It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 memorial 7 stories underground the freedom tower?!?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:29 PM
link   
As some of you know, my girlfriends dad died on 9/11. She went to a meeting last night in Long Island where the families were discussing the memorial. She told me that the families were getting very heated because the people who were in charge of the memorial were doing a presentation.

They gave out pamphlets that showed diagrams of the memorial that is just about to be built. The "museum" is 7 stories underground! The families were very upset because it is extremely dangerous if anything happened. The WTC did not have to follow the regular fire-code that all buildings were expected to maintain. This structure underground is a crazy firehazard and the families were very surprised that the builders were very care-free when it came to the safety of the visitors.

A couple of other things she told me was that there was going to be an open area where unidentified remains were and the public would be able to view this!
The families defienetly were not happy about that. Also, The wall where all the names were are all scrambled about and in not any particular order, she saw a print of it and it took her an hour to find her dads name!

From what I've heard the families are not happy with the plans for the memorial. They are even charging the public to see it! God knows where that money is going, but it sure as hell isn't going to the families.




posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   
First of all... I am sorry about your Girl friends dad



What I am upset about is the amount of $$ that is being spent!
1 BILLION DOLLARS!



(CBS/AP) Construction costs for the World Trade Center memorial have risen to an estimated $1 billion, twice as much as officials had planned to spend. Last year, officials said the memorial, slated to open in 2009, would cost $490 million to build.

www.cbsnews.com...

I am not taking anything away from the memories of those that are gone... there INDEED ..NEEDS to be a memorial.... But there has to be some sort of finanical responsibility here. A Billion dollars? Jesus... how many starving children in our country could be fed with that? How much research could be done to prevent life threatening diseases? I could go on...

The WWII memorial cost: 182 million
The Vietnam War Memorial wall: 4.2 Million

1 Billion dollars??



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
1 Billion dollars??


9/10/2001 - Donald Rumsfeld reports that the Dod has LOST (as in cannot locate/track/find) $2.3 TRILLION dollars. TRILLION with a T.

Rumsfeld PROMISED CHANGE would come "the next day"... 9/11/2001

digg.com...

I think We the People can spend < .1% of that on a memorial.

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Pootie]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 02:45 PM
link   
We are all entitled to our opinions as to how money should be spent in our country...after all we are all paying for it through our taxes.

The 1 Billion in MY opinion is excessive. It's your right to disagree.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
We are all entitled to our opinions as to how money should be spent in our country...after all we are all paying for it through our taxes.

The 1 Billion in MY opinion is excessive. It's your right to disagree.


I agree... I just saw the line in your post about financial responsibility re: the memorial, saw the agitation and thought you might take up the cause of the lost $2.3 Trillion so we could fund all of those nice things you pointed out.

I was of the understanding that the memorial was to be build above ground outside originally... anyone know when they decided it would be hidden in a basement and an admission fee would be charged?

One thing I find odd... they will not release pictures of the rubble because they say it is disrespectful to the victims families but they will show REMAINS to the public for a fee? Anyone see anything wrong here?



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   
What upsets me is that the memorial should be the main priority. It should be in plain view and free to see. It doesnt have to be expensive, the families would be happy with something that everyone can view and not be charged, and also something that is large enough to have everyones name, occupation, and birthdate. The builders are going overboard by making it underground. I really think the city/silverstien is more concerned with getting these buildings up and occupied so they can start making money again. The families really feel that the memorial is and has been on the back burner the whole time.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
How much research could be done to prevent life threatening diseases? I could go on...


How much research to actually find out what happened that day?


1 Billion dollars??


As oppossed to 3 million for the "investigation"? So, instead of finding out something that could potentially affect ALL steel buildings, they are going to construct another steel building for far more?

No offense intended for the surviving families of course.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pootie
One thing I find odd... they will not release pictures of the rubble because they say it is disrespectful to the victims families but they will show REMAINS to the public for a fee? Anyone see anything wrong here?


Definately. Disgraceful.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
As oppossed to 3 million for the "investigation"? So, instead of finding out something that could potentially affect ALL steel buildings, they are going to construct another steel building for far more?


Griff...It was my understanding that due to the NIST investigation, several changes are being made in the construction of skyscrapers and other large buildings. I don't have the info readily available, but I will find it.

Also, WTC7 was not re-built the same.... concrete!



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by Pootie
One thing I find odd... they will not release pictures of the rubble because they say it is disrespectful to the victims families but they will show REMAINS to the public for a fee? Anyone see anything wrong here?


Definately. Disgraceful.


If this is true I will agree!! Source Pootie?



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 11:19 PM
link   


Griff...It was my understanding that due to the NIST investigation, several changes are being made in the construction of skyscrapers and other large buildings. I don't have the info readily available, but I will find it.


Design enhancements at new WTC 7



Alex Kirlik’s Human Factors research activities as a member of a University of Illinois team advising Silverstein Properties (NYC) on design enhancements for the new World Trade Center-7 building reached fruition with the building’s completion this year. Human factors enhancements to the building include exit stairs 20% wider than required by code, overly-wide stairwell landings to reduce loss of kinetic energy while turning and descending, and the use of photo-luminescent paint on stairs and railings (www.wtc.com...). Skidmore, Owings and Merrill architect Carl Galioto highlighted these human factors enhancements in the PBS Nova episode Building on Ground Zero, first broadcast on September 5, 2006 (www.pbs.org...). These efforts have played a role in prompting updates of the New York City high-rise building code mandating increased stair widths and the use of photo-luminescent paint to facilitate egress.


Stairways wider and lined with concrete not sheetrock



The new building is 750ft (229m) tall and has 2ft (60cm) thick reinforced concrete and fireproofed elevator and stairway access shafts in the core. The building is considered New York City's first 'green' office tower by gaining gold status in the US Green Building Council's LEED program.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
If this is true I will agree!! Source Pootie?


did you even bother to read the OPs posts? I am beginning to think you just post at random after skimming.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Stairways wider and lined with concrete not sheetrock



The new building is 750ft (229m) tall and has 2ft (60cm) thick reinforced concrete and fireproofed elevator and stairway access shafts in the core. The building is considered New York City's first 'green' office tower by gaining gold status in the US Green Building Council's LEED program.


So, what does having the stairways wider and lined with concrete have to do with building stability?

As far as I'm aware, 9/11 didn't change the practice of erecting steel buildings. Why? If everyone now knows that steel buildings fold into themselves when on fire, why are we still building them?



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Pootie... my mistake... sorry I should have adressed that to the OP.

I find it hard to believe that human remains will be shown at the memorial. But... stranger things....



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pootie

9/10/2001 - Donald Rumsfeld reports that the Dod has LOST (as in cannot locate/track/find) $2.3 TRILLION dollars. TRILLION with a T.

Rumsfeld PROMISED CHANGE would come "the next day"... 9/11/2001

digg.com...

I think We the People can spend < .1% of that on a memorial.



Who says about change just one day before 9/11?

Or is it that its been known for awhile long before 9/11...

hv.greenspun.com...


By JOHN M. DONNELLY The Associated Press 03/03/00 5:44 PM Eastern

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The military's money managers last year made almost $7 trillion in adjustments to their financial ledgers in an attempt to make them add up, the Pentagon's inspector general said in a report released Friday.

The Pentagon could not show receipts for $2.3 trillion of those changes, and half a trillion dollars of it was just corrections of mistakes made in earlier adjustments.

Each adjustment represents a Defense Department accountant's attempt to correct a discrepancy. The military has hundreds of computer systems to run accounts as diverse as health care, payroll and inventory. But they are not integrated, don't produce numbers up to accounting standards and fail to keep running totals of what's coming in and what's going out, Pentagon and congressional officials said.

"These ($6.9 trillion in) entries were processed to force financial data to agree with various data sources, to correct errors and to add new data," the inspector general said. "The magnitude of accounting entries required to compile the DoD financial statements highlights the significant problems DoD has producing accurate and reliable financial statements with existing systems and processes."

The department's "internal controls were not adequate to ensure that resources were properly managed and accounted for, that DoD complied with applicable laws and regulations and that the financial statements were free of material misstatements," the report said.


So Rumsfeld is mentioning something that happened just as the new Administration just came in.

www.pbs.org...

This was back in Feb of 2001.


JOHN ISAACS: I hate to break up this love-fest but while I think it's a good idea for the administration to study these issues and I commend the administration for undertaking that, I think the budget is much too high. And I hope the study looks at some of the real problems that exist in the military. One of those problems is we're still buying a lot of Cold War weapons. The F-22, the next generation Air Force plane, is a wonderful plane. It was designed to combat the Soviet Union but the Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore. And it's three times as expensive as a plane it would replace. We still are... have a two-war strategy planning to fight two wars which the nonpartisan national defense panel several years ago called a justification for high military budgets. There's still huge accounting problems in the Pentagon. They don't even know how much money they have or are spending. The inspector general of the Pentagon said there are 2.3 trillion dollars in items that they can't quite account for. That's not billion. That's trillion dollars. $2.3 trillion -- and the General Accounting Office said there are about $27 billion in inventory items that they can't find. It's not a matter of money -- if the review just results war money put into the pentagon we'll be going in the wrong direction. It's time to move back.




[edit on 30-7-2007 by deltaboy]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I really wonder where the hell that money went. How can you just lose 2.3 trillion dollars!!!!! it had to go somewhere!!

$2,300,000,000,000

Thats alot of money to "misplace"



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by hikix
$2,300,000,000,000

Thats alot of money to "misplace"


It's really just chump change in the bueracracy of government.

In the words of Jud Hersch in "Independance Day". "You really think they spend $600 for a toilet seat?"

Although not a big fan of that movie.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I think a lot of that 2.3 was salted away in Swiss bank accounts.




top topics



 
1

log in

join