Correction – Evidence of Dismantling

Published by Steve De'ak on

I need to correct the record again. I mistakenly assumed that the evidence of dismantling in the lobby, detailed below, was done prior to demolition. But that’s silly, for many reasons. Not the least of which is that the lobbies were visible to street traffic, therefore the removal of interior finishes and the lobby ceiling, would be difficult to explain.

Here is a screen capture from Jack Taliercio’s footage showing the interior finishes of WTC1 were still there on the morning of 9/11.

The  trees on the mezzanine can be seen in the Naudet video.

The most damning evidence that the WTC was dismantled was provided, inadvertently no doubt, by FEMA, in their propaganda photo shoot conducted during the cleanup.

If you have been following the 9/11 Truth Movement for the last couple decades this evidence will come as a surprise to you because well, the truth was never the goal.  The goal was to keep rank and file truthers occupied with anything but the truth.  That’s why today most of the popular theories don’t include the most logical explanation, one that matches the evidence: that the buildings were demolished like buildings usually are by removing anything not integral to the construction of the building.  Contents like toilets, plumbing, HVAC and windows are removed else they will become shrapnel when the demolition charges are detonated.

To understand the clues though requires understanding how the buildings were constructed.  Without that basic knowledge it is difficult to identify what you’re looking at in the debris field.

The components for the truss-supported floors are shown below:


Anchoring straps for the truss-supported floors were situated above the floor deck and encased in the poured concrete:

But for the lobby and the other mechanical floors, I-beam construction was used to support elevator motors and other heavy equipment:

I-beam Construction:

These images show the I-beams installed for the lobby ceiling/first mechanical level:

For the I-beam supported floors, the anchoring straps were attached below the floor deck:

Now, to the proof the buildings were dismantled.

The anchoring straps are visible still neatly hanging from the walls.  Remnants of the floor deck are still seen where the lobby ceiling met the walls, but the I-beams are nowhere to be found.  The only way to explain this is that the I-beams and floor deck were removed, but the straps were left to dangle on the walls.  Pretty sloppy, I know, but the perpetrators are running the 9/11 Truth Movement, so it was easy to direct the attention of truthers away from this incriminating evidence:

And, although there is evidence of floor material for the first mechanical level, there is no such evidence of the truss-supported floors that allegedly had the anchoring straps encased in concrete, on any of the floors above the lobby.

There is no other way to explain the existence of the straps, but absence of I-beams, than by dismantling:

All these interior finishes were gone after the collapse.

I can understand how some people would reach for exotic explanations like imaginary directed energy weapons, because all those finishes do appear to have vaporized.

I know a lot of truthers who insist the towers were melted with thermite, or turned to dust with Directed Energy Weapons, or vaporized with unclear weapons, but none of them will address this evidence.  The way they deal with it is to ignore it completely, because, obviously, if the I-beams and floor deck were melted by thermite, or vaporized by unclear weapons, or turned to dust with directed energy weapons, then the relatively flimsy anchoring straps would be the first things to go.

No interior finishes remained, but the anchoring straps were hanging there.  And so were the damper connections.  No half-torn I-beams remained that the straps were once attached to, the I-beams were simply removed. But how is this possible, given the time frame?  Rescue crews immediately descended on the WTC, so, how were the finishes removed? And why would they bother? The only way it makes any sense is that they removed the lobby I-Beams and lobby finishes, to make them match the upper floors which were even more devoid of floor material than was the lobby. If the lobby finishes remained, but every floor above the lobby was blank, that would be hard to explain. But by removing the lobby I-Beams and wall finishes, they were able to blend in the bare lobby with the rest of the bare walls. But how they managed this given the time frame is beyond me.

And then there is the evidence of missing windows.  This is a closeup of the right corner of the gash.  Notice the windows – or absence of them.

The window openings were covered with some sort of fabric that was attached to the frames:

Screens are often used in demolitions to prevent debris from flying into neighboring buildings, but in this case, it looks like they were hung over empty window openings and spandrels to disguise the empty buildings.

Source file for the above:


Even the NYPD insisted glass was a rare find.  This is from an exhibit from the NYPD where they were trying to indoctrinate school children into believing the fires were so hot the concrete melted in its path.

The NYPD and Molten Concrete – 9/11 Crash Test (

And then there are the missing bolts.  Everywhere you look in the FEMA shots you’ll see evidence of removed bolts.

Fema pix – missing bolts and old glory – 9/11 Crash Test (

Removing strategic bolts would be all part of weakening the structure in preparation for demolition.  In the lower left of this image, you can see two bolts bent, and two bolts missing.

By removing the interior two bolts they ensured the walls would fall-away from the towers with a little push from interior explosives.  And that’s exactly what the videos show, the walls peeling away from the core like a big dust filled banana peel:

But, about that dust!  If the towers were dismantled, then where did the dust come from?  Well, apparently it was added as a prop to give the fully controlled truth movement something to be baffled about.

Proof that the dust was already in dust form can be seen in the first explosions:

It is all over the ground after the first explosions:

And it was still pouring out of a wall panel a few minutes later:

The dust served to disguise the empty towers and mask the means of demolition.  It also forced any curious onlookers away at a dead-run, and gave Manhattan that war-zone look of “Ground Zero.”

Even the media and authorities wanted us to be baffled about the dust:

They wanted curious people ask, “Where Did the Towers Go?”  And when they did, Judy Wood and the fully controlled but ironically named, 9/11 Truth Movement, would be waiting for them.

More details here:
Taboo Truths: Clues Avoided by the 9/11 Truth Movement – 9/11 Crash Test (







Michael · January 16, 2024 at 11:21 pm

very nice analysis. it’s a shame so few people have paid attention to these facts.

    Steve De'ak · January 20, 2024 at 9:19 am

    Hi Michael,

    Yeah, especially truthers. This evidence negates most of the truth movement hypotheses all by itself, which is why truthers go out of their way to avoid it. A lot of them earn an income by peddling false truth, so it is in their best interests to not solve 9/11.


Kristian Loekkegaard · March 14, 2024 at 5:20 am

You have summed it all up beautifully here, Steve. Thank you.

I was so fascinated when I learned about these very convincing observations back in 2018/2019.
Now it feels like it is written in neon, it is that obvious that the towers MUST have been dismantled and totally people-empty on 9/11. However, unfortunately, imagine the silence in the Danish FB group “Academics for an open-minded discussion on 9/11” , when I presented your well substantiated observations and theories about dismantling and empty towers 4-5 years ago.
I also posted the NYPD picture of the oviously planted wall panel with a landing wheel embedded in it and much, much, much more. I spend weeks serving your observations and well substantiated theories on a plate to my fellow truthers in the group. But, like I said, very disappointing outcome at the time, unfortunately. Very, very few comments and mostly total silence from most members with a few exceptions.

I will give it another go and hope to at least convince-beyond-doubt the few interested doubters, like for instance the highschool physics teacher Thomas, who is a member of the group.
(not much younger than me; (I’m 56), his last name escapes me right now, sorry);
he is a genuine 9/11 truth seeking person , I have no doubt. He is STILL mostly into the building 7 mystery, kinda stuck with it, and, as far as I know, still teaches his pupils about the infamous demolition of the building in his highschool physics classes, which has cost him much trouble during the years.
As far as I know he has kept his job despite many parents wanting him gone from the highschool he teaches in in Copenhagen.

    Steve De'ak · March 14, 2024 at 3:42 pm


    Thank you for your kind words, and welcome back!

    For those who are still married to the idea that on the morning of 9/11 all 220 floors were present in the twin towers, I invite them to try to explain the anchoring straps. Let them take as long as they like. 😉


Kristian Loekkegaard · March 14, 2024 at 5:39 am

Sh*t. What happened to my comment?.
I was just writing how beautifully you have summed up this part of your work: The dismantled and empty towers.
You’ll probably remember that we talked about it back in 2018/2019.
I will have another go presenting it in the FB group “Danish academics for an open-minded discussion on 9/11”.
First time – 4/5 years ago – and I spent weeks on it – the silence from most fellow members was deafening. With a few exceptions. There is a highschool physics teacher from Copenhagen, who’s eye I caught a little bit, at least, I think, but as far as I know he is still stuck with the WTC 7 mystery, teaching his classes about mostly that, when he brings 9/11 into his teaching. (To the irritation of numerous, brainwashed parents who have tried to get him fired, because they think he wastes his pupils’ time on 9/11 nonsens, because he diverts heavily from the official WTC7 explanation).

Another person that I used to know pretty well actually is Niels Harrit, as you might remember – him being the father of two of my best female school friends from back in the day. He has now held far more than 300 presentations in I don’t know how many countries – about primarily WTC 7. I’m afraid he will get a thermite melt down if I tell him the towers were dismantled and people-empty, but I’ll give it a go. It’s about time.

    Steve De'ak · March 14, 2024 at 3:37 pm

    Good ol’ Niels. Haha, yeah, I remember.

    I would love to hear his explanation for the anchoring straps.

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.