Sunset Cristo 01 Sep 10 18:22
 
luddite 27 Aug 10 14:52   

You need to watch it to the end

I'm not clicking on any more of your links.

Good decision

Get a job you conspiracy theorists

I've worked continually for over 35 years Neill.What about you?
Are you employed at the moment?

I can't see how it's conceivable that a US politician would consider murdering several thousand people for so little potential gain, when imagining some WMD would achieve just the same.

they've done it before a number of times apparently naydam

and the towers were Re-Insured just a few weeks before .. so no loss there

and giulani was complicit imo

tbh Nayda, I don't think the commmercial cost of the buildings an issue.

It's the completely nonsensical view that the US government would want to murder several thousand people, and do so without leaving any evidence that strikes me as bonkers.

Never?

well .. maybe the financials had already been 'shaken' ?

if you believe this shook the financial world .. you're very much on the wrong track !

Don Warro. Could you say that again, Please?

relations to George W Bush .. I believe ?

obama's ineligibility will become official at some point in the near future btw. i jumped the gun initially saying they would not let him take office but since learned the reasons why it was being allowed. he is in to accomplish certain things and then be scapegoated for the robbery of billions in tax money via the stimulus sham and all his other legislation that is littered with junk pet project spending, waste and deals for his union cronies whom he is trying to use to increase his voting base via immigration (since americans hate his policies).  he is then to be removed and it will be hailed a miracle that the country managed to survive and a hero crowned having been selected by god in the american public's eye. this fella will return them to constitutional rule.

lol

DonWarro is correct in everyway. It is possible to project our collective hopes and desires in a positive way. Collectively our consciousness is evolving and the `elite` are aware of this. They realise that we are on to them, and their agenda. The more desperate they become, the more they will lose the mask and their lies will become obvious.

...assuming you are in control of your subconscious mind which most are not, the subliminals are.

Ownership, Control, and Insurance of The World Trade Center
The World Trade Center complex came under the control of a private owner for the first time only in mid-2001, having been built and managed by the Port Authority as a public resource. The complex was leased to a partnership of Silverstein Properties and Westfield America. 1   2   The new controllers acquired a handsome insurance policy for the complex including a clause that would prove extremely valuable: in the event of a terrorist attack, the partnership could collect the insured value of the property, and be released from their obligations under the 99-year lease. 3   

Ownership Change
Author Don Paul investigated this and related issues for his 2002 book, which contains the following passage detailing financial aspects and ownership changes of the complex preceding the attack.

On April 26 of 2001 the Board of Commissioners for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey awarded Silverstein Properties and mall-owner Westfield America a 99-year-lease on the following assets: The Twin Towers, World Trade Center Buildings 4 and 5, two 9-story office buildings, and 400,000 square feet of retail space.

The partners' winning bid was $3.2 billion for holdings estimated to be worth more than $8 billion. JP Morgan Chase, a prestigious investment-bank that's the flagship firm of its kind for Rockefeller family interests, advised the Port Authority, another body long influenced by banker and builder David Rockefeller, his age then 85, in the negotiations.

The lead partner and spokesperson for the winning bidders, Larry Silverstein, age 70, already controlled more than 8 million square feet of New York City real estate. WTC 7 and the nearby Equitable Building were prime among these prior holdings. Larry Silverstein also owned Runway 69, a nightclub in Queens that was alleged 9 years ago to be laundering money made through sales of Laotian heroin. 4   

In December 2003, the Port Authority agreed to return all of the $125 million in equity that the consortium headed by Silverstein originally invested to buy the lease on the World Trade Center. The Port Authority rejected a request by the Wall Street Journal to review the transaction. 5   A press report from November 2003 about the same transaction noted that it would allow Silverstein to retain development rights. 6   


The lease deal didn't close until July 24th, just 6 weeks before the attack. 7   

Insurance Payouts
Don Paul also documented the money flows surrounding the loss of Building 7.

In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million. 8   
The insurance money flows involved in the destruction of the original six World Trade Center buildings were far greater. Silverstein Properties, the majority owner of WTC 7, also had the majority interest in the original World Trade Center complex. Silverstein hired Willis Group Holdings Ltd. to obtain enough coverage for the complex. Willis undertook "frenetic" negotiations to acquire insurance from 25 carriers. The agreements were only temporary contracts when control of the WTC changed hands on July 24. 9   

After the attack, Silverstein Properties commenced litigation against its insurers, claiming it was entitled to twice the insurance policies' value because, according to a spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, "the two hijacked airliners that struck the 110-story twin towers Sept. 11 were separate 'occurrences' for insurance purposes, entitling him to collect twice on $3.6 billion of policies." This was reported in the Bloomberg News less than one month after the attack. 10   

The ensuing legal battle between the leaseholders and insurers of the World Trade Center was not about how the 9/11/01 attack on the WTC could be considered two attacks, when the WTC was only destroyed once. Rather it seemed to revolve around whether the beneficiaries thought it was one or two "occurrences." The proceedings before U.S. District Judge John S. Martin involved a number of battles over the insurers' discovery rights regarding conversations about this issue between insurance beneficiaries and their lawyers. 11   12   

In December 2004, a jury ruled in favor of the insurance holders' double claim. 13   

A Parable
To put these events in perspective, imagine that a person leases an expensive house, and immediately takes out an insurance policy covering the entire value of the house and specifically covering bomb attacks. Six weeks later two bombs go off in the house, separated by an hour. The house burns down, and the lessor immediately sues the insurance company to pay him twice the value of the house, and ultimately wins. The lessor also gets the city to dispose of the wreckage, excavate the site, and help him build a new house on the site.

How tiresome.

Clockwork Joined: 11 Dec 01
Replies: 1736 27 Aug 10 21:22   


Sunset - I know I shouldn't indulge you, because I have already proven beyond doubt that the video is fake



This is a blatant lie.You have done no such thing. Quite the reverse in fact. The only thing you have proved is that you need to grow up .


and you have proven beyond all doubt that you are dumb,


Again you resort to personal insults rather than provide any evidence for your beliefs. Grow up.


but for the benefit of the casual reader, I'll persistif it exposed you as either a paid operative or, more likely, just thick.

More insults. This says more about you than me.


I'm going to ask you some questions and you have to answer them and not post questions back;

1. Do you understand the laws of reflection?

Just a simple yes or no and then we'll continue.




Your taking the piss. I've been asking you questions for over 3 weeks now. You have ignored my questions and now you expect me to start answering your questions. This is a joke. I will starting answering your questions when you have answered my questions.

Rage Against The Machine Joined: 29 Nov 07
Replies: 6 28 Aug 10 10:24   


I really don't have the will to read through every post on this thread so apologies if this question has been discussed previously.
It's ludicrous in the extreme to believe that America could have organised the attacks from within (it would surely involve thousands of people, if not tens of thousands, to be in on it)but one thing has always struck me as odd:

Is there really only one, time delayed, camera trained on the Pentagon??



I don't know. It does seem strange if there is only one. Probably there are others, but they were not pointing in the right direction at the moment of impact. If it was a missile why didn't the Global elite fake a good quality cctv showing a plane hitting the Pentagon?