Berlin, Germany (Weltexpress). The British Supreme Court is due to rule in mid-October on the last chance for a full investigation into 9/11. A green light would enable a proper court case to investigate the case of 9/11 victim Jeffrey Campbell, including evidence from witnesses and experts on 9/11 given under oath.
After 25 years, there is indeed new hope for a proper inquiry into 9/11 before a British court. Matt Campbell, the brother of 9/11 victim Jeffrey Campbell, has fought for this for 25 years. He received support not only from his family, but also from many people in many countries, and above all from Roger Waters. Born in 1943, the co-founder (1965) of the legendary British rock band Pink Floyd rose to worldwide fame as a guitarist, singer, composer and music producer. At the same time, the rock legend is one of the most committed advocates of peace and justice; this applies both to the victims of the Israeli genocide in the Gaza Strip and to those of 9/11, which he cannot forget.
On 17 July this year, the well-known US presenter Tucker Carlson published an interview with Roger Waters on YouTube for his audience of millions, ahead of the upcoming 25th anniversary of 9/11. On this occasion, viewers learnt that, after 25 years of official cover-ups and misinformation, there is now still a chance to get to the bottom of the 9/11 conspiracy theory officially propagated by the US. This could soon take place as part of a standard ‘inquest’i in the UK, in accordance with current British legislation (see Part V); modelled on the meticulous investigation into the terrorist attack on Pan Am Flight 103, which was torn apart by a time bomb at high altitude on 21 December 1988 over Lockerbie in Scotland.
Memories of an oppressive atmosphere
In the interview, Waters spoke about his memories of 11 September 2001 and the doubts he had harboured from the outset regarding the official account. At the same time, he said he had been preoccupied at the time with the question of whether an attack from abroad might prompt the US to reflect on the consequences of its government’s foreign policy. Similar questions were raised in Germany at the time, circulating under the catchphrase ‘That’s what you get for that sort of thing’. This led to a condemnation orchestrated by politicians and the media, delivered with such fierce malice that no one dared to publicly question 9/11 if they wanted to keep their job. For from that moment on, we in the collective West were all Americans.
The atmosphere was so oppressive, Waters said in the interview, that sceptics were branded as mad and risked losing their public voice. Instead, the same television footage was repeated over and over again, accompanied by the explanation established immediately after the attack: Osama bin Laden and Arab terrorists had organised the attacks, which was subsequently used to justify the ‘US War on Terror’ leading to the destruction of five countries in the Middle East. Today, he considers his silence to have been a mistake.
Later in the programme, Waters expressed the view that the collapse of the WTC towers had been a controlled demolition. Carlson asked whether he had his own theory about who was responsible. Waters explained that, in his view, the evidence suggested that parts of the US security services had known about a plan for an attack. Israeli authorities, too, had been aware of it. However, Waters did not wish to commit himself regarding the actual perpetrators. What matters most to Waters is that these questions have never been dealt with in a proper court of law, where evidence and witnesses are examined in public.
Last hope for the truth
In fact, in the past 25 years, there has not been a single legitimate criminal investigation into 9/11, the deadliest terrorist attack in US history. Carlson admits that this was news to him too. Through public advocacy and financial donations, Waters is trying to change this and bring the unanswered questions surrounding 9/11 to light. Central to this is Waters’ commitment to his Scottish friend Matt Campbell. Campbell’s brother, Jeffrey, was killed on 11 September 2001 on the 106th floor of the North Tower of the World Trade Centre whilst attending a conference.
For over two decades, Campbell has been waging a legal battle in the UK for a new, formal investigation (‘inquest’) into the death of his brother Jeffrey. The only judicial inquiry into his death took place in the UK in 2013, twelve years after his death. According to Campbell, the ‘inquest’ was extremely superficial. It lasted around 90 minutes, and witnesses regarding the questionable circumstances surrounding the events were not permitted to testify. The inquest’s conclusion was that the death was caused by the collapse following the plane crash, which was attributed to an Al-Qaeda terrorist attack. There was no in-depth examination of the structural causes.
In 2021, Campbell applied for a reopening of the inquest under the Coroners Act 1988 and submitted extensive new evidence, including expert analyses suggesting a controlled demolition. The Attorney General rejected the application on the grounds that there was no public interest. In 2024, the High Court (one of the highest courts) largely upheld the immunity of the Attorney General’s decision, but then granted the applicant, Campbell, a direct route to the next higher court, the Supreme Court.
In November 2025, the UK Supreme Court granted leave to appeal. The hearing is scheduled to take place on 14 and 15 October 2026. For the time being, the sole issue at stake is whether the Attorney General’s decision is subject to judicial review. A successful outcome would pave the way for a new (Lockerbie-style) ‘inquest’. This would be the first time anywhere in the world that critical expert testimony regarding 9/11 could be heard under oath. The prospects for this depend on the constitutional ruling by the Supreme Court on 14 and 15 October.
As a reminder: an ‘inquest’ is a public judicial investigation into an unexplained, violent or unusual death. It seeks to establish who died and when, where and how the death occurred. The statements of witnesses and experts are given under oath and are examined in professionally conducted cross-examinations by both sides – the prosecution and the defence – in open court. All of this was absent from every investigation in the US, including the main inquiry by the ‘9/11 Commission’. This was conducted with a great deal of window-dressing and even more media hype, without providing any new insights into the alleged perpetrators, which is why critics also described it as a ‘Hollywood show’.
Note:
See the articles
- The Unanswered Questions of Ground Zero – Series: 25 Years After 9/11 (Part 1/7) by Rainer Rupp
- Just a few seconds’ deviation from a stone in free fall – Series: 25 years after 9/11 (Part 2/7) by Rainer Rupp
- “How can aircraft-grade aluminium penetrate this steel?” – Series: 25 years after 9/11 (Part 3/7) by Rainer Rupp
- The Great Silence on Profiteers, Secret Services and Israel – Series: 25 Years After 9/11 (Part 4/7) by Rainer Rupp
- An untouchable dogma and the investigation that was never allowed to happen – Series: 25 years after 9/11 (Part 5/7) by Rainer Rupp
- Lockerbie and the Twin Towers – double standards in the investigations – Series: 25 years after 9/11 (Part 6/7) by Rainer Rupp
in WELTEXPRESS.
