It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why O Why...

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Hasnt Mr Larry SilverStein filled for and gone after his remaining $4million insurance claim for WTC#7?


Anyone... Anyone at all?


CAUSE ITS THE PAY OFF MONEY AND HE KNOWS THAT WHEN AND IF HE FILES FOR IT, ITS A WRAP ON THIS BS!


(he will never file for it... EVER... Its called discovery my friends and it will show what REALLY happened at WTC#7)


Thoughts?




posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Just because he claims it and recieves his insurance money doesn't mean anything but he is richer.....

Most if not all building owners have insurance.... This proves nothing if he claims it or not. Nor does it disprove any of the 100 million conspiracies. I am sure that he has probably already claimed his prize.

[edit on 17-4-2010 by Reign02]



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
He already has...


A settlement was reached in 2004, with insurers agreeing to pay out $4.55 billion, which was not as much as Silverstein sought. Silverstein also ran into dispute with other parties in the rebuilding effort, including the Port Authority. In an agreement reached in April 2006, Silverstein retained rights to build three office towers (150 Greenwich Street, 175 Greenwich Street, and 200 Greenwich Street), while 1 World Trade Center will be owned by the Port Authority as well as Tower Five which may be leased out to another private developer and redesigned as a residential building.


And just FYI...

Silverstein is also a governor of The Real Estate Board of New York.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


So the port authority leases the towers out for 99 years(what, a few months before 9/11?), now they want it back(or have the main one back already?).

Am I correct here? What, is it financially viable now, or what, I don't get it. What would make them want back a property they just leased for 99 years?



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by PersonalChoice
 


I'm still trying to figure that one out myself!!



posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
The interesting aspect here is not $4millioin in unclaimed insurance... Its that if he files to get it, the courts and insurance are going to look into WTC#7, and since we all know how the hell that building came down, if he files for his money for that specific tower... ITS CALLED DISCOVERY AND EVEN HIS LAWYERS KNOW THIS...


Why the hell else would he not file for at this stage in the game?



CAUSE ITS A PAYOFF



posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe
The interesting aspect here is not $4millioin in unclaimed insurance... Its that if he files to get it, the courts and insurance are going to look into WTC#7, and since we all know how the hell that building came down, if he files for his money for that specific tower... ITS CALLED DISCOVERY AND EVEN HIS LAWYERS KNOW THIS...


Why the hell else would he not file for at this stage in the game?



CAUSE ITS A PAYOFF


Industrial Risk Insurers have already paid out 861 million dollars in respect of WTC 7 :-

www.historycommons.org...

They obviously don't subscribe to the view that Silverstein had a hand in demolishing it although they have 861 million reasons for wishing it was true.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Not for nothing, but it should be noted, that this is the whole point of insurance fraud. That is, to get away with it, to achieve some goal whether it be financial, remodeling or even replacement.

Just saying.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
The monies paid out in regard to WTC#7 already are not what Im referring too. Im talking about a small, very small claim he is avoiding filing because his own lawyers know if he files for it, the gig is up.


Why would anyone not claim $4million and change? WHY?

Even if you had a trillion, you wouldnt leave $4millie on the table for nothing.


Think about.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Gig is up?
Terrorists Hijacked several planes and crashed them into the Twin Towers in order to cause fear and havoc in the western world which they despise.
No government plots and no conspiracies.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe
The monies paid out in regard to WTC#7 already are not what Im referring too. Im talking about a small, very small claim he is avoiding filing because his own lawyers know if he files for it, the gig is up.


Why would anyone not claim $4million and change? WHY?

Even if you had a trillion, you wouldnt leave $4millie on the table for nothing.


Think about.


You need to explain to us what the 4 million dollars was intended to cover. Who the alleged insurers are . Why the alleged claim is being witheld. And how you know what Silverstein's lawyers are advising him.

But the real biggie question is this :- If it is supposed Silverstein's situation is so insecure that he daren't make a claim for 4 million why aren't Industrial Risk Insurers moving heaven and earth to get their 861 million back ?



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Everton, yea..... Ok. Im sorry, but maybe you should read any of the more than half a million pages on this attack.

You really think some muslims did this with less than $500k? If so, go back to sleep.


$4millie was to cover the destruction of WTC#7. No one thought America would wake up like it did. Now its a no go on claiming it.
I dont know who the insurers are, but Im sure it can be found out.
I dont think its being withheld, I think someone is actively NOT going after it, for fear of discovery.
Because i know some of them personally. I cant say anymore on that specific issue and Im sure most with a normal thought pattern understand why.

The $861 million is nothing. This wasnt just about removing most if not all of our rights, this was about money and power. Without money though, you have no power.

WTC#7 was specifically targeted and the rest was a distraction my friends. Who was housed in WTC#7?



All I know is this. I watched all this go down that day, and no matter what anyone says now, even then, I thought it wasnt how it was being made to seem. Im not saying I know what happened. I dont. But I do know what didnt happen.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Everton
 

Classic post, Everton - on a completely unrelated matter, what do you make of this talk that David Moyes will take over at United?



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Thanks to OP for keeping this issue alive. The court cases are seldom mentioned, tho they are far from over. Lots of interesting facts in the ongoing WTC situation !



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 

"This wasnt just about removing most if not all of our rights, this was about money and power. "

What rights have been removed, Goethe? Can you name me one specific example of how you, or anyone you know, has had his or her rights directly impinged upon ? (you probably can, in which case I've made a blunder here.)

"You really think some muslims did this with less than $500k? If so, go back to sleep. "

Did what? Took flying lessons, paid for their living costs & hijacked planes? How much do you need to accomplish that?

"WTC#7 was specifically targeted and the rest was a distraction my friends. Who was housed in WTC#7? "

If Building 7 was the true target, compare these two scenarios.
1. devise a staggeringly complex & audacious plot involving, depending on what you believe, hijacked planes, remote controlled planes, voice morphing, a missile, rigging three sky scrapers with explosives in the dead of night over who knows how many months, operatives surreptitously scattering mutilated body parts & bits of plane debris around the Pentagon & hoping nobody watching the massive fire sees this, a cast of thousands including, eg, FBI / CIA / police / firefighters / President, Vice pres. & secretary of Defence/ victims' family members, not a single one of whom can even anonymously tip someone off, - ever.

2. set fire to WTC# 7, and if you have the capability to pull off any of the elements in the first scenario, then obviously you can make a fire look real. It can't surely be said that a group with access to technology we may not even know exists wouldn't be able to pull off a simple fake fire.

You may be right, but I'm trying to look at what seems most credible.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Rights removed? Really? Torture, Renditions, Posse Comitatus, The 100 mile Constitution Free zone, which has been confirmed to me y 4 seperate DHS agents I know personally.

As for Muslims, Im sure some were involved, no one including me is denying that. But, that doesnt mean it ends, or even begins there.

Who was housed in WTC#7? WOW, this is a major issue for all this. Id figured most into alt theories of this event would already know... THE CIA, NAS, SEC, IRS, FBI, SECRET SERVICE.... AND several more Govt agencies.



Sec Def Runsfeld came out 1 day before all this to admit 'we' cant find $2 triilion...

The SEC had hundreds of high level investigations going on...



And as to your other 2 overall story line theories, they dont even remotely sound realistic to me.

My theory overall.

Planes were used to make the demo look realistic and cover up the fact that they were brought down from within.

The Pentagon was hit by a plane no doubt, a drone, or even maybe, now this is a stretch for me, a bunker buster.

WTC#7 was the target overall though. This building is the key and will always be the only true way to figure this all out.

We will never get more tapes of the Pentagon that shows what really happened.

So, find the truth within the money pit of WTC#7...

Who stands to make money from this? Who has made money from this?

Oh, the military industrial complex.


We forget, we talk about world peace, but when its coming in, we fear the unknown and have to do this.

Ruby Ridge, Waco?

This is not anything new. Just this time, we all were directly targeted.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   
I have to add, to ask what if any rights weve lost since that day, you must not live in the US, or if you do, you must be very very sheltered.

Try living near NY and say you havent lost any rights.


Im not sure where in the US hasnt been hit by some form or other of loss of rights, but its going on.

Oklahoma just passed a law banning more than three locks on any one door for residences, and from fortifying your home.

How about passengers in cars now have to submit to searches and seizures against the 4th amendment?

How about Patriot Act 1 or 2?

How about NorthCom or Echelon?

How about BlackWater and Hurricane Katrina?

How about WikiLeaks video of open murder?

Rights lost from any freedom loving human anywhere on the planet by the hands of our govt, is a direct assult on all of our rights and liberties.

WE TORTURE NOW DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
So, anyone have any new info on Larry this week?



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   
He is so guilty it is ridiculous. Also, there was a video on youtube a long time ago that showed them counting down the demolition but since then it has disappeared. I don't know why no one has brought that up on ATS. It used to be on youtube.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I too remember that video.


Not surprising though on the white wash of stuff like that.


I find it sad really that we have those on this planet deny basic physics and science.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join