AU Press Council Ruling: Sydney Morning Herald Breivik Case Inaccuracy

AU Press Council Ruling: Sydney Morning Herald Breivik Case Inaccuracy

Australian Press Council Refuse to Accept Complaint from Individuals 'Overseas'

22 October 2012 | AU Press Council | Sydney Morning Herald

The Complaint submitted to Australian Press Council (APC) against Sydney Morning Herald: 08 September 2012 Article: No Breivik Appeal as Case Formally Ends: Error: The case has not ‘formally ended’.

Relief Requested in terms of General Statement of Principles: (2) Correction of inaccuracy & (3) Publishing responses

[1] 27 August Application to Supreme Court for Review of Breivik Judgement.
[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 aforementioned information, that:

(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.

Veterans Today/Press TV: Assange Mossad Ties unveiled, via EcoFeminist's Breivik USCAAF Amicus Curiae

Veterans Today/Press TV: Assange Mossad Ties unveiled, via EcoFeminist's Breivik USCAAF Amicus Curiae

Might too much transparency wake your brood sow human factory farm production factories up to Ecological reality? You Left and Right Wing Fundamentalists are playing your Left and Right Wing Masculine Insecurity Bullshit-the-Public Relations Human Factory Farming game to convince women to join your left/right wing human factory farms as brood sows to breed enough cannon fodder, so that you can enforce your Left/Right Wing Humpty Dumpty definition of ‘innocent’ and ‘guilty’ on each other by force; while totally ignoring the inaccurate assumptions about Ecological reality underlying your Masculine Insecurity Anthropocentric law!

Andrea Muhrrteyn | EcoFeminist vs. Breivik | 03 October 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 1:42 PM
To: 'PressTV'; 'Press TV Newsroom'; 'Veterans Today'; 'Veterans Today Editor'
Cc: CCR: Wikileaks; CCR: Democracy Now: Amy Goodman; CCR: Guardian: Glenn Greenwald; CCR: Kevin Goztola; CCR: Shayana Kadilal
Subject: Veterans Today / PressTV.IR: RE: Exclusive: Assange-Mossad ties unveiled

Mr. Gordon Duff
PRESS TV
6, East 2nd St.
Farhang Blvd. Saadat Abad
19977-66411, Tehran, IRAN
Tel: +98 (21) 230 111 30 | Fax: +98 (21) 230 111 39

CC: Wikileaks / CCR

Mr. Duff & Press TV Editor:

Veterans Today & PressTV.IR confirm EcoFeminist Amicus Curiae to US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces Correct: Bradley Manning Cannot get Fair Trial when Media Abuse their Publicity Power, by refusing to practice scientific journalism!

I saw your Veterans Today article posted to PressTV.IR: Exclusive: Assange-Mossad ties unveiled, which alleges that Julian Assange has ties to the Mossad.

FYI / Disclosure: I am a member of the Radical Honesty culture, which is based on 100% transparency, and does not practice any Bullshit-the-Public Relations Image management. I am also a friend of Wikileaks (FoWL) in as much as Wikileaks supports transparency about EVERYTHING. I speak only for myself.

As far as I am aware, I am the only link between Wikileaks/Julian Assange and Anders Breivik, in terms of the Ecocentric Amicus Curiae I submitted to the United States Court of Appeals for Armed Forces in the CCR / Wikileaks vs. USA matter, which you have grossly misrepresented.

As detailed in attached PDF correspondence, it appears that you proved my allegations correct: Bradley Manning Cannot get Fair Trial when Media Abuse their Publicity Power, by refusing to practice scientific journalism!

Respectfully,


Lara Johnstone
SHARP: Problem Solving Radical Honoursty Accountability

UK Press Complaints Commission Rulings Re: Breivik Inacuracy Complaints to New Statesman & The Guardian

UK Press Complaints Commission Rulings Re: Breivik Inacuracy Complaints to New Statesman & The Guardian

No Surprise! :: The Commission did not establish a breach of the Code.

29 September | Press Complaints Commission | The Guardian & New Statesman

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.

US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces: Media Censorship & Left v Right Wing Polarization Agenda Amicus Filed

US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces: Media Censorship & Left v Right Wing Polarization Agenda Amicus Filed

US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces to consider an Amicus Application to issue of Media Censorship in Bradley Manning courtmartial; that provides evidence of Media censorship of Ecocentric arguments to court disputes in McBride v Citizen, Afriforum v Malema and Norway v Breivik which prove the Media's Left vs Right wing polarization agenda.

Andrea Muhrrteyn | EcoFeminists vs. Breivik | 14 September 2012

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.

14 Sept: US Court of Appeals for Armed Services Clerk Response:
Response from US Court of Appeals for Armed Services: Clerk of the Court: Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 13:17 PM: Subject: RE: CCR v. United States - Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR - electronic filing: "Your pleadings have been received and referred to the Court."

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

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

Jakarta Post are 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.

12 September 2012 | EcoFeminist vs. Breivik | 12 September 2012

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]

AU Press Council Complaint of Inaccuracy by Sky News AU: Breivik Case Has Not Formally Ended

AU Press Council Complaint of Inaccuracy by Sky News AU: Breivik Case Has Not Formally Ended

Request Correction of Inaccuracy in: Sky News - Australia: No Breivik appeal as case ends. The case has not ‘ended’.

Andrea Muhrrteyn | EcoFeminist vs. Breivik |08 September 2012

Complaint (PDF) submitted to Australian Press Council: Re: Inaccuracy in Sky News.AU Online Article: No Breivik appeal as case ends.

Request Correction of Inaccuracy in: Sky News - Australia: 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 (PDF) against Judge Wenche Arntzen, filed on 06 June 2012 to the Secretariat for the Supervisory Committee for Judges (Case 2012-072 ), as a violation of Aarhus Convention Article 3.(3)(4)(5) principles and general ECHR public accountability transparency (Lithgow & Others v. United Kingdom) principles.

PFU Press Complaint: News in English: Nina Berglund Erroneous Statement: 'Breivik Guilt Established Long Ago'

PFU Press Complaint: News in English: Nina Berglund Erroneous Statement: 'Breivik Guilt Established Long Ago'

The prosecutor’s irregular decisions to ‘refuse to touch Breivik’s invocation of Necessity’ does not: (a) have the power to nullify Breivik’s invocation of necessity; (b) grant the court the authority to ‘refuse to touch Breivik’s invocation of necessity’; (c) grant the media the authority to find Mr. Breivik ‘guilty’ in a ‘trial by media ignorance of the law’.

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 31 July 2012

Glanville Williams expressed the necessity doctrine this way: “[S]ome acts that would otherwise be wrong are rendered rightful by a good purpose, or by the necessity of choosing the lesser of two evils.” He offers this example:

“Suppose that a dike threatens to give way, and the actor is faced with the choice of either making a breach in the dike, which he knows will result in one or two people being drowned, or doing nothing, in which case he knows that the dike will burst at another point involving a whole town in sudden destruction. In such a situation, where there is an unhappy choice between the destruction of one life and the destruction of many, utilitarian philosophy would certainly justify the actor in preferring the lesser evil.”

In United States v. Holmes, 26 F. Cas. 360 (E.D. Pa. 1842) (No. 15,383), Holmes was involved in a shipwreck, where the crew were charged with manslaughter for throwing sixteen passengers overboard in a frantic attempt to lighten a sinking lifeboat. The Prosecutor argued the passengers should be protected at all costs, whereas the Defence placed the jurors in the sinking lifeboat with the defendant. The Defendant was found guilty, but the jurors requested leniency, to which the court complied by sentencing the defendant to six months in prison and a fine of twenty dollars.

The following reports indicate that Prosecutor Engh and Holden violated their duty of objectivity in terms of (a) impartially enquiring into and/or responding to the Accuseds’ Defence; and (b) providing the court with the Prosecution’s evaluation and conclusion of the evidence for and against Breivik’s invocation of his Necessity Defence.

In her closing statement, Prosecutor Engh acknowledge’s that:

(1) Norwegian prosecutors have a duty to conduct their investigation with objectivity;
(2) Norwegian law allows for an accused to plead to necessity and/or self defence,
(3) Where an accused does invoke necessity, it is the court and prosecutor’s duty to investigate the accused’s necessity defence arguments and evidence;
(4) If an accused successfully invokes a necessity defence, this can and must result in either mitigation of sentence and/or a verdict of innocence;
(5) Breivik invoked the defence of necessity;
(6) Despite the fact that Breivik invoked the necessity defence, both Prosecutor Engh and Holden ‘refuse to touch the principle of necessity’.

Complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow case processing & discrimination by Environmental Appeals Board

Complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman: Slow case processing & discrimination by Environmental Appeals Board of complaints against Aftenposten, Dagbladet, TV2, VG, Addresseavisen, Bergens Tidende & NRK



04 July 2012 | Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik

Slow Case Processing: Environment Appeals Board first deleted my appeal without reading it, then I was refused a case number and only provided a 'reference number'; and then told my 'enquiry' would only be addressed in August at the end of summer holidays.

Failure to Provide Case Processing: Environment Appeals Board appear to be attempting to refuse to provide me with a Case Number, in their attempts to obstruct my appeal from the public record.

Discrimination: Environment Appeals Board state my appeal is only an 'enquiry' and my 'enquiry' will only be addressed in August and refuse to confirm whether their 'summer holiday policy' is applicable to all complainants, or only my complaint; also refuse to put a public notice on their website stating their 'summer holiday policy' and whom it does and does not apply to.

Full Chronology of Facts details provided in attached PDF:

On 25 May 2012, Requests for Access to Environment and Health Information were submitted to the editors of Aftenposten, Bergens Tidende, Dagbladet, NRK, TV2, VG and Addresseavisen requesting information related to their decision-making to censor information related to the (I) Media's Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway's Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny. Each respondent was additionally provided a copy of the 22 April 2012 Earth Day: 'If It Bleads, It Leads' Media's Population-Terrorism Connection Report (42pgs). The Media Publications were requested to provide the requested information by 17:00 hrs on 11 June 2012. As of 17:00 hrs on 18 June 2012, they had declined to do so.

On 18 June 2012 a complaint was filed with the Environmental Appeals Board: Appeals of environmental information.

Since 18 June 2012 I have been trying to get Environmental Appeals Board to issue me with a Case number; they refuse stating they are on summer vacation until August, but refuse to say if this is standard policy for everyone, or only my complaint.

Environment Appeals Brd: Appeal: Addresseavisen | Aftenposten | Bergense Tidende | Dagbladet | NRK | TV2 | VG: RE: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway Pharma-Psychiatry

Environment Appeals Brd: Appeal: RE: Addresseavisen | Aftenposten | Bergense Tidende | Dagbladet | NRK | TV2 | VG

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 18 June 2012

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Request for Information Questions:

[1] Editors decision-making justification for censorship of the Norway v. Breivik Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection documentation provided to their publication in 13 May 2012 email: Breivik Acquittal Justified by Media's Massive Censorship of Oslo Crt Proceedings?

[2] (a) The total number of articles published by their publication either in print or online which refer to Breivik’s alleged ‘insanity’; and (b) the number of these articles which - for fairness, impartiality and scientific objectivity - include a ‘Critical Psychiatry’ perspective, such as: ‘The Myth of Mental Illness’, the Marketing of Madness, the use of Psychiatry as social control, and Psychiatrists Legal Testimony being equivalent to that of ‘Whores of the Court’: “psychobabble with scientific foundations equal to horoscope charts… the science behind it all is nonexistent”.

[3] The total amount of advertising revenue received by your publication from Pharmaceutical Corporations per year, over the past five years.

Environment-Population: Dr. Michael Maher Ph.D thesis documents how the media censors the Environment Population Connection: How & Why Journalists Avoid the Environment-Population Connection (PDF)

Ecological Source of Political & Economic Problems: “The economic and political problems with which we concern ourselves are merely manifestations of our ecological predicament -- they are symptoms, not the disease.” – Chris Clugston: Scarcity: Humanity's Last Chapter: A Comprehensive Analysis of Non-Renewable Natural Resources and its implications and consequences for humanity (NNR Scarcity) | US Naval Services Long-Term Study: Global Tipping Points on Food, Water, Energy, Pollution, Population, & Natural Resources & Population Explosion: The Most Powerful Force on Earth | 1996: US Army War College: Parameters: The Culture of Future Conflict: Overpopulation & Resource Scarcity will be the Direct Cause of Confrontation, Conflict, and War.

Complaint: VG: Ed: Torry Pedersen: Censorship in Norway’s ‘Breivik' Media of Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norways Political Psychiatry

Complaint: VG: Ed: Torry Pedersen: Censorship in Norway’s ‘Breivik' Media of Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norways Political Psychiatry

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 25 May 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:48 AM
To: 'Torry Pedersen'
Cc: 'NO: Lippestad'; 'Crt: Pros Holden. MJus: Grete Faremo'; 'Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren'; 'Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem'; 'Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen'
Subject: [VG: Torry Pedersen] Tilgang Informasjon: Offentleglova & Miljoinformasjonsloven

Ansvarlig redaktør: Torry Pedersen
Redaktør digital: Espen Egil Hansen
Redaktør avis: Helje Solberg
Politisk redaktør: Hanne Skartveit
Digital direktør: Jo Christian Oterhals
Verdens Gang AS
Postboks 1185 Sentrum, 0107 Oslo
Telefon: 22 00 00 00 | Fax: 22 42 67 80
NO: VG: Torry Pedersen (**@vg.no)

CC: Prosecutor Holden, Breivik/Geir Lippestad, Victims Families

Dear Editor Pedersen,

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Forespørsel om tilgang til Miljø og helse informasjon i form av S.28 (offentleglova) og S.10 (miljøinformasjonsloven); RE: Sensur i Norge Media: (I) Media Miljø-populasjonsbasert terrorisme tilkobling, (II) Norge politiske Psychiatric Stalinesque Tyranny

Complaint to NRK: Ed: Hans Tore Bjerkaas: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Complaint to NRK: Ed: Hans Tore Bjerkaas: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 25 May 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:45 AM
To: NO: NRK: CEO: Hans-Tore Bjerkaas (**@nrk.no)
Cc: 'NO: Lippestad'; 'Crt: Pros Holden. MJus: Grete Faremo'; 'Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren'; 'Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem'; 'Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen'
Subject: [NRK: Hans Tore Bjerkaas] Tilgang Informasjon: Offentleglova & Miljoinformasjonsloven

Editor: Hans Tore Bjerkaas
NRK
PB 8500, Majorstuen, 0340 Oslo
Tel: 23 04 70 00

CC: Prosecutor Holden, Breivik/Geir Lippestad, Victims Families

Dear Editor Bjerkaas,

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Forespørsel om tilgang til Miljø og helse informasjon i form av S.28 (offentleglova) og S.10 (miljøinformasjonsloven); RE: Sensur i Norge Media: (I) Media Miljø-populasjonsbasert terrorisme tilkobling, (II) Norge politiske Psychiatric Stalinesque Tyranny

Complaint to Dagbladet: Ed: John Arne Markussen: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Complaint to Dagbladet: Ed: John Arne Markussen: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 25 May 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:43 AM
To: NO: Dagbladet: (2400@db.no)
Cc: 'NO: Lippestad'; 'Crt: Pros Holden. MJus: Grete Faremo'; 'Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren'; 'Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem'; 'Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen'
Subject: [Dagbladet: JA Markussen] Tilgang Informasjon: Offentleglova & Miljoinformasjonsloven

John Arne Markussen (@JAMarkussen)
Ansvarlig redaktør
Dagbladet/Dagbladet.no
Boks 1184 Sentrum
0107 Oslo
Tel: 24 00 10 00
Epost: 2400@db.no

CC: Prosecutor Holden, Breivik/Geir Lippestad, Victims Families

Dear Editor Markussen,


Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Forespørsel om tilgang til Miljø og helse informasjon i form av S.28 (offentleglova) og S.10 (miljøinformasjonsloven); RE: Sensur i Norge Media: (I) Media Miljø-populasjonsbasert terrorisme tilkobling, (II) Norge politiske Psychiatric Stalinesque Tyranny

Complaint to Aftenposten: Ed: Hilde Haugsgjerd: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Complaint to Aftenposten: Ed: Hilde Haugsgjerd: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 25 May 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:58 AM
To: 'Ed: Hilde Haugsjerd'
Cc: 'NO: Lippestad'; 'Crt: Pros Holden. MJus: Grete Faremo'; 'Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren'; 'Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem'; 'Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen'
Subject: [Aftenposten: Hilde Haugsgjerd] Tilgang Informasjon: Offentleglova & Miljoinformasjonsloven

Sjefredaktør Hilde Haugsgjerd
Aftenposten
Biskop Gunnerus' gate 14A, 0185 OSLO
Tel: 22 86 30 00
Epost (**@aftenposten.no)

CC: Prosecutor Holden, Breivik/Geir Lippestad, Victims Families

Dear Ms. Haugsgjerd,

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Forespørsel om tilgang til Miljø og helse informasjon i form av S.28 (offentleglova) og S.10 (miljøinformasjonsloven); RE: Sensur i Norge Media: (I) Media Miljø-populasjonsbasert terrorisme tilkobling, (II) Norge politiske Psychiatric Stalinesque Tyranny

Complaint to Bergens Tidende: Ed: Trine Eilertsen: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Complaint to Bergens Tidende: Ed: Trine Eilertsen: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 25 May 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:42 AM
To: 'Trine Eilertsen'
Cc: 'NO: Lippestad'; 'Crt: Pros Holden. MJus: Grete Faremo'; 'Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren'; 'Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem'; 'Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen'
Subject: [BergensTidende: Trine Eilertsen] Tilgang Informasjon: Offentleglova & Miljoinformasjonsloven

Ansvarlig redaktør: Trine Eilertsen
Reportasjesjef: Jan Stian Vold
Bergens Tidende:
Krinkelkroken 1, Postboks 7240, 5020 Bergen
E-Post: Trine Eilertsen (**@bt.no)

CC: Prosecutor Holden, Breivik/Geir Lippestad, Victims Families

Dear Editor Eilertsen,

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Forespørsel om tilgang til Miljø og helse informasjon i form av S.28 (offentleglova) og S.10 (miljøinformasjonsloven); RE: Sensur i Norge Media: (I) Media Miljø-populasjonsbasert terrorisme tilkobling, (II) Norge politiske Psychiatric Stalinesque Tyranny

Complaint to Adresseavisen: Ed: Arne Blix: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Complaint to Adresseavisen: Ed: Arne Blix: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 25 May 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:37 AM
To: 'Arne Blix'
Cc: NO: Lippestad: Odd (**@advokatlippestad.no); Crt: Pros Holden. MJus: Grete Faremo (**@jd.dep.no); Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren (**@elden.no); Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem (**@thommessen.no); Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen (**@advokatstabell.no)
Subject: [Adresseavisen: Arne Blix] Tilgang Informasjon: Offentleglova & Miljoinformasjonsloven

Chief Editor: Arne Blix
News Editor: Kirsti Husby
Digital Director: Atle Bersvendsen
Adresseavisen
PO Box 3200 sloop, 7003 Trondheim
Phone: 47 07 200 | Fax: + 47 72 50
Email: Arne Blix (**@adresseavisen.no)

CC: Prosecutor Holden, Breivik/Geir Lippestad, Victims Families

Dear Editor Blix,

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Forespørsel om tilgang til Miljø og helse informasjon i form av S.28 (offentleglova) og S.10 (miljøinformasjonsloven); RE: Sensur i Norge Media: (I) Media Miljø-populasjonsbasert terrorisme tilkobling, (II) Norge politiske Psychiatric Stalinesque Tyranny

Complaint to TV2.NO: Ed: Alf Hildrum: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Complaint to TV2.NO: Ed: Alf Hildrum: Censorship in Norway’s 'Breivik' Media of: Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection & Norway’s Political Psychiatry

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 25 May 2012

From: Habeus Mentem
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:46 AM
To: 'Alf Hildrum'
Cc: 'NO: Lippestad'; 'Crt: Pros Holden. MJus: Grete Faremo'; 'Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren'; 'Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem'; 'Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen'
Subject: [TV2: Alf Hildrum] Tilgang Informasjon: Offentleglova & Miljoinformasjonsloven

Alf Hildrum
Ansvarlig redaktør:
TV 2
Postboks 7222
5020 Bergen
Tel: 02255
Epost: Alf Hildrum (**@tv2.no)

CC: Prosecutor Holden, Breivik/Geir Lippestad, Victims Families

Dear Editor Hildrum,

Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law); RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny

Forespørsel om tilgang til Miljø og helse informasjon i form av S.28 (offentleglova) og S.10 (miljøinformasjonsloven); RE: Sensur i Norge Media: (I) Media Miljø-populasjonsbasert terrorisme tilkobling, (II) Norge politiske Psychiatric Stalinesque Tyranny