Re: 911 take 911Jan 16th, 2010
Silverstein Jury's Decision Favors the Insurers - WSJ.com (external - login to view)
Larry Silverstein: Evil Jewish Landlord
Many of the conspiracy theorists, including Loose Change, mention businessman Larry Silverstein, who owned WTC7 and began leasing the twin towers a few months before 9/11, as being part of the conspiracy. Apparently it wasn't enough that the White House, CIA, FBI, NTSB, NORAD, the NYPD, New York Fire Department, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the American Society of Civil Engineers, (take deep breath) United Airlines, American Airlines, Raytheon, Controlled Demolitions Inc., Marvin Bush, and Popular Mechanics magazine were all in on the plot, the evil landlord had to be involved too! I guess it is sort of a Mr. Roper's (external - login to view) revenge.
Well, they make all sorts of sinister implications, but what exactly are they accusing him of? Let's look at what they say.
From the 4:57 mark:
July 24th, 2001. Larry A. Silverstein, who already owned World Trade Center 7, signs a 3.2 billion dollar, 99-year lease on the entire World Trade Center complex, six weeks before 9-11. Included in the lease is a 3.5 billion dollar insurance policy specifically covering acts of terrorism.OK, considering the WTC had already been a target of terrorism in 1993, why would it be odd that it had a terrorism clause in its insurance policy? Is this some type of elaborate insurance scam? That would seem kind of unlikely, given that Silverstein originally wanted a smaller policy, and was only forced to take the $3.5 billion policy as part of the deal.
In its court papers, Swiss Re shows how Silverstein first tried to buy just $1.5 billion in property damage and business-interruption coverage. When his lenders objected, he discussed buying a $5 billion policy. Ultimately, he settled on the $3.5 billion figure, which was less than the likely cost of rebuilding. His lenders, led by GMAC, a unit of General Motors (nyse:GM - news - people ), which financed nearly the entire cost of the lease, agreed.As you can see, the article (external - login to view) even mentions the fact that this new policy may not even cover the costs of rebuilding. This apparently is a new type of insurance scam, evidently he submitted a public bid on a lease for the complex, all for the opportunity to have his investment destroyed, so he could have the chance to spend years in court (external - login to view), all for the possibility of breaking even! What a scam.
Over an hour later, apparently having forgotten the first part of their movie, they change the story to Larry Silverstein "bought" the World Trade Center.
First, we have Larry Silverstein, the man who purchased the World Trade Center in July, 2001. After September 11th, Silverstein demanded $7.2 billion dollars form his insurers, claiming that each plane counted as a separate act of terrorism. However, on December 6th, 2004, the courts only rewarded him with $2.2 billion dollars.As per their usual the Loosers like to use news articles several years out of date to make their point. The court award actually ended up being $4.6 billion (external - login to view), although Silverstein will not get all of that. Regardless, one thing they have failed to show, is any indication that he had any motivation at all to purchase this investment, only to see it destroyed.
And if it is so evident that these buildings were the victims of a controlled demolition, then why did the insurance companies pay out billions, rather than bring this subject up? I had my car broken into recently, and my insurance company wouldn't replace my $300 digital camera without me sending them receipts and police reports, but apparently multi-billion dollar insurance fraud can be carried out without anyone asking questions.