Lucky Larry wants $12.3 billion more for 9/11 By Jerry Mazza Online Journal Associate Editor

Lucky Larry wants $12.3 billion more for 9/11

By Jerry Mazza

Apr 3, 2008, 00:38

Like the proverbial bad penny, Lucky Larry Silverstein keeps popping up. He’s back and he’s bad again. Not content with the nearly $4.6 billion in insurance payments he received to cover his losses at the World Trade Center, he is now seeking $12.3 billion in damages from the airlines and airport security companies for the 9/11 attack in a suit filed in 2004.

Not tainted enough by the fact that Silverstein & Partners took out a lease for 99 years in July of 2001 on the WTC, two months before the attack . . . not content Larry & Partners upped the insurance at that time to $3.5 billion and (presciently) to cover potential hits by airliners flown by “terrorist hijackers” . . .

Not content that Silverstein & Partners subsequently sued the insurers for $7 billion, considering the attack a double strike because separate liners hit Towers One and Two. Not content that Larry spent the next six years in litigation with the insurance companies, only to have the deal fortunately settled, brokered by then Governor Spitzer in 2007, yielding $4.55 to Lucky Larry and Partners . . .

Not content either that his personal stake in the lease was only some $14 million, the balance supplied by his partners. Not content that he made another $500 million on the destruction of his Tower 7, which he owned and quickly rebuilt bigger and better. Not content that no liner hit Tower 7 and that the fires were out, he announced at 3:30 p.m. on 9/11 that there had been so much pain and suffering that he and the NYFD decided to “pull it” -- Tower 7 . . .

Not content that in fact at 5 p,m,, not even two hours later . . . Tower 7 went down at the freefall speed of gravity in a matter of seconds neatly into its own footprint, a classic “internal demolition.” Not content that you can’t set up an internal demolition on a 47-story steel-framed building in less than two hours or two days, or even two weeks. Not content that his “smoking gun” has attracted the attention of every 9/11 critic around the world . . .

Not content that the BBC made an incredible gaffe as a TV journo of theirs, supposedly in New York, reported that Tower 7 had fallen, that is, 26 minutes before it actually fell and with a News24 “time stamp” video to prove it. Not content that even Google had to pull the video . . . Larry Silverstein, the Oliver Twist of 9/11 disaster, is back, asking for more, sir, more please. Incredible! What colossal chutzpah!

But hey, Larry’s got reasons; boy, does he have reasons. His lawyers aired them in the United States Southeastern District Court in Manhattan, the same court in which the 9/11 victims families have been plaintiffs for cases to sue the airlines and security companies, and by the way, where 90 families have been turned down for lawsuits and only two remain who haven’t taken the money and shut up, and where Ellen Mariani has been consistently turned down and continues to be . . .

Yet,Larry’s lawyers have come to ask the wonderful Judge Hellerstein for more, the same Hellerstein who asked all the families to take the money and “move on” and told them that “money was the universal lubricant . . ." What goes around comes around.

By the way, the total claims involved come to about $23 billion. Silverstein’s chunk could endanger claims from other businesses and property owners, defense lawyers say. Why, Donald Migliori himself, the lawyer for the victims’ families, said he was confident “that their claims would not be affected because they would take priority over the property claims,” as reported by the New York Times. So they won’t be taking food from widows’ and children’s mouths to feed Larry, not this week at least.

Nevertheless, Desmond Barry, a lawyer for the airlines, said that if Lucky Larry won his claims, “He could push the total claims beyond the amount of insurance that the airlines and security companies have available. 'There ain’t that much insurance,' Mr. Barry said."

Silverstein’s laundry list for the $12.3 billion goes like this, “$8.4 billion for the replacement of destroyed buildings and $3.9 billion in ‘other costs,’ including $100 million a year in rent to the Port authority and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings.”

Mr. Barry, the Times tells us, reminded Silverstein’s folks that he “had been more than compensated by the nearly $4.6 billion insurance settlement, reached after almost six years of litigation. He argued that Mr. S. was entitled to the market value of the property, which he said had been established by the $3.2 billion.”

Judge Hellerstein was skeptical about Mr. Silverstein’s claim, and asked why he hadn’t sucked up his losses by just “walking away.” Hellerstein asked, “What’s the nature of your recovery,” to which Larry’s lawyer, Mr. Williamson, answered, “For damages suffered by the events of 9/11, not value. Damages.” He claimed the lease required Silverstein to rebuild and keep on paying rent.

Hellerstein retorted, “And so I’m putting to you if you walked away from the lease, you would lose the value of the lease . . . Would you have a further obligation to pay money?” Williamson answered, “You have to examine that question . . . But to me that’s not the test of what are our damages.”

When Hellerstein pressed for a dollar figure on damages, not the “precise amount,” i.e., “some order of magnitude would be appropriate,” Williamson balked. Barry said, “I think their claim is $12.3 billion.” Williamson added, “Plus prejudgment interest,” To which Hellerstein “tartly replied, 'We shouldn’t forget that.'” They won’t let you, Alvin.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers added that even after many settlements, there are seven wrongful death and two injury cases remaining from the more than 90 filed. Migliori, the victims’ survivors’ lawyer, felt that the claims with property damage, including Lucky Larry and some insurance company looking to recoup payments, should allow the death and injury cases priority of payment of damages. Fair enough.

Judge Hellerstein passed on setting a trial date. He said that would be “fictitious,” yet set a deadline for fact-finding for Silverstein to offer more documentation of his claim -- or risk losing it. Any trials, by the way, seem to be more than a year away.

The real caveat here is that to win a case of that size for damages, Silverstein would have to go to court for discovery. Meaning his lawyers could bring in every fireman who heard a blast, Silverstein himself for his “pull” remark, and even Hizzoner Rudy Giuliani for saying that morning, at 9:15 to ABC’s Peter Jennings, on the street that someone told him the towers were coming down. In short, you could grill ass like the devil until you found out what really happened.

Bottom line, Larry could get a billion dollar bone thrown at him, a take-the-money and-shut-up bone. Or Larry could end up in cement shoes, for real or legally. After all, Larry knew, going into the lease purchase that the Towers were asbestos-laden bombs, the first 60 floors sprayed with the building material when built from 1968 to '72. And they were supposed to be taken down eventually, according to a 1971 New York Council ban on asbestos.

Obviously, the buildings couldn’t be legally taken down by explosion or implosion. They would have to be taken down piece by piece. The cost would be in the billions by today’s standards. But there was another way to take them down, wasn’t there?

Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer living in New York. Reach him at

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor Puts Larry Silverstein on Trial in 9/11 Lies

Great update on Lucky Larry.

Thanks Joe ! This was an interesting read, and ties together threads of the Larry story.

I look forward to hearing you on the radio interview tonight!!

Rational 1360 AM KMNY
11:00 PM until 12:00 AM

If one does not thoroughly LOOK, the TRUTH is not visible.

Great article....

Silverstein knows no shame and seems to be protected? If I worked in the Sears Tower, I'd be concerned.

"In March 2004, Silverstein Properties bought the tower in an $800 million deal. Larry Silverstein's penchant for large insurance pay outs, coupled with the strange coincidence of buildings only owned by him collapsing on 9/11, makes for a dangerous combination."

Silverstein investigate him but
...don't believe him!

Maybe there's opportunity here...

At this point in the Truth Movement, let him take his claim to court. Would some people from WeAreChange be in the courtroom, or outside the building? I saw the look he gave when confronted at this speech-maybe he believes that legally he cannot be touched concerning prior knowledge of the demolitions. I'm sure he consults with the best of the best of New York City lawyers. I wouldn't be surprised if he has paid staff regularly visiting this site and others.

With the Jesse Ventura story hitting the AP at the same time as Steve Alten is on an ABC affiliate, maybe he's got a game plan going on. Maybe he knows that there is no proof of his prior knowledge ("Ummm...OK, we'll give you this deal on this property, but you should get it insured because we think Al-Quaeda could be targetting NYC, but of course you have no such idea of such plans" (wink-wink)

These people may be the incarnation of evil and victims of the most extreme arrogance, but they are not stupid. E-mail him and dare him to sue!

Could he be setting up the release of the Truth?
Would he do it on purpose?
At this point, anything could happen.
The administration might attack Iran because they know the Truth Movement has hit critical mass.
And 911blogger did us proud!

lucky larry's supposed confession

It's simply ludicrous to go any further with the demonization of Larry Silverstein.Do we actually believe that he slipped up and accidentally confessed to blowing up Building 7 in cahoots with the New York City Fire Department?Do we actually believe that PBS,in the process of putting together a propaganda film intended to spread the lie that fires destroyed the buildings that collapsed that day,let that little "faux pas" stay in the film?I hope not,because it's way past stupid to believe that,much less actively promote it with our outreach.In fact,there is no evidence implicating Silverstein in these events and it's truly sad that it has such a shelf life when the verdict has been in for years:It's a willful misinterpretation of a quote.

The naïve call him “Lucky Larry”, criminals call him...

Dear ae,

Some people where insiders in the controlled pulverisation of these buildings.
Are you suggesting that this Real-Estate Maverick did not know that the WTC towers were riddled with asbestos, and how much it would cost to clean them up?
Are you suggesting he had no knowledge of the past years of costs/benefits of these buildings?
Is M. Silverstein perhaps a too rich and prominent person for you to be able to suspect his involvement?

Remember, when he made his statement on the PBS program “America Rebuilds”, it was one year after the events, and still no-one could come up with an explanation about how WTC7 had fallen down with the exact characteristics of a controlled demolition. The 70 year old man volunteered a plausible explanation of this: watch him say it! Yes, absolutely, he confesses that they decided to pull the building; he just didn’t seem to understand, or he thought he could conceal that such a professional job could not have been accomplished in 2 hours in a building with some fires going on in parts of it. The naïve call him “Lucky Larry”, the criminals call him “Larry the Weasel Silverstein”. We people should be happy that some of these criminals, like Larry Silverstein, Philip Zelikow and Dick Cheney show their real face, so we can better understand the motives of the people who were involved with getting the synthetic terror show of the New American Century on the road!

In Larry Silverstein’s greed, in his frequent contacts with Benjamin Netanyahu and other people who push for AIPAC’s “A Clean Break” policies, in former Italian President’s Francesco Cossiga’s admission that the CIA and Mossad were behind 9/11, in Philip Zelikow’s article in Nov-Dec 1998 Foreign Affairs, writing that “catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event in American history”, and that what really happened would not be the issue, it would be up to the relevant people within government to define what happened (This is Zelikow’s "Parallel Universe”), and in Cheney’s deep involvement with military contractors and unprecedented war-games on the day of Sept 11th 2001, in these few people, we already see a pretty good embryo of “Motive”, “Means” and “Opportunity” behind the horrific acts of political and criminal mass-murders of the day of 9/11. If you do not see that ae, I suggest you take engagement with the official Ministry of Truth. They might pay you a hefty salary a few more weeks, while they cry out their last ridiculous fairy tales before being thrown out by an American public tired of Military-Industrial and Criminal grip of their country.

Best regards,


PS: have you signed the petition at :

"unflinching, unswerving, fierce intellectual determination, as citizens, to define the real truth of our lives and our societies is a crucial obligation which devolves upon us all. It is in fact mandatory. (Harold Pinter)

Pullverizing dissenters within the Movement

drbeeth,warm regards to you.If I had a dollar for every nitwit who has called me an agent I'd be a rich person.Congratulations,you are among a diverse and eclectic crew that folds like a cheap tent while firing stray bullets every where,while demanding we drink their Kool Aid.I guess you consider yourself one of the elite of this movement,hence your disdain for any one who questions the received wisdom of previous assertions.It's a real shame that your patronizing condescension is so prevalent here in our movement.A shame because it prevents true and open discussion of what should be our talking points and Best Evidence for outreach.I remember being flabbergasted when I looked into the charge that Condoleeza Rice had warned Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco not to fly on 9/11/01.Flabbergasted because what seemed like a bonafide smoking gun turned out to be a rumor floated by,none other than,David Irving,the world's most notorious Holocaust minimizer.Unfortunately,that story went far and wide thanks to Alex Jones and others.Weird,because Willie Brown actually flew that day,or tried to.Minimal digging proved useful and showed the wisdom of the elite Truth "leaders" to be lacking,perhaps tainted.Minimal research into the Silverstein quote shows how absurd the idea that he "slipped" is.To still believe(as I did for years) that Larry confessed accidentally is religious doctrine in this movement and to point out how ridiculous that notion actually is has put me in the category of a disinfo agent or a shill or whatever you smarter people choose to label any honest and open seeker of the Truth.Sound like a cult to you?What I would like to know is:who started this story?who came up with this outlandish,desperate attempt to pin the blame on Mr.Silverstein,in the form of an inadvertant confession?To state that he's a Zionist with connections to Israel is not evidence,it's a sense.To say he's buddies with Netanyahu is not evidence.To say he bought insurance against terrorist attacks is dopey.Remember the 1993 attack(yes,another inside job).To say he didn't show up that day means nothing.Because there is nothing actually implicating him except specious circumstantial stuff there has been a lemming like rush to misquote the man because,"hey,we know he's guilty so what's a little stretch in the name of Truth?" The fact is that "pull it" and "pull" are clearly firefighting terms referring to pulling back fire and search and rescue teams back and away from potential danger zones.The evidence is clear:Pull and pulling are demolition tactics which involve pulling buildings down with guide wires,not blowing them up.This pathetic and willful misinterpretation of Mr. Silverstein is going to set us all back,because basically it's become one of the pillars of the Truth Movement,tied in directly with our "go to guy",Building 7,the Holy Grail.When we get people to look at this story it's not going to help when they see that Silverstein is being misquoted and demonized with nothing more than a retarded attempt to twist his words into our own special pretzel.I find it troubling that in the effort to spread the Building 7 story far and wide,what seemed to be a slam dunk case is undermined by this misquote,the selective citations of fire personnel and an incomplete and inaccurate portrayal of the condition of the building after the "collapses" of the Towers.Who cares what Larry says anyway,he's not a scientist or a technical expert so it's a empty track to go down.Now,people are trying to make a case that his recent comments about an antenna compromising the stability of the building by severing the gas lines are further evidence of a cover up on Building 7.The fact is he's less than useful as a target and is probably sent out to distract the movement,now that he's known as Enemy #1 in our movement.Larry Silverstein never admitted anything and please delineate the evidence that he was and is part of the plot.That is,delineate all the evidence that doesn't mention the fact that he's a rich Jew! My best wishes to you.Peace