User login

Who's online

There are currently 13 users and 66 guests online.

Online users

  • libby
  • Just another voice
  • Thad Curtz
  • Just another voice
  • M Kretzler
  • OlyDowntowner
  • Laurian
  • Kay
  • a.future.with.n...
  • Judith

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

  • Lisa P
  • GRuB
  • ktcoxster
  • making a differ...
  • johnmac

    Creative Commons License
 
Submitted by Mike on Sat, 01/05/2008 - 4:55pm.

I am going to retract on this post. I have been able to reach one of the journalists who published the original posts in major newspaper and they have said their concerns were long ago settled on this question.

It's interesting that none of the journalists who posted these relatively explosive stories subsequently published a story retracting. The single journalist I was able to reach on it, said he thought he had essentially retracted in some side notes, but that is really pretty weak from a journalistic ethics pov.

And, so today, if you google this story, you can still find lots of references to the original story and no retractions pop up. I think it's important when a story is wrong, that the paper print a no-nonsense retraction.

I hereby retract. I think the story regarding the put options on the WTC attacks is not factual.

 

Original post below:

 

I believe there is no question that some folks made bets (put and call options) based on foreknowledge of the attacks planned against the World Trade Centers on September 11th.

If an investigator wanted to know all about the crime, wouldn't it make sense to track down the individuals who made the bets, find out how they came to have foreknowledge, and correlate the results of the investigation of the profits with all the other evidence that could be gathered regarding the collapse of the WTC buildings (3 of them).

CBS News reported on the put options on September 19, 2001. Bloomberg News and the London Times were carrying the same story about the same time. There doesn't seem to be much question that folks placed bets based on inside knowledge about the attacks.

A lot of folks spent some time trying to argue that the put options were not that unusual, that this was simply hysteria of some sort. But if you win on a bet in the stock market, would you come get your money?

The SF Chronicle reports on September 29, 2001 that somebody was leaving 2.5 million USD on the table rather than stepping up to pick up their profit and answer any questions regarding their bets.

I don't want to go into all of the various conspiracy theories regarding September 11th. There are too many of them and lots of them are pretty far-fetched. But I do think that certain basic investigation processes could and should be followed to bring criminals to justice. And one investigative process that did not seem to be completed was to follow this money trail and identify the parties involved.

If you want to comment, please keep the discussion down to the money trail on the put/call options.

»

Puts and calls happen

Puts and calls happen everyday, so to suggest there "is no question" that investors acted with foreknowledge of the 911 attacks is a pretty remarkable assumption.
»

My take on that based on the 2.5 million reported to

unclaimed.  I retract once it becomes clear the 2.5 was claimed and that no one is hiding and not picking up their profits.

Not there yet, but seem to be headed that way.  

»

It appears the 911 Commission examined this issue

According to Snopes the Commission tracked those transactions and concluded that they were "innocuous." Of course that does not rule out the possibility of some kind of cover up, but nothing ever does.
»

Trying to track down the folks who wrote the story at SF Chron

These two reporters, Christian Berthelsen, Scott Winokur, Chronicle Staff Writers, wrote the following on the 29th:

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.

"Usually, if someone has a windfall like that, you take the money and run," said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "Whoever did this thought the exchange would not be closed for four days.

"This smells real bad."

The source and others in the financial industry speculate that the purchaser or purchasers -- having initially assumed the money could be picked up without detection -- now fear exposure, or that the account has been frozen.

I don't find anywhere that the reporters ever retracted or clarified their story.  Will let you know if I hear back from the reporters.

»

One article quoting one source

"familiar with the trades and market data." That's all I can find on this story about the $2.5 million in uncollected funds. Not saying it didn't happen, but it's a bit aprocryphal. Would be interesting to see if the authors followed up at all.
»

Journalism

The SF Chronicle article is pretty pointed. Good journalistic ethics should require a followup. It may be that it is not possible to break through the confidentiality of the financial transactions in any legal way. I am continuing to try to reach the journalists for evidence of a retraction, explanation or additional stories on the unclaimed funds. If the trading was innocuous, it becomes hard to explain why the trader did not claim their profit.

Page 172 of the 911 Commission Report has a couple of sentences indicating there was exhaustive investigation of the trades and the trades were found to be innocuous. Footnote 130 regarding this finding can be found on page 499.

The footnote cited an example of an institutional trader that purchased large blocks of put options, but I could find no details in the report regarding their investigation other than this single footnote that says they expended considerable effort investigating the put option story.

Michael C. Ruppert has reported that the put options that produced the unclaimed 2.5 million dollar profit were placed by the firm that Buzzy Krongard (#3 at the CIA) was formerly headed by "Buzzy" Krongard. Buzzy is brother to Cookie Krongard, the inspector general accused of impeding investigations into the money trail in Iraq.

This is not an easy story to untangle. I think the Woodward and Bernstein habit of following the money makes sense.

»

Did get one response already

Here is the exchange with Howard Simons:

 I had a number of notes in the weeks and months following 9/11 asking what the resolution was, and I responded it was under federal investigation.  The issue was attracting various fringe groups, and I didn't want to get involved much further.  I think I may have posted some sort of "Columnist Conversation" note once the 9/11 Commission reported, but that's about it. 


-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:13 am
Subject: Re: September 11 put options

Thanks for the quick response.  It's interesting that it's easy to find the online articles raising the issue, but not easy to find the followups noting resolution of the questions raised.

Thanks again,

Mike

Howard Simons wrote:

Yes, a long time ago.  The issue was raised, the trades were examined in detail and the conclusion was reached.
 
Howard Simons


-----Original Message-----

Sent: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 9:47 pm
Subject: September 11 put options

You published an article on September 25 2001 about the put options on airlines and others. The 9/11 Commission indicates on page 516 of its 585 page report that all of the put options trading turned out to be innocuous. Have you accepted the Commission's findings that the trades were innocuous?

 

»

Cool...

Thanks for checking into that. I often forget that we can actually ask people instead of speculating.
»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at:

Get Firefox!


More Flickr photos tagged with "olympia" and "washington"

OlyBlog is a site for news and discussion about Olympia, Washington.
free hit counter