Translate

Showing posts with label cancellation of membership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cancellation of membership. Show all posts

Saturday, 6 April 2013

Chairman of the Conservative Party claims I can find the aims, objectives and principles of the Conservative Party in this piece of puffery


http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Activist%20Centre/Press%20and%20Policy/Manifestos/Manifesto2010

vii

FOREWORD
Britain needs change: few can doubt that. Our national finances are mired in massive debt.


Millions are living the misery of unemployment. Communities are shattered by crime and abuse.

People in the public services are trapped in a web of rules and regulations. People have lost faith that politics can fix our problems, or that politicians can lead us into a better future. There is a feeling of helplessness. once again, there is a mood afoot that the decline of Britain is inevitable.


But there is no law that says we must accept decline. We have the energy, the ideas and the ambition to get Britain back on track.  And that includes everyone in Britain, wherever they live and whatever their circumstances. if we join together, if we act decisively, and move forward with optimism, we can start to fix the economic, social and political problems that threaten the nation.


We can bring about the change Britain needs.


What is that change? Some promise solutions from on high – but real change comes from collective endeavour. So we offer a new approach: a change not just from one set of politicians to another; from one set of policies to another. It is a change from one political philosophy to another. From the idea that the role of the state is to direct society and micro-manage public services, to the idea that the role of the state is to strengthen society and make public services serve the people who use them. in a simple phrase, the change we offer is from Big Government to Big Society.


This manifesto is the most important stage so far on a journey that began four and a half years ago, when the Conservative Party itself voted for change by electing David Cameron as its leader.


Since then, the Party has remoulded itself for the modern era, applying its deepest values and beliefs to the urgent problems of the hour. Even as it has done so, the problems confronting Britain have escalated, and escalated fast. So our ideas are ambitious and radical as well as modern. They match the scale of britain’s problems, and are in tune with a world that is changing before our eyes.


But our core values have not altered and our core beliefs remain consistent.
We believe in responsibility: government responsibility with public finances, personal responsibility for our actions, and social responsibility towards each other. We believe in enterprise and aspiration. We believe there is such a thing as society, it’s just not the same thing as the state.


Our fundamental tenet is that power should be devolved from politicians to people, from the central to the local. Personal ambition should be set as high as is humanly possible, with no barriers put in its way by the state. Perhaps most importantly, we believe that we are all in this together.


Everything you will find in this manifesto is built on these beliefs. They are the building blocks of the change we want to see in every home, every street, every community, every business.



viii

Our belief in responsibility with public finances is the starting point of our plan for economic recovery and growth. We want your consent for a programme of public spending control that will deal with Labour’s debt crisis and stop the Labour jobs tax that would kill our economic recovery.


The programme set out in this manifesto is fully costed and fully funded. Some of our proposals – such as on school discipline – cost nothing, but require energy and leadership. others – like stopping Labour’s jobs tax – will require money, and we will make savings in other areas to pay for them. The debt crisis is the terrible legacy that Gordon Brown is bequeathing to our country.


But fiscal responsibility needs a social conscience or it is not responsible at all: so we will not allow the poorest people in Britain to pay an unfair price for the mistakes of some of the richest.


Nor will we allow irresponsibility in the private sector to continue unchecked. We will bring law and order to our financial markets as a necessary step to restoring confidence. But the real prize for Britain is to create a new economic model, one founded on investment and savings not borrowing and debt. This economic vision reflects our belief in enterprise and aspiration. It is a vision of a truly modern economy: one that is greener and more local. An economy where Britain leads in science, technology and innovation. But it is founded on a determination that wealth and opportunity must be more fairly distributed. We want to see an economy where not just our standard of living, but everyone’s quality of life, rises steadily and sustainably.


But a nation is only really successful if it is built on a strong society. We will never deal with our debts and build a new economy unless we solve the social problems that cost so much and hold so many people back. Labour’s big government approach is making our social problems worse, not better – inequality and poverty on the rise; social mobility stalled; family breakdown a fact of life for too many children. So we need fundamental change: from big government that presumes to know best, to the Big Society that trusts in the people for ideas and innovation.


We will move from state action to social action, encouraging social responsibility in all its forms and across all the country – whether curbing incivility on our streets or supporting social enterprises with the power to transform neighbourhoods. mending britain’s broken society will be a central aim of the next Conservative government.
That is why in this manifesto we set ourselves an ambitious goal: to make Britain the most family-friendly country in Europe. That is why we back the NHS. That is why we will reform schools to raise standards and restore discipline. It is why we will get people off benefits and into work; reform policing, sentencing and prisons. And why we are committed to a greener future.



ix

But we will not succeed in building the Big Society, or in building a new economic model, unless we stop government trying to direct everything from the centre. We will get nowhere with yet more top-down state control. So, after thirteen years of Labour, we need radical political reform. We need to change the whole way this country is run. As Conservatives, we trust people.


We believe that if people are given more responsibility, they will behave more responsibly. We believe that if you decentralise power, you get better results and better value for money. So the plans set out in this manifesto represent an unprecedented redistribution of power and control from the central to the local, from politicians and the bureaucracy to individuals, families and neighbourhoods.


We will give people much more say over the things that affect their daily lives. We will make government, politics and public services much more open and transparent. and we will give the people who work in our public services much greater responsibility. but in return, they will have to answer to the people. All these measures will help restore trust in our broken political system.


We know that this is an ambitious vision. a profoundly optimistic vision. it is also an authentically Conservative vision: sound money, backing enterprise, trusting people. The journey we embarked on four and a half years ago was all about applying this Conservative approach to the progressive challenges of our age: making opportunity more equal; fighting poverty and inequality; improving the environment and general well-being. So our creed today is progressive Conservatism; and this is an unashamedly progressive Conservative manifesto.


Now we ask you to join us for the next and most important stage of the journey: changing Britain so we can offer a better life to all our citizens and play a proud and leading role in the world.


Each of the three programmes of reform outlined in this manifesto – our plans to build a new economic model; to build the big Society; to build a political system where people have more power and control over their lives – is a massive undertaking in its own right. Yet we are proposing to carry out these changes all at once, because that is the only way to put Britain on the right path for a successful future.


Britain faces huge problems that demand radical change; and it cannot come soon enough.


We are impatient to get on with this work. We are determined to make a difference. We have the policies to make that difference. and most importantly, we have faith in the people of Britain, because we know that if we all pull together, stick together, then this country can change its future.

Interestingly, the Foreword is just a list of vague promises and platitudinous statements.   If any of you can distill any Conservative principles from this unholy mess, then please do let me know what you think they are.

A Statement of Principles, however laughable, would be along these lines:


"The Party supports the following principles:

1. We shall go on to the end.

2. We shall fight in France.

3. We shall fight on the seas and oceans.

4. We shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air.

5. We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be.

6. We shall fight on the beaches.

7. We shall fight on the landing grounds.

8. We shall fight in the fields and in the streets.

9. We shall fight in the hills.

10. We shall never surrender."


The word "principle" is not even mentioned.

If you are a politician - particularly a Tory politician - and not sure what a principle is, or what they are for, or how to apply them, it is hoped that you will find http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/principles-in-nutshell.html helpful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffery

Puffery as a legal term refers to promotional statements and claims that express subjective rather than objective views, which no "reasonable person" would take literally. Puffery serves to "puff up" an exaggerated image of what is being described and is especially featured in testimonials.


What I  understand to be Conservative principles can be found at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/conserving-long-term-national-interest.html


Below is what the Secretary of the Board of the Conservative Party said was the reason for my expulsion:

Tory Party to CK
Tuesday, January 15, 2013 3:34 PM
The Conservative Party received a complaint and subsequently launched an investigation. The investigation found subject matter personally attributed to you which were wholly inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Party.

Do you, like me, find it difficult to find anything I have said or done that has been inconsistent with what passes for the aims, objectives and principles of the Conservative Party as expressed above?

The reasons for my expulsion as enumerated at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/my-appeal-against-cancellation-of-my.html (which also contains my appeal) do not refer at all to any of  "principles" above or state how I have infringed against them.

Below is what I received today from the Chairman of the Board of the Conservative Party:

Decision of the Conservative Party Disciplinary Committee in the matter of the appeal by Ms Claire Khaw against her expulsion from the Conservative Party by the Board
The Committee met at Conservative Campaign Headquarters, 30 Millbank on Wednesday 27th March 2013 to consider an appeal by Ms Claire Khaw against the decision by the Board to expel her from membership of the Conservative Party.

Members of the Disciplinary Committee who heard the Appeal on the papers were:

Simon Mort (Chairman)
John Flack
Pauline Lucas
In attendance: Marcus Booth

The Committee DISMISSED the appeal.

Based on the evidence provided (including by Ms Khaw), the Committee concluded that Ms Khaw's publicly stated views and values, together with her conduct (that the Committee were in a position to appraise) are such that they are not compatible with membership of the Conservative Party, which is not an absolute right.

The aims, objectives and policies of the Conservative Party are freely available to read and Ms Khaw should have reasonably appraised herself of these before applying to join the Party.

Ms Khaw questioned the whereabouts of these principles.  The Committee commend to anyone suffering from similar uncertainty to study the Foreword to the 2010 General Election Manifesto
http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Activist%20Centre/Press%20and%20Policy/Manifestos/Manifesto2010.  Page vii seems particularly applicable in this specific context.

A  reading of her wholly unconvincing evidence http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/my-appeal-against-cancellation-of-my.html therefore led the Committee to reach the view that her expulsion should be upheld and that the Board of the Conservative Party acted reasonably.   
SIMON MORT
Chairman

Wednesday, 6 March 2013

My appeal against the cancellation of my Conservative Party membership


CLAIRE KHAW - GROUNDS FOR APPEAL AGAINST CANCELLATION OF MEMBERSHIP

I was told  by Stephen Phillips on 15 January 2013 by email that "subject matter personally attributed to you which were wholly inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Party."

Despite repeated requests to be told what the aims, objectives and principles of the party were, my question was not even acknowledged, much less addressed or answered properly or at all.

However, I was given a list of "Key Episodes" which were deemed to be "wholly inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the party".

KEY EPISODE 1

Pictured in front of swastika holding gun.  A website called 'EDL News' contains a picture of Khaw in front of a swastika, holding a gun, as does a blog entitled 'Griffin Watch' (EDL News, 17 September 2012, http://edlnews.co.uk/index.php/featured-stories/derek-fender-corner/828-the-big-fight-kim-gandy-vs-claire-khaw; Griffin Watch, 29 November 2012, http://griffinwatch-nwn.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/khaw-blimey-camerons-latest-recruit.html)  

I am no more a Nazi in that photograph than I would be a policeman if I were photographed standing outside a police station. As for why I did it, it was quite clearly for the publicity which very effectively brought me to the attention of British nationalists up and down the land, and now, of course, the Conservative Party itself.  It is my contention that if the Conservative Party were doing its job properly, there would be no need for UKIP or the BNP.  I wish to be a member of  the Conservative Party in order to help it  promote Conservative principles so as to prevent the further marginalisation of those who regard themselves as social conservatives.  It is farcical and ridiculous that a Conservative Prime Minister should be proposing to legalise "gay marriage" while his government has not implemented a single policy that would support the institution of marriage between heterosexual couples capable of sexual reproduction and bringing up the next generation nor will it criticise never married single mothers who are the cause of widespread illegitimacy which is the cause of national decline.   If the Conservative Party refuses to support the institutions of marriage and family and instead desecrates it by falling in with the liberal feminist  agenda, then it is clearly not  implementing Conservative principles at all.  In any case, that photograph was taken in April 2012, before I joined the Conservative Party.

KEY EPISODE 2

Refers to Jews as 'a global metaphor for the rich and powerful who exploit the poor'.  Khaw blogged on 13 February 2012, 'I think Jews are the teacher's pet in a class of bullies and dunces who envy the teacher's pet but who refuse to work hard while not being particularly clever.  Jews are perhaps a global metaphor for the 'rich and powerful who exploit the poor." (The Voice of Reason blog, 13 February 2012 http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/nationalism-wont-ever-get-off-ground.html


I am praising Jews for their cleverness and teacher's pet status which would cause the bullies and dunces of the world to envy and hate them.  How is this antisemitic or against the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are?  In any case, this was said before I joined the Conservative Party.

KEY EPISODE 3

Refers to Grant Shapps as 'Jewish millionaire' and 'spivocrat'.  In a blog post Khaw wrote on 5 December 2012: "Grant Shapps, Jewish millionaire and now Chairman of the Conservative Party ... is the greatest spivocrat of all' - unclear if quoting someone else or stating her own views (The Voice of Reason Blog, 5 December 2012  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/nationalism-wont-ever-get-off-ground.html)  

I was indeed quoting Peter Rushton whose talk I was reviewing on my blog.  It was not I who coined the term 'spivocrat', but Peter Rushton, as any viewing of the video would reveal.  Anti-semitism is endemic in Christian  Europe so it cannot be that my reporting of what someone who may dislike Jews says makes me guilty of antisemitism.  How is reporting what someone else said against the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are?

KEY EPISODE 4

Suggested on a radio phone-in that a disabled child should have been smothered at birth.  Claire Khaw appears to have told a BBC 5 Live phone-in in March 2011 with reference to a severely disabled child: "She should smothered it after it was born, shouldn't she, rather than expect the taxpayer to pick up the bill? Why should the taxpayer pay for her severely disabled child? Ask her that.  Professional sympathy seeker. Well, she ain't getting none from me.  We all know lots of mothers tote their severely disabled children around to get attention and rise in the pecking order of a group of mums.  The more disabled your child, the higher you are in the pecking order."  (The Voice of Reason Blog, 2 March 2011  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/claire-khaw-on-victoria-derbyshire-show.html)

How is voicing this opinion - however offensive  to some - against the the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are?   There is nothing morally or intellectually indefensible about what I said or tried to say during the phone-in, which  was that

(a) I would not wish to bring up a severely disabled child
(b) no one should have to pay to maintain the children of other parents, whether able-bodied or disabled
(c) when home births were the rule rather than the exception, the midwife would dispose of unwanted unviable severely disabled babies.

This was said in contemplation of the problem mentioned at  http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/may/31/care-failing-those-with-learning-disability

" ... people with a learning disability, whose numbers are growing by up to 5% a year ... " 

Is the Conservative  Party against the principle of free speech and the discussion of anything controversial?   It is after all a political party and must necessarily discuss difficult issues that affect the long-term national interest.   In any case, that phone-in took place  before I joined the Conservative Party.

KEY EPISODE 5

Appears to be in favour of honour killings.  Tweeted on 5 December 'The practice of honour killings suggest that Asians have a sense of honour while non-Asians do not, perhaps.'  (Claire Khaw's Twitter, 5 December 2012).  

How is pointing out that the British these days seem to have a defective sense of honour and appear to feel no shame in their Culture of Excuses and Entitlement against the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are?

KEY EPISODE 6

Banned from BNP.  Khaw was expelled from the BNP in July 2011.  Published correspondence from the party suggests 'the comments you made regarding disabled children were deemed to be unacceptable.'  (The Voice of Reason Blog, 7 July 2011 http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/claire-khaw-expelled-from-bnp.html)

How is being expelled from the BNP against the principles of Conservative Party, whatever they are?  The comments referred to were the comments made on the Victoria Derbyshire Show on BBC Radio 5 Live mentioned above.

KEY EPISODE 7

Boasts of being banned from 'every nationalist party' in Britain.  Khaw wrote in a blog on 5 December 2012: 'I have been banned from every single nationalist party in the land on trumped up charges and spurious accusations.' http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/nationalism-wont-ever-get-off-ground.html  

How is being banned from nationalist parties and meetings (probably because I am (a) not white , (b) a civic nationalist (c) an anti-feminist or (d) persona non grata for any other reason that I am not aware of ) against any principle of the Conservative Party, whatever they are?

KEY EPISODE 8

Suggested illegal immigrants should be made slaves.  Khaw is quoted as saying on her Facebook page: "I see no harm in introducing a form of slavery with those who don't have the right papers and aren't British citizens. After five years they are free to go. They can re-enslave themselves for a further five years and thereafter become British citizens. It would solve the Labour shortage ... Then everyone would be happy." Guardian, 29 April 2010  http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/29/stephen-bates-diary 

How is engaging in what the Guardian described as "banter" against any of the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are?  In any case,  I made that comment before I joined the Conservative Party.

KEY EPISODE 9 

Anti-Semitic jokes.  Tweeted on 11 December 2012 "Banned from posting for 7 days for posting a rabbi joke on a rabbi Facebook account!"  (Claire Khaw's Twitter, 11 December 2012  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/banned-from-posting-for-7-days-for.html) 

How is telling a Jewish joke (Rabbi Zvi Solomons on whose wall I posted this himself tells me he did not find the joke offensive) against the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are?
Below is the exchange I had with him after my ban from posting:

13 December 2012
10:33
Claire Khaw
Was it your missus who reported me, Rabbi?

10:34
Rabbi Zvi Solomons
?

10:35
Claire Khaw
Reported me for posting that rabbi joke on your wall, I mean.
It must have been one of your Facebook friends.
If you said it wasn't you.

10:35
Rabbi Zvi Solomons
Shame.

10:35
Claire Khaw
Yes, it is a shame that Jews these days don't appreciate Jewish jokes!

10:36
Rabbi Zvi Solomons
It might have been a gentile. Some of my best Gentiles are friends...

10:37
Claire Khaw
Gentiles are such hypocrites.

10:37
Rabbi Zvi Solomons
So they're human.

10:37
Claire Khaw
I bet it was a woman.
No sensayumah.

KEY EPISODE 10 

Wants a one party state.  On her LinkedIn profile, Claire Khaw states that one of her goals is to convince enough people of the merits of having a one-party state and to guide its formation. "to convince enough people of the merits of having a one-party state and to guide its formation, before one is imposed on us"
Claire Khaws' LinkedIn profile, accessed 12 December 2012  http://www.linkedin.com/in/1party4all) 

How is it against the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are, to propose what is in effect electoral reform along the lines of Peter Bone MP's House of Commons (Disqualification) Bill mentioned at http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2010/10/peter-bone-seeks-to-abolish-the-flatterers-cajolers-and-sometime-bullies-that-are-the-party-whips.html?






Since it is being claimed by the Secretary of the Board that I have acted in a way that is claimed to be "wholly inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Party" it is incumbent on the Party to  state what they are.

Surely no decision can be made as to this appeal until and unless the principles of the Conservative Party have been officially stated as well as how I have been alleged to act against them demonstrated?



CLAIRE KHAW
5 March 2013

Wednesday, 13 February 2013

Claire Khaw to appeal against the cancellation of her membership of the Conservative Party


The Conservative Party have finally outlined what I have done that they say is "wholly inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Party", but they have not seen fit to tell me what the aims, objectives and principles of the Party are!


Tory Party to CK
Tuesday, January 15, 2013 3:34 PM 

The Conservative Party received a complaint and subsequently launched an investigation. The investigation found subject matter personally attributed to you which were wholly inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Party.


"Dear Ms Khaw 
I write in response to your various emails relating to the termination of your membership of the Conservative Party by the Board of the Conservative Party on 12 [sic] December 2012.

The information upon which the Board relied is attached to this letter.

In accordance with the Constitution of the Party, you may lodge an appeal against the decision of the Board to terminate your membership. Should you wish to do so, you should inform me in writing by no later than Wednesday 13 March. 
Yours sincerely
Stephen Philliips
Secretary to the Board of the Conservative Party
11 February 2013"



Not antisemitic: Jeffrey Marshall and me outside Bevis Marks
KEY EPISODES
  • Pictured in front of swastika holding gun.  A website called 'EDL News' contains a picture of Khaw in front of a swastika, holding a gun, as does a blog entitled 'Griffin Watch' (EDL News, 17 September 2012, link: Griffin Watch, 29 November 2012, http://griffinwatch-nwn.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/khaw-blimey-camerons-latest-recruit.html)  [I hope they are not suggesting that I am a Nazi!  I am no more a Nazi in that photograph than I would be a policeman if I were photographed standing outside a police station. As for why I did it, it was quite clearly for the publicity which very effectively brought me to the attention of British nationalists up and down the land, and now, of course, the Conservative Party itself.  It is my contention that if the Conservative Party were doing its job properly, there would be no need for UKIP or the BNP.  I wish to be a member of  the Conservative Party in order to make it more Conservative and fit for purpose and prevent the further marginalisation of those who regard themselves as social conservatives.  For a Conservative Prime Minister to propose the legalisation of gay marriage is like the Communist Party of China deciding to become the Capitalist Party of China without changing its name.  Anyway, that photo was taken before I joined the Conservative Party.]
  • Refers to Jews as 'a global metaphor for the rich and powerful who exploit the poor'.  Khaw blogged on 13 February 2012, 'I think Jews are the teacher's pet in a class of bullies and dunces who envy the teacher's pet but who refuse to work hard while not being particularly clever.  Jews are perhaps a global metaphor for the 'rich and powerful who exploit the poor." (The Voice of Reason blog, 13 February 2012, http://griffinwatch-nwn.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/khaw-blimey-camerons-latest-recruit.html) [I am praising Jews for their cleverness and teacher's pet status which would cause the bullies and dunces of the world to envy and hate them.  How is this antisemitic or against the principles of the Conservative Party? Anyway, that was said before I joined the Conservative Party. ]
  • Refers to Grant Shapps as 'Jewish millionaire' and 'spivocrat'.  In a blog post Khaw wrote on 5 December 2012: "Grant Shapps, Jewish millionaire and now Chairman of the Conservative Party ... is the greatest spivocrat of all' - unclear if quoting someone else or stating her own views (The Voice of Reason Blog, 5 December 2012  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/nationalism-wont-ever-get-off-ground.html)  [I was indeed quoting someone else and was commenting on the talk being given by Peter Rushton.  It was not I who coined the term 'spivocrat'.  Anti-semitism is endemic in Christian  Europe so it cannot be that my reporting of what someone who may dislike Jews says makes me guilty of antisemitism.  The woman I regard as my best friend is in fact an Orthodox Jewesss.  What principle of the Conservative Party have I gone against?]
  • Suggested on a radio phone-in that a disabled child should have been smothered at birth.  Claire Khaw appears to have told a BBC 5 Live phone-in in March 2011 with reference to a severely disabled child: "She should smothered it after it was born, shouldn't she, rather than expect the taxpayer to pick up the bill? Why should the taxpayer pay for her severely disabled child? Ask her that.  Professional sympathy seeker. Well, she ain't getting none from me.  We all know lots of mothers tote their severely disabled children around to get attention and rise in the pecking order of a group of mums.  The more disabled your child, the higher you are in the pecking order."  (The Voice of Reason Blog, 2 March 2011  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/claire-khaw-on-victoria-derbyshire-show.html  [What Conservative principles have I gone against by saying what I said?  Are Conservatives against the principle of free speech?  Anyway, that phone-in took place  before I joined the Conservative Party.]
  • Appears to be in favour of honour killings.  Tweeted on 5 December 'The practice of honour killings suggest that Asians have a sense of honour while non-Asians do not, perhaps.  (Claire Khaw's Twitter, 5 December 2012).  [What Conservative principles have I gone against by saying that?  What is so wrong about asking if the British these days might have a defective sense of honour, or that too many of them these days appear to feel no shame?  Could this be related to their worship or fear  of  SSMs?  https://www.facebook.com/pages/Are-Slut-Single-Mothers-a-burden-on-the-state/220271251432495 Are the Conservatives against the principle of free speech?]
  • Banned from BNP.  Khaw was expelled from the BNP in July 2011.  Published correspondence from the party suggests 'the comments you made regarding disabled children were deemed to be unacceptable.'  (The Voice of Reason Blog, 7 July 2011 http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/claire-khaw-expelled-from-bnp.html)  [What Conservative principles have I gone against by saying that?  Are Conservatives against the principle of free speech?  Anyway, that was before I joined the Conservative Party.]
  • Boasts of being banned from 'every nationalist party' in Britain.  Khaw wrote in a blog on 5 December 2012: 'I have been banned from every single nationalist party in the land on trumped up charges and spurious accusations.' http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/nationalism-wont-ever-get-off-ground.html  [How is being banned from nationalist parties and meetings against any principle of the Conservative Party?]
  • Suggested illegal immigrants should be made slaves.  Khaw is quoted as saying on her Facebook page: "I see no harm in introducing a form of slavery with those who don't have the right papers and aren't British citizens. After five years they are free to go. They can re-enslave themselves for a further five years and thereafter become British citizens. It would solve the Labour shortage ... Then everyone would be happy." Guardian, 29 April 2010  http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/29/stephen-bates-diary [How is engaging in what the Guardian described as "banter" against any principle of the Conservative Party?  Anyway, that was before I joined the Conservative Party.
  • Anti-Semitic jokes.  Tweeted on 11 December 2012 "Banned from posting for 7 days for posting a rabbi joke on a rabbi Facebook account!"  (Claire Khaw's Twitter, 11 December 2012  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/banned-from-posting-for-7-days-for.html) [How is telling a Jewish joke which (Rabbi Zvi Solomons himself tells me he did not find offensive) against the principles of the Conservative Party?  
  • 13 December 2012

  • 10:33
  • Claire Khaw
  • Was it your missus who reported me, Rabbi?

  • 10:34
  • Rabbi Zvi Solomons
  • ?

  • 10:35
  • Claire Khaw
  • Reported me for posting that rabbi joke on your wall, I mean.
  • It must have been one of your Facebook friends. 
  • If you said it wasn't you.

  • 10:35
  • Rabbi Zvi Solomons
  • Shame.

  • 10:35
  • Claire Khaw
  • Yes, it is a shame that Jews these days don't appreciate Jewish jokes!

  • 10:36
  • Rabbi Zvi Solomons
  • It might have been a gentile. Some of my best Gentiles are friends...

  • 10:37
  • Claire Khaw
  • Gentiles are such hypocrites.

  • 10:37
  • Rabbi Zvi Solomons
  • So they're human.

  • 10:37
  • Claire Khaw
  • I bet it was a woman.
  • No sensayumah.  
  • Wants a one party state.  On her LinkedIn profile, Claire Khaw states that one of her goals is to convince enough people of the merits of having a one-party state and to guide its formation. "to convince enough people of the merits of having a one-party state and to guide its formation, before one is imposed on us"
    Claire Khaws' LinkedIn profile, accessed 12 December 2012  http://www.linkedin.com/in/1party4all) [How is it against the principles of the Conservative Party to propose what is in effect electoral reform along the lines of Peter Bone MP's House of Commons (Disqualification) Bill mentioned at http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2010/10/peter-bone-seeks-to-abolish-the-flatterers-cajolers-and-sometime-bullies-that-are-the-party-whips.html?]

What are the principles of the Conservative Party??




Friday, 11 January 2013

Are the aims, objectives and principles of the Conservative Party a closely-guarded secret?

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_jrv

CK to Tory Party
Wednesday, January 23, 2013 11:31 AM 

Subject: The reason for the cancellation of my membership

When may I expect to hear from you on this?


CK to Tory Party
Friday, January 18, 2013 3:22 PM 

May I know if it is your intention not to tell me 

1. what I have done that is inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Conservative Party; and 

2. what are the aims, objectives and principles of the Conservative Party?


CK to Tory Party
Wednesday, January 16, 2013 5:49 PM 

Subject: The reason for the cancellation of my membership

I wonder if you have received my earlier email.



CK to Tory Party
Tuesday, January 15, 2013 4:39 PM 


Yes, I gathered that I have done something which you dislike, but may I know

(a) what I have done that is inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Party?

(b) what are the aims, objectives and principles of the Conservative Party?



Tory Party to CK
Tuesday, January 15, 2013 3:34 PM 

The Conservative Party received a complaint and subsequently launched an investigation. The investigation found subject matter personally attributed to you which were wholly inconsistent with the aims, objectives and principles of the Party

The Board of the Party reserves the right to cancel the membership, in its absolute discretion, of any Party member.



CK to Tory Party
Monday, January 14, 2013 3:18 PM

Dear Mr Phillips

May I hope to receive from you an acknowledgement or an answer to my question?

If it is the Conservative Party's view that I am not entitled to receive an answer then please also let me know this.

Yours sincerely

Claire Khaw

CK to Tory Party
Friday 11 January 2013


Dear Mr Phillips

I refer to your letter dated 20th December and would be grateful if you would let me know the reason why you cancelled my membership.

Yours sincerely

Claire Khaw



Tory Party to CK
Thursday 20th December 2012:

Dear Ms Khaw

I am writing on behalf of the Conservative Party Board to inform you that your membership of the Conservative Party has been cancelled under Part IV 17.7 of the Constitution of the Party, which states:

The Board of the Party shall have power to do anything which in its opinion relates to the management and administration of the Party.  It shall be ... responsible for ... the cancellation or refusal of membership, in its absolute discretion of any Party member ....

Yours sincerely

Stephen Phillips
Secretary to the Board of the Party


http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/claire-khaws-membership-of-conservative.html
Chinese Communist Party members have more rights than Conservative Party members

God behaving badly

1:03:00  CLAIRE  KHAW joins to say God in the Koran is more reasonable than God in the Old Testament, but there is only one Abrahamic God.  ...