guess u gotta do stuff like this when the msm is cia controlled...oh well a good read...
copy and past for ur enjoyment...
What Did Our Government Know About
9/11?
Interview by Bruce David and Dan Kapelovitz
According to investigator Michael Ruppert,
millions—if not billions—of dollars were made
from insider trading by people who knew what was
going to occur on September 11, 2001. More
disturbingly, Ruppert accuses factions of our own
government of allowing the terrorist attacks to
succeed.
Michael Ruppert is a former LAPD narcotics
investigator who resigned in 1978 after attempting
to expose CIA drug trafficking. Since then, Ruppert
has published and edited From the Wilderness
(http://www.FromTheWilderness.com), a newsletter that
sheds light on government corruption and counts
35 members of the U.S. Congress among its
subscribers. Ruppert’s video, The Truth and Lies
of 9-11, and his latest book, Crossing the
Rubicon: America’s Descent Into Fascism at the
End of the Age of Oil, present compelling evidence
(derived from government documents, official
statements and reliable news organizations) of
CIA foreknowledge and insider trading related to
9/11. Many of Ruppert’s findings are extremely
con-troversial and, in some cases, even hard to
believe. However, we feel it is important to give our
readers this information, especially given the fact
that the Bush Administration is thwarting
investigations into the events surrounding
America’s darkest day.
* * *
HUSTLER: The story you tell concerning 9/11 and
insider trading is deeply disturbing.
RUPPERT: The put options are one of the most
glaring anomalies of everything that stands out
about 9/11.
HUSTLER: Explain exactly what put options are.
RUPPERT: They’re basically a bet that the price of
a given stock is going to fall dramatically. Let’s say
that I buy a put option to sell United Airlines at $100
a share, and the stock goes down to $25 a share
tomorrow. I can go out and buy the stock at $25 a
share, exercise the put option, and the person
holding the other end of the put option is required
to pay me $100 a share. I can make enormous
amounts of money if I know that the stock price is
going to fall.
HUSTLER: So if people were aware of what was
going to happen on 9/11, there was an easy way
for them to make some quick money on the stock
market?
RUPPERT: Yes. It happened not only in the U.S.
and not only on UAL [United Airlines]; it happened
all over the world. The press reports, not only from
the United States, but especially from Germany,
England and Japan, indicated that the insider
trading pre-9/11 was worldwide. Estimates from
Europe have said that as many as hundreds of
billions of dollars could have been made. Of
course, all the results of those investigations are
secret.
HUSTLER: Reliable news organizations, at first,
reported this story, but they dropped it.
RUPPERT: CBS was saying there was an
increase in UAL put options. I think it was 285
times—not percent, but 285 times—above normal
and that the imbalances were absolutely
unmistakable. CBS News said the trades were
setting off alarm bells the day before the attacks.
HUSTLER: People who are critical of your claims
contend that there will be normal spikes in put
options from time to time.
RUPPERT: The true key is not just the number of
put options but also the drastic imbalance
between puts and calls. A call is just the reverse. A
call’s a bet that the stock price is going to rise. It’s
when you see these huge imbalances that you
know there is insider trading. In other research I
have done over the years, I document clearly that
all major intelligence services always track stock
trades in real time for just such reasons, to warn of
economic or other kinds of attacks.
HUSTLER: Based on this research, we can be
pretty certain that there were people all around the
planet who knew what was going to happen on
September 11.
RUPPERT: Right.
HUSTLER: Isn’t it true that there’s $2 million
unclaimed by someone who put in put options?
RUPPERT: It was about $2 1/2 million, and that’s
only one of the many put options made on UAL that
went unclaimed.
HUSTLER: Are they still unclaimed?
RUPPERT: That I don’t know. Again, all this
information was locked up tighter than a drum right
after 9/11. What really shut up all the investigations
was a story that I wrote right after 9/11, in which I
disclosed that most of the UAL put options had
been purchased through the Alex. Brown unit of
Deutsche Bank, which had been headed, until
1998, by a guy named A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard.
Today, Krongard is the executive director—that’s
the number three guy—at the CIA. As soon as I
broke that story, everything around the planet went
dead-silent about the insider trading.
HUSTLER: So there’s a link between the insider
trading and the CIA?
RUPPERT: Yes, and not only that; a guy by the
name of Mayo Shattuck III, who was the head of the
Alex. Brown unit, resigned on September 12,
suddenly, right after the attacks.
HUSTLER: You’re speculating he resigned
because he was tainted by this?
RUPPERT: Absolutely, and he’s very good friends
with Krongard, who went to the CIA in ’98.
HUSTLER: Is Krongard still with the CIA?
RUPPERT: Yes, sir. The point that I made very
early on, which was since corroborated, was that
there is absolutely no way on God’s green earth
that Osama bin Laden or anyone connected with al
Qaeda could have or would have made these
trades. It would have been an absolute warning
signal that, “We’re coming to make attacks.” It’s
ludicrous to presume that, if the attacks were, as
the government said, three to four years in the
planning in the most strict secrecy, Bin Laden
would have tipped his hand. The only people who
really could have made these trades would have
been people connected to or in the intelligence
community who would have known that the attacks
were going to occur, that the attacks were going to
be successful, and that there was definite money
to be made. The trades were not just United and
American Airlines; they included Axa Reinsurance
and Munich Reinsurance [which covered
insurance companies that had clients in
the World Trade Center], Merrill Lynch and Morgan
Stanley [which had offices in or right next to the
World Trade Center], and so on and so forth.
People who knew that these attacks were going to
take place and succeed were the ones who made
the trades. It could have been guys in the
intelligence community, in some cases, saying,
“I’m just going to go out and make a few million, ha
ha,” but it also could have been intelligence
agencies [in an institutional manner] who wanted
to increase their cash flow. That’s what they do.
HUSTLER: Can’t they track who made these put
options?
RUPPERT: Oh, absolutely. A high-ranking guy at
the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]
said, “We can find out within hours who made
these trades.”
HUSTLER: Yet we’ve heard nothing?
RUPPERT: Right, and oil is critical to all this. In the
past 100 years, we have used up half of the
planet’s oil supply. We have passed the peak of
production; we’re at a point where demand is
going to increase continually as supplies
decrease. That is the reason for 9/11, and that is
the reason for everything that’s happened. It’s why I
was able to predict and describe accurately our
moves into Central Asia, and, boy, I was on West
Africa a year ago saying, “We are going to have to
go to West Africa,” and look at what’s happening
now. Nigeria is in worse shape than Liberia; it’s
just not being covered by mainstream press. There
have been major revolts with hundreds dead,
oil-shipping facilities have been overrun, British
and American oil workers have been taken
hostage and released, and the U.S. Navy is giving
warships to Nigeria.
HUSTLER: Is it your thesis that we let 9/11 happen
so we’d have an excuse to go into the other
countries and grab their oil?
RUPPERT: Absolutely. Not only did we let it
happen; we opened the door and held it wide
open. Aside from the insider trading, there’s other
extremely compelling evidence of that. The U.S.
fighter response was interfered with on 9/11. In the
calendar year prior to 9/11, we had 56
documentable instances where fighters were
scrambled and flying beside aircraft that had
merely gone off course or lost radio contact, not
even been hijacked. Yet on 9/11, in the middle of
four hijackings, we had 90-minute delays before
any fighters were scrambled. I have a six-foot-long,
pull-out chart that’s fully footnoted in my book that
shows the contravention of normal Federal Aviation
Administration [FAA] U.S. Air Force operating
procedures on 9/11. Not only from news sources,
but I also have the FAA and the North American
Aerospace Defense Command [NORAD] records.
HUSTLER: Isn’t there a big dispute between the
FAA and NORAD as to who was responsible for
not scrambling the jets?
RUPPERT: Right. There were major discrepancies
in their statements, and I lay these out in a flow
chart that just hits you in the face so hard you can’t
even breathe.
HUSTLER: What other evidence do you have in
terms of our government knowing about 9/11
beforehand?
RUPPERT: I established this early on, and
this forms a basis of statements made by
Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who’s a very
good friend of mine. I think she’s a wonderfully
courageous woman who’s being vindicated on a
daily basis. Shortly after the attacks—and I’m in
touch with many members of Congress who are
my subscribers—I was in touch with her office, and
I said, “Wait a minute. I have all of these foreign
stories from major respected publications
showing that the intelligence services of Germany,
France, Russia and Israel had delivered very
specific warnings to the highest levels.” In the case
of Russia, President Putin sent personal
emissaries to warn President Bush. Putin even
said so on MSNBC right after the attacks. You take
all [of the reports] together, [and you have
knowledge that] suicide hijackers in the week of
September 9 were going to hijack airliners and
crash them into the World Trade Center.
HUSTLER: So there was so much information that
they would have had to look the other way to ignore
it.
RUPPERT: Absolutely. Now this is part of the stuff
that’s classified in the new 9/11 report. When I
gave information to McKinney, she said, “Jesus,
Mike, I don’t get this. I went to my Congressional
intelligence contacts and laid out all this stuff for
them, and they won’t talk to me. They won’t
answer.” She said, “The only time that they never
get back to me is when it’s right.”
HUSTLER: There seems to have been ample
information that Arabs with al Qaeda ties were
learning how to fly planes in schools in the United
States.
RUPPERT: Oh, absolutely. Mohammed Atta
received flight training at Maxwell Air Force Base; a
couple others had received training at Pensacola
[Florida]. We had an Air Force lieutenant colonel
who came out and disclosed that several of the
alleged 9/11 hijackers had received
foreign-language training at the Defense
Language Institute in Monterey, California.
HUSTLER: Then, you would say that what we’re
faced with is either a conspiracy within the
government or an incredible amount of
incompetence.
RUPPERT: Well, I cannot buy the incompetence
theory because there’s too much systematic action
that took place, which allowed the attacks to
happen. For example, Coleen Rowley of the
Minneapolis FBI Office, one of Time’s 2002
Persons of the Year, wrote a memorandum, which
she sent to Dianne Feinstein and a couple other
senators. It was a blistering memo about how FBI
headquarters had suppressed the Minneapolis
office’s investigation into Zacarias
Moussaoui—denying search warrants of his
computer to the point where you had FBI agents in
Minneapolis going, “My God, Bin Laden must have
a mole in FBI headquarters.” “Bin Laden’s going to
crash planes into the World Trade Center”: Those
were notes from the FBI field office. The FBI
supervisory agent, in her case, who suppressed
her investigation was a guy named Dave Frasca.
Frasca also was the guy who sat on the Williams
Memorandum from Phoenix, which [detailed] all
the al Qaeda guys in flight school, but I have tied
Dave Frasca to three other 9/11 investigations that
were suppressed, including a Carnivore wiretap of
al Qaeda e-mails and a direct order from the White
House to the FBI in January 2001 to stop
investigating two of Osama bin Laden’s cousins
who were living in Falls Church, Virginia, right
outside of CIA headquarters. That order quite likely
went through Dave Frasca. Since Frasca is the
head of the bureau’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit,
it’s reasonable to infer this one guy inside the FBI
sat on five separate investigations, each one of
which could have prevented the attacks.
HUSTLER: So someone higher up must have told
him, “Don’t go there.”
RUPPERT: Not only that; he’s still at the FBI, and
he got promoted right after 9/11.
HUSTLER: Do you believe that the intelligence
agencies planned 9/11, or rather that they just
knew about it and didn’t do anything to prevent it?
RUPPERT: Plan is a difficult word here.
Intelligence agencies succeed by running
“assets”—in other words, somebody who does the
intelligence agency’s bidding without necessarily
knowing who’s running them or what the motive is.
T.E. Lawrence, Lawrence of Arabia, was a classic
case. He was used by British intelligence, sent out
on a mission, believed he was doing something
when in fact he was being used to do something
else. We have huge documented evidence now.
I’ve got a long trail—the penetration, the
relationship and the protection of al Qaeda by U.S.
State Department and CIA officials. One of the
most damaging pieces of information is that the
head of the Pakistani Intelligence Service wired
$100,000 to Mohammed Atta about a week before
the attacks, and yet he was meeting in Washington
with Cheney, Rumsfeld, all these people, on the
day of the attacks. So we were using cutouts to
support and protect al Qaeda. We have a clear
record that many of the 9/11 hijackers could have
been rounded up before the attacks, like the two
who were living in San Diego. So the government
didn’t necessarily plan. It’s more like they held the
doors open, and they knew exactly what was going
to take place and how. They facilitated by, in effect,
being the unseen door openers.
HUSTLER: Much of this sounds incredible. Yet with
the suppressing and redacting of the 9/11 report,
the government isn’t offering much of an
explanation.
RUPPERT: In my book, I’ll be filling in some of the
blanked-out pages that are in that 9/11 report. We
have to fully understand that we’re facing a huge
problem here that’s not being addressed in any
way that’s beneficial to the human race. Without
transparency, we’re all screwed. Bottom line: No
matter what the cost, we have to put all the cards
on the table, and we have to be willing to face
whatever they tell us.
*******************************************************
******
A DISTURBING TIMELINE
What do you do when your country is under
attack? If you're the leader of the free world, you
read a kids' book.
8:46: Flight 11 smashes into the World Trade
Center’s north tower.
8:48: The first news accounts of the crash are
televised.
Shortly after 8:48: According to an ABC report, as
Bush is preparing for his photo-op at the Emma
Booker Elementary school in Florida, a reporter
asks him, “Do you know what’s going on in New
York?” He says he does.
8:51: Bush arrives at Booker Elementary.
9:00: Bush is taken to a holding room and briefed
over the phone by National Security Advisor
Condoleezza Rice. This is how Bush later recalled
the events: “I was sitting outside the classroom
waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the
tower—the TV was obviously on, and I used to fly
myself, and I said, ‘There’s one terrible pilot.’ I
said, ‘It must have been a horrible accident.’ But I
was whisked off there—I didn’t have much time to
think about it.” Bush is mistaken; there was no
footage of the first plane hitting the tower until later
that day, and the second plane had yet to hit the
south tower. More disturbingly, the President
decides to read to the children while there are two
(possibly three) confirmed hijackings.
9:02 to (approximately) 9:23: Bush listens to
students read a story about a pet goat when he
should be making decisions whether or not to
shoot down the hijacked planes, since only the
President can order the shooting down of civilian
aircraft. In fact, jet fighters had not even been
scrambled to intercept the aircraft, contradictory to
standard operating procedures .
9:03: Flight 175 hits the World Trade Center’s
south tower.
9:05: Chief of Staff Andrew Card whispers in
Bush’s ear that a second plane has hit the World
Trade Center. Bush continues to read with the
children, allegedly because he didn’t want to scare
them. If he was composed enough to carry on a
photo-op, couldn’t the President have calmly told
the kids, “I’m sorry, but I have to attend to some
important business”?
9:41: Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon while
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is in his
Pentagon office watching TV.
10:03: Flight 93 crashes in southern Pennsylvania.
hustler article on 911...
Ruppert has done a lot of genuine investigative work on this, and it would behoove any American to at least read up on what he has put together.
Judging solely by mainstream news sources and official statements of government officials, there are quite a few disturbing revelations that cannot be denied, no matter how much you don't want to believe them.
He has given up on the 9/11 story, basically saying that current events have now outpaced anything that could have been done about 9/11 that would make any material difference in the current world geopolitical environment, and the direction things are going.
Judging solely by mainstream news sources and official statements of government officials, there are quite a few disturbing revelations that cannot be denied, no matter how much you don't want to believe them.
He has given up on the 9/11 story, basically saying that current events have now outpaced anything that could have been done about 9/11 that would make any material difference in the current world geopolitical environment, and the direction things are going.
-
Freakaloin
- Posts: 10620
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am
anyone who thinks the govt didn't at the very least allow these attacks to happen is just plain ignorant...
remember shortly after 911 condi rice said they had the evidence that osama was behind the attacks and they would give us the evidence soon...we are atill waiting...so that mean the govt official version is just as much as a conspiracy theory as all the other theories...hmmm...
remember shortly after 911 condi rice said they had the evidence that osama was behind the attacks and they would give us the evidence soon...we are atill waiting...so that mean the govt official version is just as much as a conspiracy theory as all the other theories...hmmm...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
-
Freakaloin
- Posts: 10620
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am
-
Freakaloin
- Posts: 10620
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am
-
Freakaloin
- Posts: 10620
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am
-
Freakaloin
- Posts: 10620
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am
-
Freakaloin
- Posts: 10620
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am
Michael Ruppert is a former LAPD narcotics
investigator who resigned in 1978 after attempting
to expose CIA drug trafficking. Since then, Ruppert
has published and edited From the Wilderness
(http://www.FromTheWilderness.com), a newsletter that
sheds light on government corruption and counts
35 members of the U.S. Congress among its
subscribers. Ruppert’s video, The Truth and Lies
of 9-11, and his latest book, Crossing the
Rubicon: America’s Descent Into Fascism at the
End of the Age of Oil, present compelling evidence
(derived from government documents, official
statements and reliable news organizations) of
CIA foreknowledge and insider trading related to
9/11.
Which might be a good argument if Goofy actually were the source, and not just some guy spending all day on the internet while his kids get cocksucker disease from faeces.Geebs wrote:Plus, you post so much utter bullshit that you have no credibility as a surce.
Don't shoot the messenger, even if he wears an apron and tinfoil hat.
1) I don't believe any digital photograph published on the web. That rules out about half of geoff's materialR00k wrote:Or someone who doesn't read serious alternatives to the official story at all, for vague reasons like 'that guy probably has a tin foil hat, LOL'Geebs wrote:No, I'm just someone who doesn't read stuff from sites with pictures of little green men on them
All very reasonable if you ask me.
2) Disaffected former employees are inherently unreliable sources
3) Conspiracy theories are boring since every time they're refuted, that just implies another level of cover-up
4) People are a problem
Take, for example, the bloke who invented homeopathy. He started out as a brilliant biochemist and then went frankly off the rails in exactly the same way as, for example, abductees. The process goes like this:
1) theory which might just be true
2) backlash; theory unconfirmed by evidence
3) backlash and strident claims generate media interest
4) completely off rails; add wilder and wilder theories to maintain media spotlight
5) declare self reincarnation of Jesus; start cult
I meet enough mad people every day to take any of that shit with a pinch of salt.
Shh, the microwave is stealing my thoughts....
-
Freakaloin
- Posts: 10620
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am
-
GONNAFISTYA
- Posts: 13369
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:20 pm
-
GONNAFISTYA
- Posts: 13369
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:20 pm