Government destroys documents on 9/11 put-options - a smoking gun for an inside job?

[Makalakumu]

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/sec-government-destroyed-documents-regarding-pre-911-put-options

So, an FIOA is filed on the 9/11 put options on United and American and the SEC announces that they government destroyed them. These put-options tie back to a Baltimore based financial firm that has direct ties to the CIA through it's CEO. There is NO WAY that this level of put-options could have been put on these particular airlines as random trading activity. In fact, the SEC looks at levels FAR LESS then this in order to charge people with insider trading. Insider trading, in this case, would mean that a CIA tied financial firm at least had foreknowledge of the attacks...and the information detailing the trades was destroyed by the government. It was not classified and locked up somewhere, it was DESTROYED, which is a crime all by itself.

What do you think? Was this a smoking gun that showed that some elements within the government at least had foreknowledge of the attacks? Is this a smoking gun? Or does this simply show that some unscrupulous individuals decided to make a profit off an event that killed 3000 American citizens?

One of the rebuttals I've read against foreknowledge is that these trades were backdated (a crime) and that the profits collected were purely fraudulent. The problem with this line argument is that the money for the trades was already piled up in accounts post-9/11 after the stock exchange was closed. No body could collect it. The money in the accounts is how people first because aware of the put-options.

Anyway, may we all live in interesting times...

 

[CanuckMA]

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/sec-government-destroyed-documents-regarding-pre-911-put-options

So, an FIOA is filed on the 9/11 put options on United and American and the SEC announces that they government destroyed them. These put-options tie back to a Baltimore based financial firm that has direct ties to the CIA through it's CEO. There is NO WAY that this level of put-options could have been put on these particular airlines as random trading activity. In fact, the SEC looks at levels FAR LESS then this in order to charge people with insider trading. Insider trading, in this case, would mean that a CIA tied financial firm at least had foreknowledge of the attacks...and the information detailing the trades was destroyed by the government. It was not classified and locked up somewhere, it was DESTROYED, which is a crime all by itself.

What do you think? Was this a smoking gun that showed that some elements within the government at least had foreknowledge of the attacks? Is this a smoking gun? Or does this simply show that some unscrupulous individuals decided to make a profit off an event that killed 3000 American citizens?

One of the rebuttals I've read against foreknowledge is that these trades were backdated (a crime) and that the profits collected were purely fraudulent. The problem with this line argument is that the money for the trades was already piled up in accounts post-9/11 after the stock exchange was closed. No body could collect it. The money in the accounts is how people first because aware of the put-options.

Anyway, may we all live in interesting times...

How long are firms obligated to keep records?

In Canada it's 7 years, after which all financial records may be destroyed.

 

[Makalakumu]

How long are firms obligated to keep records?

In Canada it's 7 years, after which all financial records may be destroyed.

These were not private records. From the article, these were SEC (government) records.

Specifically, David Callahan - executive editor of SmartCEO - submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the SEC regarding the pre-9/11 put options.

The SEC responded:

This letter is in response to your request seeking access to and copies of the documentary evidence referred to in footnote 130 of Chapter 5 of the September 11 (9/11) Commission Report.

***

We have been advised that the potentially responsive records have been destroyed.​

 

[CanuckMA]

These were not private records. From the article, these were SEC (government) records.

Same question applies. How long does the SEC have to keep records?

 

[CoryKS]

I'm sure there's a perfectly fnord reasonable explanation for all of this.

 

[Makalakumu]

Same question applies. How long does the SEC have to keep records?

You aren't allowed to destroy these. The SEC has records that go back to it's inception. These are part of the public record. This doesn't mean that some aren't "mistakenly" destroyed. That happens particularly when their is a scandalous event.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Securities_and_Exchange_Commission

 

[chaos1551]

Lots of people knew 9/11 was going to happen. Namely, the people/organization who did it knew. Also, a French arm knew about it:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/16/world/main2689205.shtml

I wouldn't be surprised if the government destroyed the documents to get rid of evidence showing they knew about the attacks enough to have stopped them yet did nothing. It also wouldn't surprise me too much if it was an inside job. However, it was likely al qaeda operatives that participated in the stock job and our pathetic government trying to cover it's *** over being stupid.

 

[CanuckMA]

You aren't allowed to destroy these. The SEC has records that go back to it's inception. These are part of the public record. This doesn't mean that some aren't "mistakenly" destroyed. That happens particularly when their is a scandalous event.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Securities_and_Exchange_Commission

I see no evidence that the SEC keeps records of transactions. They keep quaterly and annual filings, as well as MD&A.

 

[Makalakumu]

I see no evidence that the SEC keeps records of transactions.

http://maxkeiser.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/FOIAresponseGIF1.gif

They admitted they destroyed their own records. These were records pertaining to controversial put-options on airlines where people profited from the 9/11 attacks, records that indicated foreknowledge of the attacks by the party who made them, records that tie directly to the CIA through the deputy director at the time under Director George Tenet.

The SEC is a public institution that keeps public records. Destroying those documents is criminal.

 

[Ken Morgan]

If it was a real conspiracy, then you would never know that the records were destroyed. What type of amateur conspirators announce that they have done anything?

 

[Makalakumu]

If it was a real conspiracy, then you would never know that the records were destroyed. What type of amateur conspirators announce that they have done anything?

If that were true, then there would be no crime, because real criminals would never leave evidence behind that they did anything.

 

[CanuckMA]

http://maxkeiser.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/FOIAresponseGIF1.gif

They admitted they destroyed their own records. These were records pertaining to controversial put-options on airlines where people profited from the 9/11 attacks, records that indicated foreknowledge of the attacks by the party who made them, records that tie directly to the CIA through the deputy director at the time under Director George Tenet.

The SEC is a public institution that keeps public records. Destroying those documents is criminal.

First, that letter does not even give a hint that SEC maintains detailed transaction records, let alone that they must keep them forever. That type of details is maintained by the corporations, and can be destroyed after 7 years. It speaks to copies of transactions used to produce a report, judging by the date of the response, at least 7 years after said report was produced. I see no evidence of a conspiracy, simply of regular records retention policy. It makes sense that the regulatory agency destroys records at the same schedule it enforces.

 

[Makalakumu]

First, that letter does not even give a hint that SEC maintains detailed transaction records, let alone that they must keep them forever. That type of details is maintained by the corporations, and can be destroyed after 7 years. It speaks to copies of transactions used to produce a report, judging by the date of the response, at least 7 years after said report was produced. I see no evidence of a conspiracy, simply of regular records retention policy. It makes sense that the regulatory agency destroys records at the same schedule it enforces.

That makes no sense whatsoever. The financial world didn't just cease to exist seven years ago and neither did the word fraud just appear in 2003. You can file FIOA requests on SEC documents prior to 2003 any time you wish. Lawyers do this in order to check the financial health of various firms or to check for past fraud.

Also, the letter clearly states, "...we conducted a thorough search of the Commission's various systems of records..." How can you say that the letter does not even hint that the SEC maintained detailed transaction records? Did you miss this when you read it?

Like I stated above, the SEC is not a corporation, they are a public institution and any forms submitted to them become part of the public record. Destroying forms in the public record is a crime.

Since this was done in secret and it involved more then one person, it's a conspiracy. It's that simple, braddah. No evidence, eh?

 

[Makalakumu]

http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/webusers.htm

Looks like you can search the records all of the way back to 1934.

 

[Bruno@MT]

First, that letter does not even give a hint that SEC maintains detailed transaction records, let alone that they must keep them forever. That type of details is maintained by the corporations, and can be destroyed after 7 years. It speaks to copies of transactions used to produce a report, judging by the date of the response, at least 7 years after said report was produced. I see no evidence of a conspiracy, simply of regular records retention policy. It makes sense that the regulatory agency destroys records at the same schedule it enforces.

In regulated environments, the opposite is true actually. You want to make sure that you keep everything and anything you are required to retain for the mandated number of years. And after that you make sure that everything and anything older than that is purged irreversibly.

The latter may be surprising, but there are several reasons why you would do this. A legal one would be liability. Since it could be used as proof of wrongdoing, you get rid of it as soon as the law says you can. another reason would be that if you keep some data longer than required, it might raise questions why you don't retain the other data. Yet another reason is practicality: storing data and making sure that it is retrievable costs time, money, and space. Regulated environments need to retain a ton of data. This costs a lot of money.

Now, in the case of the SEC, it is a regulated environment, so I would be hard pressed to believe that they don't operate under the same protocols: keep data as long as required, but not any longer. Also note that different data can have different retention limits. Some data needs to be kept indefinitely, other data up to x years after the release of a batch to market, and other data y years after manufacturing.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Destroying forms in the public record is a crime.

Not arguing about whether what they did was wrong or a crime or not, just wanted to address this point.

Destroying public records is not a crime necessarily. I actually just had this discussion in a class that I took. Most municipalities, counties, states, and federal agencies have what is called a "document retention policy". Now, I don't know what the Federal governments policy is for its various agencies, but I do know that destroying document is not necessarily a crime just because it is a public record.

 

[Makalakumu]

Not arguing about whether what they did was wrong or a crime or not, just wanted to address this point.

Destroying public records is not a crime necessarily. I actually just had this discussion in a class that I took. Most municipalities, counties, states, and federal agencies have what is called a "document retention policy". Now, I don't know what the Federal governments policy is for its various agencies, but I do know that destroying document is not necessarily a crime just because it is a public record.

From the link I provided, it would seem that everything back to the inception of the SEC is available search. Whether one does it from a FOIA or uses the search engine they provide, it appears that it all comprises a complete public record of SEC documentation. Considering the charter of the SEC I posted earlier, this makes sense. So, yeah, you can destroy certain kinds of public docs, not all types and not these types.

I don't know who is going to investigate this. Can the Fed be trusted to investigate itself and to find the individuals who apparently had foreknowledge of the attacks and traded on that knowledge? Would you consider it treason for people in the Fed to NOT do anything about the attacks AND cynically adjust one's stock portfolio in order to profit from them? My gut feeling on this is that the names of the people who made these trades will lead to a surprising shadowy network of people who are responsible for much more then people expect.

The financial firm in question links directly back to the CIA, directly to the top of the agency in fact.

 

[CanuckMA]

From the link I provided, it would seem that everything back to the inception of the SEC is available search. Whether one does it from a FOIA or uses the search engine they provide, it appears that it all comprises a complete public record of SEC documentation. Considering the charter of the SEC I posted earlier, this makes sense. So, yeah, you can destroy certain kinds of public docs, not all types and not these types.

I don't know who is going to investigate this. Can the Fed be trusted to investigate itself and to find the individuals who apparently had foreknowledge of the attacks and traded on that knowledge? Would you consider it treason for people in the Fed to NOT do anything about the attacks AND cynically adjust one's stock portfolio in order to profit from them? My gut feeling on this is that the names of the people who made these trades will lead to a surprising shadowy network of people who are responsible for much more then people expect.

The financial firm in question links directly back to the CIA, directly to the top of the agency in fact.

SEC keeps filings back to it's inception. You can get quaterly and annual reports as well as MD&A.

What it does not keep is details of transactions. The corporations do that. And are allowed to destroy those after 7 years.

That FOIA request was for copies of transaction details contained in a report. Since it is not what the SEC is mandated to keep, it is quite feasible that it falls under a document retention policy.

 

[Bruno@MT]

SEC keeps filings back to it's inception. You can get quaterly and annual reports as well as MD&A.

What it does not keep is details of transactions. The corporations do that. And are allowed to destroy those after 7 years.

That FOIA request was for copies of transaction details contained in a report. Since it is not what the SEC is mandated to keep, it is quite feasible that it falls under a document retention policy.

And just to hammer this point home again: if the retention policy says 'destroy after 7 years', then it gets detroyed no matter what it is.

You are really not allowed to say 'hm this might be interesting to the conspiracy nuts, I'll just keep a copy just in case'. It gets destroyed barring a policy exemption handed down from the legal department, and they only do that if they are forced to do so.

 

[CanuckMA]

And just to hammer this point home again: if the retention policy says 'destroy after 7 years', then it gets detroyed no matter what it is.

You are really not allowed to say 'hm this might be interesting to the conspiracy nuts, I'll just keep a copy just in case'. It gets destroyed barring a policy exemption handed down from the legal department, and they only do that if they are forced to do so.

That is correct.

And I suspect that it's just what happened. The SEC keeps filings seemingly forever. Everything else is likely to be subject to a RRP. The letter is just the poorly worded typical legalese speak. They don't want, for whatever reasons, to just come out and say 'we destroyed it as per RRP', instead they say the nebulous 'We looked and couldn't find it, it's likely destroyed.'