WHY DID THE INSURANCE COMPANIES PAY UP

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

On the basis that controlled demolition would be provable beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law - why don't the insurance companies ask Larry Silverstein for their money back - or did the clause in the insurance policy include "State Sponsored Terrorism"

[blackcat]

Perhaps that will yet happen. When faced with government reports that lie and distort but which would be used as evidence in a corrupt legal system to back up Silverstein's claim, there is little point in embarking on an expensive legal case. At this stage anyway.

Are you the new kind of shill then? A little less obvious but a shill no doubt. You should be sent to the trolls gutter asap.

There's that f*uckin pong again!!

[Bushwacker]

It could still happen, now that "experts" that a court would recognise as such are starting to come forward, but of course it is not enough to prove that it was controlled demolition, they would also have to prove that Silverstein was a party to it. The test in a civil case is not beyond reasonable doubt, but only on the balance of probabilities, so not as difficult to prove.

[Pikey]

I wonder if the insurance company shareholders are aware of the information on here and if they are not how they would react to this information?

[Bicnarok]

Maybe the insurance company belongs to him as well, and he insured the insurance company at another insurance company. Or some other windy complicated rip off scenario.

[waking life]