“Lucky Larry” Sil...
 
Notifications
Clear all

“Lucky Larry” Silverstein

4 Posts
4 Users
0 Reactions
658 Views
expose_them_all
(@expose_them_all)
Posts: 724
Noble Member
Topic starter
 

[color="Blue"]

(This is a little over a month old but I wasn't sure if it was posted on VNN or not).

“Lucky Larry” Silverstein

You’ve got to be lucky to make $4 Billion killing on a 6-month investment of $124 Million

Larry Silverstein is the New York property tycoon who purchased the entire WTC complex just 6 months prior to the 9/11 attacks. That was the first time in its 33-year history the complex had EVER changed ownership.

Mr. Silverstein’s first order of business as the new owner was to change the company responsible for the security of the complex. The new security company he hired was Securacom (now Stratasec). George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on its board of directors, and Marvin’s cousin, Wirt Walker III, was its CEO. According to public records, not only did Securacom provide electronic security for the World Trade Center, it also covered Dulles International Airport and United Airlines — two key players in the 9/11 attacks.

The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for many years to the Bush family. KuwAm has been linked to the Bush family financially since the Gulf War. One of its principals and a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, Mishal Yousef Saud al Sabah, served on the board of Stratesec.

Now, consider: The members of a small cabal owned the WTC complex, controlled its electronic security, and also controlled the security not only for one of the airlines whose aircraft were hijacked on 9/11, but the airport from which they originated.

Another little “coincidence” -- Mr. Silversten, who made a down-payment of $124 million on this $3.2 billion complex, promptly insured it for $7 Billion. Not only that, he covered the complex against “terrorist attacks”.

Following the attacks, Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy ($7B), based on the two -- in Silverstein's view -- separate attacks. The insurance company, Swiss Re, paid Mr. Silverstein $4.6 Billion — a princely return on a relatively paltry investment of $124 million.

There’s more. You see, the World Trade Towers were not the real estate plum we are led to believe. From an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized since its inception by the NY Port Authority -- has never functioned, nor was it intended to function, unprotected in the rough-and-tumble real estate marketplace. How could Silverstein Group have been ignorant of this?

The towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. It was well-known by the city of New York that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. For years, the Port Authority treated the building like an aging dinosaur, attempting on several occasions to get permits to demolish the building for liability reasons, but being turned down due the known asbestos problem. Further, it was well-known the only reason the building was still standing until 9/11 was because it was too costly to disassemble the twin towers floor by floor since the Port Authority was prohibited legally from demolishing the buildings.

The projected cost to disassemble the towers: $15 Billion. Just the scaffolding for the operation was estimated at $2.4 Billion!

In other words, the Twin Towers were condemned structures. How convenient that an unexpected “terrorist” attack demolished the buildings completely.

WTC Building 7 was a part of the WTC complex, and covered under the same insurance policy. This 47-storey steel-framed structure, which was NOT struck by an aircraft, mysteriously collapsed 8 hours later that same day into its own footprint at freefall speed — exactly in the manner of the Twin Towers.

How could this have happened? Mr. Silverstein gave the world the answer when he slipped up during a PBS television interview a year later, on 9/11/2002:

"I remember getting a call from the...er...fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

As anyone who knows anything about construction can tell you, “Pull” is common industry jargon for a controlled demolition.

One thing is for sure, the decision to 'pull' WTC 7 would have delighted many people. Especially because it has been reported that thousands of sensitive files relating to some of the biggest financial scams in history — including Enron and WorldCom -- were stored in the offices of some of the building’s tenants:

US Secret Service
NSA
CIA
IRS
BATF
SEC
NAIC Securities
Salomon Smith Barney
American Express Bank International
Standard Chartered Bank
Provident Financial Management
ITT Hartford Insurance Group
Federal Home Loan Bank

Read The Rest Here


 
Posted : 18/10/2006 5:12 pm
(@contumacyman)
Posts: 221
Reputable Member
 

There's more (there HAS to be!). Someday the details will come out about the two towers from conception to completion - that would be a very interesting story - whose idea was it to build these two structures in the first place? How did they get away with a design that wound up being "condemned" in that they could not be authorized for demolition? Who put up the money for this architectural disaster? I hope I live long enough for the WHOLE STORY to come out - going way back to when the original idea got proposed somewhere, by somebody. After all, the Empire State Building still stands and functions well - eh?


 
Posted : 18/10/2006 8:25 pm
(@c-stoff)
Posts: 305
Reputable Member
 

There's more (there HAS to be!). Someday the details will come out about the two towers from conception to completion - that would be a very interesting story - whose idea was it to build these two structures in the first place?

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/wtc1.html
(search engines are your friend)

How did they get away with a design that wound up being "condemned" in that they could not be authorized for demolition?

Construction of the buildings began prior to the outlawing of asbestos, so asbestos was used as a fire retardant up to the 60th floor.

Due to the big asbestos scandle, which hit right in the middle of the WTC construction, floors above 60 were treated with some substance that was not asbestos.

Who put up the money for this architectural disaster?

see above link

I hope I live long enough for the WHOLE STORY to come out - going way back to when the original idea got proposed somewhere, by somebody.

see above link

After all, the Empire State Building still stands and functions well - eh?

The Empire State building's steel frame was insulated with concrete, so there is no problem with asbestos.

The World Trade Center buildings were very well constructed, they only fell due to the demolition charges used.

Take note of the 45 degree angle cut on the central column in the photo below:

Kinda looks just like this detcord cutting charge, huh ??
(it's cut at an angle so the column will slide off it's base)

The World Trade Center buildings had a big problem with asbestos, but they had no structural problems.

.


 
Posted : 18/10/2006 9:15 pm
Proud White Guy
(@proud-white-guy)
Posts: 2056
Famed Member
 

This Is Major, Send A Copy To All Your Friends,and Wake Em All Up.

It"s All About The Jews Stupid, Wake Up!!!!!


Niggers aren't human. Humans don't behave that way.

God Bless Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and America, and God Damn the anti-white, anti-christian, and anti-American jewish controlled media.

 
Posted : 18/10/2006 11:41 pm
Share: