Does Larry Silverstein Have A ‘Heart’?, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times


reply posted on 22-3-2007 @ 03:52 AM by gottago
Originally posted by djohnsto77
There's absolutely nothing helpful in that link. So even if this document which seems to no longer exist is even real, you're saying a multibillion dollar building was worthless because of asbestos tiles that needed to be removed at $1 million/year? This work would have required millenia to complete then

A much better info source is here: www.btinternet.com...

If there's any conspiracy here, it's that there wasn't enough asbestos in the WTC.


Nary a figure in sight on that link, though the site has a pretty blue theme.

And seeing it's six years on, what a surprise the Port Authority would have removed its link to asbestos abatement contract bidding to the WTC, which is no longer either theirs or in need of the contract. But certainly that old link is disinfo and no such bid contract ever existed, even though half the work was already done--doubtless pro bono.

But you're right on one thing, the work was carried out quickly: it only took a single morning, not millenia, sadly enough--but that was a different contract entirely.

And that comment about not enough asbestos in the towers is indeed thought-provoking; you're suggesting it would have been better to have even more micronized asbestos particles floating about lower Manhattan after the towers were destroyed? A bit ghoulish, no?

[edit on 22-3-2007 by gottago]


reply posted on 22-3-2007 @ 08:33 AM by Pootie
Originally posted by snoopy
I did. So you can imagine why it would be absurd for the cost of removing asbestos to be as much as rebuilding the entire complex.


The $10-$12 Billion is not for removing asbestos tiles.

It is the 1980's cost estimation prepared (think inflation now, the cost would be far more now so I am being conservative) to completely surgically dismantle the WTC 1 and 2 because they were money losers re: liabilities. The disassembly required installing scaffolding ALL THE WAY up the buildings and taking them down piece by piece since there is NO WAY the EPA of City of NY would allow them to be taken down via CD.

Consider the targets chosen. The WTC complex was an enormous
architectural white elephant filled with asbestos and with far too few
tenants. But because the WTC had been built much too big and much too
well, the cost of deconstruction, an estimated 20 billion, far
outweighed whatever profit an owner might gain from years of
ownership. But suppose a buyer stepped forward and purchased the
property, with the foresight to realize the towers were targets? And
suppose that buyer, possessed insider information about an attack and
insured them against such a fate? And suppose that buyer collected
when those white elephants crashed to the ground within months? In
fact that is exactly what did happen, to the extent of 3.5 billion
dollars.


I have a link on my home PC that has the complete deconstruction plans and cost estimations... I am having a hard time googling them now. I even have schematics for the massive scaffolds, etc. that were proposed in the 90's.

Larry, the port Authority and everyone else would have financially wanted those buildings gone.

[edit: bad date]

[edit on 22-3-2007 by Pootie]
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



Flight 93 was headed for Building 7
  Posted 10 days ago with 48 member flags
9/11 INTERCEPTED
  Posted 2 days ago with 45 member flags
9/11: The WTC Elevator Key
  Posted 12 days ago with 43 member flags
What are your favorite 9/11 debunking tactics?
  Posted 6 days ago with 17 member flags
Who is the Joker on ATS radio now running their mouth?
  Posted 14 days ago with 13 member flags
Was the government a co-conspirator?
  Posted 16 days ago with 9 member flags
British Police Want Us To Present False Flag Terror Evidence.
  Posted 6 days ago with 8 member flags