Let's see now..... correct me if I'm wrong....... Bear didn't have an answer as to why Flanagan was on the mailing list and didn't do any real research concerning the mailing list ........... you, on the other hand, researched the crap out of it and.....surprise, surprise, surprise,.... don't have an answer either, beyond speculation.
Now, based on the above, I'd say that denial had nothing to do with "the search of facts" or the lack of, but instead what it showed was the intelligent use of restraint and the ability of an individual not to get caught up by the media wh)ores and their speculation only rants.
In my opinion, Bear took the intelligent stand, which leaves you with................................................................................
Speculation is what everyone who stated that the Wildrose party, Manning, Harper, the CBC distanced themselves from Flanagan out of fear of public hysteria and political correctness that censors "unpopular" questions. That's quite damning speculation, given that one would think the prime minister of this country, a seasoned politician such as Manning and a media outlet such as the CBC were made to look like spineless, thoughtless fools by such speculation. It never occurred to them, it seems, that the decision to distance themselves was based on disgust with statements that are both ignorant of all the facts and contrary to all efforts in this country to protect children from sexual abuse.
Those who did so lacked the curiosity to dig further and get some facts to develop questions, such as:
* The vast majority of those convicted of viewing child porn have in fact personally sexually abused a child. Those who have not at the very least are fantasizing about doing so. Child porn also plays a role in more than a third of cases of known sexual abuse in that it was the catalyst behind their decision to "do it themselves" rather than just watch. There is no research, no science, zilch to back up his claim that those who view porn are "harmless." Harper, Manning, the Wildrose party and CBC presumably are aware of these facts.
* Child porn laws are a critical tool in catching sexual abusers and thus serve to protect children. Child porn are images of crime scenes and the criminal acts that are causing catastrophic physical, emotional and psychological injuries to the victims that will be with them throughout their lives, which are often cut short by it.
* From a political and social perspective, the costs of sexual abuse to Canadian society are astronomical. Victims of sexual abuse, and child porn require millions of dollars in physical and healthcare costs. Because of the injuries sexual abuse causes to brain functioning, many turn to delinquency, violent rages, addictions. It costs the Canadian legal system millions. The loss of productivity many experience in life, the inability to parent well due to their injuries and PTSD, lead to multi-generational suffering and costs. That a political science professor and political advisor would illustrate such a profound ignorance of an issue that affects so many Canadians, destroys so many lives, costs the economy so much is quite shocking and I can understand political parties and media outlets would want to not want to rely on the insights and commentary of someone illustrating such profound ignorance that is contrary to the health and safety of Canadian children, youth, adults and the economy.
* Anyone who has any knowledge of the issue is also aware that the tactics used by those lobbying to legalize sexual abuse, including child porn, attempt to do so by spreading false information and manipulating public ignorance. Favourite themes they use: child porn is harmless and no different from adult porn. Those who view child porn are harmless. There is public hysteria about sexual abuse of children (as in, the public is over reacting to what is essentially a harmless thing). Pedophiles are victims of social norms and need counselling because they aren't criminals, just men or women with sexual preferences society does not accept. One of the groups most involved in perpetuating all this blatantly false and exploitive and manipulative information is NMBLA, which lobbies to legalize child sexual abuse.
* In his own words, in the 1990s, Flanagan was given the job of hunting for racists who might have infiltrated the Reform Party. As part of this, he subscribed to the Heritage Front newsletter, a neo-Nazi group. In other words, he used association and subscriptions to a racist organization as part of his efforts to identify racists in his organization. Presumably, he didn't believe he was doing this in response to "public hysteria" about racism, since really, if we apply his way of thinking on child porn to racism, most racists are "harmless" in that they don't actually commit a crime themselves. Presumably, he didn't believe he was taking a stand against freedom of speech. Presumably, he thought it reasonable to investigate individuals based on their association with a racist organization, and didn't think this was a case of "guilt by association", but rather a case of identifying people's ideological beliefs. Presumably, he thought the Reform party had the right and responsibility to distance itself from individuals who hold racists beliefs, because racism is contrary to the wellbeing and safety of Canadians and Canadian society as well as his party.
Yet for some reason, it is unintelligent to do the same when it comes to sexual abuse and child porn and to raise questions based on an individual's claim that he subscribed to NMBLA for a couple of years, even after his explanation--that it was due to the Heritage Fund selling their mailing list to NMBLA--makes no sense since NMBLA's subscriptions are all paid and their membership is politically across the spectrum and, based on known members, includes individuals from professionals in every field and social class.
There are more answers than questions. Indeed, we don't know why Flanagan made the statements he did. Why he introduced his subscription to NMBLA to the discussion. Why he continues to stand by statements that are so embarrassingly ignorant of the facts and so parallel to NMBLA's positions. He has left us with a lot of questions. Hopefully, these are questions he asking of himself and eventually will come out with answers that will help him regain some credibility.
