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

Aarhus CCC: Breivik Trial Media Censor Env.Scarcity.Conflict Connection

10/8/2013

0 Comments

 
Picture
JAG EOPGASM Notice to Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee Secretariat: Ms. Smagadi, Aarhus Convention Committee Members; and Media, Bar Association & Breivik parties: RE: Aarhus CCC (ref. ACCC/C/2013/82) ruling re: Media Censorship of Env-Scarcity-Conflict Connection during Breivik trial.

I have copied Aarhus Convention Committee Members, due to your failure to honourably and professionally respond to my last request for confirmation of my interpretation of the Committee’s statement. 

Specifically, I have still received no confirmation from the Committee to my interpretation that your statement “The reasons are clear” as confirmation of “The Committee is alleging that my requests for environmental information submitted to the media industry and bar association does not meet the committee’s interpretation of the convention’s definition of ‘environmental information.”

Please take note that in the absence of a response from the Committee confirming my interpretation, my application to the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union for an Application for Annulment under Article 263 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union; shall request the General Court to interpret the application of Lara Johnstone, for annulment, as also being from JAG Lt. Cdr. Lara Braveheart, as authorized by US Navy Judge Advocate General: Vice Adm. Nanette Derenzi, as part of the NSA Æquilibriæx Sustainable Security Theses Ecology of Peace v. Near Term Extinction campaign.

The declaration to US Navy Judge Advocate General: VADM Nanette Derenzi, CC: Asst. Sec. for Energy, Installations & Environment: VADM Dennis McGinn and Senator James Inhofe: NSA Æquilibriæx Sustainable Security Theses Ecology of Peace v. Near Term Extinction campaign is in support of Æquilibriæx Amicus Applications filed in among others the following cases: Germany v. Beate Zschape; United Kingdom v. Michael Adebolajo; US v Bradley Manning; US v Edward Snowden; ACLU v Clapper; Unitarian Church of LA v NSA.


Read More
0 Comments

Aarhus C-82: 'Manifestly Unreasonable' Req for ‘Scarcity & Conflict’ Info

12/5/2013

0 Comments

 
Picture
Appeal (PDF) to Aarhus Convention Comm (CC: Parties & Anders Breivik; Bjørn Magnus Jacobsen Ihler, Center 4 Free & Creative Expression; Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn & Former CIA Dir. James Woolsey): Request for Written Reasons: Re: Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee 26 April 2013 “manifestly unreasonable” ruling concerning compliance by Norway with provisions of the Convention in connection to ‘Scarcity & Conflict’ and ‘Environmental Complaints Policy’ access to information and access to justice (ACCC/C/2013/82).Supporting Documentation: 
A.     List of Aarhus Convention Inadmissible Rulings. (PDF)
B.     ECHR: 16325/13: Johnstone v. Norway: Oslo District Court’s Breivik Necessity Judgement was Discriminatory & Ineffective Remedy. (PDF)
C.     Media Censorship: Citizens are ignorant of how to contribute to Sustainable Security: Procreate and Consume below carrying capacity, to avoid scarcity induced resource war conflict: Maher, Michael (1997/03): How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection.(PDF)
D.    Every Child Increases a Woman’s Carbon Footprint by a factor of 20: A woman can reduce her carbon footprint 19 times more by having one fewer child than by all other energy efficiency actions the E.P.A. suggests combined: Paul A. Murtaugh, Michael G. Schlax (2009): Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals; Global Environmental Change.(PDF)
E.    Only Civilization Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change: Industrial Civilization/Consumption Developmentism as Heat Engine Root cause of Scarcity-Conflict Climate Change-National Security Impending Near-term Extinction reality: Timothy J. Garrett (Nov. 2009), Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?; Climatic Change.(PDF)


Read More
0 Comments

Aarhus CCC: Johnstone v Norway: Access to Env. Information

10/3/2013

0 Comments

 
Picture
Subject: Communication to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee: [01/02] Communication & Summary (PDF)

Communication to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee – Alleged Non-Compliance by Kingdom of Norway with the obligations under the Aarhus Convention: Rejection of Request for Access to Environmental Information from (a) Newspaper Editors, and (b) Bar Association; by Norwegian Environment Appeals Committee and Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Emails:
[01/02] Attachments: Communication & Summary
[02/02] Attachments: Enclosures [A]-[H]

Overview of Communication: 

[1.1] Non-compliance to Access to Information (Article 4 (1) & (7)), by Media Editors: Adresseavisen: Editor: Arne Blix; Aftenposten: Editor: Hilde Haugsgjerd; Bergens Tidende: Editor: Trine Eilertsen; Dagbladet: Editor: John Arne Markussen; NRK: Editor: Hans Tore Bjerkaas; TV2: Editor: Alf Hildrum; VG: Editor: Torry Pedersen.

[1.2] A general failure to implement, or implement correctly, the General (Article 3(1)) and Collection and Dissemination of Environmental Information (Article 5(1)) provisions of the Convention; by the Bar Association (Advokatforeningen): Disciplinary Committee and Disciplinary Board for Advocates (Disiplinærnemnden for advokater).

[1.3] Non-Compliance to Access to Justice (Article 9 (1) & (4)), by the Environmental Appeals Board (Klagenemnda for miljøinformasjon): Erroneous ‘Environmental Information’ definition, Denied Due Process and Effective Remedy. 

[1.4] Non-Compliance to Access to Justice (Article 9 (1) & (4)), by the Parliamentary Ombudsman: Denied Due Process & Effective Remedy.


Read More
0 Comments

ECHR: Norway Breivik Necessity Judgement is Discriminatory

9/1/2013

0 Comments

 
Picture
Norway Transparency Notice's RE: Application to European Court of Human Rights: Johnstone v. Norway: Re: Violations of Article 13 (Effective Remedy) and 14 (Discrimination); sent to: Anders Breivik & Geir Lippestad (PDF); Addresseavisen: Arne Blix (PDF); Subject: Aftenposten: Ed. Haugsgjerd (PDF); Bergens Tidende: Ed Eilertsen (PDF); Dagbladet: Ed. Markussen (PDF); Env. App. Board: Ms. Strom (PDF); Fremskrittspartiet: Ms. Siv Jensen (PDF); Min Foreign Aff: Mr. Espen Eide (PDF); Min of Justice: Grete Faremo (PDF); NRK: Ed: Hans Bjerkaas (PDF); Supreme Court: Sec. Gen. Gunnar Bergby (PDF); Supreme Court: Justice Tore Schei (PDF); Oslo Dist Court: Judge Arntzen (PDF); Oslo Dist Court: Judge Nina Opsahl (PDF); Parl Ombudsman: Arne Fliflet (PDF); Pros Svein Holden & Inga Engh, c/o NO Police (PDF); Den Rettsmedisinske Kommisjon: Psych Husby & Sorheim (PDF); Supv. Comm for Judges: Espen Eiken (PDF); TV2: Ed: Alf Hildrum (PDF); VG: Ed: Torry Pedersen (PDF); 22 Juli Victim Families; c/o Hallgren, Elgesem & Larsen (PDF); Miljøpartiet De Grønne: Marcussen & Nissen (PDF); Hoyre: Erna Solberg (PDF); KRF: Knut Arild Hareide (PDF); KSP: Ørnulf Nandrup (PDF); Arbeiderpartiet: Jens Stoltenberg (PDF); AUF: Eskil Pedersen (PDF); PensionerParty: Einar Lonstad (PDF); Rodt: Bjornar Moxnes (PDF); SV: Audun Lysbakken (PDF); Venstre: Trine Skei Grande (PDF)

I have filed an application to the European Court of Human Rights, under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Rules 45 and 47 of the Rules of Court.

Specifically the violations are:  

•     Discrimination: 24 August 2012: Oslo District Court: Judge Wenche Arntzen: Norway v. Anders Breivik Necessity Judgement 

•     Discrimination and Denied Right to an Effective Remedy: Supreme Court: Secretary General Gunnar Bergby: 10 September 2012 Decision

•     Discrimination and Denied Right to an Effective Remedy: Parliamentary Ombudsman: Head of Division: Berit Sollie: 15 November 2012 Ruling

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Encl: Johnstone v. Norway Application to ECHR (Application Exhibits not enclosed)


Read More
0 Comments

Parl Ombud: 2012-1987: Ruling on Environmental Appeals Board

26/11/2012

0 Comments

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

Reference is made to your letter 11 November 2012 and complaints form 12 November 2012 where your complaint about a decision made 10 September 2012 by the Norwegian Appeals Board for Environmental Information. In the decision the Appeals Board find that your "appeals are denied as not justified." 

According to the Civil Ombudsman Act section 6 paragraph 4 the Ombudsman "shall decide whether there are sufficient grounds for dealing with a complaint". The Ombudsman has reviewed your complaint and the enclosed documents, and your complaint does not give reasons to initiate further investigations regarding the Appeals Board case processing or decision.

Your case at the Ombudsman's office against the Appeals Board for Environmental Information is hereby concluded. 
Picture
Picture

Read More
0 Comments

Response from Env. Appeals Board: Benedikte Strom: Ruling

6/11/2012

0 Comments

 
Response from Env. Appeals Board: Benedikte Strom: Subject: Information from the secretariate for the Appeals Board for Environmental Information

Reference is made to your e-mails of October 8 and November 3 2012, where you request a justification for statements in the e-mail of  September 18 2012 from the secretariat for the Appeals Board for Environmental Information.

The secretariat would like to point out that our e-mail of September 18 2012, were we explained how your appeals had been prepared prior to the Appeals Board decision, is not an administrative decision. We can not provide you with a ruling clarifying the factual and legal grounds for our statements in this e-mail. However, as the decision of the Appeals Board for Environmental Information shows, the board agreed that your appeals were not justified and therefore had to be denied. The board´s grounds for this were, in accordance with the Public Administration Act § 24, stated in the e-mail of September 10 2012 notifying you of the decision. The secretariat does not wish to add anything to these grounds, and will not reply to further e-mail from you regarding this same matter.

We can however inform you that we have chosen to provide you the Appeals  Board's decision on an official letterhead. You will find this document enclosed.
Picture
Picture

Read More
0 Comments

Env. Appeals Brd: Req for Info ITO Public Admin Act S.23,24,25

2/11/2012

0 Comments

 
Correspondence (PDF) to Env. Appeals Board: Benedikte Strom: Subject: RE: Appeals Board for Environmental Information Decisions: Media Censorship & AdvokatForengin Disc. Brd & Committee

Request to Environment Appeals Board in terms of Public Administration Act (PAA), section 23, 24, 25, and (iii) Freedom of Information Act: Section 22.

I have received no response to my request for information submitted to you on 08 October:  Appeals Board for Environmental Information Decisions: Media Censorship & AdvokatForengin Disc. Brd & Committee; in response to your ruling of 18 September 2012.  

Relief Requested:

In terms of the Public Administration Act, Section, 24, 25, and 26, and Freedom of Information Act, Section 2: Please could you kindly provide a ruling in consideration of clarifying what factual and legal grounds you considered in terms of coming to your conclusion that my complaint ‘clearly had to be denied’; including clarifying exactly how my complaints do not fit the definition of Environment as clarified by the Aarhus convention and LAW 2003-05-09 # 31: Act concerning the right to information and participation in public decision-making processes relating to the environment (environmental law), as requested in correspondent of 08 October.
Picture
Picture

Read More
0 Comments

Env. Appeals Board: Request for Clarification of 'Environment' Definition

8/10/2012

0 Comments

 
Request to Benedikte Strom: Subject: Appeals Board for Environmental Information Decisions: Media Censorship & AdvokatForengin Disc. Brd & Committee

Please could you clarify for me your reasoning viz a viz: “When receiving appeals that clearly have to be denied”

It is not remotely clear to me why my complaints ‘clearly had to be denied’; unless your office is massively corrupt, like many other Norwegian government offices, on the matter of Mr. Breivik’s case and surrounding issues. 

The Dept of Environment clearly encourages people to be active in holding Government Departments and corporations accountable on environmental issues:

---------
A prerequisite for environmental law to work as intended is that the public uses it actively.

The law will put citizens able to:

* contribute to the protection of the environment
* protect against health and environmental 
* influence public and private decision makers in environmental issues
---------
Picture
Picture
According to: LAW 2003-05-09 # 31: Act concerning the right to information and participation in public decision-making processes relating to the environment (environmental law).
http://www.lovdata.no/all/hl-20030509-031.html

--------

§ 2 What is understood by environmental
(1) An environmental means factual information and reviews about
a) environment,
b) factors that affect or may affect the environment, including
- planned and implemented measures and activities in the environment,
- product features or content,
- Ratio of operating the business, and
- administrative decisions and actions, including individual decisions, agreements, regulations, plans, strategies and programs, and associated analyzes, calculations and assumptions,
c) human health, safety and living conditions to the extent they are or may be affected by the state of the environment or the factors mentioned in b
(2) The environment means the environment including cultural heritage.
--------

The Aarhus Convention defines 'environmental information' as:

-----------
3. “Environmental information” means any information in written, visual, aural, electronic or any other material form on:

(a) The state of elements of the environment, such as air and atmosphere, water, soil, land, landscape and natural sites, biological diversity and its components, including genetically modified organisms, and
the interaction among these elements;

(b) Factors, such as substances, energy, noise and radiation, and activities or measures, including administrative measures, environmental agreements, policies, legislation, plans and programmes, affecting or likely to affect the elements of the environment within the scope of subparagraph (a) above, and cost-benefit and other economic analyses and assumptions used in environmental decision-making;

(c) The state of human health and safety, conditions of human life, cultural sites and built structures, inasmuch as they are or may be affected by the state of the elements of the environment or, through these elements, by the factors, activities or measures referred to in subparagraph (b) above;
-----------

The information requested of the Adresseavisen, Aftenposten, Bergens Tidende, Dagbladet, NRK, TV2 and VG clearly - if you read it - falls under both LAW 2003-05-09 # 31: Environmental Law and the Aarhus Convention definitions. 

The information requested of Norwegian Bar Association´s Disciplinary Committee and the Disciplinary Board clearly falls under both LAW 2003-05-09 # 31: Environmental Law and the Aarhus Convention definitions.

It is therefore not remotely obvious why you wrote:

"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."

Is the secretariat for the Appeals Board for Environmental Information | www.miljoklagenemnda.no | Environmental Appeals Board just a Fake PR front for Corporate whores raping the planet? Setup just to pretend Nowegian Government gives a fuck about the environment? You just sit there and rubber stamp environmental requests with " clearly have to be denied" and laugh how massively stupid the citizens are for believing the bullshit in your Duhmockery press releases that you legislate laws to encourage citizens to:

* contribute to the protection of the environment
* protect against health and environmental 
* influence public and private decision makers in environmental issues

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

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
<<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 Create your own unique website with customizable templates.