>Stan mentioned on L-I that what is needed now is to look and see
>whether or not
>the actual evidence that the Mossad and/or CIA and or.... had something to do
>with the recent attacks.
This seems like the mirror image of Bush's nomination of Osama bin Laden: who needs evidence? It just feels right.
>Of course.
>Perhaps now there has arisen guilt for *someone* that any but the
>truly paranoid
>can deal with. I not familiar with Wall St Terms, I own no stock ands likely
>never will. So I'm not entirely sure how "put options" work, but I
>gather it is
>like Wall St insurance. If you purchase this kind of "insurance" and
>then stocks
>fall, you make some return in cash.
Put options - the right to sell a security at a given price over a fixed period of time - rise in value as the underlying security falls. E.g., an American Airlines October 30 put would give you the right to sell AA stock at a price of 30 through the Oct expiration date. If AA falls from 30 to under 20, which is what it did over the past 10 days, then the value of a put option would expand from almost nothing to a bit over 10 points.
> The CBC now reports that Put options on
>American Airlines was traded 60 times more than usual on September 10th. This,
>to me, seems like a smoking gun to at least the knowledge of the buyers.
Options trading leaves a considerable "paper" trail, and anomalous trading patters are monitored by exchanges and regulators. So if the CIA and/or Mossad was doing this trading, they were either trying to leave some false clues behind, or were very stupid.
Doug