Say for instance can a jumbo jet hit the lawn in front of the Pentagon on it's way in and not disturb giant reels of cable sitting in it's path? Or "vaporize" from heat leaving little plane but lot's of Pentagon?
Brother. Here we go again.
I've reviewed a lot of the 9/11 Pentagon material & theories. Those slinging accusitorial questions about various "facts" are wilfully ignorant of what actually happened.
Giant reels of cable? it missed them. Really, it did.
"Vaporized"? Compared with a huge hardened concrete structure, the plane was little more than an aluminum-foil bag of air & fuel hitting a large rock. And YES, there was a lot of plane debris lying around afterwards.
I'll stop there. I've seen the 9/11 conspiracy theories. The're rubbish. Every point can be explained with a simple natural explaination. The problem is that the conspiracy theorists, having little grasp of the real world, fling half-fact half-assed accusations so fast & thick that you can't get a rational response in edgewise ... which perversely eggs them on, because the lack of sane explaination (regardless of having no time to review it) is pointed at as proof of conspiracy, and any sane explaination is either attacked with fervor, with either any perceivable hole instantly burdened with more conspiracies, or the sane explaination is ignored outright.
Conspiracy theorists have a very weak grasp of reality, and feed off each others' rumors. Pretty pathetic, really. If someone doesn't want to be convinced of mundane reality, it's amazing how much effort they'll put into concocting elaborate mental tarpits.