Radical Honoursty EcoFeminist vs. Knights Templar Anders Breivik
  • Ecofeminist v Breivik: Suspended Publication

PCC Ruling: 123663 (New Statesman) 123691 (The Guardian)

28/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Commission’s decision in the case of Johnstone v New Statesman / The Guardian

The complainant considered that the publication (23/08/2012) had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice by saying, in relation to Mr Anders Breivik, “so, how do we handle the man who is truly guilty?” The complainant was concerned that this characterised Mr Breivik as “truly guilty” before a verdict had been passed.

Clause 1 states that “the press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information”. The Commission acknowledged the complainant’s point that, at this stage, Mr Breivik was not technically guilty in the legal sense. However, the Commission considered the context in which the words had been used and noted that the article made clear that the verdict had not yet been decided: “on 24 August, the verdict against Anders Behring Breivik will be pronounced at Oslo District Court”.  

The Commission also noted that this article reflected the personal views of the journalist: “Asne Seierstad questions a system that gives Anders Breivik publicity”.  The Commission made clear that columnists are entitled to express their personal views and comments provided that they are clearly distinguished from fact. The Commission considered that the phrasing “truly guilty” was the journalist’s view and that the readers would have been aware of this. 

Read in the context of the article, the journalist had been discussing the amount of blame that the Prime Minister and other individuals should shoulder for the events; before addressing the “man who is truly guilty”. In this way the Commission considered that the term “guilty” was being used, not in the legal sense, but synonymously with the term “responsible” or “to blame”. Given that Mr Breivik had publically admitted to the murders and bombing, the Commission did not consider this to have been inaccurate or misleading. The Commission did not establish a breach of the Code.

The Commission acknowledged the complainant’s concern about Mr Breivik’s ability to receive a fair trial, it made clear however that this issue did not fall within the Editors’ Code of Practice, and therefore it was unable to comment on this further.

The Commission turned next to the complaint regarding the article of 28 August. The complainant considered that the newspaper had breached the terms of Clause 1 (Accuracy) by referring to Mr Breivik’s “conviction” and by inferring that his inspiration was from the “far right”.  Regardless of whether or not there is a review, it remained the case that the conviction stood at the time of publication, and the newspaper was entitled to refer to it. There was no breach of Clause 1. 

The Commission addressed the complainant’s concern that it was inaccurate to state that Mr Breivik got his inspiration from the far right. Clause 1 (iii) states that “the press, while free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.” The Commission considered that the article was a comment piece and the remark reflected the journalist’s opinion that Mr Breivik’s actions were based on an extreme right-wing ideology. In this regard the Commission was satisfied that readers would not have been misled and did not establish a breach of the Code.

Reference no’s: 123663 /123691


Read More
0 Comments

US Crt of Appeals for Armed Forces: Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security Amicus Curiae in CCR v. USA

24/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Amicus (PDF) Electronically filed with Clerk of the Court: US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces: Subject: CCR v. United States - Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR - Electronic Filing - Amicus

USCA Misc. Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR :: CCR v USA & Judge Lind

Electronic Filing:  BRIEF IN PROPRIA PERSONA BY AMICI CURIAE LARA JOHNSTONE IN SUPPORT OF AN ECOCENTRIC WILD LAW SUSTAINABLE SECURITY PERSPECTIVE

[Caveat: Subject to Order from Court ITO S. 35 Judiciary Act of 1789, 1 Stat. 73, 92; Rules 13(a) & 33 (leniency on procedure and Radical Honesty English)]

SUMMARY OF RH ECOCENTRIC ARGUMENT:
1. EcoFeminist Radical Honoursty Transparency culture Wild Law Sustainable Security perspective to parties Anthropocentric Masculine Insecurity PR War of Pretend Transparency to profit from the ‘Control of Reproduction’ Human Farming War Economy Racket
2. Pfc Manning cannot receive free and fair trial, if Media Abuse their Publicity Power

PLEASE NOTE: AS EXCERPTED FROM CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE

I further certify that the following parties referenced in this - EcoFeminist Radical Honoursty Transparency culture Wild Law Sustainable Security perspective to parties Anthropocentric Masculine Insecurity PR War of Pretend Transparency to profit from the ‘Control of Reproduction’ Human Farming War Economy Racket - Amicus will be served honourable transparency copies on 24 September 2012, immediately subsequent to this electronic filing, with a copy of this electronic filing:

‘Control of Reproduction’ Human Farming War Economy Racket:


1. Norway & Sweden’s ‘War is Peace Whores’ Committee:
Nobel Foundation; Nobel Peace Center; Norwegian Nobel Institute: Nobel Committee

2. SA’s TRC Fraud ‘War is Peace Whores’: 
Archbishop Desmond Tutu; Nelson Mandela: Head of Memory Programme at the Nelson Mandela Foundation: Verne Sheldon Harris; F.W. de Klerk: CEO: FW de Klerk Foundation

Anthropocentric Masculine Insecurity PR-Breeding War Disputes:

1. Norway v. Breivik: 
Anders Breivik: Adv Geir Lippestad; Prosecutor Holden & Engh: Justice Minister: Grete Faremo; 22 July Victims: Adv Siv Hallgren, Adv Frode Elgesem  & Adv Mette Yvonne Larsen; Judges: Judge Wenche Arntzen, Judge Nina Opsahl, Justice Tore Schei; Court Admin: Sec Gen Gunnar Bergby.

2. Afriforum v. Malema: 
Afriforum: CEO Kallie Kriel, Att Willie Spies, Adv Martin Brassey; TAU - SA: Henk van de Graaf, Att Riaan van der Walt, Adv Roelof du Plessis; Julius Malema & ANC: Min. Derek Hanekom, Att Byron Morris, Adv Vincent Maleka; Amici: Afrikaans Regslui: Prof Koos Malan

3. Citizen v. McBride: 
The Citizen: Editor Martin Williams, Att Willem de Klerk, Adv Wim Trengrove; Robert McBride: Att David Maphakela, Adv DI Berger; 2-5th Amici: Att Dario Milo, Adv Gil Marcus; 6th Amici: Att V Dhuluam

4. United States v. Lakin, Terrance L: 
USA Counsel: Major General Karl Horst; Captain Philip J. O'Beirne; Terrence Lakin Counsel: Paul Rolf Jensen; Neal Puckett; Major Martthew Kemkes 


Read More
0 Comments

Env. Appeal Brd: Response to Req. for Statutory Authority authorising their due process violations

18/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Response from Benedikte Strøm: Secretary for the Appeals Board for Environmental Information: RE: Media Censorship & Bar Association complaints; RE: Request for Statutory Authority authorising due process violations. 

The secretariat for the Appeals Board for Environmental Information refers to your e-mails of September 10 and 11 2012.

The Appeals Board`s reference number for you appeal of June 18 2012 against Adresseavisen, Aftenposten, Bergens Tidende, Dagbladet, NRK, TV2 and VG is 2012/2. For archival purposes the reference number 2012/708 is used in addition. The Appeals Board's reference number for your appeal of August 16 2012 against the Norwegian Bar Association´s Disciplinary Committee and the Disciplinary Board is 2012/5. For archival purposes the number 2012/1023 is used in addition.

The information on www.miljoklagenemnda.no about how cases prepared has only status as guidance. The rules that are binding for the Appeals Board are found in the regulation December 14 2003 regarding the Appeals Board for Environmental Information. This regulation is available in Norwegian at http://www.lovdata.no/for/sf/md/xd-20031214-1572.html. 
Picture
Picture
When receiving appeals that clearly have to be denied, it is not necessary to ask the respondents to provide their arguments. In these cases the secretariat prepares a draft decision and consults the members of the board. If the draft decision is approved by the members of the board, no further discussion is needed. This makes the Appeals Board able to settle obvious cases without arranging unnecessary meetings. Your appeals have been settled this way. Because no meeting has taken place, you will not receive a signed decision.  

Read More
0 Comments

US Crt of Appeals for Armed Forces: Ecocentric Amicus Application Filed

14/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae - including arguing issues of media censorship in trial of Anders Breivik - electronically filed (PDF) in United States Court of Appeals for Armed Services: Subject: CCR v. United States - Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR - electronic filing [Crim. App. Misc.: Dkt. No. 20120514  || USCA Misc. Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR] 

Petitioners: CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, ET AL.:  Glenn Greenwald, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!, The Nation and its national security correspondent Jeremy Scahill,  Wikileaks and its publisher, Julian Assange; Kevin Gosztola, co-author of Truth and Consequences: The U.S. vs. Bradley Manning, and Chase Madar: author of The Passion of Bradley Manning 

Respondents: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and COL. DENISE LIND, MILITARY JUDGE

Amici: REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS: Allbritton Communications Company, American Society of News Editors, The Associated Press, Association of Alternative Newsweeklies, Atlantic Media, Inc., Cable News Network, Inc., Digital Media Law Project, Dow Jones & Company, Inc., The E.W. Scripps Company, First Amendment Coalition, Gannett Co., Inc., Hearst Corporation, Massachusetts Newspaper Publishers Association, The McClatchy Company, Military Reporters & Editors, The National Press Club, National Press Photographers Association, New England First Amendment Coalition, New York Daily News, The New York Times, Newspaper Association of America, The Newspaper Guild – CWA, North Jersey Media Group Inc., Online News Association, POLITICO LLC, Radio Television Digital News Association, Reuters, Society of Professional Journalists, Tribune Company, The Washington Post and WNET.

NOTICE OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED AS AMICUS CURIAE

[1] For an Order to approve the Applicant, to Appear Pro Se (propria persona / pro per), pursuant to Section 35 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, 1 Stat. 73, 92 and Rules 13(a) and 33 (leniency on procedure and Radical Honesty English) of this Court’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, to appear pro hac vice for the limited purpose of being admitted as an Amicus Curiae.

[2] For an Order to approve the Applicant as an Ecocentric Amici Curiae in the above Anthropocentric proceedings in the form of written submissions in accordance with Rule 26(a)(3), of the Rules of Court.

Response from Clerk of Court:
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 7:17 PM: Subject: RE: CCR v. United States - Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR - electronic filing: "Your pleadings have been received and referred to the Court."  


Read More
0 Comments

Parl. Ombud: Case 2012-1987: Environmental Appeals Board

12/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Response from Parliamentary Ombudsman: Complaint Regarding the Appeals Board for Environmental Information.

Reference is made to your letter 1 September 2012 and complaints from 2 September 2012 where you revisit your case regarding slow case processing at the Appeals board for Environmental Information. You state taht you have still not received any response from the Appeals Board.

In a telephone conversation 7 September 20111 the secretariat for the Appeals Board stated that they have received your letters and are currently working on their response. It was also informed that the prelimintary case processing unfortunately has taken longer than first expected, but you should be receiving a response within a few weeks.

On this background, the Ombudsman has not found ground for further investigation of your latest complaint here. In the event that you do not receive any response within the expected time period or a reasonable time after that, you are welcome to contact the Ombudsman again.

A copy of your letter 1 September 2012 and a copy of this letter will be sent the Appeals board for Environmental Information for their information.



Read More
0 Comments

Fed.Comm.Comm: FoxNews Complaint: Inaccuracy: Breivik Case Not Formally Ended (Ref: 12-C00424455)

12/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Filed a Complaint (PDF) at Federal Communications Commission (FCC): Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau: Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division against Fox News: Complaint: Failure by FoxNews to Correct Factually Inaccurate / Misrepresentation Reporting: Request Correction of Inaccuracy in: 07 Sept 2012: Fox News Online Article: No appeal from Breivik as case formally ends.

The case has not ‘formally ended’.

[1] 27 August Application to Supreme Court for Review of Breivik Judgement.

On 27 August 2012 an application  was filed with the Norwegian Supreme Court for Review of the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement, to set aside (A) the Necessity ruling, and (B) the conviction and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of further evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry. The finding of guilt, in the absence of full Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Conclusions renders the Guilt Finding Inadequate.  


Read More
0 Comments

SkyNewsTV AU: Inaccuracy: Breivik Case has not Formally Ended

12/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Filed an Electronic Complaint to SkyNewsTV Australia, via FreeTV's electronic Complaints site: Request Correction of Inaccuracy in: Sky News – Australia Online Article: No Breivik appeal as case ends 

The case has not ‘ended’:

[1] 27 August Application to Supreme Court for Review of Breivik Judgement.

On 27 August 2012 an application was filed with the Norwegian Supreme Court for Review of the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement, to set aside (A) the Necessity ruling, and (B) the conviction and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of further evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry. The finding of guilt, in the absence of full Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Conclusions renders the Guilt Finding Inadequate.  

Additionally the application for review also requested an Order to Set Aside the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement’s failure to disclose the pending Judicial Ethics violation complaint against Judge Wenche Arntzen, filed on 06 June 2012 to the Supervisory Committee for Judges (Case 2012-072 ), as a violation of Aarhus Convention Article 3.(3)(4)(5)  and general ECHR public accountability transparency (Lithgow & Others v. United Kingdom) principles.

The Norwegian Supreme Court Registrar initially refused to respond to the Application, or to provide reasons for their refusal. A complaint of Slow Case Processing against the Supreme Court Registrar was submitted to the Parliamentary Ombudsman on 02 September 2012. On 10 September the Secretary General of the Supreme Court: Gunnar Bergby responded, by refusing to issue a case number or refer the application to another relevant court, citing alleged lack of locus standi/legal standing. 

On 11 September, the applicant provided a detailed response to Mr. Gunnar Bergby, clarifying her legal standing in terms of (I) her applications to the Oslo District Court, which were never officially refused; and still pending resolution with the Supervisory Committee for Judges; and among others (II) her legal standing in terms of her ‘legal interest’ in the matter, in terms of Section 377 of the Criminal Procedure Act (Interlocutory Appeal: Section 377: An interlocutory appeal may be brought against a court order or decision by any person who is affected thereby) and The Dispute Act: Section 29-8: Legal Standing: (2): “A person who is not a party to the action may appeal against rulings that relate to their rights or obligation’. It is a matter for a court to make an impartial enquiry into any applicants alleged lack of ‘legal standing’, if or where, any respondent raises the matter as an issue of contention. 

[2] Notifications to Norwegian Foreign Press Association (FPA)

The Norwegian Foreign Press Association  as well as all their members, which include journalists from Reuters, Agence France Presse (AFP), Associated Press (AP), Al Arabija, Al Jazeera, BBC, Bloomberg, Globe and Mail, Xinhua, Die Welt, Irish Times, Himalayan Times, Itar-Tass, etc., were notified  by 13:00 hrs (GM+2) on 07 September 2012 of, among others the Application for Review of Breivik Judgement filed with Norway Supreme Court.


Read More
0 Comments

Notice to Edmonton Journal: Inaccuracy: Breivik Case Not Formally Over

12/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Correspondence (PDF) to Editor in Chief & Managing Editor of Edmonton Journal: Subject: L.Chodan/S Coombs: Edmonton Journal: Inaccuracy: Breivik case formally over as appeals period expires without challenge from far-right guman.

Request Correction of Inaccuracy in: 07 September 2012: Edmonton Journal: Breivik case formally over as appeals period expires without challenge from far-right guman.

The case is not ‘formally over’.

Info in attached PDF letter: [1] 27 August Application to Supreme Court for Review of Breivik Judgement; [2] 07 Sept 2012: Notifications to Norwegian Foreign Press Association (FPA)

Encl: [A] 12-08-27: Review of Breivik Judgement Filing Sheet & PO complaint; [B] 12-09-03: Supv. Comm. 4 Judges: Pending Judge Arntzen Complaint (12-072); [C] 12-09-10: Sup.Crt: Sec.Gen: G Bergby: Breivik Review Applic. & Response


Read More
0 Comments

Complaint to Indonesia Press Council: Jakarta Post Inaccuracy: Breivik Case Not Formally Over

12/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Complaint to Indonesian Press Council (PDF): Subject: RE: Jakarta Post: Editor: Req. Correction of Error in Jakarta Post: No appeal from Breivik as case formally ends

Request Correction of Inaccuracy in: Jakarta Post: No appeal from Breivik as case formally ends.

The Case Has Not Formally Ended (Enclosures)

[1] 27 August Application to Supreme Court for Review of Breivik Judgement.

On 27 August 2012 an application  was filed with the Norwegian Supreme Court for Review of the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement, to set aside (A) the Necessity ruling, and (B) the conviction and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of further evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry. The finding of guilt, in the absence of full Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Conclusions renders the Guilt Finding Inadequate.  [continued in 12-09-12 PDF Complaint]

[2] Notifications to Norwegian Foreign Press Association (FPA)

The Norwegian Foreign Press Association  as well as all their members, which include journalists from Reuters, Agence France Presse (AFP), Associated Press (AP), Al Arabija, Al Jazeera, BBC, Bloomberg, Globe and Mail, Xinhua, Die Welt, Irish Times, Himalayan Times, Itar-Tass, etc., were notified  by 13:00 hrs (GM+2) on 07 September 2012 [continued in 12-09-12 PDF Complaint]

Violations of Press Code:

Article 1: (2)Accuracy: Accurate means absolutely unbelievable fit the objective circumstances when the event occurs; (3) Balanced: Balanced means that all sides get equal opportunities.

The republished Associated Press article is not accurate. The case is not formally ended. It is not balanced in terms of not including information censored by the Norwegian Media.

Article 2: (4)  produce clear and factual news source

The republished Associated Press article is not factually correct. The Breivik case is not formally over.

Article 3: (1) Testing information means do check and recheck about the truth of the information.

The Jakarta Post were provided with evidence (12-09-03) to prove the Associated Press’s article was factually incorrect; but have so far refused to test the evidence provided to them and print a correction.

Article 4: (1) Lying means something that is already known in advance by journalists as being inconsistent with the facts that occurred.

Republishing – and refusing to correct - the Lies of the Associated Press. All members of the Norwegian Foreign Press Association (including its Associated Press member) were informed on the morning of 07 September of the pending Application for Review of the Breivik Judgement, filed with the Supreme Court on 27 August 2012.

Encl: [A] 12-09-12: Request to Jakarta Post to Correct Inaccuracy; [B] 12-08-27: Review of Breivik Judgement Filing Sheet & PO complaint; [C] 12-09-03: Supv. Comm. 4 Judges: Pending Judge Arntzen Complaint (12-072); [D] 12-09-10: Sup.Crt: Sec.Gen: G Bergby: Breivik Review Applic. & Response


Read More
0 Comments

Notice to Associated Press: Inaccuracy: Breivik Case Is not Formally Over

11/9/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Correspondence to Associated Press: Corrections Department: Subject: AP: Correction: 07 Sept: No appeal from Breivik as case formally ends 

Inaccuracy: Request Correction: Article: "Breivik case formally over as appeals period expires without challenge from far-right guman" (as published in among others Edmonton Journal)

The case has not ‘formally ended’.

[1] 27 August Application to Supreme Court for Review of Breivik Judgement.

On 27 August 2012 an application[1] was filed with the Norwegian Supreme Court for Review of the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement, to set aside (A) the Necessity ruling, and (B) the conviction and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of further evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry. The finding of guilt, in the absence of full Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Conclusions renders the Guilt Finding Inadequate.  
[1] http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/27-aug-12-review-applic.html

Additionally the application for review also requested an Order to Set Aside the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement’s failure to disclose the pending Judicial Ethics violation complaint[2] against Judge Wenche Arntzen, filed on 06 June 2012 to the Supervisory Committee for Judges (Case 2012-072 ), as a violation of Aarhus Convention Article 3.(3)(4)(5)  and general ECHR public accountability transparency (Lithgow & Others v. United Kingdom)   principles.
[2] http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-072-judge-wenche-arntzen.html

The Norwegian Supreme Court Registrar initially refused to respond to the Application, or to provide reasons for their refusal. A complaint of Slow Case Processing against the Supreme Court Registrar was submitted to the Parliamentary Ombudsman on 02 September 2012. On 10 September the Secretary General of the Supreme Court: Gunnar Bergby responded[3], by refusing to issue a case number or refer the application to another relevant court, citing alleged lack of locus standi/legal standing. 
[3] http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/11-sept-legal-standing.html

On 11 September, the applicant provided a detailed response to Mr. Gunnar Bergby[3], clarifying her legal standing in terms of (I) her applications to the Oslo District Court, which were never officially refused; and still pending resolution with the Supervisory Committee for Judges; (II) her legal standing in terms of her ‘legal interest’ in the matter, in terms of The Dispute Act: Section 29-8: Legal Standing: (2): “A person who is not a party to the action may appeal against rulings that relate to their rights or obligation’. It is a matter for a court to make an impartial enquiry into any applicants alleged lack of ‘legal standing’, if or where, any respondent raises the matter as an issue of contention. 
 
[2] Notifications to Norwegian Foreign Press Association (FPA)

The Norwegian Foreign Press Association  as well as all their members, which include journalists from Reuters, Agence France Presse (AFP), Associated Press (AP), Al Arabija, Al Jazeera, BBC, Bloomberg, Globe and Mail, Xinhua, Die Welt, Irish Times, Himalayan Times, Itar-Tass, etc., were notified[4]  by 13:00 hrs (GM+2) on 07 September 2012 of: 
(A) Application for Review of Breivik Judgement filed with Norway Supreme Court;
(B) Complaint filed with Parliamentary Ombudsman against Supreme Court, for slow case processing;
(C) Pending Judicial Ethics violation complaint against Judge Wenche Arntzen. 
[4] http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/no-foreign-press-assoc.html

The Associated Press member to whom the evidence was provided on 07 September is: Nils Myklebost 

A request for correction was submitted to Editor in Chief of Edmonton Journal and other publications. Edmonton Journal responded that I should contact you directly. 

Any evidentiary documents can be provided at request; but are not included herein attached, since your website states you do not accept attachments.


Read More
0 Comments
<<Previous

    RH Data Archive:

    Radical Honoursty Eco-Feminist legal applications and complaints submitted to Norwegian and European Authorities in the Norway v. Breivik trial.

    Archives

    April 2016
    November 2015
    April 2014
    August 2013
    July 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    February 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011

    Categories

    All
    22.07 Defence
    22.07 Families
    22.07 Prosecution
    Aarhus Ccc
    Acquit.v.Execute
    Adv: Bar Association
    Adv: Disciplinary Board
    Adv: Disciplinary Comm
    APC: AU Press Council
    CA: Idle No More
    CA: Sec Intel Svc
    Crt: Administration
    Crt: ECHR
    Crt: EU Crt Hum Rights
    Crt: ICC: Int. Criminal Court
    Crt: Oslo District
    Crt: Rev. Breivik Judgement
    Crt: Supreme Court
    Crt: Supv Comm 4 Judges
    Crt: US C.A.A.F.
    Ecology Of Peace
    Eco: Pentti Linkola
    Eco: Wild Law Nature Rights
    ECRE: ELENA
    ECRE: NOAS
    ECRE: NO Refugee Cnl
    Env Appeals Board
    EU Cncl. Legal Medicine
    EU: MP: Mem. Parl.
    Euprol Network
    FCC: Fed Comm Comm
    FFI: NO Def. Research
    Indonesia Press Council
    Int. Legal Medicine
    M: Aargauer Zeitung
    M: ABC News
    M: Adresseavisen
    M: AFP
    M: Aftenbladet
    M: Aftenposten
    M: Agderposten
    M: Aisa Nordland
    M: Al Arabija
    M: Al Jazeera
    M: Allbritton Comm Co
    M: AMTA
    M: AP: Assoc Press
    M: Arbeidsliv I Norden
    M: A Soc News Ed
    M: Ass Alt Newsweeklies
    M: Atlantic Media Co
    M: BBC
    M: Bergensavisen
    M: Bergens Tidende
    M: Bloomberg
    M: Buddstikka
    M: Cable News Network
    M: Calgary Herald
    M: Chicago Sun Times
    M: Christian Sci. Monitor
    M: Copenhagen Post
    M: Dagbladet
    M: Dagen
    M: Dag Of Tid
    M: Dagsavisen
    M: Dawat Media
    M: Democracy Now
    M: Demokraten
    M: Dev Today
    M: Die Welt
    M: Dig Media Law Proj
    M: Document.NO
    M: Dow Jones & Co
    M: Drammens Tidende
    M: Edmonton Journal
    M: EW Scripps Co
    M: Finnmarken
    M: First Amendment Coal
    M: Fjordbladet
    M: Fjordenes Tidende
    M: Fjordingen
    M: Fjuken
    M: Foreign Policy
    M: Forsiden
    M: Fox News
    M: FrederikstadBlad
    M: Fremover
    M: Friheten
    M: FT Deutschland
    M: Gazeta Wyborcza
    M: Globe And Mail
    M: Glomdalen
    M: Guardian
    M: Ha Halden
    M: Hallingdolen
    M: Hamar Arbeiderblad
    M: Hamar Dagblad
    M: H Avis
    M: Himalayan Times
    M: Honest Thinking
    M: Icenews
    M: Idag
    M: Indre Akershus
    M: Inst Journalism
    M: Irish Times
    M: Itar-Tass
    M: Jaerbladet
    M: Jaerlsberg Avis
    M: Jakarta Post
    M: JB Ecologico
    M: Journalisten
    M: Journalistlag
    M: Klassekampen
    M: Kvinnheringen
    M: Laagendalsposten
    M: Levangeravisa
    M: Lokal Radio
    M: Medietylsynet
    M: Mena
    M: Military Rep Ed
    M: Morgenbladet
    M: Moss Avis
    M: National Post
    M: National Press Club
    M: Nat Press Photo Ass
    M: NE 1st Amend Coal
    M: Nettavisen
    M: News Assoc Of A
    M: News In English
    M: New Statesman
    M: New York Times
    M: Nordlys
    M: NRK
    M: NY Daily News
    M: Nye Troms
    M: Ny Tid
    M: Oppland Arbeiderblad
    M: Ostlandestblad
    M: Ostlandsposten
    M: Ostlendingen
    M: Politico LLC
    M: Politika
    M: Polska The Times
    M: Radio 102
    M: Radio Dager
    M: Radio France
    M: Radio Nac De Espana
    M: Radio Nyhetene
    M: Rana Blad
    M: Reason Mag.
    M: Redaktorforening
    M: Reuters
    M: Ringblad
    M: Ringsaker Blad
    M: Rogaland Avis
    M: Romerikesblad
    M: Romsdalsblad
    M: RTV 21
    M: RUV-Islands Radio
    M: Salt Lake Tribune
    M: San Bernadino Sun
    M: Sandefjordsblad
    M: San Francisco Chronicle
    M: SarpsborgA
    M: Sky News AU
    M: Soc Prof Journos
    M: SognAvis
    M: Strandbuen
    M: Sunnmorposten
    M: Svenska Dagbladet
    M: Sveriges Radio
    M: Sydney Morning Herald
    M: The Age
    M: The Daily Star
    M: The Guardian
    M: The Local
    M: The Nation
    M: The News PK
    M: Tidenskrav
    M: Tonsbergblad
    M: Tromsefolkeblad
    M: Tromso
    M: Tronderavisa
    M: TSF Radio Noticias
    M: TV2
    M: TV Azteca
    Muslim Soc Trondheim
    M: Varden
    M: Varingen
    M: Vartland
    M: VG
    M: Washington Post
    M: Wikileaks
    M: Xinhua
    M: Zweites DE Fernsehen
    NFPA: NO For Press Assoc
    NO: Intel Service
    NO: King Harald
    NO: Min Culture
    NO: Min Defence
    NO: Min Environment
    NO: Min For Affairs
    NO: Min Justice
    NO: PM Press Office
    NO: PM Stoltenberg
    NTI: Nuclear Threat Init
    NUPI: NO Inst. Int. Affairs
    Parl. Ombudsman
    PCC: Press Comp Comm
    PFU: Press Comp Comm
    Police: Interpol
    Police: Kripos
    PP: AP: Arbeiderpartiet
    PP: AP - AUF
    PP: FRP: Progress Party
    PP: Green Party
    PP: Hoyre
    PP: KRF: Kystpartiet
    PP: KSP
    PP: Pensioner Party
    PP: Rodt: Red Alliance
    PP: Senterpartiet
    PP: SV: Socialist Left
    PP: Venstre
    Psych Association
    UK: Queen Elisabeth II
    Univ Of Oslo
    Un Spec Rap Indig Rights
    Us Joint Chiefs Of Staffe78126b497

    RSS Feed



    Website Hit Counter
    Get a FREE Domain
Powered by
✕