our suspicions that the building was subjected to controlled demolition and that the knowledge of its demise derived ultimately from those who intended to bring it down. Comment number 33. That documentary, being titled "The Conspiracy Files" suggested from the outset that we already have a credible explanation and some others, less credible, were about to be presented. What I'd rather see though, is a police style investigation that looks for evidence and assesses it, from a starting point of no assumption. It did cover quite a lot, but since it started with a very strong suggestion in the title not to take the whole thing seriously, it wasn't an impartial investigation. It's interesting to note that these programmes often end with something like " don't rake over this, it is upsetting and insulting to the families of those who died", which is pretty strong emotional suggestion. What they don't say is that many of those families do not believe the official line either and want further investigation. So, we have the suggestion in the title - "don't take this seriously" and at the end we have "think no more about this, you are insulting the dead". Like I said, hardly balanced. If it was a true investigation it would have been called something like "Panorama". Imagine the difference. It may still have concluded the alternative viewpoints don't add up (or maybe some do), but it wouldn't have been biased from the outset. Anyway, whether terrorism or inside job, 9/11