Unexplained 9-11 Explosion at WTC Complex

nyeff- this wasn't a "bombing."

Sorry had a terroist attack on that kind of a scale happened anywhere else.I Do however consider a plane flown into a building loaded with fuel to be a bomb.Therefore i called it a bombing.Or any other device meant to blow something up a bomb.Just my thoughts.

Look if your any kind of New Yorker! You should beable to smell a scam from a mile off. I have lived or worked in 19 different countries over the past 22 years. Most of them third world. So I think you could "assume" that I am street savy enough to smell a scam myself. At least well enough to keep myself alive in places that are unforgiving of fools.
My point! You are either as dim as the last embers of a fireflys tail, or you are playing the fool. To draw me out, for reasons only known to yourself. Why do you keep asking rediculious questions, that are well beyond obvious?

1. Whom ever financed the put option buy out, made tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars by all estimates.

2. The World Trade Center is a gold mine. And Larry Silverstein knows it.
Silverstein already owned number Seven WTC, but he led a consortium that just months ago signed a new $3.2 billion US, 99-year lease on the WTC complex. That was the first time the WTC had changed hands in it's thirty year history

3.The deal was finalized and celebrated on the 23rd July -just seven weeks before almost the entire complex was destroyed. Port Authority officers gave a giant set of keys to the complex to Silverstein and to Westfield CEO Lowy.

4. The leased buildings included Numbers One and Two (the Twin Towers), Four, Five and 400,000 square feet of retail space. The Marriott Hotel (3WTC), U.S. Customs building (6WTC) and Silverstein's own 47-story office building were already under lease.

5.Which leaves everybody financially consoled, even if not emotionally so. The vendors still have the $3.2 billion they made on the sale. The purchasers lease deal had spanking new insurance --with new beneficiaries-- for capital value and loss of income.

6. Silverstein has insurance money to rebuild and get the $110 million of annual rental income flowing again. Or double that with his planned four towers. Nice money if you can get it. Can he?

7. So using alittle deductive logic one might ask a few other questions. Such as if the planners of this operation risked speculating on the put options, why would they have stopped there? A number of other investment opportunities would arise from the ashes of this attack.

*Insurance companies would have been high on the list.
*Military arms suppliers and contractor's.
*Legal firms of every kind.
*Demolition and salvage contractors " *Already under contract since the Oklahoma bombing".
*Millions of finacial records, wiped clean, evidence gone. Who knows how many shady deals, records are gone forever.
*Speculation on the tenants of the towers would also have occured.

Without going any further, which would not be that hard to do. I think you can see where the billions are coming from.

Originally posted by William
Like others, you begin your research with one basic fault, you assume government complicity when searching for facts/information/evidence.

However, in the interests of moving on...

Let's examine one point at at time:

You said, "1. Billions of dollars were made by both known, and as yet unknown persons or organizations."

What is your basis for this statement?

Often times I do play the fool or devil�s advocate... It�s always to make a point.


There was indeed suspicious activity on American and United Airlines stock. By some estimates, the put-to-call ratio was over 75. The Chicago Board Options Exchange is investigating each of these trades and at this time is declining to offer comment on its progress. The volume traded and the one-sidedness of the trades, however, make it clear that those who had knowledge of the details of the attacks (which airlines would be involved and that the World Trade Center was a target) were behind them and stood to profit mightily from them.

However, the short sell activity was limited to the two airlines and the accounts were frozen, so no cash was made there.

Yes, the WTC complex was a very important piece of commercial real estate. However, the Silverstein deal was in the works for years. The insurance payments he�s currently getting only cover the rent payments that need to be made to the Port Authority. All of the six plans for rebuilding exceed the insurance payments provided for the rebuilding process (I�ll look for the story, it was in the Times on Monday but they didn�t mention the amounts).

No matter what you claim, the fact is that the wealthy have lost over four trillions dollars of equity value since the 9|11 attack. And that�s just the two US stock markets, not global markets. While you�re correct in assuming financial gain is a strong motivating factor, any financially savvy person would know, in advance, of the catastrophic effect on the global economy of destroy the most important buildings to the US economy.

Well... This certainly isn�t the �billions of dollars� of your original point. Perhaps you�d like to modify the statement?

I have made an effort, however I don't think I can help you see beyond the teacup in front of you.
And I'm quite sure that those involved in this tragedy were depending on Americans like you, to defend thier dirty deed. You are being played like a fiddle my friend. And you don't even know it.
You have completely burst my illusions of New Yorkers being difficult to chump off.

seriously william.
you crack me up.

oh lupe --- you're sooo bad

[[[shudder]]]

CG-

Think what you like... But you fail to realize there is just as much disinformation in the �conspiracy� side of the coin as there is in the rosy patriotic Bush young-republicans side of the coin.

(Thanks for that initial comment about New Yorkers by the way. This city never ceases to amaze me. You weren�t on ATS when I posted my daily updates from the city during and after the event. In the evening of 9|11, the image of NYers was shattered by the sight of too many volunteers, heroism from the jaded, kindness from the cold, compasion from the hardened, cabbies working all day carrying out the hurt/tired/weak for free, and entire grocery stores and restaurants opening their doors to rescue workers.)

You said persons are making �billions of dollars� off this little affair. When the equity in the US markets falls by $4 trillion since the event, I can�t imagine how your claim could be true. Not to mention that that much money is traceable.

You�re so busy looking for spooks in every corner, you can�t imagine there might be none in this corner! (Or at least none in the corner of those planning the hijacking) When examining political conspiracy, look closely at one claim at a time, determine how many stand up under scrutiny. There are far too many complex claims of conspiratorial complicity that involve long lists of detailed events. If the little details begin to fall apart, then the conspiratorial concept must be abandoned and a new one considered. Don�t cling to your concepts when pieces begin to unravel.

The bigger, darker event began several years ago when daddy Bush decided to give junior the Presidency. Here is your conspiratorial concept in which we have details that remain intact despite scrutiny. Our governments inability to be proactive about terrorism (among other things like the economy) before 9|11 is a direct result of junior, his party pals, and daddy�s buddies being in office (not that Clinton was much better, but his interests were elsewhere... There�s a man who really enjoyed being president). Now, after the fact, these �fine republicans� have reacted in excellent �One World Order� fashion which is fueling much of the conspiracist�s hypothesizing.

Anyway... By focusing on looking for government conspiracy in the planning/operations of the 9|11 attack, your view is much too narrow and you�ll miss the larger problems.


Oh well... I can�t convince you otherwise I suppose.

Skeptic Overlord out...


Who�s got the beer?

I to play devils advocate on occasion, but not often. I find it a waste of time, especially in cyber space.

You have somehow painted me into this two dimensional corner, why I haven't a clue.

I look at all the facts/information I can find, but remain unconvinced about most of them.

Its very true both sides of the equation have stacked lies and speculation like cordwood, to be taken in by any fool that may pass. I am not a fool, and have not been taken in. Dispite your apparent opinion to the contrary.

You made one of my points for me in your last post. Of course the damned money can be traced. And you can bet your hat it has been.

Lets assume this administration is clean as a whistle for a moment. Of course from the headlines coming out daily we know thats damn well not the case. But for the purpose of discussion we'll stamp them honest leaders of the free world. It makes me turn green to even write that.

Putting yourself in the President position with all the resources of America at your beck and call. How long do you think you would wait to order someone to find out who made money on this deal?
If you think like I do, not very bloody long I can tell you. So would you agree ten months into this, he knows who made the cash? And has decided for some reason not to tell "We The People" who that person/persons is. He may have his reasons, but I don't believe he has a right to do that. He works for us, not vice versa! He knows who is behind this, and its not OBL. He's somebodies fall guy. And surely guilty of many crimes, but he's not the top dog in this arena. All we are being handed is the heads of soldiers. Where are the heads of the generals?

Well... I won�t go anywhere near your �sake of argument� position on our leaders.

Also, don�t imagine Li�l Bush has any more intelligence than Bluto from Animal House... So he�s unlikely to act as you laid out.

I think it�s clear no one has made any money from this, if anything, a great deal ($4 trillion) has been lost. Which is not say certain groups didn�t try to profit.

I�m certain OBL and his Islamic lunatics are 100% behind the events of 9|11. (gasp) However, that doesn�t leave out the possibility that he is simply reacting as (somewhat) expected after being influenced by outside factors. If there is a covert group involved (we can imagine who), it would certainly serve their purpose to have crazy Islamic terrorists as a enemy to rally against. However, I�m certain OBL�s actions far exceeded the expectations of these covert influencers. But don�t look for them, after Iran-Contra, they know how to hide.

The fact that somebody made a enormious amount of money is a fact man!
Have you not read the damned papers?
Are you a disinformatin agent?

I don't see anyone making an "enormous amount of money", either... so you'll have to spell it out, eh?

Furthermore, in order to have made this enormous amount of money, they'd have had to spend even more in buying bin Ladin and his associates. They wouldn't just hit the WTC out of the goodness of their hearts... as a favor for a buddy.

Besides, OBL's been after the WTC ever since 1990. Remember the truck bomb? And now the agents of Al Qaida caught in Spain with footage of American targets? If you're theorizing someone making a lot of money, then you'll have to include that 15 year timeframe PLUS the recent plans for other Al Qaida attacks.

...and the attacks on the US embassies several years ago... and so forth.

We can show a logical chain of events by linking it to a fundamentalist madman with an Islamic agenda, a finite source of income, and a large group of easily influenced religious fundamentalists (who happen to be Islamic.)

So, just for the sake of discussion, I'd like to see why you think that all these events add up to someone making a lot of money, when as far as I can track, EVERYONE involved (including bin Ladin) spent a lot of money and there doesn't seem to be a consistant profiteer off any of this.

I have to say, I made quite a bit of money out of it.
Not intentionally.
I'm not a goul.
but as luck would have it, the situation did absolute wonders for sales of our magazine.

1. Whom ever financed the put option buy out, made tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars by all estimates.

2. The World Trade Center is a gold mine. And Larry Silverstein knows it.
Silverstein already owned number Seven WTC, but he led a consortium that just months ago signed a new $3.2 billion US, 99-year lease on the WTC complex. That was the first time the WTC had changed hands in it's thirty year history

3.The deal was finalized and celebrated on the 23rd July -just seven weeks before almost the entire complex was destroyed. Port Authority officers gave a giant set of keys to the complex to Silverstein and to Westfield CEO Lowy.

4. The leased buildings included Numbers One and Two (the Twin Towers), Four, Five and 400,000 square feet of retail space. The Marriott Hotel (3WTC), U.S. Customs building (6WTC) and Silverstein's own 47-story office building were already under lease.

5.Which leaves everybody financially consoled, even if not emotionally so. The vendors still have the $3.2 billion they made on the sale. The purchasers lease deal had spanking new insurance --with new beneficiaries-- for capital value and loss of income.

6. Silverstein has insurance money to rebuild and get the $110 million of annual rental income flowing again. Or double that with his planned four towers. Nice money if you can get it. Can he?

7. So using alittle deductive logic one might ask a few other questions. Such as if the planners of this operation risked speculating on the put options, why would they have stopped there? A number of other investment opportunities would arise from the ashes of this attack.

*Insurance companies would have been high on the list.
*Military arms suppliers and contractor's.
*Legal firms of every kind.
*Demolition and salvage contractors " *Already under contract since the Oklahoma bombing".
*Millions of finacial records, wiped clean, evidence gone. Who knows how many shady deals, records are gone forever.
*Speculation on the tenants of the towers would also have occured.

Without going any further, which would not be that hard to do. I think you can see where the billions are coming from.

Didn't you already post that?

And didn't we cover that the short sells orders on the airline stocks were not completed as part of the investigation?

And didn't we show how good ol' Larry is doing only a little better than break-even under the current insurance payout?

Even if these were true, we're still far short of the "billions" you initially claimed.

Sorry William but I was starting to think you were some kind of disinfo agent myself with that last post..

As far as money to be made is concerned..I"m surprised no one is mentioning the 'billions' Bush upped the military defense budget.

Or the 'billions' to be made by the construction of the oil pipeline through afghanistan. (Plans are already on the table and its just a matter of who gets that contract. What role do you think Halliburton will play in the building of the afghani pipeline, eh?)

Or the 'billions' to be made through the pharmaceutical company contracts that have already passed with cipro and the smallpox vaccine (the smallpox vaccine you Won't be able to refuse if your state passes MEHPA).

etc etc. I think the money to be made here is in the consequences of 9-11.
And I don't think this is money to be made to 'boost' the economy either. It seems like only the special interest players will be getting the bucks.

...

Not only was it a repost -- he didn't answer the questions:

1.) Why has Silverstein been engineering this attack on the WTC since 1993 (timing of the first attack)?

2.) How did Silverstein (a member of a faith that bin Ladin has sworn to wipe off the face of the planet) get to bin Ladin and establish accountability to send enough money and support to encourage bin Ladin to do a second attack. Remember, bin Ladin's been planning this since 1997 or so.

3) I don't believe he's gotten the money OR the settlement yet... and if you've ever had a major disaster (we had a house fire), you'll remember that the insurance companies don't exactly roll over and hand out checks. And he gets to pay taxes on that insurance money.

There's some stuff you don't seem to be aware of (but that I'm very aware of because of my investments in the stock markets): the insurance companies did NOT make any profits. In fact, the whole industry took a huge nosedive after 9/11.

Billions of dollars to contractors? Uhm... did you perhaps forget that NYC is a Union Town? Some contractors will get a piece of that, but there's a gazillion that won't. And for right now, they haven't even settled on a design -- when they do, contractors will have to bid on it and whoever wins the bid is going to be shoved in the spotlight and a fine toothed comb gone over them to make sure they did nothing shady to win the bid.

As far as I can see (reading the direct company financial reports sent to stockholders and reading stock charts) there's been a huge loss that we haven't recovered from.

And yes, my stockbroker's company had offices close by the WTC. As a result of 9/11 (stocks falling and people abandoning the market), they went bankrupt and were bought out by someone else.

Dadenfach, Bayer's profits (worldwide) on Cipro are about $2 billion - 1/10th of its profits. The US government pressured Bayer to allow other drugmakers who want to release a generic version of Cipro. Bayer's patent on Cipro expires next year. They didn't profit as much as they could have and are now in a bit of a bind:

www.aegis.com...


Bayer's stock collapsed after 9/11 and hasn't yet gotten back to what it was a year ago. It's currently falling in price, too
finance.yahoo.com...

They're currently selling off one of their units (Harmann) to try and clear up some of their huge debt.

So I don't see that it did them that much good.

And I'll go back to muttering to myself, its alot easier on the fingers.

Well now that's a cop-out isn't it?

You make claims, but are unable to support them? This thread began with "unexplained explosions," so we explained them, and you brought up the spectre of "someone making billions of dollars" off the events. Well, we showed how that's highly unlikely, and you're not able to respond with information other than rumor and suposition.

It seems as though you really want there to be conspiracy associated with the 9|11 WTC attack to the degree it's almost a religious-like conviction. You're unable to rationally examine all factors, and look with a conspiracy-jaded eye at only those items within your tunnel vision.

Who's head is in what sand here?

As far as money to be made is concerned..I"m surprised no one is mentioning the 'billions' Bush upped the military defense budget.

Bush did indeed increase the defense budget by $48 million with his 2003 budget. Silver star for you.


Or the 'billions' to be made by the construction of the oil pipeline through afghanistan.

I might have to take your star away, that is the CentGas pipe which will carry natural gas to India and possibly beyond.


Or the 'billions' to be made through the pharmaceutical company contracts that have already passed with cipro and the smallpox vaccine (the smallpox vaccine you Won't be able to refuse if your state passes MEHPA).

Hmm... bronze star since this is actually projected at about $800 million in new contract before tax net for 2003. it could end up being more, but likely not "billions"


etc etc. I think the money to be made here is in the consequences of 9-11.

Indeed, however, don't forget the collective equity loss of $4 trillion dollars in the American markets. A lot of wealthy people have lost a lot of money. These items listed here are but small pitances when compated to the effect of 9|11 on the global economy.


Disinfor agent? Nah, the Skeptic Overlord is an agent of reason... nothing more... sometimes less.