Follow The Money

[Mr. Jones]

Then you'll love this. Another CT board has tackled this thorny prob and come up with an "ingenious" response. The insurers - I believe there were at least 12 - were threatened by someone to pay up and shut up. Their proof? Yeah ... that's another thorny prob.

The real thorny problems are the ones you keep avoiding, namely the very real factual dilemma of the WTCs destruction and the avoidance of science and physics that clearly point to something else having helped their destruction in such short time.
Insurance fraud is but a subplot that benefited Silverstein, and his lawyers along the way.
When one considers who benefited the most from the 9-11 attacks, and also considers who the players were, where their loyalties are, etc. It is Israel, and their Sayanim. Silverstein is a close friends with Benjamin Netanyahu who declared the 9-11 attacks on our nation as good for Israel. Silverstein is an Israeli firster,
and Lewis Eisenberg, vice president of AIPAC and former Goldman Sachs partner, was Chairman of the Port Authority ("PA"),
In April 2001 Silverstein was informed he had lost his bid in the privatization of the WTC. Then events took a surprising turn. The winner dropped out, leaving Silverstein and his partners, who had finished second, as the new winner.

The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion on July 24, 2001. Silverstein put up $125 million, only $14 million his own money. The net lease covers four buildings at the World Trade Center, including the Twin Towers and the retail Mall.

The speed with which this painstakingly complex deal was closed is notable. "There are a million items that need to be dealt with", said Marc Schauer, of NAI Lawrence, a leasing firm. The entire negotiation period--from start to finish--lasted only a few [3] months, a relatively swift duration in the world of colossal lease transactions especially with a governmental entity. [This frantic rush to close [for possession] by some deadline was the principal cause of the litigation to follow. Why the rush?]

Silverstein said. "We will be in control of a prized asset and we will seek to develop its potential, raising it to new heights." Was that, "raising" or "razing"?

But from an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized since its inception -- has never functioned, nor was it intended to function, unprotected in the real estate marketplace. It would cost $800 million just to upgrade the electrical, electronic, and cooling systems.
And it was well-known that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. Plans were made in 1989 to completely dismantle the WTC not only because of the asbestos problems but also the electrolytic corrosion problems. Apparently, the plans were dropped because they were considered prohibitively expensive. The only reason the building was still standing on 9/11 was it was too costly to disassemble floor by floor. There is a persistent report on the internet that either the state of New York or the EPA had ordered the dismantling of the WTC. And dismantling the WTC would not result in the recovery of insurance proceeds since it would not be a casualty.

Why would Silverstein, a knowledgeable real estate developer, pay millions of dollars to get control of a building that was uneconomic, was an environmental basket case, and had serious corrosion problems?

All one needs to realize first and foremost is that the massive, steel, WTC buildings were brought down with the assistance of something other then fires, is a little physics and science lesson. The rest of the plan and who was involved, is secondary, and with a little time and research, one can deduce a plausible theory about.

One such theory is that the crimes of 9-11 were conceived in New York City, by people linked to organized crime and the Israeli Mossad, as an illegal demolition project, and subsequently sold to corrupt elements of the Bush Administration, the intelligence community, and the military.
Once one realizes the players involved and connected to the 9-11 attacks, and considers their loyalties and allegiances, this becomes clearer.

But to be so ignorant and stupid as to say that the OCT as told by corrupt officials and their agencies, simply MUST be true and factual because of an insurance payout, while dismissing or ignoring the glaring inconsistencies regarding the science and physics involved, is fucking stupid, and an attempt to muddy the waters and distract from real facts regarding 9-11.

Nice try OP but you still suck, and you still are a pussy for avoiding the real issues and objections to the OCT and NIST.

Here is a link with a little more insight then what you have provided about the Silverstein issue, but remember folks, you can't research or discuss this matter in earnest without first facing what the objections are and why there are objections in the first place to the governments version. You can't just skip to the middle or the end of something to search for answers and pick and choose only certain aspects and claim any sort of "debunking" victory.
The science and physics are the only constant and they do not lie.

Who Destroyed The WTC?
Now that

Do you really believe that insurance companies are any match for corrupt US government officials, Judges, the state of Israel, its Mossad among other factions that can provide the convincing necessary to achieve whatever outcome they desire?
To assume that the laws of physics and science simply vanished because of an insurance fraud payout is naive at best and insanely ignorant at its worst.

In today’s news, American Home Assurance has announced that it is capping payouts for WTC-demolition asbestos claims at a measly $10 million.
The announcement underlines just how much cheaper it is to demolish asbestos-laden skyscrapers without a permit, than to follow legal procedures.
Insurer Caps WTC-Demolition Asbestos Payout at 10 Million | Veterans Today

The IRR on his investment was 6% from the time he purchased the lease to when he collected the insurance payout, less than if he had purchased a building almost anywhere else in Manhattan.

Fail.

You do realize what the WTC complex was used to initiate don't you. Have you no idea what the "rate of return" possibly was for others that benefited from their defense industry investments or in say Haliburton, or the mercenary companies like the Blackwaters, even down to the paltry by comparison put options, among others, not to mention the huge security apparatus that has formed into huge cash cows under the guise of "protecting" us from the boogeymen?
Fact is 9-11 was an ingenious undertaking that greased many hands, and the illegal demolition of a problem property was a small but very important positive outcome when compared to the bigger picture.
What is truly amazing is the power that these criminals have been able to attain once they were allowed credibility, trust and gained control of the crucial areas and positions necessary in the US government.
It's a shame that such cunning and planning isn't used to better our nation, the world and mankind. Fucking smart greedy, power tripping psychopathic evil motherfuckers....that's for sure
BTW, a link to this most interesting claim of yours would be appreciated tho, I like to read things of interest pertaining to this topic, as unlike some on here I do keep an open mind and dig learning stuff about it.

 

[Politico]

Another thread full of cuttin' and pastin'. How did I miss it?

 

[Mr. Jones]

ANother thread full of cuttin' and pastin'. How did I miss it?

Do you find it easier to copy something word for word when trying to respond with material from a source, cause if you do you're foolish. Copying and pasting is useful when considering not only time, but also when confirming and showing that information about the relevant subject being discussed is easily available and at hand.
Why don't you stop being such a crybaby about such trivial bull shit, and perhaps comment on what is in the subject matter? Click the fucking links brainiac, read and then discuss the material it's easy try it.
You know, it's very apparent you have nothing to rebuttal or "debunk" so you act like a child and complain about cuttin" and pastin"? C'mon man grow up.

 

[Politico]

No I find it easier to do my own research.

 

[Mr. Jones]

No I find it easier to do my own research.

So do I. I have much information regarding the initial objections to the fire melting steel, the pan cake theory, fuel loads, and the NIST pseudoscience. I have looked these things up, and verified the sources, making sure they had nothing to gain, like government grants, jobs, or contracts, possible promotions, or stock ownership in companies or nations that benefitted from the 9-11 attacks or the wars it was used to initiate. How bout you, what ya got?

 

[Toro]

The real thorny problems are the ones you keep avoiding, namely the very real factual dilemma of the WTCs destruction and the avoidance of science and physics that clearly point to something else having helped their destruction in such short time.
Insurance fraud is but a subplot that benefited Silverstein, and his lawyers along the way.
When one considers who benefited the most from the 9-11 attacks, and also considers who the players were, where their loyalties are, etc. It is Israel, and their Sayanim. Silverstein is a close friends with Benjamin Netanyahu who declared the 9-11 attacks on our nation as good for Israel. Silverstein is an Israeli firster,
and Lewis Eisenberg, vice president of AIPAC and former Goldman Sachs partner, was Chairman of the Port Authority ("PA"),
In April 2001 Silverstein was informed he had lost his bid in the privatization of the WTC. Then events took a surprising turn. The winner dropped out, leaving Silverstein and his partners, who had finished second, as the new winner.

The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion on July 24, 2001. Silverstein put up $125 million, only $14 million his own money. The net lease covers four buildings at the World Trade Center, including the Twin Towers and the retail Mall.

The speed with which this painstakingly complex deal was closed is notable. "There are a million items that need to be dealt with", said Marc Schauer, of NAI Lawrence, a leasing firm. The entire negotiation period--from start to finish--lasted only a few [3] months, a relatively swift duration in the world of colossal lease transactions especially with a governmental entity. [This frantic rush to close [for possession] by some deadline was the principal cause of the litigation to follow. Why the rush?]

Silverstein said. "We will be in control of a prized asset and we will seek to develop its potential, raising it to new heights." Was that, "raising" or "razing"?

But from an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized since its inception -- has never functioned, nor was it intended to function, unprotected in the real estate marketplace. It would cost $800 million just to upgrade the electrical, electronic, and cooling systems.
And it was well-known that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. Plans were made in 1989 to completely dismantle the WTC not only because of the asbestos problems but also the electrolytic corrosion problems. Apparently, the plans were dropped because they were considered prohibitively expensive. The only reason the building was still standing on 9/11 was it was too costly to disassemble floor by floor. There is a persistent report on the internet that either the state of New York or the EPA had ordered the dismantling of the WTC. And dismantling the WTC would not result in the recovery of insurance proceeds since it would not be a casualty.

Why would Silverstein, a knowledgeable real estate developer, pay millions of dollars to get control of a building that was uneconomic, was an environmental basket case, and had serious corrosion problems?

All one needs to realize first and foremost is that the massive, steel, WTC buildings were brought down with the assistance of something other then fires, is a little physics and science lesson. The rest of the plan and who was involved, is secondary, and with a little time and research, one can deduce a plausible theory about.

One such theory is that the crimes of 9-11 were conceived in New York City, by people linked to organized crime and the Israeli Mossad, as an illegal demolition project, and subsequently sold to corrupt elements of the Bush Administration, the intelligence community, and the military.
Once one realizes the players involved and connected to the 9-11 attacks, and considers their loyalties and allegiances, this becomes clearer.

But to be so ignorant and stupid as to say that the OCT as told by corrupt officials and their agencies, simply MUST be true and factual because of an insurance payout, while dismissing or ignoring the glaring inconsistencies regarding the science and physics involved, is fucking stupid, and an attempt to muddy the waters and distract from real facts regarding 9-11.

Nice try OP but you still suck, and you still are a pussy for avoiding the real issues and objections to the OCT and NIST.

Here is a link with a little more insight then what you have provided about the Silverstein issue, but remember folks, you can't research or discuss this matter in earnest without first facing what the objections are and why there are objections in the first place to the governments version. You can't just skip to the middle or the end of something to search for answers and pick and choose only certain aspects and claim any sort of "debunking" victory.
The science and physics are the only constant and they do not lie.

Who Destroyed The WTC?
Now that

Do you really believe that insurance companies are any match for corrupt US government officials, Judges, the state of Israel, its Mossad among other factions that can provide the convincing necessary to achieve whatever outcome they desire?
To assume that the laws of physics and science simply vanished because of an insurance fraud payout is naive at best and insanely ignorant at its worst.

In today’s news, American Home Assurance has announced that it is capping payouts for WTC-demolition asbestos claims at a measly $10 million.
The announcement underlines just how much cheaper it is to demolish asbestos-laden skyscrapers without a permit, than to follow legal procedures.
Insurer Caps WTC-Demolition Asbestos Payout at 10 Million | Veterans Today

The IRR on his investment was 6% from the time he purchased the lease to when he collected the insurance payout, less than if he had purchased a building almost anywhere else in Manhattan.

Fail.

You do realize what the WTC complex was used to initiate don't you. Have you no idea what the "rate of return" possibly was for others that benefited from their defense industry investments or in say Haliburton, or the mercenary companies like the Blackwaters, even down to the paltry by comparison put options, among others, not to mention the huge security apparatus that has formed into huge cash cows under the guise of "protecting" us from the boogeymen?
Fact is 9-11 was an ingenious undertaking that greased many hands, and the illegal demolition of a problem property was a small but very important positive outcome when compared to the bigger picture.
What is truly amazing is the power that these criminals have been able to attain once they were allowed credibility, trust and gained control of the crucial areas and positions necessary in the US government.
It's a shame that such cunning and planning isn't used to better our nation, the world and mankind. Fucking smart greedy, power tripping psychopathic evil motherfuckers....that's for sure
BTW, a link to this most interesting claim of yours would be appreciated tho, I like to read things of interest pertaining to this topic, as unlike some on here I do keep an open mind and dig learning stuff about it.

I did the calculation for you all somewhere on this site some time ago, and I no longer care enough to do it again. However, if you look at what he paid and what he received in insurance payments, his return is roughly half that of the typical appreciation of a commercial building in Manhattan, and that doesn't include all the rent foregone.

 

[editec]

This is probably the BEST POSSIBLE ARGUMENT against most of the 911 conspiracy theories.

 

[Mr. Jones]

This is probably the BEST POSSIBLE ARGUMENT against most of the 911 conspiracy theories.

How do you figure it is the best possible evidence against the counter theory that discredits the official theory. This does not in any way debunk the fact that something else helped destroy the WTC buildings in such short burn times, and produced the rapid descents.
This insurance fraud in no way changes the calculations of the science and physics others have made that show the impossibility of the WTC destruction.
The same is true for trying to explain that the science and physical laws are of no consequence because it is supposed that "too many people, and someone would have talked because of extreme guilt" BS..

The successful insurance fraud only proves the power the criminals have and the leverage they wield and have at their disposal..

 

[Truthmatters]

what insurance company would be libel?

 

[Truthmatters]

exactly how much was paid out and by whom to whom?

 

[Mr. Jones]

The IRR on his investment was 6% from the time he purchased the lease to when he collected the insurance payout, less than if he had purchased a building almost anywhere else in Manhattan.

Fail.

You do realize what the WTC complex was used to initiate don't you. Have you no idea what the "rate of return" possibly was for others that benefited from their defense industry investments or in say Haliburton, or the mercenary companies like the Blackwaters, even down to the paltry by comparison put options, among others, not to mention the huge security apparatus that has formed into huge cash cows under the guise of "protecting" us from the boogeymen?
Fact is 9-11 was an ingenious undertaking that greased many hands, and the illegal demolition of a problem property was a small but very important positive outcome when compared to the bigger picture.
What is truly amazing is the power that these criminals have been able to attain once they were allowed credibility, trust and gained control of the crucial areas and positions necessary in the US government.
It's a shame that such cunning and planning isn't used to better our nation, the world and mankind. Fucking smart greedy, power tripping psychopathic evil motherfuckers....that's for sure
BTW, a link to this most interesting claim of yours would be appreciated tho, I like to read things of interest pertaining to this topic, as unlike some on here I do keep an open mind and dig learning stuff about it.

I did the calculation for you all somewhere on this site some time ago, and I no longer care enough to do it again. However, if you look at what he paid and what he received in insurance payments, his return is roughly half that of the typical appreciation of a commercial building in Manhattan, and that doesn't include all the rent foregone.

It is stated that-
The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion on July 24, 2001. Silverstein put up $125 million, only $14 million his own money.

And-
It would cost $800 million just to upgrade the electrical, electronic, and cooling systems.
And it was well-known that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. Plans were made in 1989 to completely dismantle the WTC not only because of the asbestos problems but also the electrolytic corrosion problems. Apparently, the plans were dropped because they were considered prohibitively expensive.

Why would Silverstein, a knowledgeable real estate developer, pay millions of dollars to get control of a building that was uneconomic, was an environmental basket case, and had serious corrosion problems?

My thought about this, is that, it was a perfect target for the PNAC plans of a new Pearl Harbor event, right in Americas biggest city, and financial center. It was quickly blamed on the evil Alqaeda, and the US went off to eliminate Israel's enemies..It was a near perfect plan on paper but mistakes were made that upon further examination reveals a more likely scenario, especially when attention is payed to who the people were in positions to facilitate this crime, and where their loyalties are....



March 2008: Larry Silverstein joined in a suit by the Families of the Victims of 911 and is seeking $12.3 bn. in damages from airlines and airport security companies. He filed the claim in 2004, saying the airlines and airport security companies failed to prevent terrorists from destroying the WTC. The $12.3 bn. represented $8.4 bn. for the replacement value of the destroyed buildings [that he declared for insurance purposes as $3.9 bn.] and $3.9 bn. in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the PA and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings. Judge Hellerstein expressed skepticism about Silverstein's claim and asked why he had not stemmed his losses by just "walking away. Any trials in the case appear to be more than a year away.

[Judge Hellerstein also played an important role in the 911 Victims lawsuits, judicially "blackjacking" them into settlements rather than lawsuits.] He ruled out testimony from top government officials raising serious questions as to why the judge would cover up and potentially obstruct government testimony and evidence under oath by key players when it would be in the interests of both parties to the suit.

An atmosphere of intimidation was apparent when an attorney for the victim families explained that his clients wanted a trial not a settlement, to which Hellerstein retorted, "Sit down." The judicial coercion continued, attorney Schiavo told Hellerstein that she was also experiencing problems with "difficult clients" who were adamant about going to trial with full discovery and government witness testimony, to which the judge said, "This is the way it's going to be. Go back and you tell them we are going to settle, period."

 

[Truthmatters]

The Cost of September 11

this thing says 40 billion.

anyone know how many and which insurance Cos?

 

[Truthmatters]

when you seek to follow the money you have to truely LOOK at it

 

[Truthmatters]

I cant seem to find anything more about this subject.


WHY????

 

[Mr. Jones]

when you seek to follow the money you have to truely LOOK at it

The idiot that started this thread has been torched and exposed for the troll that he/it is.
It's one thing to start a thread that can make a point, and be interesting, but this person knows next to nothing about the 2 sides that have opposing theories, knows next to nothing about the fact that credible people in the pertinent fields of study have viable science and physics that NIST failed to even acknowledge in their reports, and by what he/it has posted has no intention of even educating itself on any facts.
It is hilarious to see this poster equate the seriousness of the 9-11 attacks on our nation to things like bigfoot, aliens, and what he/it deems "any CT"!!
The OP of this thread has no idea what the main focus of the objections to the NIST narrative are, and hasn't even once in his/its many postings and threads, managed a coherent response to what others have posted in response to his ramblings!

He/it thinks that because of a successful insurance fraud that the main objections to the exposed and fraudulent NIST reports that leave out the explanations regarding the WTC "collapses" that they were tasked with explaining to the American public, are not to even be part of the discussion!!

I've seen a lot of idiots come and go throughout the years on the USMB, but this idiot is truly one dumb motherfucker when it comes to the topic of 9-11 and the insane shit he/it believes. The poster Daws101, is right there with this idiot though, they both run away from the challenges that invariably come up with these sort of discussions.
It is all talk and no substance with people like these, always saying how "wrong" we are or our theories and information is, but they never ever post anything that in anyway back their claims.

 

[SAYIT]

You do realize what the WTC complex was used to initiate don't you. Have you no idea what the "rate of return" possibly was for others that benefited from their defense industry investments or in say Haliburton, or the mercenary companies like the Blackwaters, even down to the paltry by comparison put options, among others, not to mention the huge security apparatus that has formed into huge cash cows under the guise of "protecting" us from the boogeymen?
Fact is 9-11 was an ingenious undertaking that greased many hands, and the illegal demolition of a problem property was a small but very important positive outcome when compared to the bigger picture.
What is truly amazing is the power that these criminals have been able to attain once they were allowed credibility, trust and gained control of the crucial areas and positions necessary in the US government.
It's a shame that such cunning and planning isn't used to better our nation, the world and mankind. Fucking smart greedy, power tripping psychopathic evil motherfuckers....that's for sure
BTW, a link to this most interesting claim of yours would be appreciated tho, I like to read things of interest pertaining to this topic, as unlike some on here I do keep an open mind and dig learning stuff about it.

I did the calculation for you all somewhere on this site some time ago, and I no longer care enough to do it again. However, if you look at what he paid and what he received in insurance payments, his return is roughly half that of the typical appreciation of a commercial building in Manhattan, and that doesn't include all the rent foregone.

It is stated that-
The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion on July 24, 2001. Silverstein put up $125 million, only $14 million his own money.

And-
It would cost $800 million just to upgrade the electrical, electronic, and cooling systems.
And it was well-known that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. Plans were made in 1989 to completely dismantle the WTC not only because of the asbestos problems but also the electrolytic corrosion problems. Apparently, the plans were dropped because they were considered prohibitively expensive.

Why would Silverstein, a knowledgeable real estate developer, pay millions of dollars to get control of a building that was uneconomic, was an environmental basket case, and had serious corrosion problems?

My thought about this, is that, it was a perfect target for the PNAC plans of a new Pearl Harbor event, right in Americas biggest city, and financial center. It was quickly blamed on the evil Alqaeda, and the US went off to eliminate Israel's enemies..It was a near perfect plan on paper but mistakes were made that upon further examination reveals a more likely scenario, especially when attention is payed to who the people were in positions to facilitate this crime, and where their loyalties are....



March 2008: Larry Silverstein joined in a suit by the Families of the Victims of 911 and is seeking $12.3 bn. in damages from airlines and airport security companies. He filed the claim in 2004, saying the airlines and airport security companies failed to prevent terrorists from destroying the WTC. The $12.3 bn. represented $8.4 bn. for the replacement value of the destroyed buildings [that he declared for insurance purposes as $3.9 bn.] and $3.9 bn. in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the PA and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings. Judge Hellerstein expressed skepticism about Silverstein's claim and asked why he had not stemmed his losses by just "walking away. Any trials in the case appear to be more than a year away.

[Judge Hellerstein also played an important role in the 911 Victims lawsuits, judicially "blackjacking" them into settlements rather than lawsuits.] He ruled out testimony from top government officials raising serious questions as to why the judge would cover up and potentially obstruct government testimony and evidence under oath by key players when it would be in the interests of both parties to the suit.

An atmosphere of intimidation was apparent when an attorney for the victim families explained that his clients wanted a trial not a settlement, to which Hellerstein retorted, "Sit down." The judicial coercion continued, attorney Schiavo told Hellerstein that she was also experiencing problems with "difficult clients" who were adamant about going to trial with full discovery and government witness testimony, to which the judge said, "This is the way it's going to be. Go back and you tell them we are going to settle, period."

Conveniently you forgot to post the source of that screed ... probably for good reasons.

 

[Toro]

I did the calculation for you all somewhere on this site some time ago, and I no longer care enough to do it again. However, if you look at what he paid and what he received in insurance payments, his return is roughly half that of the typical appreciation of a commercial building in Manhattan, and that doesn't include all the rent foregone.

It is stated that-
The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion on July 24, 2001. Silverstein put up $125 million, only $14 million his own money.

And-
It would cost $800 million just to upgrade the electrical, electronic, and cooling systems.
And it was well-known that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. Plans were made in 1989 to completely dismantle the WTC not only because of the asbestos problems but also the electrolytic corrosion problems. Apparently, the plans were dropped because they were considered prohibitively expensive.

Why would Silverstein, a knowledgeable real estate developer, pay millions of dollars to get control of a building that was uneconomic, was an environmental basket case, and had serious corrosion problems?

My thought about this, is that, it was a perfect target for the PNAC plans of a new Pearl Harbor event, right in Americas biggest city, and financial center. It was quickly blamed on the evil Alqaeda, and the US went off to eliminate Israel's enemies..It was a near perfect plan on paper but mistakes were made that upon further examination reveals a more likely scenario, especially when attention is payed to who the people were in positions to facilitate this crime, and where their loyalties are....



March 2008: Larry Silverstein joined in a suit by the Families of the Victims of 911 and is seeking $12.3 bn. in damages from airlines and airport security companies. He filed the claim in 2004, saying the airlines and airport security companies failed to prevent terrorists from destroying the WTC. The $12.3 bn. represented $8.4 bn. for the replacement value of the destroyed buildings [that he declared for insurance purposes as $3.9 bn.] and $3.9 bn. in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the PA and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings. Judge Hellerstein expressed skepticism about Silverstein's claim and asked why he had not stemmed his losses by just "walking away. Any trials in the case appear to be more than a year away.

[Judge Hellerstein also played an important role in the 911 Victims lawsuits, judicially "blackjacking" them into settlements rather than lawsuits.] He ruled out testimony from top government officials raising serious questions as to why the judge would cover up and potentially obstruct government testimony and evidence under oath by key players when it would be in the interests of both parties to the suit.

An atmosphere of intimidation was apparent when an attorney for the victim families explained that his clients wanted a trial not a settlement, to which Hellerstein retorted, "Sit down." The judicial coercion continued, attorney Schiavo told Hellerstein that she was also experiencing problems with "difficult clients" who were adamant about going to trial with full discovery and government witness testimony, to which the judge said, "This is the way it's going to be. Go back and you tell them we are going to settle, period."

Conveniently you forgot to post the source of that screed ... probably for good reasons.

That, and the huge presumptions, ie that everyone knew for over a decade the WTC was a huge asbestos trap but companies remained even though there were massive lawsuits bankrupting companies at the time.

The claim is so ridiculous. They're going to risk their multi billion investment on the whims of one judge in insurance court. What planet are these nutters on?

 

[editec]

This is probably the BEST POSSIBLE ARGUMENT against most of the 911 conspiracy theories.

How do you figure it is the best possible evidence against the counter theory that discredits the official theory.

I figure that insurance companies have the means and the motive to refute the evidence if it turns out to be bogus.

This does not in any way debunk the fact that something else helped destroy the WTC buildings in such short burn times, and produced the rapid descents.

And tthoise "facts" are exactly the "facts" that are in contention.

What I am saying here is that given our inability to actually TO KNOW what facts are real, we are looking for additional arguments to either support or refute those two dimetirically opposing narratives.

This insurance fraud in no way changes the calculations of the science and physics others have made that show the impossibility of the WTC destruction.

"That have been made to show..." (to you who believes it)

The same is true for trying to explain that the science and physical laws are of no consequence because it is supposed that "too many people, and someone would have talked because of extreme guilt" BS..

The issue ofkeeping a large conspiracy secret is, of course, still another issue that suggests that the conspiracy theory might be wrong.

The successful insurance fraud only proves the power the criminals have and the leverage they wield and have at their disposal..

Your logic is circular.

YOu believe what you believe, and therefore, what you believe discounts anything that puts those facts (that you believe) into discredit.

Like you I have my doubts about the offical narrative.

But unlike you, I am not taking the engineering evidence either for or against the offical narrative into account.

As I am not qualified to accept or reject that engineering evidence, I am seeking other issues (like the insurance issue) to evaluate this story.

Ifr anything I have just written confused you?

Than you are truly unqualified to discuss this issue at all.

 

[slackjawed]

This is probably the BEST POSSIBLE ARGUMENT against most of the 911 conspiracy theories.

How do you figure it is the best possible evidence against the counter theory that discredits the official theory. This does not in any way debunk the fact that something else helped destroy the WTC buildings in such short burn times, and produced the rapid descents.
This insurance fraud in no way changes the calculations of the science and physics others have made that show the impossibility of the WTC destruction.
The same is true for trying to explain that the science and physical laws are of no consequence because it is supposed that "too many people, and someone would have talked because of extreme guilt" BS..

The successful insurance fraud only proves the power the criminals have and the leverage they wield and have at their disposal..

The insurance payouts were made by insurance companies who have a lot more at stake than you, and it stands to reason they performed every bit of due diligence in order to be certain they were note being scammed.

your "rapid desent" arguement has long been debunked by SCIENCE!!!!
from here;
Nutty 9-11 Physics

"9-11 troofers keep blind-siding me because they keep on coming up with things I can't believe any toilet-trained human being would be dumb enough to say. Lately I've been hit a couple of times with the assertion that the 9-11 Commission Report states, on Page 305, that "At 9:58:59, the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds" Indeed it does. The 9-11 Commission Report deals with events leading up to 9-11, agency responses to the crisis, and possible changes in procedure and policy to cope with future crises. It contains no technical information whatsoever about the causes of the building collapse. Nevertheless, because the report says the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds, 9-11 troofers insist that is the official Government position.

People who take that stance aren't merely scientifically illiterate; they're verbally illiterate as well. Insisting that ten seconds is meant to be a scientifically definitive finding in a paragraph dealing with firefighting efforts shows a complete lack of critical reasoning. A person who reasons like that is completely lacking in the critical reasoning necessary to sort out the events of 9-11.

The technical information on the building collapse is in the NIST reports, not the 9-11 Commission Report. There is little discussion of the chronology of the collapse once the buildings began to fall, but the NIST FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) site has the pertinent information.

The seismic spikes for the collapse of the WTC Towers are the result of debris from the collapsing towers impacting the ground. The spikes began approximately 10 seconds after the times for the start of each building’s collapse and continued for approximately 15 seconds. "

that's strike one against your so-called logic and reasoning.....


to get back to the OP, this snip is from the same source;
"Who Stands to Profit?

A question much asked by 9-11 truthers, who point to gold allegedly being removed from the World Trade Center, investigative files being destroyed, a pretext for invading Iraq or declaring martial law, etc.

A few months ago I agreed to be on a truther talk show (I'll try almost anything once. Almost.) and the commercial breaks were a revelation. There were endless spiels for crank medical remedies and nutritional supplements, investment schemes that ranged from shady to crazy, newsletters for conspiracy cults, and wacko theories on how to avoid taxes. One former truther who became disillusioned said he would no longer help the movement sell T-shirts and DVD's. It's a lot more than just T-shirts and DVD's. Look at the Web sites, the newsletters, listen to the talk shows and look at who's bankrolling them and advertising on them. Truther sites are to conspiracy thinkers what televangelists are to lonely Christians: a place to send money to buy a feeling of participation and fulfillment."


Yup, the 911 twoofer movement is a money making scheme!

Now once again mr jones, you have 4 possible choices here;
a) respond to my post with links of your own showing why mine are wrong, include your own opinion.
b) agree with me
c) continue to deflect by offering no links, no opinion, just continue to insult me and the other grown folks around here
d) do nothing, go smoke a bowl, smack the cat and grumble to yourself.


What's it gonna be boy?

 

[Mr. Jones]

I did the calculation for you all somewhere on this site some time ago, and I no longer care enough to do it again. However, if you look at what he paid and what he received in insurance payments, his return is roughly half that of the typical appreciation of a commercial building in Manhattan, and that doesn't include all the rent foregone.

It is stated that-
The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion on July 24, 2001. Silverstein put up $125 million, only $14 million his own money.

And-
It would cost $800 million just to upgrade the electrical, electronic, and cooling systems.
And it was well-known that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. Plans were made in 1989 to completely dismantle the WTC not only because of the asbestos problems but also the electrolytic corrosion problems. Apparently, the plans were dropped because they were considered prohibitively expensive.

Why would Silverstein, a knowledgeable real estate developer, pay millions of dollars to get control of a building that was uneconomic, was an environmental basket case, and had serious corrosion problems?

My thought about this, is that, it was a perfect target for the PNAC plans of a new Pearl Harbor event, right in Americas biggest city, and financial center. It was quickly blamed on the evil Alqaeda, and the US went off to eliminate Israel's enemies..It was a near perfect plan on paper but mistakes were made that upon further examination reveals a more likely scenario, especially when attention is payed to who the people were in positions to facilitate this crime, and where their loyalties are....



March 2008: Larry Silverstein joined in a suit by the Families of the Victims of 911 and is seeking $12.3 bn. in damages from airlines and airport security companies. He filed the claim in 2004, saying the airlines and airport security companies failed to prevent terrorists from destroying the WTC. The $12.3 bn. represented $8.4 bn. for the replacement value of the destroyed buildings [that he declared for insurance purposes as $3.9 bn.] and $3.9 bn. in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the PA and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings. Judge Hellerstein expressed skepticism about Silverstein's claim and asked why he had not stemmed his losses by just "walking away. Any trials in the case appear to be more than a year away.

[Judge Hellerstein also played an important role in the 911 Victims lawsuits, judicially "blackjacking" them into settlements rather than lawsuits.] He ruled out testimony from top government officials raising serious questions as to why the judge would cover up and potentially obstruct government testimony and evidence under oath by key players when it would be in the interests of both parties to the suit.

An atmosphere of intimidation was apparent when an attorney for the victim families explained that his clients wanted a trial not a settlement, to which Hellerstein retorted, "Sit down." The judicial coercion continued, attorney Schiavo told Hellerstein that she was also experiencing problems with "difficult clients" who were adamant about going to trial with full discovery and government witness testimony, to which the judge said, "This is the way it's going to be. Go back and you tell them we are going to settle, period."

Conveniently you forgot to post the source of that screed ... probably for good reasons.

I conveniently linked it in this thread. Can't help it you're so obtuse about following posts in your own thread..