Good article. Thanks. Yeah the term's been around a while, but George HW Bush first used it publicly on 9-11-90. I should've been more clear on that. Like his Illuminatist 'thousand points of light' mumbo jumbo, he was careful with his allusions, and references to the new order were touchy. I mean, his family did business with Hitler's Nazi interests until 1951, so they have to be careful about such things.

Ebbie's points, one by one, because there are a few. She said:

There was money to be made. Numerous insurance policies were taken out in advance of the event by people "in the know".

Yes there was money to be made. Silverstein bought the towers and insured them heavily. There was also stock market insider trading regarding 9-11. Buzzy Krongard, # 3 at the CIA at the time is the most glaring culprit in this area....

Associated Press, 10/18/2001; San Francisco Chronicle 10/19/2001 -- "To the embarrassment of investigators, it has also [learned] that the firm used to buy many of the 'put' options ... on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by 'Buzzy' Krongard, now executive director of the CIA." Krongard was chairman of Alex Brown Inc., which was bought by Deutsche Bank. "His last post before resigning to take his senior role in the CIA was to head Bankers Trust—Alex Brown's private client business, dealing with the accounts and investments of wealthy customers around the world."

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a090601putsshorts

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/12_06_01_death_profits_pt1.html

Krongard, by the way, retired a while back and said it was better if Osama bin Laden remain at large. No kidding. And I expect that'll become US govt policy by and by...that Osama be allowed to remain free because someone worse might replace him.

"You can make the argument that we're better off with him (at large)," Krongard said. "Because if something happens to bin Laden, you might find a lot of people vying for his position and demonstrating how macho they are by unleashing a stream of terror."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/1/9/205501.shtml

Krongard should be just a stain on the electric chair by now, but he's sucking up a govt pension and saying it's a GOOD thing Osama is running around. (In "1984" all acts of terrorism were blamed on a single terrorist...and that's what Osama is...America's bogeyman).

As far as money to be made, there was some, but again, the people behind the event print the money and own everything, so money's only a smokescreen. Common folk like us can understand greed and theft more or less, and if these monsters are ever backed into a corner, they'll try to act like it was just greed that motivated them. But it's much more than that.

One other point on money and 9-11. The day after Bush announced a "War on Terror," his campaign received a huge contribution from Hartford Insurance Company. And they were just the first of many insurers to contribute. It was beneficial to the insurance companies to have a president declare a "War" on terrorism, because most property loss isn't covered against acts of war. Hartford now has supplemental "Terrorism Insurance." So, they get to create a new class of coverage and not have to pay off on acts of war. Pretty slick.