I could have sworn this answer came not from the question you cite but from the equally dumb ‘Master, does a cow have buddha nature’?
Another way to explain the “What happened to the wings?” question is to point out that they were full of fuel - that’s where a lot of the tanks are. If the plane had touched down before hitting the building, the wings were probably half-burnt before reaching the wall.
Sheeesh! The Twin Towers suffered too much damage - “those towers shoulda been built to withstand an unpredictable impact from a hijacked airliner!” - and the Pentagon didn’t suffer enough - “well I see smoke and stuff, but what happend to the airplane?”.
There’s just no pleasing some people.
BTW, you don’t see much airplane left from the Twin Towers either. Care to try and blame that on a car bomb?
No. No we’re not, Princhester, we have then moved well and trully into the land of Aus 
[QUOTE=GMRyujin]
Is this a new catchphrase? QUOTE]
Yes.You.must.pass.it.down.from.generation.to generation.
ACcually, it does seem to have become a catchphrase mocking the 9/11 conspiracy guys in certain USENET groups. One of the conspiracy accounts claims there were “pools of molten steel” in the bottom of one of the elevator shafts. Their logic being that the steel should not have melted and thus something was fishy.
As it turned out, the source for the “molten steel” was iffy at best (heard it from somebody who heard it from somebody who saw it). And the account of how the sekrit guv’ment coverup carried away the molten steel was laughable (buckets and a garbage truck).
Much like all the 9/11 conspiracy claims.
Doc Nickel has already done a magnificent job, but I would like to ask the 9/11 conspiracy folks why they think there would be much plane debris left?
Anyone remember that Alaska airlines plane that had trouble with its tail rudders and went into the Pacific Ocean at about 250 mph? Water is about 50 times more dense than air and there was damn near nothing left but an oil slick.
Now, what is more dense? Water or steel? Think carefully now.
I also love the question “what happened to the wings”? Did you expect some kind of hole shaped like the profile of an airplane, as if you were in a Bugs Bunny cartoon?
Sheesh…
What has always made me wonder about this non-conspiracy is WHY?
Why on earth when 20 million people saw a plane fly into the two towers live on TV would the Pentagon blow itself up?
Whatever was going to happen was already set in motion, what would/could a third attack (not even "accidentally " on Greenpeace or the Russian Embassy or even the Capital or White House all of which could make some tiny % of conspiratorial sense) but on the Marine Aviation Office and Marine Office of General Counsel? It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever
Who gained anything by that attack that wasn’t already gained by the WTC attacks-- let alone being worth the huge risk & effort in faking it.
Uh, jealousy?
Did anyone else notice the date of the security camera footage that CNN obtained? Check it out here. The date and time are Sept 12 at 1700 approximately.
See, there is a huge conspiracy. 
A few times a year, a newb will show up and link to this sort of nonsense. Usually it’s 911 conspiracy or moon landing hoax sites. We spend a bunch of time contering the allegations on these sites with facts and they never, ever seem to reply. I wonder if they even bother to read the replies or if they are just spamming and not returning.
Haj
You forget that they do often give the obligatory “You guys just believe everything you see on the news!!!” reply before they get buried in a load of reality.