No on both counts. Was it cleaned up? Yes. Was evidence removed and a conclusion not reached? No. They just didn't reach YOUR (or other theorists') conclusion, so 'evidence was cleaned up'.
I only implied a single person in response to the term conspiracy. As for your argument being 'whacky', in your opinion, to what end was the WTC cleaned of evidence?
So your intent was to rule out impossible outcomes or to label those arguments as derived from your (otherwise meaningless) statement as impossible?
Well, either ad hominem attacks are taboo, in which case your response to thunderbird is either meaningless or taboo, or ad hominem attacks are perfectly acceptable and Zap's questioning of your political motivation is perfectly founded. If the Popular Mechanics links don't argue against the character of thunderbird's source, why did you post them?
Zap and thunderbird both answered the question, and you dismissed them. As well, you asked for three things, one of which was my thoughts, which were given. As for the others, you want answers;
The WTC towers were built to withstand the largest aircraft of their day. The planes that hit them were bigger, and in the future, it probably won't be planes or hitting. Get rid of the 'evidence', save the people, clear the area.
What's the plan once you've collected and analyzed the 'evidence' (which already exists ask any civil engineer) retrofit everything you deem a target?
Okay, things may look peculiar, but so what? That's where you'd earn your foil hat IMO. Not crazy, but getting there.