Major WTC Insurance Company Questions Building 7 Collapse As Potential Fraud

This message was sent from: Breaking News.

----------------------------------------------------------------

[img]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:KY48VLC2IokJ:thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/wtc7-demolition.gif[/img] [img]http://www.allianzgroup.com/Az_Res/azgrp/_any/cda/pictures/logo_ng.gif[/img] [img]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:en6uoFLM_1QJ:www.luogocomune.net/LCproxima/modules/911/larrysil/larryo.jpg[/img]
A proposal by a small shareholder to withhold approval from the Board of
Directors for failure to investigate signs of insurance fraud on 9/11 has
been published on the website of the Allianz Group, one of the world�s
largest insurers, in preparation for its May 4th annual meeting.

Shareholder Proposal: Insurer to Investigate 9/11

A proposal by a small shareholder to withhold approval from the Board of
Directors for failure to investigate signs of insurance fraud on 9/11 has
been published on the website of the Allianz Group, one of the world�s
largest insurers, in preparation for its May 4th annual meeting.

(PRWEB) May 2, 2005 -- Allianz Group published a shareholder proposal on
April 20th faulting management for ignoring signs of insurance fraud on
9/11/2001. Allianz carried a significant portion of the insurance coverage
on the WTC, and stands to pay a corresponding portion of the $3.5 billion
payout currently being litigated in New York. In his proposal, shareholder
John Leonard, a California native and a publisher of books on 9/11, pointed
to reports that building WTC 7 apparently collapsed by demolition, and for
no plausible reason related to the 9/11 attacks. Management replied that it
relied on official US government reports which made no mention of such
evidence.

The Allianz Group is incorporated in Germany and has approximately 570,000
shareholders. Under German Stock Companies law, publicly held companies are
required to publish shareholder proposals that meet certain criteria.

The text of the shareholder proposal, which may also be viewed at the
Allianz website, , is reproduced below.

+++

Countermotion (Shareholder Proposal) to the General Meeting of Allianz AG to
be held May 4th, 2005

From Shareholder:
John-Paul Leonard,
P.O. Box 126,
Joshua Tree, California 92252

Re: Agenda Item 3, Approval of the actions of the members of the Board of
Management, I propose that approval not be granted.

Re: Agenda Item 4, Approval of the actions of the members of the Supervisory
Board, I likewise propose that approval not be granted.

Reasoning:

The managing and supervisory boards have taken a passive attitude toward the
insurance claims and the suspicious aspects of the WTC insurance loss.

The investigation of insurance losses and insurance damage claims against
the Company is naturally one of the chief duties of the management of every
insurance firm.

The WTC catastrophe was doubtless one of the biggest insurance incidents in
history. A significant portion of the multi-billion dollar loss is expected
to be borne by Allianz.

Numerous observers and researchers find the WTC case very suspicious. For
example, in a public opinion survey, 49.3% of respondents in New York City
agreed that �some of our leaders knew in advance that attacks were planned
on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act.�
[Source: .]

When this belief is so widespread among unrelated parties, haven�t the
affected insurance companies ever asked whether perhaps the US Government
instead of the insurers is responsible for the damages, or whether the
possibility of insurance fraud has been investigated?

From reports in the media about the trial in New York between the insurers
and the insured WTC leaseholder, no sign of such motions has been made
public. The dispute has been mainly over the question, whether to pay out $7
billion or �only� $3 billion, whereby the shareholders are supposed to be
relieved at the latter sum as a victory of the �lesser of two evils.�

Nor has there been any lack of critical and analytical voices in Germany.
Several books in the last few years have posed sharp questions to the
official WTC scenario. In 2003, Deutsche Welle published an article
entitled, �9/11 Conspiracy Theory Books Dominate Debate at Frankfurt Book
Fair.� ( .)

Anyone who is interested can quickly obtain similar materials from the
Internet free of charge, as well as continuing researches of the background
of 9/11 by independent journalists.

Two German-American writers, Jim Hoffman () and Eric Hufschmid, have
contibuted greatly to the theory of the dynamiting of the Twin Towers and
Building WTC-7. Hufschmid�s work was translated and published in German ().
They claim that never in history has the structure of a steel building ever
been destroyed by fire, and that on the contrary, the evidence points to a
controlled demolition. I could find no evidence to gainsay their thesis
anywhere.

WTC-7, as is well-known, was never struck by airplanes, and photographs of
it show only insignificant fires ( ). Nevertheless, the 47-story building
at WTC 7 suddenly collapsed at around 17:28 on 9/11/2001. This fact was not
even mentioned in the report of the official 9/11 commission. ( )

How can an insurer take such an extreme case simply and casually as business
as usual?

There is plenty more such evidence that would be useful in the
billion-dollar lawsuit, which every citizen with an Internet connection can
confirm. Why aren�t Allianz (and the other insurers) able to?

When the managing and supervisory boards take no action to join the
investigation of a case as huge and notorious as the WTC, how are the
shareholders to know that other cases, too, for whatever reason, are not
paid out without being properly investigated?

There is already a private lawsuit against US government officials in
connection with the events of 9/11, see .

RELATED: WTC 7 Imploded by Silverstein, FDNY and Others

----------------------------------------------------------------
Sent using Phorum software version 3.3.2c