portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

9.11 investigation

George II Sacrificed The People In The WTC

The Emperor's lies about 9/11 being exposed.
Total Information Awareness Ready Before 9/11.

Plans To Scrap WTC
Towers For $5.6 Bn In 1989!
From Karl W. B. Schwarz

To Jimmy Walter

Hi Jimmy, your comment completely misses the point.

That is why, in 1989, they planned a $5.6 billion takedown and rebuild, it was tanked.

The witness came to me...and we are protecting them.

The building had the structural equivalent of osteoporosis.

I am about to fund $25-50 million to THE LAWSUIT - United States Citizens v United States Government. Something major happened over the past several days.


-----Original Message-----

From: Jimmy Walter
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 12:49 PM
To: 'Karl W. B. Schwarz'
Subject: RE: galvanic versus flying beams

No amount of galvanic action will hurl steel beams straight out horizontally and cause the building to fall at the speed of gravity. However, it would be cause for insurance fraud!
But keep trying


From: Karl W. B. Schwarz
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 1:22 PM
To: Jimmy Walter

Hello Jimmy

You are going to wind up owing me the $100,000. :-)

The Statute 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 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,

Karl W. B. Schwarz
President, Chief Executive Officer
Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC

to PIMC tech? 07.Dec.2004 12:29

once more

Can you please add another category to this article? It's related to "9/11 investigation."

Hey, thanks for posting this! It goes well with this.

Title: 9-11: secret RESEARCH TEAM disbanded in 1988 seeking ways to cheaply remove WTCs
Author: tg
Date: 2004.01.26 04:49
Description: go covert-----and find below: statement from an accidental witness to the 1988 disbanding of the WTC's demolition team, disbanded because of the incredible expense of billions of dollars it would have taken to remove WTC1 and WTC2. Expensive only if it was done legally that is... THERE IS A HUGE MOTIVATOR TO REMOVE THEM WITHOUT BILLLIONS IN COST: In other words, the motivation to take them down illegally was VERY HIGH. So, when you put 2 and 2 togther with other known connections (US secret police to both the failed 1993 and successful 2001 attempts to INTENTIONALLY take them down)---explains a lot about FBI/CIA being in on both of these these illegal attempts at demolition in 1993 and 2001: a) 1993 bombing created with a fake cover context of "arab terrorism" to take them down, is very similar to the b) 2001 fake context of "arab terrorism" in 2001--except that a lot more interests had time to simmer for 8 more years and many more ideas were bundled into the 2001 WTC demolitions. In this later case, the cover story was elaborated---even adapted--from existing Arab terror plans. The US made sure it was done 'right.' By 'right,' I mean it was to be a useful example of how state terror could help out the Bush family interests consolidate power: 2001 version of illegal demolition of the WTCs extended into a cause for global war by adding in 'the icing on the WTCs cake'--fake hits on the Pentagon and other potential DC targets (fourth plane failed to reach its target, though would have). They said it themselves, they were ready with the shadow government that very day. Personally, this is the second statement from this team that I believe I have read. I have read a statement by an architect who was dismissed from this or a similar team. This is the statement from the 'accidental photographer,' accidentally included into the group in 1988.

Anyone have that additional architects's web statement to group here?

whaaaaaa? 07.Dec.2004 12:41


the statue of liberty was erected in 1886. the wtc was completed in 1973.

Liberty speaks 07.Dec.2004 13:05


now, with this knowledge, let's replay the 9-11 film.
"Galvanic corrosion, as well? Bush blew you up, though it blew me up to watch."

categories 07.Dec.2004 13:12

PIMC tech

i gave your article the category of "9/11 investigation" only. that's its primary focus.

posting articles with 3 categories makes the entire site slower, as each topic page then needs to be regenerated. in most cases, 1 category is good enough for a story.


"Dubious" a well chosen name ; when's that lawsuit? 07.Dec.2004 13:14


The other witness--the photographer, above--says galvanic (he uses the term "electrolytic") issues were mentioned to him as well. Dubious, I know for a fact you could not be at these 1988-9 meetings, otherwise you would agree. You would know the architect spoken about above and you would have seen that phtographer as well.

Come on, this is hardly the only evidence of demolition that you have to spin furiously about....and you know it....

The quote at hand from the above link from the photographer's statement:

-Finally, pushing my luck, I prodded again: "So tell me about the electrolytic issues."

Everyone went quiet, but realised they were in deep. They began a patent narritive which was clearly not about to go anywhere, since I think they knew that I knew as much as each of them about the composition and arrangements of these metals. I had effectively blown my cover.

. . .

AND, hope to hear more about the lawsuit mentioned above. We require a class action lawsuit of millionaires against Bush and it looks like there are still quite a few patriotic ones around.

Toto, where is Kansas? 07.Dec.2004 20:49


Somewhere in Texas, a town is missing its idiot.