See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Lucky Larry Sues for 2.8Billion More!
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/re ... ?articleid=1061159482&srvc=rss
Published: Sep 11, 2012
Author: .
Post Date: 2012-09-11 18:52:35 by Lod
Keywords: None
Views: 500
Comments: 9
www.bostonherald.com/news...cleid=1061159482&srvc=rss Poster Comment: Full story and videos at link. (We need a Jew!Jew!Jew! category here)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Lod (#0)
That jew is going to get one hell of a lot richer, just watch.
... If a man has nothing that he is willing to die for, then he has nothing worth living for....
Yep just like the other "judgements" from the WTC insurance claims this too will be decided a jew judge. Stealing from the Goy is just fine according to jewish teachings. (1) Larry Silverstein is not the sole owner of the WTC. He is merely the CEO of an enormous consortium of investors. (2) So far the WTC has been an enormous LOSS to this consortium because its lease requires it to make very large payments to the Port Authority (the actual owner) - even though the consortium has been unable to collect a penny in rent since Sept 11th. (3) If any of those nasty rumors trying to connect Silverstein with the attack were true, you'd think they'd be advanced during the very pricey lawsuits that the consortium has had to bring. First there was an enormous lawsuit against, primarily, the Lloyds of London insurance consortium, which had tried to argue that it could pay off only for one mishap for the entire loss of the whole WTC, on the pretext that the collisions into two towers were part of only one conspiracy and therefore only a single mishap. You'd think if Silverstein knew what was going to happen, he'd have had the insurance policy written a lot more clearly on that issue. Now his consortium is suing airlines for millions - if there were anything to those nasty rumors, you can be sure the airlines will mention them rather than have to pay millions of dollars.
Once the structures were destroyed, the rent became a moot point; (you can't collect rent on a structure that no longer exists) you need to read and understand contract law. Towers 1 and 2 were paid for by the insurers as 2 separate incidents. Silverstein is sitting on more than $2 billion in cash payouts thus far. He is now hoping for another 2.8 billion, and he will get it. Additionally, he and his daughter were missing from the tower where they normally worked on 9-11, maybe that was a coincidence, but I doubt it. I wonder who is paying you to spew this drivel, because it doesn't pass the smell test.
... If a man has nothing that he is willing to die for, then he has nothing worth living for....
It took prolonged litigation to make the insurers pay for the two separate incidents. And it's you who needs to read contract law; the consortium headed by Silverstein was contractually required to pay the Port Authority a fixed annual rental on the WTC ... regardless of how much rent Silverstein was collecting from tenants. Silverstein had a small office at the WTC but his regular real estate & law office was in midtown. Considering that the first plane hit at 8:46 AM, on a primary election day, a LOT of people were not yet inside the towers. Even in the multi-million dollar insurance litigation, the defense did not attempt to suggest that Silverstein had any complicity with the attack or the collapse of the towers.
Fixed. "Mr. Prime Minister, there is only one important question facing us, and that is the question whether the white race will survive." -- Leonid Brezhnev to James Callahan
After a certain level of display of avarice, you gotta laugh.
"Mr. Prime Minister, there is only one important question facing us, and that is the question whether the white race will survive." -- Leonid Brezhnev to James Callahan
The "loss" is lost rent. They leased the towers for $2.8 billion, not coincidentally the amount the judge has said they can sue for. They've collected $4 billion from insurance. +$1.2 billion. "Mr. Prime Minister, there is only one important question facing us, and that is the question whether the white race will survive." -- Leonid Brezhnev to James Callahan
Your first post suggested that silverstein would have to pay rent on the nonexistent structures, which is not true. Building gone, no rent. period. Secondly, I never implied that silverstein had any complicity in the event, just that neither he nor his daughter were in their normal offices when the event occurred, make of it what you want. The buildings had to go as they were loaded with asbestos. They couldn't get a permit to do a controlled demolition because of the asbestos in the structures. The costs involved in manually re-mediating the structures was prohibitive. Towers 1 and 2 also had a problem with dissimilar metal corrosion related to the stainless exterior attached to the iron structure, which would all have to be removed and replaced by something. With all of what needed to be done to the buildings (asbestos & stainless exterior), it would have been far less expensive to implode the buildings than manually make the necessary repairs, except for the asbestos problem. The city of New York would not issue a demolition permit with asbestos present in the structure. How convenient that the buildings were hit by an aircraft and collapsed when the buildings were designed to handle just such a impact. I don't know how the buildings were brought down (explosives or electromagnetic force etc.), but they should not have fallen. All one has to do is look at the buildings in excess of 45 stories that burned for days in Spain and China that did not fall or collapse. Those buildings burned very hot, not the black smoky fires of the WTC towers. ... If a man has nothing that he is willing to die for, then he has nothing worth living for....
#2. To: Give Me Liberty (#1)
That jew is going to get one hell of a lot richer, just watch.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" 
#3. To: Lod (#0)
#4. To: Shoonra (#3)
#5. To: Give Me Liberty (#4)
#6. To: Shoonra (#3)
(1) Larry Silverstein is not the sole owner of the WTC. He is merely the CEO of an enormous consortium of [Jewish] investors.
#7. To: Lod (#0)
#8. To: Shoonra (#3)
2) So far the WTC has been an enormous LOSS to this consortium because its lease requires it to make very large payments to the Port Authority (the actual owner) - even though the consortium has been unable to collect a penny in rent since Sept 11th.
#9. To: Shoonra (#5)
the consortium headed by Silverstein was contractually required to pay the Port Authority a fixed annual rental on the WTC
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest