Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES ) CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, ) ET AL., ) ) Petitioners-Appellants, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and COL. ) DENISE LIND, MILITARY JUDGE ) ) Respondents-Appellees. ) ) )

PLEASE

TAKE

NOTICE

that

the

NOTICE OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED AS AMICUS CURIAE Crim. App. Misc. Dkt. No. 20120514 USCA Misc. Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR

applicant,

a

Radical

Honoursty

EcoFeminist member of the Radical Honesty culture and religion; herewith applies to this Court for the Following orders: [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. PLEASE

TAKE

NOTICE

that

the

accompanying

affidavit

of

Lara

Johnstone will be used in support of this application. PLEASE

TAKE

NOTICE

THAT

the

Applicant

requests

that

the

Respondents inform the Applicant and Court of their objection or consent to this Amicus Curiae application, within 5 days of receipt hereof, in terms of Rule 39(e)(b). Please

Take

Notice

that

should

Applicant

be

accepted

as

an

Amici, Applicant shall request the ACLU and/or US Law Schools for Pro Bono Assistance of Counsel for procedural purposes, so as not to burden the court or respondents on procedural matters, in terms of Rule 26(e). Please Take Notice that in the interim, Applicant shall accept notice and service of all process in these proceedings per email at

habeusmentem@mweb.co.za

or

in

person

at

16

Taaibos

Ave,

Heatherpark, George, 6529, South Africa. KINDLY place this matter before the Honourable Court’s Justices for their consideration at their earliest convenience, on or after 5 days, subsequent to receipt of this motion; including Respondents consent or opposing statements. Dated at George, Southern Cape, South Africa on this 13th day of September 2012

___________________________ LARA JOHNSTONE, Pro Se PO Box 4052, George, 6539 South Africa Tel/Fax: (044) 870 7239 habeusmentem@mweb.co.za

2


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES Clerk of the Court 450 E Street, Northwest, Washington, D.C. 20442-0001 Per Electronic Filing: efiling@armfor.uscourts.gov PETTIONER-APPELLANTS COUNSEL: Shayana D. Kadidal J. Wells Dixon Baher Azmy, Legal Director Michael Ratner, President Emeritus CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, New York, 10012 Tel: (212) 614 6438 Fax: (212) 614 6499 Per Electronic Service: shanek@ccrjustice.org RESPONDENT-APPELLEE’S COUNSEL: CHAD M. FISHER Captain, JA Office of the Judge Advocate General, United States Army Appellate Goverment Counsel 9275 Gunston Road Fort Belvoir, VA 22060 (703) 693-0783 Per Electronic Service: Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil Lead Counsel C.A.A.F. Bar Number 34883 FIRST AMICUS COUNSEL: Gregg P. Leslie Counsel for Amicus Curiae Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press 1101 Wilson Blvd., Suite 1100 Arlington, VA 22209-2100 Per Electronic Service: gleslie@rcfp.org (703) 807-2100

3


IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES ) CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, ) ET AL., ) ) Petitioners-Appellants, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and COL. ) DENISE LIND, MILITARY JUDGE ) ) Respondents-Appellees. ) ) ) ) )

FOUNDING AFFIDAVIT OF LARA JOHNSTONE in support of NOTICE OF MOTION TO PROCEED AS AMICUS CURIAE

Crim. App. Misc. Dkt. No. 20120514 USCA Misc. Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR

Declaration of Lara Johnstone I, Lara Johnstone, declare as follows: [1] I

am

an

adult

Radical

Honoursty

Ecofeminist

Wild

Law1

Sustainable Security practicing paralegal (subsequently referred to as ‗applicant‘), member of Friend of Wikileaks (FoWL) and the Radical South

Honesty

Africa;

culture2;

where

I

resident

run

a

small

in

George,

EcoFeminist

Southern

Cape,

pedal-powered

wormery business (www.sqworms.co.nr).

1

Wild Law is a new legal theory and growing social movement. It proposes that we rethink our legal, political, economic and governance systems so that they support, rather than undermine, the integrity and health of the Earth. www.wildlaw.org.au 2 SA Constitutional Court ruling of 03 May 2012 in CCT 23-10, reads as follows: ―Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an amicus curiae‖


[2] When dealing with legal questions, the applicant relies on an Anthropocentric

SA

Institute

of

Legal

Training

Paralegal

Certificate and Diploma3; and an EcoCentric Wild Law/Rights of Nature

Sustainable

Security

philosophical,

theoretical

and

existential worldview. [3] If

approved,

alternative arguments

the

Applicant‘s

Ecocentric deemed

Anthropocentric

Wild

too

Law

far

respondent

Amicus

brief

Sustainable

reaching

parties

intent

for on

shall

address

Security

legal

emphasis winning

by their

particular Anthropocentric cases4; thereby enabling the court‘s final

judgment

to

include

both

an

Anthropocentric

and

an

Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security perspective.5 [4] Issues addressed in this Affidavit: [5] The Applicant [6] The Present Application [7] The main issues: 1. The

Ecocentric

Wild

Law

Sustainable

Security

Worldview

interest of the Applicant in the main application;

3

A Paralegal Certificate & Paralegal Diploma, both with Distinction, from the South African Institute of Legal Training and Damelin Correspondence Career Development College. 4 Luther T. Munford, When Does the Curiae Need an Amicus?, 1 J. App. Prac. & Process 279, 280 (1999). 5 Paul M. Smith, The Sometimes Troubled Relationship Between Courts and Their “Friends”, note 2, at 26 (1998). 2


2. Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security Submissions which will be advanced by the Applicant if admitted as an amicus curiae; 3. Attitude of the parties in the main application to the Applicants admission; and 4. The relief that ought to be granted to the Applicant in this application. [8] The Applicant: [9] The applicant was a California legal resident (INS # A77 177 281; CA Drivers Licence #: CA: B9644585) subsequent to marrying African American prisoner, Demian Emile Johnson on 11 October 1997 in Folsom Prison, California; where he has been serving a sentence of 15 to life since 1982; currently amicably separated. [10] Applicant was arrested in San Francisco on 29 January 2002, subsequent sensitive

to

providing

information

the

related

SF to

City the

Attorney‘s Oklahoma

office

City

with

Bombing;

provided to her by a friend, a former United States Army Special Forces

assassin

pertaining

to

who

referred

Oklahoma

City

to

himself

Bombing

as

events.

‗John

Doe

#2‘

Applicant

was

detained at Yuba County Jail, and deported from San Francisco Airport, to South Africa on 02 March 2002. [11] Applicant joined the Radical Honesty culture in 1999, after reading Dr. Blanton‘s book Radical Honesty: How To Transform Your Life By Telling the Truth. The Radical Honesty culture is

3


founded on 100% transparency and opposes all secrecy, including Anthropocentric Bernaysian Bullshit-the-Public Relations Pretend Transparency Image Management. Radical Honesty believes that a significant

psychosocial

factor

contributing

to

Patriarchal

Anthropocentric cultures reliance on war as a general social psychosocial redistribution

release of

function,

―for

undifferentiated

the

release

tensions‖6

and

and the

―dissipation of general boredom‖, is a result of its preference for PR image management, as championed by the Bernaysian Public Relations addicted churnalist7 media. PR Image Management dispute 6

―War as a general social release. This is a psychosocial function, serving the same purpose for a society as do the holiday, the celebration, and the orgy for the individual---the release and redistribution of undifferentiated tensions. War provides for the periodic necessary readjustment of standards of social behaviour (the "moral climate") and for the dissipation of general boredom, one of the most consistently undervalued and unrecognized of social phenomena. War fills certain functions essential to the stability of our society; until other ways of filling them are developed, the war system must be maintained -and improved in effectiveness.‖ - Report from Iron Mountain: On the Possibility and Desirability for Peace (paragraphs found respectively on p45 & p4) 7 "I commissioned research from specialists at Cardiff University, who surveyed more than 2,000 UK news stories from the four quality dailies (Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Independent) and the Daily Mail. They found two striking things. First, when they tried to trace the origins of their "facts", they discovered that only 12% of the stories were wholly composed of material researched by reporters. With 8% of the stories, they just couldn't be sure. The remaining 80%, they found, were wholly, mainly or partially constructed from secondhand material, provided by news agencies and by the public relations industry. Second, when they looked for evidence that these "facts" had been thoroughly checked, they found this was happening in only 12% of the stories. The implication of those two findings is truly alarming. Where once journalists were active gatherers of news, now they have generally become mere passive processors of unchecked, second-hand material, much of it contrived by PR to serve some political or commercial 4


resolution has a preference for a sliding scale of sycophantic intellectual fairness above public Gunnery-Sgt-like face-to-face expression of anger8; whereas cultures who have little or no preference

for

PR

transparent

public

image

management

airing of

and

a

preference

for

dirty linen dispute resolution,

such as Radical Honesty9 and the Matriarchal Mosuo10 (Mósuō also

interest. Not journalists, but churnalists. An industry whose primary task is to filter out falsehood has become so vulnerable to manipulation that it is now involved in the mass production of falsehood, distortion and propaganda." - Nick Davies, Our media have become mass producers of distortion (Guardian, 04/02/2008) 8 ―Many of us are concerned about fairness and use the principle of fairness as our primary rationalization for withholding anger. Advanced instruction in this principle creates lawyers who are miserable people. Divorces handled by lawyers often result in children shot back and forth like missiles between hostile camps. If you force yourself to be fair while still angry, you are a fool, and any agreements you make in such a state won't work for you. Judges and lawyers ignore this fact. Judges and lawyers exist for people who can't handle their anger. A judge tells you what to do, based on what he or she thinks is fair, whether you like it or not, because you haven't been able to work things out on your own.‖ – Brad Blanton, Practicing Radical Honesty 9 Practicing Radical Honesty six minimal requirements to resolve conflict, none of which may be skipped, being: (1) You have to tell the truth about the specific behavior you resent, to the person, face-to-face; (2) You have to be verbally and vocally unrestrained with regard to volume and propriety; (3) You have to pay attention to the feelings and sensations in your body and to the other person as you speak; (4) You have to express any appreciations for the person that come up in the process, with the same attention to your feelings and to the other person as when you are expressing resentments; (5) You have to stay with any feelings that emerge in the process, like tears or laughter, regardless of any evaluations you may have about how it makes you look; and let the tears or laughter or pain or anger not be interrupted by your mind until they go naturally to completion; (6) You have to stay with the discussion until you no longer feel resentful of the other person. 10 ―Women have a different way of dominating. When women rule, it's part of their work. They like it when everything functions 5


spelled Moso or Musuo) culture in S.W. China, release their tensions verbally in the moment, without regard to intellectual propriety,

are

seldom

bored

and

have

very

little

or

no

violence11. [12] Radical Honesty is a powerful process by which members make corrections in their minds distorted and only partly conscious maps of the world, by overcoming societies demands for ‗bullshit the public relations image management‘ and learning to express their suppressed anger and resentments honourably in the moment, face to face, and resolving them. Our maps of the world are distorted by our repressed anger and resentment; the greater the amount

of

repressed

anger

and

resentment,

the

greater

the

distortion. Futilitarians (members of Radical Honesty) believe and the family is doing well. Amassing wealth or earning lots of money doesn't cross their minds. Capital accumulation seems to be a male thing…… [t]here is no violence in a matriarchal society…. it simply doesn't make sense to the Mosuo women to solve conflicts with violence. Because they are in charge, nobody fights. They don't know feelings of guilt or vengeance – [In a dispute] ... the women decide what happens. Some of them do it more strictly and others in a friendlier way. They are strong women who give clear orders. When a man hasn't finished a task he's been given, he is expected to admit it. He is not scolded or punished, but instead he is treated like a little boy who was not up to the task.‖ 'Men live better where women are in charge', 05/28/2009, Der Spiegel, Ricardo Coler 11 ―Their language has no words for ―rape‖ or even for ―jealousy.‖ Suicide is rare and murder unheard of. As relationships avoid entangling economic factors and love, finding and leaving a partner are simple affairs that leave little emotional scarring behind. Watching my own friends and family struggle through difficult marriages and painful divorces, I wonder how we‘ve deviated so far from these roots. And people like the American woman wonder how we can ever recapture the wholesomeness of life that the Na have not yet lost.‖ – The NA of Southwest China: Debunking the Myths, Tami Blumenfeld, May 2009 6


the

key to individuality, integrity, individual freedom, and

free societies, lies in providing people with the skills and capabilities to find the courage to give up their addiction for ‗bullshit the public relations image management‘ by learning to get

over

their

anger,

and

experience

sincere

sensate

forgiveness. It is the way the statistics from Stanley Milgram‘s experiments on blind obedience to authority get changed. [13] Radical Honesty culture and religion was founded by Dr. Brad Blanton, who is: (1) President and CEO of The Center for Radical Honesty, dedicated to promoting honesty and transparency in the world; (2) former Independent and Green candidate for Congress in 2004 and 2006, on the platform of ‗Honesty in Politics‘ ; (3) Pope

of

the

Radical

Honesty

Futilitarian

Church;

i.e.

―Dr.

Truth‖; and (4) author of (a) Radical Honesty: How To Transform your Life by Telling the Truth; (b) Practicing Radical Honesty: How to Complete the Past, Stay in the Present and Build a Future with a Little Help from Your Friends, (c) Honest to God: A Change of Heart that Can Change the World, with Neale Donald Walsh (Conversations with God series); (d) Radical Parenting: Seven Steps to a Functional Family in a Dysfunctional World; (e) The Truthtellers: Stories of Success by Radically Honest People (f) Beyond Good and Evil: The Eternal Split-Second-Sound-LightBeing; (g) Some New Kind of Trailer Trash and (h) The Korporate Kannibal Kookbook.

7


[14] Applicant is also a former employee of (1) Ms. Peggy Noonan, former Speechwriter for President Reagan and G.W. Bush, Snr; at her home in New York City, NY; (2) HRH Princess Gloria Von Thurn & Taxis Family on their Private Yacht: S.Y. Aiglon; (3) Lord and Lady Glenapp, now Earl and Countess Inchcape, at their home in Swindon, Wiltshire. (PDF References12) [15] As

an

Ecocentric

Beyond

Left

and

Right

Wing

Radical

Transparency Rule-of-law political activist, applicant has been involved in non-violent civil disobedience actions on behalf of her former husband13, Greenpeace14, Amnesty Int‘l, Pacific Inst. for

Criminal

Disclosure

Justice15,

Project18,

New

Jericho

9816,

Crack

Abolitionist19,

the

Justice

CIA17, for

The

Timothy

McVeigh20, Alliance for Democracy21, Boycott 2010 World Cup, Right

12

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/jl-references RSA OVERSEAS: South African on hunger strike in California, by Ilda Jacobs 14 In Easter 1993, applicant was arrested with a few dozen Greenpeace activists in a Save Our Seas anti-nuclear demonstration at Sellafield, Nuclear Power station, in Scotland, for trespassing. See: Greenpeace’s Campaign Against Ocean Dumping of Radio-Active Waste, 1978 – 1998 (www.greenpeace.org). 15 98-07-04 Miami Herald: Police action harms image as protectors 16 Jericho 98 is the movement to Free America‘s Political Prisoners. Applicant participated in Jericho 98, petitioned President Mandela on behalf of release of many Anti-Apartheid Activists in US prisons: Marilyn Buck, Jaan Laaman, Tom Manning, etc. Applicant was approved by the FBI to visit Marilyn Buck. 17 99-03-16: San Francisco Chronicle: CIA Class Action Suit For Not Reporting Drug Trade 18 Presidential UFO: George W. Bush‘s UFO Mail: Are You Ready for the Revolution? 19 New Abolitionist: Race Traitor: Zero Tolerance 20 April 2001: New Abolitionist: Tim McVeigh and Me 13

8


of

Return

for

African

White

Refugees22,

Mandelatopia‘s

TRC

Fraud23, EcoFeminist vs. Anders Breivik24, etc. [16] Applicant consumption

is

nations

local,

national and

years

lifestyle,

African

wars;

45

has

with

carrying or

old, a

has

footprint

capacity;

international

never

advocated

lived

to

a

procreation

below

avoid

US

behalf

of

South

contributing

overpopulation

on

and

or

and

to

resource

population

or

economic growth; or materialist consumerism. [17] The Applicant is an individual to whom Judge Lind‘s court order with respect to Amicus briefs applies (Transcript at page 11), who would be affected by the Court‘s decision that it ―will not grant leave for a non-party to file an Amicus brief. The government or the defense may attach such a filing by a nonparty as part of the brief filed within the suspense dates set by the Court.‖

21

In 2000, applicant was arrested & detained for 3 hours, with Brad Blanton, Ronny Dugger (founding editor of Texas Observer and Alliance for Democracy), & others in the Wash, DC, Capital of the Rotunda. Issue: Campaign Finance Reform. 22 10-04-23: Algemene Dagblad: Zuid Afrikanen Smeken Om Wilders Hulp ; 10-04-25: Sunday Argus: SA family seeks repatriation to Netherlands; 10-04-30: Mail & Guardian: Persecuted Afrikaners Talk of Returning Home; 10-05-17: Christian Science Monitor: White South Africans use Facebook in Campaign to Return to Holland 23 Mandelatopia‘s TRC Fraud: Jus Sanguinis Boer Volkstaat 10/31/16 Theses: Boer Volkstaat; or Jus Sanguinis EU Citizenship for African White Refugees Petition Justifications http://astore.amazon.com/jussanguinis-20/detail/1478230622 24 http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/ 9


[18] Absent publication of the order, or of the transcript of the session, as made available by the appellant25, applicant would have been unaware of the order

or its deadlines; and since

applicant‘s Ecocentric interests are not firmly aligned with either of the Anthropocentric interests of the government or Pfc. Manning, Applicant might ―end up investing huge amounts of effort in drafting briefs that end up yielding no benefit to the court or the public good;‖26 although, as is to be seen in subsequent argument, this is frequently the case, when media publications

have

totally

censored

Applicants

Ecocentric

arguments to South African High Court, Supreme Court of Appeal and

Constitutional

Courts

and

Norwegian

Oslo

District

and

Supreme courts. [19] Applicants intended Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security application to Chief Judge Lind‘s court martial of Pfc. Manning would examine the court martial matter from a Radical Honoursty Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security perspective. Whether Pfc. Manning should be executed for treason ‗for giving aid to the enemy‘ or awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, for his ‗conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action

25

http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/ccr-et-al-v-usaand-lind-chief-judge 26 Petitioner-Appellants Response pursuant to Interlocutory Order of 24 July 2012: Page 5 10


exposing the traitor27 enemies28 of the United States;‘ would depend on: 1. An

Ecocentric

objective

enquiry

into

the

military

necessity for Pfc. Manning‘s alleged criminal actions; 2. A subjective enquiry into the military necessity for Pfc. Manning‘s alleged criminal acts, in accordance with the Rendulic Rule29; and

27

Treason: A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor—he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation—he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city—he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.......Cicero, 42 B.C.E. 28 In Valour of Ignorance, Homer Lea‘s perspective of a nations traitor enemies, are (I) those ‗high or low‘ who only regard [the Nation] in a parasitical sense, as a land to batten on and grow big in, whose resources are not to be developed and conserved for the furtherance of the Republic‘s greatness, but only to satisfy the larval greed of those who subsist upon it‘s fatness;‘ and (II) International Arbitrationists and Disarmamentists who advocate on behalf of disarmament and arbitration without understanding the true origins of war: ―Only when arbitration is able to unravel the tangled skein of crime & hypocrisy among individuals can it be extended to communities & nations. As nations are only man in the aggregate, they are the aggregate of his crimes and deception and depravity, and so long as these constitute the basis of individual impulse, so long will they control the acts of nations.‖ 29 The United States of America vs. Wilhelm List, et al; also known as ‗The Hostages Trial‘, which occurred as part of the "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT). In the Trial of Wilhelm List and Others; United States Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 8th July, 1947 to 19th February, 1948 (The 11


3. An

Ecocentric

objective enquiry

into the

Pfc Manning‘s

acts effect on the homeostatic plateau / stability of a Sustainable Ecocentric

Security

ecosystem,

in

accordance

to

the

arguments of ecologist Garret Hardin in

The

Cybernetics of Competition30 that the effect of any act, depends on the state of the system at the time it is applied. An ‗act which is harmless when the system is well within its homeostatic boundaries may be quite destructive when

the

system

is

already

stressed

near

one

limits‘, and vice versa. To promote the goal of

of

its

stability

[sustainable security]; a law must take cognisance not only of the act but also of the state of the system at the time the act is performed.31 [20] The Present Application: [21] Private First Class (PFC) Bradley Manning is charged with five specifications of violating a lawful general regulation, one specification of aiding the enemy, one specification of conduct

Hostages Trial), as reported in Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Selected and prepared by the United Nations War Crimes Commission, Volume VIII (Pg 68-69): Did Pfc Manning at the time of his military acts, act within the limits of honest judgement on the basis of the conditions prevailing at the time. Were the conditions, as they appeared to the defendant at the time, sufficient upon which he could honestly conclude that urgent military necessity warranted the decision he made. If this is true, the defendant may have erred in the exercise of his judgement but he was guilty of no criminal act. http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/Law-Reports_Vol-8.pdf 30 Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 7:58-84 (1963) 31 Hardin Garrett: Stalking the Wild Taboo: Chapter 21, pg 201205 (Social Contract Press (1996)) 12


prejudicial

to

good

discrediting,

eight

information,

five

converting

order

and

specification specifications

goverment

property,

discipline

of

and

communicating

of and

stealing two

or

service

classified knowingly

specifications

of

knowingly exceeding authorized access to a goverment computer, in violation of Articles 92, 104, and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The convening authority referred the charges to a general court-martial on February 3, 2012, and PFC Manning was arraigned on February 23, 2012. The military judge held Article 39(a), UCMJ, sessions on March 15-16, April 24-26, and June 6-8, 2012.32 [22] On March 21, appellants, who are not parties to the courtmartial, sent a letter to Judge Lind requesting the Court to "make available to the public and the media for inspection and copying all documents and information filed in the Manning case, including the docket sheet, all motions and responses thereto, all

rulings

and

orders,

and

verbatim

transcripts

or

other

recordings of all conferences and hearings before the Court."

33

[23] At the 39(a) session on April 24, the military judge marked appellant‘s letter as Appellate Exhibit 66, treated it as a request to intervene, and denied the request.34

32

Appellee's Answer to Appellants Petition for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of Writs of Mandamus and Prohibition, filed 05 July 2012: Page 2. 33 Appellee's Answer.., filed 05 July 2012: Page 2 34 Appellee's Answer.., filed 05 July 2012: Page 3 13


[24] On May 23, 2012, appellant filed a writ-petition at the Army Court seeking similar relief. Appellant asked the Army Court to compel

the

military

judge

to

grant

public

access

to

all

documents pertaining to the case and to require conferences held under Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M) 802 to be made part of the record

in

their

entirety.

On

May

30,

2012,

the

Army

Court

ordered the Goverment to respond to the Petition, and on June 21, 2012, the Army Court denied the Petition. Five days later, on

June

26,

2012,

appellant

timely

filed

this

writ-appeal

petition ("writ-appeal") at this Court.35 [25] The

Respondents

ask

the

Honourable

Court

to

deny

the

Appellants petition because they argue the appellant fails to meet the threshold criteria for extraordinary relief. They argue that

the

Army

Court

properly

denied

the

petition

for

extraordinary relief because the appellants failed to meet the first two conditions for extraordinary relief. First, a writ of mandamus

or

prohibition

is

appropriate

only

when

no

other

adequate remedy is available. Here, appellants have an adequate remedy under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to request access to these court-martial documents.36 [26] Secondly Respondents argue, the appellant failed to show that their right to the requested relief is clear and indisputable. They argue that 窶病t the very least, federal courts have divided

35 36

Appellee's Answer.., filed 05 July 2012: Page 3-4 Appellee's Answer .., filed 05 July 2012: Page 5 14


over

whether

the

press

is

constitutionally

entitled

to

contemporaneous access to judicial documents."37 [27] According to the petitioners38, CCR v. United States is a petition for extraordinary relief filed with the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, and a subsequent writ-appeal filed with the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, seeking an order to force Chief Judge Lind to grant the public and press access to the government‘s

motion

papers,

the

court‘s

own

orders,

and

transcripts of the court-martial proceedings of Private First Class Bradley Manning. [28] Additionally,

―the

petition

challenges

the

fact

that

substantive legal matters in the court martial – including a pre-trial publicity order – have been argued and decided in secret‖.

39

[29] The Petitioners argue that Judge Lind should comply with their requests

on

the

grounds

of

the

First

Amendment

and

the

application of the First Amendments ‗strict scrutiny‘ provisions in releasing these documents to the public.40 [30] Petitioners burdensome,

do

since

not

consider

court

their

document

requested

should

relief

ordinarily

be

to

be

made

37

Appellee's Answer .., filed 05 July 2012: Page 5 http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/ccr-et-al-v-usaand-lind-chief-judge 39 http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/ccr-et-al-v-usaand-lind-chief-judge 40 Petitioner-Appellants Response pursuant to Interlocutory Order of 24 July 2012: Page 5-7 38

15


accessible to the public in the normal course of events, just as 41

courtroom sessions are.

[31] Petitioners argue that should the government ―assert a need to alter the First Amendment‘s default presumption of openness, the press and public are entitled to advance notice, an opportunity to participate in the judicial decision-making, and an adequate record

of

decision

sufficient

to

facilitate

later

appellate

review;‖ this process requires the government to articulate with specificity a compelling interest for secrecy, and requires the trial court to engage in strict scrutiny analysis of each of the governments alleged ‗necessity‘ justifications for secrecy.

42

[32] Finally Petitioners argue that the governments secrecy ―serves no

one‘s

interests

government,

which

least

will

see

of

the

all

the

legitimacy

interests of

any

of

the

conviction

questioned if the current status quo prevails‖; and ―[d]oing so is vital if the military justice system is to be taken seriously as the equivalent of the civilian criminal justice system in terms of fairness, accuracy and transparency.‖43 [33] The petitioners include CCR itself and a diverse group of media figures: Glenn Greenwald, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!, The

Nation

and

its

national

security

correspondent

Jeremy

Scahill, and Wikileaks and its publisher, Julian Assange. Also included 41 42 43

are

Kevin

Gosztola,

co-author

of

Truth

and

Petitioner-Appellants Response.., Page 5 Petitioner-Appellants Response.., Page 5-7 Petitioner-Appellants Response.., Page 7-8 16


Consequences: The U.S. vs. Bradley Manning and a civil liberties blogger covering the Manning court martial, and Chase Madar, author of The Passion of Bradley Manning and a contributing editor to The American Conservative. [34] The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 31 News Media Organisations44 Amicus filed in support of the PetitionerAppellants

states

organizations,

that

they

non-profit

are

national

associations

and

local

representing

news news

gatherers and their interests and trade groups whose journalists and

members

regularly

gather

and

disseminate

news

and

information to the public through their newspapers, magazines, television, radio stations and via the Internet, who have a strong interest in ensuring that journalists covering the courtmartial of Pfc. Bradley Manning (―Manning‖) are able to do so meaningfully

by

proceedings.

The

being

able

absence

of

to

view

a

court

documents

filed

transcript

and

in

the

secrecy

involving motions filed are a ―serious obstacle to effective

44

First Amici are The 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. 17


reporting

on

concern‖,

and

this

matter

that

the

of

significant

court

should

public

consider

interest this

and

secrecy

surrounding these proceedings unconstitutional; in accordance to the U.S. Supreme Court‘s recognition of a presumptive right of access to criminal proceedings (Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 573 (1980) (plurality opinion)). [35] The main issues: [36] The

Ecocentric

Wild

Law

Sustainable

Security

Worldview

interest of the Applicant in the main application: [37] The applicant fully supports the Appellant and Supreme Court‘s arguments that ―openness promotes not just public confidence in the

criminal

process

but

also

accuracy

in

fact-finding

and

ultimate outcomes,‖45 but disputes the alleged motives of (1) the Appellant‘s (except for the scientific journalism practiced by Wikileaks and Julian Assange) being ―to cover the proceedings consistent with their journalistic standards and obligations;‖46 and (2) the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press‘s being that of

‗meaningful reporting

in the public interest‘47.

Put

simply: The schizophrenic Pied Piper churnalist cheerleaders for

45

Appellants Writ-Appeal Petition for Review of Army Court of Criminal Appeals Decision on Application for Extraordinary Relief and Supporting Memorandum of Law Pg.10 46 Appellants Writ-Appeal Petition for Review of Army Court of Criminal Appeals Decision … Pg. 8 47 Brief on behalf of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 31 News Media Organisations as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners-Appellants; Pg.1 18


War; wish to bullshit the Court, they are principled anti-war protestors. [38] The appellants argue that ―The Supreme Court has long held that contemporaneous access to criminal proceedings is necessary to serve the various functions – public legitimation, diligent and upstanding official behavior, and error-correction – that public access has traditionally served. As early as 1948 the Court had announced that ―[t]he knowledge that every criminal trial

is

subject

to

contemporaneous

review

in

the

forum

of

public opinion is an effective restraint on possible abuse of judicial power.‖‖.48 [39] Applicant argues the court statement would be more accurate as follows: ―[t]he knowledge that every criminal trial is subject to contemporaneous review in the forum of public opinion [if the public

are

informed

of

the

court

proceedings

by

journalists

practicing scientific journalism] is an effective restraint on possible abuse of judicial power.‖ [40] The

Appellants

fail

to

clarify

what

happens

when

the

journalists reporting on any particular public interest criminal trial

deliberately

censor

one

or

more

parties

arguments

submitted to the court. Essentially, any court can practice 100% transparency, but if the media choose to censor one or more parties arguments, before that court, the media choose not only

48

Appellants Writ-Appeal Petition for Review of Army Court of Criminal Appeals Decision … Pg. 15 19


to limit the contemporaneous review of the court proceedings, in the forum of public opinion; but effectively, in terms of public opinion knowledge of the fairness of the proceedings, conduct a trial

by

media,

thereby

undermining

the

credibility

of

the

court‘s decisions, as a result of public ignorance of all the arguments and evidence submitted to the court. [41] In

the

Beyond

Applicants

Left

and

experience, Right

Wing

this

occurs

Ecocentric

frequently applications

with to

Anthropocentric court proceedings. Applicants working hypothesis conclusion is that the true motive of the majority of these media publications is not ―to cover the proceedings consistent with

their

provide

journalistic

meaningful

definitely Wikileaks

not

standards

reporting

the

standard

advocates;

but

in of

yellow

obligations,‖49

and the

public

scientific journalism

or

‗to

interest‘50;

and

journalism consciously

that or

unconsciously focussed on enabling the endless escalation of the divide

and

conquer

polarisation

of

their

respective

Anthropocentric ‗Left vs. Right wing‘ reader bases. [42] Left

and

Right

Wing

Anthropocentric

Media

censorship

has

occurred in the RH Ecofeminist Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security focused applications, Applicant has submitted in the disputes between [A] ANC ‗Left Wing‘ Terrorist Robert McBride 49

Appellants Writ-Appeal Petition for Review of Army Court of Criminal Appeals Decision … Pg. 8 50 Brief on behalf of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 31 News Media Organisations as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners-Appellants; Pg.1 20


vs. ‗Right Wing‘ Citizen Newspaper (ZA: CCT 23-10); [B] ‗Right Wing‘

Afriforum

vs.

Settlers‘-Terrorist ‗Left

Wing‘

ANC

‗Left

Julius

Malema

Kingdom

of

Norway

Wing‘ (ZA: vs.

Political-‗Kill SCA

815/11);

Norwegian

the

and

‗Right

[C]

Wing‘

Terrorist Anders Breivik (NO: ODC #11-188627MED-OTIR/05) cases. [43] In Wing

all –

South

provided Left

aforementioned

endless

vs.

during

African,

Right

these

escalation

of

cases

Norwegian

reporting Wing

court the

the

of

legal

and

the

and

Left/Right

International

respective

arguments

proceeding

divide

Anthropocentric

conquer

media

Anthropocentric

submitted

disputes,

-

to

the

enabling

polarisation

court

endless of

their

respective ‗Left vs. Right wing‘ reader bases, while totally and utterly censoring even the reality that the court had received alternative ‗Beyond Left and Right Wing‘ Wild Law Sustainable Security whether

problem the

solving

courts:

focussed

[A]

approved

arguments; the

irrespective

applicants

of

Ecocentric

application, recognizing the applicant as an official Amicus respondent in proceedings (Concourt: McBride), [B] officially recognized applicants documentation into the court record and final

judgement

irregularly

(Equality/High

ignored

the

Court:

application

Malema); (Norway:

[C] Oslo

totally District

Court), resulting in complaints currently pending before the Parliamentary

Ombudsman

(Cases:

2012-1943

and

2012-1987)

and

Secretariat for the Supervisory Committee for Judges (NO: Cases: 12-071, 12-072, 12-073).

21


[44] Applicant‘s

working

hypothesis

conclusion

being

that

Anthropocentric media publications reporting on resource-war / scarcity-security court disputes have no regard for scientific journalism (providing readers full access to all original source documents) to report all relevant arguments submitted into the court record by all parties; but propagandize reporting of the respective Anthropocentric Left vs. Right Wing legal arguments their editorial bias endorses, to enable the exponential growth of the divide and conquer polarisation of their respective ‗Left vs. Right wing‘ reader base, while totally and utterly censoring their

readers

from

the

reality

that

the

court

has

received

alternative ‗Beyond Left and Right Wing‘ Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security problem solving focussed arguments. [45] The applicant consequently recommends the court – as a social science experiment to determine the validity of the Applicants arguments about the alleged motives of First Amici‘s – keenly observe the Anthropocentric response, or lack thereof, by the Appellants

so-called

‗national

and

local

news

organizations…

news… whose journalists … regularly gather and disseminate news and

information

to

the

public

through

their

newspapers,

magazines, television, radio stations and via the Internet‘ to being

provided

with

this

Ecocentric

Wild

Law

Sustainable

Security application, to this court, in this matter. [46] Applicant recommend that if or when the court considers it necessary for the benefit of Pfc Manning‘s Free and Fair trial

22


interests

and/or

proceedings

are

journalists

who

the

courts

accurately don‘t

credibility reported

practice

interests

upon;

scientific

to

restrict

journalism

primary access to the relevant documentation,

only

that

from

providing

primary access to such documentation to publications/journalists who

agree

to

practice

scientific

journalism

in

their

news

reports, whereby they provide their readers with direct or link access

to

a

site

where

all

available

source

documents,

transcripts, in the particular proceedings are published. [47] Ecocentric

Wild

Law

Sustainable

Security

Submissions

which

will be advanced by the Applicant if admitted as an amicus curiae: [48] If approved as an Ecocentric Pro Se Amicus, the applicant‘s submissions will expound – from an Ecocentric perspective - on a more comprehensive analysis and overview of the Anthropocentric Left vs. Right Wing media‘s censorship of the applicants Beyond Left and Right Wing Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security applications

to

South

African

and

Norwegian

courts,

the

International Criminal Court: Office of the Prosecutor (PDF51) and current complaints to five Press Complaints Commissions52 UK

– PCC (New Statesman: Ref: 123663) & The Guardian: Ref:

123691); Norway – PFU (News and Views from Norway: Case 239/12), Indonesia Press Council (Jakarta Post); Australia Press Council

51 52

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/110509_icc_trcfraud_complaint http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/media-complaints.html 23


(Sydney Morning Herald); Federal Communications Commission (Fox News: Ref: 12-C00424455) - against Left vs. Right Wing Media Publications

deliberate

censorship

of

parties

submissions

to

court proceedings, in a public interest criminal trial, thereby avoiding providing an accurate impartial fair contemporaneous review

of

the

trial

in

the

forum

of

public

opinion,

as

an

effective restraint on the possible abuse of judicial power; and providing

the

unholistic

public

with

perspective

as

a

false,

to

the

inaccurate arguments

and

and

biased evidence

submitted to the relevant court. [49] Overview: Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security Worldview: [50] Wild

Law:

A

wild

law

regulates

human

procreation

and/or

resource utilization behaviour, to ensure sustainability53. [51] Sustainability, i.e. environmental or ecological rights and responsibilities are the sine qua non54 foundation for all other rights55. However adding "sustainable" to our legal vocabulary, is

not

sufficient

sustainable,

unless

to the

ensure

that

our

definition

of

society

becomes

sustainable

is

sufficiently precise to enable sustainable living. 53

The term ―sustainable‖ pertains both to ―natural resource utilization behavior‖ and to ―a societal condition‖. Sustainable natural resource utilization behavior and sustainable human societies exist in perpetuity—indefinitely—in the absence of an aborting act of Nature. 54 Opinion of Weeramantry J in the Case Concerning the GabcikovoNagymaros Project (Hungary v Slovakia) (1998) 37 International Legal Materials 162 206. 55 Democracy Cannot Survive Overpopulation, Al Bartlett, Ph.D., Population & Environment, Vol. 22, No. 1, Sep 2000, pgs. 63-71 24


[52] Sustainability Sustainable Behaviour.57 society levels

Procreation Sustainable

utilizes less

Defined:

than

A and

Human

renewable or

Sustainable

equal

Natural

society56

Resource

Societies:

A

practices Utilization

sustainable

human

natural

resources

exclusively,

to

levels

which

the

at

they

at are

replenished by Nature. Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour:

Sustainable

natural

resource

utilization

behaviour

involves the utilization of renewable natural resources—water, cropland, pastureland, forests, and wildlife—exclusively, which can be depleted only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. The utilization of nonrenewable natural resources—fossil fuels, metals, and minerals— at any level, is not sustainable.

56

Sustainable Human Societies: A sustainable human society utilizes renewable natural resources exclusively, at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. Nonrenewable natural resources are not used at any level. A sustainable human society degrades natural habitats at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are regenerated by Nature. A human society that engages in other natural habitat degradation is unsustainable—period. (Sustainability Defined, by Chris Clugston, author: Scarcity) 57 Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behavior: Sustainable natural resource utilization behavior involves the utilization of renewable natural resources—water, cropland, pastureland, forests, and wildlife—exclusively. Renewable natural resource reserves can be depleted only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. The utilization of nonrenewable natural resources—fossil fuels, metals, and minerals—at any level, is not sustainable. Aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric natural habitats can be degraded only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are regenerated by Nature. All other natural resource utilization behavior and all other natural habitat degradation are unsustainable—period. (Sustainability Defined, by Chris Clugston, author: Scarcity) 25


[53] Anthropocentric Law’s Inaccurate Assumption: NNR Abundance: [54] Anthropocentric58 law views the world from a firmly entrenched anthropocentric

(human-centred)

perspective,

where

there

is

always a brighter future, because the implicit assumption of our anthropocentric political, economic and legal worldview is that there will always be ―enough‖ Non Renewable Natural Resources (NNR‘s)

to

enable

a

brighter

future,

and

all

politics

and

economics needs to concern itself with, is how to use these NNR‘s to provide ever improving material living standards for ever-increasing numbers of our ever-expanding global population. From a broader Ecocentric59 Wild Law Finite Resource Scarcity perspective, however, beyond Peak NNR60, there is no hope for a

58

―The anthropocentric perspective considers the philosophy, processes, and activities by which natural resource inputs to a society‘s economy are converted into goods and services outputs (wealth creation). It also considers the philosophy, processes, and activities by which goods and services (wealth) are allocated among a society‘s population. The fundamental assumption underlying the prevailing anthropocentric perspective is that notwithstanding periodic temporary shortfalls, natural resource inputs and natural habitat waste absorption capacities will remain sufficient to perpetuate global industrialism indefinitely.‘ – Scarcity, Clugston Chris (pg. 127) 59 ―The ecological perspective considers natural resource inputs and natural habitat waste absorption capacities as the ultimate limiting factors governing a society‘s economic/political processes and activities, its attainable economic output (GDP) level, and its attainable level of societal wellbeing—i.e., the material living standards enjoyed by the society‘s population.‖ – Scarcity, Clugston C (127) 60 Peak NNR: ‗NNRs are finite; and as their name implies, NNR reserves are not replenished on a time scale that is relevant to humans. More unfortunately, economically viable supplies associated with the vast majority of NNRs that enable our industrialized way of life are becoming increasingly scarce, both domestically (US) and globally. While there will always be ―plenty of NNRs‖ in the ground, there will not always be ―plenty 26


brighter future, because the fundamental assumption of everincreasing

NNR‘s,

underlying

our

limited

anthropocentric

perspective is inaccurate.61 [55] Scarcity: Domestic (US) & Global NNR Scarcity Analysis: [56] Scarcity’s Domestic (US) & Global NNR Scarcity Analysis is based upon Mr. Chris Clugston‘s62 analysis of data from USGS, EIA, BEA, BLS, Fed, CBO, FBI, IEA, UN, World Bank, and countless NGOs and industry associations, and concludes in general that ‗absent some combination of immediate and drastic reductions in our

global

NNR

utilization

levels,

...

we

will

experience

escalating international and intranational conflicts during the coming

decades

over

increasingly

scarce

NNR‘s,

which

will

devolve into global societal collapse, almost certainly by the year 2050.‘63 [57] Scarcity Domestic (US) NNR Scarcity Analysis (pg.37-5064/pg 31-4165))

summarizes

domestic

(US)

criticality

and

scarcity

of economically viable NNRs‖ in the ground. In fact, there are ―no longer enough economically viable NNRs‖ in the ground to enable continuous improvement in human societal wellbeing at historical rates.‘ –Clugston, C: Scarcity 61 Clugston Chris: Scarcity: Humanity‘s Final Chapter: The realities, choices and likely outcomes associated with everincreasing non-renewable natural resource scarcity, page 4 62 Scarcity is a comprehensive, multidisciplinary assessment of the realities, choices, and likely outcomes associated with ever-increasing non-renewable natural resource (NNR) scarcity. NNRs are the fossil fuels, metals, and non-metallic minerals that enable our industrialized existence. 63 Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. ix 64 Clugston, Chris: Scarcity (Booklocker.com Inc 2012) 65 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/clugston_scarcity_pg31-55 27


associated overwhelming

with

each

of

the

majority,

68

of

89 the

analyzed 89

NNRs:

analyzed

(a)

NNRs,

An were

considered ―scarce‖ domestically (US) in 2008, immediately prior to the Great Recession; most (58) are almost certain to remain scarce permanently; (b) The US imported some quantity of 69 of the 89 analyzed NNRs in 2008; imports associated with 19 of the NNRs accounted for 100% of 2008 US supply; (c) Annual domestic (US)

extraction/production

levels

associated

with

a

sizeable

majority, 61 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, have almost certainly peaked permanently; and

(d)

Annual domestic (US) utilization

levels associated with a majority, 50 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, have likely peaked permanently. [58] Scarcity Global NNR Scarcity Analysis (pg.51-5966) (pg 41-4967) summarizes global criticality and scarcity associated with each of the 89 analyzed NNRs: (a) An overwhelming majority, 63 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, were considered ―scarce‖ globally in 2008, immediately

prior

to

the

Great

Recession;

(b)

A

significant

number, 28 of the 89 analyzed NNRs have peaked: are ―almost certain‖

to

remain

sizeable

number,

scarce

16

of

the

permanently 89

going

analyzed

forward;

NNRs,

will

and

a

―likely‖

remain scarce permanently; and (c) Global extraction/production levels

associated

with

39

of

the

89

analyzed

NNRs,

are

considered ‗at risk‘.

66 67

Clugston, Chris: Scarcity (Booklocker.com Inc 2012) http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/clugston_scarcity_pg31-55 28


[59] Scarcity’s Final Political and Economic Conclusion to Domestic (US) & Global NNR Scarcity Reality: [60] Mr. Clugston concludes that ‗Our Next Normal is Catastrophe‘, since

our

Anthropocentric

worldview

does

not

recognize

that

"from a broader ecological perspective, all human economics and politics

are

‗thrashing

irrelevant,"

at

the

to

economic

‗paraphrase

and

political

Thoreau,

we

are

branches

of

our

predicament, rather than hacking at the ecological root.‖68 [61] ―Because the underlying cause associated with our transition from prosperity to austerity is ecological (geological), not economic or political, our incessant barrage of economic and political

―fixes‖

fiscal

and

monetary

―stimulus‖

is

misguided and inconsequential. Our national economies are not ―broken‖;

they

are

―dying

of

slow

starvation‖

sufficient economically viable NNR inputs. [62] ―Our

industrial

lifestyle

paradigm,

for

lack

of

enabled

by

69

which

is

enormous quantities of finite, nonreplenishing, and increasingly scarce NNRs, is unsustainable – actually, physically impossible – going forward. [63] ―Global culminate

70

humanity‘s in

steadily

self-inflicted

deteriorating

global

societal

condition collapse,

will almost

certainly by the year 2050. We will not accept gracefully our

68 69 70

Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. 103-104 Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. 103-104 Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. 103-104 29


new normal of ever-increasing, geologically-imposed austerity; nor

will

we

suffer

population

level

degradation

associated

voluntarily

reductions with

the

and our

horrifically

material inevitable

living

painful standard

transition

to

a

sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm. [64] ―Ownership of the means of production—from private ownership to state ownership; the methods by which scarce resources are allocated—from free markets to central planning; and our forms of government—from democracy to autocracy—have no bearing on humanity‘s ultimate destiny. [65] ―All industrialized and industrializing nations, irrespective of their economic and political orientations, are unsustainable and will collapse in the not-too-distant future as a consequence of their dependence upon increasingly scarce NNRs. [66] Anthropocentric Law’s Denial of Masculine Insecurity’s Use of Penis/Womb as Weapons of War: [67] ―We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group

to

control

its

population

by

discussion,

debate,

intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an act of war.‖ - Former Municipal Court Judge Jason G. Brent [68] In Eve’s Seed: Masculine Insecurity, Metaphor, and the Shaping of History, and Eve’s Seed: Biology, the Sexes and the Course of History, Robert McElvaine described it thus: ―Karl Marx had it 30


wrong. Class has, to be sure, been a major factor in history; but class itself is a derivative concept that is based on the ultimate

causative

formulation existing

power

must

be

society

is

in

revised: the

history: The

history

sex.

history

of

Marx‘s

of

struggles

all

famous hitherto

based

on

the

division of our species into two sexes, jealousies emanating from this division, exaggerations of the differences between the sexes, misunderstandings about sexual reproductive power, and metaphors

derived

from

sex.

Together,

these

closely

related

matters constitute the most important, but largely neglected, set of motive forces in human history. Control -- or the claim of control -- over the means of reproduction has been even more fundamental

to

history

than

has

control

of

the

means

of

production... [69] In Humans: An Endangered Species71 Judge Brent challenges the world elite and his readers with two choices to: (1) Prove the author‘s facts, math, logic or conclusions wrong; (2) If unable to do so, implement his shocking birth control proposal to avoid destruction of civilization; as overpopulation and Peak Oil and NNR resource scarcity confronts regions at an accelerated pace of confrontation, conflict, and war. Judge Brent was forced to resign from the American Mensa Society, because of his views on reducing

overpopulation.

His

writings

have

so

irritated

the

Catholic Church that a Cardinal devoted an entire homily given

71

http://www.jgbrent.com/ 31


at St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York to attacking him and his ideas. [70] Judge Brent‘s Shocking Proposal: ―limit the right of any male to father only one live child and limit the right of every woman to one live birth. [..] Since survival of our species depends on the one child rule, under my proposal any attempt to evade the rule would result in death of the evader and of any second child. The rule to be fair must be absolute, without a single exception. [..] Population would continue to be reduced pursuant to the method [..] until it reached 300 million [or a number] based on the ability of the earth to provide resources for humanity to maintain an acceptable standard of living for a minimum of 25,000 years.‖ [71] Masculine Insecurity’s Greatest Weapon: Control of the Means of Reproduction: [72] 1. Houari Boumediene, President of Algeria, at the United Nations, 1974: ―The wombs of our women will give us victory.‖ [―One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.‖

(Boumediene was an ardent supporter of the ANC and

SWAPO)] [73] 2. Yasser Arafat: Palestinian Womb is his people‘s greatest asset [Arnon Soffer, a geography professor at Israel's Haifa

32


University Command

and

a

college,

lecturer first

at

the

warned

Israeli of

the

Army's

Staff

impending

and

Jewish

demographic minority in the 1980s, but was widely dismissed. He predicted Arabs would outnumber Jews in both Israel proper and the occupied territories by 2010. In February 2001, the night of his election, Sharon sent an aide to ask Soffer for a copy of his 1987 treatise about the demographic threat to Israel; it was the same study that had led Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to declare in the late 1980s that the "Palestinian womb" was his people's greatest weapon.] [74] 3. Nelson Mandela‘s ANC: ANC ‗Operation Production‘ Policy: During the ANC‘s ‗liberation struggle‘ African women were forced (1) to have sex with ANC cadres, & (2) not allowed to use contraception. Any woman who refused sex from an ANC cadre or was caught using contraception was detained, accused of being an 'Apartheid agent', given a People‘s Court trial, the sentence was usually Necklacing, incl. broken bottles shoved up their vagina72. [Johannes Harnischfeger, Witchcraft and the State in South Africa (*German version of published in Anthropopos, 95/ 72

Maki Skosana was an ANC comrade who was accused – for no observable reasons – of being an apartheid spy, given a people‘s court trial and publicly executed by necklacing in July 1985. The TRC made no effort whatsoever to investigate the motives for shoving broken glass bottles up women‘s vagina‘s who were necklaced. TRC Report: ―Moloko said her sister was burned to death with a tyre around her neck while attending the funeral of one of the youths. Her body had been scorched by fire and some broken pieces of glass had been inserted into her vagina, Moloko told the committee. Moloko added that a big rock had been thrown on her face after she had been killed.‖ http://www.doj.gov.za/trc/hrvtrans/duduza/moloko.htm 33


2000, S. 99-112): ―Especially evening assemblies girls had to attend as well: ―They would come into the house and tell us we should go. They didn't ask your mother they just said ‗come let's go.‘ You would just have to go with them. They would threaten you with their belts and ultimately you would think that if you refused, they would beat you. Our

parents were

afraid of them‖ (quoted by Delius 1996:189). All those opposing the wishes of the young men were reminded, that it was every woman‘s obligation to give birth to new ―soldiers‖, in order to replace those warriors killed in the liberation struggle. The idiom of the adolescents referred to these patriotic efforts as ―operation production‖. Because of exactly this reason it was forbidden for the girls to use contraceptives. (Delius 1996:189; Niehaus 1999:250)‖] [75] 4. New Black Panther Party: Dr. Khalid Muhammad: Kill the White Woman as the White Man‘s Military Manufacturing Center rolling out reinforcement from between her legs: In Dr. Khalid Abdul

Muhammad‘s

1993

'Kill

the

White

Man'

speech,

at

Kean

College in Union Township, New Jersey, he stated among others: ―Kill the women cause the women are the military manufacturing center; cause every nine months they lay down on their backs and reinforcement rolls out from between their legs. So shut down the military manufacturing center, by killing the white woman.‖73

73

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Abdul_Muhammad http://www.metacafe.com/watch/456363/khallid_muhammads_speech_ki ll_the_white_man/ 34


[76] 5.

Adolf

Hitler

and

the

Nazi

Party:

―The

selection

of

a

racially highly worthy wife in itself still does not necessarily mean an improvement of the race. That only comes when the right mate selection is followed by the breeding of an above-average number

of

hereditary

children. factors

For

from

what the

would

folk

the

help,

elimination if

of

bad

simultaneously

a

reproduction of the good hereditary factors was not preserved and expanded? ... The birth rate will determine the future of our folk. The number of cribs must be much larger than the number of coffins. Only then can we offer successful resistance against all arising dangers and turn into deed our right, which is due us on the basis of our leading position in Europe. … Two weapons are at the disposal of each folk in the struggle for survival: Its ability to fight and its fertility. Never forget that the ability to fight of a folk alone can never make it possible for a folk to survive into the far future, rather that the inexhaustible fountain of its fertility is also necessary."74 [77] Anthropocentric Law endorses the Absence of Procreation and Voting Licensing, to Profit from the ‘War Racket’: Human Farming of Economic & Military Cannon Fodder for the Profiteers (and their Media Pied Pipers) of the War Economy Racket. [78] ―In order to achieve this goal [of world domination], we must introduce universal suffrage beforehand, without distinctions of 74

SS Race Theory and Mate Selection Guidelines, translated from Original SS Publications by Libertarian National Socialist Green Party; original SS publication Glauben und Kampfen ("Faith and Struggle") 35


class

and

wealth.

Then

the

masses

of

people

will

decide

everything; and since it [universal suffrage] is controlled by us we will achieve through it the absolute majority, which we could never achieve if only the educated and possessing classes had the vote.‖ -- Protocols of the Elders of Zion, 10th Sitting, Wallstein Pub. House, ISBN 3-89244-191-x, p. 60 [79] ―We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.‖ -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Buck v. Bell75 [80] The Human Factory Farm War Economy Matrix: ‗When you look at a map of the world, you are not looking at countries, but farms. Farm

Management

communism,

&

fascism,

Licensing: democracy

State –

capitalism,

these

are

all

socialism, livestock

management approaches. The most productive livestock are the 75

Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) 1927 36


professionals, so the rulers fit them with an electronic dog collar called a ―license,‖ which only allows them to practice their trade on their own farm. Animal Farm Elections: To further create the illusion of freedom, the livestock are allowed to choose between a few farmers, who provide a few minor choices in how they are managed. They are never given the choice to shut down

the

farm,

and

be

truly

free.

Problem

of

modern

human

livestock ownership: challenge of ―enthusiasm.‖ Liberties are granted to the human livestock not with the goal of setting them free, but to increase their productivity. Government schools are indoctrination

pens

Anthropocentric

farm.

to

teach

Of

livestock

course,

to

intellectuals,

love

the

teachers,

artists and priests were – and are – well paid to conceal this reality. You do not have to be livestock. Take the red pill. Wake up.‘ – Stefan Molyneux: True News 13: Statism is Dead Part 3 - The Matrix76 [81] Aldous

Huxley‘s

A

Brave

New

World

Revisited,

eloquently

describes the insidious conspiracy to manipulate the masses by propaganda and lies, so as to make them controllable under the ―steadily increasing pressures of over-population and of the over-organization

imposed

by

growing

numbers

and

advancing

technology‖: ―It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison, and yet not free -- to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel 76

Stefan Molyneux: True News 13: Statism is Dead - Part 3 - The Matrix http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P772Eb63qIY 37


and act as the representatives of the national State, or of some private interest within the nation, want him to think, feel and act. There will never be such a thing as a writ of habeas mentem;

for

no

sheriff

or

jailer

can

bring

an

illegally

imprisoned mind into court, and no person whose mind had been made captive by the methods outlined in earlier articles would be in a position to complain of his captivity. The nature of psychological

compulsion

is

such

that

those

who

act

under

constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him, the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective.‖ [82] In

Why

Are

10/10/2010)

Wars

John

not

Pilger

being

Reported

describes

Honestly

journalists

(Guardian:

and

editors

confirming their role as censorship agents, along similar lines of reasoning as detailed in Dr. T. Michael Maher‘s report: How and

Why

Journalists

Avoid

the

Population

Environment

Connection, where PR News churnalists admit they are hoodwinked, but

omit

Pilger‘s

to

77

of

why

documentary

motivations father

say

for

the

public

they The

self-hoodwink/censor

War

hoodwinking

relations:

You self

Edward

Don’t

themselves.

See77

censorship Bernays,

traces back

the

to

nephew

the the of

http://johnpilger.com/dvds/the-war-you-dont-see-uk38


Sigmund Freud. In Bernays‘s 1928 book Propaganda, he described the conspiracy of manipulating the public with ‗public relations news‘

to

behave

automatonic culturally

as

politically induced

fairness)

instead

sufficient

psychologically correct

preference of

zombie for

educating

ecologically

insecure,

consumers

sycophantic

them

responsible

dumbed-down,

to

be

problem

(with

a

intellectual

rational solving

self-

citizens

(With the courage to practice transparent public airing of dirty linen dispute resolution). The PR image management / Political Correct induced suppression of their anger, creates a sterile, fake sycophantic environment, which ripens in time, when the Human Slaughterhouse Managers are ready to market their next war, marketed for great profit78 by the Churnalist Pied Pipers, as

the

citizens

PR/politically are

finally

correct given

obsessed

approval

cultural

―for

the

adherent

release

and

individuals

are

redistribution of their undifferentiated tensions‖. [83] Anthropocentric

Legal

doctrine

holds

that

issued licences - to own a gun, drive a car, practice Law, watch television,

obtain

credit,

earn

a

living

as

a

professional,

fish, hunt, sell liquor, operate a business, get married – once they

have

fulfilled

certain

skills

or

informed

consent

commitment requirements required for the particular licence. [84] If

Anthropocentric

internationally,

was

legal

theory

committed

to

within the

a

country,

or

perpetuation

of

78

The Military-Industrial-Media Complex, Norman Solomon, FAIR, July/August 2005 http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2627 39


sustainable republics and democracies; then application of its own Anthropocentric licensing principles, would require it to implement

‗Sustainable

Democracy/Republic

Licence

to

Vote‘

legislation where licences to vote are only issued to citizens whose lifestyle – in terms of procreation and consumption – is below the nations sustainable resource use carrying capacity footprint. [85] No

political

‗inalienable Military

party

right

Cannon

to

or

politician

breed‘

Fodder),

(Human

or

who

endorsed

Farming

(b)

of

corporate

(a)

the

Economic

and

or

military

unsustainable use of non-renewable natural resources; would ever be able to get elected to run a children‘s lemonade stand, let alone

the

capacity

to

implement

national

legislation

that

endorsed the long term extermination of the Democracy/Republic and its resources, for short-term corporate or socio-political status profits; in a ‗Sustainable Democracy/Republic‘ where the only citizens licensed to vote, were those whose lifestyle – in terms of procreation and consumption – was below the nations sustainable resource use carrying capacity footprint. [86] The

Anthropocentric

Legal

Matrix

-

Attorneys,

Prosecutors,

Academics and Judges - avoid implementing ‗Sustainable Democracy Licence to Vote

and Breed‘ legislation, as a result of its

endorsement of, and socio-eco-political profit from the Human

40


Farming79 of Economic and Military Cannon Fodder Racket - the breeding of surplus youth bulge80 populations, to be converted into ―dumb, stupid animal pawns‖81 cannon fodder soldier armies – ‗possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most

vicious‘

international

profiteering

racket;

where

their

‗profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in military families lives‘; by sending ―dumb, stupid animal pawns‖ cannon fodder soldier armies, as the ―high-class muscle men for Big Business, Wall Street and the bankers‖ (War is a Racket by USMC General

Smedley

D

Butler

(1881-1940));

frequently

to

fight

corporately profitable, but militarily un-winnable wars82, such as

in

Afghanistan

Afghanistan83

at

the

(General

Stanley

International

McChrystal

Institute

for

Speech

on

Strategic

Studies (IISS) in London, October 2009) and Vietnam (Col. David 79

Human Farming: Story of Your Enslavement http://youtu.be/Xbp6umQT58A 80 Demographics & Violence: Youth Bulges: Numerous reports provide details how population age structures have significant impacts on a countries stability, governance, economic development and social well-being. Put differently, countries with large populations of idle young men, known as youth bulges, account for 70 – 90 percent of all civil conflicts. Additionally a wealth of historical studies indicates that cycles of rebellion and military campaigns in the early modern and modern world tended to coincide with periods when young adults comprised an unusually large proportion of the population. Youth Bulge Reports: (1) The Shape of Things to Come: Why Age Structure Matters to a Safer More Equitable World, by Population Action International; (2) YouthQuake: Population, fertility and environment in the 21st Century, by Optimum Population Trust. 81 "Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns" -- Henry Kissinger, August 9, 2005 82 Press TV, 26 May 2011: US military suicide rate exceeds combat fatalities http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4SrziRCqyE 83 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1KGnacqfMc 41


Hackworth: About Face: The Odyssey of an American Warrior and the subsequent Brave Men.) [87] Sustainable Security: [88] Sustainable

Security

‗Sustainability

is

is

founded

Security‘

(US

on

the

ARMY

principle

STRATEGY

that

FOR

THE

ENVIRONMENT, 24 Oct 200684); which requires confronting the – ‗There is no resource scarcity security without sustainability‘ - reality that in the absence of a new moral order (1996: US Army War College: Parameters: The Culture of Future Conflict85) where

Ecocentric

procreation

and

laws

are

resource

implemented

utilization

to

regulate

behaviour,

to

human ensure

84

SCARCITY & SECURITY: ―Resource Scarcity contributes to Global Instability. There is No Security without Sustainability / Sustainability is Security‖ - US ARMY STRATEGY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, Environment, Safety & Occupational Health: Richard Murphy, Assistant for Sustainability, 24 Oct 2006 http://www.cecer.army.mil/techreports/ERDC-CERL_TR-079/Session%20I/RichardMurphy.pdf 85 1996: US Army War College: Parameters: The Culture of Future Conflict: Overpopulation & Resource Scarcity will be the Direct Cause of Confrontation, Conflict, and War: Major Ralph Peters | US Army War College: Parameters | Winter 1995-96, pp. 18-27.: ―Resource scarcity will be a direct cause of confrontation, conflict, and war. The struggle to maintain access to critical resources will spark local and regional conflicts that will evolve into the most frequent conventional wars of the next century. Gross overpopulation will destroy fragile possibilities for progress in much of the non-Western world, and much of this problem is the West's fault. .. Basic resources will prove inadequate for populations exploding beyond natural limits, and we may discover truths about ourselves that we do not wish to know. In the end, the greatest challenge may be to our moral order.‖ 42


sustainability86; confront

‗overpopulation

regions

at

an

and

accelerated

resource

scarcity

pace

confrontation,

of

will

conflict, and war in this [2010-2020] decade‘ (US ARMY & TRADOC UNIFIED QUEST 2012: US Army Unified Quest 2012 Fact Sheet87) and (1996: US Army War College: Parameters: The Culture of Future Conflict88)

and

(2000:

CIA

&

Pentagon

on

Overpopulation

and

Resource Scarcity as Sources for Resource Wars89). [89] Media’s Self-Censorship of the Ecocentric Perspective: [90] Research perspective

about in

the

their

media‘s daily

self

censorship

reporting,

was

of

Ecocentric

conducted

by

T.

Michael Maher, Ph.D. (Journalism), Professor and Head of the Dept. of Communication at the University of Louisiana, in his (A)

Ph.D.

Population

dissertation: Issue,

Anthropocentrism (ii)

Population:

at

Media

Framing

which

includes

World

Population

The

Once

and

and

(i)

Salience The

Conferences

Future

of

the

Triumph

of

(1999),

and

Environmental

Crisis

(1995); and (B) his study: How and Why Journalists Avoid the

86

The term ―sustainable‖ pertains both to ―natural resource utilization behavior‖ and to ―a societal condition‖. Sustainable natural resource utilization behavior and sustainable human societies exist in perpetuity—indefinitely—in the absence of an aborting act of Nature. 87 www.army.mil/article/68379/Unified_Quest_2012___Fact_Sheet/ 88 1996: US Army War College: Parameters: The Culture of Future Conflict: Overpopulation & Resource Scarcity will be the Direct Cause of Confrontation, Conflict, and War: Major Ralph Peters | US Army War College: Parameters | Winter 1995-96, pp. 18-27. 89 2000: Nightline: Ted Koppel: (1) CIA & Pentagon on Overpopulation: www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OJeUAx0y-g; (2) CIA & Pentagon on Resource Wars: www.youtube.com/watch?v=s22yr-Fvl5Q 43


Population-Environment

(PDF90),

Connection

published

in

Population and Environment, Volume 18, Number 4, March 1977. [91] Case

Study

of

Media

Censorship

of

Ecocentric

Wild

Law

Sustainable Security Problem Solving Arguments in resource-war / scarcity-security court disputes: [92] SA Concourt: Robert McBride vs. The Citizen: [93] The

applicant

was

admitted

to

the

Constitutional

Court

proceedings as First Amicus, on 03 May 2012, as follows: ―Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an amicus curiae‖ (PDF91). The primary parties were appealing and cross-appealing a judgement of the Supreme Court

of

Appeal

(―SCA‖),

Case:

277/2008,

regarding,

among

others, the interpretation of the meaning of ‗amnesty‘ in the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995 (―TRC Act‖). The SCA Judgement had ruled on behalf of McBride, that McBride‘s 1986 Umkhonto we Sizwe bombing of Magoo's Bar / "Why Not" Restaurant in Durban, car-bomb terrorism conviction and sentence was expunged from all official records, by his receipt of TRC amnesty, and also that ―the conviction shall for all purposes… be deemed not to have taken place.‖ Consequently reporting, by The Citizen, referring to McBride as a ‗murderer‘ was considered as ‗defamation‘, because it was false.

90 91

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100718_rhwr-concourt-amicus 44


[94] Two expert witness affidavits were submitted in support of the Applicants (PDF93),

Amicus

Curiae

supporting

the

(PDF92): Radical

One

from

Honesty

Dr.

Brad

argument

Blanton

of

South

Africa‘s Truth and Reconciliation fraud; and the second one from Dr.

Michael

Maher

(PDF94),

population-environment

on

the

media‘s

connection95,

censorship

thereby

driving

of

the

public

ignorance of Ecocentric perspective to our social, political and economic problems, in this Concourt argument: South Africa‘s Truth and Reconciliation Fraud and its consequences. [95] Applicant‘s Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security Amicus was

titled:

Radical

interpretation argued that

of

TRC

Honesty Social

Population Contract

Policy and

the

Common

Sense

Amicus

brief

South Africa‘s Truth and Reconciliation Hearings

were a fraud, as a result of their Anthropocentric Left vs. Right / white vs. black wing blame game focus, and absence of an Ecocentric root cause problem solving focus. Arguments included: (1) The TRC Social Contract avoids providing key definitions, is vague

and

ambiguous

on

fundamental

culturally

conflicting

concepts, such as ‗forgiveness‘, ‗closure‘, ‗national unity‘, ‗reconciliation‘ etc. (2) The definition and meaning of Amnesty was changed, subsequent to Interim Constitution, and prior to TRC Act, without due Process to all parties; (3) SA‘s TRC Fraud 92

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100718_rhwr-concourt-amicus http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100518_cc2310_affid-bblanton 94 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/100522_concourt-expwitnesstmmaher 95 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection 93

45


analysis in accordance with Just War Principles: * having a just cause, * being a last resort, * declared by proper authority, * possessing right intention, * reasonable chance of success, and *

using

proportional

force.

The

Amicus

Analysis

of

Evidence

concludes: The ANC had no Proper Authority, No Right Intention, No Reasonable Prospects of Just War Success, its Desired End was not proportional to the Means Used; and its declaration of war was not a last resort. Finally, under Post Bellum principles, the ANC‘s Promises of Amnesty were reneged upon, destroying all trust in future multi-cultural political agreements for minority cultures. Consequently: Truth and Reconciliation was not seen to be done. The Commission was biased, skewed and not remotely interested in addressing root cause problems of ecological and overpopulation understanding perspectives,

/

resource

scarcity

for

a

better

holistic

of Apartheid violence, nor in rainbow struggle ignoring

blatantly

obvious

enquiries

into

population demographic causes of violence, etc. Consequently in the absence of a free and fair enquiry into Apartheid and AntiApartheid violence, ‗CRIME OF APARTHEID‘ WAS A FALSIFICATION OF HISTORY. [96] The media extensively reported upon all Left vs. Right wing arguments

lodged

before

the

court,

including

other

Amici

arguments made by Anthropocentric Left vs. Right Wing Second to Fifth

Amici

(2:

Freedom

of

Expression

Institute;

3:

The

SA

National Editors Forum; 4: Joyce Sibanyoni Mbizana; 5: Mbasa

46


Mxenge),

except

for

the

RH

Ecofeminist

Ecocentric

Wild

Law

Sustainable Security arguments of Applicant, which were totally censored and unreported. [97] SA HC & SCA: Afriforum vs. Julius Malema: [98] The Applicant filed an application to proceed as Amicus Curiae (PDF96) in the South Gauteng Equality Court (07-2010 EQ JHB). The dispute

was

between

Right

Wing

Afriforum

and

Transvaal

Agricultural Union (TAU) against Left Wing Mr. Julius Malema, leader of the African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL), for publicly singing ‗Kill the Boer‘.

Afriforum

/

TAU

argued

among others, that the ‗Kill the Boer‘ words communicated are constitutionally prohibited for inciting harm and hatred against whites and farmers; that a reasonable person would consider the words to be intended to hurt, harm or incite hatred; and that Mr. Malema is an influential public figure whose utterances are widely reported. Malema and the ANC argued among others that there are many meanings for the words ‗Kill the Boer‘, that the Plaintiffs

are

inaccurately

interpreting

the

words

including

misinterpreting Mr. Malema‘s intentions when he sings the words ‗Kill the Boer‘. The words do not encourage farm murders, or hatred towards farmers; that their freedom of speech to sing ‗Kill the Boer‘ should not be infringed and that there should be a national dialogue about the song "awudubhule ibhunu" or "shoot the boer", given that some people had been offended by it.

96

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/110419__eq-07-10 47


[99] The applicant argued that the dispute between the primary parties

was

a

direct

result

of

South

Africa‘s

Truth

and

Reconciliation Fraud. The TRC‘s Fraud failed to address the root ecological (population growth vs. resource depletion) and lack of

psychological

integrity

causes

of

South

Africa‘s

racial

animosity and violence. In the absence of truly transparent root cause problem solving Truth and Reconciliation Hearings, the left vs. right wing and black vs. white polarisation cultural friction war would escalate as resource depletion and the ANC‘s induced

welfare-brood-sow-vote-bribery

collided; minority

and

the

only

solutions

with

any

self

preservation

population

for

explosion

providing

security,

the

would

white be

to

either: (A) Implement the 23 April 1994 Accord on Afrikaner Self-Determination Sanguinis

for

a

Repatriation

of

Boer

Volkstaat;

‗Settlers‘

to

and/or

European

(B)

Jus

Progenitor

Nations. [100] One

of

the

applicant‘s

arguments

to

substantiate

South

Africa‘s Truth and Reconciliation Fraud was the TRC‘s failure to examine

ecological

and

demographic

breeding

war

sources

for

Apartheids violence. The TRC failed to ask the question whether the ANC could have won their struggle against Apartheid nonviolently, by demonstrating their honourable Just War Just Cause Population applicant

Policy

Intentions

submitted

International

numerous

Anti-Apartheid

to

end

their

requests

to

Organisations

Breeding

War?

The

South

African

and

for

evidence,

to

48


submit to the court, that the ANC‘s ‗liberation struggle‘ was honourably a Just War: Prior

to

the

ANC‘s

M-Plan

declaration

of

War

against

Apartheid: Did any EU Anti-Apartheid Organisation advise the

ANC

or

any

SA

Anti-Apartheid

Organisation

to

avoid/suspend the violent ‗liberation struggle ‘campaign against

the

Apartheid

violent

cultural

Goverment,

and

political

campaign

and

to

launch to

a

stop

nonthe

African ‗swart gevaar‘ breeding-war population explosion, to demonstrate the ANC‘s honourable Just War Just Cause Intentions? If (a) it was abundantly clear that the major fundamental motive for establishing Apartheid was fear of the ‗swart gevaar‘;

(2)

Apartheid

Officials

and

citizens

‗swart

gevaar‘ population policy fears are not only legally and ecologically justifiable, but common sense; (3) the ANC and

Anti-Apartheid

movement

were

culturally

honourably

concerned with Just War practices; (4) why did the ANC not consider launching a non-violent cultural and political campaign to stop their African ‗swart gevaar‘ breeding-war population explosion, to demonstrate their honourable Just War

Just

Cause

Intentions

to

‗swart

gevaar‘

Apartheid

Officials and citizens? [101] The Anthropocentric Left vs. Right Wing Blame Game Patriarchal Parasitism Arguments of the proceedings were televised live on South African E-News, and reported on, by all South African media, including International Media; in the context of the Left vs.

Right

Wing

Blame

Game

Information/Propaganda

War.

The

Applicants arguments and application were totally ignored and censored by all media.

49


[102] In Afri-Forum and Another v Malema and Others (20968/2010) [2011] ZAEQC 2; 2011 (6) SA 240 (EqC); [2011] 4 All SA 293 (EqC); 2011 (12) BCLR 1289 (EqC) (12 September 2011)97; Judge Lamont‘s judgement confirmed that: [48] Lara Johnstone, the sole member of an entity known as the Radical Honesty Culture and Religion delivered a number of documents by electronic transmission. I tabled the documents at the hearing and they form part of the record. [103] The matter was subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal by the primary parties: Afriforum, Malema and the ANC. Applicant again applied to the court to proceed as Amicus Curiae (PDF98), repeating the arguments submitted to the Equality Court. [104] On 22 May 2012 the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled (PDF99) that "It does not appear, from the reading of the documents forming part of your application, that any value will be added to the arguments to be made by the parties legal representatives and thus

will

not

be

useful

to

the

court.

The

application

is

accordingly refused." [105] On 18 July 2012, applicant filed an application for leave to approach

97 98 99

the

Constitutional

Court,

for

review

of

the

SCA‘s

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAEQC/2011/2.html http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/111230_sca81511 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120522_sca 50


denial of applicants Amicus application ―IF:

Supreme

Court

of

Appeals

(PDF100)

Values

arguing that

endorse

EcoFeminist

Sustainable Democracy Transparency TruthSeeking Problem Solving: Applicant Should be Approved as an Amicus Curiae‖ since ―no Primary

Party

Represents

Radical

Honesty

EcoFeminist

Problem

Solving Values‖ [106] The

Supreme

Court

of

Appeal

have

not

yet

ruled

on

the

applicant‘s 18 July 2012 application for leave to approach the Constitutional Court, for review of SCA‘s denial of applicants Amicus application. [107] Once again South African media extensively reported upon all Left vs. Right wing Patriarchal Anthropocentric arguments lodged before the Equality court and later the Supreme Court of Appeal, while totally censoring the reality of an Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable

Security

argument

having

been

made

in

the

proceedings, let alone the content of the Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security arguments. [108] NO: Kingdom of Norway vs. Anders Breivik: [109] The Applicant has filed three RH Ecofeminist Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security applications to Norwegian courts; and notified

over

journalists

and

1,000

Norwegian

editors

of

and

the

International

applications.

European

All

three

applications were ignored by the court authorities and presiding Judicial officials, and as a result were filed as complaints to 100

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120718_sca_815-11 51


the Parliamentary Ombudsman (Case 2012-1943) and the Secretariat for the Supervisory Committee for Judges (Judge Wenche Arntzen: 12-072; Chief Justice Tore Schei: 12-073). On 15 April 2012, applicant filed an application to Oslo District Court, for an order to (1) proceed as Amicus Curiae Breivik

(PDF101); and

and

(2)

Applicant

Amend

to

the

include

Charges Treason

Against in

Mr.

terms

of

Article 85 of Norwegian Constitution, and if found guilty, in a free and fair trial, equivalent to the trial given to Nelson Mandela by the Apartheid government; to be executed by firing squad. [As explained to Mr. Breivik: ―You are willing to die for your ideological beliefs, for saving your people and your culture; I am willing to risk death, to challenge your country to give you a free and fair trial,

so

that

we

can

examine

the

truth

about

your

evidence.‖102] [110] On 10 May 2012, applicant filed an application for review (PDF103)

of

the

Oslo

District

Courts

refusal

to

provide

a

101

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120414_amicus ―Finally to me honour means you don‘t ask someone to do something you are not willing to do yourself. If I ask you to put yourself forward to be charged with treason and the death penalty, then I demonstrate my integrity, seriousness and commitment to the request, by asking of myself the same consequences. You are willing to die for your ideological beliefs, for saving your people and your culture; I am willing to risk death, to challenge your country to give you a free and fair trial, so that we can examine the truth about your evidence. I don‘t doubt your sincere belief that the evidence you wish to bring before the court is as serious as you believe it to be. My worldview seriously doubts certain of your allegations and perspectives; but I am willing to put my perspectives to the serious test. I would be happy to risk death in support of seeking the truth and to encourage others to support the rule of law, particularly for those whom they consider their enemies.‖ – 13 Aug 2012 RH Letter to Mr. Breivik 103 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120510_nsc-rev 102

52


response

to

the

applicants

Amicus

application;

including

a

request for an Order that the Norwegian Ministry of Culture act in

accordance

to

European

Court

of

Human

Rights

ruling

in

Lithgow & others v. United Kingdom, and clarify in adequately accessible and sufficiently precise statement; whether Norway is (A)

a

‗Children

of

the

Rainbow‘

State

legally

committed

to

Multiculturalism, providing all cultures their right to invoke cultural law and hence granting the Applicant her rights to invoke Radical Honoursty cultural law; or (B) a Monocultural Indigenous European Supremacy Legal Hegemonic State, and that the Labour Party Immigration policy is a tactic to maintain their

grip

on

power,

by

importing

Non-Western

immigrants

as

Labour Party vote-fodder. [111] Both

the

Amicus

and

Review

applications

were

ignored

by

respectively the Oslo District Court (Judge Wenche Arntzen: Case 12-072104) and the Norway Supreme Court (Justice Tore Schei: Case 12-073105), Secretariat

and for

subsequent the

complaints

Supervisory

were

Committee

filed for

with

the

Judges,

for

violation of the applicants right of due process free and fair hearing

(receipt

of

case

number,

hearing

of

eligibility

of

argument) for her applications.

104

http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-072-judge-wenchearntzen.html 105 http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/12-073-justice-toreschei.html 53


[112] Subsequent to the Oslo District Court‘s 24 August Judgement, finding Mr. Breivik sane and guilty, the applicant filed a RH Ecofeminist Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security application for

Review106

Judgement,

of

parts

specifically

of

the

for

Patriarchal

orders

to

Anthropocentric

[A.1]

Set

Aside

the

Judgements ‗Necessity (Nødrett) Ruling‘; and [A.2] Set Aside Defendant‘s District

Conviction

Court

for

(Finding

hearing

of

of

Guilt)

Further

and

Remit

Evidence

to

to

Oslo

conclude

Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry, and to ... [B] Set Aside the Judgements Failure to disclose the pending

Judicial

Ethics

violation

complaint

against

Rettens

Leder: Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, filed on 06 June 2012 to the Secretariat

for

the

Supervisory

Committee

for

Judges,

as

a

violation of Aarhus Convention Article 3.(3)(4)(5) principles, and general ECHR public accountability Transparency (Lithgow & others v United Kingdom)

principles.

[113] The grounds for the application being that: [A.1.a] Necessity Judgement fails to provide any necessity criminal provisions that

prohibit

Necessity;

killing

[A.1.b]

of

Government

Necessity

Judgement

Officials Ignores

in that

case

of

Criminal

Necessity provisions do not prohibit the killing of Government Officials in case of objective and subjective Necessity; [A.1.c] Necessity related

Judgements

criminal

law

Erroneous provisions

interpretation and

of

Necessity

international

necessity

106

http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/27-aug-12-reviewapplic.html 54


related human rights law; [A.1.d] Necessity and Guilt Judgements Failure to conduct required Objective and Subjective Tests for Defendant‘s

Necessity

Defence;

[A.1.e]

Necessity

and

Guilt

Judgements Absence of Objective and Subjective Test Enquiry and Conclusions Renders it Inadequate; [A.1.f] Necessity and Guilt Judgements Absence of Clarification Upon which party the Onus of Proof lies in a Case of Necessity; and how or why their evidence was insufficient renders the Judgements Conclusions inadequate; [A.1.g] Necessity and Guilt Judgements Absence of Objective and Subjective

Test

Enquiry

and

Conclusions

Renders

it

a

Discriminatory Precedent; [A.1.i] Necessity Judgements ‗Extreme Political Objectives‘ conclusion is unsupported in the Absence of Objective and Subjective Necessity Test; and is a Masculine (Reason and Logic) Insecurity Left vs. Right Wing Blame Game Parasite Leeching Polarization – not a Matriarchal Ecological and

Psychological

Integrity

Root

Cause

Problem

Solving

conclusion. [114] The Ecocentric Sustainable Security Wild Law focused arguments being

that

the

Courts

Judgement

of

Breivik

-

like

most

Patriarchal Anthropocentric legalism - is about Left vs. Right Wing

Blame

transparent

Game

polarization

root

cause

and

problem

parasitism, solving,

which

not

about

requires

confronting the ecological and lack of psychological integrity (transparency) root causes of our disputes.

55


[115]

When the court denies Breivik his right to an objective and

subjective examination of his necessity defence, giving him a rubber

stamp

of

‗guilt‘;

this

reinforces

Breivik‘s

argument

about the so-called ‗Corrupt Multicultural Feminist State‘; and rewards his Ego Anthropocentric Patriarchal parasitic desire for greater Left vs. Right wing blame game polarization. [116] What Breivik fears more than an insanity ruling, is a free and fair trial where his Anti-Islam arguments are given an objective and subjective examination, not only from within the Left Wing vs.

Right

Wing

blame

game

Anthropocentric

worldview,

but

particularly from an Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security worldview that examines both (1) the ecological and demographic resource

reality

foundations

of

the

Europe

Titanic

Islam

iceberg dispute; as well as (2) Masculine Insecurity and lack of psychological

integrity

Anthropocentric

use

of

avoidance

women

as

of

the

Patriarchal

human-factory-farming-cannon-

fodder-brood-sows for their Left vs. Right Wing profiteering from their Human Farming Tragedy of the Commons breeding war resource wars. [117] Finally, denying Breivik his ‗Necessity‘ Defence Right to an Objective

and

Subjective

Test

of

his

Evidence

sets

horrific

Precedent for denying other Activists, including future Decisive Ecological Warfare107 Deep Green Resistance Eco-Warrior Necessity Activists their Necessity Test Rights.

107

Decisive Ecological Warfare: deepgreenresistance.org/dew/ 56


[118] Further

argument

Disobedience

includes

Necessity

dozens

Defence

of

Cases

Common

which

Law

have

and

Civil

resulted

in

Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing; as well as

Military

Command

Necessity‘s

Trial

and

cases

(2)

of

(1)

Generaloberst

Nuremberg Lothar

German

Rendulic,

High Armed

Forces Commander North, who commanded the Nazi Forces in Norway, and

who

because military

was

acquitted

the

Tribunal‘s

necessity

by

the

found

mandated

Tribunal

on

various

―reasonable

his

orders,‖

his for

charges,

belief ―the

that

complete

destruction of all shelter and means of existence in, and the total

evacuation

of

the

entire

civilian

population

of

the

northern Norwegian province of Finmark...‖, ―while still others were summarily shot for refusing to leave their homeland - in all, the thoroughness and brutality of this evacuation left some 61,000

men,

women,

and

children

homeless,

starving

and

destitute‖; whose case offers one of the few adjudicated views of

what

constitutes

military

necessity;

and

resulted

in

the

Rendulic Rule, which emphasizes the importance of the Subjective Test, which is still applied in current Military doctrine. [119] Initially the Supreme Court Registrar refused to respond to the application either with a case number, or clarify their reasons Applicant

for

failure

filed

a

to

provide

complaint

of

a

slow

case

number,

whereupon

case

processing

to

the

Parliamentary Ombudsman on 02 September 2012.

57


[120] On 10 September the Secretary General of the Supreme Court: Gunnar Bergby responded108 refusing to process my Application for Review, citing Section 306109 of the Norwegian Criminal Procedure Act110,

stating

that

―According

to

this

regulation,

1st

paragraph, the parties may appeal against a criminal judgment rendered by the district or appellate court. Persons or legal entities that are not parties to the case are not given the right of appeal. Mr. Anders Behring Breivik and the prosecution authority are the only parties in the specific case mentioned above, and the right of appeal is constricted to these.‖ [121] On

11

September

2012,

Applicant

responded111

to

Secretary

General Bergby that her Application was not an Appeal, but one of Review; and that Applicant had legal standing in accordance to-among

others-Criminal

Procedure

Act

Section

377:

―Interlocutory Appeal: An interlocutory appeal may be brought against a court order or decision by any person who is affected thereby …‖; read in conjunction with: (1) ECHR: ARTICLE 13: Right

to

Prohibition Standi

/

an

effective

of Legal

remedy;

discrimination. Standing

are

and

(2)

ECHR:

Furthermore, not

for

ARTICLE

matters

Court

of

14: Locus

Registrars

or

108

http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/11-sept-legalstanding.html 109 "Section 306: Appeals against judgements of the District Court or the Court of Appeal may be brought by the parties to the appellate court…." 110 http://www.ub.uio.no/ujur/ulovdata/lov-19810522-025-eng.pdf 111 http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/11-sept-legalstanding.html 58


Secretary Generals to decide upon, but for courts to enquire into, if the matter is raised by any respondents, as an issue in dispute. Applicant requested Secretary General Bergby provide Applicant with the relevant statutory authority that allowed the Secretary General to make a ruling on locus standi, to deny an applicant access to a court, for an impartial enquiry into the matter. Legal Standing: Legal Interest: I am an Ecofeminist Political Necessity Activist, who has an interest in ensuring that all political activists from all ideologies, religions, races, cultures who plead to political

or

military

necessity

have

their

‗necessity‘

evidence examined by the court, in terms of an objective and

subjective

test

of

such

‗necessity

evidence‘;

the

results of such an enquiry being used to make the final determination as to the accused‘s guilt or innocence, or mitigation or aggravation of sentencing. Mr. Breivik‘s trial was the most high profile necessity trial on the world stage, for decades. If Mr. Breivik wants to deny himself and other White Nationalists, their right to the court conducting a full impartial enquiry into their necessity evidence, by conducting a subjective and objective test thereof; then that is Mr. Breivik and White Nationalists right... [and] should not be allowed to set a precedent where environmental, immigrant, religious or other necessity activists are also denied their right to

an

objective

necessity

and

evidence,

subjective

just

because

examination one

white

of

their

nationalist

chooses to become a martyr, with the enthusiastic support of

the

Oslo

District

Court

and

Norwegian

Prosecutory

authorities.

59


.. it is my assertion that the ‗Nodrett/Necessity‘ ruling in

the

Oslo

currently

District

stands

Court:

Breivik

discriminates

judgement

against

as

other

it

future

necessity activists, by setting a precedent whereby they can be denied (or can due to ignorance deny themselves, by lacking the knowledge to assert their right thereto); an objective and subjective examination of their necessity evidence. My application for review is accordingly to demand the right to an effective remedy, to amend this discriminatory necessity

ruling

in

the

Oslo

District

Court‘s

Breivik

judgement, from affecting other necessity activists. [122] The following media have been informed112 of the Application for

Review

of

the

Breivik

Judgement:

Chicago

Sun-Times

and

Reason Magazine; The Globe and Mail; Christian Science Monitor; Pakistan: The News; National Post; Copenhagen Post; Bangladesh: The

Daily

Statesman,

Star; Sky

Foreign

News,

The

Policy;

IceNews;

Washington

The

Guardian;

ABC

News,

Post,

New

Jakarta

Post, Salt Lake Tribune, Sydney Morning Herald. [123] On the morning of 07 September the following Norwegian Foreign Press Association members113 were informed of the Application for Review

of

Presse,

Al

the

Breivik

Arabiya,

Al

Judgement: Jazeera,

Dawat

Media,

Associated

Agence

Press,

France

Bloomberg

News, Al-Baghdidia, Die Welt, Middle East News Agency (MENA), Itar

Tass,

Zeitung,

Politika, Swiss

BBC,

JB

Broadcasting

Ecologico,

Xinhua,

Company,

Financial

Aargauer Times

112

http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/edletters-errors.html 113 http://ecofeminist-vbreivik.weebly.com/1/post/2012/09/120907_nfpa-bj.html 60


Deutschland, Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, Development Today, RUV Islands Radio, RTV 21, TV Azteca, GPD News Agency, Himalayan Times, News and Views from Norway, Gazeta Wyborcza, TSF Radio Noticias,

Polska

Times,

Reuters,

Radio

Nacional

de

Espana,

Sveriges Radio, Svenska Dagbladet, SVT Nyheter, Iraq National News Agency, etc.; who declined to report on the matter. [124] On the evening of 07 September, Associated published a story with a headline, published114 by among others Washington Post, ABC News, FoxNews, etc; as variations of ―Breivik Case Formally Over/Ended‖.

Associated Press and many of the publications who

published the Associated Press story were contacted to provide them with evidence of the (A) Application for Review; and (B) correspondence from Secretary General Bergby and the Applicants response thereto; requesting that they publish a correction115. There

has

been

no

response

from

Associated

Press,

to

the

application

to

the

request. [125] Attitude

of

the

parties

in

the

main

Applicants admission: [126] The applicant is unaware of the respondents attitude to the Applicants possible admission as an Amicus. [127] The relief that ought to be granted to the Applicant in this application:

114 115

http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/edletters-errors.html http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/edletters-errors.html 61


[128] The Applicant submits it is in the Courts interests to hear an Ecocentric perspective on these matters, hence to issue: 1. An

Order

to

approve

the

Applicant,

to

Appear

Pro

Se

(propria persona / pro per). 2. An Order to approve the Applicant as an Ecocentri Amici Curiae in the above proceedings in the form of written submissions in accordance with Rule 15.4: Amicus Curiae Briefs, of the Rules of Court. [129] Pursuant

to

28

U.S.C

ยง

1746,

I

declare

under

penalty

of

perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed this 13th day of September, 2012 George, South Africa

_____________________ Lara Johnstone

62


CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 24 (d)

I hereby certify that this Amicus Motion and Affidavit: 1. May not comply with the type-volume limitation for Motions for Leave to Proceed as an Amicus because the Applicant is unclear of the requirements for such motions (Does a Motion qualify as a Brief?); however the Applicant requests leniency in terms of Rule 33, in the event her Motion is over the required length. The Motion contains a total of 542 words and 137 lines; the Affidavit contains a total of 11,226 number of words / 1,316 number of lines of text. 2. Complies with typeface and type style requirements of Rule 37 because it was prepared in a monospace typeface using Microsoft Word Version 2007 with a 12-point Courier New font.

George, South Africa 14 September 2012

___________________________ LARA JOHNSTONE, Pro Se PO Box 4052, George, 6539 South Africa Tel/Fax: (044) 870 7239 habeusmentem@mweb.co.za


CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE I certify that the original was electronically filed to efiling@armfor.uscourts.gov on 14 September 2012, and contemporaneously served electronically on Respondents: (i) Petitioner Appellant’s Counsel: Mr. Shayana D. Kadilal at shanek@ccrjustice.org, (ii) Respondent Appellee’s Counsel Captain Chad M. Fisher at Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil and (iii) First Amicus Counsel: Mr. Gregg P. Leslie at gleslie@rcfp.org. George, South Africa 14 September 2012

___________________________ LARA JOHNSTONE, Pro Se PO Box 4052, George, 6539 South Africa Tel/Fax: (044) 870 7239 habeusmentem@mweb.co.za

12-09-14: CCR v USA: USCA 12-8027/AR: EcoCentric Amicus Application  

12-09-14: CCR v USA: USCA 12-8027/AR: EcoCentric Amicus Application

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you