Brother of 9/11 victim goes to court with the BBC over alleged cover up
Brother of 9/11 victim goes to court with the BBC over alleged cover up
Friday 6th March 2015 at 09:36 By David Icke
Please support him on March 23rd.
Click here for background details …
The Richie Allen Show on Davidicke.com: Matt Campbell – 'Im Suing The BBC For
Covering Up My Brothers Murder on 9/11'
======================================================
Brother of 9/11 victim goes to court with the BBC over alleged cover up
Wednesday 05 March 2014
By David Icke
Posted in:
9/11
Event Details
Date: Monday March 23rd, 2015
Time: 2.15pm
Venue: Court 1 Hastings Magistrates Court, Bohemia Rd, Hastings TN34 1ND
Summary Overview
On 23rd March Matt Campbell of Sussex, United Kingdom, will go to court against the
BBC and will claim that the BBC is in violation of UK anti-terrorist legislation in the way
that they have covered up evidence relating to 9/11 and evidence relating to the
murder of his brother Geoff. Geoff Campbell was killed while inside the North Tower of
the World Trade Centre on September 11th, 2001. Mr Campbell will claim that he has
reasonable cause to believe that the BBC has been wilfully complicit in the deliberate
cover up of vital and incontrovertible evidence relating to how his brother Geoff was
killed and that as such the BBC is guilty of complicity with terrorism.
Representing Mr Campbell’s case against the BBC is senior litigation solicitor and human
rights activist Mahtab Aziz who has represented a number of well-known public figures
such as Imran Khan, the former Pakistan cricketer captain turned politician, Herbie Hide
the former 2 time World Heavyweight boxing champion and a number of other
internationally well-known artists, singers and sportsmen. Mr Aziz also advised British
Film Director Tony Rooke at Horsham Magistrates Court in 2013 for his similar case
against the BBC’s alleged cover up of 9/11 evidence. That particular court case between
Mr Rooke and the BBC was attended by several hundred members of the public and by
independent journalists from across Europe where they witnessed Mr Rooke achieve a
partial victory against the BBC.
Mr Campbell will also be calling on the support of a number of expert witnesses.
See below for further details of this court case.
Legal details of Mr Campbell’s court case
Mr Campbell claims that the BBC is refusing to inform the public of incontrovertible
scientific evidence relating to free fall acceleration during the collapse of World Trade
Centre Building 7, and the BBC appears to be supporting a cover up of the true events
of that day. He is therefore pleading “Not Guilty” to having an appropriate TV licence as
he has ”reasonable cause” to suspect that by funding the BBC through his TV Licence
Fees he would be supporting the purposes of terrorism and he would be guilty of
breaking the law under Article 15 Section 3 of the Terrorism Act.
He will also claim that the BBC is guilty of an offence under Section 38B of the
Terrorism Act 2000 as amended by Section 117 of Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security
Act 2001. Under Section 38B(2) of the TA 2000 if a person without reasonable excuse,
fails to disclose information falling within Section 38B(1). A person may commit this
offence through total inactivity (by not answering police questions or by not
volunteering information), through the partial suppression of information, or by relating
a false account when the true facts are known.
The cover-up of 9/11 evidence and Geoff Campbell’s murder
Mr Campbell’s brother, Geoff, was on business in the North Tower of the World Trade
Centre on September 11, 2001 when the tower was struck by an aircraft and later
collapsed killing everyone who was still inside. The official reason provided for the
collapse of both the Twin Towers that day was that fire resulting from the crashed
airliners caused a weakening of the structure of the buildings which eventually led to
their complete collapse. The official explanation given to Mr Campbell for who was
responsible for the aircraft hitting the North Tower was that it was due to Al Qaeda
terrorists who hijacked the aircraft and then deliberately flew it into the tower, and that
therefore it was the alleged Al Qaeda hijackers who were responsible for the murder of
Mr Campbell’s brother.
However, over the last several years Mr Campbell has been conducting a detailed
investigation into the death of his brother and has come up with some startling
information and evidence which he believes casts huge doubts about the official
explanation he has been provided with for his brother’s murder. Through Mr Campbell’s
own investigations, as well as the scientific analysis of dozens of professional physicists,
architects, engineers, demolition experts, and other scientists, Mr Campbell, as well as
thousands of professional and technical experts, believes that both the Twin Towers and
World Trade Centre Building 7 (a 47 storey tower not hit by an aircraft) collapsed as a
result of controlled, explosive, demolition, rather than from fires from the crashed
aircraft. If Mr Campbell’s assertion is correct then it creates a very different picture
about what really took place on 9/11, who was potentially involved, and who was
actually responsible for his brother’s murder.
Mr Campbell’s court case against the BBC is based upon the allegation that he has
reasonable cause to believe that the BBC has been deliberately withholding the available
evidence which supposedly proves his belief that the three towers were brought down
through controlled demolition. Mr Campbell claims that numerous professional experts
from around the world and more than 500 members of the public have provided
detailed evidence and written requests to the BBC demanding that they adhere to their
Editorial Guidelines and their Royal Charter and show the public what he claims is
incontrovertible scientific evidence and eye-witness evidence. He claims that this
evidence proves beyond any doubt that his brother Geoff was murdered in a way that is
very different to what he has been told by government officials and by the coroner. Mr
Campbell aims to present to the court in Sussex evidence showing that the BBC has
been deliberately covering up this vital information from the public.
Mr Campbell believes that by covering up this evidence the BBC are supporting those
terrorists to get away with their crime which included the murder of his brother.
Therefore, according to Mr Campbell, to pay his TV Licence Fee to the BBC would in fact
be a criminal act according to Section 15, Article 3 of the Terrorism Act. Mr Campbell
believes that he has a situation of conflict of law whereby he is prepared to continue
paying his TV Licence Fee, but not if it goes to the BBC, because to provide funds to the
BBC would be to provide funds to an organisation that is supporting an act of terrorism,
according to Mr Campbell and his lawyers.
Evidence to support Mr Campbell’s allegation of controlled demolition
The following are some of the points of evidence that Mr Campbell cites as supporting
the allegation that the three towers that collapsed on 9/11 collapsed due to controlled,
explosive demolition. This is not a complete list of Mr Campbell’s evidence:
1. Confirmed free fall of WTC Building 7
World Trade Centre Building 7 fell at free-fall acceleration for at least 2.25 seconds
(105 feet/8 stories) as confirmed in 2008 by the official investigators NIST (National
Institute for Standards & Technology). This means that at least 8 stories of the building
collapsed with absolutely zero structural resistance within them, and that all 80 of the
core steel columns, and all of the steel beam cross connections for those 8 stories had
to have been completely severed, all within a split second of each other in order to
achieve the perfectly symmetrical free fall collapse that is seen in WTC Building 7. The
only thing that can achieve this is controlled-demolition using carefully placed
explosives and perfectly timed detonation. Controlled Demolition of a high rise tower
cannot be prepared within a few hours. It takes weeks or months to plan and implement
2. BBC foreknowledge of the unprecedented collapse of WTC Building 7
Apart from the three towers that collapsed on 9/11, no steel frame building has ever
collapsed from fire in history, either before or since 9/11. High rise towers are designed
specifically so that this cannot happen. However on that day the BBC reported on live
television that WTC Building 7 had collapsed more than 20 minutes before it actually
collapsed. While the buildings collapse was being reported to the world by a BBC
journalist, the fully intact building could still be seen standing in the background in what
appeared to be a relatively uncompromised state and no obvious fires of any
consequence. This footage is still available to see on YouTube. This would suggest that
someone likely knew that the building was going to come down in a controlled manner
and that the BBC reporter had inadvertently been given this information a little too early.
How did anyone know that the building was going to collapse as a result of simple office
fires, as is NIST’s official explanation, when fire has never caused this to happen to any
other building in history, apart from on that day, and it is physically impossible for fires
to reach even close to the required temperature to even begin to weaken steel? Why did
the BBC not actively investigate where that foreknowledge of collapse came from and
inform the police or investigators, and the public? How did the source of that
information know that the building was going to come down if a symmetrical collapse at
free fall acceleration is impossible from office fires and is unprecedented in history?
3. The BBC’s misinformation & refusal to notify the public about critical and
incontrovertible evidence
In 2007 the BBC ran a documentary which claimed that despite what hundreds of
professional engineers, physicists, demolition experts, and scientists were claiming
about free fall of WTC Building 7, they were in fact wrong and there was no free fall of
WTC Building 7. Even after NIST, the official investigators, officially confirmed the
existence of free fall in 2008 the BBC has refused to comply with the requirements of
their own Editorial Guidelines and publicly correct their error about this absolutely vital
issue. This is despite a number of professional experts and more than 500 members of
the public making written requests in 2012 to the BBC for them to do so. The BBC still
has not corrected this error and still has not informed the public of the quite incredible
fact that in 2008 NIST officially confirmed the existence of free fall of WTC Building 7,
which can only occur through controlled demolition.
In addition to this, a great deal more incontrovertible evidence supporting the controlled
demolition of the three towers has been forwarded to the BBC by numerous professional
experts and hundreds of the public, but the BBC has refused to show this evidence to
the public. This includes eye witness testimonies from 118 first responder fire fighters
on 9/11 who reported hearing or seeing explosions going off in all three towers. These
eye witness reports were originally suppressed by the US government, but were later
forced to be released through the Freedom of Information Act.
4. BBC deliberately misleading the public with biased and inaccurate reporting
Despite having hundreds of people demanding that the BBC show the evidence
described above, the BBC has refused to do this and have instead shown
documentaries which are seemingly designed only to smear and discredit the
reputation of the professional individuals and organisations bringing this evidence
forward, and the BBC has instead presented information that is based on
methodology that runs in direct contradiction to the BBC’s own Editorial Guidelines
for providing accurate and impartial information. This has included such things as
removing the sounds of huge explosions going off in WTC Building 7 moments
before it collapsed during one of the BBC’s documentaries which was examining the
claims of hundreds of professional experts that WTC Building 7 was brought down
with explosives in a controlled demolition. Why would the BBC remove these
sounds of explosions going off in a documentary aimed specifically at examining the
claims that the collapse of the towers on 9/11 may have been due to explosives?
Mr Campbell and his support team will be asking these questions and more in the
upcoming court case.
=======================================================
=======================================================
ENHANCED VERSION: News Reports WTC7 Fell Before It Happens!
Uploaded on 26 Feb 2007
An astounding video uncovered from the archives today shows the BBC reporting on the
collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the
afternoon of more 9/11. The incredible footage shows BBC reporter Jane Standley
talking about the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building while it remains standing in
the live shot behind her head. How did the BBC know that it was going to collapse? And
why did they report the collapse when it is clearly standing in the background?
- Home
- Forum
- Chat
- Donate
-
Site Links
-
Avalon Library
-
External Sites
- Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts
- The Wall Will Fall | Vanessa Beeley
- Unsafe Space | Keri Smith
- Giza Death Star | Joseph P. Farrell
- The Last American Vagabond
- Caitlin Johnstone
- John Pilger
- Voltaire Network
- Suspicious Observers
- Peak Prosperity | Chris Martenson
- Dark Journalist
- The Black Vault
- Global Research | Michael Chossudovsky
- Corbett Report
- Infowars
- Natural News
- Ice Age Farmer
- Dr. Joseph Mercola
- Childrens Health Defense
- Geoengineering Watch | Dane Wigington
- Truthstream Media
- Unlimited Hangout | Whitney Webb
- Wikileaks index
- Vaccine Impact
- Eva Bartlett (In Gaza blog)
- Scott Ritter
- Redacted (Natalie & Clayton Morris)
- Judging Freedom (Andrew Napolitano)
- Alexander Mercouris
- The Duran
- Simplicius The Thinker
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks