good evening, good people. welcome along to the neil oliver show on gb news tv, radio and online. tonight i delve into the ongoing questions surrounding the event that changed the world. ted, walter and alan mendoza shed more light on that shortly. also, with the rise of the supposed far right making headunesin the supposed far right making headlines in the uk and across europe, i ask what this label really means, if anything, with conservative mp sir david davis. all of that and more coming up. but first, an update on the latest . latest. news. >> good evening. the top stories from the gb newsroom. home office figures show 801 illegal

migrants crossed the english channelin migrants crossed the english channel in 14 small boats yesterday. that's a record daily number since labour came into power, and brings the total who've crossed this year to over 23,200. and that's as eight migrants died overnight whilst trying to cross the channel. 53 migrants were on board a boat which got into difficulty off the coast of northern france. around 51 survivors were rescued and six were taken to hospital, including a ten month old baby suffering from hypothermia. the news comes less than two weeks after a separate incident where 12 migrants died after a boat sank off the french coastline . a sank off the french coastline. a murder investigation has been launched in east london after a woman was stabbed to death. officers were called in the early hours of this morning to an address in tower hamlets with an address in tower hamlets with a 32 year old woman since being arrested on suspicion of murder. a 37 year old man was also arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender. in other

news, foreign secretary david lammy has defended the prime minister following allegations that sir keir starmer has broken parliamentary rules by failing to declare donations of clothing for his wife. the sunday times reported the gifts came from labour donor lord alli and covered the cost of a personal shopper, clothes and alterations for the prime minister's wife, victoria, during the election campaign . campaign. >> this is not a breach of transparency rules. it's a prime minister that's acting positively to make sure that everything is above board. and this money comes from a long standing over two decades. lord alli has been in the house of lords. he has been a big supporter of the labour party. he's a self—made man, and i think there is nothing to see here really . here really. >> and there's more trouble for sir keir starmer's government, as it's revealed pensioners could be left £1,000 worse off this winter . this comes on top

this winter. this comes on top of suggestions that labour could also axe the single person discount on council tax at next month's budget. the party have thus far refused to rule this out, stating that difficult decisions need to be made in order to fill the so—called £22 billion black hole left by the conservatives sir ed davey says the nhs cannot withstand labour reforms without more funding. the lib dems leader made the comments during the second day of the lib dem party conference in brighton today. earlier this week, sir keir starmer said the nhs will not get any more funding without reforming as he laid out a ten year plan to fix the health service. sir ed davey says he's concerned that the government is talking about reform before investment being spent on the nhs and in some areas there has, but in many areas there has, but in many areas there's not enough being spent. >> and at the election we said in community health services, gps , nhs dentists, community

gps, nhs dentists, community pharmacists, we said they've been underfunded, they don't have enough staff. that was our argument and that's our argument now. and you know, if you don't get more gps, if you don't get more nhs dentists, if you don't open those community pharmacists which are on the front line for many people's healthcare, people will end up going to hospital. that part of the problem has been so many people in going to hospital, because we haven't got the primary care as strong as it needs to be. >> today is the duke of sussex's 40th birthday, the youngest son of the king will be celebrating the start of his 40s at his californian home with his wife, meghan, and their two children, archie and lilibet. the prince has said he was anxious to turn 30, but that he's excited about turning 40 and his mission is now doing good in the world. earlier this morning, the x account for the royal family wished harry a happy birthday in their first public message for their first public message for the prince since 2021. and today

is the 84th anniversary of the battle of britain, a military campaign that was seen as a turning point of world war ii. the british royal air force fought the german luftwaffe in the skies over the uk, with the brits claiming a victory that's now commemorated each year on the 15th of september, a commemoration service took place earlier today to mark the anniversary, with both sir keir starmer and the former prime minister, rishi sunak, in attendance. and those are the latest gb news headlines for now. i'm tatiana sanchez. more from me in an hour for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code, of those twin towers changed everytbyg in some , t l, ,, of those twin towers changed everytby scanninge t t t, ,, of those twin towers changed everyt by scanning the t t t, ,, of those twin towers changed everyt by scanning the qr... t t, ,, of those twin towers changed or go to gb news. everyt by scanning the qr code, t t, ,, alerts by scanning the qr code, or go to gb news. >> dot com. forward slash alerts . >> dot com. forward slash alerts . >> dot com. forward slash alerts. >> dot com. forward slash alerts. >> what we're watching now feels >> dot com. forward slash alerts. >> dot com. forward slash alerts. >> what we're watching now feels like the final season of an like the final season of an otherwise endless soap opera otherwise endless soap opera

that's come to the end of the that's come to the end of the road to few viewers, taken in road to few viewers, taken in far less caring writers and far less caring writers and actors phoning in their actors phoning in their contributions , and the audience contributions , and the audience contributions, and the audience almost entirely moved on. no contributions, and the audience almost entirely moved on. no longer able to bear it. hardly longer able to bear it. hardly anyone's buying it any longer. anyone's buying it any longer. this badly written, badly this badly written, badly directed, badly acted farce of directed, badly acted farce of all farces. time to call . all farces. time to call . directed, badly acted farce of all farces. time to call. time of death, i would suggest roll directed, badly acted farce of all farces. time to call. time of death, i would suggest roll the credits one last time, the credits one last time, because the attention of the because the attention of the watching billions is watching billions is increasingly focused elsewhere on more credible plotlines. this increasingly focused elsewhere on more credible plotlines. this week saw the 23rd anniversary of week saw the 23rd anniversary of the event that changed the world the event that changed the world for everyone alive. being the for everyone alive. being the 9/11 destruction of the world 9/11 destruction of the world trade centre. there are adults trade centre. there are adults in the world now born after that in the world now born after that moment , grown adults who can't moment , grown adults who can't moment, grown adults who can't remember the world of before . it moment, grown adults who can't remember the world of before . it remember the world of before. it used to be said, the first world remember the world of before. it used to be said, the first world war was a set of iron railings war was a set of iron railings separating what had gone before separating what had gone before from everything that came after from everything that came after 9/11. feels like that. whether 9/11. feels like that. whether you remember watching it on the you remember watching it on the day or whether it's history from day or whether it's history from before your time, the dropping before your time, the dropping of those twin towers changed of those twin towers changed

everything in some everything in some strange way. the footage seems to play on an endless loop , whether anyone is endless loop, whether anyone is watching or not. somewhere always and forever, the images of the planes, the explosions, the burning, the way the towers dropped one after the other as though stamped on by an invisible foot. a flashback for the whole world, brought to mind by passenger planes against cloudless skies and skylines, by skyscrapers like tall poppies. footage of demolitions by now, fewer people believe the official narrative of that timeless horror. by now, the plot holes still dismissed by officialdom, furiously dismissed as the stuff of conspiracy theory, have for increasing numbers , rendered the official numbers, rendered the official 9/11 story into something too worn out to accept any longer. too many questions have risen, like the clouds of dust that billowed above the debris after the thunderous falling. whatever really happened that day and no one forgets that thousands of innocent souls were murdered. the notion that officialdom told the whole truth about it all is gone for many. if not most, leaving questions and suspicion in its place, as well as the

thousands who died on 9/11 itself. the so—called war on terror that then ensued, and it's with us, yet has killed millions more, directly or indirectly. in came the patriot act for americans, an end to privacy and an attitude of nafion privacy and an attitude of nation states towards their citizens. that has been replicated and perpetuated one way or another by one government after another. ever since islam was recast, then as the source of the world's darkest villainy. in spite of the fact that the united states had for decades been at least partly responsible for conjuring extremist islamism into being and then using it for its own ends. mujahideen taliban, al—qaeda. so much changed after 9/11, and therefore the official narrative has to be defended to the death. if that domino were to fall, what then? but the undeniable truth now is simply that to many experts, credible people with no axe to grind, save curiosity and the insistence on official transparency and honesty have disputed the claim, those towers dropped into their own

footprints only on account of fires made of spilled aviation fuel that melted steel. to many experts and grieving citizens, have contemplated the official account of the dropping of building seven also perfectly, and symmetrically into its own footprint, and found it wanting. officially, the fire weakened the structure very evenly, as it turned out, at all four corners at once, and completely so that it too dropped as though pooled earthwards by invisible strings. too many questions have surfaced since and refused to go away. the old answers are wearing thin , the old answers are wearing thin, at least in places. the family of british man geoff campbell, among the nearly 3000 people who perished in the twin towers, continued to challenge in the courts. the narrative that the destruction of the north tower, in which he died, was caused by the impact of american airlines flight 11. their lawyer alleged in a british court this week that significant evidence showed both the twin towers and building seven were destroyed by

explosives . credulity. if not billions of people once and forevijfk also his own his uncle jfk and also his own father, bobby kennedy sr, were

murdered by the cia . credulity. murdered by the cia. credulity. in the official version of murdered by the cia. credulity. in the official version of events regarding 9/11 lasted a events regarding 9/11 lasted a third as long. i say again that third as long. i say again that the authorities have only the authorities have only themselves to blame in 2020. the themselves to blame in 2020. the whole world was enveloped by whole world was enveloped by what the authorities told us was what the authorities told us was a pandemic. the world was shut a pandemic. the world was shut down, its heartbeat shocked to a down, its heartbeat shocked to a standstill because those standstill because those authorities said that to have authorities said that to have done otherwise would have been done otherwise would have been catastrophic. what then ensued catastrophic. what then ensued by official command, trumpeted by official command, trumpeted by official command, trumpeted by officialdom, the mass media by official command, trumpeted by officialdom, the mass media and celebrities alike in the and celebrities alike in the form of national lockdowns , form of national lockdowns , form of national lockdowns, cancelled education, impaired health, loss of income, the form of national lockdowns, cancelled education, impaired health, loss of income, the pushing of medical products into pushing of medical products into billions of men, women, pregnant billions of men, women, pregnant women, children and babies, the women, children and babies, the death or damaged lives of death or damaged lives of uncounted millions was uncounted millions was catastrophic anyway. the world catastrophic anyway. the world was changed for everyone and was changed for everyone and forever by the events of 9/11. forever by the events of 9/11. the world was changed again by the world was changed again by the way the authorities handled the way the authorities handled covid. say what you want about covid. say what you want about the way they did it, love it or the way they did it, love it or loathe it. but the falsehoods loathe it. but the falsehoods and propaganda with which we and propaganda with which we were swamped ended for millions, were swamped ended for millions, if not billions of people once if not billions of people once

and forever. and forever. any trust they had in those in positions of power over their lives . millions of over their lives. millions of people all over the world have felt inclined to review much, if not everything they have been told about that world. call it conspiracy theory if you must, but for many, a conspiracy theory is just a matter of knowing first what everyone else will have to know eventually . will have to know eventually. podcaster joe will have to know eventually. podcasterjoe rogan said podcaster joe rogan said recently podcasterjoe rogan said recently in his stand up comedy act that not so long ago, he thought vaccination was the greatest achievement of science , greatest achievement of science, but that by now he doesn't believe we went to the moon. i know how rogan feels. trust is gone. faith in the establishment is gone as never before. we know they've told lies. what we need to know now is how much of they lied and for how long. in fact, have they ever told the truth? if that makes me a conspiracy theorist, then fine. as far as i'm concerned, the explanation for all of it is the way money is created and distributed. put simply and honestly and undeniably, the creation and distribution of all money has been for centuries, entirely in the hands of private business.

money creation and distribution is a private business run by secretive individuals for

many , the establishment for many, the establishment media is dying on its behind. fewer and fewer people drinking from that tainted trough in the uk parliament, the latest iteration of the uniparty is mostly talking to itself. most recently voting to stop cold weather fuel payments condemning thousands of our british elderly to death by cold while simultaneously promising another £600 million to the war machine still grinding ukrainian and russian flesh. for the longest time, it was enough for the authorities to lead the chorus of ridicule and vilification of those who had seen through the fakery. the cry was conspiracy theory, or granny killer or anti—vaxxer, or putin apologist or anti—semite. any slur to get the job done and keep the hecklers at bay? not for much longer, though. here's the thing faster and faster people spot the trick. see beyond the sleight of hand to what the other hand is doing. i say again, it's all about money. the more we don't see, the more they get away with. be aware. the silencing, the censoring, the defamation, the locking up of

dissenters will only get worse because increasingly lying and threatening into silence or the jail cell, those who call out the lying is all they've got. freedom. the revelation of truth is not going to rest on a new president in the white house, or any prime minister in downing street is going to be about courage. it's going to be about courage, because those who would lead us are cowards. my courage, because those who would lead us are cowards . my guest lead us are cowards. my guest this evening is greg swenson of republicans overseas. greg, a bit of a rant from me there. what do you make of it? has the time come finally when, in the case of 9/11, the questions just have to be asked? that won't go away? >> yeah, i think that would be healthy and even if i might think that argument is nonsense, it doesn't mean that it shouldn't. those questions shouldn't. those questions shouldn't be asked. it will shouldn't. those questions shouldn't. those questions shouldn't be asked. it will probably provide great relief probably provide great relief and clarity to those people who and clarity to those people who suffered, or whose family suffered, or whose family members died on 9/11, and i know members died on 9/11, and i know so many of them, so i don't so many of them, so i don't think. transparency. think. transparency. transparency is ever a bad transparency is ever a bad thing. so and then on the on the thing. so and then on the on the

bigger picture in your in your bigger picture in your in your monologue. yeah of course we're monologue. yeah of course we're suspicious because of what suspicious because of what happened with covid, with what happened with covid, with what happened with covid, with what happened with covid, with what happened with covid, with what happened with covid, with what happened with elections constantly . the fake you know, happened with elections constantly . the fake you know, constantly. the fake you know, the fake news, the you know, the constantly. the fake you know, the fake news, the you know, the understanding that any time you understanding that any time you question authority, you're a question authority, you're a conspiracy theorist and you're conspiracy theorist and you're shut down and you know who would shut down and you know who would ever think we would have a ever think we would have a conversation in in the 2020s conversation in in the 2020s that governments were censoring that governments were censoring information? it's unthinkable information? it's unthinkable that we have 1984. we have or that we have 1984. we have or what orwell . now that's crazy. what orwell . now that's crazy. what orwell. now that's crazy. >> no lesser figure than, bobby what orwell. now that's crazy. >> no lesser figure than, bobby kennedy jr said a couple of kennedy jr said a couple of months ago when he was still months ago when he was still running for president. he said running for president. he said in relation to 9/11, my take on in relation to 9/11, my take on 9/11, it's hard to tell what's a 9/11, it's hard to tell conspiracy theory and what isn't. but conspiracy theories flourish when the government routinely lies to the public as president, i won't take sides on 9/11 or any of the other debates, but i can promise i will open the files and usher in

a new

on. >> a break is upon us. after which, though, i'll be picking up a lot of these themes when i talk to mp david davis about the slur of far right that's being appued slur of far right that's being applied to so many for no good reason at all. stay with .

us. welcome back to the neil oliver show. now we hear all the time about the rise of what they call the far right in politics here at home in the uk, across europe, it's been widely debated in recent times. joining me now to delve deeper is conservative mp david davis. thank you for being with me . being with me. >> hello. my pleasure. >> hello. my pleasure. >> should we be angered as as

democratic people at the way in which this far right, far right extremist slur. i would call it, is being bandied about here, there and everywhere . there and everywhere. >> no, it's to be expected , >> no, it's to be expected, frankly. i mean the centre parties never like being displaced, but there's been a collapse of the centre really right across europe. and we should always remember , you should always remember, you know, the collapse of the centre is because of the failure of the centre. they haven't been able to deliver on a whole series of things control, migration, control of inflation, even, even covid and international affairs. failure of free trade and war in europe. these are all failures and the public at large are expressing their reaction to that. so they've got absolute right to choose who they want . right to choose who they want. and of course the centre is never going to like it. you know, it's no surprise. it's no

surprise at all. >> if it was just politics, i would i would defer. but what about the fact that people are now frightened? you know, there has been enough of a climate of fear around, let's say, crackdown, you know, people being processed very, very quickly for not things they've done, but for things they've said, opinions that they've shared on social media and the like are actually being cracked down upon , you know, and put down upon, you know, and put through the whole judicial process, just general law abiding members of the public. it's not just it's not just about, you know, the, the, the back and forth of politics, is it? it's actually frightening people into silence and into wondering what they're actually still free to do. >> well, no, that's right . and >> well, no, that's right. and what's been going on, i mean, partly an attempt to maintain control, is the what you might think of as the tolerable range of behaviour has been shut down and shut down and shut down more and shut down and shut down more and more and more and as our society devolves into sort of

competing echo chambers rather than real debate, that's driving it. and the government's driving it, too. you see, it in the aftermath of the riots, there were people who should have been arrested, and there were people who were simply repeating what other people told them. well, you know, i don't i don't believe that's a crime in any society. but it is now. >> it's moving faster and faster , >> it's moving faster and faster, though, you know, it genuinely feels as though a baton was passed at the last election . and passed at the last election. and i don't really get any sense that, you know, that had a conservative government been in power or remained in power rather than the labour administration that we have at the moment, that things would necessarily be any different. it feels like a gallop towards establishing, as you say , establishing, as you say, control before much else happens. perhaps being influenced by the upcoming events in november in the united states. >> well, well, to some extent. but look, i mean, you've got i mean , it might have been mean, it might have been different in in direction, as it were. i think you're probably right , neither party

were. i think you're probably right, neither party in this day and age really puts freedom at the forefront of what they want to do. you know, they they prefer control to freedom. i mean, i grew up with a, with a party under thatcher and others who believed that the right to say what you believe was fundamental, it was, you know, it came before everything else. and sometimes if it's inconvenient, well, just hard luck. you have to put up with it now. i mean, i'll for take example, the labour party politics. they've got a problem with the muslim voters who would traditionally have voted labour, and now they're losing people to, to, to muslim minority parties. they're nearly losing the seat. i mean, a couple of cabinet members have nearly lost their seat and they're afraid of it. and so what they do is they try and control society. they control what people say to protect their own political interests. and the conservative party in different ways. i suspect it would behave the same in the same way, albeit with different aims. >> it's quite an indictment,

david davis, you know that you that you're saying that the parties don't care about freedom if i'm if i'm paraphrasing or summarising, that is quite an indictment that we're now in a britain, you know, the home of the mother of parliaments with neither of the significant political parties cares about freedom . freedom. >> well, it's been going on for a long time , neil. i mean, gosh, a long time, neil. i mean, gosh, i mean, i fought a by—election because i didn't want people to because i didn't want people to be locked up without charge. you know, i mean, the first defeat of the blair government. and how long ago is that the first defeat of the blair government was for locking people up for 90 or wanting to lock people up for 90 days without charge, and that all came out of, a nominally came out of, counter—terrorism. that was the justification. but every single time this happened, we got one notch further reducing the freedom of people to say what they want to say. and we're seeing the same again today. i mean , look, i mean,

today. i mean, look, i mean, i am entirely in favour of laws that that stop racism. i'm entirely in favour of laws that, take away the right to incite violence. i mean, that's that for me, a fundamental. but now you're talking about, trying to define the racism as islamophobia . now, you know, islamophobia. now, you know, throughout all of our modern history, hundreds of years. and you're the historian , not me. we you're the historian, not me. we have had the right to criticise religions, criticise the catholic religion or the church of england or the methodists or whatever. that's what we did . whatever. that's what we did. well, you know, and why shouldn't we criticise parts of islam? you know, i've got very strong, favourable opinion of sufi islam, but there are some sects that i think are really, you know, the wahhabi sect. and so you really do deserve criticism if you, if you have a crime of islamophobia, it'll stop that in its tracks. there may be nominal reasons for it, but it is a restriction of

freedom. >> it's a restriction of freedom. david davis i've run out of time. thank you so much for making time for us, though. this evening we'll speak again soon, i hope, on this and other matters. thank you very much. >> my pleasure. >> my pleasure. >> after the break. welcome. renowned 9/11 expert , ted renowned 9/11 expert, ted walter, as we mark the 23rd anniversary of the event that changed the world for everyone forever

welcome back, everyone, to the welcome back, everyone, to the neil oliver show. now, this week saw the 23rd anniversary of neilthe 23rd anniversary of 9/11, an event that has courted saw the 23rd anniversary of 9/11, an event that has courted countless so—called conspiracy countless so—called conspiracy theories ever since , with the theories ever since , with the theories ever since, with the official version of events being theories ever since, with the official version of events being

questioned almost from the questioned almost from the beginning. i'm joined beginning. i'm joined now by the executive director of the international centre for 9/11, justice ted walter, and executive director of the henry jackson society, alan mendoza. thanks, gentlemen, for making time for this today , ted, if time for this today, ted, if i can come to you first. tell us first of all about the case of british man geoff campbell and the case that's being in the process of being brought by his family in relation to what happened to him on 9/11. >> thank you. neil. yeah. so my organisation, the international centre for 9/11 justice, has been working with the family of geoff campbell for the past several years. geoff campbell was 31 all believed that

towers, who all believed that the who all heard explosions and believed that the towers had been, had been brought down with explosives and many other reports and studies and so on, and the attorney general for england and wales essentially sat on that application for almost two years, finally issued almost two years, finally issued a decision denying it . there was a decision denying it. there was some back and forth. the attorney general withdrew that decision and then issued another decision, again denying it. and now the family is seeking judicial review of the attorney general's decision because it is absolutely unlawful. the family's application easily meets the threshold for a new inquest to be opened. the only question is whether there's any evidence that could conceivably, evenin evidence that could conceivably, even in the remotest possible chance, overturn the original conclusion, which there is. the coroner also did not conduct an inquiry. actually, there was not a shred of evidence heard at the inquest to support the conclusion that the aeroplane caused the collapse. so that's yet another reason for the inquest to be reopened, >> just at the moment, i have to say we have lost connection with alan mendoza , who is obviously

alan mendoza, who is obviously going to offer an alternative point of view. and a lot of this said, if i can continue with you at the moment, it's obviously been very. it must have been very difficult or a lot much more difficult for a long time for people like geoff campbell's family and other people who had an alternative point of view about what had happened on 9/11. after all of this time, is there any sense in which a tipping point might be being reached, where maybe on account of this case, maybe an account of an accumulation of other evidence that finally, finally, the alternative points of view might be taken more seriously . be taken more seriously. >> yeah, neil. so unfortunately , >> yeah, neil. so unfortunately, i was not able to hear much of your question for some reason, but i think maybe you were asking if this case might allow an opportunity for this evidence to finally be seriously considered . considered. >> suggestion was that there was a tipping point, maybe being reached, and it may be something

like this case of geoff campbell's family, you know, requesting a further inquest into what happened to their loved one might be enough, finally, to make people open up to the possibility that perhaps there are other questions that might legitimately be asked and, you know, and other answers demanded of the authorities . demanded of the authorities. >> yeah, i think you're right. i think we are nearing a tipping point. you can see it all over social media. you can see it. i see it every day when i talk to people about this issue. and i think the campbell family's effort is coming at an opportune moment when people really are in large percentages of the public beginning to open their mind to the possibility that the official account of 9/11 is untrue. and i think that this case, the law is it should have been a slam dunk three years ago. this should have been an open and shut case. the family should have been allowed to go forward with the new inquest. and if what happens should happen either at the high court or if the attorney general withdraws his decision and finally allows the family to

apply finally allows the family to apply to the high court for the new inquest to be ordered. i think that this inquest really may serve as the thing that that causes the tipping point to to, actually happen and go over the edge. >> ted, walter, bear with me. at the moment in the in the absence of alan mendoza, at the moment, i'm going to go to my guest in the studio, greg swenson from republicans overseas uk , greg, republicans overseas uk, greg, what say you? i mean , clearly what say you? i mean, clearly this has been one of the most controversial stories of the second half of my life. really? what's your take on the appetite for asking more questions now? >> well, i think there's plenty of appetite for questions. i might think that the case about, you know , the destruction or the you know, the destruction or the planned destruction, i might think it's nonsense, but i don't think it's nonsense, but i don't think it's nonsense for the family to have a hearing, if that's their view and if they have and if there's evidence, it's so much better to be transparent and i'm sure that those who argued against the

family would have been much better off actually hearing the case. >> still, only nonsense is that still your preferred adjective, given that you know the kind of 2500 pages of testimony that ted walter is talking about having been submitted to the court? you know, it's not from it's not from spurious individuals. it is expert testimony. so is it still nonsense to say that everything we've been told is all we should have been told? >> what i want? yeah. so i think it would be healthy to view that evidence and to compare it to the, to the, i'm sure many more pages of evidence that argue that it was the united flights and the american airlines flights. so but there's nothing wrong with inquiry and there's nothing. and i think you have to keep this in the context of what's happened in the last 8 or 10 years with the denying of any arguments about covid and the vaccines , you know, covering up vaccines, you know, covering up the hunter biden laptop. we even saw it this week at the debate, you know, with kamala harris arguing that trump, you know, said this or that at charlottesville, which has been proven to be a hoax. >> let me put that to ted

walter. isn't it is it perhaps the case that the authorities , the case that the authorities, officialdom has only itself to blame, that in recent years it's been so apparent that so many lies have been told about so many stories that it was inevitable that something as big as 911, with so many counter contrary voices, that this would eventually happen . eventually happen. >> i think it was inevitable. you know, i think we are seeing across the political spectrum people questioning official narratives. and i completely welcome and appreciate your other guests take on this. and i think intellectually and morally , think intellectually and morally, he's absolutely right in terms of the legal question, the attorney general has no leg to stand on in terms of the letter of the law. there is zero doubt that this inquest should have already been reopened, and that is what the family intends to show the high court if the attorney general. we have a new attorney general. we have a new attorney general. we have a new attorney general now who took office in july, and a labour

party . and we expect we actually party. and we expect we actually expect this attorney general to withdraw the previous attorney general's decision, which is absolutely indefensible. >> what is the reaction now amongst your fellow americans? you know, when you when people ask what you do and you tell them that you're involved in something like you know, questioning 9/11, i can imagine there was a time when it was very difficult. is it still the case now ? case now? >> it is not the case now, you know where i live in my community. i live in the hudson valley, about an hour north of new york city, and, you know, the. so it's a it's a specific community. but even so, the vast majority of people that i talked to, the other parents that i talked to, i rarely encounter somebody who's opposed to what i to what i do, and, you know, on a larger scale , you know, i do a larger scale, you know, i do this, you know, for much bigger audiences than just, you know, people in my community. and, you know, we're seeing, like, incredible receptiveness to it now, and it's taken it's really sad and tragic for the families and for the rest of society that

it's taken this long. but finally, we are getting there and we are reaching the tipping point. >> ted walter, bear with me. we're going to pick up this conversation after an inevitable break, ted will be returning to continue this conversation as we mark, you know , it's poignant mark, you know, it's poignant every time it comes around. this is the 23rd anniversary of nine the over 11 attacks that shook the over 11 attacks that shook the world and changed everything. stay with .

us. >> mark dolan tonight is your weekend dose of news, debate and entertainment? this sounds like a wild conspiracy theory. don't miss my big opinion. mark meats and my take at ten. democracy is and my take at ten. democracy is a funny old thing, and we don't do boring. not on my watch. i just won't have it. it's. go and get another glass of that bubbly. you've earned it. that's mark dolan tonight saturday and

sunday, 9 to 11. only on gb news, the people's channel. britain's news channel . britain's news channel. >> i'm joined this evening by the executive director of the international centre for 9/11 , international centre for 9/11, justice, ted walter, to pick up with the conversation that i was having earlier. ted. you talk about 2500 pages of expert testimony. what kind of testimony. what kind of testimony are we talking about specifically? and from what sort of people ? of people? >> yeah. so we have, six witness statements from from experts in chemistry , physics and chemistry, physics and engineering, chemistry, physics and engineering , testifying in engineering, testifying in regards to the destruction of the twin towers and building seven, but especially the collapse of the north tower, which jeff campbell was in. he was on the 106th floor of the nonh

was on the 106th floor of the north tower when that building came down, and so they provide a range of insights, having to do with the downward motion of the building. first and foremost, the way that the north tower comes down, it actually comes down almost in absolute freefall at about two thirds of freefall, which is very rapid acceleration and it never slows down in the process of coming down. and if the top was, if the top of the building was actually coming down and destroying the 90 storeys below it, which it would, it would have to slow down as it hits the structure and you never see it. there's never deceleration. so that's one very strong indication that the building was demolished. you also have they also testified to the explosive behaviour of both buildings coming down the way in which all of the concrete was pulverised into fine powder, and the way in which the steel structure was just instantly pred structure was just instantly ripped apart and ejected literally hundreds of feet in every direction. and if this was a gravitational collapse, you would not expect to see large steel sections being ejected up

to 600ft away from the building. the building would basically kind of come straight down, but it's really a preposterous nofion it's really a preposterous notion that the top of the building could somehow in itself, remain intact and yet and just keep kind of crushing the rest of the building all the way down the top is going to destroy itself just as fastly, just as quick as the bottom part. but you actually see, as they testify to when you look at they testify to when you look at the videos, that the top of the nonh the videos, that the top of the north tower disappears before the destruction even proceeds down the rest of the building, the top of the north tower has already disintegrated. clearly, blown apart by by explosives. there's also chemical evidence. there's also chemical evidence. there's extreme temperatures, as evidence in the molten metal seen pouring from the south tower for seven minutes. the south tower was the second tower to be hit, but the first to come for down seven minutes before it came down, there was molten metal pouring out of the out of the building. the official government agency that investigated the collapse, the national institute of standards and technology, tried to claim that that was molten aluminium,

but molten aluminium would have a silvery appearance . even if a silvery appearance. even if you put materials burning in it, it's still going to appear silver. and this was bright orange yellow molten metal . so orange yellow molten metal. so that's evidence of thermite. you also have it in the dust . you also have it in the dust. you have, metallic, spheres, which when they're in a spherical shape, it means that they were molten previously when they were being when they were molten and flung through the air, they turned into a sphere. and then you have actual nano thermite so that you actually have the weapon itself identified by a team of scientists. so this is just a snapshot of what's there. >> i think it's probably worth stressing, ted, you know, you know, you and i have probably paid a lot more attention to some of the minutia of this than, you know, than perhaps the general viewer. but no one's denying the impact of the aircraft . it's simply that the aircraft. it's simply that the experts are testifying that that in and of itself, undenied would not be expected to cause the devastation that it caused in,

in the way that it was caused. no one is saying it wasn't the planes weren't involved . planes weren't involved. >> correct. absolutely. neil yes. no. some people out there in the internet do deny that planes hit the building, this family and the experts supporting this family and thousands of others are questioning aeroplanes hitting the buildings. we're questioning that the aeroplanes could have caused the buildings to come down. >> bear with me, ted . walter. >> bear with me, ted. walter. greg is. i think i need to keep coming back to this idea that it's the it's the little boy that cried wolf, isn't it? you know, when authority has been exposed. without doubt , about exposed. without doubt, about lying about other things hugely important things, not least the covid pandemic that it's no surprise that this long held view about 9/11 is being re—examined. >> yeah , absolutely. i mean, why >> yeah, absolutely. i mean, why wouldn't you after after all that's happened in the last ten years, the constant lies from authority, you know, matt hancock and the and the covid

conspiracy theory and any time you question, you know, the great barrington declaration, you know, which was basically censored from social media and media in general, turned out to be absolutely right, you know, and when i first read it, it didn't seem so crazy, by the way, it wasn't some outrageous argument. but yeah, there's a long list. so it doesn't surprise me that it's worth looking back at 9/11. i can tell you the planes hit the building because i saw them from the from the ground floor at the north tower. but but knowing the, you know, not knowing the engineering arguments on both sides, i'm really curious. >> and ted . walter, there's so >> and ted. walter, there's so much to discuss here, but building seven, which wasn't hit by no one, suggests that it was hit by an aircraft. and then of course, there's what, we were told about what happened to the pentagon building, does your you know, the investigation that you're involved in, does it touch on those matters? also >> well, my organisation

definitely is also talks about building seven and building seven is covered in the application submitted by the campbell family to some degree. although the focus is highly on the twin towers and the north tower in particular, we also do facilitate research into the, you know, the pentagon attack and, you know , several many and, you know, several many papers are published in our journal of 9/11 studies as well as our debated topics forum on the pentagon question in terms of building seven, i'm sure that you're aware that your counterparts at the bbc reported the collapse of this building 23 minutes before it actually came down. at 457 in the afternoon of 911, they began reporting that building seven came down in 23 minutes at 5:20 pm. then it came down. and this this is a highly improbable event. there's simply no way that anybody could actually foresee this happening. so what that really was, was a product of the authorities at the scene, at what became ground zero around 11:00, starting to

spread the word that building seven would collapse. and why would they think that they would have no reason for thinking that even though it was struck by debns even though it was struck by debris from the north tower, there's no reason to think it's just going to come down, that someone clearly knew that there was a plan to demolish this building, and they needed to start putting out a cover story for it to come down and so the cover story was, oh, the fires and the structural damage. and people kept repeating it. and so the news, the news media picked up on that and started reporting that this building was going to come down later in the day and, and then mutated into the bbc reporting that it actually had come down earlier. >> ted walter, i'm extremely pleased that i have had the opportunity to, you know, to take part in and to listen to our conversation. greg swenson and yourself, you know, just heanng and yourself, you know, just hearing at the very least, heanng hearing at the very least, hearing the seeming justice of the of the right to ask additional questions about such additional questions about such a world changing event. ted, walter, thank you so much for joining me this evening. >> thank you. neil. you've been

watching the neil oliver show on gb news. >> thank you to all my guests. thank you for your company. we'll be back next week. god willing . >>a >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on gb news. >> hello, good evening and welcome to your gb news weather update brought to you by the met office. well, we've got high pressure dominating the weather this week, which means plenty of fine and dry weather and plenty

of autumnal sunshine too to enjoy. next week. to finish off sunday, though, we do have this cold front which is slowly moving its way towards the southeast of the country, so plenty of cloud here and some rain and drizzle through into the evening though, although still plenty of cloud across the south, that rain and drizzle will eventually fizzle out , and will eventually fizzle out, and that means a milder night across the south compared to those recent nights to the north of this, though. plenty of clear skies and light winds, which means it's going to be feeling much chillier and likely to see plenty of mist and fog overnight, too, particularly in the northwest of england and wales, where we do have a yellow fog warning issued. otherwise, though, to start monday, there will be plenty of bright sunshine and that mist and fog will generally dissipate fairly quickly through the course of the morning. once again across northern ireland through into the scottish borders. plenty of bright sunshine. those mist and fog patches and rural spots. that fog may just be a little bit dense where we do have the warning issued. so do be careful for the monday morning commute and any cloud across the south

will kind of lift and break through the course of the morning, and that does allow plenty of sunshine to develop across most of the country. so plenty of that warm sunshine to start the new working week . just start the new working week. just a build of higher cloud into the northwest through into the afternoon. perhaps some rain and drizzle towards the outer hebrides, but otherwise plenty of warm sunshine. highs of 22 celsius down to the south. now, heading into tuesday, that high pressure is still dominating the weather, so still plenty of fine and dry conditions. after a chilly start, that cloud will continue to build in the northwest. we may see some outbreaks of rain and drizzle to the far north, but as we head into next week, still plenty of that fine and dry weather around just feeling a little bit chilly overnight. bye for now . overnight. bye for now. >> that warm feeling inside from boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb news >> it's patrick christys tonight

and here we do things differently, explaining the absolute madness of this, doesn't it? it's explosive. i mean, this is very good. it's lively. >> 850. your government sat there, sean, and it did nothing. >> it's controversial in the middle east, has been in turmoil since before i was born. it's everything you need to kick start your evening. everyone's had their weetabix tonight. i love to see it. that's patrick christys tonight. weeknights from 9 pm. only on gb news. the people's channel, britain's news channel

oh well. >> good evening. the top stories from the gb newsroom. home office figures show 801 illegal migrants crossed the english channelin migrants crossed the english channel in 14 small boats yesterday . that's a record daily yesterday. that's a record daily number since labour came into power, and brings the total

who've crossed this year to over 23,200. and that's as eight migrants died overnight whilst trying to cross the channel. 53 migrants were on board a boat which got into difficulty off the coast of northern france around 51 survivors were rescued and six were taken to hospital, including a ten month old baby suffering from hypothermia. this news comes less than two weeks after a separate incident where 12 migrants died after a boat sank off the french coastline . sank off the french coastline. foreign secretary david lammy has defended the prime minister following allegations that sir keir starmer has broken parliamentary rules by failing to declare donations of clothing for his wife, the sunday times reported the gifts came from labour donor lord alli and covered the cost of a personal shopper, clothes and alterations for the prime minister's wife, victoria, in the election campaign . campaign. >> this is not a breach of transparency rules, it's a prime

minister that's acting positively