Roger Waters Refuses to Fully Explain Who He Believes Orchestrated 9/11 Attacks
"The most obvious culprit, and I don't believe this to be true, by the way, in case he gets upset, is the guy who collected billions and billions of dollars and insurance money the next day and didn't go into work that day in his office. And I've forgotten his name now, but the whole thing is that's a crazy... I don't know. So, why do you say things when you clearly have no idea? We know it wasn't caused by Muhammad Ata and his mates. All 15 of them."
About this episode
Piers Morgan hosts a contentious debate with Pink Floyd legend Roger Waters and Matt Campbell, whose brother Jeff died in the North Tower on 9/11. Campbell is pursuing a landmark UK Supreme Court case scheduled for October 14-15, 2024, seeking to reopen the inquest into his brother's death, claiming evidence suggests a different mechanism than the official narrative caused the towers' collapse. Waters has contributed £100,000 toward Campbell's legal fees and argues the case is fundamentally about whether the UK attorney general should have the power to block evidence from reaching courts. The heated exchange centers on Waters' belief that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 fell by controlled demolition, a theory Morgan vehemently rejects. When pressed repeatedly by Morgan to identify who he believes orchestrated such a conspiracy, Waters deflects, vaguely references someone who collected insurance money, then admits he doesn't know. Morgan accuses Waters of using Campbell's genuine grief to advance conspiracy theories, specifically challenging the notion that the American government would murder thousands of its own citizens. Campbell maintains he is not seeking to assign blame but simply wants evidence heard in court, including eyewitness testimony from first responders and expert analysis from physicists and chemists. The interview exposes the tension between Campbell's careful legal approach focused on establishing cause of death versus Waters' more provocative conspiracy-oriented framing, with Morgan arguing that not a single whistleblower has ever come forward to support the controlled demolition theory despite the thousands who would need to be involved in such a conspiracy.
Key takeaways
- Matt Campbell is taking the UK government to Supreme Court on October 14-15, 2024, seeking to reopen the inquest into his brother Jeff's 9/11 death with new evidence
- Roger Waters has donated £100,000 to Campbell's legal fund and claims UK attorneys general since 2001 have operated above the law by blocking 9/11 evidence from courts
- Waters asserts World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 fell by controlled demolition but refuses to name who he believes planted explosives or orchestrated the alleged conspiracy
- Campbell's legal application includes eyewitness testimony from first responders, police officers, and expert analysis from physicists and chemists suggesting an alternative collapse mechanism
- The Supreme Court case will decide whether the attorney general's gatekeeping power to block evidence from courts is subject to judicial review, a major constitutional question
- Morgan challenges Waters on why no whistleblowers have ever come forward if thousands would have had to know about an alleged government conspiracy
- Campbell distances himself from conspiracy theories, stating he seeks only to establish how his brother died through proper legal proceedings, not to assign blame