• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Larry Silversteins insurance

Are we still playing "just asking questions"? Can I play, too?

If Larry Silverstein is involved in a conspiracy plot that's so obvious that even children on the internet can see that WTC7 fell "at free fall speed", why is the insurance company paying him at all? Why isn't he arrested for insurance fraud?

This is fun!!
I don't suppose there's any chance you'll read my paper on WTC 7, which you said you would do? You'd save yourself a lot of embarrassment.

By the way, the reason that some of the insurers have to pay double is that's what their policies say. The courts agreed.
 
Last edited:
Are we still playing "just asking questions"? Can I play, too?
That's all you've ever played. You have no interest in the answers though, do you?
If Larry Silverstein is involved in a conspiracy plot
He's not.
that's so obvious that even children on the internet can see that WTC7 fell "at free fall speed",
It didn't.
why is the insurance company paying him at all?
He paid the premiums.
Why isn't he arrested for insurance fraud?
There was no fraud.

This is fun!!
Accusing a man of the deaths of nearly 3,000 people w/o any evidence is fun for you? How utterly despicable.
 
I'm just saying if Larry wasn't being accused by 9/11 CTs then i'm sure you would agree he was a slimebag claiming twice what the policy is worse. I don't think Larry blew the building up ok?
 
LOL, I almost made the same mistake. Damn that Alex Jones!

I did too :D In fact, I even almost said "That's all you've ever played. You have no interest in the answers though, do you?" exactly.
 
I'm just saying if Larry wasn't being accused by 9/11 CTs then i'm sure you would agree he was a slimebag claiming twice what the policy is worse.

No. There were 23-24 policies involved. Those that were written in a certain way were interpreted one way; those that were written differently were interpreted another way. All in accordance with the law and in accordance with their terms.

Sheesh. I already pointed you to a concise summary - you could at least try to understand the facts before you go off half cocked, yet again.
 
Last edited:
LOL, I almost made the same mistake.

Me too! :eek:

Anyways, Silverstein is not only strapped for cash to rebuild the complex, but he is also risking putting a lot of money into a project that might not work out as profitable - that area has been economically devastated ever since 9/11, and many businesses there are suffering - an episode of Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t! covered this story nicely. Other businesses that might have been interested in the area have gone and set themselves up in other places that aren't waiting to be rebuilt.
 
That's all you've ever played. You have no interest in the answers though, do you?

He's not.

It didn't.

He paid the premiums.

There was no fraud.


Accusing a man of the deaths of nearly 3,000 people w/o any evidence is fun for you? How utterly despicable.

Wildcat - I think you misunderstand me. I was mocking Docker. Sorry if it was in bad taste, but i wasn't accusing Silverstein of anything. I am not a CT.
 
Me too! :eek:

Anyways, Silverstein is not only strapped for cash to rebuild the complex, but he is also risking putting a lot of money into a project that might not work out as profitable - that area has been economically devastated ever since 9/11, and many businesses there are suffering - an episode of Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t! covered this story nicely. Other businesses that might have been interested in the area have gone and set themselves up in other places that aren't waiting to be rebuilt.


I heard thw wtc was losing to begin with. Less and less office space was being rented. Larry is definitely pushing his luck with this 2 event scenario. It's a scam.
 
Sorry for all the confusion, folks. Before I get myself into trouble, I think I'll change my avatar.
 
I don't suppose there's any chance you'll read my paper on WTC 7, which you said you would do? You'd save yourself a lot of embarrassment.

By the way, the reason that some of the insurers have to pay double is that's what their policies say. The courts agreed.

You're probably right, Gravy, the Docker won't read your excellent paper on WTC7. Too many facts and too much evidence, which are anathema to CTers, apparently. It's much easier for them to maintain their delusions when they are not confronted with reality.
 

Back
Top Bottom