The Bush Administration's War on Women

“U.S. Deletes, Alters Gender Issue Web Data -Report

By Deborah Zabarenko

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration has stripped information on a range of women's issues from government Web sites, apparently in pursuit of a political agenda, researchers reported on Wednesday.

"Vital information is being deleted, buried, distorted and has otherwise gone missing from government Web sites and publications," Linda Basch, president of the National Council for Research on Women, said in a telephone interview.

"Taken cumulatively, this has an enormously negative effect on women and girls."

A council report said the missing information fell into four categories: women's health; their economic status; objective scientific data; and information aimed at protecting women and girls and helping them advance.

The deletions and alterations appear to hew to a political agenda, rather than providing the nonpartisan, unbiased data that has been the tradition of U.S. government reports, the council said.

Its report cited a fact sheet from the Centers of Disease Control that focused on the advantages of using condoms to prevent sexually transmitted disease; it was revised in December 2002 to say evidence on condoms' effectiveness in curbing these diseases was inconclusive.

The National Cancer Institute's Web site was changed in 2002 to say studies linking abortion and breast cancer were inconsistent; after an outcry from scientists, the institute later amended that to say abortion is not associated with increased breast cancer risk.

25 PUBLICATIONS DELETED

At the Labor Department's Women's Bureau Web site, the report said 25 key publications on subjects ranging from pay equity to child care to issues relating to black and Latina women and women business owners had been deleted with no explanation.

Key government offices dedicated to addressing the needs of women have been disbanded, according to the report. These include the Office of Women's Initiatives and Outreach in the White House and the President's Interagency Council on Women.

At the Pentagon, the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services was slated to be dismantled but was saved after an outcry. However, the report said this committee now focused on issues such as health care for servicewomen and the effects of deployment on families, but not on equity and access issues.

In the area of scientific objectivity, the report said two advisory committees recommended the Food and Drug Administration approve a contraceptive known as Plan B as a nonprescription drug but were blocked by political pressure from doing so.

Regarding violence against women, the report said the U.S. attorney general, as of March 2004, had failed to conduct and publish a study required under the 2000 Violence Against Women Act to investigate discrimination against domestic violence victims in getting insurance.

The White House did not immediately return a call for comment.”

“Good on ya Matt! Teach they attention starved children how to properly behave! 8P

Anyhoo, is there special information on these web sites concerning men? Why is it the left want a colorless and genderless society yet hold onto the power these groups give them?”

“We hope he deletes this one.”

“Violin, will check my prostrate for me?”

“Ban all the women!

Ban the truth!



JK”

“Is violin more hated than me?”

“Violin,
you must not check your email, because I warned you of this exact situation in an email this morning. Big Brother is watching!”

“Fan mail!”

“"Is violin more hated than me?"

Perish the thought little buddy. He’s just irrelevant.”

“lol!

Whew, my reputation is intact.”

“Now I've read it.

I don't bring up old threads to circumvent the new rules. Just a while back, the chronic whiners asked people not to create numerous threads on the same topic. An agreement was reached that we would do a search for similar threads before starting a new one.

Are the simpletons who can’t decide from a thread title whether or not they want to read it lobbying you to ban me?”

“don't flatter yourself, violin.”

“It is pretty funny being referred to as Violin et. al.”

“Heck V, your threads don't bother me. I just like busting your onions for crying for constant attention.

Do yourself a favore; loosen up, go buy a pack and take up backpacking. It's great fun ya know.”

“Looks to me like only about 10% of the Bush threads are properly labled as 'Fuego'.

Am I to understand that I can only post to threads that you have gotten around to re-labeling?”

“Well, when photos of coffins can be banned for purely political reasons, when supreme court justices can confiscate and erase tapes of a public speech, when any views opposing the administration can be labeled as unpatriotic, can you be surprised at anything, Violin?”

“Poor little innocent freedom fighting violin.
Boo Hoo.”

“Fiddle boy,
There is no need to bring up old threads since there are already a ton of current threads for you to degrade. This afternoon, there are 5 "Bush" threads that have been posted to in the past day. What is wrong with posting to one of those five? Or is your platform about being broad and shallow?”

“Wow! I wish Matt would call me out like that.”

“Me too. Matt's never called me out. hmmmm”

“I'll be over in a minute, Mutt and we can commiserate over a beer.”

“violin's even using old threads that have nothing to do with politics now.

See Stupid contractor tricks.
A thread on home repairs becomes about Graphic photographs showing the torture and sexual abuse of Iraqi prisoners.”

“$5 bucks says violin is crying right now.”

“If you can't take your handslapping like a big boy, don't do the crime. ;-)”

“Viola, are you going to respond? Don't walk away angry.”

“Meanwhile Bush is screwing over more women than Clinton EVER could, LOL... millions and millions more.

I wish I hadn't missed that episode of FRONTLINE last night. I'm sure there were multiple tie-ins to this phenonmenon based on historically paternalistic societies.”

“No, actually Tilt, it was quite factual and didn't tie in any paternalistic views of fundamentalism. I thought it was quite restrained and a good journalistic recounting of GW's religious life. The viewer was left to make up his/her own mind.”

“All I remember is that God told him he would be president after he gave up the booze and got religion.”

“Stovie is the whiner who got matt all agitated in the first place with his “matt, please reclassify this thread” blubbering.

I did a search and posted on the only ‘contractor’ thread around. It hadn’t been posted to in nearly two months so I figured it was safe. Besides, I thought the title was perfect. I forgot how offensive truths can be to some folks.

Don’t worry – I’ll just start a new thread for every post to avoid upsetting the more frail TTers. I guess I’ll have to link to the old threads for reference.”

“It may not have touched on those issues, but fundamentalism is riddled with them. I believe this is the foundation for many of the inequities in society due to sex... even those that could be termed 'reverse discrimination' such as child custody hearings where women tend to be favored.”

“violin et al - seems like you are the whiner here. I am only the person to make a public point of exposeing your inmature behavior.
A bunch of TTers have emailed me to thank me for making that thread.”

“"Inequities in society due to sex..."

Maybe more sex means more equality!

I pledge to have more sex so women can be more equal!

Can I get some female volunteers, please?”

“Yes, MP -- that's what I saw in the promo for it. I guess I need to bite the bullet and get a faster connection so I can watch these things over the 'Net whenever I want, <G>”

“Well... I hate them all then.”

“The Net Nannies Strike From Afar

LOL”

“Leave those Net Nannies alone Bearmagnet!”

“I suppose the male counterpart might be a 'Net Nanner'... at least in some instances.”

“I don't get it.... again”

“I've never had a net nannie, though.”

“The night is young.... LOL... But then you'll have to change your name to Nannymagnet, <G>


Mary Phyl - I was saying that I missed that episode last night, but I could see it over the Internet anytime I wanted if I had a faster connection....”

“I don't see how any of this makes Violin a whiner. Thanks violin for posting an article that again demonstrates how the current admin promotes it's religious policies in the government.”

“Matt, instead of calling his platform broad and shallow, couldn't you just ban him?


...And dunadan too, please.”

“You know that Jamie Gorelick is a member of the 9/11 Commission. You also probably know that she was an Assistant Attorney General in the Clinton Administration And .. you might know that she is the Clinton official who wrote that memo that pretty much eliminated any possibility that the CIA and the FBI would cooperate and share intelligence on terrorism. But .. do you know why Gorelick wrote this memo? Simple. To protect Clinton from an investigation into Chinese involvement in his campaign finance scandal.”

“Gorelick Rejected Attempt to Revise 'Wall' Memo
Scott Wheeler, CNSNews.com
Thursday, April 29, 2004

One of America's most prominent federal prosecutors sought changes to the 1995 "wall" memo authored by then-Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, but most of the concerns expressed by U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White over the barriers erected between criminal and counter-intelligence investigations were rejected.
Gorelick's "wall" memo was the subject of an April 26 CNSNews.com report, which quoted four sources as saying the memo erected barriers to intelligence-sharing between the FBI and intelligence agencies, and impeded the investigation of alleged Chinese espionage and illegal campaign donations to then-President Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign.

According to documents obtained by CNSNews.com, White, who was the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, spelled out her concerns shortly after Gorelick wrote the memo establishing the new guidelines for federal investigations.

The reply that followed came from Michael Vatis, deputy director of the Executive Office of National Security, with Gorelick signing off on Vatis' language.

White was concerned that Gorelick's new guidelines for investigations had made it too complicated for the FBI to contact the U.S. attorney's office and launch a probe of suspicious activity. White suggested that only the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review at the Department of Justice needed to approve such an investigation, and not the department's criminal division.

However, the Vatis/Gorelick memo offered a blunt reply.

"I recommend rejecting this change," the June 19, 1995 document stated. "[A] USAO [U.S. attorney's office] should not be notified of a national security investigation -- particularly one that has not yet developed into a criminal case -- without the approval of the AAG [assistant attorney general], Criminal Division."

The Vatis/Gorelick memo also addressed White's reservations over how the new investigative guidelines would impact a probe under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). White contended that once the Justice Department's Criminal Division had decided that criminal law enforcement concerns existed in a FISA investigation, the appropriate U.S. attorney should be contacted.

Vatis rejected this notion as well.

"Notifying the USAO as soon as law enforcement concerns exist -- but before Crim. thinks that the investigation should 'go criminal' -- is simply too early," the document stated.

The current U.S. attorney general, John Ashcroft, recently de-classified the original Gorelick memo that established the new investigative guidelines. He did so shortly before testifying in front of the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, calling the Gorelick memo "the single greatest structural cause for September 11."

The June 19, 1995 memo from Vatis/Gorelick was included in a batch of documents released Wednesday by the Justice Department in response to a request by U.S. Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Lindsay Graham, R-S.C.

The senators, in a joint statement, asked the department to "provide key Gorelick documents" in response to the Sept. 11 commission's "failure to hear testimony from a key Clinton administration Justice Department official [Gorelick], preventing the Congress from receiving a full accounting of intelligence and enforcement procedures that led to the tragic attacks."

A separate statement, released by Cornyn's office late Wednesday, charged that the newly released documents "substantially discredit former Deputy Attorney General -- and current 9/11 Commission member -- Jamie Gorelick's claims of limited involvement in the promulgation of 'the wall' separating counterintelligence and law enforcement agencies.

"Specifically, the documents show that she was substantially involved in the development of the information-sharing policy and contradicts statements that the department's policies under the Clinton-Reno administration enhanced, rather than restricted, such vital information sharing," Cornyn stated.

'Special Knowledge'

"These documents show what I've said all along: Commissioner Gorelick has special knowledge of the facts and circumstances leading up to the erection and buttressing of 'that wall' that, before the enactment of the Patriot Act, was the primary obstacle to the sharing of communications between law enforcement and intelligence agencies," Cornyn's statement continued.

Gorelick's membership on the 9/11 commission has become controversial considering that she also worked in the Clinton administration's Justice Department. Many Republicans in Congress have called for her to testify before the commission, a request the commission's chairman has rejected.

"This is a person with knowledge of relevant facts. Either the Commission wants the whole truth, or it does not," Cornyn stated.

"If it does, she should appear in public testimony so that the families of the victims, the American people and the Congress can have a full and complete picture of what led to the failures of 9/11," Cornyn added.

Copyright CNSNews.com”

“Gorelick....talk about having the fox watch the hen house. Having her on the 9/11 comission is like letting Micheal Jackson investigate his own case. She should have requesed herself from day one.”

“The two of you are just now getting on that band wagon?”

“I have no idea why you guys bring up Gorelick but it does serve as an illustration of the misogynous attitudes many conservatives hold toward women. Barefoot and pregnant, right? Are either of you two involved with the death threats and vulgar emails she’s received? Did you know that Bush, through McClellan have disassociated themselves from Asscrack’s attacks on her ? - (he said the president was “disappointed”).


Debunking the Smear of Gorelick”

“ok then, well by your standards, you are a racist AND hate women because you viciously attacked condy rice.

the jumps in logic ya'll make are so stupid, it's hard to even take you seriously anymore.

idiots bore me, liars pi$$ me off.
which are you?

wake up and smell the desperation people!”

“Why do all your posts descend into infantile name calling and unsupported accusations? Is that all you’ve got?

Firstly – it’s Condi. Secondly – can you tell me when I ‘attacked’ her or what I may have said?”