Last updated : 11 December 2005.
Carpenter, Dave. “Option Exchange Probing Reports of Unusual Trading Before Attacks.”
The Associated Press. 18 September 2001.
Schoolman, Judith. “Probe of Wild Market Swings in Terror-Tied Stocks.”
[New York] Daily News. 20 September 2001 (p. 6).
Toedtman, James and Charles Zehren. “Profiting from Terror?”
Newsday. 19 September 2001 (p. W39).
Got a tip or a rumor? Contact us here.
Snopes Delivered to Your Inbox:
Published: 24 April 2008.
Most Searched.
Trump Administration Bans CDC Officials From Using Certain Words?
15 December 2017 Policy analysts will be instructed to avoid using seven words in budget policy documents, including "fetus" and "transgender," say reports.
Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States’ Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?
Updated Allegations of a "quid pro quo" deal giving Russia ownership of one-fifth of U. S. uranium deposits in exchange for $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation are unsubstantiated.
FCC Repeals Net Neutrality.
14 December 2017 The Republican majority of FCC commissioners voted to eliminate Obama-era regulations ensuring open Internet access; here's what that could mean for the average user.
Is This ‘Invisibility Cloak’ Video Real?
11 December 2017 Footage purportedly showing an "invisibility cloak" was created with digital video editing software.
Did Donald Trump Say Republicans Are the “Dumbest Group of Voters”?
16 October 2015 Donald Trump did not proclaim that Republicans are the "dumbest group of voters" in a 1998 'People' magazine interview.
Most Shared.
Did Starbucks Refuse Free Product to Marines Serving in Iraq?
Updated A rumor that Starbucks refused free product to Marines serving in Iraq, saying the company didn't support the war or anyone taking part in it, is both old and false.
Was Barack Obama President During Hurricane Katrina?
30 August 2017 Twitter users tried to pin the blame for Katrina relief issues on Obama, though he wasn't even president when it hit New Orleans.
Antifa Member Photographed Beating Police Officer?
14 August 2017 A photograph purportedly showing an Antifa member hitting a police officer has been digitally manipulated.
Are Motorists Finding HIV-Infected Needles on Gas Pump Handles?
Updated Rumors that service station customers are getting stuck by HIV-loaded syringes affixed to gas pump handles are a hoax.
Was the Texas Church Shooter an Antifa Member Who Vowed to Start Civil War?
5 November 2017 Reports that the perpetrator carried an Antifa flag and told churchgoers “this is a communist revolution” are fake news.
4. ICT, op. 시카고의 옵션 거래소 (CBOE)의 데이터를 인용하여 인용했다. [. ] "CBPE에서 훈련 된 테러범들." 시카고 일 - 타임즈, 2001 년 9 월 20 일, & lt; suntimes / terror / stories / cst-nws-trade20.html & gt; "확인 된 공격에 대한 옵션 거래 링크 조사"[. 2001 년 9 월 21 일 시카고 일 - 타임즈,
Ruppert는 그 이야기를 특이한 것으로 설명함으로써 묻어 버리려는 명백한 시도를 보여줍니다. 9 월 30 일자 뉴욕 타임스 기사에 따르면 SEC의 조사에서 "양성적인 설명이 나오고있다"고 주장하고있다. 이 기사는 "시장 비관론"에 대해 정량화되지 않은 풋 옵션의 활동을 비난하지만 항공사 주가가 동일한 시장 비관론을 반영하지 않는 이유를 설명하지 못한다.
250 만 달러의 풋 옵션이 청구되지 않은 채로 남아 있다는 사실은 시장 비관론에 의해 전혀 설명되지 않고 풋 옵션 구매자가 범죄 음모의 일부라는 증거입니다. 21.
옵션 넣기.
9/11 전에 유나이티드 항공과 아메리칸 항공에 내기를 걸었습니다.
9/11 스캔들 중 하나는 & quot; 풋 옵션 & quot; 9/11 테러 직전에 유나이티드 항공의 미국 주식 가치에 비극을 빚은 사람이있다.
오사마 현이 역사상 가장 아프간 주식 거래를 한 것으로 추측하는 주류 언론의 기사가 많아 공격 후 몇 주 만에 세계 금융계에서 큰 뉴스가되었습니다. 그러나 대부분의 기사에서는 주식 시장이 실시간으로 모니터링되고 있다고 언급하지 않았습니다 (다른 이유로도 이러한 유형의 위협에 대한 정보를 제공 할 수 있습니다). 9/11과 같은 주요 범죄를 저지른 사람이 유나이티드 항공과 미국 항공사의 주식 거래와 같은 계획에 대한 증거를 제공하지는 않을 것입니다. 왜냐하면 심각한 감시를 받고 아마도 잔학 행위에 대한 계획을 혼란시킬 것이기 때문입니다 (잔학 행위가 ' 국토 보안 경찰국과 중동 유전의 압수에 대한 구실을 제공하기 위해 녹색 빛을 암묵적으로 제공했다.
몇 주 후 마이클 루 퍼트 (Michael Ruppert)에 의해 발행 된 Wilderness에서, 영향을받은 항공사 (타워에 위치한 다른 몇몇 회사)의 Put 옵션을 이전에 CIA 사무 총장이 이끄는 AB Brown 3 번 위치).
풋 옵션에 관한 이야기가 갑자기 미디어에서 사라졌고 이제는 주로 웹을 통해 보도되는 지하 언론 만이 이야기를 나눕니다. 현재까지 주식 거래를 한 정부에 대한 공개 조사는 없었습니다. (A B 브라운은 단순히 사용 된 회사 중 하나였으며 상인의 신원은 공개적으로 알려지지 않았습니다).
2004 년 9/11위원회 보고서가 발표되었을 때 PDF 다운로드가 가능했습니다. 제가 찾은 첫 번째 일은 유나이티드 항공과 아메리칸 항공의 9/11 이전 주식 거래에 대한 언급이었습니다. 위원회 보고서는 상인들이 알 카에다와 관련이 없기 때문에 중요하지 않다고 설명했다. 이 보고서는 상인들이 CIA와 관련이 있는지를 논의하지 않았다.
Lars Schall.
9/11 내부자 거래의 세부 사항을 추적하는 독립적 인 독일 언론인.
아시아는 온라인 독점 조사를 시작합니다.
내부자 거래 9/11. 사실은 벌거 벗었다.
2001 년 9 월 11 일경에 주식이 갑자기 하락할 것이라는 베팅 옵션에 대한 투기 거래는 미국 증권 거래위원회 (SEC)와 9/11위원회가 그렇게 말하지 마라. 소수의 사람들이 테러 공격에 대한 사전 경고가 있었음에 틀림이 없으며 수백만 달러에 현금을 지불했습니다.
특수 작업 이해.
비밀 팀 이해.
Fletcher Prouty와의 인터뷰.
주식 중개인은 돼지의만이 열리기 시작하기 며칠 전에 워싱톤에서 나에게 전화를 걸었다. "Prouty 대령 - 방금 나를 알기 위해 일어났던 일이다, 그는 나의 직업을 알지 않았다. 그러나 그는 말했다 - 대령 갑자기 펜타곤 사람들이 설탕 재고를 사라고 부르는 이유를 설명해 주시겠습니까? " 카스트로는 미국의 설탕을 보이콧하고 기업들은 많은 돈을 잃어 버렸기 때문에 설탕은 페니로 떨어졌다. 그러나 갑자기 침략의 전망을 알고 있던 사람들은 한 번에 1 만 달러, 2 만 달러의 사탕 스톡을 사려고했고 돼지 사냥 베이가 상륙하기 전에는 설탕 재고량이 많이 올라갔습니다. 그들은 상업적 벤처 기업으로 운영하고있었습니다.
돈 따라와? 신 금지.
9.11 테러가 조사되기 바로 전에 수십억 달러의 현금화가 왜 발생 했습니까?
그들은 살인을했다.
CIA가 주도한 쿠데타에 관한 비밀을 아는 사람들이 그 정보를 사용하여 주식 시장을 게임 했습니까?
2008 년 10 월 28 일 화요일 게시 됨.
테러의 수수께끼 '내부자 상인'
Chris Blackhurst, The Independent, 2001 년 10 월 14 일
주식 투기꾼들은 9 월 11 일 세계 무역 센터 (World Trade Center) 공격 이후 유나이티드 항공의 주가 하락으로 생긴 이윤에서 2.5 백만 달러 ($ 1.7m)를 모으지 못했다.
한 달이 넘게 돈이 청구되지 않았다는 사실은 우연의 일치로 기각 된 이야기에 대한 수사관들의 관심을 다시 불러 일으켰다.
주식 가격의 추락을 예견 할 수있는 투자자가 너무 비관적으로 비극적 인 이익을 보는 것을 꺼려 할 수도 있습니다. 그러나 수사관들은 더 불길한 설명이 있는지 궁금해합니다.
당국은 규제 당국이 사기 가능성을 깨기 전에 상인들이 무슨 일이 일어날지를 알면 즉시 이익을 얻으려는 의도가 있는지를 조사하고있다. 그러나 투자자들은 재앙에 대한 미국 주식 시장의 첫 번째 반응은 4 일 동안 모든 거래를 중단하여 이익을 얻는 기회가 없다고 예측하지 못했다.
납치 사건으로 큰 이득을 얻은 선물 거래에 대한 자세한 내용이 공개되었습니다. 조사관의 당혹감에 따라, 회사가 많은 "put"상품을 구매할 때 사용되는 것으로 나타났습니다. 옵션 - 사실 상인이 주가 하락에 베팅하는 유나이티드 항공 주식은 1998 년까지 "Buzzy"에 의해 이끌 렸습니다. Krongard, 지금 CIA의 전무 이사.
1997 년까지 Krongard는 미국에서 가장 오래된 투자 은행 회사 인 Alex Brown Inc의 회장이었습니다. Alex Brown은 Bankers Trust에 인수되었으며, Deutsche Bank가 인수했습니다. CIA에서 수석 역할을 맡기 위해 사직하기 전의 그의 마지막 직책은 Alex Brown의 개인 고객 비즈니스 인 Bankers Trust를 이끌고 전세계의 부유 한 고객들에 대한 투자와 투자를 다루는 것이 었습니다.
Krongard가 공격에 대한 사전 지식을 갖고 있었다는 어떠한 제안도 없습니다.
9 월 6 일에서 7 일 사이에 시카고 보드 옵션 거래소 (Chicago Board Options Exchange)는 4,744 "put & quot; UAL의 옵션 계약 대 396 통화 옵션 - 투기자가 가격 상승에 대해 베팅하는 경우. 풋 옵션 보유자는 9 월 11 일 이후 항공사 주가가 급등하면 5 백만 달러 (3.3m)의 이익을 얻었을 것이다. 9 월 10 일, 시카고에서 더 많은 거래가 이루어지면서 아메리칸 항공 (American Airlines)에 4,516 개의 풋 옵션이 매입되었습니다. 이것은 그 날 구매 한 미국인의 748 통화 옵션과 비교됩니다. 수사관들은 다른 항공사가 풋 옵션에서 그러한 거래를 보지 못했다는 것을 알 수는 없습니다.
그것은 현저하게 영리한 투자자에 의해 표적으로 한 항공이 아니었다. 세계 무역 센터의 가장 큰 거주자 중 하나는 투자 은행 인 Morgan Stanley입니다. 9 월 첫 주에 평균 27 개의 풋 옵션 계약이 매일 주식에 매입되었습니다. 공격 전 3 일 동안의 총계는 2,157이었다. anotherWTC 세입자 인 Merrill Lynch는 공격 전날 4 일 동안 하루에 252 계약의 평균을 보았을 때 12,215 풋 옵션을 구매했다.
저작권 및 사본; 2001 독립 디지털 (UK) Ltd.
공정한 사용만을 위해 증쇄.
9/11위원회의 설명
뉴욕의 닉 출신 :
내부자 거래에서 알리바이는
알 카에다와 상상할 수없는 단일 미국 기관 투자가는 9 월 6 일 UAL의 95 %를 9 월 10 일에 미국 주식 115,000 주를 인수하는 거래 전략의 일환으로 구매했다.
아. "알 카에다와 상상할 수없는 관계" "사전 지식 없음"으로 간주된다.
알 카에다 연결을 통해서만 예지를 얻을 수 있다고 가정합니다.
런던, 프랑크푸르트, 도쿄 외에서의 이야기에 대한 언급 없음. 또는 UAL 및 AAR 풋 옵션 (WTC 세입자, 재 투자자) 이외의 거래.
What about the uncollected $2.5 million? Who was the "small airline" responsible for the puts purchased in London?
Al Qaeda has been alleged to have used a variety of illegitimate means, particularly drug trafficking and conflict diamonds, to finance itself. While the drug trade was a source of income for the Taliban, it did not serve the same purpose for al Qaeda, and there is no reliable evidence that Bin Ladin was involved in or made his money through drug trafficking.128 Similarly, we have seen no persuasive evidence that al Qaeda funded itself by trading in African conflict diamonds.129 There also have been claims that al Qaeda financed itself through manipulation of the stock market based on its advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Exhaustive investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, FBI, and other agencies have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions.130. 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. Joseph Cella interview (Sept. 16,2003; May 7,2004; May 10-11,2004); FBI briefing (Aug.15,2003); SEC memo, Division of Enforcement to SEC Chair and Commissioners,"Pre-September 11,2001 Trading Review," May 15,2002; Ken Breen interview (Apr.23,2004); Ed G. interview (Feb.3,2004).
Mike Ruppert describes 9/11 insider trading.
several articles on the insider trading scandals.
SUPPRESSED DETAILS OF CRIMINAL INSIDER TRADING LEAD DIRECTLY INTO THE CIA's HIGHEST RANKS.
CIA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR "BUZZY" KRONGARD MANAGED FIRM THAT HANDLED "PUT" OPTIONS ON UAL.
Michael C. Ruppert.
FTW, October 9, 2001 - Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U. S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the "put options" on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency. Until 1997 A. B. "Buzzy" Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A. B. Brown. A. B. Brown was acquired by Banker's Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U. S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard's last position at Banker's Trust (BT) was to oversee "private client relations." In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U. S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
Krongard (re?) joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined firm is the single largest bank in Europe. And, as we shall see, Deutsche Bank played several key roles in events connected to the September 11 attacks. .
(note: most publications refuse to touch this material, one need not defend Larry Flynt's other publications to understand the importance of this interview - no nudity on that page, it is "G" rated)
Krongard and Blackwater.
This story was on the New York Times website on Saturday, November 17, 2007:
State IG's Brother Quits Blackwater.
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS.
Published: November 17, 2007.
Filed at 5:34 a. m. ET.
WASHINGTON (AP)-- The brother of embattled State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard quit as an adviser to Blackwater Worldwide on Friday, two days after the relationship with the security contractor was sharply criticized by a congressional oversight committee.
Erik Prince, Blackwater's top executive, said the conflict-of-interest questions raised by the connection prompted Alvin ''Buzzy'' Krongard to submit his resignation.
''I have reluctantly accepted it,'' Prince said in a statement.
It's unclear whether the move will salvage Howard Krongard's damaged credibility and career, however. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee plans to meet in December to determine if Howard Krongard testified truthfully about his brother.
Alvin Krongard never received any payment for his work on Blackwater's advisory board, which only met once, Prince said.
Prince said there are no allegations of impropriety against Alvin Krongard for his membership on Blackwater's board, a group recently created to help the North Carolina-based security company plan future business activities.
Blackwater is a major State Department contractor and the subject of ongoing federal investigations. One of those is examining whether Blackwater guards violated use-of-force rules during a Sept. 16 shooting in Baghdad that left 17 Iraqis dead.
Prince said there is no evidence that Howard Krongard's ability to perform his oversight duties was compromised by Alvin Krongard's relationship with Blackwater.
''The publicized allegation of an 'apparent conflict of interest' against his brother Howard, with whom Buzzy has not been close for years, is just that, an allegation,'' Prince's statement said.
Alvin Krongard's departure from Blackwater's board comes two days after the connection was made public during a hearing by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. In sworn testimony Wednesday, Howard Krongard was asked by Democratic members of the committee about his brother's ties to Blackwater, and he angrily said there weren't any.
But when confronted by committee members with evidence Alvin Krongard had joined the board, Howard Krongard called his brother during a hearing break and was told he attended a Blackwater advisory board meeting in Williamsburg, Va., on Monday and Tuesday. Before that conversation, Howard Krongard said he was not aware of the link.
Howard Krongard then told the committee he was recusing himself from any inquires related to Blackwater.
On Thursday, however, Alvin Krongard challenged Howard Krongard's version of events. According to the oversight committee's chairman, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., Alvin Krongard called the committee and said he had told his brother well before Wednesday's hearing about his decision to become a strategic adviser to Blackwater.
In a move that further escalated the differences, Howard Krongard's attorney on Friday sent Waxman a copy of notes she said Howard Krongard took during an Oct. 31 conversation with his brother. The call was initiated by Howard Krongard and lasted 10 minutes, said attorney Barbara Van Gelder.
''No financial interest whatsoever,'' the notes read, referring to Alvin Krongard's explanation of his status with Blackwater. ''Was on short list for advisory board but not taking it.''
In a side note to himself on the same page, Howard Krongard wrote, ''Why would anybody go on the board now?''
Asked to reconcile the conflicting versions, Van Gelder called the situation ''he said, he said.''
''These discrepancies between the testimony of Howard Krongard and the information from Buzzy Krongard raise questions about the truthfulness of Howard Krongard's testimony,'' Waxman said in a memo delivered Friday to committee members.
The union that represents U. S. diplomats on Friday repeated its call for Krongard to step down.
''We still believe he should step aside temporarily until this issue has been fully resolved by the appropriate bodies,'' said John Naland, president of the American Foreign Service Association.
Waxman said he plans to invite the Krongard brothers to testify at the December hearing.
If both appear, it's likely to be a chilly reunion. They speak rarely.
Alvin Krongard contacted the committee after receiving a letter from Waxman seeking information about his connections to Blackwater and any communication he may have had with Howard Krongard about the company.
Alvin Krongard said he was watching his brother testify on television and heard him say there was no Blackwater connection.
''You could have blown me over,'' Alvin Krongard told the committee, according to Waxman's memo.
Alvin Krongard recounted for the committee the conversation he had with his brother prior to the hearing.
'''He asked me whether I had any financial interest or any ties to Blackwater, and so I told him 'I'm going on their board,''' Alvin Krongard told the committee, according to Waxman's memo. ''He responded by saying, 'Why would you do that?' and 'Are you sure that's a good idea?'''
It was his decision to make, Alvin Krongard told his brother, and ''we just differed on that,'' according to Waxman's memo.
Van Gelder, Howard Krongard's attorney, asked Waxman not to hold the December hearing.
''There is no legitimate legislative purpose to be gained by publicly pitting two brothers against each other,'' she said in a letter to Waxman.
The role of the advisory board is to offer ''leadership advice'' on the paths Blackwater should take to expand its business, according to the company. Prince invited Alvin Krongard to join the board in July.
Expenses for attending board meetings would be covered and board members would receive a $3,500 honorarium for each meeting attended. The money could be paid to them or to a charity of their choice.
In addition to recusing himself from matters related to Blackwater, Howard Krongard also said he is no longer involved in corruption investigations related to the flawed construction of the U. S. Embassy in Baghdad, a $600 million project that is beset by logistical delays and security concerns.
Associated Press writer Matthew Lee contributed to this report.
U. S. Suggests, Without Proof, Stock Adviser Knew of 9/11.
By ALEX BERENSON.
Published: May 25, 2002.
A San Diego stock adviser who is accused of bribing an F. B.I. agent to give him confidential government information may have had prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks, a federal prosecutor said yesterday. But a judge disregarded that contention and the adviser's lawyer called the allegation ludicrous.
In a court hearing in San Diego, Kenneth Breen, an assistant United States attorney, said the adviser, Amr Ibrahim Elgindy, tried to sell $300,000 in stock on the afternoon of Sept. 10 and told his broker that the stock market would soon plunge. ''Perhaps Mr. Elgindy had preknowledge of Sept. 11, and rather than report it he attempted to profit from it,'' Mr. Breen said.
Mr. Breen, coordinator of the stock market unit of a government task force set up to investigate financing for terrorist groups, offered no other evidence that Mr. Elgindy had prior knowledge of the attacks.
A lawyer for Mr. Elgindy said the allegation appeared to be motivated by the fact that Mr. Elgindy is Muslim and was born in Egypt. Senior F. B.I. officials also said they had no evidence that Mr. Elgindy had prior knowledge of the attacks.
In the hearing yesterday, Mr. Breen asked Judge John A. Houston of Federal District Court in San Diego to hold Mr. Elgindy without bond. Mr. Elgindy, also known as Tony Elgindy and Anthony Pacific, recently moved $700,000 to Lebanon and is a serious flight risk, Mr. Breen said.
Judge Houston disregarded Mr. Breen's claims about Mr. Elgindy and Sept. 11. But the judge said there was enough other evidence that Mr. Elgindy might flee to justify detaining him at least until a June 6 hearing to determine whether he should be moved to New York for a trial.
Jeanne Geren Knight, a lawyer for Mr. Elgindy, said after the hearing that Mr. Breen's allegations were ludicrous and untrue. ''The government, for lack of factual evidence, has decided to smear my client with terrorist innuendoes,'' Ms. Knight said. ''This is smacking of racial profiling.''
Mr. Elgindy and four other people, including one current and one former F. B.I. agent, were charged Wednesday with using confidential government information to manipulate stock prices and extort money from companies. Jeffrey A. Royer, who was an F. B.I. agent before joining Mr. Elgindy's stock advisory firm in December, accepted $30,000 from a partner of Mr. Elgindy's in exchange for providing Mr. Elgindy with information about current criminal investigations of companies, prosecutors allege.
Mr. Elgindy and his partner, Derrick W. Cleveland, sold short the shares of companies that they learned were under investigation, according to the indictment. (Short sellers borrow shares and sell them, hoping to buy them back later at a lower price and pocket the difference.) Then Mr. Elgindy publicized the negative information on two Web sites he ran, hoping that the companies' stocks would fall, prosecutors say.
At the hearing yesterday, Mr. Breen said that on the afternoon of Sept. 10, Mr. Elgindy contacted his broker at Salomon Smith Barney and asked him to sell $300,000 in stock in his children's trust funds. During the Sept. 10 conversation, Mr. Elgindy predicted that the Dow Jones industrial average, which at the time stood at about 9,600, would soon crash to below 3,000, Mr. Breen said. Mr. Elgindy was unable to sell the stock before markets closed Sept. 10, and it was instead sold Sept. 18, the first day that markets reopened for trading after the attacks, Mr. Breen said.
The Salomon Smith Barney broker contacted the F. B.I. after the attacks to report the conversation, Mr. Breen said. He did not identify the broker. A spokesman for Salomon Smith Barney confirmed that Mr. Elgindy was a client but said that Salomon did not comment on matters relating to its clients.
Mr. Elgindy also transferred more than $700,000 to Lebanon in the months after the attacks, Mr. Breen said. When F. B.I. agents raided Mr. Elgindy's home outside San Diego on Wednesday, Mr. Breen said, they found $43,000 in cash, as well as a loose diamond and faxes indicating that Mr. Elgindy had been tipped about the raid and had given his wife a power of attorney to liquidate his assets.
Ms. Knight, Mr. Elgindy's lawyer, denied that Mr. Elgindy had any prior knowledge of the attacks.
Mr. Elgindy's wife is from Louisiana, Ms. Knight said, adding that his mother was a pediatrician and his father a professor. ''Tony isn't political at all,'' she said. ''He's a capitalist. He's not going to move to a third world country.''
Senior law enforcement officials said yesterday that investigators had no hard evidence that Mr. Elgindy had advance information about the Sept. 11 attacks. So far, they have not found anyone who had prior knowledge of the attacks, they said. But they said the investigation into why Mr. Elgindy tried to sell the shares in his children's trust accounts before Sept. 11 had raised questions that had not been fully answered.
Mr. Elgindy has been an active supporter of Muslim causes. In 1999, he arranged to bring 30 Muslim refugees from Kosovo to the United States, according to The Daily Herald of Chicago.
Mr. Elgindy said the violence in Kosovo, Serbia's southern province, appalled him, comparing it to the shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado. ''Take Columbine, have it occur five times a day for a year, and that's Kosovo,'' Mr. Elgindy told The Daily Herald.
Mr. Elgindy's father and brother are also active in Arab and Muslim causes. His father, Ibrahim Elgindy, founded an umbrella group of Muslim organizations in Chicago and led a 1998 protest on behalf of Muhammad A. Salah, whose assets were seized that year after the United States government linked Mr. Salah to Hamas, the radical Palestinian group. Mr. Elgindy's brother, Khaled, has worked for several Arab political groups.
Neither Ibrahim Elgindy nor Khaled Elgindy has ever been linked to terrorism. Khaled Elgindy did not return calls yesterday. Ibrahim Elgindy could not be reached for comment.
Mr. Elgindy himself publicly criticized the Sept. 11 attacks. In a press release that day, his company, Pacific Equity Investigations, said, ''We must seek, find, apprehend and destroy those who are responsible for this terrorist attack.''
Two days later, Mr. Elgindy put out another press release, saying that he had forwarded to the F. B.I. and the Securities and Exchange Commission ''many Internet posts and messages that may have relevance on this tragedy and the capture of the responsible parties behind it.'' He also asked that investors refrain from selling short the stocks of any United States companies or the United States dollar.
Mr. Elgindy sold the shares in his children's trusts five days later.
911 stock put options
There was very high trading in "put options" on American Airline and United Airlines, immediately before 9/11. These were effectively gambles that their share prices would fall, which of course is what happened once the attacks took place. This shows the traders must have had advance knowledge of 9/11.
This is a complex story, but the claims don’t always match the reality.
"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.
Perhaps the strongest challenge to this conclusion comes from Professor Allen M Poteshman from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He decided to investigate this further, analysing market data statistically to try and assess the trades’ significance. Professor Poteshman points out several reasons to question the foreknowledge argument:
Despite the views expressed by the popular media, leading academics, and option market professionals, there is reason to question the decisiveness of the evidence that terrorists traded in the option market ahead of the September 11 attacks. One event that casts doubt on the evidence is the crash of an American Airlines plane in New York City on November 12. According to the OCC Web site, three trading days before, on November 7, the put-call ratio for options on AMR stock was 7.74. On the basis of the statements made about the links between option market activity and terrorism shortly after September 11, it would have been tempting to infer from this put-call ratio that terrorism probably was the cause of the November 12 crash. Subsequently, however, terrorism was all but ruled out. While it might be the case that an abnormally large AMR put-call ratio was observed by chance on November 7, this event certainly raises the question of whether put-call ratios as large as 7.74 are, in fact, unusual. Beyond the November 12 plane crash, an article published in Barron’s on October 8 (Arvedlund 2001) offers several additional grounds for being skeptical about the claims that it is likely that terrorists or their associates traded AMR and UAL options ahead of the September 11 attacks. For starters, the article notes that the heaviest trading in the AMR options did not occur in the cheapest, shortest-dated puts, which would have provided the largest profits to someone who knew of the coming attacks. Furthermore, an analyst had issued a “sell” recommendation on AMR during the previous week, which may have led investors to buy AMR puts. Similarly, the stock price of UAL had recently declined enough to concern technical traders who may have increased their put buying, and UAL options are heavily traded by institutions hedging their stock positions. Finally, traders making markets in the options did not raise the ask price at the time the orders arrived as they would have if they believed that the orders were based on adverse nonpublic information: the market makers did not appear to find the trading to be out of the ordinary at the time that it occurred.
However, he then devises a statistical model, which he suggests is consistent with foreknowledge after all:
Options traders, corporate managers, security analysts, exchange officials, regulators, prosecutors, policy makers, and—at times—the public at large have an interest in knowing whether unusual option trading has occurred around certain events. A prime example of such an event is the September 11 terrorist attacks, and there was indeed a great deal of speculation about whether option market activity indicated that the terrorists or their associates had traded in the days leading up to September 11 on advance knowledge of the impending attacks. This speculation, however, took place in the absence of an understanding of the relevant characteristics of option market trading.
One issue that troubles us about this is the lack of analysis of the string of bad news delivered by American Airlines on September 7th, the trading day before September 10th, when the most significant trading occurred. Professor Poteshman told us via :
My study does include quantile regressions that account for the market conditions on particular stocks. Hence, there is at least a first order correction for the negative news that was coming out on Sept. 7 on AMR.
But can you really treat the news so simply? Professor Paul Zarembka supports the claims, saying:
Poteshman finds . these purchases [of options on American Airline stock] . had only 1 percent probability of occurring simply randomly.
But we’re not saying they were random, rather that they may have been a rational response to significant bad news delivered the day before. Poteshman is essentially saying (with regard to AMR) is that people bought too many puts for that to be explained by the 9/7 news, therefore another explanation is required, but how can you say that without analysing the news itself? After all, if that news had been “we’ll probably be bankrupt in six months” then the put ratios would probably have been even more significant, and Poteshman’s model given even more confirmation of “unusual option market activity”, but would that have made the idea of foreknowledge more likely? We don’t think so. Obviously the AMR news was less significant, but we would still say that you cannot accurately judge the significance of these trades until you take it into consideration.
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.
The September 6th UAL puts would automatically appear significant, then, even though only one investor was reportedly behind them. But does that really mean you can mathematically indicate it’s likely that investor had foreknowledge of 9/11, without considering the other market conditions and information available at the time?
911 stock put options
Options The Days Prior To 911?
Can You Amplify On This Comment, Please?
By Walter J. Burien, Jr.
12-30-3 Gentlemen: Can we all unite on a single task: finding out who placed the orders for the "put" options in the days immediately before 9/11? Discussions I've had in the enclosed e-mail seem to indicate this information is available and not protected by financial disclosure restrictions. Please examine the enclosed and brainstorm how we can get this information into the public sphere. It could be the thread to unravel the mystery. Discovering the names of those who apparently had prior knowledge of 9/11 as indicated by their "savvy" bets on the fortunes of United and American airlines are a necessary first step toward interrogating these individuals to find out where they got their information, something the law enforcement community should be doing but obviously isn't. Best wishes, John Kaminski REPLY FROM.
911 stock put options
Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading Lead Directly into the CIA’s Highest Ranks.
FTW - October 9, 2001 – Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U. S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency.
Until 1997 A. B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A. B. Brown. A. B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U. S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U. S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
THE SCOPE OF KNOWN INSIDER TRADING.
Before looking further into these relationships it is necessary to look at the insider trading information that is being ignored by Reuters, The New York Times and other mass media. It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades – in real time – as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U. S. interests. Previous stories in FTW have specifically highlighted the use of Promis software to monitor such trades.
It is necessary to understand only two key financial terms to understand the significance of these trades, “selling short” and “put options”.
“Selling Short” is the borrowing of stock, selling it at current market prices, but not being required to actually produce the stock for some time. If the stock falls precipitously after the short contract is entered, the seller can then fulfill the contract by buying the stock after the price has fallen and complete the contract at the pre-crash price. These contracts often have a window of as long as four months.
“Put Options,” are contracts giving the buyer the option to sell stocks at a later date. Purchased at nominal prices of, for example, $1.00 per share, they are sold in blocks of 100 shares. If exercised, they give the holder the option of selling selected stocks at a future date at a price set when the contract is issued. Thus, for an investment of $10,000 it might be possible to tie up 10,000 shares of United or American Airlines at $100 per share, and the seller of the option is then obligated to buy them if the option is executed. If the stock has fallen to $50 when the contract matures, the holder of the option can purchase the shares for $50 and immediately sell them for $100 – regardless of where the market then stands. A call option is the reverse of a put option, which is, in effect, a derivatives bet that the stock price will go up.
A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism, entitled “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” documented the following trades connected to the September 11 attacks:
- 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.
- [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]
- No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.
- Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley’s share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million. Merrill Lynch & Co., with headquarters near the Twin Towers, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill’s shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by “insiders,” their profit would have been about $5.5 million.
- European regulators are examining trades in Germany’s Munich Re, Switzerland’s Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [ FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a “double whammy” for them.]
On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data.
“The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors – whose identities and nationalities have not been made public – had advance knowledge of the strikes.” They don’t dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.
“… October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called “put” options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearinghouse Corp.”
“…The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options…” This was the operation managed by Krongard until as recently as 1998.
As reported in other news stories, Deutsche Bank was also the hub of insider trading activity connected to Munich Re. just before the attacks.
CIA, THE BANKS AND THE BROKERS.
Understanding the interrelationships between CIA and the banking and brokerage world is critical to grasping the already frightening implications of the above revelations. Let’s look at the history of CIA, Wall Street and the big banks by looking at some of the key players in CIA’s history.
Clark Clifford – The National Security Act of 1947 was written by Clark Clifford, a Democratic Party powerhouse, former Secretary of Defense, and one-time advisor to President Harry Truman. In the 1980s, as Chairman of First American Bancshares, Clifford was instrumental in getting the corrupt CIA drug bank BCCI a license to operate on American shores. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and banker.
John Foster and Allen Dulles – These two brothers “designed” the CIA for Clifford. Both were active in intelligence operations during WW II. Allen Dulles was the U. S. Ambassador to Switzerland where he met frequently with Nazi leaders and looked after U. S. investments in Germany. John Foster went on to become Secretary of State under Dwight Eisenhower and Allen went on to serve as CIA Director under Eisenhower and was later fired by JFK. Their professions: partners in the most powerful - to this day - Wall Street law firm of Sullivan, Cromwell.
Bill Casey – Ronald Reagan’s CIA Director and OSS veteran who served as chief wrangler during the Iran-Contra years was, under President Richard Nixon, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and stockbroker.
David Doherty - The current Vice President of the New York Stock Exchange for enforcement is the retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.
George Herbert Walker Bush – President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11 th largest defense contractor in the nation, which also shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.
A. B. “Buzzy” Krongard – The current Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency is the former Chairman of the investment bank A. B. Brown and former Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust.
John Deutch - This retired CIA Director from the Clinton Administration currently sits on the board at Citigroup, the nation’s second largest bank, which has been repeatedly and overtly involved in the documented laundering of drug money. This includes Citigroup’s 2001 purchase of a Mexican bank known to launder drug money, Banamex.
Nora Slatkin – This retired CIA Executive Director also sits on Citibank’s board.
Maurice “Hank” Greenburg – The CEO of AIG insurance, manager of the third largest capital investment pool in the world, was floated as a possible CIA Director in 1995. FTW exposed Greenberg’s and AIG’s long connection to CIA drug trafficking and covert operations in a two-part series that was interrupted just prior to the attacks of September 11. AIG’s stock has bounced back remarkably well since the attacks. To read that story, please go to copvcia/stories/part_2.html .
One wonders how much damning evidence is necessary to respond to what is now irrefutable proof that CIA knew about the attacks and did not stop them. Whatever our government is doing, whatever the CIA is doing, it is clearly NOT in the interests of the American people, especially those who died on September 11.
[© COPYRIGHT, 2001, Michael C. Ruppert and FTW Publications, copvcia . 판권 소유. – May be reprinted or distributed for non-profit purposes only.]
Commander in Chief.
Back Off Bin Ladens.
The Bushes and the Carlyle Group.
How Bush and other ex-politic os profit from connections and access.
What doesn't he want Americans to know?
The sanctions have loopholes our vice president made millions from.
September 11 Put Call.
were the stocks of various airlines shorted just before 9/11?
Claim: In the days just prior to the 11 September 2001, large quantities of stock in United and American Airlines were traded by persons with foreknowledge of the upcoming 9/11 attacks.
Origins: On 11 September 2001, four planes were hijacked and used in the Attack on America: American Airlines Flight 11 leaving Boston bound for Los Angeles, American Airlines Flight 77 leaving Washington bound for Los Angeles, United Airlines Flight 175 leaving Boston bound for Los Angeles, and United Airlines Flight 93 leaving Newark bound for San Francisco. Each of these planes was deliberately crashed, killing all on board — two into the World Trade Center towers, one into the Pentagon, and one into a field in Pennsylvania. (Only the delay in takeoff of UA Flight 93 and the actions of the alerted passengers on board prevented it from becoming yet another instrument of destruction resulting in an even greater loss of life.)
The operation had taken years to plan, and the perpetrators knew well in advance which airlines would be affected.
In the month prior to the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, unusual trading activity involving American and United Airlines stock was noted by market analysts who at the time had no idea what to make of it. Wildly unusual discrepancies in the put and call ratio — 25 to 100 times normal — were reportedly observed in stock options of the two airlines. In one case, Bloomberg’s Trade Book electronic trading system identified option volume in UAL (parent of United Airlines) on 16 August 2001 that was 36 times higher than usual.
(Options are wagers that the price of a 100-share block of a particular stock will rise or fall by a certain date. “Puts” are “shorts” — bets the stock price will fall. “Calls” are bets the price will rise. Thus, one who has reason to believe a particular company is about to suffer a terrible reversal of fortune would purchase “puts” against that entity’s stock.)
But it was during the final few trading days (the market closes on weekends) that the most unusual variances in activity occurred. Bloomberg data showed that on 6 September 2001, the Thursday before that black Tuesday, put-option volume in UAL stock was nearly 100 times higher than normal: 2,000 options versus 27 on the previous.
On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines’ stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.
On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines’ option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.
Accelerated investments speculating a downturn in the value of Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch (two New York investment firms severely damaged by the World Trade Center attack) were also observed.
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the “9/11 Commission”) investigated these rumors and found that although some unusual (and initially seemingly suspicious) trading activity did occur in the days prior to September 11, it was all coincidentally innocuous and not the result of insider trading by parties with foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks:
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 — instruments 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. The SEC and 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.
Last updated : 11 December 2005.
Carpenter, Dave. “Option Exchange Probing Reports of Unusual Trading Before Attacks.”
The Associated Press. 18 September 2001.
Schoolman, Judith. “Probe of Wild Market Swings in Terror-Tied Stocks.”
[New York] Daily News. 20 September 2001 (p. 6).
Toedtman, James and Charles Zehren. “Profiting from Terror?”
Newsday. 19 September 2001 (p. W39).
Got a tip or a rumor? Contact us here.
Snopes Delivered to Your Inbox:
Published: 24 April 2008.
Most Searched.
Trump Administration Bans CDC Officials From Using Certain Words?
15 December 2017 Policy analysts will be instructed to avoid using seven words in budget policy documents, including "fetus" and "transgender," say reports.
Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States’ Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?
Updated Allegations of a "quid pro quo" deal giving Russia ownership of one-fifth of U. S. uranium deposits in exchange for $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation are unsubstantiated.
FCC Repeals Net Neutrality.
14 December 2017 The Republican majority of FCC commissioners voted to eliminate Obama-era regulations ensuring open Internet access; here's what that could mean for the average user.
Is This ‘Invisibility Cloak’ Video Real?
11 December 2017 Footage purportedly showing an "invisibility cloak" was created with digital video editing software.
Did Donald Trump Say Republicans Are the “Dumbest Group of Voters”?
16 October 2015 Donald Trump did not proclaim that Republicans are the "dumbest group of voters" in a 1998 'People' magazine interview.
Most Shared.
Did Starbucks Refuse Free Product to Marines Serving in Iraq?
Updated A rumor that Starbucks refused free product to Marines serving in Iraq, saying the company didn't support the war or anyone taking part in it, is both old and false.
Was Barack Obama President During Hurricane Katrina?
30 August 2017 Twitter users tried to pin the blame for Katrina relief issues on Obama, though he wasn't even president when it hit New Orleans.
Antifa Member Photographed Beating Police Officer?
14 August 2017 A photograph purportedly showing an Antifa member hitting a police officer has been digitally manipulated.
Are Motorists Finding HIV-Infected Needles on Gas Pump Handles?
Updated Rumors that service station customers are getting stuck by HIV-loaded syringes affixed to gas pump handles are a hoax.
Was the Texas Church Shooter an Antifa Member Who Vowed to Start Civil War?
5 November 2017 Reports that the perpetrator carried an Antifa flag and told churchgoers “this is a communist revolution” are fake news.
Comments
Post a Comment