Harriet Harman Defends CHILD Porn but Attacks Page 3!

The Right Honourable Harriet Harman QC MP is a rather curious creature.

The Deputy Leader of the opposition has recently been stepping up her campaign to dispense with Page 3 Models, as featured in a number of tabloid newspapers. She tells SKY News:

“I’m not saying that we should ban it, but I think that women in the 21st century who are going out to work, who are bringing up their children, who are playing a full role in public life, I think that the idea that women are sex objects to be posing in their knickers to be leered at by men in a national newspaper - I don’t think that that’s the right thing for women in the 21st century.”

Fair enough.

ALAS.

Contrast THAT statement with what she has to say about images of CHILDREN portrayed as "sex objects" for the gratification of paedophiles:

“A pornographic photo or film of a child should not be considered indecent unless it could be shown that the subject had suffered”........and..... “childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage”.


She also stated that prosecutors should have to prove harm rather than paedophiles having to justify themselves.

She also suggested that the age of consent be LOWERED to 14, and that INCEST be decriminalised.

These astonishing motions and statements were made in Legal documents, signed by Harman, whilst legal officer for the NCCL, (National Council for Civil Liberties, now known as Liberty), in 1978 and formed part of an official response to the then Governments’ proposals to tighten the laws on child pornography by banning indecent images of under-16s.

Associate GROUPS of the NCCL were the renowned Paedophile Information Exchange and the Paedophile Action for Liberation.

Miss Harman has never responded to journalists requests for statements about this rather embarrassing period in her illustrious career. A spokesperson once tried to distance Harman from her involvement with NCCL, insisting that the Paedophile Information Exchange was no longer part of the NCCL when she worked there.

Press reports from the 1980’s clearly refute this statement however, showing that PIE was, indeed, still an associate group.

In 2009, the then Shadow Children’s Minister, Tim Loughton, said:

“Clearly there is a serious conflict of interest with the committees she sits on, who might want urgently to clarify her position on the exploitation of children for the sexual gratification of adults........... It’s a shame that Miss Harman’s zeal for positive discrimination and all things politically correct among adults does not extend to the exploitation of children. Any child who is used for the sexual gratification of adults counts as an abused child and needs protecting.”

Fortunately, for Harriet, the furore appears to have somewhat died down these days.

It’s only when she makes a stride to make, as how the ‘SUN’ describes, a “right tit of herself”, (geddit!!??), that her past keeps regurgitating to haunt her.

Harriet Harman Minister for Child Porn?

"They hate equality agenda which most of them, as men, feel threatened by".

Deputy Labour Leader Harriet Harman tweeting today about her critics in the Press, in response to Huffington Post's Political Editor, Mehdi Hasan who fawned :

"Don't know why (Harriet) has so many haters and mockers in the press. She is a very articulate & convincing media performer"

Actually, Harriet, at the risk of seeming to want to derogate your 'Sisterhood' rant,  maybe it’s because some of them abhor CHILD pornography and are very suspicious of those who advocate it.

People like yourself, who once asserted that sexually explicit photographs or films of children should be LEGAL unless there was “evidence that the subject had been harmed”.

People who don’t forget that, alongside Patricia Hewitt, you held a very senior position at the National Council for Civil Liberties, (now known as Liberty), a group whose affiliates were the odious and despicable Paedophile Information Exchange and Paedophile Action for Liberation.
Groups whose members argued openly for the abolition of the age of consent, insisting it should be lowered to 14, as well as decriminalising INCEST.


Groups for whom, as the ‘umbrella’ body, the NCCL, YOU, as an acting LEGAL officer, signed the official response to the Government’s proposed Protection of Children Bill, (designed to tighten the laws on child pornography by banning indecent images of under-16), describing the proposed laws as:-

(could lead to) “damaging and absurd prosecutions” and “increase censorship”.

People who recall that you suggested that a “pornographic photo or film of a child should not be considered indecent unless it could be shown that the subject had suffered, and that prosecutors would have to prove harm rather than defendants having to justify themselves”.

People who remember your letter as suggesting that “Our amendment places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed.”

People who, in response to those who query and express astonishment as to how predatory Paedophiles like Jimmy Savile and OTHERS were allowed to prosper for so long, might point to the activities of the afore-mentioned groups, and those who FOUGHT for them, as the possible source of an answer. 

So you’ll have to forgive me, Harriet, if I remain one of your critics.

NOT as a man who hates “Equality Agenda” due to the fact that, as a man, I feel threatened by it.

But as a man who despises hypocritical opportunists; ‘FEMINISTS’, whose professions for Political Correctness,  EQUALITY and the rights of others seemingly precludes the exploitation of children for the sexual gratification of paedophiles.......