1. The Twin Towers did not "collapse."

2. Anyone who says they did, structural engineer, physicist, whatever, is wrong. I'm neither, and I will debate 100 of them. It's a lie.

It's what you can prove

/////////////////////
911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

anyone who claims those towers "collapsed" due to planes & fire.

i'm debating some people over on the screw loose change forums... and it's funny... this one guy told me to read this paper which he used as evidence against me... which was strange because the paper agrees that there was insider trading from foreknowledge.

http://www.business.uiuc.edu/poteshma/research/poteshman2006.pdf

his summary on the right side of the first page:

After September 11,
2001, there was a great
deal of speculation that
the terrorists or their associates
had traded in the
option market on advanced
knowledge of the
impending attacks. This
paper generates systematic
information about
option market activity
that can be used to assess
the option trading that
precedes any event of interest.
Examination of the
option trading leading up
to September 11 reveals
that there was an unusually
high level of put
buying. This finding is
consistent with informed
investors having traded
options in advance of the
attacks.

the last paragraph:

The option market volume ratios considered do not provide evidence of
unusual option market trading in the days leading up to September 11. The
volume ratios, however, are constructed out of long and short put volume and
long and short call volume; simply buying puts would have been the most
straightforward way for someone to have traded in the option market on
foreknowledge of the attacks. A measure of abnormal long put volume was
also examined and seen to be at abnormally high levels in the days leading
up to the attacks. Consequently, the paper concludes that there is evidence of
unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that
is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks.

sorry for long post... didn't feel as though it was worthy of a blog entry... just wondering how many people have looked at this article. it's a bit long (25 pages) and has some pretty complicated information and calculations that i don't really understand, but maybe someone here can explain a little better what he's saying.

peace,
-adam
http://www.truth911.net

Looked into this and they say -

"the unusual put options were placed by a single US based invester WITH NO CONCIEVABLE TIES TO AL QEADA" . :)

(sarcasm)

The fact that the said that is bewildering to me.
If it WAS Al Queda who did the put options, then it would be understandable. Since they knew about the attacks (since they supposedly planned them then pulled them off), why not try to make some extra bucks on the side?
The fact that it WASN'T Al Queda is MORE of a reason to investigate it!!!!

Exactly, why wouldn't bin Laden or his network/money handlers or associates have tried to score big extra $$$ on the options market with their foreknowledge???

..."just wondering how many people have looked at this article. it's a bit long (25 pages) and has some pretty complicated information and calculations that i don't really understand, but maybe someone here can explain a little better what he's saying."

This is called obfuscating the truth. That is what he's doing.

Obfuscate: to make something (such as a known fact) obscure or unclear, especially by making it unnecessarily complicated.

Give'em Hell Larry.

This Larry Flynt's second piece on 911 Truth. I believe he was the first major publication to dig into the Truth. This latest one is excellent.

yes and yes :)

The official Hustler site is still stuck on the December issue.

it is supposed to symbolize female sexual frustration - at least that is what we are conditioned to believe.

btw- getting all sorts of errors just now :

warning: preg_match() [function.preg-match]: Compilation failed: invalid UTF-8 string at offset 2 in /home/n11blog/public_html/includes/unicode.inc on line 32.

The top picture on the loose change blog shows the issue as March. I guess we have to wait a little bit longer...

One place I called said they have the March issue, which I thought was weird. Dude didn't know if it was the one with 9/11 on the cover, but it does feature "Veronica" he said.

Mags usually publish 1 month in advance - some 2, its all about ad revenue...

in the back of the current issue of Hustler it says the 9/11 issue should be out on the 9th of this month. the Hustler website seems to be way behind.