But, you can\’t blame Silverstein for trying. What\’s his downside? A couple of million in legal fees. What\’s his upside? $3.5 Billion. It\’s a no brainer.
Sue anybody even when you know you are wrong because you might get money.
Honor and honesty don\’t count if you can get some money? What a sleeze. I\’m glad I mispelled his name.
Theft by any other name is still theft.
Theft
Thief of property = robber, burglar
Thief of truth = liar
Thief of life = murderer
The difference in these theives is how they rationalize their actions.
There is a growing movement in the U.S., the 9/11 Truth movement, that says that the attacks on the WTC show earmarks of demolition. Recently, Charlie Sheen was the lastest in a list of high-profile individuals to express their reservations about the official story. See http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html for a physicist who discusses these. Not only is there Mr. Silverstein\’s admission that he and a fire chief decided to \”pull it\”, but the visible evidence that squibs can be seen going off in a video of the event.
Is the building\’s collapse being described as anything other than the controlled demolition it appears to be in this second court case? If so, I should think the defense lawyers might like to investigate the source of videos like this:
It seems a relevent topic to at least touch on, with billions on the line.
If evidence like that is being barred from the trial, then it can only mean that the judge\’s impartiality has been co-opted. Can anybody supply the best website to keep posted on the progress of these trials?
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Sure, it\’s an Insurance to Value issue.
But, you can\’t blame Silverstein for trying. What\’s his downside? A couple of million in legal fees. What\’s his upside? $3.5 Billion. It\’s a no brainer.
Sue anybody even when you know you are wrong because you might get money.
Honor and honesty don\’t count if you can get some money? What a sleeze. I\’m glad I mispelled his name.
Theft by any other name is still theft.
Theft
Thief of property = robber, burglar
Thief of truth = liar
Thief of life = murderer
The difference in these theives is how they rationalize their actions.
There is a growing movement in the U.S., the 9/11 Truth movement, that says that the attacks on the WTC show earmarks of demolition. Recently, Charlie Sheen was the lastest in a list of high-profile individuals to express their reservations about the official story. See http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html for a physicist who discusses these. Not only is there Mr. Silverstein\’s admission that he and a fire chief decided to \”pull it\”, but the visible evidence that squibs can be seen going off in a video of the event.
Is the building\’s collapse being described as anything other than the controlled demolition it appears to be in this second court case? If so, I should think the defense lawyers might like to investigate the source of videos like this:
http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/Flashes/squibs_along_southwest_corner.htm
It seems a relevent topic to at least touch on, with billions on the line.
If evidence like that is being barred from the trial, then it can only mean that the judge\’s impartiality has been co-opted. Can anybody supply the best website to keep posted on the progress of these trials?