1989 Plans to Demolish the WTC

What do the Statue of Liberty
and WTC Towers have in common?
from WhatReallyHappened.com


The Statue of Liberty had to be repaired due to galvanic corrosion in air. Not what most think is possible but in ocean environments, very possible. Normally galvanic corrosion is only a factor in an electrolyte such as sea water and the stern drive on the boat - having steel and aluminum components - erodes, turns brittle and snap - it fails - if electrolytic grounding plates are not installed.

"""The galvanic reaction between iron and copper was originally mitigated by insulating copper from the iron framework using an asbestos cloth soaked in shellac. However, the integrity and sealing property of this improvised insulator broke down over the many years of exposure to high levels of humidity normal in a marine environment. The insulating barrier became a sponge that kept the salted water present as a conductive electrolyte, forming a crude electrochemical cell as and Volta had discovered a century earlier."""

In 1989 - there were plans to erect scaffolding and disassemble the WTC towers and rebuild them. Cost projection was around $5.6 billion. One of the architects shows up to work one day and the MIB's were there - had confiscated all of the plans, specs, details, etc for WTC. They even confiscated their office cubicles and had tape on the floor outlining where they went.

Reason - the exterior cast aluminum WTC panels had been directly connected to the steel superstructure of the building, thus causing galvanic corrosion. In short, the "life cycle" of the WTC was not 200 - 300 years, more like 30 years or so.

The exterior skin of the building - in being aluminum and connected directly to the super structure - was making the building weaker every day.

That could explain why there appears to be explosives set only about every 25 floors. Once the failure started, the brittleness of welds, rivets, bolts, etc would fail much easier as the loads became progressively greater on the way down.

That same process would also explain why the concrete was "powderized" over time because electrolytic processes weaken concrete too by "debonding" the Portland that causes concrete to bond in the first place. However, bear in mind that the "concrete floors" were not load bearing reinforced concrete. They were supported by what was a weakening by the day superstructure and cross members.

There was a 1989 meeting and the folks at the architectural firm Emory Roth, the project architect that took over after the design architects completed the conceptual drawings that had their office, records, plans and specs seized - were told that the $5.6 billion "take it down, rebuild it" project was cancelled and in about "10-12 years" they would "blow it up and start over". Consider that - and consider that NYC and the US Govt could not stand the global embarrassment of being so stupid or negligent that they did not consider the effects of galvanic corrosion on the superstructure. That is structural design 101 in architectural school and why they want architects to take physics and chemistry for Christ's sake. I did.

I am an architect by the way, quit practicing in 1988.



http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Aircraft/galvdefi.htm see bimetallic corrosion to get to the two links above


Guess what?

The fat lady HAS SUNG. You know, the one in New York Harbor with the torch of Liberty and Freedom held high.

I want to find the sick bastard that thought it would be a cute idea to have close to 3,000 in the building and use that as an excuse to go take on a whole new energy policy, war policy, and lining the pockets of just certain people.

I think a Statute of Liberty hanging for that person would be most appropriate.

best regards,

Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC

Karl W. B. Schwarz President, Chief Executive Officer

just so I know I have this

just so I know I have this right....it was the EPA that ordered Port Authority to begin taking bids for the
decommissioning of the towers, and this bid came from CDI inc?......my question is why would CDI be consulted if this was to be a traditional dismantling?
Was anyone else allowed to bid on this that youre aware of?

Ironic this post, as I read

Ironic this post, as I read Tom Scott-Gordon's story last night(at his website).


This confirms much of his testimony.

Pointless rhetorical: why can't anyone in corporate America just admit they screwed up?

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Karl Schwarz

I was almost hooked by this post, and then I saw the name "Karl Schwarz".

As much as I hate to link to a "debunker" site, I feel like I must.

If I'm wrong about Mr. Schwarz, please correct me.

Of course, that doesn't necessarily discredit the information above. (I did notice, however, that the link you provide at the top goes nowhere.)

You are correct about Karl

You are correct about Karl Schwartz, something is foul with him on board. However, he appears to be spinning the needed and costly WTC repairs, which were public before 911 yet have magically dissappeared as of late. I suspect it is a poor setup to provide explanation for the demolition-like collapse: "oh, the buildings were about to fall down from corrosion so that's why they dissapeared in a cloud of dust in 10 seconds." Sure, it seems obvious, but at this point I'm playing them for the publicity of the pre-911 plans for the demolition of White Elephants, WTC 1 & 2. WTC 7 is the smoking gun and they cannot run from it. These creeps are in disaster mode. They are simply trying to salvage anyone they can and soften the blow as best they can. In other words, they are weak and I'm interested in the kill as quickly as possible. The corrosion of the fascade of the WTC 1 & 2 had minimum effect on the stability of the buildings, if anything, in twenty years we might have seen the aluminum skins peeling off in a mighty wind, but the superstructure would still stand. Ultimately we should take away from this piece the fact that the WTC 1 & 2 were judged to be in need of costly repairs, repairs which cost more than the towers would ever beeen able to produce. If we are lucky, we'll soon get our hands on the actual demolition estimate and contingency plans to bring down the buildings. One of my sources has confidently stated that those plans are sitting in wait.

OK. I recall your other

OK. I recall your other posts have been related to this issue. Do you (or can you) point to any "public" documents to support this? Is there something online one can link to?

I'm relying on a

I'm relying on a confidential source who states that the pre-911 plans of demolition are out there and will be revealed. Maybe I have them and maybe I don't. I think you should get the gist of it at this point. No?

I think this is an important

idea to stay connected to
Independent International Truth commission

Show "100% Drivel. Or Twaddle, whichever you like." by Mark Roberts

100% Drivel

For once Mark- I totally agree with you on this point. I'm glad that you are a skeptic on real issues too. If the only thing you do is to sharpen our focus you will help this movement. Thanks for the heads-up!

Ahh another opinion from the

Ahh another opinion from the truly clueless.


I'll just quote myself about Mark Roberts and his probable relationship to science from another thread:

"...It is doubtful Mark is a tech geek of any sort,... Mark strikes me as someone who studied advertising or some other business where you get ahead by "making your own reality". That's why once you start to talk higher mathematics or technical details he falls back on "well these experts said" instead of trying to understand the subject enough to debate it in his own words.

He's not stupid(evidence to the contrary), he's just not interested in that loser geeky stuff. His motto is "I win if I can convince you or discredit you". A very useful asset to some. He probably doesn't believe anything he says the way you or I do; he's too shallow to really believe anything."

So just remember that to him we're all loser techy geeks.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

I met with Karl Schwarz (at length)

... almost two years ago, and continue to correspond with him through stable email and international phone calls.

I've got a lot more reasons to think he is legitimate truth seeker, than reasons to believe he is a shill, disinfo, infiltrator or otherwise.

For now, I continue to vouch for him... (as if I was anyone who could). I was able to surreptitiously elicit a solid confirmation from a completely unsuspecting third-person entity in high-tech research (don't burn your bridges, kiddies) that "Mr. Schwarz is onto something" in respect to his nanotech developments.

I give him a 9 out of 10 for both legitimacy in business AND good intentions pertaining to the truth movement. I reserve one point from a perfect score for the chance that he may not have everything perfectly right. (show me someone who does)


In regaurds to extierior panels....I've heard that before.
BUT the integrity of the internal core columns
to weaken and allow a ten sec collapse in my opinion
is bullshit.

Wisdom, you obviously

Wisdom, you obviously misread my post. I was pointing out that the corosion of the WTC fascade might provide the creeps a weak attempt in trying to explain why the WTC 1 &2 dissappeared into a cloud of dust withing ten seconds. Weak attempt are the oppurative words. Mostly my post was trying emphasize that WTC 1&2 had been deemed useless (for business profit) and had been previously planned for demolition.dismantling at a very costly price. Think of it has the major motive for selecting the towers as false flag targets as opposed to other potential buildings or structures.


I agree with that. What a sick way to kill two birds with one stone.
I read that the asbestos removal would exceed the cost of the buildings.
You know Larry had to know this.

The lowest of the low. G*d

The lowest of the low. G*d help us all.

My understanding is that no insurance company

would even cover the asbestos removal that the EPA was requiring.

Good thing the US taxpayers are always around to pay the bills, eh?

These sick perps need to go to jail and the sooner the better.

The truth shall set (most of) us free. Love is the only way forward.

Be well.

Why couldn't they just tell

Why couldn't they just tell the people in the second tower to GO HOME after the first plane hit. Didn't they have enough bodies for the op by then? There was plenty material for the false-flag at that point--people there would never be time to rescue(because the towers were going to blow).

So why didn't they just declare it an emergencey after the first plane hit and send them all home? Or at least NOT tell people to return to their desks?

It boggles--cold blooded evil boggles...

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Eliminating thousands of

Eliminating thousands of wittnesses and key figures in possession of pertinent information about the condition of the Towers and all the activity which was occuring in the Towers before the dreadful day.

Okay, I see--and they would

Okay, I see--and they would have heard all those strange muffled explosions--and people like Roderigez could be dismissed or talked over---"there, there, poor hero, you're just a little rattled--here's a big check".

Still, they were putting a bit TOO much faith that people would go back to their desks if told so--this is NYC-"bad attitude central"--I wouldn't go back to my desk after an airplane hit the building next door, reguardless who told me, and I'm a mild mannered(relatively speaking) Pacific Northwesterner!

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Great article Karl...

... are you aware where I can obtain information about the proposed asbestos removal program can be located?
I understand there were major dollars removing that also.

Some info

on the asbestos.

"Several materials were considered for the sprayed thermal insulation. The exterior columns required insulation not only for fire protection but also to control column temperatures under service conditions. Alcoa recommended for the exterior columns the use of a sprayed material produced by U.S. Mineral Products, Co. known as BLAZE-SHIELD Type D. The same material was eventually selected for the floor trusses and core beams and columns. This product, however, contained asbestos fibers. On April 13, 1970, New York City issued restrictions on the application of sprayed thermal insulation containing asbestos. The use of BLAZE-SHIELD Type D was discontinued in 1970 at the 38th floor of WTC 1. The asbestos-containing material was subsequently encapsulated with a sprayed material that provided a hard coating. A green dye was added to the encapsulating material so that the asbestos containing SFRM could be identified. Thermal protection of the remaining floors of WTC 1 and all of WTC 2 was carried out using BLAZE-SHIELD Type DC/F, a product that contained mineral wool (glassy fibers) in place of the crystalline asbestos fibers. On the basis of tests, it was reported that the thermal properties of BLAZE-SHIELD Type DC/F were equal to or "slightly better" than those of BLAZE-SHIELD Type D"

And you can find that here.

Page xxxv (37) at bottom.

You can see

the original papers about that in the same file i linked to. Just go to page 167 (219) and on.


Reason - the exterior cast aluminum WTC panels had been directly connected to the steel superstructure of the building, thus causing galvanic corrosion. In short, the "life cycle" of the WTC was not 200 - 300 years, more like 30 years or so.

This is false because the aluminium cladding was not directly connected to the exterior columns.

U can see how it was actually connected in the following file.


See page 72 (122)