Thursday, December 16, 2010

Robert Segal & Masayuki Nagare

The photographer and the artist. Segal, the shutterbug, has an image gallery posted online at the semi-professional web hosting service photo.net, called simply Robert Segal Photography. It contains only a single portfolio, named "WTC Ground Zero, 9/14 - 9/16/2001," which holds 92 extraordinary images---that we are to believe were authored then and there by him.

archive.org dates sightings of this page from Dec. 24, 2002 through Jan. 01, 2008. The photo.net community member page for Robert Segal says "This page has been visited 1323 times since January 05, 2006," and I can't imagine why they'd say that if it wasn't when Segal uploaded his images to the web.

I say all this because, as 9/11 research materials go, these important images are in a league all of their own. They are new to me, an inveterate web surfer in related searches---although this may only be due to my defining as "rare" anything I've never seen before. However, to my knowledge, no other of the thousands of committed researchers who profess to seek the truth of the attacks of 9/11 has noted, commented upon, or referenced these images.

Segal's photo.net member page lists a personal home page that contains a possible clue within the web address as to his background: http://members.bellatlantic.net, however that link is dead. But the indispensable archive.org maintains copies of the page, which he dates as October 2, 2001, with only minimal updates twice thereafter---in March and June of 2002. This is all in keeping with the standard efforts made by the army of supporters who created the official 9/11 narrative. At archive.org is evidence his personal web page was up online from Dec. 11, 2004 through May 27, 2007.

Trying to establish Segal's background and credibility is pretty straightforward, if the intent, and effect, of his photo efforts may not be so clear. His web page came in consequence to 9/11 he tells us, and it transparently has a link to his resume: R-Segal-Resume.pdf

He is a highly educated IT specialist, beginning with time spent at the Naval Nuclear Power/Electronics School. From 1997 through 1999, he single-handedly created the electronic "mission-critical display of precious metals and energy markets," for the New York Mercantile Exchange, housed in Building 4 of the World Trade Center. He brags that
"As the only qualified person in nation, became wholly responsible for Opening Day set-up at new headquarters building. Was for two years almost single-handedly and without supervision responsible."
This established an important fact for the general public's understanding---that the Mercantile Exchange was moved to the trade center sometime in the spring of 1997, at a time when the 9/11 conspiracy was in full gear, and all such lease signings, certainly from that period onward, were strategically planned with the coming false-flag attack in mind.

Although Segal had apparently moved on after May of 1999, the free range and unfettered access in his movements over the weekend following September 11th, as evidenced by the images, prove he remained centrally tapped in to the Ground Zero undertaking.

The 92 images Segal took there are unique in several regards. For one, he carefully captions what is being depicted, always giving us the cardinal directions of his point of view. He is positively cheeky, as he captures irrelevant moments at odds with the grim official story. In a fearless gesture, he even identifies himself in several of the images, apparently taken by a second pair of hands.

Notably, in several shots, Segal shows unique scenes that stand in opposition to the standard narrative. And in one important matter, which has remained oddly unaddressed since 9/11, Segal provides a pointed single-source reference, but it is one that only adds to the mystery instead of clarifying it.

This has to do with the disposition of a major work of art by Masayuki Nagare that before 9/11 stood in the Church Street entrance to the World Trade Center plaza. Named "Cloud Fortress," the black granite-clad, sculpture was of monumental size. Variously described as being either 5 tons, or 250 tons, it survived the destruction of the towers intact, but was entirely lost in the subsequent cleanup efforts. No trace of it was ever found at the Fresh Kills landfill, where all the debris was taken, supposedly to undergo examination with a fine-toothed comb.

The loss of art works in the World Trade Center disaster was a recognizable component in a planned narrative of loss and victimization rolled out in the aftermath. An article about art losses appeared as soon as September 15, when most of the focus, and all the good taste, was still concerned with human casualties. But the public relation effort was in full swing before the month was out, as dozens of newspapers began publicizing the loss of art works, which were quickly estimated as totaling $100 million.

This theme is clear evidence of an incidental sidebar of art market insurance fraud---as the attacks themselves, which consisted of a larger real estate insurance fraud, paled in comparison to the overriding macrocosm of religious vilification and intent on war. Unfortunately, the insurance industry itself was part and parcel of the corrupt deception, and this becomes clear when studying the art angle.

This is an enormous area for investigation, and I am not prepared to begin the work here. Suffice it to say that one company, Cantor Fitzgerald, was reported by scores of national and international media outlets as having lost between 350 and 450 bronze sculptures designed after Rodin, while in truth, Cantor's offices contained only four modern casts on 9/11---and even these were likely pilfered during the building's final moments by responders bent on looting the premises for valuables.

The disappearance of the surviving Nagare work during the clean-up effort following 9/11, probably wasn't an example of this kind of financial art fraud in any case, but I think it may be evidence of a different and more troubling kind of fraud---proof that the images of devastation fed to the public by the media were doctored lies, manufactured, like the so-called human loss, to pump up our sense of communal wounding, and with it, a desire for retaliation, and revenge for the atrocity.

Only one site plan illustration clearly depicts the placement of the Nagare work on the plaza in relation to the buildings and other outdoor art work, such as the much-photographed globe-shaped fountain designed by Fritz Koenig, which stood in the center of the plaza, and which survived in damaged condition. Photographs taken by FEMA officials depict the plaza area as being a Dante-esque landscape of utter destruction, with only the smoking remains of steel beams cast about.

It's interesting that the bronze Koenig fountain survived with only scratches and dents, while the massive rectangular Nagare piece, situated much further away from the towers, facing Church Street in a square made up of two short flights of steps between raised planting beds situated between Buildings Four and Five, was destroyed without a trace.


I believe this was done to visually expand the area of destruction. This necessity developed as an afterthought by those tasked with the plot's public relations, in much the same way that Ground Zero was originally referred to anecdotally as "the Pit," since so much debris fell into the sub-stories below the plaza level. Then a calculated effort went into effect in the media, whereby these same remains were suddenly known as "the Pile."

Official control of the media is an inexact science, with insiders working alongside patsies and useful idiots. However, inconvenient facts which can surface in honest journalism have been proven to be vulnerable to a methodical suppression before they can gain a toehold in the public consciousness---at least that was the case before the advent of the internet changed the rules of the game.

That the Nagare work survived the collapses of the towers was a fact that had been previously established with a photograph published in New York Magazine's October 1, 2001 issue, which showed a staged vignette of a fireman walking in front of the intact sculpture. (I believe it's the same image maintained in a pdf document prepared by Nagare's New York dealer, Jason McCoy, Inc.---since you certainly won't find it maintained online in a New York Magazine resource.)


I only know of that publishing history through a September 2002, article in Art in America, by Janet Koplos, titled, "WTC sculpture: lost or destroyed?" which tells us that
"Masayuki Nagare's large public sculpture Cloud Fortress (1975)survived the collapse of the World Trade Center but was lost in the rescue and recovery efforts. When a photograph of the smoking ruins appeared in New York magazine's Oct. 1, 2001, report on the attack, the black stone sculpture stood, intact, in the foreground. It may have been precisely its position that was fatal: the sculpture was set at the Church Street entrance to the central plaza. According to sources at Jason McCoy Gallery, which represents Nagare [see review on p. 136], as well as Mark Wagner of Voorsanger Architects, who is involved in the archiving of art fragments recovered from the site, the sculpture was bulldozed and removed, probably within the first 24 hours, to allow heavy machinery to facilitate the rescues anticipated in those early hours. No trace of it has come to light at the landfill on Staten Island or elsewhere. The sculpture seems to have endured like a fortress and then vanished like a cloud."
What Robert Segal's images and captioning add is an actual time frame for the sculpture's destruction, which came three or four days after the Tuesday collapses---and not in the immediacy of that fearful first day, as Jason McCoy, Mark Wagner or Bart Voorsanger must have sourced it for the Janet Koplos' article. Segal has no bones to pick. He was honestly, openly, and intelligently confused by the proceedings, as his caption for one picture reads "A shame this one didn't survive recovery efforts. Was this thing just too heavy to move?"

Search Team Inbound Briefing, view to southwest, 4WTC at left, tower 2 at rear.

A shame this one didn't survive recovery efforts. Was this thing just too heavy to move?

Demolishing Masayuki Nagare's Granite Sculpture, East of the Plaza, view to west, from left 4WTC,

On a recent, December 5, 2010, exchange at forum.skyscraperpage.com, on a thread called "NEW YORK | Twin Towers of the WTC | 1368/1362 feet | 110 FLOORS | 1972/1973-2001," someone named STR, posted an interesting tidbit of information about the following photograph

"The "Peace on Earth" sculpture was put up during the holiday season every year after the 1993 bombing. Presumably, the sign was stored on-site from January-November and destroyed in the collapse, but I don't have any concrete info. The mountain-like sculpture (Cloud Fortress by Masayuki Nagare) behind it did survive the collapse, but was torn down during the recovery because there was extra structural support built into the plaza in order to hold up the 5-ton steel and stone art piece, which made it a good place to site a crane."
This would make sense, since the site of the sculpture lies directly over a BMT subway hub. STR is the only source in the record for the sculpture's weighing 5 tons, which is more plausible than an alternate weight of 250 tons published elsewhere. Unfortunately for this opinion, in Segal's image showing the work while it was undergoing its destruction, apparently a crane has already assumed a position on the plaza behind it. The photograph's field of depth is distorted by a special lens, as is every other photograph taken of the events in New York City and Arlington, Virginia, and to be made public---so it appears that the sculpture sits behind Buildings 4 and 5, while the site plan makes it clear they were all in alignment.

Several other Segal images taken in the vicinity---on either Friday, Saturday or the Sunday following the Tuesday attacks---show a scene that's clean and orderly, if a bit too obvious, as stage-managed by the FBI

Aircraft Parts Bin, view to southwest, 5WTC at right, 4WTC at rear.

The Borders Bookstore in Building 5, at the corner of Church and Vesey Streets, looks like it could reopen for business without much ado.

  Resting Outside Five World Trade, View to southwest.

I might even think that the Customer Services sign inside the bookstore was art directed by a hack to hang as it does, since none of the ceiling tiles or fixtures were effected. Even the lights are working! Not bad for a building that had been consumed by fire, with giant holes crushed through it from top to bottom!

Another shot, westerly across the plaza to the American Express Building at the World Financial Center, showing the crane as positioned. The firemen even set up a formal "rest" camp in the area between Buildings 4 and 5, so it's unlikely much heavy debris was removed through this point.

              Firefighters at Camp, view to south, 4WTC at right center, top of tower 2 at left Liberty St.

Since we can't trust any of the images taken anywhere on 9/11 or thereafter, we should even doubt whether such central visual reference points as the standing tridents of structural steel from the WTC facades, which somehow managed to impound themselves in the centers of both Church Street to the north, and West Street to the south. These focal points are too obvious to be real in my opinion, and it's likely that every camera was directly hooked up to central command computers where objects like these sentinels could be inserted as seen from any vantage point. It's an awfully long distance for the remains to have traveled, only to arrive standing vertically, a feature which wasn't found anywhere closer to its source.

       Church Street at Dawn; view to southwest, from right 5WTC, 4WTC crushed, top of 2 tower impaled...

We can thank the New York Historical Society for their exhibit, "Here is New York: Remembering 9/11," where they acknowledge 790 photographers by name, whose images appeared in the exhibition, which makes for easy work by any researcher, or prospective prosecutor. I can't claim that 100 percent of the names on the list were insiders to the plot, whose work products were directly controlled by master authorities at higher levels than agency or employer, but I'd bet it's in the 98th percentile.
                  Standing Portion of Four World Trade, View to southwest, Bankers' Trust bldg. at rear.

      Shift Change at Ground Zero, View to south; from right 5WTC, 4WTC, top of 2 tower impaled into
     Church Street.

According to an article in the National Underwriter Property & Casualty-Risk & Benefits Management newsletter by Caroline McDonald, titled, "WTC fine art losses undervalued," the "World Trade Center Plaza Sculpture" by Masayuki Nagare, was valued at $1 million. Even a small 1975 maquette, or model of the "Cloud Fortress" piece, which was housed and then lost in the Port Authority's offices in Tower 1, was valued at $150,000, according to the Bergen County Record, "The price of lost art-- PA nears settlement for pieces destroyed on 9/11," by Pat R. Gilbert.

So what was the logic in destroying the art work, if the stated purpose was it obstructed an effort to bring in heavy moving equipment? Couldn't they have started with its removal without obliterating it?

Artists and their patrons take their world very seriously. Endless ink was utilized, for instance, in discussing the effort by the grandson of Alexander Calder to recover pieces of the master's damaged stabile, which stood outside Building 7. Experts had never considered it to be an important example of Calder sculpture, while the Nagare work was widely regarded as a crowning masterpiece in his oeuvre.

Much like the fundamental Christians who were chosen to serve roles in the invasion of Iraq, the people whose jobs were to attend to these important matters of art sound more like empty figureheads, chosen for attributes, like loyalty to a secret cause, instead of meaningful artistic credentials. Architect Bart Voorsanger, from the firm Voorsanger & Mills,
"was appointed to archive debris from the collapsed World Trade Centre and the objects he collected include a row of chained-up bicycles, battered fire trucks, splinters from what was once the city's tallest television antenna and the crushed shell of a train which used to run beneath the Centre."
according to a 2002 article in The Scotsman, "Picking up the pieces," by Rhiannon Batten.
Voorsanger was quoted as saying, "two weeks after the attacks, I was approached to form a small committee to save artifacts from the site." The article continued
"So while Ground Zero, as a crime site, was closed off to all but emergency workers and clearance personnel, Voorsanger's committee was granted special access. Searching for finds and marking them down on a map, the archiving team spent about eight weeks on the site.

"At first I went down to Ground Zero every day or every other day, along with other people from my office" he says. "The emergency workers were hostile to us initially - they imagined we were just scavenging.

"The reason Voorsanger, rather than a curator, was chosen to head the project was that architecture had been such a key component of the site. But although it was hoped the collected material could later be used to construct a memorial, Voorsanger was adamant that they called what they were doing archiving. "A memorial seemed to place too much emphasis on the emotional side of things," he says.

"The artifacts we found covered a whole panoply of items, from individual coffee cups to a burning steel facade. As well as forming a picture of everyday life on the site, we wanted to make sure we had a record of the materials used to build each of the towers and that we were documenting their collapse."
Since none of the steel from Building 7 was saved for study to understand why, for the first time in history, a steel-framed building had collapsed due to fires alone, Voorsanger's claim that "we wanted to make sure we had a record of the materials used to build each of the towers and that we were documenting their collapse," is patently offensive in a most amateurish way.

On June 3, 2002, well before President Bush was forced to empanel a semi-legal 9/11 Commission, an ad hoc group made this announcement: "Heritage Preservation Publishes First Comprehensive Study of Loss to Nation's Cultural Heritage as a Result of 9/11," Their comprehensive study, a 26-page report titled Cataclysm and Challenge, offered "the first" look at what was lost on 9/11. It is in keeping with established parameters, and the time frame of the United States government-organized conspiracy, we're told that the
"Heritage Preservation prepared the report on behalf of the Heritage Emergency National Task Force, a partnership of 34 federal agencies and national associations founded with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 1995 to help protect museums, archives, libraries and historic sites from disasters."
The report only mentions the loss of Cloud Fortress once, in passing, when it incorrectly titles the work, saying, "Nagare’s black granite World Trade Center Sculpture...was destroyed." However, they claim their mission differently
"As part of its assessment, the Task Force undertook an evaluation of nearly 200 pieces of outdoor sculpture located south of 14th Street to Battery Park at the island’s southern tip. We have already discussed the destruction and damage to pieces at the Trade Center itself. Beyond its perimeter, however, there was remarkably little damage to outdoor artwork."
However, it lauds the resourcefulness of the enterprising employees at the nearby Museum of Jewish Heritage
"Sensing smoke from the burning towers, the building’s automatic fire alarm system began a computerized shutdown of outside air vents and other critical systems.

"But the entire automated circuit panel failed when all electrical power was cut off to the area. With the Twin Towers ablaze in the background, museum engineers climbed to the roof and hand cranked the remaining vents closed. Even as police warned of the towers’ collapse and ordered the area evacuated, the engineers stayed to finish the job, turning off water valves as they left. Because police and other rescue workers used the museum grounds as a staging area following the
attack, only a few staff members were allowed to return for a brief inspection on September 13. They found no damage to the building or its fragile collection—not even a trace of dust inside."
This is the sort of important finding that they then feature in their news release.

The report produced is filled with terrible mistakes and the most errant nonsense. Private agendas leap from the page, such as
"A complete inventory of the numerous corporate art collections lost on September 11 may be impossible to compile because it is believed many art inventories were destroyed along with the Trade Center itself. AXA Art Insurance Corporation has estimated the value of artwork lost at $100 million."
That estimate is a neat trick of AXA's, who only insured three clients in the trade center, and wasn't privy to other private collections.

This quasi-governmental organization had the covert task of helping to create a totally false version of reality. For instance, they warn us
"In addition, 22 federal government departments and agencies had offices in the Trade Center complex. Included were the Secret Service, the Department of Transportation (Coast Guard), the Department of Defense, the Peace Corps, the Department of Labor, the Federal Maritime Commission, the Treasury Department, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. All official records and office documents, together with computer hard drives, were destroyed. Although certain revenue collection agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service and the Customs Service, are required to have back-up documentation stored off-site, the National Archives and Records Administration presumes vast numbers of other federal records were simply lost.
This seems like an odd conclusion, since the major advisement the report issued is the importance of maintaining off-site backups of critical records. The group was formed in 1995, and one would assume they arrived at that finding long before September 11th, 2001, and would have advised the individual government agencies that make up the group, as well as private arts organizations.

An example of utter nonsense is their claim that a resource stored in offices on the 60th floor of Tower 1 had "miraculously" survived the total destruction
"Even months after the disaster, a historic photographic archive owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey was miraculously recovered. Up to 100,000 negatives dating back to the 1920s were found under the debris of Tower One in conditions ranging from ruined to pristine. This pictorial history of the entire metropolitan transportation system included documentation of the building of the George Washington Bridge, the Holland and Lincoln tunnels, and the World Trade Center itself."
This is evidence of advance planning and foreknowledge, with an obvious removal of a valued collection from the trade center before the attacks took place, similar to a report that a Rodin bronze cast of The Thinker had survived undamaged after falling from Cantor Fitzgerald offices on the 105th floor---only then to be lost or stolen while being held in the custody of members of the New York Fire Department.

An equally specious effort was made to tally cultural losses and create a reality from thin air by the International Foundation for Art Research (IFAR), which describes itself un-ironically as "a not-for-profit educational and research organization dedicated to integrity in the visual arts."

IFAR held a public symposium on February 28, 2002, and issued several reports of the proceedings under the heading, September 11th: Art Loss, Damage, and Repercussions."

Each of these separate reports is more fascinating then the last one read.  One of them has long been unavailable online, but has recently surfaced at archive.org. Called "The Art Lost by Citigroup on 9/11," by Suzanne F. W. Lemakis, it provides further evidence that art had been removed in advance from the trade center---in this case, Soloman's headquarters in Building 7. There comes a time when all such "coincidences" as these need to be added up.

Important to a discussion of Nagare's missing sculpture, is the report by Saul Wenegrat, the former Director of the Art Program for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, who curated the public art collection at the trade center, and is titled, "Public Art at the World Trade Center," Wenegrat retired after 20 years on the job, a period of time during which he helped acquire exactly seven pieces of public art. He tells us that
"After the recent destruction of the World Trade Center, I was asked to join a committee to put together items found at the site for possible use later in an archive or memorial. Together with Bartholomew Vorsanger and Marilyn Jordan Taylor, I was a member of a committee with that grim task. When I went to the site shortly after the bombing, this is what I found..."
so he lacks Vorsanger's excuse of only having had come aboard the project two weeks after the "bombing" had occurred. If possible, Wenegrat is even more circumspect about Nagare's lost work than Heritage Preservation was three months later. The extent of Wenegrat's remarks about the missing sculpture is found in one short paragraph:
"At the Church Street entrance to the World Trade Center Plaza (Fig. I), there was a large, black Swedish granite sculpture by Japanese artist Masayuki Nagare (Fig. 2). It was completed in 1972 and measured 14 feet high by 34 feet wide by 17 feet deep. Although it looked like a solid piece, it was actually a veneer of granite over a steel and concrete armature."
Apparently, like Barbara Bush, Wenegrat doesn't bother his "beautiful mind" with unpleasant facts, such as the wanton and willful destruction of a major art work, which formerly was under his care. He remains unmoved, incurious and unaffectionate---unlike the humanity underlying Robert Segal's expression of confusion and regret over the loss. Art means nothing to Wenegrat and it never did. Like the other "professionals" mentioned here, who work in service to the lie, he is a sad bureaucratic cog in a corrupt machine. And since we can tell one another apart now, where once we couldn't, there must be consequences for the evildoers.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Deutsch Bank, and the Debris Field from the Collapsing World Trade Center

Of the following three site plans, why does only the first illustration show the elevated bridge which connected the Deutsch Bank Building (herein described as the "Bankers Trust" building,) with the World Trade Center plaza?



These three maps obviously share the same origin. The level of information they contain is identical, except for the single change concerning one of five elevated walkways that connected the trade center plaza with neighboring office buildings.

The story of how Deutsche Bank agreed to purchase Bankers Trust in November 1998, with the deal finalized on June 4, 1999, is fascinating, and well within the design parameters of a decade-long plot by financial interests, in league with the United States government, to engage in a classic case of Jewish Lightning insurance fraud. Unfortunately for the schemers, Bankers Trust's greed and corruption got ahead of them, and nearly cost the conspiracy one of its key players.

Views of the connecting pedestrian bridge are very rarely found in the record, but I located the following two images---looking north and south along Liberty Street. Deutsch Bank/Bankers Trust was also a major tenant of the trade center, leasing 273,991 square feet in Building Four, and this causeway allowed access between the sites.

Does this represent an attempt by the corporation to distance themselves from the racketeering that destroyed the complex? I think so, absolutely.



From a layman's point of view, the demolishing of the bank's building at 130 Liberty Street following the attacks of September 11th was very strange indeed. The non-professional writing of Wikipedia's Deutsche Bank Building entry captures a flavor of the controversial act
The collapse of 2 World Trade Center during the September 11 attacks tore a 24-story gash into the facade of the Deutsche Bank Building and destroyed the entire interior of the structure. Steel and concrete were sticking out of the building for months afterward. This was eventually cleaned up but it was decided that the 41 story ruin was to be taken down. After the 9/11 attacks, netting was placed around the remains of the building. The bank maintained that the building could not be restored to habitable condition, while its insurers sought to treat the incident as recoverable damage rather than a total loss. Work on the building was deferred for over two years during which the condition of the building deteriorated.
I recall how the former Gulf and Western Building uptown at Columbus Circle was reconditioned, first in 1993, and then in 1994, after first being striped down to its steel skeleton. Surely 130 Liberty Street suffered no worse damage on 9/11 than the Verizon Building, or the Federal Office Building on Vesey Street (wrongly described on the maps above as being the "U.S. Post Office,") or the nearby 90 West Street, which was already a 94-year-old structure in 2001.



I think it was the illogic in the overstatement from Wikipedia, "Steel and concrete were sticking out of the building for months afterward," that made it clear to me how massive was the visual fraud that the perpetrators engaged in---in cahoots, of course, with a corrupt media.

All the images of the debris field surrounding the WTC were created out of whole photoshop cloth. For instance, it is highly unlikely that a four-story section of structure steel facade from the trade center would carve the gash we see in the Deutsch Bank Building; and if it did, it's more unlikely that it would be left hanging by what seems like a thread for months afterward, as the street below was emptied and cleared.

The effort to visually expand the debris field was necessary in order to try and make sense of the loss of Building 7---and ultimately, 130 Liberty Street. In addition, the almost unbelievable chutzpa required in attempting to deceive the general public on a scale so vast as found in these fraudulent cityscape scenes must also speak to the hidden method by which the towers were destroyed---what I remain convinced involves a secret energetic technology, which the powers-that-be weaponized for use against its own citizenry.




Was the structure partially reconstructed before the decision was made to abandon the building?

All photographs that depict debris collected right up to the edge of neighboring buildings are faked in the extreme. The image following has what appears to be four-stories worth of steel and debris right up to the edge of the Verizon Building at West and Vesey Streets.


This image shows debris piled up to the edge of buildings north of the 10 & 10 firehouse on Liberty Street.

The following three images show debris piled up to the edge of 90 West Street. Aside from the basic layout and relationships between the buildings, everything else we see in these shots, from debris, to workers, to the equipment, is faked.


These shots depict debris piled up like the swirl of a soft-serve ice cream cone. The aluminum piping and black fabric intermixed is supposedly the remnants of the scaffolding which completely obscured the facade of 90 West Street before the attacks.


The debris fields were visually expanded to explain the destruction that occurred to neighboring buildings, as well as the lack of appropriate quantities of steel and other mixed debris.

Saturday, December 04, 2010

Building 7 was Emptied of Tenants in Advance of 9/11

After the total loss of its headquarters in Building 7 of the World Trade Center, from the surprise attack by Muslim terrorists on September 11th, the 2,500 employees of Citibank's Soloman, Smith, Barney unit housed there were back-filled into existing corporate offices located elsewhere.

So it was puzzling to real estate experts, as the Wall Street Journal reported, when in the weeks following the attack, Citibank sought to divest itself of a further block of 300,000 square feet of space that Soloman was then currently occupying downtown. How could the utilization of a combined million-and-a-half square feet of office space have suddenly become unnecessary, they wondered?

But it is questionable if 2,500 Soloman employees were actually working in Building 7 on September 11th, as the Journal reported. Within the previous year, Soloman had merged with Travelers Insurance, and together they'd been bought out by Citibank only four months before the attacks.

Even with a possible restructuring and layoffs underway, the number of employees who reportedly were occupying the space in Building 7 is an impossibly low figure given the amount of space Soloman was understood to be leasing there.

Making this determination requires some effort, as the available facts seem designed to elude us. A note in the NIST draft report released on August 21, 2008, said
Among those interviewed by the Investigation Team, there was limited recollection of the organizations occupying some of the floors, especially those occupying smaller spaces, and no one had copies of all the tenant leases.
Since major tenants like the United States government didn't think to keep backups, or off-site copies of their lease agreements, and with the principals unwilling, or too traumatized, to agree on even minimal outlines of the tenancy in Building 7, we're left with a jumbled and unreconciled accounting instead of facts.

Two tenant's lists make up the official record. They come from the 2005 FEMA WTC Building Performance Study, and the 2008 NIST WTC Investigation Report, and they are much at odds. FEMA, for instance, has the Standard Chartered Bank occupying the entire 26th and 27th floors, while NIST gives those floors over to Soloman. FEMA has the National Association of Insurance Commissioners Securities Valuation Office as sole tenant on the 19th floor, while the more definitive NIST account doesn't even mention NAIC, or the Standard Chartered Bank. These are hardly the sort of "smaller spaces" tenancies that might slip the mind.


It can't be understand precisely which floors make up the lease-able space even. The FEMA list has the top two penthouse floors indicated as mechanical spaces, while the NIST document has Soloman occupying at least some portion of those floors.

In contrast, a commercial real estate organization called the CoStar Group was the source for the first tenant's lists distributed by the media, like one maintained by CNN. It has far better information on the leasing arrangements, including a square-footage allocation for each company.

There we find that the third-largest block-holder of space in Building 7 is the Standard Chartered Bank, listed as sharing two floors with Soloman, and two other floors with the Secret Service and the Securities & Exchange Commission. Subsequent newspaper articles informed us that the Standard Charter bank was actually a CIA-ran business front.

So it would appear that personal enterprise has become inextricably mixed up with a privatized public good. And for those of us on the outside, it's troubling to see this scrim, which hides the interplay between a powerful investment banking house, and the regulatory agencies, and secretive governmental intelligence networks, that mean to monitor and inform it.

Off the CoStar list, we can infer that each floor of Building 7 has about 45,000 square feet of rentable space, so we can divide Soloman's block of 1,202,900 square feet and determine that the bank occupied 26 full floors. The other allotments add up to 750,800 square feet, which make for an additional 16 floors in the building---or 42 fully tenantable floors, This establishes a 4-to-7 occupancy ratio for Soloman to the other users.

The NIST account narrative starts out
Shortly before 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, September 11, 2001, about 4,000 people were at work in WTC 7. This was about half of the roughly 8,000 people who worked there. It was the first day of school for many local children, and it also was a primary election day in New York. The weather was clear and comfortable, so some had taken time to do early morning errands.
If 8,000 people worked in Building 7, it represents 190 workers for each of the 42 tenant floors. Soloman's 26 floors would then have an occupancy total of 4,952 employees---or almost twice the number who were said to be relocated after 9/11.

Other factors, like the intensity of use between various floors, or the time of worker's arrival, don't matter. If Soloman indeed employed only 2,500 workers in Building 7, they could be split up with just 96 workers to a floor, but then the other 5,500 workers out of 8,000, would have to divide into the 16 remaining floors, for a census of 343 employees per floor. A tight fit, even for the CIA!

The floor schematic below is from the NIST report. It depicts a hundred spacious private offices on a floor occupied by the SEC---60 of which have windows. The football-field sized floor occupied by American Express has a warran of office cubicals, but even so, 343 is a squeeze.

Building 7 Floor Schematic, NIST August 2008

Apparently, that density is contemplated, as NIST tells us
The stairwells, although somewhat narrow for the maximum possible 14,000 occupants (estimated using the formula in the NYCCBC), were more than adequate to evacuate roughly one-third of that number in the building that morning (NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Chapter 7)
An occupancy of 14,000 makes for 333 per floor. But NIST can't keep its story straight one way or the other. Their public affairs office Factsheet, updated September 17, 2010,
Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation, proposes that an additional staircase be added to the already "more than adequate" egress:

What specific code changes based on recommendations from NIST's investigation of the WTC towers have been approved for inclusion in the International Building Code?

The eight specific code changes adopted in the International Building Code based on recommendations from NIST's investigation of the WTC towers include:
1. An additional exit stairway for buildings more than 420 feet in height.
The Factsheet goes further, even contradicting itself

Did WTC 7 conform to building and fire codes?

The team found that the design of WTC 7 in the 1980s was generally consistent with the New York City building code in effect at that time.
WTC 7's designers intended its stairwells to evacuate nearly 14,000 occupants, anticipated at the time to be the maximum occupancy of the building. Though the stairwell's capacity was overestimated, it was adequate for evacuating the building's actual maximum occupancy of 8,000, and more than adequate to evacuate the approximately 4,000 occupants who were in the building on Sept. 11.
So why are they proposing an additional exit stairway then? The inconsistencies in the record begin to become so extreme as to be mind-boggling. Take this vapid attempt at an excuse

Why didn't the investigators look at actual steel samples from WTC 7?

Steel samples were removed from the site before the NIST investigation began. In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, debris was removed rapidly from the site to aid in recovery efforts and facilitate emergency responders' efforts to work around the site. Once it was removed from the scene, the steel from WTC 7 could not be clearly identified. Unlike the pieces of steel from WTC 1 and WTC 2, which were painted red and contained distinguishing markings, WTC 7 steel did not contain such identifying characteristics.
How about assuming any piece without the red markings came from Building 7? Besides, according to the October 21, 2001, New York Times, in "At Landfill, Tons of Debris, Slivers of Solace," by Dan Barry and Amy Waldman,
And so he has sought to bring order to the chaos. Along the perimeter are rows of crushed police cars and fire engines, stacked on top of one another. A separate field has been created for the remains of 7 World Trade Center, which once housed regional offices of several federal agencies, including the Secret Service. In the dirt lay a pink-and-black chunk of its marbled facade.
This is the sort of detail that goes awry when conspiracies get too large, and their participants begin to tire. Anyone would think that special attention should be paid to the piles containing CIA and Secret Service records---or Enron and WorldCom files for that matter.

The October 2, 2001, New York Times article, "Scarred Steel Holds Clues, And Remedies," quotes Dr. Astaneh-Asl, a professor of structural engineering at the University of California at Berkeley, who was a member of one of eight projects "financed by the National Science Foundation to study the World Trade Center disaster. He is also a member of a team assembled by the American Society of Civil Engineers to investigate the trade center site." Astaneh-Asl literally stumbles out in his nightgown upon a scene of truck loads of steel being secreted out of the city without inspection. And NIST now wants to claim that it all got away from them.

Look at the faulty logic in this tacit admission that the main stream media are major participants in the conspiracy

An emergency responder caught in the building between the 6th and 8th floors says he heard two loud booms. Isn't that evidence that there was an explosion?


In June 2009, NIST began releasing documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the International Center for 9/11 Studies for "all of the photographs and videos collected, reviewed, cited or in any other way used by NIST during its investigation of the World Trade Center building collapses." One of the items released, a video obtained from NBC News, shows World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC7) in the moments before it collapsed, then cuts to the collapse already in progress, with the building's east penthouse "disappearing" from the scene (as it had already fallen in the intervening time). Other videos of the WTC 7 collapse show the penthouse falling first, followed by the rest of the building. Did NIST edit the NBC News video to remove the collapse of the penthouse?
The video footage released under the FOIA request was copied from the original video exactly as it was received from NBC News, with video documentation of the WTC 7 east penthouse collapse missing. The footage was not edited in any way by NIST.
Why didn't NIST demand the unedited sequence from NBC News themselves? We know this crucial evidence exists because it was reveled by the illogical editing.

Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.
For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.
NIST is denying reality when it neglects the multiple references in the written and video records of gun shot blasts and bomb explosions. But NIST is a mess. Listen to them whine
The account that follows is the result of an extensive, state-of-the-art reconstruction of the events that affected WTC7 and eventually led it its collapse at 5:20:52 p.m.. Numerous facts and data were obtained, then combined with validated computer modeling to produce an account that is believed to be close to what actually occurred. However, the reader should keep in mind that the building and the records kept within it were destroyed, and the remains of all the WTC buildings were disposed of before congressional action and funding was available for this Investigation to begin. As a result, there are some facts that could not be discerned, and thus there are uncertainties in this accounting. Nonetheless, NIST was able to gather sufficient evidence and documentation to conduct a full investigation upon which to reach firm findings and recommendations. The reconstruction effort for WTC7, the uncertainties, the assumptions made, and the testing of these assumptions are documented in NIST NCSTAR 1-9

Citibank, Deutsche Bank, Firefighter Robert Beddia, and Firefighter Joseph Graffagnino

Before the September 11th attack occurred, Deutsche Bank bought 60 Wall Street for $600 million, with no certain or known plans for the building. However, after the 9/11 terrorist attack damaged 130 Liberty Street, Deutsche's main building, the bank was able to move more than 4,500 of its personnel into the newly acquired building without a problem.

Later, Deutsche Bank agreed to sell and lease back its new North American headquarters for nearly double what it paid to acquire the property six years before, when Paramount Group paid nearly $1.2 billion for the 47-story Class A building. The deal occurred just in advance of a major recession and decline in real estate values, with millions of Americans out of work and losing their homes to bank foreclosure.

 NEW YORK - AUGUST 24: New York firefighters wait for the body of firefighter Robert Beddia to emerge out of St. Patrick's Cathedral August 24, 2007 in New York. Beddia was killed with another firefighter battling a blaze at the abandoned Deutsche Bank building next to Ground Zero.

In other news, a October 21, 2001 Wall Street Journal article, "Citigroup Considers Leaving Lower Manhattan, tells a similar story
More bad news for downtown Manhattan: Now it's Citigroup that's thinking about transferring one of its operations and hundreds of employees out of the area. Making matters worse, the operation isn't even close to the World Trade Center disaster zone, indicating that the softness in the financial-district market is spreading.

The operation, which is part of Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney unit, is housed in 10 floors of the office tower at 125 Broad St. Citigroup's lease runs for another 8 1/2 years but it has hired real-estate firm CB Richard Ellis to sublease the 330,000 square feet, people familiar with the situation say. The bank also has informed its landlord, developer Steve Witkoff, that it plans to put the space on the sublease market, the people say. Citigroup and Mr. Witkoff decline to comment.

Until now, most of the downtown firms that have defected had been located west of Broadway in or close to the still-smoking World Trade Center site. Citigroup would be leaving a part of downtown east of Broadway that, so far, hasn't suffered a sharp rise in vacancy.

Citigroup's plans also are surprising because many real-estate experts figured the bank had too little space, not too much, in the wake of Sept. 11. Citigroup immediately had to relocate 2,500 employees who had been housed in 7 World Trade Center, a building that collapsed a few hours after the Twin Towers. Most of those employees were subsequently housed in existing bank offices throughout the New York metro area. But even after that, the bank finds itself with surplus space.
Citibank suddenly, and without foreknowledge, loses over 1,200,000 square feet of space utilized by its Salomon Smith Barney unit in Larry Silverstein's Building 7, yet are able to backfill those displaced workers into their pre-existing corporate real estate holdings, and then are still able to relinquish another major block of Salomon Smith Barney real estate---this one of 330,000 square feet? How is this done?

TenantWise analyzed the disruption to the downtown commercial real estate market caused by the September 11th attacks, and issued a WTC Tenant Relocation Summary Special Report, called Destroyed Buildings: Tenant Relocation Summary as of September 2003, which is maintain online. The report indicates a consistent and marked decline in the square-footage requirements of the relocating WTC companies.

The report contains some recognizable errors. It tells us that Empire/Blue Cross, who had signed a 461,000 s.f. lease at WTC1 in 1997,
"signed a lease for 105,429 s.f. at 11 West 42nd Street and for 322,000 s.f. at MetroTech 9 South in Brooklyn for 1,300 employees. These commitments represent 100,000 s.f. less than previously occupied at WTC."
Simple arithmetic however, makes that a net loss of 33,571 s.f.

TenantWise says that Cantor Fitzgerald leased 245,000 s.f. at WTC, and after the attacks, relocated to 80,000 s.f. at 135 East 57th Street and decentralized its operations into two other new locations: Reston, VA and London. However, a New York Times article from January 1997, said,
"[t]he company has renewed its lease for the 104th and 105th floors -- the top office floors in the 110-story, 4.7 million-square-foot tower -- and has added the 103d and part of the 101st floors."
Why Cantor was expanding its office requirements in 1997, at the same time they began significantly downsizing as a result of advances in electronic trading technology, does not represent a failure of corporate forward thinking, but it is key to analyzing what this real estate data represents. In my opinion, adding on one-and-a-half floors of tenancy represents a "Potemkin office" strategy that began as early as the bombing in 1993, which was meant to structure the building's occupancy in anticipation of their eventual destruction. Howard Lutnick's "brother Gary" was said to have worked on the 103rd floor. This represents a net loss of 75,000 s.f in space required by Cantor Fitzgerald.

The decline in the need for office space for tenants who relocated after the disaster is striking. In only one or two cases did a firm increase their square footage in a temporary move or permanent relocation. Keep in mind, that each floor of the World Trade Towers had a rentable area of approximately one-acre in size, (an acre is 43,560 square feet.) The term "backfill" is used by commercial real estate brokers to describe an office tenant who relinquishes space but transfers the employees housed there into other corporate offices without having to lease additional new space.

The case for a Potemkin-office strategy is made most unambiguously in the 1997 lease signed by Oppenheimer Funds for 231,000 s.f. at WTC2. After the attacks, Oppenheimer signed a 10-year lease at 498 Seventh Avenue for 135,000 s.f., for a net loss: 96,000 s.f. No mergers, acquisitions, spin-offs, backfills or back offices were announced as part of this transition.

245,156 s.f. at WTC2, Fiduciary Trust signed a part direct/part sublease for 156,000 s.f. at 600 Fifth Ave and occupied the space in November. Approximately 650 employees will operate from 8 floors at this location. Net Loss: 89,156 s.f.

100,000 s.f. at WTC1 (floors 49-51 sic), Dai-Ichi Kangyo Bank is now part of Mizuho Corp. Bank, located at 1251 Ave of Americas and at Harborside Plaza in Jersey City, NJ. Net Loss: 100,000 s.f.

182,956 s.f. at WTC2, Fuji Bank is now part of Mizuho Corp. Bank and is operating from Mizuho offices at 1251 Ave of Americas and Harborside Plaza in NJ. Net Loss: 182,956 s.f.

179,244 s.f. at WTC5, Credit Suisse First Boston occupied 1 Madison Avenue and 11 Madison Avenue and backfilled approximately 700 employees from 5 WTC. CSFB has no new space requirements and sublet its space at 277 Park Avenue. Net Loss: 179,244 s.f.

45,540 s.f. at WTC2, Commerzbank Capital Markets backfilled into existing space at 1251 Avenue of the Americas. Net Loss: 45,540 s.f.

26,367 s.f. at WTC2, IOC/Regus is operating from an existing office at 245 Park Avenue. (Regnus signed a lease for half of the 93rd floor in WTC2 in June of 2001. After the attack, the Guardian reported on September 14, 2001, that "Regus Business Centres said five employees unaccounted for but trying to ascertain precisely how many clients were in the offices. Concerned toll could rise significantly." Net Loss: 26,367 s.f.

40,000 s.f. at WTC2, Continental Insurance is in a long term lease at 40 Wall Street. Offices moved prior to the attacks. Net Loss: 40,000 s.f.

10,000 s.f. at WTC1, Zim-American Israeli Shipping had put its 16th floor space at the World Trade Center up for sublease and moved a majority of its employees to Norfolk, VA before the attack. Now, a few employees have moved into a smaller 5,000 s.f. office at 1000 South Avenue in Staten Island, NY. Net Loss: 10,000 s.f.

18,591 s.f. at WTC, TD Waterhouse Group, Inc. A move to a new headquarters in Jersey City was in progress since June 2001 and many employees from WTC and other locations had already relocated there. After the attack, WTC employees moved to the new headquarters in Harborside, Jersey City, and a few to an existing office at 100 Wall Street. Net Loss: 18,591 s.f.

12,211 s.f. at WTC, Barclay's offices were relocated from WTC1 to 222 Broadway before the attack. Has regained possession of its space at 222 Broadway. Net Loss: 12,211 s.f.

2WTC 50,903 s.f. GBI Capital/ Ladenburg Capital Management will abandon both their 21,970 s.f. at 22 Cortlandt St. and WTC2, GBI will backfill both into existing Ladenburg offices at 590 Madison Avenue and in Long Island. Net Loss: 50,903 s.f.

25,000 s.f. at WTC, World Travel employees operated a small office for Sidley Austin Brown & Wood and relocated with the law firm to 787 7th Avenue. (a half-acre sized travel office serving a mid-sized law firm?)

48,000 s.f. at WTC, Washington Group relocated to 30,000 s.f. at 2 Penn Plaza Net Loss: 18,000 s.f.

155,490 s.f. at WTC2, Verizon had 400 employees, backfilled elsewhere 155,490 Net Loss: 155,490 s.f.

20,750 s.f. at WTC1, Global Crossing Holdings Ltd. used space on the 83rd floor as record storage and will not replace it. Net Loss: 20,750 s.f.

10,325 s.f. at WTC, The Nishi-Nippon Bank closed its New York office at 1 WTC and no longer has a New York presence. Net Loss: 10,325 s.f.

40,000 s.f. at WTC1, Asahi Bank is now Resona Bank Ltd., and operates from 8,000 s.f. on the 19th floor of 546 5th Ave. Net Loss: 32,000 s.f.

13,262 s.f. at WTC, Friends Ivory & Sime, Inc. closed its New York office and relocated to London. Net Loss: 13,262 s.f.

57,000 s.f. at WTC, Fireman's Fund, an Allianz Company, relocated to 36,000 s.f. at 75 Wall St. Net Loss: 11,000 s.f.

89,162 s.f. at WTC, Sun Microsystems relocated to 78,200 s.f. on floors 3 and 4 at 101 Park Avenue. Net Loss: 10,962 s.f.

27,000 s.f. at WTC, Seguros Commercial closed its New York Office and relocated to headquarters in Plano, TX. Net Loss: 27,000 s.f.

59,000 s.f. at WTC, SCOR consolidated with a newly acquired company and relocated WTC employees to existing offices at 199 Water Street. (SCOR leased in WTC in Sept. 1995. "SCOR had been at 110 William Street, he said, and bought a smaller company, Unity Fire and Marine, whose offices were at the trade center. "When it bought that company," he said, "SCOR decided it wanted to consolidate the two offices. It had a choice of doing it here or on William Street.") Net Loss: 59,000 s.f.

10,000 s.f. at WTC, Unistrat joined with affiliate company SCOR in space at 199 Water St. Net Loss: 10,000 s.f.

30,000 s.f. at WTC, Sandler O'Neill relocated to 919 Third Avenue (Into existing, or newly leased space? TenantWise's wording isn't clear.)

33,000 s.f. at WTC, Ohrenstein & Brown relocated to 20,000 s.f. at 1 Penn Plaza with 60 employees. Net Loss: 13,000 s.f.

44,325 s.f. at WTC, National Development & Research Institute relocated to 39,000 s.f. at 71 West 23rd Street. Net Loss: 5,325 s.f.

22,500 s.f. at WTC, NAIC Securities relocated to 16,000 s.f. at 1411 Broadway, 9th floor. Net Loss: 6,500 s.f.

80,000 s.f. at WTC, NY Shipping relocated to 18,000 s.f. of new office space in Iselin, NJ and to existing offices to 45 Broadway. Net Loss: 62,000 s.f.

24,539 s.f. at WTC, N.Y. Institute of Finance backfilled space from Pearson, Inc., parent company, at 1330 Avenue of the Americas for permanent relocation Net Loss: 24,539 s.f.

92,232 s.f. at WTC, Kemper Securities signed a lease for space at 30 Rockefeller Center on 11th & 12th floors for 65,381 s.f. Net Loss 26,851 s.f.

15,000 s.f. at WTC, John J. McMullen Associates has relocated to 10,000 s.f. space at 70 Wood Avenue South, Iselin, NJ for 3 years with about 35 employees. Net Loss: 5,000 s.f.

180,000 s.f. at WTC, Guy Carpenter, a Marsh USA company, relocated its headquarters to 105,255 s.f. at 1 Madison Avenue and also placed some employees in new Marsh space in Hoboken, NJ. Net Loss: 74,745 s.f.

10,000 s.f. at WTC, Drinker Biddle & Reath is relocating to existing offices in Florham Park, NJ, and a new 5,000 s.f. space at 30 Broad Street. Net Loss: 5,000 s.f.

58,500 s.f. at WTC, Baseline signed a sublease for 58,000 s.f. of permanent office space at 395 Hudson Street, 6th floor, for approximately 200 employees. (Baseline had subleased at the WTC2 in March 1999, from a previous tenant, Georgeson & Company, who was already in the process of upgrading the floors, having about finished the full 77th floor. Baseline intended to put executive offices on the half-floor above. The floors were connected by escalator.

11,612 s.f. at WTC, AT&T relocated to existing offices, including headquarters at 32 Avenue of the Americas, 811 10th Ave, 33 Thomas St, 75 Broad. AT&T will not need any additional space. Net Loss: 11,612 s.f.

111,398 s.f. at WTC, Standard Chartered Bank relocated to 92,000 s.f. at 1 Madison Avenue. Net Loss: 19,396 s.f.
American Express had 55,000 s.f. at 100 Church St., 23,000 s.f. at 140 Broadway, 1,120,500 s.f. at 3WFC3, and 106,117 at 7WTC, who were backfilled into other spaces. Net Loss: 106,117 s.f.

1,415,000, s.f. at 190 Liberty Street, Deutsche Bank employees from downtown locations temporarily relocated to existing offices. In 2001, before the 9/11 attacks, Deutsche Bank had purchased 60 Wall St. from J.P. Morgan Chase. Net Loss: 1,415,000 s.f.

1,202,900 s.f. at WTC7, Citigroup/Soloman Smith Barney backfilled existing space in Midtown; Rutherford, NJ; and Stamford, CT. Net Loss: 1,202,900 s.f.

Many of the other major lease signings that followed the 1993 bombing, which I consider to be the effective start date for the September 11th, 2001 conspiracy, like those of Bankers Trust (Deutsch,) Bank of America (who signed a lease for eight full floors shortly after the bombing,) Dow Jones, Thacher, Proffitt & Woods, and Exco Noonan should also be examined for evidence they took on unneeded space (Sandler O'Neill moved to their 104th-floor perch in WTC2 just four days before the bombing.)

CoStar reported an additional 440,882 square feet of space in the North Tower, and the South Tower, as being marketed on 9/11.

This loss of 1,553,900 square feet in the World Trade Center proper, 1,534,513 square feet in Building 7, which was also completely destroyed, and the 1,415,000 square feet in Deutsch Bank's 130 Liberty Street, an adjoining tower to the trade center, linked together by an elevated bridge to space Deutsch leased in WTC4, a tower which had to be dismantled following the attacks, totals 4,944,298 square feet of office space, but does not represent the complete picture of the non-existent and false tenancy at the World Trade Center in advance of September 11th attack. But it is certainly enough to open our eyes to the collusive secret agreements between a wide swath of business interests, who collective agreed to attack themselves, as part of a plan for war and profit.

Friday, December 03, 2010

A Little Known Roster of World Trade Center Tenants

The several different lists to be found online, like those issued by CNN or the AP, vary in some interesting ways, so it might appear they were all tampered with in order to disguise, or dumb down, some relevant information. Knowing an attempt was made to obscure a fact is a good first step in recognizing the relevance of it.

I don't know the source or origin for the list on these pages, but I like what distinguishes them---details like "B.E. Windows Corp." instead of "Windows on the World" for the restaurant on the 106th floor, which is the way Dun & Bradstreet would understand the tenancy. I only found pages for the floors above 89 in One World Trade Center, and a handwritten note reference this fact, so maybe that's evidence of suppression.










Actually, I found the source (Team8+?):

WORLD TRADE CENTER TENANT LIST REVISED JANUARY 27, 2003 ONE WORLD ..
www.911myths.com/images/6/6b/NYC_Box5_Civilians_WTC-Tenants.pdf

(This is the only index to list "LMCC Artists" on the 91rst floor of tower one for instance, which was donated space kept off the commercial market for four years.)

The contact names and phone numbers alone add to our broader knowledge base. I can make no sense of the edited heading, "Revised January 27, 2003," except to say, at least it's honest!

Let me link to several other lists here,

Washington Post, Former World Trade Center Firms, Business/Commerce Contact Information
About this list: This list originated from the World Trade Center leasing company tenant list obtained just after 9/11/01. Companies are listed only if we were able to obtain relocation information from the company's Web site or from contact with a company representative by phone or email. We have listed Web sites if we determine additional contact information is needed. Last updated September 4, 2002

CNN - Tenant List provided by CoStar Group, Inc.

Associated Press (via the LA Times)
(The same list as provided by CoStar to CNN, but alphabetized,and with the square footage information removed. Dated 9-11-01)

Wall Street Journal- A Look at Former World Trade Center Tenants

Voltaire Network - Liste des sociétés occupant le World Trade Center de New York au 11 septembre 2001. Simply fascinating! Thanks Miranda Priestley!

List of tenants of One and Two World Trade Center and their suite numbers, as of Feb. 2, 2001, provided by E-expedient.com.

BBC News

Gary Stock: UnBlinking
Thank God for spooks!

boston.com published a list with, SOURCES: CoStar Group Inc.; Skyscrapers, An Architectural Type of Modern Urbanism; compiled from AP wire reports. This list carried the apparently "erroneous" listing for "Gibbs & Hill Engineers" on the 91rst floor of the south tower, see:
"N.Y. Grand Jury Indicts Man Accused of Defrauding 9/11 Fund; Claimed Company Was 'Destroyed' by the Attacks,"

TenantWise -- Special Report: WTC Tenant Relocation Summary
(The best review of the relocation of firms after 9/11.)

WorldTrade Aftermath

www.sadnews.net is a web site still found at archive.org,which carries the date of 9-11-11 within its web address, and is a source for the errant Gibbs & Hill information. It shows the firm sharing the same 91rst floor in the south tower as Raytheon and "The Washington Group." This same information is found on the Associated Press list, linked to above, just in a different, non-alphabetized format, and might confirm an AP release of a WTC tenant's list as from as early as the eleventh.

See: "N.Y. Grand Jury Indicts Man Accused of Defrauding 9/11 Fund; Claimed Company Was 'Destroyed' by the Attacks," for some real awkwardness.

This AP list is also the source for for the Atlantic Bank of New York's full-floor tenancy on the 106th floor of the south tower (See: December 20, 2001, USA Today, "For many on Sept. 11, survival was no accident,"
"Other offices were leased but empty or under renovation. The Atlantic Bank of New York had moved out of the 106th floor of the south tower in July but was still paying rent."
Survival was no accident indeed! Ouch!

But this leads us to another mistake, and correction---in the august Wall Street Journal's Pulitzer Prize winning 9/11 submission:
Corrections & Amplifications
NORTHERN TRUST Corp. doesn't have any offices in the World Trade Center, as was incorrectly stated in a tenant listing in yesterday's edition. In August 2000, Northern Trust International Banking Corp. moved from the World Trade Center to 40 Broad St., New York. (WSJ Sept. 13, 2001)
But the Northern Trust International Banking Corporation once did, even if it didn't have to continue paying rent after it moved out, like some former tenants did. Their Dun & Bradstreet number is 051943231!
The following is a list of those businesses that, according to Dun & Bradstreet's records, operated from an address at the World Trade Center. This information is representative of information in D&B's database as of September 11, 2001 and may be updated as additional facts become known. Please Note: In some instances there will be multiple records with the same name or a similar name. This may result from the existence of multiple business operations or divisions/affiliates within the World Trade Center. D&B requests that any reprinting, reproduction or redistribution of this information include the following notation:
Source: Dun & Bradstreet - www.dnb.com
So what do you think got them so riled up they made the Wall Street Journal issue a correction on September 13th that imprecisely de-amplifies the record, by neglecting to mention the firm was formerly a tenant?

The extensive D&B database .pdf can be found maintained online by Let'sRollForums

[PDF] World Trade Center Business Listing - www.dnb.com- Dec 3
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
World Trade Center Business Listing. As of 9/11/01. D&B D-U-N-S Number. Business Name. 787890029. 3 S USA, INC. 825502904. 32 GROUP COMPANY. 083739263 ...
letsrollforums.com/phpwebsite/files/documents/WTC.OccupancyList.pdf

Somebody needs to thank Phil Jahan really quick, and that would be me! So thanks Phil, for saving western civilization from the Philistines---once more!

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Martina Geccelli

is a German-born, Italian-surnamed, and London-based artist who specializes in photographing sculptural still-life interiors. At the turn of the millennium, she served a stint with the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council’s World Trade Center Artists Residency program, which provided studio space on the 91rst and 92nd floors of the North Tower of the World Trade Center.

Her online Martina Geccelli Biography tells us that
Her project in this secluded building was dealing with vacant office spaces, which were called 'Suites.' Often left in a rush these spaces defined themselves by their markings. The spaces are in a stage of in between: moving out; leaving and restarting. The vacant space is still occupied. Geccelli is dealing with the topography of the space. The events of September 11th have in retrospect imposed on the readability of her work.
The LLMC published a book in 2004 called "Site Matters," that chronicles the residency program in the towers, which ran from 1997 until the their untimely demise in 2001. Geccelli's term from winter of 1999 through the spring of 2000, coincided with that of the most celebrated alumnus of the program---a collective of four young conceptual artists who went by the name of Gelatin.

Suites 8203- Broken Panels, Martina Geccelli

All the artists who participated in the program were directed to work at interpreting the WTC site as a direct experience, which "raised compelling questions about the aesthetic, psychological and political aspects of the World Trade Center." Gelatin achieved a measure of fame in art circles with their plan to remove a narrow fixed window on the the eastern face of the 91st floor of the North Tower, then installing a temporary Juliette balcony, so they could step outside and enjoy a few moments of exhilaration.

Whether they succeeded in actually doing so is open to question. Moukhtar Kocache, the Director of Visual Art & Media for the project, wrote a letter to "categorically deny and refute Gelatin’s (the Austrian art collective) preposterous claim to have removed a window and installed a balcony from the 91st floor of Tower 1 in the World Trade Center," Describing them as pranksters who "thrive on shock value and attention," Kocache exclaimed that "[n]o one in his or her sane mind would believe such an account!"

However, during a FEMA-sponsored symposium in early 2002 addressing the damage and art losses from the September 11th attacks, Kocache took an opposite tack, describing as art
The wad of red chewing gum that performance art group Gelatin had stuck outside the building on the 91st floor after removing one of the windows, signing or marking the building from the outside, this is an art work that's also gone.
So much for a shared concept of sanity---let alone artistry.

Suite 4047 - Looking out, 2000, 125cm X 100cm, Martina Geccelli
What Gelatin's project accomplished with its daring-do, Geccelli achieved through her sedate political consciousness. It can't have been easy for the program's participants to repay the generosity of their hosts with an ostensible focus on the World Trade Towers as their artistic object. Although I haven't read the book yet, much of the art I've heard described sounds contrived and forced to my ear.

Suite 4047 - Reflections, Martina Gecelli

But not so Geccelli's, as evidenced by my finding online a body of her images taken in the emptied and abandoned floors of a outmoded tower just awaiting its fate. Could she have known what these interiors would portend? Speaking from the perspective of international business and trade, how many other unprofitable floors was she aware of in this downtown office building? Did she appreciate that her own presence on the 91rst floor was liminal, and what it signified from a capitalist standpoint?

Did she know that David Rockefeller and Chase Bank had founded the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council 30 years previously to stimulate development downtown, and that he continued to fund it with millions of dollars every year?

Suite 4047 - Wall panels, 2000, Martina Geccelli

In Moukhtar Kocache's FEMA presentation, she specifically mentions this body of work
Martina Gecelli, who in the year 2000, photographed abandoned office spaces at the Trade Center that were left in complete disrepair. For Martina, the architecture, the space, and the psychology of the space became her subject matter.
Suite 4047- Long View, Martina Geccelli, 2002

By "psychology of the space" do you think she means appreciation for the underlying truth behind the reality being presented? The Trade Towers had been emptied in 1993 after a clearly preventable act of terrorism occurred---had the FBI agents who were guiding the "perpetrator" only chosen a different outcome to that "conspiracy." But that result was necessary in order for the next planned outcome to unfold.

A May 31, 1998, New York Times article reported that
"The leases were signed, one after another. Bankers Trust took 274,000 square feet, Aon Risk Services 396,000, Oppenheimer Funds 181,000, Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield 461,000 and, finally, J&H Marsh & McLennan committed to 361,000 square feet earlier this month. All the space is at one building complex, the World Trade Center..."
"In all, the trade center reached agreements to lease 2.2 million square feet of office space in 1997, or almost a quarter of the 9.6 million square feet leased in the downtown district."
The signing of these leases fell within the design parameters of a secretly planned false-flag terrorist-attack exercise/operation upon the trade towers. They represent the ground work, and then the green light that the plot was good to go.

Cantor Fitzgerald had fired several hundred of their supernumerary voice-bond brokers in advance of the 9/11 hit---some of the floors they leased atop Tower 1 must have looked similar to these here, having been stripped of both human occupants as well as emptied of their famous Rodin bronze tax writeoffs.

Suite 4047-Broken Corner, Martina Geccelli

In her resume's biographic third-person voice, we're told
The uneven setting, the place of somehow 'in-between,' are the zones of focus. She was interested to catch the facts of the changing and shifting environment. With the camera she documented urban settings behind the official thoroughfares. The little addition around a space, the twist in a smooth setting, the improvised, those locations are representing the every day urban life.

Suite 8203 - Cables, Martina Geccelli, 2002

Despite the damning message these pictures carry to her nominal benefactor, Mr. Rockefeller, Martina Geccelli has earned her reward by creating beautiful images "in this secluded building," which serve a higher power then David's---not that there's anything wrong with him. It is a "suite" force, which I'll loosely describe as being the combined manifestation of truth and justice.

Indeed, "[t]he events of September 11th have in retrospect imposed on the readability of her work," but I chalk that up as proof she conceived outside the conspiracy of dunces who at present, are still calling the shots. I thank her for letting me use her work to make my point, with a creative attribution of course, but without her express permission.

There were no planes,
and no jumpers.
There were no victims,
innocent or otherwise.
No bucket brigades either,
since debris was lacking,
for reasons unknown.
And the "pit" became the "pile."
Searching at Fresh Kills was staged
for the cameras and the overtime.
The heroism was a joke,
and any suffering a lie.
A managed farce,
where nobody worked,
just nobly posed about in images.
The whole story is a mess,
badly told in the media,
by monsters accustomed to
having the upper hand.
Their burns would prove to be minor,
and self-inflicted anyway.
Even the dogs looked confused
and it's no wonder.

Received October 26th, 2011:
I have noticed you have published an article about myself and my work ( World Trade Center- Photographs) on your blog on
12/01/2010.
I have never given you permission to publish an article on my work and details about myself. Also you state a poem in this context- looking as it is written by me. This is incorrect and false. This wrong informations are now falsley used by other bloggers.
I have nothing to do with that poem. I do not like to be seen on websites or blogs of which I do not share any opinion in any way.Your article does my work and my person harm. I like you to remove all parts of that article which are in connection to my person and my work - in word and image.
I am an artist and do not like to see my work being used for the wrong purposes.

Please follow my wish as you have no legal rights to publish anything without my permission.

Thank You

Martina Geccelli
London

Critics don't need the "permission" of "artists" to produce criticism about their work, anymore than artists' private emails to said critics need be treated in some privileged fashion. Her art consists of the original prints of photographs wherein she controls the negatives and reproductions. I merely reproduce copies of the copies which she self-disseminated on the internet. This reproduction is wholly noncommercial, and given the broad public interest paid toward the arrival at the truth of the attacks of September 11th, 2001, would seem to fall well within the editorial provisions of the "Fair Use" law.

In fact, I would claim, I've created a new work of art, incorporating pieces of her imagery, which thus transforms her art into a new context revealing a deeper, more resonant value than she may have originally intended---thus, I may even be the better artist.

If Ms. Geccelli cared so deeply about personal control of the images she took of the interiors of the World Trade Center in advance of its destruction, she could have posted said images in any of the proprietary and protective formats which prevent the copying and pasting of images "found" online.

And most importantly, if she were any friend of the truth, she would stop hiding behind the canard of possible "misunderstanding" of her, or my work. Nowhere do I claim she authored a poem, and in all fairness, comments to this blog clarify the fact most clearly. We have no right, nor ability to control, what others do or say regarding our output.

Ms. Geccelli may have better luck contacting Google Blogger directly to have her images removed from this blog. Others have done so successfully despite my opinion and objections. However, the issue is now larger than the sum of its parts. She will not be able to remove the discussion of the work at hand, a discussion which she has joined in on. My personal advice to her would be that she examine her motives and agenda. She won't be able to rollback what art has begun.