Brief Bio of a Peace Activist
Here are a few comments about my murky past. I was born in 1946.
In the early 1980s, I stood as the first Green/Ecology Party candidate in Guildford, and then the Guildford Green Party was run for about twelve years from my house. In the West Surrey Euro-election of 1989 I was the Press Secretary, and the Greens came second, securing 22% of the vote. We beat Labour and the social Democrats.
In 1982 my first book was published, Lead on the Brain, a Guide to Britain’s Number One Pollutant and this was part of a campaign to get lead removed from petrol, which was successful. In the 1980s I did some work in the office of END, European Nuclear disarmament.
As a member of the UK’s Ecology Party, I was initiator for what in 1985 became the ‘Nuclear warfare Tribunal.’ I was sent over to Germany to liase with Die Grunen because we wanted to emulate what they had done. This was the first UK symposium to query the legality of current nuclear weapon policies. (Proceedings published in 1989 as ‘The Bomb and the Law,’ Stockholm)
After the 1982 Falklands war, I and three others formed the ‘Belgrano Action Group’ and we held the ‘Belgrano Inquiry’ at Hampstead Town Hall, about what the war had been about. Top speakers like Tam Dalyell, Clive Ponting and Paul Rogers came and gave evidence. We then published the proceedings of this (by Spokesman Press 1988), as The Unnecessary War: Proceedings of the Belgrano Inquiry, November 7/8th 1986.
I’ve been a founder-member of Inlap, the Institute for Law and Peace, and initiated and edited a few issues of its journal ‘Inlap Times.’ At my suggestion Inlap had the legal proceedings published whereby CND had attempted to challenge the legality of going to war with Iraq. CND spent some 80k on this in 1992 and it seemed worthwhile to remember the effort. I’m thus co-editor of The Case Against War, The Essential Legal Inquiries, Opinions and Judgements concerning War in Iraq.
I’ve been a founder-member of the London 9/11 Sceptics (or the 911 ‘truth’ movement). My web-essay ‘Nine keys to 9/11’ was praised by the prestigious Physics9/11 site, here is their review: Nine Keys to 9-11
“This website provides an excellent summary of the major problems that knowledgeable people have with the Bush interpretation of 9/11. In this case, the “knowledge” is embedded in nine major points that have no explanation within the Bush scenario: no hikacker names (or faked names) on the official airline passenger lists; hole in the Pentagon too small to have been made by a 757; complete failure of cellphones to operate at cruising altitude; etc. One of the best places for “students” to start. – Nick Kollerstrom” recently these essays have been re-posted on Prof Jim Fetzer’s website (he founded ‘Scholars for 911 truth’).
I worked with a London group especially focused on July 7th, in 2005/6, and contributed two of their web-pages (modified by others), then in 2008 I worked with a BBC ‘Conspiracy Files’ team for a program about July 7th. (I was thoroughly trashed in this program, through the BBC’s use of quite dishonest techniques – which everyone had warned me would happen)
In 2007 London’s 911 group invited Cynthia McKinney over to England, and she came, that was my initiative and campaign. She then ran as US Green Party presidential candidate. As a postdoctoral Research fellow of UCL for 11 years (1995-2008) in the Science and Technology Studies Department, I was involved in the College’s Stop the War group.
A Book about Geometry
Once it became known that I was researching a book about 7/7, an intense media-abuse campaign started up against me, in 2008 (it was published in 2009). I was chucked out of my college UCL, where I’d been an honorary member of staff (i.e. unpaid) for 11 years, with a statement of ethical damnation posted up. This didn’t actually say what I had done that was so terrible, so everyone was free to imagine the worst. This then spilled over into the 911 ‘truth’ movement and I soon got banned from their site.
I had never really had any enemies before, so this was all rather bewildering for me.
Alas my book about the geometry of British crop circles did not survive the hurricane of abuse and calumny. The Association of School Math Teachers had reviewed it as ‘this wonderful book .. a really lovely book.. a must for any school library’ and it stayed in print for five years. Kindly note that it does not comment upon any other aspect of crop circles, than their geometry. As a school maths teacher I had dreamed of bringing some inspiration into school maths lessons.
In web-pages dedicated to vilifying my name (eg by Tony Gosling of the 911 ‘truth’ forum or Bridget Dunne of the July 7th ‘truth’ campaign, people enjoy scoffing at my interest in ‘crop circles’ without ever mentioning that that the book was a study of geometry.
Revisionism: a chemical Interest
Revisionism means an endeavour to search for a more balanced account of WW2. My feelings were that Germany was made to take all the blame in that war but could this be the whole truth? How can we accept the views of only one side of the argument? As a scientist, I was intrigued to realise that wherever cyanide had been used in the old labour camps of ww2, it imprinted a memory in the walls—one only had to measure the iron cyanide to understand how much of this gas had been used.
So therefore, could a question be asked?
Can we look at all sources, to find an answer?
Can we confront the accepted narrative with an alternative, yet controversial option?
The answer I found was a resounding “NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!”
The first response was a calumny by certain bloggers to ensure my respectable university had completely understood that I had strayed into forbidden territory.
The second response was for the college where I had received my doctorate to agree that I had indeed strayed into uncharted and unwanted territory and to announce that I was a true heretic and therefore no longer wanted. I was given no chance to discuss the matter with anyone or remove any offending essays. In retrospect, I should have been ashamed of being associated with an institute of learning that thus proscribed freedom of thought. Who would have thought this might have happened?
The third response was for the media to jump on the bandwagon and tar me with the “holocaust denier” damnation.
I learned people could not debate the subject without resorting to hysteric labelling, name-calling and ethical damnation that even involved bringing my family into the (supposed) equation.
Gosh, did that ever teach me something about the world and how it actually works!
Do I wish I had ever shut up about questioning the holocaust?
Well, I sometimes wonder whether I should have used a pseudonym in the first place. But, I used my real name – to have used a false one would seem to imply I had something to be ashamed of. In fact, I had only wanted to ask a few questions but was far too trusting that I could receive honest, constructive answers. I believed that some people would be ready to accept that there might new chemical evidence that could challenge the accepted view that the Holocaust was the single-most devastating event in human history.
I still feel that the notion of chemical memory found in the old walls of the German camps is an interesting one and I hope that in time to come, we can discuss this in a more fair and balanced way.
My couple of dozen history of astronomy academic-published articles from while I was at at UCL are now posted on the US ‘Dio’ site.