No 767's at the WTC

gets mentioned by Salon's piece on "Loose Change" and 9/11 conspiracies:

Overall, "Loose Change" presents a story of 9/11 that some have labeled the "no-plane theory," because it argues that the aircraft crashing into buildings were essentially a pyrotechnic distraction from the main destructive acts, the missile at the Pentagon and the controlled demolition of the trade towers. "Loose Change" acknowledges that two planes did actually hit the trade towers -- this marks a variation from more outré versions of the no-plane theory, which propose that live videos of the crash were doctored to include the 767s or that some kind of highly classified holographic technology created the illusion of planes hitting the towers (both theories have obvious flaws).

(tip to Nico)

Incredibly they point to Salter's Questions-Questions article to debunk the no-planes idea.

The piece isn't too snottily dismissive of the conspiracy stories; it's better than I expected. Most interestingly was the way Bob Kerrey, at the end of the piece, laid the groundwork for alternative 9/11 stories and revelations.