>It does quite a good job of explaining this one.

<shrug> Doesn't seem to do a much better job than the thing it's refuting. The thing I'm really curious about is the wings -- in the WTC, the wings clearly punched through the building. I know the Pentagon had a much stronger exterior wall, but I'm not sure I buy the "snapped during the initial impact, then were pushed inward towards the fuselage and carried into the building's interior" story. If they were weak enough to snap, why wouldn't they have stayed outside the wall that snapped them and exploded there? Also, my rough estimations say that about a third of the weight of a fully-loaded 757 is in the wings. Then see the pictures at the bottom of this page: http://www.ifrance.fr/silentbutdeadly/

Specifically this one: http://www.ifrance.fr/silentbutdeadly/pentagonxox3.jpg

Though I guess I'm supporting a story that I don't really believe in myself. Problem is, I'm a perpetual devil's advocate. I swear, if the general consensus was that it was a truck bomb, I'd argue that it was a plane.

Alex