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.
Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by Judge_Holden
i provided a credible demonstrrtion of the common usage of the term "pull it' as it is used in the demolition industry.
what proof have you provided to counter it
NONE
poop or get off the pot
deny ignorance and all that
If you...
Is it...
Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by Alfie1
If you...
Is it...
Hypothetical questions which you have not backed up with proof don't count a statements of proof in any way shape or form
LandP
have a nice day
edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: fixed quote box
A major insurance company is holding back from paying Larry Silverstein insurance money he says he is still owed from the destruction of the World Trade Center complex, the question is why?
Reuters is reporting:
Mr Silverstein, who leased the downtown site destroyed on September 11, 2001, claims Allianz still owes him $US553 million ($A708.57 million) and that a second insurer, Britain's Royal & Sun Alliance, owes him $US250 million ($A320.33 million). He said their reluctance had slowed rebuilding at the site.
It now seems that Allianz is being forced to back down as Brooklyn-Queens Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner has vowed to punish the insurers with fines or operating restrictions if they do not pay up.
If you think that Larry Silverstein publicly announced deliberate demolition of WTC 7 by explosives on tv; why do you suppose Industrial Risk Insurers paid out $861 million for the rebuild ?
Is it your experience that insurance companies fall over themselves to pay out vast sums even when there is, according to you, a glaring and obvious reason to deny liability ?
Perfect example of a truther being asked a question too big for their flawed theory.
He will not answer it.
Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by Judge_Holden
just to prove you wrong again I will answer it
boy you sure are batting zero today aren't you
get off the pot
it makes a person slow on the draw
A major insurance company is holding back from paying Larry Silverstein insurance money he says he is still owed from the destruction of the World Trade Center complex, the question is why?
Reuters is reporting:
Mr Silverstein, who leased the downtown site destroyed on September 11, 2001, claims Allianz still owes him $US553 million ($A708.57 million) and that a second insurer, Britain's Royal & Sun Alliance, owes him $US250 million ($A320.33 million). He said their reluctance had slowed rebuilding at the site.
It now seems that Allianz is being forced to back down as Brooklyn-Queens Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner has vowed to punish the insurers with fines or operating restrictions if they do not pay up.
As reported by Reuters
www.infowars.net...edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: to spell slowly AS REPORTED BY REUTERS for the peeps
reply to post by Danbones
NOTE THAT THE INSURERS WERE THREATENED TO FORCE THEM TO PAY
Since then a total of nine insurance companies have continued to pay Silverstein as the legal wrangle continues. The only ones who have resisted in any way have been Allianz.
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Alfie1
If you think that Larry Silverstein publicly announced deliberate demolition of WTC 7 by explosives on tv; why do you suppose Industrial Risk Insurers paid out $861 million for the rebuild ?
Is it your experience that insurance companies fall over themselves to pay out vast sums even when there is, according to you, a glaring and obvious reason to deny liability ?
You are right and I did hear many asked why the claim was paid so fast..
Fact is, those that agreed to the payment don't actually pay out of their own pocket..
It's the shareholders that pay...Ahhh, follow the money..A phrase that never gets old..
to remain forever silent ?
Originally posted by weedwhacker
The only claims of "thermite" come from a man named Stephen Jones,