9/11: key companies profited from insider trading by knowing in advance about the attacks

Original and surely better explained story by Kevin Ryan at Foreign Policy Journal (also at Global Research, where I found it).

While we wait to see if the much announced new Wikileaks release will finally provide key evidence on the insider job that were the 9/11 attacks, more modest research keeps providing circumstantial evidence of this quite clear fact.

In this case it seems it's just a journalist, a good one indeed, joining the dots of so many investigations on insider trading benefiting from knowing in advance about the attacks.

Oddly enough while all these investigations conducted around the globe found quite clear evidence of such criminal insider trading, all them were archived because the speculators could not be related to Al Qaeda.

This is an example of the circular logic often used by those who created the official explanations for 9/11.  The reasoning goes like this: if we assume that we know who the perpetrators were (i.e. the popular version of “al Qaeda”) and those who were involved in the trades did not appear to be connected to those assumed perpetrators, then insider trading did not occur.

Or did it?

All those investigations indicate that some people and companies did profit from the attacks but as the culprit of such attacks is supposed to be a long vanished bearded guy with a turban in some remote cave of the Hindu Kush... case closed. Osama did not benefit from insider trading related to the 9/11 attacks, at least not apparently.

Instead companies such as UAL (owner of United Airlines) and AMR (ower of American Airlines), each losing two planes in 9/11, did. How curious! But they are not Osama bin Laden, so they are innocent. Are they not?

Other such innocent company who profited from the non-existent insider trading around 9/11 attacks, was Marsh & McLennan Companies (MMC), whose offices were destroyed by American Airlines Flight 11, when it crashed against the North Tower, exactly on all them. 256 employees and 60 consultants of the company lost their life that day.

Marsh also had a number of offices in the South Tower.

According to Wikipedia, its subsidiary Marsh Inc.:

On October 11, 2001 Marsh established a crisis consulting practice specializing in terrorism, with Ambassador L. Paul Bremer as Chairman and Andrew R. Daniels as President and COO. Marsh also announced a partnership with Control Risks Group to provide political risk assessment.

Bold type is mine. Bremer, who would beome proconsul of Iraq after the 2003 invasion, was that very day of 9/11 blaming Al Qaeda, Iran and Iraq and demanding a blockade against these countries.

Also:

In July 2007 Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc. was ranked first in Business Insurance's world's largest brokers list.

How curious. 

The fourth large beneficiary of  non-existant insider trading was Citigroup. From the original article:

Citigroup was the parent of Travelers Insurance, which was expected to see $500 million in claims, and also Salomon Smith Barney, which occupied all but ten floors in World Trade Center (WTC) building 7.  Oddly enough, Salomon Smith Barney had both Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney on its advisory board until January 2001.

But they don't wear turban and shave every day, so guess it's all fine, right?

Wrong!

Other less important people and companies mentioned in this research are:

• Wirt D. Walker III, a client (in the Roman sense of the term: a vassal) of George Bush Sr. He and his wife Sally earned some $50,000 but the FBI did not even interview them, as they had "no ties to terrorism". However as Ryan explains, Walker had connections with Osama bin Laden.
• Amir Ibrahim Elgindy, an Egyptian-born Chicago stock trader who on 8/11/2001 attempted to make one such advantageous trade claiming that Dow Jones would collapse soon. Again he was not interviewed by the FBI but he would be briefly arrested in 2002 along with two FBI agents, Jeffrey A Royer and Lynn Wingate, who were on his track and also profited. Elgindy, who seems a small time insider rather than a big fish, was eventually convicted in 2005.
• Viisage Technologies who would benefit from increased use of facial recognition techniques, and related to the Saudi American Bank, eventually convicted of helping Bin Laden in Sudan in the 1990s.
• Wellington Management, which allegedly held large accounts for Osama bin Laden. The case was dropped in spite of the Boston firm effectively having accounts of the other Bin Ladens. 

These all seem less important or at least less clear cases. 

More interesting is the information recovery job from hard disks found at Ground Zero, much of which was done by German company Convar. 

In December 2001, Reuters reported that “Convar has recovered information from 32 computers that support assumptions of dirty doomsday dealings.” Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert at Convar, testified that “There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million.

$100 million is some big money, right?

There is more recent information anyhow: in January this year a Swiss financial team again found evidence of insider trading involving five airline companies (including United, American and Boeing) and four financial companies (three of them based in the WTC and the fourth being Citigroup, owner of WTC7).

In April another report, this time from an international team found that:

... there was a significant abnormal increase in trading volume in the option market just before the 9/11 attacks, and they demonstrated that this was in contrast to the absence of abnormal trading volume over periods long before the attacks.  The study also showed that the relevant abnormal increase in trading volume was not simply due to a declining market. Their findings were “consistent with insiders anticipating the 9-11 attacks.”

One of the objections I have found when exposing the case for the 9/11 attacks being an elaborate insider job is that for many such a complex operation would require the knowledge of too many people, more than a conspiration they'd be like a mob. However the evidence quite clearly indicates that large sectors of the oligarchy (and some sidekicks, it seems) knew in advance from all this and actively or passively participated in the plot.

What is difficult for these people is to understand how the oligarchy works. What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas, goes the saying, and similarly what happens in certain aristocratic circles stays within them. They just think and organize themselves at a totally different level of normal people. 

Still, when you follow for instance the blackmail to which so many workers have been subject in the comparable scandal of the Gulf of Mexico oil catastrophe and see that they are most reluctant to talk to the media, even when they are getting sick, for fear of losing their jobs, you realize that even with common people, the mafioso organization of modern capitalism can achieve incredible levels of passive complicity. Simply put: people instinctively know that they have a lot to lose and nothing to win from speaking up when such mighty powers are pushing in the direction of silence and obscurantism. 

If this can happen with common, essentially good hearted and honest, people, what cannot be achieved in the elite oligarchic circles where to gain entrance is necessary to show total lack of morals and an almost compulsive tendency to lie, specially in public. 

It's like expecting some demon from Hell to stand up and denounce the Devil (I Christian mythology but in this case it does help). Why would they would that? They have all to lose and nothing to gain, and they only think in such terms not in terms that we commoners consider moral or ethic. 

As Machiavelli exposed a prince has not to behave morally, but he has to pretend to be moral. So they go to church every Sunday and write beautiful speeches full of convincing morality. Then they get together and plan some mass murder. That's how power reality works.

I insist, read the original research article at Foreign Policy Journal or at Global Research. Not just Ryan explains some stuff better than I can do but also all the bibliography is there.

See also the various materials on the 9/11 that I have discussed before at my old blog Leherensuge.