Any news on the PUT options on UA & AA?

[Nihil]

What happened to the (big) money from the PUT options on United and
American Air?

Last I heard the 'investigation' was dismissed with the same sort of
"these aren't the droids you are looking for" amnesia as was applied
to the anthrax 'investigation'.

Has there been any update please?

[spooked911]

1. Nothing solid.

The orginal articles on the insider trading have never been disproven.

Although I have problems with Mike Ruppert, his book "Crossing the Rubicon" gives a good treatment of the insider trading.

But no news on them.

[Nihil]

3. That's what I thought

Thanks.

[nomatrix]

2. From Paul Thompson 9/11 Timeline

9/11 Commission Dismissed Allegations of Insider Trading

"In a footnote contained in its Final Report, the 9/11 Commission dismissed allegations of insider trading in the days preceding 9/11. According to the Final Report, the put options of the parent companies of United Airlines were placed by a “US-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al-Qaeda” “as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10.” With respect to the highly suspicious trading on the parent company of American Airlines, the Commission stated that much of the trades were “traced to a specific US-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.” According to the Commission, “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.” <9/11 Commission, 7/22/2004, pp 499>

[Nihil]

4. Thanks - I hadn't caught that comment

> “US-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al-Qaeda”

I wonder how they determine "no conceivable ties"?

> “traced to a specific US-based options trading newsletter, faxed to
> its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these
> trades.”

And the source of this recommendation in the US-based newsletter was ...?

> These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious
> consistently proved innocuous.

Was this "innocuous" in the same way that the other "coincidences" on
that day were "innocuous"?

[RedSock]

5. "innocuous" yet still kept totally secret

if this is all above-board, why not give us the info on who did the trading?

[pberq]

7. Exactly.

It would seem a simple matter to give out the name(s), let people check it out, and there we have it -- it was innocuous!!!

But no, we can't tell anyone the names.

With everything that is happening now, does anyone think it's possible that reporters will start looking into these issues?

[StrafingMoose]

6. The FBI guy who said to the Kean-Hamilton commission....

that there was nothing to the "insider trading" story is Dennis Lormell. The same man who confirmed that Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed (ISI head) sent 100,000$ to Atta in the summer of 2000.

Some other people said that the 100,000$ wire was done in the summer of 2001, I haven't seen these reports myself. Anyone?

[nomatrix]

8. Please do some investigating and discuss

Complete 9/11 Timeline by Paul Thompson

http://wwww.cooperativeresearch.net/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&before_9/11=insiderTrading

Take any of these links within this heading.
More than one country that discovered it.

Was the 2.5 million that was on 09/29/01 unclaimed, ever claimed?


Hint: Look it Up!

Do you know how much more information we would have beyond the 9/11 commission, if we did our own independent investigation.

IF everyone (who has a genuine interest in getting the truth out) took the time to look for it.

Rather than just comment, bring something to the threads here.

[nomatrix]

9. $5 Billion single trade on U.S. Treasury Note

9/11 Complete Timeline
Insider Trading
http://wwww.cooperativeresearch.net/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&before_9/11=insiderTrading


"After 9/11, both the SEC and the Secret Service announce probes into an unusually high volume trade of five-year US Treasury note purchases around this time. These transactions include a single $5 billion trade. The Wall Street Journal explains: “Five-year Treasury notes are among the best investments in the event of a world crisis, especially one that hits the US. The notes are prized for their safety and their backing by the US government, and usually rally when investors flee riskier investments, such as stocks.” The value of these notes has risen sharply since the events of September 11. The article also points out that with these notes, “tracks would be hard to spot.” "

This is another example not talked about

[Nihil]

10. Some answers and some more questions

OK, had an interesting lunchtime following a few threads from the
(interesting & useful) timeline ...

(The emphasis in the following extracts is mine, not the originals.)

From Allen M. Poteshman (Department of Finance, Univ of Illinois) in
March 2004 (i.e., four months *before* the 9/11 Commission dismissed
allegations of insider trading in the footnote that I'd missed before
starting this thread):

> The option market volume ratios considered do not provide evidence of
> unusual option market trading in the days leading up to September 11.
> The volume ratios, however, are constructed out of long & short put
> volume and long & short call volume, while simply buying puts would
> have been the most straightforward way for someone to have traded in
> the option market on foreknowledge of the attacks.
> A measure of abnormal long put volume was also examined and seen to be
> at abnormally high levels in the days leading up to the attacks.
> Consequently, the paper concludes that there is evidence of unusual
> option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 which
> is consistent with investors trading on advanced knowledge of the
> attacks.

(PDF at http://www.business.uiuc.edu/poteshma/WorkingPapers/UnusualOptionActivityAndTerroristAttacks10March2004.pdf)


From the Slate article in 2003 (http://slate.msn.com/id/2088092/):

> The SEC has not filed any complaint alleging illegal activity, nor
> has the Justice Department announced any investigation or prosecution.
>
> This does not mean terrorist wagering didn't occur: It might well
> have. The absence of any complaint suggests the SEC found nothing
> illegal, but that's not definite. The SEC and the Chicago board seal
> the records of their investigations and won't offer any explanation
> — even if there is an innocent one — for the strange trading.
> So ... we may never know what they learned about terror trading.

Question: Can the US Freedom of Information Act extract information
that has been "sealed" in this way or is that the whole purpose of
"sealing" it? (Please excuse my ignorance!)


Interestingly enough, the British markets were investigated by the
FSA (Financial Services Authority) ... a body that was only allowed
to investigate this sort of event from December 2001 ...

> The Financial Services Authority (FSA) is an independent non-governmental
> body, given statutory powers by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.
(http://www.fsa.gov.uk/Pages/About/Who/index.shtml)

The above act was implemented on 1st December 2001, making the FSA
responsible for Securities & Futures against anyone, not just
registered City (of London) firms. Previously the watchdog had
been restricted under old laws which meant it could only act against
registered City professionals.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1684872.stm)

Before gaining statutory powers, it merely did the work for more
than ten "self-regulatory bodies" - non-statutory regulators paid
for by member firms which had to be registered to conduct business.
That hampered investigations into financial crimes (e.g., the Sumitomo
copper scandal in 1996, where a rogue trader at the London Metals
Exchange lost £1.5bn of his bank's money trying to manipulate the
copper price ... City watchdogs were unable to prosecute the trader
because he was not directly regulated, even though his crimes took
place in London. Prosecuted in Tokyo, he later admitted forgery and
fraud.)

Its first chairman (Sir Howard Davies, a former deputy governor of
the Bank of England) suddenly decided to leave the FSA in September
2003, four months ahead of schedule.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2570595.stm)

12 cases of insider dealing were expected to go before the courts or
the FSA's own Regulatory Decisions Committee over the following three
months.

> "There are quite a lot of cases coming to fruition" outgoing FSA
> chairman Howard Davies told the Sunday Times. "The pipeline is going
> to disgorge soon and there will be some fun for my successor."
>
> The watchdog has launched several high-profile investigations into
> possible insider dealing in recent years, but has secured few
> convictions.

Didn't see any convictions from insider dealing on September 11th
2001 either. Oh well, it must be ok then ...


> Was the 2.5 million that was on 09/29/01 unclaimed, ever claimed?

Doesn't look like it according to your link to the San Francisco
Chronicle (29-Sep-01) ...
(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/29/MN186128.DTL)

> 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.
>
> ...
>
> Authorities here and abroad have not publicly disclosed any
> conclusions they have reached and refuse to discuss the case.
>
> ...
>
> While the identities of possible beneficiaries of advance knowledge
> of the attacks were not known publicly, experts were quick to point
> to possible candidates - all presumed to be affluent
> residents of Arab nations.

Saves them having to look at white American businessmen ... like,
perhaps, Buzzy Krongard - the executive director of the CIA who had
previously been the head of the firm used to buy many of the put
options on United Airlines ...


Well, just goes to show that it's a small world after all ...

Unfortunately, it's also a small lunchbreak so I'll return you to
your normal programme!
:hi: