"It's my duty to inform you that as a result of your cyber activities, you have been reported to the executive disciplinary committee for bringing the party into disrepute."
On the same day I received a notice of my suspension which means I cannot attend any meetings, and in particular the meeting at which prospective mayoral candidates will be selected. It states:
"Your membership of the British National Party has been suspended, pending an investigation into alleged serious breaches of the BNP Code of Conduct.
While suspended you may not take part in any Party event, attend meetings or send circulars that give the impression that you hold any position within the Party. You are required to fully comply with the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Party constitution.
Failure to comply with these requirements could result in your expulsion from membership of the Party, and Civil or Criminal proceedings being taken against you.
You will be informed of the outcome of the investigation in due course."I asked:
"Do I have the right to defend myself and be told what I am accused of?"
The response I received:
"We are in the investigatory period at the moment. We will keep you informed of developments."
I guess the answer is "No" then.
It was the former North East Organiser Chez Dunn who reported my comments on the Facebook wall of Charlotte Lewis, another former BNP organiser who is now also suspended pending an investigation.
Charlotte and I were expressing surprise and disappointment at how few nationalists now appear to believe in family values. She also agreed with me that if she were to have a severely disabled baby, she would not wish to bring it up either and agreed with my solution, which was to dispose of it myself ie commit infanticide, if the midwife would not dispose of it for us. This was indeed common practice as evidenced at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwifery#Early_Historical_Perspective
"After the delivery, the midwife made the initial call on whether or not an infant was healthy and fit to rear. She inspected the newborn for congenital deformities and testing its cry to hear whether or not it was robust and hearty. Ultimately, midwives made a determination about the chances for an infant’s survival and likely recommended that a newborn with any severe deformities be exposed."
Ms Dunn is herself a single mother with disabled offspring. She threatened to maim and kill me on her Facebook wall in the following terms on Saturday 25 June 2011 at 12:31:
"If anyone wants to take a screenie, tell Claire that when I get my hands on her it won't be my children that are born disabled, she will be the disabled one and lets see if her husband wants to care for a drain on society or if he would have her put down. What a cheeky slut. I will kill the bitch."
The disabled are electorally insignificant, and what I said did not threaten them in any way.
All I said was that I would not wish to bring up a severely disabled baby, and would not wish to pass the cost of the care of such a child to the taxpayer, so if the midwife would not do it for me, I would have to commit infanticide. This is because I know it would not have much of a life if I passed it like a parcel to the uncertain kindness of strangers and to carers who do not care, but instead neglect, bully and abuse their charges as was seen at Winterbourne Vew in Panorama recently.
This however now translates into the defamatory claim that "Claire Khaw wants to kill all disabled people."
I believe some members would rather have a white candidate polling fewer votes than an ethnic member attracting more votes and reminded of members of the Chinese Communist Party who said they would rather have the weeds of communism than the fruits of capitalism.
Do I regret what I said about what I would do with my own severely disabled baby? No, because what I said was the truth that most Britons would admit, if they were not drowning in their own cowardice and hypocrisy in the way a heroin addict might be drowning in his own vomit.
Four men have privately admitted that if they were presented with a baby as severely disabled as Riven Vincent's Celyn, they would have it smothered too. It is quite understandable that they would not wish to keep a child like that out of taxed income. It is unlikely, however, that Riven Vincent's husband has much taxed income to speak of from the sound of things at http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jun/09/disability-cuts-mumsnet-david-cameron
Celyn's father, Mark Williams, makes sure he is home from work every day at the same time she returns from school. Riven has had multiple sclerosis for 13 years, and three years ago began using a wheelchair outside the house, and a stick to get around inside, making her doubly sensitive to changes in government policy that affect disabled people. As a result her husband does more than 50% of the caring for Celyn. A research scientist, he works part-time, fitting his hours around Celyn's school timetable. "He worked full time until she was two or three, and then it just became too hard," Riven says.
By suspending me and preventing me from becoming mayoral candidate and thereby punishing me for what I said, it does rather suggest that they would rather endorse the lifestyle choices of Riven Vincent and Chez Dunn than criticise them, even when it is pretty clear that so many decades of condoning the bad reproductive choices of white British women is the cause of Britain's decline. That is why the stupid breed with the poor, producing the feeble-minded, morally destitute feeble-bodied populace we now have. The British are now more accurately described as "dipso, fatso, bingo, Tesco, ASBO and paedo", and that is why the foreigners keep coming to do the jobs that the locals are no longer capable of doing, and that is why they don't want to integrate. They don't want to integrate because they don't want their daughters becoming single mothers and they don't want their sons to be divorced homeless losers who have lost contact with his children because his ex-wife has decided it doesn't suit her to have him around.
I really cannot see how encouraging more white women to behave like Riven Vincent and Chez Dunn would improve the quality and future of the white race, but I guess the BNP are not really into advocating unpopular solutions, and prefer to continue blaming foreigners for all their ills.
It is a great shame really, that a party formed for the purpose of promoting the interests of white people should so unthinkingly support one of their own rather than another who is not of their race, but who has stuck her neck out for them in the face of predictable vilification by the liberal establishment.
Still, if they want to discipline me and expel me for saying what most white people are too afraid to say and prevent me from attending a meeting at which I could be selected as mayoral candidate, then the way ahead is clear for me.
I can just pack my bags and go home and leave white people to choke on their own vomit of hypocrisy and cowardice, while poor, promiscuous and stupid white people continue to have more illegitimate and disabled children (with the encouragement of the BNP) and wonder why their country is going to the dogs and Muslims.
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=151 has a poll in which you are invited to decide whether I would attract more votes than a white candidate for the 2012 London mayoral candidate.
NB: The question is not whether you want me to become the BNP mayoral candidate because I am your Facebook friend or because you think it would be quite entertaining, but whether you actually believe I would attract significantly more votes than the other candidates.