There are plenty of answers available to those easy questions, but it's hard to tell what's authentic and what isn't. I don't want to open up a very tangled can of very slimy worms here, but although there is a lot about the official account of 9/11 that's fishy to me, these "This is what REALLY happened!" sites beg the question:
If the government can fake all that "official" evidence, why should anyone believe what some independent researchers put forward? Are they assumed trustworthy because they apparently have less to gain from deceit than some cabal of government conspirators? Does that really make sense, given the super-abundance of outlandish "hoax exposed" sites? Those guys seem very highly motivated, although God only knows why... in short, I don't trust their claims at face value any more than I blindly accept the official line from Washington.
You'd have to be pretty damn stupid to think "gosh, this picture proves that the other picture I saw was a fake!!"
I mean, think about it...

I've been meaning to go through all the taped TV broadcasts I have from that very day, to look for some of the "evidence" of black helicopters hiding in smoke, missiles, and airliners with externally-mounted bombs and remote-control antennas instead of the normal nav/comm, etc...
Unless I pop them in the VCR only to find they've been mysteriously erased.... (cue "X-Files" theme...)
