9/11 Could Be Insurance Fraud As “Trial” Of Conspiring Duo Begins In NY

< snip > Notice how they have never bothered to explain how no one noticed the tonnes of explosives needed.... or the workmen needed to lay the explosives....

have a look at this quality video from AE911's "leader"

reply to post by awakehuman


Greta vansustern and court tv should be broadcasting this 24/7 - but they will not....

Oh trayvon-----

Get the racist beating on eachother - such theater for the uninformed - when BIG truths are being scuttled away............

It's been a long time since I have thought of the insurance angle related to the destruction of the WTC. It has been discussed in great detail in the 9/11 forum. I was involved in some of the threads. When you look at the insurance story in detail, you find a very intriguing set of "happenings".

The US government actually underwrote terror related insurance claims for a period of time after 9/11. It may have been as much as two years. I don't remember the details. It was done during a period in which insurance companies set up the mechanisms for a new branch of the industry, terror insurance.

In effect it was as if Al Capone offered to underwrite extortion demands in Cicero, a risk free thing to do if you are running the extortion racket, to encourage small business owners to stay in business until extortion insurance could be started (just another form of extortion).

I have no confidence in the American justice system and don't expect any positive result from any 9/11 related trial. When you hear about the Bush cabinet being indicted at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, it might be a sign that things are changing. Not before.

The best "actuarial" explanation of the destruction of the World Trade Center is the one given by the Ace Rothstein character in the movie Casino. There is rough language in this, so be forewarned.

Graphic language. Swearing.



The mathematics involved in the unprecedented "collapses" of three steel framed high rise buildings occurring all in one day, within hours of one another, make it completely clear that insurance companies were accessories after the fact of these crimes. The insurance companies would have known, with mathematical certainty, that 9/11 was an inside job.

They were and are collaborators, like the main stream media and other institutions in the US. A trial involving Silverstein and them is like a sit down between Tony Soprano and Johnny Sack to discuss a financial matter. Nothing more.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
The mathematics involved in the unprecedented "collapses" of three steel framed high rise buildings occurring all in one day, within hours of one another, make it completely clear that insurance companies were accessories after the fact of these crimes. The insurance companies would have known, with mathematical certainty, that 9/11 was an inside job.

The odds that the building collapses could occur by random chance are not particularly relevant, I would say.

This won't make it to trial it will be settled out of court or totally ignored.It is gonna be fun to watch the insurance companies and Sliverstein fight over the cash.

Just a gentle reminder folks...

The guidelines for decorum in this forum are more stern than in most other forums on ATS. Please refrain from name calling, off topic avenues of bickering and ad hominem attacks.

Thanks!

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer


Quite right, the odds of it being annihilated by all sorts of interesting technology is what should really be debated, not the insulting jet fuel and kinetic energy that lasts for hours argument.

Quite likely the steel should be in question as well, how it was so incredibly weak all of a sudden, and why a lot of it just seemed to blow away in the wind, as if it were talcum powder.

I would think insurance companies normally would look into this, but this time not a peep.

Originally posted by ParasuvO
why a lot of it just seemed to blow away in the wind, as if it were talcum powder.

What makes you claim the steel was blown away in the wind?

I would think insurance companies normally would look into this, but this time not a peep.

Because the conspiracy theorists just have silly claims, not backed up by any evidence....

reply to post by awakehuman

Originally posted by awakehuman

edit on 17-7-2013 by awakehuman because: (no reason given)

LOL. Just when I thought I would never see that one again.



This one is a well known hoax video.