So Silverstein "pulled" his buildings so he could go broke rebuilding them?

TriskettheKid said:
He will.

Because he still has to pay rent on space not being used. Just because the insurance money is currently covering it doesn't mean he's not going to go broke. Far from it. The longer he has to pay rents out of the insurance money, the less available to build.

The longer it takes to get something built, the more money owed.

He is going broke. He'll be lucky to break even.
Click to expand...

Whether Larry eventually takes a loss or not, that's a helluva lot different than going broke. You do get that right?
 
RedIbis said:
Whether Larry eventually takes a loss or not, that's a helluva lot different than going broke. You do get that right?
Click to expand...
Depends on how long he takes that loss now, doesn't it? Or do you think he has unlimited funds to pay this with?
 
RedIbis said:
Whether Larry eventually takes a loss or not, that's a helluva lot different than going broke. You do get that right?
Click to expand...

Will Silverstein be destitute and on the street? Probably not.

But he does stand to take a huge loss on WTC, which makes his involvement in any conspiracy to destroy those buidlings patently absurd. Which is the point of this thread.

But please, continue rambling on with your tedious semantic argument. Your desperate, flailing attempts to completely avoid the point are quite amusing.
 
RedIbis said:
Whether Larry eventually takes a loss or not, that's a helluva lot different than going broke. You do get that right?
Click to expand...

I understand the difference.

But since he's legally obligated to make the payments, he WILL go broke.

Unless something gets built and rent can start getting collected. But then he's out the rent he's paid, and the costs for rebuilding.

Like I said, he could very well go bankrupt (broke) because of this. If he's lucky, he'll be able to break even on his investment.
 
I've never really got an answer from a CTer as to why Silverstein would admit on national television that he demolished his own building.
 
Why is Silverstein demanding money from either the insurance people or the public when he was part of a conspiracy to steal 2.3 trillion dollars? Why doesn't he demand it from his "friends"?

Either way, I would expect Silverstein to be killed soon. When a member of a criminal gang starts needing more and more money and starts begging the rest of the gang for some of their share of the loot with the threat of turning states evidence unspoken but still hanging over every ones heads, that's when people get killed.

Any of you twoofers wanna start the death clock on old "Lucky Larry"?
 
RedIbis said:
So if Silverstein continues to resist investing his "PERSONAL FUNDS" it's not likely he'll be going broke.

Now, try and spin Bloomberg's comments.
Click to expand...


Speaking of spin, you described Silverstein's agreement with the fire chief's assessment as "nonsensical" and "dishonest." I asked you to explain how it could be either and you ran away. Obviously you won't address your bizarre choice of words, so tell us if Silverstein is really the "Lucky Larry" of "truther" myth, or if he actually lost a bundle in the 9/11 attacks.
 
Last edited:
seems no one is concerned with larry spilling the beans

RedIbis said:
I like how you go right for invective and overlook a perfect example of what you so "skeptically" asked for.
Click to expand...


well I suppose "lying Larry" could threaten to "talk' and extort funds from the conspirators. Aint that right redibis?
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Why is Silverstein demanding money from either the insurance people or the public when he was part of a conspiracy to steal 2.3 trillion dollars? Why doesn't he demand it from his "friends"?

Either way, I would expect Silverstein to be killed soon. When a member of a criminal gang starts needing more and more money and starts begging the rest of the gang for some of their share of the loot with the threat of turning states evidence unspoken but still hanging over every ones heads, that's when people get killed.

Any of you twoofers wanna start the death clock on old "Lucky Larry"?
Click to expand...


Aha! At last we learn the motive behind the seemingly pointless crime. It was to steal $2.3 trillion. Now we have to find out from where the perps tried to steal that staggering sum, the "truther" myth that money is somehow "missing" from the Pentagon having been thoroughly debunked.
 
RedIbis
How does that suggest that it will make him go broke?
Originally Posted by RedIbis
So if Silverstein continues to resist investing his "PERSONAL FUNDS" it's not likely he'll be going broke.


johnny karate said:
Larry Silverstein owes the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey $10 million a month in rent.

Without new buildings on the site from which to lease office space, Silverstein has no way to recoup that $10 million a month.

$10 million per month X an indeterminate amount of time = eventually broke.

Let me guess: You're not an accountant, are you?
Click to expand...



Johnny please, stop kicking the cornered kitten, I can't bear to watch.

__________________________________________________________
 
It's a little disturbing watching RedIbis smear his mind-bogglingly irrational disgust for Silverstein all over the place. Like a monkey that's got nothing to play with except his own poo...

JimBenArm said:
Or do you think he has unlimited funds to pay this with?
Click to expand...


He's a "filthy Jew". He has all the money in the world. :rolleyes:
 
I, for one, am still waiting for RedIbis to offer up any evidence whatsoever in support of his repeated (and juvenile) refrain that Mr. Silverstein - in RedIbis' words - "is lying through his dentures".

Just thought this might be an appropriate place to remind RedIbis that he never has substantiated that oft-repeated claim of his.
 
TriskettheKid said:
Uh, that link isn't saying what you think it's saying.

A little reading comprehension, please.

It's saying that the money already invested (the insurance money), Silverstein counts as his own. What the others are saying (Bloomberg and Silver), is that some of Silverstein's PERSONAL FUNDS should be invested.

Mr. Silverstein, however, is saying that the insurance payout is part of his funds, and that it's already been put back (rental payments, etc).
Click to expand...
And the proceeds from the insurers is not nearly enough to cover the expenses of the past 7.5 years and replace the four buildings to which the insurance policies applied (WTC 1, 2, 4 and 5). Anyone who believes otherwise is living in a fantasy world.
 
Larry will never go broke. He sold his soul to the devil.

Oh, yeah, he may look down and out, living in the gutter, barfing on his loafers. Don't worry. Larry is just waiting.
 
LashL said:
I, for one, am still waiting for RedIbis to offer up any evidence whatsoever in support of his repeated (and juvenile) refrain that Mr. Silverstein - in RedIbis' words - "is lying through his dentures".

Just thought this might be an appropriate place to remind RedIbis that he never has substantiated that oft-repeated claim of his.
Click to expand...


Interesting. He made the bizarre claim that Silverstein's agreement with the fire chief was "nonsensical" and "dishonest." These terms make no sense whatever. When I asked him to clarify, he ran away.

The "truther" myth about Silverstein "confessing" to having the fire department (!) blow up his building, for reasons that can't possibly be explained, has been debunked. What is Silverstein supposed to have done? Is there anything other than anti-Semitism involved in the ranting about Larry Silverstein?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom