My email to Roger Silverstein, the son of Larry Silverstein and Senior Vice President of Silverstein Properties, concerning Jeffrey Scott Shapiro’s April 22 article revealing Silverstein’s discussion of demolishing WTC 7 with insurers
by Larry Simons
May 2, 2010
I have decided to email Roger Silverstein [pictured], son of World Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein concerning the article written by FOX News’s Jeffrey Scott Shapiro on April 22, in which he inadvertently revealed that he heard cops and city workers tell him that Larry Silverstein was on the phone on 9-11 talking to insurers, discussing bringing down WTC 7 by controlled demolition.
Of course, this information completely flies in the face of the fact that Silverstein has denied having any involvement in the bringing down of WTC 7 for eight years and even won $500 million for Building 7 alone based on the fact that WTC 7’s collapse was unexpected.
I emailed Roger Silverstein in 2006 about WTC 7, and he responded by denying involvement in WTC 7’s destruction by saying:
“You need to spend your time more wisely by reading and understanding the true facts of 9/11, instead of the garbage you read from conspiracy theories.
For your information, the correct story is that 7 WTC came down as a result of a massive fire that was ignited from fuel tanks located within the Building's base floors, in turn causing the steel to melt and buckle upon a number of hours of burning. Following the collapse of the Towers, 7 WTC became fully ablaze shortly thereafter. Firefighters tried to contain the blaze for some six hours, but due to very difficult conditions (rapid spread of the fire), could not bring the blaze under control.
To your conspiracy theory, think about this: would Silverstein Properties have ever been awarded by the Federal and State governments the wonderful task of rebuilding the most important real estate project in New York City's history if we acted improper in ANY way? Think about it.”
Discussing controlled demolition of his own building and then being awarded $500 million based on the fact that it was an unforeseen event is acting very improperly. Wouldn’t you agree?
Here is the email I sent to Roger Silverstein yesterday. I will keep you posted if there is a response.
I urge you to read my email [despite any objections you may have to the topic].
An article on FOX News.com on April 22, 2010 by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro has shed new light on the issue of whether your father, Larry Silverstein, had advance knowledge of WTC 7 coming down with the use of explosives. Your father has claimed [ever since the big 'pull it" controversy] that he had absolutely nothing to do with its collapse and that explosives were not used at all.
But, in a recent article attempting to debunk former governor Jesse Ventura's claims that the government or your father was involved in WTC 7's collapse, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro has inadvertently revealed information that, if true [and there would have been NO REASON why Shapiro would lie], could incriminate your father for insurance fraud, which could mean prison time for him and anyone involved in it, which could also include you.
Shapiro wrote in his article "Shame On Jesse Ventura" that Ventura is simply wrong for his theories that it was the government involved in the collapse of WTC 7. In an attempt to debunk Ventura, Shapiro inadvertently reveals this information:
"Governor Ventura and many 9/11 “Truthers” allege that government explosives caused the afternoon collapse of Building 7. This is false. I know this because I remember watching all 47 stories of Building 7 suddenly and silently crumble before my eyes.
Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall."
There's no reason why Shapiro would be lying, because Shapiro has no clue he was even revealing incriminating information. He was simply attempting to debunk Ventura by saying "It wasn't the government that took down WTC 7, it was Silverstein."
Your father has vehemently denied being involved in any way to the taking down of WTC 7. You have denied it as well in an email you sent to me in 2006. This new information by Shapiro is very incriminating against your father, and Shapiro didn't even have a clue he was leaking damning information.
If this information is true, this is a MAJOR case of insurance fraud on the part of your father and Silverstein Properties as a whole, and it is definitely worthy of investigation. Shapiro, as of this day [May 2, 2010] has not changed his article nor has retracted anything, but even if he does, I have captured screen shots of his original article proving that he claimed he heard cops and city workers tell him your father was on the phone with insurers discussing the controlled demolition of building 7. This proves that explosives were already set in place in the building. It takes 7 or 8 weeks to rig a building of that size with explosives. The ONLY way your father could have been discussing demolition is if the explosives were already set in place.
I will be pursuing this with the proper authorities and I will make attempts to get in touch with the insurance carrier involved and with the NY courts to expose this information. Your father made $500 million from building 7 alone based on the contention that Building 7's collapse was an unforeseen, unexpected event. Shapiro's revelation states otherwise, and this will be pursued.
I would love to hear your response to this and please enlighten me on where I am wrong. Click here for the article by Shapiro