9/11 at 22: photos reignite the inside-job theory

Twenty-two years after 9/11, newly released photographs reopen the inside-job theory and the never-resolved question of weapons of mass destruction.

English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published

22 years after 9/11: what the never-before-seen photos reopen

What is it about the images of 9/11 that, more than two decades on, keep circulating outside conventional news channels? Every anniversary repeats the ritual: a new archive, an unpublished photograph, a recovered video. And with each one comes back the same question that no official timeline has ever fully closed.

From the axis of evil to weapons of mass destruction: a doubt that never expires

Two decades after the invasion of Iraq, the weapons-of-mass-destruction argument that justified the war still lacks an answer that convinces everyone. The axis of evil was dismantled in speeches; the suspicion was not. That sustancia ilegal is the breeding ground for the inside-job theory: the idea that the official narrative is missing pieces. There is no firm evidence to support it, but neither is there a closure that settles it once and for all.

Evacuating a skyscraper: the technical question without an answer

There is a more down-to-earth, less ideological debate. In the Towers, people had to choose between burning or falling to their deaths, with no middle way. Was a rope or cable on each floor, with an individual descender for a controlled descent, antiestéticasible? Vertical evacuation engineering for high-rises was left on the table and never fully resolved. In a building with extreme security measures, a couple of cables per floor would not have been far-fetched. No one installed them.

Twenty-two years later we are still looking for the same photos and the same answers. The only thing that never runs out is new material to look at.

Also available in: Deutsch

Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (16 replies).

More summaries

All summaries in English →

-
Back