Developer Lawsuit Seeks $12.3 Billion in 9-11 Damages

Larry Silverstein, president and CEO of Silverstein Properties, the developer of the World Trade Center in New York is seeking $12.3 billion in damages from the airlines and other companies for damages related to the September 11 terrorist attacks. The defendants include American Airlines, United Airlines, Continental Airlines and Boeing.

Of the $12.3 Billion, $8.4 billion is sought to replace buildings and $3.9 billion would pay for lost income and expenses.

This could be a fascinating case and could lead to some interesting discovery, particularly the failure of the airlines to heed repeated warning in prior years to reinforce cockpit doors and spend more money on security. It will also make for some interesting questions of the superseding intervening acts of the terrorists. While crime will often cut off liability in tort, some crime is foreseeable and actionable. The process of defending against such allegation could prove quite embarrassing for the airlines, who have been relatively quite about their failures leading up to the attacks.

For the full story, click here.

27 thoughts on “Developer Lawsuit Seeks $12.3 Billion in 9-11 Damages”

  1. Hope George W. and Dicky Cheney are included in the suits.

    After all it was Dick who was conducting war games following the EXACT scenario of terrist flying plans into building on the SAME day that terrist actually flew plans into buildings.

  2. On another note: Just because a faction or entity stands to gain from the occcurance of an event, doesn’t imply they caused the event.

    I know the 911 theorists can present lists of implausible coincidences that buttress their theory….

    But so do the creation science folks.

    Occam/Ockham still rules.

  3. Mespo,

    No problem, I figured you were engaged in a witticism. Did you notice my spelling got corrected? Probably a philosophy major! Hey Bob, esq., who was Odo of Tournai?

    “You say Po-tah-toe, I say Po-tay-toe…”

  4. Deeply:

    In my haste, I forgot it was William Occam who gave us the Razor. Just too lazy to look up the spelling. Must be old age creeping up again. Sorry for the faux pas.

  5. Just for the record, if I hadn’t already been one of ‘those’ that have seriously believed something is criminally awry with the official story – Bob’s very concise assessment would have easily convinced me to consider examining the challenges to the ‘official’ story.

    Very nicely done!

  6. 3 of 4

    “Maybe those terrorists were just lucky or good at their villainous plot.”

    Of Course…

    “Of all the radar gaps in all the air space in all the U.S to exploit that day…”

    http://tinyurl.com/38btue

  7. 2 of 4

    “but I must say it raises issues worthy of examination. I do remind you though that in examining a catastrophe requiring interlocking paths of complex events to occur, the simplest answer might be the best choice as Hakim’s Razor instructs.”

    Actually, Ockham’s Razor tells us “It is pointless to do with more what can be done with less.” Thus, according to Ockham, we ought never to postulate the reality of any entity unless it is logically necessary to do so.

    For example, when four planes just happen to intentionally turn off course and into gaps in the primary radar during an ‘orchestrated’ attack, most notably flights 11 and 93, without any other explanation offered, Sir Ockham would advise us to postulate the reality of another entity; such as a TREASONABLE DESIGN.

    http://tinyurl.com/2jjdxa

  8. mespo727272,

    Since the following comment is “awaiting moderation” I’ll attempt to repost it in segments:

    1/4

    “Really fascinating story about Arnold. Could you suggest any reading materials?”

    http://www.amazon.com/General-Washingtons-Spies-Long-Island/dp/094572618X/ref=pd_bbs_9?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206743518&sr=8-9

    “Not sure it proves that 9-11 was an inside job however,”

    Wasn’t presented as direct evidence; merely as a “jaws of life” against the ‘tranquility over the truth’ mindset.

  9. Oh, and it is Occam’s Razor, isn’t it!? or is Hakim’s Razor an updated version?

    DW

  10. Mespo,

    You are right of course. I was just trying to get off a rather tastless piece of snarkery.

    Mea culpa.

  11. Defense for the airlines might be the following: None of our fleet of aircraft hit the twin towers. Prove it?

    The US government certainly isn’t able to produce any evidence, an independent review of CNN video to determine if it is computer generated isn’t going to happen, and there is ample evidence that bombs exploded within the twin towers.

  12. Bob, Esq:

    Really fascinating story about Arnold. Could you suggest any reading materials? Not sure it proves that 9-11 was an inside job however, but I must say it raises issues worthy of examination. I do remind you though that in examining a catastrophe requiring interlocking paths of complex events to occur, the simplest answer might be the best choice as Hakim’s Razor instructs. Maybe those terrorists were just lucky or good at their villainous plot.

  13. “There are even those that feel they have sufficient cause to believe it was an inside job including American traitors.

    Feelings aren’t facts.”

    The fact that each plane PERFECTLY exploited holes in primary radar is not a feeling. Factually speaking, such information is not readily available to the public or recorded on any published maps; much like the maintenance schedule of a chain that stretched across the Hudson protecting West Point.

    Gee, can you imagine if a Benedict Arnold type let the ‘terrorists’ know exactly where and when he’d be replacing a link in the chain with a piece of rope; e.g. mapped out where and when to attack by exploiting holes in the primary radar???

    “Arnold began to correspond secretly with General Clinton about his plan to let West Point fall into British hands. As a result, Clinton sent Major Andre up the Hudson in the British Sloop-of-War, Vulture, on September 20, 1780 to meet with Benedict Arnold. Andre was rowed ashore at the long cove just south of Haverstraw, where the two men conferred until sunrise. Their plans for the handing over of West Point still not complete, they rode on horseback to the home of Joshua Hett Smith, which stood on what is now known as Treason Hill. There it was agreed that Arnold should have one of the links removed from the great iron chain which stretched across the Hudson from West Point to King’s Ferry to prevent the passage of British ships up the river. Arnold planned to replace the iron link with rope, on the pretext that the chain needed mending….”

    Just a wild conspiracy theory? The good folks at Roe’s Tavern & Mabies Tavern didn’t seem to think so.

    http://www.76house.com/history_tavern.html

    Regards,

    Bob

  14. Conspiracy theories have had a fertile environment in the mist and haze created by many conflicting stories, multiple personal accounts and ostensibly inconsistent supporting facts surrounding the disaster of the terrorist attack at the World Trade Center. There are even those that feel they have sufficient cause to believe it was an inside job including American traitors.

    Feelings aren’t facts. Regardless of the cacophony opinion, whether based on careful examination of media accounts or a deck of Tarot cards – this case increases the possibly for some clarity. If nothing else though – it will, without question, spawn a new media industry and at the very least – a dedicated cable / satellite channel.

  15. Deeply:

    I wouldn’t be too sure on this one. I think the magnitude of the suit will speed settlement. This is the classic case that is too big for either side to lose and that makes for good settlements. When the Fortune 100’s and their insurers collide money is always the debris.

Comments are closed.