This video from the USA is called Bush Science Policy.
From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation:
US scientists protest against political interferenceSea also here.The American Union of Concerned Scientists says thousands of its members and their colleagues have signed a statement protesting against political interference in the scientific process.
The group has highlighted what they say are dozens of recent allegations on issues from global warming to sex education that they say involve censorship and political interference in science.
Scientists working for federal agencies have been told that they cannot talk about climate change and have been asked to change their data to fit predetermined policy decisions.
Campaigners blame the Bush Administration for the increased political interference.
They say that in recent years the White House has been able to censor the work of agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration because the Republican Congress has been loathe to stand up for scientific integrity.
White House censorship of op-ed column: here.
Bush wants creationism at US schools.
Creationist film censorship in USA here.
*NYT to ignore White House, will run Flynt Leverett’s op-ed*
Posted by: “hapi22″ hapi22@earthlink.net robinsegg
Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:52 pm (PST)
Apparently, The New York Times is going to publish the op-ed piece by
Flynt Leverett that the White House has been trying to suppress.
It is going to be in tomorrow’s newspaper (if the rumor is correct).
———————————————————-
*NYT to Ignore White House, Run “Classified” Op-Ed*
by Paul Kiel
Talking Points Memo
December 21, 2006, 3:58 PM
Over at the Washington Note, we see that the New York Times is set to
reject a White House-led effort to block publication of an essay
critical of its foreign policy.
Last week the paper was set to publish an op-ed piece by Flynt Leverett,
a former Bush Administration official who worked at the Central
Intelligence Agency, the Department of State, and on the National
Security Council, which criticized the White House for its disastrous
diplomatic approach towards Iran.
The CIA reviewed the article and cleared it for publication, but the
White House put the brakes on it, saying it contained classified
information that the CIA missed. Leverett cried foul: “All of my
publications on Iran — and, indeed, on any other policy matter on which
I have written since leaving government — were cleared beforehand by
the CIA’s Publication Review Board to confirm that I would not be
disclosing classified information.”
Now Steve Clemons, a friend of Leverett’s, reports on his blog that
tomorrow the Times will run the op-ed “with redacted lines ‘blacked
out.’” Clemons told me by phone that the Times will instruct readers
where they can find the omitted information in other (unclassified)
publications — like, for instance, in Leverett’s paper on the same
topic called “Dealing with Tehran,” published through the Century
Foundation.
The information the White House had redacted, according to Leverett,
“include Iran’s dialogue and cooperation with the United States
concerning Afghanistan in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and Iran’s
offer to negotiate a comprehensive “grand bargain” with the United
States in the spring of 2003.”
Read this WITH LINKS to sources at:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002214.php
READ Flynt Leverett’s long paper on the same topic called “Dealing with
Tehran,” published through the Century Foundation, at:
http://www.tcf.org/publications/internationalaffairs/leverett_diplomatic.pdf
In a new report for The Century Foundation, Flynt Leverett, a senior
fellow and director of the Geopolitics of Energy Initiative in the
American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation, lays out a
comprehensive strategy for diplomatic engagement with Iran. Leverett
says that a successful resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue requires
a “grand bargain” between the United States and Iran — that is, an
overarching framework in which outstanding bilateral differences are
resolved as a package.
Comment by Administrator — December 22, 2006 @ 4:46 pm