Why The World Trade Towers "Must come down!"­

[alfsevic]

Hope this is not already here, very interesting!

http://redlineav.com/tsg.deposition.contd.2.html

[Westgate]

Thanks so much for this link - it makes truly fascinating reading. Let's assume it is true - it certainly could be I suppose, although this is the first time I have read of such structural problems

So, did Silverstein know all about the structural problems when he took over the WTC lease? Let's assume that being the astute fellow we know him to be, he obviously did. Thus, he surely was not about to spend billions on scaffolding!

Far better to get the buildings imploded, an easy peasy way of getting rid of the structural problem. But that would imply he was actually part of the 911 planning, surely not? But then again, I am led to believe he made a bob or two out of the loss of WTC 1 & 2 on 911 - what an astute businessman he must be!!

A most interesting aspect that I for one have never read of before.

[Mark Gobell]

Also, in May 2001 the pre-Silverstein WTC owners, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey - PANYNJ, had just lost a law suit where it tried to claim 600 million dollars from it's insurance company for asbestos removal costs from the WTC and New York airports.

[Westgate]

Guys - I have read the article a few more times and the more I think about it, the more I feel this could be the most amazing and damning piece of evidence if only it could be proven to be true.

The guys accidental attendance at a critical dismissal meeting is somewhat bizarre. But that aside - does anybody know if the article has been tested for truth?

The piece about corroded bolts in the columns may perhaps be viewed by some as a potential 'trojan horse', ie. the corrosion helped in the collapse of the towers. Let me quickly make it quite clear that I do not subscribe to that theory, neither does the author of the article of course, but forewarned is forearmed.

That said, what we appear to have here is a realisation that the twin towers were rapidly approaching the end of their useful life. There was asbestos to be removed, but more importantly there were signs of metal and bolt corrosion/fatigue that meant they would have to be demolished no later than 2007. That meant a bill of some $4.5 billion in order to erect the scaffolding in order to begin demolition of the first tower, then re-erection on the second tower for it's demolition. The engineers and architects were adamant that a demolition implosion was totally out of the question - for obvious reasons.

Clearly the NYPA and indeed the City were faced with a huge problem here - one that involved massive costs.

Now, this is the first time I have come across this story and I have been researching 911 since 912. But given the almost logarithmic growth of 911 web-sites I guess that is more than feasible that one misses things.

I cannot stress enough the true importance of this story if it is really true.

Let's imagine for one moment that it is true - although I feel a red face coming on when a forum poster quickly proves it is not.

So somewhere, sometime, the 911 planners discovered the corrosion problems with the twin towers. What an amazing opportunity to get rid of an enormously expensive headache, at very low (relatively) material cost (please, I am not forgetting the horrendous loss of human life, both during, after, and still today). Not only that, but the owner gets the benefit of Insurance payouts after seeing his buildings collapse - poor old Silverstein! Those massive icons could be used as the 'Pearl Harbor' climax - but also satisfy all the construction headaches that were due to cost so very much. Also, earlier on in the site's history wasn't a Bush Brother involved with building Insurance, probably just a red herring of course.

The article makes me so suspicious as to it's authenticity - but should it prove to be true, it really is a 'smoking gun', one that is worthy of further investigation, if indeed that is possible from here in the UK. Could that possibly mean that the nice Mr Guliani, Mr Silverstein, and goodness knows who else, would have actually welcomed two aircraft hitting the twin towers any time soon. As 'Private Eye' magazine might say - "shurley shome mishtake here occifer"

[Mark Gobell]

I recall reading about the corrosion and Tom Scott-Gordon's affidavit a long while ago but was puzzled by the July 2006 on page 1 of the document http://redlineav.com/tsg.deposition.1.html

Scholars has a page from TSG here http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ArticlesWTCBombing.html dated Jan 2004 so maybe that was it.

The main theme I recall was the cost of the scaffolding.

[scubadiver]

I worked in Tesco for awhile and I got friendly with one of the delivery drivers and we discussed 9/11. He told me of a plan to bring down the towers anyway because they were coming to the end of a useful life.

There could be a lot of truth in this article (and I do seem to remember reading somewhere before on another website)

[Westgate]

http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-61940.html

I don't know if this proves anything - except adding to my worries as to the authenticity of the article.

[Mark Gobell]

The scaffolding cost is mentioned here at Rense - again from 2004

http://www.rense.com/general47/pulled.htm

[Mark Gobell]

Just reading up on the history of the bid process for the WTC.

Silverstein Properties were the 2nd bidder.

Vornado was the frist and entered into a 20 day contract negotiaiton with PANYNJ.

PANYNJ subsequently wanted Vornado to pay 100 million in taxes and the deal fell through.

Enter Silverstein, who was accepted on 24 July 2001

LOL - don't shoot me.

The towers came down after Larry had owned them for 1 month and 19 days.

[London Mick]

I assumed that everybody here knew that the buildings had huge asbestos problems and would have had to come down soon anyway. The heartless b****** could have at least let everybody be evacuated. They could have still have had their Pearl Harbour event.

[Mark Gobell]

200,000 pounds of asbestos, or, just under 100 metric tonnes apparently

[conspiracy analyst]