When I first posted on the wasted life of Keith Locke, the Green Party’s “Frogblog” came out with some very dodgy statements, which I will tackle one by one.
“In a post appropriately called Green Bashing, Dave Farrar….summarises another who lists various things Keith said decades ago. I’m disappointed that DPF has chosen to point to such rubbishy posts…As to the Keith stuff. It is so silly defining people by their politics decades ago (and distorting even that record). No one ever does it with Donna Awatere-Huata, Stephen Franks, Ken Shirley, Deborah Coddington or Maurice Williamson, all of whom had radical pasts.”
Frogblog is quite right that the people named have radical pasts. Keith Locke however, has a radical past, present and probably future. My history of Locke started in the sixties and carried on to 2005. Locke has supported tyrants and murderers all his adult life. He has worked with hard core Marxist-Leninists up till well after entering parliament. What aspects of my history are “distorted”? Please identify my mistakes.
“DPF leaves out the bloggerÂs repetition of the slander that Keith supported Pol Pot. As Keith has said in parliament, he,like all of the anti-Vietnam War movement, welcomed the overthrow of the corrupt US puppet regime in Phnom Penh by the Khmer Rouge, having no idea what was going to happen next. When Pol Pot emerged and the killing fields began, he was at the forefront in NZ of opposing the Khmer Rouge at a time when the Muldoon Government supported it.”
I’m sure Keith Locke didn’t know that Pol Pot would be as bad as he was. Locke did however know that the Khmer Rouge were hard core Maoists and that their victory was likely to lead to the mass killing of “class enemies”. It happened in China, why wouldn’t it happen in Cambodia? Where is the public apology to the Cambodian people for his monumental error of judgement. Before WW2 many Europeans backed Hitler. They didn’t know how barbaric Hitler was going to be either, yet history still rightly judges them extremely harshly. Why should Locke be judged any more leniently?
For that matter, where is the apology to the Afghan people for publicly backing the rape of their country. Where is the public apology to the victim’s of those murdering Filipino Maoists, the New People’s Army, who Locke happily supported?
Where is the apology to the people of New Zealand for campaigning against our Frigate’s and our Air Force Strike wing? Locke can’t claim he did this to promote peace, because he has a long history of supporting war when it suits him.
“Keith was directly elected to his place on the Green list by 3000+ members and then into Parliament by 120,000 or so voters at the most recent election. As such he and the Greens have been judged twice now on his record as an MP and are still here.”
Only two groups now campaign in parliamentary elections as open Marxists-the Communist League (the remnants of Locke’s old Socialist Action League) and the Anti-Capitalist Alliance (co-led by old SALer, Philip Ferguson). Their vote is counted in the tens.If Locke stood as what he is-a Marxist, how many votes would he get? Would he be in parliament without the Green camouflage? Locke is in parliament because well-meaning people think your party cares about the environment. Not because hordes of Marxist nutters want Keith Locke to lead the storming of Queen Street.
Frogblog should answer these questions honestly or issue apologies to myself and David Farrar. You should thank me for exposing the Marxist in your midst. You should get rid of Locke and all the other covert Marxists that hide in your party. Abandon socialism and become a true environmental party, like ACT. Do this and you might regain a little respect.
Don’t do it and you will forever be known as the “Pumpkin Party” Green on the outside, yellow in the middle.