World Trade Towers Owner Loses Bid to Cash in Twice

Photo by Senior Airman Milton Turner

Lucky LarrySilverstein denied right to double compensation

By John Friend

Larry A. Silverstein, who became the primary lease holder of the World Trade Center (WTC) complex just weeks before it was destroyed during the 9-11 terrorist attack, recently lost a bid to recover over $3.5B from American Airlines and United Airlines.

Silverstein has already received $4.55B in an insurance settlement as a result of the WTC complex’s destruction; however, he had been seeking much more in his effort to ostensibly rebuild the complex.  Had Silverstein been awarded damages from the airline companies, he would have received over 2 ½ times the value of the buildings the day they fell, according to the airlines’ attorneys.

In 2004, Silverstein sued American Airlines and United Airlines for over $8B in damages, arguing the airlines were responsible for security breaches that led to the destruction of the WTC complex.

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, who has presided over numerous court cases relating to the 9-11 attacks, recently ruled that Silverstein has already received compensation for the loss to his property. Hellerstein justified his ruling arguing that Silverstein cannot receive compensation twice from the same damages, which is prohibited by New York law.

Silverstein won a 99-year lease on the WTC complex six weeks before the 9-11 attacks. He immediately purchased an insurance policy on the WTC complex, which included acts of terrorism.  Since 9-11, Silverstein has been arguing in court that each attack on the WTC was a separate incident, rather than a collective attack, in an effort to secure as much money as possible from his insurance contract.

Donate to us

“Every serious student of 9-11 knows that ‘Lucky Larry’ Silverstein was one of the most conspicuous benefactors of 9-11,” Dr. Jim Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth explained to this reporter.

“Not only did he have two enormous ‘white elephants’ taken off his hands (which the Port Authority had directed to be subject to asbestos removal at the tune of around $1B), but his investment of $14M yielded a return in excess of $4.4B, because he immediately fired the security company that had covered the WTC since it first opened in 1970, but also obtained an insurance policy that included a provision for ‘terrorist attacks.’  Since ‘officially’ there were two planes, he claimed double indemnity,” Fetzer concluded.

In an interview for the PBS documentary “America Rebuilds: A Year at Ground Zero,” Silverstein explained that after consulting with the New York City fire department commander regarding WTC Building 7, which was not attacked on 9-11, they made the decision to “pull it” – a term which implied they decided to take down the building using controlled demolitions.

Skeptics of the official government and media conspiracy theory explaining the events of 9-11 have pointed to Silverstein’s statement as evidence the WTC buildings were prepared for a professional-style demolition – a feat the Islamic terrorists who allegedly organized the 9-11 attacks could not have accomplished.

A spokesman for Silverstein has pledged to appeal Hellerstein’s decision.

AFP Newpaper Banner

John Friend is a writer who lives in California.