As the Conservatives prepare to hurriedly rush-in legislation on child pornography that absolutely has nothing to do with distracting public attention from the Richard Colvin's testimony and the growing scandal about what the government knew about allegations of torture in Afghan prisons and when, here's what Tom Flanagan, a senior adviser to Stephen Harper and former senior campaign staffer, had to say on the subject to The Manitoban:
Before making his comments about context in the media during his first lecture, Flanagan digressed for a moment and spoke about the misinterpretation of the beliefs of lawyers, due to the people they defend in court. Flanagan cited the example of Stockwell Day suggesting that a lawyer by the name of Lorne Goddard, who had defended a client accused of possessing child pornography, believed the same thing as their client — “that the lawyer himself believed that it was OK to have child pornography.” Flanagan then continued, saying “But that’s actually another interesting debate or seminar: what’s wrong with child pornography — in the sense that it’s just pictures? But I’m not here to debate that today.”Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
6 comments:
..and so where is the Liberal Party in response to this garbage piece of legislation?
It appears that the liberty of Afghan detainees is more important than the erosion of liberties at home.
..... your quote doesn't seem to tell us which side of said debate Mr. Flanagan is on....
....despite the fact you seem to have chosen his side for him on the basis that he is an evil conservative. I thought it was only those evil conservatives that were out to smear people good names....
1) I provided all the quote available, and the source. If Flanagan wants to expound and clarify, power to him.
2) You're the one attributing thoughts and actions to me that I haven't expressed. My only editorial comment in this post about Flanagan's comments was that he "says the darndest things."
and of course highlight the part of the quote you wish people to take out of context.... I bet it was done like that in the original article tho.. right? You wouldn't be using dirty conservative tricks to trick people into thinking something would you?
Actually my jedi liberal mind tricks require italicization, not bolding.
This is another one of those booby-trapped issues that opposition parties must approach with caution. The framing of the issue 'child porn' would make many believe that if you oppose the bill, you support child porn -- that's exactly what the CONs expect. It's one of those issues that can only be truly addressed while in government, because the intent -- helping stomp out child porn -- is good. The action is hamfisted.
Post a Comment