The propriety of such a project remains a matter of conjecture, however, as the numerous entities involved have not yet publicly addressed the implications of redeveloping the site.

"The engineering is certainly there to rebuild and build higher," observes one source. "If a developer owns a building that catches fire, he has the right to rebuild, but this is different. We have a high-profile landowner, an international disaster and a private developer. There's going to be a huge discussion on what's appropriate."

Silverstein's statement follows:

"I was asked by the governor what must be attempted with respect to rebuilding, and I told him what I tell you. We signed a lease at 7 World Trade Center on the 31st of December 1980. Seven years later, we completed the building and thereafter got it occupied. Our mission thereafter was to acquire the twin towers.

"The reality is once we care for the human needs, I personally feel we have an obligation to our children and our grandchildren and the world. If we don't rebuild it, we give in to the people who resort to destroying our way of life. There is no doubt in my mind that we'll have the cooperation of the port, the insurance carriers and the political leaders.

"We can get this done. To those who lost their lives and who almost lost their lives, this is our obligation. Let's get to it and get to it today."

Despite his stirring words, Silverstein's statement presumes the as-yet unannounced cooperation of the Port Authority. "Silverstein doesn't own the land," says another observer who worked closely with Silverstein during the master-lease negotiations. "He would have to have the PA's support or he couldn't pull it off. Theoretically, he could continue to pay the Port Authority but he has no rent, and we're talking huge amounts of money."