posted 09-03-2003 07:26 AM            

WACO woke up a lot of people to the abuses of power by the Federal Government.
(Many already upset during the Bush administration; at the murder of Randy Weaver's unarmed wife as she held their baby)

President Bill Clinton repeatedly signed Executive Orders on "Federalism" (after Reno's debacle at WACO)

eg:
>Executive Order 13132--Federalism
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and
the laws of the United States of America, and in order to guarantee the
division of governmental responsibilities between the national
government and the States that was intended by the Framers of the
Constitution, to ensure that the principles of federalism established by
the Framers guide the executive departments and agencies in the
formulation and implementation of policies,...Sec. 2. Fundamental Federalism Principles. In formulating and
implementing policies that have federalism implications, agencies shall
be guided by the following fundamental federalism principles:
(a) Federalism is rooted in the belief that issues that are not
national in scope or significance are most appropriately addressed by
the level of government closest to the people.
(b) The people of the States created the national government and
delegated to it enumerated governmental powers. All other sovereign
powers, save those expressly prohibited the States by the Constitution,
are reserved to the States or to the people.
(c) The constitutional relationship among sovereign governments,
State and national, is inherent in the very structure of the
Constitution and is formalized in and protected by the Tenth Amendment
to the Constitution.
(d) The people of the States are free, subject only to restrictions
in the Constitution itself or in constitutionally authorized Acts of Congress, to define the
moral, political, and legal character of their lives.
(e) The Framers recognized that the States possess unique
authorities, qualities, and abilities to meet the needs of the people
and should function as laboratories of democracy.
(f) The nature of our constitutional system encourages a healthy
diversity in the public policies adopted by the people of the several
States according to their own conditions, needs, and desires. In the
search for enlightened public policy, individual States and communities
are free to experiment with a variety of approaches to public issues.
One-size-fits-all approaches to public policy problems can inhibit the
creation of effective solutions to those problems.
(g) Acts of the national government--whether legislative, executive,
or judicial in nature--that exceed the enumerated powers of that
government under the Constitution violate the principle of federalism
established by the Framers....

<
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html

In addition:
Executive Order 12886:
>Section 1. Statement of Regulatory Philosophy and Principles. (a)
The Regulatory Philosophy. Federal agencies should promulgate only such
regulations as are required by law, are necessary to interpret the law,
or are made necessary by compelling public need,...In deciding whether and how to regulate, agencies should assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives, including
the alternative of not regulating.<

>In addition, as appropriate, agencies shall seek to
harmonize Federal regulatory actions with related State, local, and
tribal regulatory and other governmental functions.
(10) Each agency shall avoid regulations that are inconsistent,
incompatible, or duplicative with its other regulations or those of
other Federal agencies.
(11) Each agency shall tailor its regulations to impose the least
burden on society, including individuals, businesses of differing sizes,
and other entities <

"There is a government within the government and I am not in charge!" President Bill Clinton (1996 DNC fundraiser)
A woman had just demanded he "...straighten out (a government agency)..."
She had heard from Rush Limbaugh that it was "Clinton's fault".

"There is a government within the government and I am not in charge!" President Bill Clinton

posted 09-03-2003 11:01 AM            

What amazes me, is that some Far Right people believe that Clinton was involved in some way with Waco, 1st WTC bombing, and Ruby Ridge, but absolutely do noe believe BushLaden Productions could not have any involvement in 9/11.

Clinton knew.....Bush knew.....They all knew

posted 09-03-2003 04:08 PM            

Clinton could possibly have stopped WACO.
Reno trusted professional Federal cops to tell her the truth.
They lied to Reno, and she passed the lies on to Clinton.

Ruby Ridge happened on Bush (the first's) watch.
That murder and cover-up was purely a crime buried under the Bushes.

OK city involved Feds who infiltrated Elohim city (a rightwing hangout) and acted as "agents provocateur" to get people like McVeigh involved in law breaking.

WTC One was adjucated in a courtroom, with BinLaden implicated by convicted Arab terrorist bombers.
Note they went for the building's base, not the upper floors.
Knock out the legs and the tallest building will fall.

IMHO a proven terror event-except-
An FBI informant told his handlers about the WTC bomb and they told him to leave it in the hands of the people who eventually bombed the WTC.

Federal involvment in every event you cited!

That government within the government wants civil unrest to justify expansion of it's police state powers/ IMWIO.

WTC one and OKC both fit our insane uncle Dod's Northwoods scenario to a "T"/ BTW

Evil Aunt Cia's help in training Northwoods'
actors probably helped. Neh?

posted 09-03-2003 07:25 PM            

No stopping that.

Probably make him head of the U.N.

posted 09-03-2003 08:06 PM            

Fact reamins:
Bill Clinton loved and respected the US Constitution, same as we do.

Wrong on everything else, yet respect for our sacred Constitution, gets my respect.

Beats Bush's hate of the Bill of rights and our basic freedoms/IMHO.

At least we prove again that the only people who lock step to their leaders' orders are neo-cons.

posted 09-03-2003 11:40 PM            

Fact reamins:
Bill Clinton loved and respected the US Constitution, same as we do

posted 09-04-2003 10:14 AM            

Professor also proves all others except "neo-cons" argue endlessly,
instead of lockstepping to the leaders' orders.

thanks.
You'all continue to hate Clinton.
I'll continue to like Bush, as a person,
yet hate what is done in his name.

That Clinton is the only President in my lifetime who even tried to restore the Constitution;
(& IMHO; that's why the NWO's media programmed everyone to hate him)
still gets my respect.

At least he went down trying.
Monica went down "Going to Washington to get my Presidential kneepads" serving the NWO manipulation.

Hate Clinton, but love our sacred Constitution?
We agree more than we disagree.

Clinton is out of office & his successor has suspended the US Constitution!
(and authorized Operation Northwoods/IMWIO)

Does anyone else care?

That "government within the government" now has a willing dupe.
Lunatics are now running the asylum.

The leash has been dropped.
The "dogs of war" have been let loose.

posted 09-04-2003 10:59 AM            

Excuse me but NAFTA and GATT are CERTAINLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ANTI-American and Clinton was beaming a great big NWO grin when he signed it.

The whole Monica NWO media circus meant NOTHING to me. I just look at what laws Slick enacted. His record speaks for itself. Anti-gun, Pro-NWO, Pro-Police state expansion, pro-drug war, pro-globalist trade policy...ad nauseaum.

Clinton deserves no praise...period.

Hes a traitor to America...just like Bu$h.

posted 09-04-2003 06:55 PM            

The Ever Dogged 9/11 Investigation
By Stunning Reversal
Updated Daily Starting in May 5th, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For some strange reason, George Bush Jr. simply does not want an investigation of the attacks of September 11th, 2001 to take place. In the past it was only far left, progressive news sources that dared to question the President's role in 9/11. Now it appears that even the consolidated corporate media is asking the same questions. Let's follow the story in reverse chronological order.
Date 9/11 Story
August 1st, 2003 9/11 Funds Traced to Pakistan Accounts (Yahoo/AP). Oh oh, looks like George had better classify some more information, quickly!
July 30th, 2003 US Aims to Reduce Air Marshalls (ABC News). So much for the tough talking president who wants to "protect the American people". He's spending so much money on wars of colonization and tax cuts for the rich that we can't even afford to protect our aircraft from terrorist attacks. This guy must really enjoy playing with other people's lives in order to gratify himself and his friends.
Bush Won't Reveal Saudi 9/11 Info (CBS News). What is Bush covering up? Here is a peak from this article:

Sources tell CBS the redacted section lays out a money trail between Saudi Arabia and supporters of al Qaeda, reports CBS White House Chief Correspondent John Roberts.

Among others, it singles out Omar al-Bayoumi, who gave financial assistance to 9-11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar.

The FBI charges al-Bayoumi, an official of the Saudi civil aviation authority, never lacked for money and is believed to have received funds from a charitable trust run by the wife of the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. The Saudis, for all their protestations of cooperating in the war on terror, still refuse to allow the FBI access to al-Bayoumi.

Look, I know it sounds like boring conspiracy theory, but WHY is Bush covering up for the Saudis? Is he hiding his own possible negligence or complicity in the attacks of September 11th? Is he hiding the fact that Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law had a 5% investment in Bush's first oil company, Arbusto? Is her covering up the fact that under his government the FBI was ordered not to investigate Saudi terror links before and after 9-11? Thousands of Americans have been killed because of these issues and we deserve to know the truth behind them.

posted 09-04-2003 07:01 PM            

Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading Lead Directly into the CIA’s Highest Ranks
CIA Executive Director “Buzzy” Krongard managed firm that handled “PUT” options on United Airline Stock
by Michael C. Ruppert

FTW - October 9, 2001 – Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream U.S. media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In the case of at least one of these trades -- which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed -- the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency.

Until 1997 A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U.S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.

Krongard joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined firm is the single largest bank in Europe. And, as we shall see, Deutsche Bank played several key roles in events connected to the September 11 attacks.
THE SCOPE OF KNOWN INSIDER TRADING

Before looking further into these relationships it is necessary to look at the insider trading information that is being ignored by Reuters, The New York Times and other mass media. It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades – in real time – as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. interests. Previous stories in FTW have specifically highlighted the use of Promis software to monitor such trades.

It is necessary to understand only two key financial terms to understand the significance of these trades, “selling short” and “put options”.

“Selling Short” is the borrowing of stock, selling it at current market prices, but not being required to actually produce the stock for some time. If the stock falls precipitously after the short contract is entered, the seller can then fulfill the contract by buying the stock after the price has fallen and complete the contract at the pre-crash price. These contracts often have a window of as long as four months.

“Put Options,” are contracts giving the buyer the option to sell stocks at a later date. Purchased at nominal prices of, for example, $1.00 per share, they are sold in blocks of 100 shares. If exercised, they give the holder the option of selling selected stocks at a future date at a price set when the contract is issued. Thus, for an investment of $10,000 it might be possible to tie up 10,000 shares of United or American Airlines at $100 per share, and the seller of the option is then obligated to buy them if the option is executed. If the stock has fallen to $50 when the contract matures, the holder of the option can purchase the shares for $50 and immediately sell them for $100 – regardless of where the market then stands. A call option is the reverse of a put option, which is, in effect, a derivatives bet that the stock price will go up.

A September 21 story by the Israeli Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism, entitled “Black Tuesday: The World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” documented the following trades connected to the September 11 attacks:

- Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines, but only 396 call options… Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these “insiders” would have profited by almost $5 million.

- On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Airlines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls. Again, there was no news at that point to justify this imbalance;… Again, assuming that 4,000 of these options trades represent “insiders,” they would represent a gain of about $4 million.

- [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]

- No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.

- Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley’s share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million. Merrill Lynch & Co., with headquarters near the Twin Towers, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill’s shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by “insiders,” their profit would have been about $5.5 million.

- European regulators are examining trades in Germany’s Munich Re, Switzerland’s Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a “double whammy” for them.]

On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “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.

More Articles
Meet the Carlyle Group
The Carlyle Group/Bin Laden Connection
Amazing coincidence?
FBI Told To Back Off Bin Ladens
Special agents told to stop investigating after President Bush took office
The UNOCAL Oil Pipeline and Afghanistan
Will the war mean big business for oil? Of course it will. You have no idea how big.
Read this, too.
Bush Hides Presidential Records
What doesn't he want Americans to know?
Bush Companies Seized under Trading With the Enemy Act
Bush Timeline
Dick Cheney's Business Dealings in Iraq
The sanctions have loopholes our vice president made millions from.

Forbidden Truth

US - Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy, Saudi Arabia and the Failed Search for bin Laden

More books

“The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors – whose identities and nationalities have not been made public – had advance knowledge of the strikes.” They don’t dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.

“… October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called “put” options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearinghouse Corp.”

“…The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options…” This was the operation managed by Krongard until as recently as 1998.

As reported in other news stories, Deutsche Bank was also the hub of insider trading activity connected to Munich Re. just before the attacks.

CIA, THE BANKS AND THE BROKERS

Understanding the interrelationships between CIA and the banking and brokerage world is critical to grasping the already frightening implications of the above revelations. Let’s look at the history of CIA, Wall Street and the big banks by looking at some of the key players in CIA’s history.

Clark Clifford – The National Security Act of 1947 was written by Clark Clifford, a Democratic Party powerhouse, former Secretary of Defense, and one-time advisor to President Harry Truman. In the 1980s, as Chairman of First American Bancshares, Clifford was instrumental in getting the corrupt CIA drug bank BCCI a license to operate on American shores. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and banker.

John Foster and Allen Dulles – These two brothers “designed” the CIA for Clifford. Both were active in intelligence operations during WW II. Allen Dulles was the U.S. Ambassador to Switzerland where he met frequently with Nazi leaders and looked after U.S. investments in Germany. John Foster went on to become Secretary of State under Dwight Eisenhower and Allen went on to serve as CIA Director under Eisenhower and was later fired by JFK. Their professions: partners in the most powerful - to this day - Wall Street law firm of Sullivan, Cromwell.

Bill Casey – Ronald Reagan’s CIA Director and OSS veteran who served as chief wrangler during the Iran-Contra years was, under President Richard Nixon, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. His profession: Wall Street lawyer and stockbroker.

David Doherty - The current Vice President of the New York Stock Exchange for enforcement is the retired General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency.

George Herbert Walker Bush – President from 1989 to January 1993, also served as CIA Director for 13 months from 1976-7. He is now a paid consultant to the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the nation, which also shares joint investments with the bin Laden family.

A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard – The current Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency is the former Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown and former Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust.

John Deutch - This retired CIA Director from the Clinton Administration currently sits on the board at Citigroup, the nation’s second largest bank, which has been repeatedly and overtly involved in the documented laundering of drug money. This includes Citigroup’s 2001 purchase of a Mexican bank known to launder drug money, Banamex.

Nora Slatkin – This retired CIA Executive Director also sits on Citibank’s board.

Maurice “Hank” Greenburg – The CEO of AIG insurance, manager of the third largest capital investment pool in the world, was floated as a possible CIA Director in 1995. FTW exposed Greenberg’s and AIG’s long connection to CIA drug trafficking and covert operations in a two-part series that was interrupted just prior to the attacks of September 11. AIG’s stock has bounced back remarkably well since the attacks. To read that story, please go to http://www.copvcia.com/stories/part_2.html.

One wonders how much damning evidence is necessary to respond to what is now irrefutable proof that CIA knew about the attacks and did not stop them. Whatever our government is doing, whatever the CIA is doing, it is clearly NOT in the interests of the American people, especially those who died on September 11.

posted 09-04-2003 10:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by the professor:
Coincidence? theres a little more than that going on I'm sure. The question is who really made off with the big payoff.

---

Follow the Money is what deepthroat kept saying.

The killers of JFK,RFK MLK and shooter of Wallace all had some of those hundred dollar bills with consecutive serial numbers.

This will reference the documented "Wall Street killing" that took place on Monday Sept. 11/2001,
Just before the events of Tuesday Sept., 11 caused a sharp drop in the market. Millions were made by people who "sold short", prior to the WTC and Pentagon bombings. Short-selling is an extremely speculative and potentially dangerous method of stock trading that anticipates a substantial drop in a stock's price over a short period of time.
_____________
"FOLLOW THE MONEY"
{"Deep Throat"'s advice about who was behind the Watergate Conspiracy}
_____________ http://www.usatoday.com/money/general/2001-09-21-suspect-options.htm
on the Chicago Board Options Exchange.
In the days leading up to the terrorist attacks, there was an unusual rise in the number of October put options in American Airlines and United Airlines stock that changed hands.
The put options would pay off if the price of the airline stocks dropped over a 6-week period. After last week's hijackings of four planes, the share prices of American and United, along with other airlines, plummeted, putting the contracts into the money.
According to Bloomberg, American Airlines put contracts purchased for $337,700 on Sept. 10 were worth $1.6 million when the market reopened after the attacks. United contracts purchased for $180,000 in early September jumped to $2.4 million.
___________ http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/39439_trade19.shtml
Bloomberg data shows that trading in so-called "put" options, which profit when stock price falls, in airlines UAL Corp. and AMR Corp. surged in the days before terrorists crashed hijacked United and American jets into the center's twin towers and the Pentagon.
Shares in Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the 110-story 2 World Trade Center, and Merrill Lynch & Co., with headquarters near the towers, also experienced pre-attack option trading from 12 to more than 25 times the usual volume in put options, according to Bloomberg data.
One day before two American Airlines jets were hijacked and crashed, 1,535 contracts changed hands on options that let investors profit if AMR stock falls below $30 per share before Oct. 20. That was almost five times the total number of October $30 put options traded before Sept. 10, according to Bloomberg data.
Those 1,535 contracts were worth $1.6 million at yesterday's closing price compared with $337,700 at the end of trading on Sept. 10, according to Bloomberg data. A contract represents options for 100 shares.
October $30 put options for UAL soared, with 2,000 contracts traded on Sept. 6, three trading days before the attack. A total of 27 contracts had traded previously. UAL shares fell $13.32 yesterday to $17.50. The 2,000 contracts were valued at $2.4 million today, compared with $180,000 on Sept. 6.
_____________ http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/09/18/MN63703.DTL
In the days leading up to terrorist attacks on America, unknown investors made unusually large bets in the financial markets against the stocks of two companies that would come to be prominently associated with the disaster: United Airlines and American Airlines.
Using what is known in the options trading industry as a "put," investors bet heavily against United's parent, UAL Corp., on Sept. 6 and 7, and against American's parent, AMR Corp., on Sept. 10, in the three trading days before the attack. Put options are essentially market methods for profiting when an investor believes the price of a security will drop.
No similar bets were made against the stocks of any of the companies' major competitors, including Delta, Continental, Northwest and Southwest. That would suggest that the investors had specific reason to believe UAL and AMR shares would drop.
In addition, the trading ratio in UAL put options on the Thursday before the attack was 25 times its normal level, according to data from the Options Clearinghouse Corp.
the unusual trading of a number of securities in the days leading up to the attacks. What also has drawn attention was the short-selling of the stock of Munich Re, a German insurance company whose shares took a sharp and unexplainable tumble in the week before the attack. A short sale is when an investor borrows stock from a broker and sells it in the hope of repurchasing it at a lower price and profiting on the difference.
There also was an increase in the number of put options on the Standard & Poor's 500 index, a broad measure of the market.
A put contract is the purchase of an option at a price lower than the level at which the security is currently trading; if the security drops to that level, the investor profits on the fall.
UNUSUALLY HIGH VOLUME http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/09/18/MN63703.DTL
"I saw put-call numbers higher than I've ever seen in 10 years of following the markets, particularly the options markets," said John Kinnucan, a principal of Broadband Research, an independent telecommunications research firm. "When one sees this type of activity, the first thing one does is ask oneself, 'What is the explanation? What are people worried about?' "
_____________ http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010923money0923p4.asp
there were highly suspicious sales of shares in airlines and insurance companies, along with major trades in gold and oil markets, before Sept. 11 that suggest they were conducted with advance knowledge of the attacks.
Welteke said his researchers came across what he considers almost irrefutable proof of insider trading as recently as Thursday, but he refused to release any detailed information pending further consultations with regulators in other European countries and the United States.
"What we found makes us sure that people connected to the terrorists must have been trying to profit from this tragedy," he said at a meeting of European finance ministers and central bankers.
Besides massive short-selling of airline and insurance stocks, Welteke said "there was a fundamentally inexplicable rise" in world oil prices just before the attacks that suggest certain groups or people were buying oil contracts that were then sold for a much higher price. He said German researchers also detected movements in gold markets "which need explaining."
The comments by the central bank chief of Europe's biggest economy were the first public confirmation that regulators were close to proving that groups linked to the U.S. attacks sought to reap windfall gains by exploiting their advance knowledge through trades in international markets.
______________
Watchdogs investigating insider trading http://www.dawn.com/2001/09/18/int10.htm
Concerns are growing that, with US stock markets shut for all but one day last week, insiders sold stocks short in European and Asian markets.

By short selling, investors can profit from a fall in share prices without ever owning the stocks outright. Often, investors sell borrowed shares and buy them back at a lower price. They can also take short positions using futures and options markets.
In Europe, speculation of short selling by people with prior knowledge of the attacks has centred on the fall suffered by Munich Re, one of the world's biggest reinsurers.

The stock fell from 307.29 euros at the close on Sept 3 to 273.30 on Sept 10, on the eve of the attacks. It touched a near-two-year low of 207.02 euros the day after the attacks.
 
***
 
documented "Wall Street killing" that took place on the afternoon of the assassination. Millions (in 1963 dollars) were made in the short period between the shooting and the early closing of the New York Stock Exchange, by people who "sold short", earlier that day (prior to the assassination), on blue-chip issues.
Short-selling is an extremely speculative and potentially dangerous method of stock trading that anticipates a substantial drop in a stock's price over a short period of time. Those who made the money that day were said to have been connected to the New York/New England banking industry and Dallas oil money. Professional financial portfolio managers seldom speculate via short-selling, and "blue-chip" stocks are the least likely candidates for a profitable short-selling strategy, without some inside information. A full disclosure on all this should have been undertaken by the WC; that it was ignored speaks volumes. http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
________________________________________
How long have these same people been controlling events?
"WHO ARE THESE GUYS?" {Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid}
Nixon always referred to the CIA's part in the Kennedy Assassination as "that Bay of Pigs thing", and tried to use it to get Helms to tell the FBI (Hoover had passed away) not to investigate Watergate because of, again, national security.
It was the release of the tape of a conversation between Nixon and his then chief-of-staff H. R. Haldeman, dated June 23, 1972, that included Nixon's orders to do this, which has been deemed the "smoking gun" of Watergate. This revelation is the one that finally forced Nixon's decision to resign in 1974, rather than face probable impeachment. He was succeeded of course, by none other than his own Warren Commission member, Gerald R. Ford, who immediately pardoned him for "all crimes", and who today continues to defend the WC conclusions.
Also, the famous "gap" tape, with 18 minutes edited out, was a conversation between Nixon and Haldeman. Many believe that they were discussing parallels between the two political "problems" and the methods and means to use them in the Watergate cover-up. Some, including this author, feel that the involvement of Hunt and his Cubans, in both affairs, was the real cause of the Watergate cover-up. http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
_______
Richard M. Nixon
"...I 'm not a crook..."
Nixon, during a Watergate related speech.
Nixon, who always felt that JFK had stolen the 1960 election from him by cheating better than Nixon had himself, was both a personal friend of Hoover and tied to Mob money. His fear and hatred of the Kennedys was only exceeded by his burning ambition to become president. A Kennedy dynasty loomed as a seemingly insurmountable obstacle to that goal.
Defeated for governor of California in 1962, his dying political career would, and did, only resurrect itself with JFK's removal.
Nixon's political views were also more in line with those of Johnson and his conservative wing of the Texas Democratic Party, than were Kennedy's. In fact, Connally switched party affiliations after LBJ's death and was a member of President Nixon's cabinet, as Secretary of the Treasury.
In retrospect, Nixon's ability to get involved in illegal activities is both documented and unquestioned, as are his financial ties to both big business and the Mafia.
It required the deaths of 2 Kennedy brothers for Nixon to gain the White House, and probably the political self-destruction of a third, to maintain it. http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
The "Party"
As amazing as it may seem, most of this group attended a party on the night of November 21, 1963, in Texas, at the home of close LBJ (and Hoover) friend and financial backer, oilman Clint Murchison. Many of the members of this group broke off from the main party for a "meeting" in another part of the house. What was discussed is not known but, after the meeting broke up is when Madeline Brown, LBJ's longtime paramour claims he told her:
"After tomorrow, I'll never have to worry about those damn Kennedys again."
This group did have the money and power to plan and cover-up the assassination and also the ability to control the investigation and to set-up and frame Oswald. They however, would have needed to "hire" the people to actually perform the act. They also possessed at least some ties to Jack Ruby, since Ruby did have documented ties to Nixon, when Nixon was in Congress. Ruby was also linked to the mob, and was said to deeply fear them. Nixon also has been tied to organized crime. These ties may have been the right combination for the "motivation" needed. http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
 
E. Howard Hunt
Hunt, a key CIA field officer during the Bay of Pigs invasion, and linked to anti-Castro Cubans for many years, is one of only two people on earth to not remember where he was when the assassination took place (Richard Nixon was the other). He has always maintained that he was in Washington, with his family. However, several people have placed him in Dallas that day, and no one can verify his story. In fact, the "hobo wearing a hat" who was taken from the railroad car behind the knoll looks quite a bit like Hunt.
When a small circulation magazine, Spotlight , stated in a 1978 article attributed to former CIA official and author Victor Marchetti, that Hunt was involved in the assassination, Hunt sued them for libel. Researcher Lane, also an attorney, defended the magazine during their second trial (Hunt had won the first, but that decision was overturned on appeal). The jury who heard the case in federal court, found sufficient reasons to believe that Hunt had lied about where he was and credible testimony establishing his presence that day, in Dallas. Hunt's statement, under oath, that he spent the day in Washington with his family, explaining what was going on to his children, was in direct conflict to his claim that his children were now suspicious of his possible involvement, due to the Spotlight story. When Lane pointed out that if Hunt had been with his children, they would have known that he was not in Dallas, the jury denied the suit.
An interesting sidelight here, is that, while the press gave front-page coverage to the first verdict, they virtually ignored the second.
Charles V. Harrelson
Forensic anthropologists have stated that one of the three "hobos" pulled from a rail car behind the "grassy knoll" bears a 90%+ probability of being Harrelson (Harrelson once admitted, but now denies any such involvement). He is currently serving a life sentence for the brutal contract assassination of another federal official...a judge. Harrelson has also been linked to both right-wing groups and the CIA.
The Others
The other two mentioned, Martinez and Sturgis , were soldiers-of-fortune and CIA contract agents who seemed to be anywhere and everywhere that Hunt was, such as the Bay of Pigs in 1961 and also including Democratic National Headquarters in the Watergate Building on June 17, 1972. Both were among the original burglars arrested and convicted for that crime. Neither ever divulged anything about the involvement of "higher-ups" in the Watergate scandal.
Fonzi, while working for the HSCA, uncovered evidence that showed that Sturgis was actually interviewed in connection with the assassination by the FBI. Interestingly, that fact, along with several possible connections between Sturgis and Oswald, did not make it into any of the 26 Warren Commission volumes. http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
I can't fail to see the irony in the fact that many of the same people (Helms, E.H. Hunt, Ford, Hughes, Sturgis and Martinez, among others) involved in the events that helped Nixon gain the Presidency in 1968, were also responsible, because of Watergate, for his resigning that office in 1974. Hunt's huge money demands for his silence, over $1,000,000, were also a major factor. Were these hush-money demands only due to his Watergate involvement? Would we have ever learned the truth about Watergate, if Hoover had still been alive or the CIA really involved in it?
I'll discuss the correlations between the two scandals in detail, later in this narrative.
Another interesting coincidence is that Hunt's wife, Dorothy, was killed in a commercial plane crash, in 1973, while she was ferrying around a large sum of the hush money. The FBI helped investigate that crash and found that there was no evidence of sabotage...
Setting the Stage
Dallas was probably chosen as one of a number of possible assassination scenarios because it was part of Johnson's power base and ex-CIA executive, General Charles Cabell's brother, Earle, was mayor, allowing for suitable early control over the events. General Cabell remember, had also been fired after the Bay of Pigs invasion. The groups behind it all, and the CIA’s Phillips, a key connection, were also native to this area, with links to the many "seedy" sides of Dallas. These businesses and people can also be tied to the Mafia element, as can the CIA contingent. Plus, most of the Dallas Police Department at this time was very conservative. It has even been rumored that, to be a Dallas cop, the first requirement was a John Birch Society membership card. Such individuals were not going to cry over the death of the "liberal Bostonian" and, subsequently would be more easily maneuvered into acts that would help point to the type person Oswald was to be depicted as. http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
Maybe, by the time RFK started putting the real story together (if he did), his power to do anything about it was gone. We also must remember that Hoover, who would have been the Justice Department's chief investigator, was one of the conspirators. If RFK had become President, he might have done something. Could that have been the reason, in 1968, that he too, was killed, also by an alleged "lone nut", again under very strange circumstances? It has been claimed that Bobby kept a file that traced the assassination back to Howard Hughes near him at all times. That file allegedly disappeared immediately after his murder.
E Howard Hunt was the reason behind Nixon's downfall. It wasn't Watergate per se, it was Hunt's involvement. Nixon's ordering Haldeman to have the CIA warn the FBI off of the investigation of the break-in was the smoking gun of the scandal. After Nixon's long drawn out efforts failed to keep the tape of that conversation from Congressional and public scrutiny, he resigned. Is it reasonable to believe that Hunt's involvement in the break-in, still a very minor affair at the time of the fatal Nixon-Haldeman conversation, and the other illegal activities being directed by Nixon's staff would have elicited such an obviously illegal request direct from the President? And no one else had the audacity (or ammunition) to demand (and get) any hush money. Only because of those activities? It was those continual demands for money, and the difficulty in obtaining it, which finally so demoralized White House Counsel John W Dean III, that he "jumped ship".
The avenue of approach which Nixon suggested that Haldeman use on CIA Deputy Director Vernon Walters seems cloaked in intrigue which points to Nixon's belief at least, that Hunt was a part of the assassination and CIA Director Richard Helms knew it. We have this excerpt from the transcripts of the tape of Nixon's June 23, 1972 conversation with Haldeman:
NIXON: Well, we protected Helms from one hell of a lot of things...
HALDEMAN: That's what Ehrlichman says.
NIXON: Of course this Hunt,...that will uncover a lot of things. You open that scab...there's a hell of a lot of things...this involves the Cubans, Hunt and a lot of hanky-panky...just say (unintelligible) very bad to have this fellow Hunt, ah, he knows too damn much...if it gets out that this is all involved, the Cuba thing, it would be a fiasco. It would make the CIA look bad, its going to make Hunt look bad, its likely to blow the whole Bay of Pigs thing, which we think would be very unfortunate...both for the CIA and the country. (my emphasis)
This conversation took place just before Nixon told Haldeman to get the CIA to tell the FBI to back off investigating Watergate on the basis of "national security". It was the disclosure of that particular request, after Helms' failure to accede to it, which sealed the President's fate. I'll simply let you draw your own conclusions as to what Nixon was talking about...
No less of an inside figure than whistle-blower Dean has stated that there are still "...very big revelations..." in the Watergate episode which are yet to emerge. Twenty-five years after the fact, that is a truly fascinating statement, especially when one considers that the contents of Hunt's White House safe were seized by Dean within days of the break-in. In his book Blind Ambition , Dean refers to some of the items found there as "...politically explosive...". These items he later gave directly to L Patrick Gray, the acting Director of the FBI after Hoover's death, so he could say they were given "...to the FBI..." and yet depend on Gray to have the political savvy to keep them out of the investigation. They were considered so hot that Nixon's domestic advisor John Erhlichman suggested that Dean "...toss them into the Potomac River..." on his way to work one morning. Gray admitted that he did finally burn them (would Hoover have ever admitted that??). These files were missing from the inventory of Hunt's safe given to the Justice Department investigators and their whereabouts was questioned by Hunt during the discovery part of his trial. Care to speculate on their contents?
Next there is Nixon's faux pas during the news conference after the Huston Plan became public knowledge. While attempting to defend his use of illegal wiretaps by making general references to their use by previous administrations, he slipped up and suggested that Robert F Kennedy might have been able to save his brother from the assassin's bullet had he used more wiretaps.
What good would wiretaps have been if Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman?
We also have the famous 18 minute gap and later a not-quite-so-famous 19 minute gap. What was so sensitive that Nixon felt the need to obliterate them and face the probable consequences? Other items, including his rough and sometimes vulgar language, admissions that eventually cost him the White House, and his top aides' prison sentences, were left in. The entireties of these actions certainly appear to be attempts to cover up something of far greater consequence than anything Watergate related.
Finally, there is contained in The Haldeman Diaries, the following paragraph from Friday, January 12, 1973:
The P got back on the Watergate thing today, making the point that I should talk to (John B) Connally about the Johnson bugging process to get his judgment on how to handle it...The problem in going at LBJ is how he'd react...A Star reporter was making an inquiry in the last week or so, and LBJ got very hot and called Deke (Cartha DeLoach-FBI #3 man, under Hoover), and said to him that if the Nixon people are going to play with this, that he would release (deleted material---national security), saying that our side was asking that certain things be done...(my emphasis)
Nixon, while hoping to pressure LBJ into using his influence to stop the Congressional investigations (LBJ did just that when he created the Warren Commission in 1963) into Watergate, obviously did not appear to wish to get into a mutual disclosure war with Johnson, since it seems that BOTH were vulnerable on some items. The reference to "national security", especially when taken in context, is quite intriguing. It never came to a head because, 10 days later, LBJ was dead.
  http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
Similar Goals
The first comparison that can easily be drawn is that the goals of both the Kennedy Assassination and Watergate were the same...to decide who would be President of the United States without the Constitutional input of the people. We have seen efforts of this type in hundreds of other nations, and have looked down our noses at those countries. Few realize that we too, have been subjected to it, not once but twice (at least).
Jack Kennedy's assassination removed one elected head of the government...Watergate was to insure the re-election of another (another irony...that Nixon's re-election committee would be called by an acronym: CREEP). Both are reflective of a person or group of people with absolutely no regard for the principles outlined in the Constitution of the United States, nor any consideration for the wants and needs of the people. Whether this was brought about by a misguided feeling that only he, or they, knew what was best for the country and its people, or simple greed and/or hunger for power, is totally irrelevant. No one has that right; that is the essence of democracy. http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/chapter6.htm
Intertwined Casts
There are a few names that have been linked to both misdeeds...Richard Nixon, E Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, Eugenio Martinez, and Richard Helms.
Then, there are those who were asked to help either "clean up" the Watergate mess or try to find a way to hide or contain it, and were also involved in the Warren Commission's definition of "investigation"...Rankin, Jaworski, Ball, Jenner, McCloy, Shaffer, Ford, Rhyne, and Specter. Quite a cast. Obviously some are there sheerly by coincidence...but ALL?
Next we have the eerie coincidences...FBI Directors lying, hiding and/or destroying evidence...CIA operatives lurking here, there and everywhere...references by top government officials to "...massive, far reaching, even into foreign countries, investigations which showed NO ONE ELSE was involved..."
Deja vu...all over again.
____________
"WHO ARE THESE GUYS?"
_____________ http://www.conspiracydigest.com/bushwhacked.html
powerful forces conspired to destroy the financial equity of employee-owned Hamilton Securities, as well as the personal life savings of the firm's president, Catherine Austin Fitts.

Why? Because Hamilton Securities had opened up the market for defaulted HUD mortgages. In simple terms, the established network of insiders would be susceptible to -- horrors! -- open competition, not to mention an entire universe of new bidders.

In fact, Hamilton's plan for optimization of sales of defaulted mortgages resulted in a savings of over $2.2 billion for US taxpayers.

The numbers are staggering. Every year HUD issues about $70 billion of mortgage insurance which guarantees the mortgages used to finance homes, apartment buildings, nursing homes, assisted living facilities and hospitals. HUD then pays out about $6 billion on claims for defaulted mortgages, which the agency has to then manage at great cost to taxpayers.

Prior to Hamilton's involvement, HUD was recovering about 35 cents on the dollar of mortgage insurance payments made on defaulted mortgages.

When Hamilton instituted their new program, HUD's recovery rate soared to about 70 to 90 cents on the dollar. How? Hamilton introduced a proprietary optimization bidding software and an on-line database of information, accessible to all investors, so that the defaulted portfolio could be bid upon in an open auction.

In October 1997, the Chairman of one Congressional oversight committee referred to the Hamilton-based loan sales at HUD as generating "eye-popping" yields.

In fact from 1994-97, HUD saved about $2.2 billion in HUD's $12 billion mortgage portfolio. These savings then allowed HUD to issue far more new mortgage insurance at a lower cost.

When Hamilton's successful loan sales-auction program was suspended due to the investigation, the old levels of government inefficiency and fraud were resumed. Call it "Business As Usual."

That means HUD is now losing about $4 billion per year on its $6 billion of defaulted mortgages -- instead of just $2 billion. That's the equivalent of 20,000 taxpayers working their whole lives to pay for this boondoggle for just one year. http://www.conspiracydigest.com/bushwhacked.html
The Spooky Life of Stanley Sporkin

Then, it just so happened that the judge presiding over the Hamilton case was the former CIA Counsel -- Federal Judge Stanley Sporkin (recently retired).

According to Rodney Stich, author of "Defrauding America," "Sporkin was involved with the 1980 October Surprise scheme and his judicial appointment was probably his reward by the Reagan-Bush administration for helping carry it out, and to block any judicial exposure or prosecution action."

(The October Surprise was the Reagan-Bush black-ops/covert action to delay the release of the hostages in Iran, resulting in the electoral victory of Reagan as US President.)

Sporkin was appointed to the bench by Ronald Reagan in 1985. His spooky roots, however, go back to the days when he was a director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, while the infamous Bill Casey was practicing his Wall Street shakedown techniques as Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
_________________
{SO WHY LINK THE JFK STUFF TO THIS MONEY TRAIL?}
_________________
The October Suprize
A special feature program from The Other Americas Radio. http://catalog.com/hopkins/text/october-suprise.html
Richard Allen was head of the October Surprise Working Group. It met every morning to try to come up with ways to prevent Carter from bringing the hostages successfully home.
You have to remember that Reagan realized he would win as long as Carter didn't pull off a last-minute hostage rescue.
It was meant to release the hostages . . . exactly . . . the moment Ronald Reagan was president.
Barbara Honegger: Not just many of the key witnesses but the key witnesses in this entire affair have been, in my opinion, murdered.
The best way to get to the bottom of controversial activities is to air the facts. Air them dispassionately and carefully, and let the chips fall where they may.
November 1979. Fifty-two Americans were taken hostage in Iran. The American public was held in suspense as the Carter Administration worked to bring the hostages home--first, in the failed Desert One rescue attempt, and then through negotiations with the revolutionary Iranian government. In October of 1980 an agreement was reached to unfreeze Iran's monetary assets for the safe return of the hostages. For some reason, the hostages were not released until January 20, 1981, the day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as president. In the dawn of the Reagan era, many, in momentary blindness, neglected to seriously question the implications of such an event. It is now charged that in the few short months before the 1980 presidential election, the tremors of a domestic destabilization of America by Americans was shaking the nation.
The October Surprise. Produced by The Other Americas Radio. I'm Jane Perry. In this special program we will examine allegations that members of the Reagan-Bush campaign cut a secret deal with the Ayatollah Khomeini before the 1980 election. We will also explore what may have been the deliberate failure of President Carter's Desert One hostage rescue mission.
Honegger: The very possibility that Carter could bring the hostages home was close to certain to wreck a Reagan bid for the presidency; so the Reagan campaign took phenomenal secret measures to ensure that the Carter White House was not successful.
Perry: Barbara Honegger was a researcher with the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980. Subsequently she spent two years in the White House as a policy adviser to President Reagan. Honegger's investigation into this issue has revealed a disturbing story of treason, blackmail and sabotage. http://catalog.com/hopkins/text/october-suprise.html
_________________
"THERE YOU GO AGAIN" {as Reagan said}
LINKING A MONEY TRAIL AND MURDER!