Didn't see any mention of this on the previous two pages, and also figured that it would have been a fairly hot topic had it been mentioned, so:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/08/28/russia.security/index.html

The explosive in question is 'hexogen,' apparently a compound used before by the Chechen rebels. If the Chechens are behind it, that's really not a good way to engender sympathy for your cause in the world community.

At the same time, the cynic in me almost wonders if it might be a plant in order to discredit the rebels and strengthen Russia's position.

Interesting stuff.

At the same time, the cynic in me almost wonders if it might be a plant in order to discredit the rebels and strengthen Russia's position.

Same sorts of theories are out there about 9/11, as well, in many different forms. It all depends on where you are in the world and who you trust.

Sure. The primary difference as far as I'm concerned is that we weren't physically fighting anybody prior to 9/11, whatever level of rhetoric may have existed notwithstanding.

The Russians and Chechens have been fighting for years, on the other hand, and there was a lot of speculation following 9/11 that the Russians were happy - not because of what happened to the US, mind, but because of what it potentially meant as far as world support for their fight against the Chechens went.

Note there's also a difference between sponsoring (or turning the other way for) an attack, and perhaps planting evidence to make something look like an attack.

I have a much easier time believing something may be hinky with the Russian jets than I would believing that our government had anything to do with 9/11.