Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
RedIbis said:
You are woefully ill-educated on this topic. A simple google search will pull up all of the recent court decisions. You seem not to want to accept the fact that Silverstein is not going to be financing any rebuilding, (other than WTC 7, which I believe he's always owned outright) out of the insurance proceeds.

Port Authority Officials and Ground Zero Developer to Discuss Their Latest Impasse - NYTimes_com


My bolds. Perhaps now, you can understand why Oystein needs to recalculate.
Click to expand...

False.
You need to do that calculation if you want to rebut mine. Burden of Proof is on you. You made the original claim that Silverstein "made out like a bandid". In that calculation, you need to show that Silverstein actually cashed in the insurance payment, without being left with an obligation. This is not covered by the things you quote.
 
Old news, but then again that can be said for most of what truthers tend to purport.

The Port Authority, the City and Silverstein Properties have reached an accord to end that will allow the developer to build two towers at Ground Zero, the parties announced Thursday, ending a dispute that has been dragging on for over a year.

Under the agreement, the Port will provide $1 billion in backstopping to help Mr. Silverstein build his towers, but the developer [e.g Silverstein's company] will have to find $300 million in equity if the second of his buildings is to be constructed.
...

Additionally, Mr. Silverstein would agree to put all of his proceeds from the insurance from the attacks of Sept 11, 2001 and Liberty Bonds into the two towers. The money was originally supposed to be split among the three towers Mr. Silverstein planned to build, but the construction of the last tower will be delayed indefinitely.
Click to expand...

Continued news'ings on the formentioned:
The $1.275 billion offering to fund Larry Silverstein’s New York City’s World Trade Center Liberty Tower 4 was withdrawn yesterday for the second time.
...
The deal was first postponed last December as the municipal market was roiled by talk of mass defaults. The bankruptcy talk caused many investors to exit the market and sent muni yields rising.
Click to expand...

On what, exactly, is Silverstein making out like a bandit. Where's the windfall?
 
Oystein said:
False.
You need to do that calculation if you want to rebut mine. Burden of Proof is on you. You made the original claim that Silverstein "made out like a bandid". In that calculation, you need to show that Silverstein actually cashed in the insurance payment, without being left with an obligation. This is not covered by the things you quote.
Click to expand...

That's a fine bit of Texas Two-Steppin' you're doing there, but a) you were the one who claimed he was on the hook to rebuild the bldgs, and b) I gave you the articles which clearly show he is not investing his funds in any rebuilding.

You did read it right?
 
RedIbis said:
That's a fine bit of Texas Two-Steppin' you're doing there, but a) you were the one who claimed he was on the hook to rebuild the bldgs, and b) I gave you the articles which clearly show he is not investing his funds in any rebuilding.

You did read it right?
Click to expand...

Yep, I read it.
What I didn't read was that Silverstein received insurance money without obligation and made out like a bandid.
You did read it, right?
 
Oystein said:
Yep, I read it.
What I didn't read was that Silverstein received insurance money without obligation and made out like a bandid.
You did read it, right?
Click to expand...

How does the following statements factor into your calculations:

Two weeks ago, Mr. Bloomberg and Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker whose district includes Lower Manhattan, said that work should proceed on two of Mr. Silverstein’s three towers and should invest some of his own money in the buildings.



Mr. Silverstein, who regards the insurance proceeds as his money, has shown no intention of doing so.
Click to expand...
 
RedIbis said:
How does the following statements factor into your calculations:
Click to expand...

It's a bit neglective of what he's done so far, flirting with a financial fiasko to get the buildings up, all while paying over a hundred million dollars annually for unoccupied space basically. He wants to make money, so that would mean to get the buildings up and have companies et al renting space. But it was quickly clear that the insurance payout would not cover it by far.

So, he's stalling because he (from your own source):
insisting that the authority guarantee as much as $3.2 billion in financing for two skyscrapers, while the authority maintains that it is not the responsibility of the public to support speculative office space.

...
Under a 2006 development agreement, Mr. Silverstein is to build three large office towers along Church Street, using insurance proceeds, tax-free bonds and private financing. [edit: Why not just the insurance proceeds? Well because it would not cover it by a longshot! So much for windfall, so much for the "prior knowledge" nonsense]
Click to expand...

Though, this is old news, more recent updates are given in my post above.
 
RedIbis said:
How does the following statements factor into your calculations:
Click to expand...

No, wrong question. How do they factor into YOUR calculations? Why don't you answer by presenting your calculation? Like ... now?
 
After Bin Laden is killed, looks like Steven Jones continues his mental breakdown.

Why settle for the AAAS when you have Conspiracy Con 2011!

http://www.conspiracycon.com/speakers.html

The official story regarding 9/11 is false. This conclusion is not mere conjecture as it is supported by ample hard evidence and peer-reviewed publications, which Dr. Steven Jones will review briefly. As the planet is experiencing more and more large-scale "tectonic" events, especially of late with devastation to both Haiti and Japan, he will also ask the audience to consider clear evidence for the existence and testing of earthquake-inducing devices. Finally, he will present his latest research into clean, "free" energy, which would permit formation of energy-independent homes and communities. With energy issues so prevalent and with the ongoing hot debate over nuclear power after the recent release of radiation from Japan, Dr. Jones will apply scientific rigor to try to ferret out which (if any) claims of "free energy" are viable replacements for current polluting and hazardous methodologies.

I guess he fits in quite well with the other respected members of science that will be attending.
Hat tip:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com
 
Piece about the flight instructor who taught some of the hijackers.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/05/03/al.qaeda.flight.school/index.html?eref=rss_us&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_us+%28RSS%3A+U.S.%29

"Al Shehhi was a more likable person. He laughed and joked," said Dekkers.

"My employees called Atta 'Dead man walking.' He had a white face and no emotions and was a nasty person, very unfriendly," Dekkers told CNN.

The two future terrorists went on to pass the FAA commercial pilot's test and were granted their licenses.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting. Dekkers was one of the "Flying Dutchmen". Poor guy.

CNN said:
"Guilty by association [title of his book] is meant as a phrase to mean banks won't borrow you money. I can't get a job because I'm related to 9/11," he claimed.
Click to expand...


History Commons:
Rudi Dekkers was a participant or observer in the following events:

May 1999: New Owner with ‘Checkered History’ Takes Over Flight School Later Attended by 9/11 Hijackers
February 15, 2001: Atta and Alshehhi Offered Jobs as Co-Pilots with New Florida Airline
Spring-Summer 2001: Hijackers Allegedly Receive Extra Training on Large Aircraft
August 23, 2001-April 2004: Owner of Flight School Attended by Two 9/11 Hijackers Faces Numerous Legal Suits
June 26, 2002-January 24, 2003: Owners of Florida Flight Schools Attended by Hijackers in Separate Air Crashes
Click to expand...


Daniel Hopsicker: Was the CIA running a terrorist flight school?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Interesting. Dekkers was one of the "Flying Dutchmen". Poor guy.
History Commons:
Daniel Hopsicker: Was the CIA running a terrorist flight school?
Click to expand...
History Commons, junk which idiots lie CIT make up lies from.
Daniel Hopsicker, the missing CIT investigator, dumber than dirt article. Good finds of nonsense which is fodder for losers from 911 truth to make up crazy stories. That was a stupid article, how do you find this claptrap? Give Hopsicker a few facts and hearsay from news sources and he has the CIT running a flight school question seeping out of his failed mind.

nothing going on,

Are you trying to get something going on?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom