So who is involved in the cover 9/11 up

reply to post by Big Unit

You are talking about WTC7 here, which is in a different category than the rest of the complex, which Silverstein leased but did not own.

This is a complicated story involving somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 insurers, some of whom were forced to pay as if two attacks occurred and some of which only had to make payments based on one attack.

The whole discussion is off topic. If you really want to get into it you should start another thread and show us comprehensively how Silverstein made or lost money on 9/11.

One of the ways that 9/11 truth is fought on the internet is to derail threads.

reply to post by Big Unit


HE might have lost 20 billion but his insurance payout was around 60Billion if I remember right If i am wrong Big unit please correct me with a link or something that shows actual numbers.

reply to post by audas


No, he took out one policy, he tried to get the towers considered separate claims for insurance purposes. As it is, when he originally was shopping for insurance he tried to purchase LESS.

In its court papers, Swiss Re shows how Silverstein first tried to buy just $1.5 billion in property damage and business-interruption coverage. When his lenders objected, he discussed buying a $5 billion policy. Ultimately, he settled on the $3.5 billion figure, which was less than the likely cost of rebuilding. His lenders, led by GMAC, a unit of General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ), which financed nearly the entire cost of the lease, agreed

www.forbes.com...

reply to post by blackpheonix


Not sure where you got 20 billion.....

Those lease payments have drawn $800 million out of the $4.5 billion insurance settlement since 2001. (The Port Authority has said that money is earmarked for reinvestment into the site.)

online.wsj.com...

Did you get that..he still has to pay the Port Authority the lease payments for ground zero...no buildings are there, he has no rent coming in from that property and he is still paying the lease... Yep that definitely sounds like a money maker to me.........

I am disappointed.

I read through this entire thread hoping that someone would reply stating the single biggest piece of evidence that 911 was an inside job but for some reason nobody has has been willing to comply with one of the above posters simple request.

Odd.

Originally posted by SPreston

You have not bothered to research 9-11 at all, you have just joined ATS, and you cannot watch videos, and you want us to waste our time babysitting you? Forget it.

Instead of replying with the above, would it have not been easier just to provide that one single biggets piece of evidence that 911 was an inside job?

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Well looks like that debunked my theory