Who was the WTC asbestos company ?

[GEFBASS]

In this video

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=529253447051382848&q=prof+stev en

At about 30 minutes ( 30:10 ), Prof Steven Jones talks about the asbestos removal and that it had already been started.
So logically thinking the asbestos removal is a great cover for outside `people` to gain access to any parts of the buildings.

My question, therefore, is does anybody know what the company was called that started the removal of asbestos and when did it start ?

Geoff.

[Pikey]

Well done Gefbass! Keep asking the tough questions folks!

[GEFBASS]

Article about the asbestos rip off.
from the American Spectator magazine. October 1989.

http://www.fumento.com/asbest.html

Just a small section of the article, IMO what a motive.

"For example, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is expecting to pay about $1 billion for the abatement of just the World Trade Center
and LaGuardia Airport. (New York City law requires abatement if renovation work is being done, as it is at these buildings.)
A report by the Assembly Office of Research in California said that the total cost of removing asbestos from all asbestos-containing buildings
in that moderate weather state could be $20 billion.
Thus California and two complexes in New York City are slated to take up almost half of the EPA estimated total cost.
According to Stephen L. Schweich, an environmental industry analyst, direct abatement costs could be around $100 billion,
and other reputable estimates put the figure as high as $200 billion."............
(and that was 1989 estimates).

Then later it goes on to say...

"Nor is it surprising, with such high financial stakes, that some bribery occurs on those occasions when inspectors are monitoring abatements.
In New York last year, officials of twenty-three companies (twenty-five men in all),
representing the majority of concerns involved in the removal and disposal of asbestos material in the New York metropolitan region,
were charged with bribing an EPA inspector.
While officials said that there appeared to be little danger to the public in the illegal removals,
which included part of Madison Square Garden, the New York Coliseum, and the former Gimbel's department store,
hundreds and possibly thousands of asbestos removers were at risk.
An officer of the US. Department of Labor described the workers as being from the "low end of the social scale."
Some of them, in fact, were reportedly foreign nationals employed illegally while on a one-year tourist visa.
They have since returned home-many perhaps with a 30-year time bomb ticking away in their lungs."



Geoff.

[brian]

It would also be interesting to see what was written into Silversteins lease regards the asbestos.

Absence of any specifics regarding the asbestos would speak volumes.

He had every other angle covered

"Explicity included in the [lease] agreement was that Silverstein and Westfield 'WERE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO REBUILD THE STRUCTURES IF THEY WERE DESTROYED.' " [9] [with emphasis added]

Paul and Hoffman add that "Quoting the British Financial Times of September 14, 2001, the American Reporter wrote that 'THE LEASE HAS AN ALL-IMPORTANT ESCAPE CLAUSE: IF THE BUILDINGS ARE STRUCK BY "AN ACT OF TERRORISM," THE NEW OWNERS' OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LEASE ARE VOID. As a result, the new owners are not required to make any payments under their lease, but they will be able to collect on the loss of the buildings...destroyed and damaged in the attacks.' "

http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2006/04/114928.shtml

[GEFBASS]

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=4373

This really just goes on a bit from brian`s thought...

brian quote:

"It would also be interesting to see what was written into Silversteins lease regards the asbestos."

Quote from article:

"But as more eyewitness and expert reports surface regarding the controlled demolition, reports are also revealing that the buildings--in particular, the twin towers--were functionally obsolete and plagued with problems, including asbestos-related problems which would have been extremely expensive to solve. And just a few months before 9/11 (and just weeks before transferring the WTC into privatized ownership), the Port Authority of New York lost its ten-year legal battle with insurers over the cost of needed asbestos-abatement work in the WTC. It's becoming clear that the World Trade Center buildings were, in a word, "disposable." " end quote.

There has to be motive here. IMO.


Geoff.

[blackcat]

There is plenty of motive - not just the insurance money and ridding themselves of a multi billion dollar white elephant but the destruction of records investigating corporate fraud on a massive scale. Records were kept in wtc7 as well as 1 & 2. The Pentagon bookkeepers section was also singled out where records relating to the stolen $2.3 thousand billion were kept and these were obliterated at a stroke. That scandal was also reduced to nothing in the news by the 9/11 event and of course the nation went vengeance seeeking so agreed to a war with Iraq, conveniently ignoring Iraq had nothing to do with it.

On another thread a shill, who did not even KNOW about the theft of $2.3 thousand billion, but still considers himself knowledgeable, somehow has the gall to tell me to "think". When informed of the biggest theft ever (isn't it grand that so few people seem to know) he simply praises the government for making it public. No thought in his mind that people in the military are screaming about it and that the lid can no longer be kept on. No thought that the timing was extremely convenient for the government. Why it is almost like they do not want anyone to be concerned that such a trifling sum should go missing.

When motives like this are added to all the lies and deceptions it is absurd that anyone can believe it was a bunch of Arabs. Even more absurd is the fact people bother to come here to argue for the governments lies.

[TonyGosling]

1 building insured, predicted asbestos removal costs of 1.5 – 2 Billion the documents so say destroyed in the demolition, a chap on this thread claimed to have them for 3 hours before his computer was hacked and they were lost
http://911blogger.com/news/2006-11-26/destroyed-records-pre-911-wtc-es timated-asbestos-removal-and-demolition-plans
(thread also lists documents destroyed in the demolition)

The diabolical statement from the EPA to the new Yorkers and workers stating that there was no health risks from the demolition which anybody who rises through the ranks of this sort of organisation would damn well know that pretty much every commercial building built in the 60’s & 70 would contain asbestos in the form of amosite and crocidolite pipe lagging and flock which is asbestos in its most deadly form. The demolition released about 2000 tons of asbestos dust into the atmosphere. This report states that “Other news reports suggest that the EPA was not fully forthcoming about the air quality at ground zero. EPA scientist Cate Jenkins argues that the agency plainly lied in its public declarations. Jenkins told CBS News in September 2006 that the EPA knew "this dust was highly caustic, in some cases as caustic and alkaline as Drano."9 In September 2006, CNN reported that an October 5, 2001 letter from the EPA to the New York City Health Department warned of threats to worker safety from exposure to hazardous materials.10 Yet this knowledge failed to affect the EPA's unworried public statements.
http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/promoting- scientific-integrity/ground-zero-air-pollution.html#.WNzPm6K1viw The EPA lied, I would state my career on it.
The EPA evaluation report states 'EPA's early public statements following the collapse of the WTC towers reassured the public regarding the safety of the air outside the Ground Zero area. However, when EPA made a September 18 announcement that the air was “safe” to breathe, it did not have sufficient data and analyses to make such a blanket statement
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/wtc_repor t_20030821.pdf

This would 100% have contaminated every house, office & person upwind & within the vicinity
A quick internet search finds this guy who in 1998 faced a $250,000 fine and 5 years in prison for asbestos violations
https://archive.epa.gov/epapages/newsroom_archive/newsreleases/a247569 37fe1beea8525726c00743eb5.html
I would argue that everyone involved in this asbestos lie with the WTC should be facing lifelong jail time, especially when you consider that “According to a report from a Hopkins University study, even workers who joined the clean-up process by January 2002 developed "significant respiratory health problems." As of September 2009, the organization 9-11 Health Now reported that 817 World Trade Center workers had died from various causes. About 40,000 were enrolled in medical monitoring and 20,000 were "sick and under treatment." Many had upper respiratory issues, while some reported multiple medical concerns ” https://www.asbestos.com/world-trade-center

Furthermore the NY Daily news states that 'Directly after the World Trade Center attacks, debris from the site was carted off to Staten Island's Fresh Kills landfill. And there it sits, nearly seven years later, on the 48 acres that are called Hills 1 and 9. The hills contain household trash and about 1 million tons of World Trade Center material — including 200,000 tons from the first 32 days after the attacks that we believe was never sifted. If it was never sifted or segregated then I guarantee it would be full of asbestos. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/9-11-victims-not-left-fresh-kills-d ump-families-article-1.307359

I guess the jet fuel burning temperature and steel melting point argument is kinda debunked due to steel holding its integrity under these conditions but I wonder if anybody has taken into account that the beams would most likely have been protected by asbestos which has a melting point at 2552°F. The 'destroyed' asbestos survey for the WTC would show what floors had this protection in place along with what form it was in, also the argument could be put forward as to the condition of the fire protection immediately after impact. If the form of the asbestos was encased and sprayed with cement then it is much more likely to survive an impact. Only the asbestos survey would reveal that information. If you ever come across a copy I would very much appreciate the opportunity to dissect it.