The story...

Most of the suspicious 9/11 put options were purchased through a CIA-linked bank.

Our take...

The link? It seems A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard (executive director at the CIA) was Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust-AB Brown up until 1998, when he left. We might have thought the link expired at that point, but apparently we're supposed to believe it was still significant. Why, though? If, let's say, Government conspirators wanted to engage in a perfectly legal transaction to purchase put options in United and American Airlines, then why would it matter which bank they used? Especially if you're assuming they had enough power to block any investigation?

Presumably the explanation would be that people at this bank would be willing to help the CIA profit from the deaths of thousands of American citizens. Uh-huh. Is there any evidence for this, though? None whatsoever, and it seems unlikely as now Bankers Trust was part of another company.

[Bankers Trust] was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/illegaltrades.html

Finally, although some sites quote the trades as all or mostly being linked to AB Brown, you might notice they never post references to prove that. Why? Because if they did you'd read something like this.

The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of the options.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/29/MN186128.DTL

So this whole story comes from an unidentified source, making us question its reliability. And even if true, it may only be referring to "some" (not most) of the trades for one of the shares in question. If it was so vital to use a "CIA-linked bank" to make these trades, then why not use all of them?

It's clear that, for the conspiracy to stand up, we must make an increasing number of assumptions. That the conspirators needed to use a particular bank, for instance, even though they have the power to cover up just about any investigation. That the conspirators had influence at AB Brown, even though Krongard had left years before. That the report about Deutsche Bank being involved in the first place is accurate, and that the conspirators would be stupid enough to let this information get out, but clever enough to spread the trades across other banks (which presumably must be "CIA-linked", too).

Maybe this is all true, but it would help if there was some evidence to support any of these claims. Until there is, the simpler explanation makes more sense to us -- these trades were made by normal investors with no foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks.