Med Mech: I have no idea what e-mail you refer to. My thoughts were spurred from Griffin's book.

There's nothing in the photographs that looks like the impact of a 757 to me. I don't see any place where the wings and engines would have hit the building on the exterior. Griffin tackles the idea that the wings folded back as the nose hit. It doesn't make any sense, particularly with the weight of the engines on the wings. The wings would have continued forward as the nose slowed when it hit the building. When the planes hit the Towers, there was clear evidence of the wings penetrating the structure.
I suppose the picture of the large circular hole in the interior could be a result of an engine piercing the structure.

Griffin's book does refer to a standard procedure for aircraft to be scrambled if a scheduled flight deviated from its standard path.
I find it hard to believe that the Pentagon was not defended with a a missile system of some sort. It had also been known for a fairly long time that two planes had been flown into the Twin Towers as this plane approached the Pentagon.

I read the Snopes piece. It doesn't answer all the questions. At one point it states that there is a hole where the aircraft pierced the building but it is behind the water and smoke in the photograph. Perhaps, but they don't give any evidence to support that claim.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13