2) Ola og Kari skal lære å drikke smart (By KNUT H. LEKNES) 7 June 2005
3) Slanket seg på McDonald's (By Morten Andersen) 2 March 2005
4) Tiltalt for drap på 27 kvinner (Trond Eide) 26 May 2005
5) Fugleinfluensa - verdens mest alvorlige trussel i dag? (JENS ULLTVEIT-MOE)
11 November 2005
6) Luftballong brant opp (EIVIND SØRLIE) 25 August 2007
7) Canadas metropol (Reprinted from Lonely Planet) 13 March 2006
8) Vegvesenet får alkolås i alle tjenestebiler (By NTB) 26 September 2006
9) Cheney antyder at han kunne støtte tortur (Author unknown) 28 October 2006
10) Flyktninge-suksessen (LARS NEHRU SAND) 28April 2006
In this story the Norwegian journalist writes, "Canadas ambassade i London." Canada has what is called a High Commission in London. Between British Commonwealth countries (Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand, etc.) there are High Commissioners and High Commissions. What this journalist writes is not the correct terminology. Two e-mails were sent to notify the journalist of his mistake, but a reply was never received.
11) Forsvunnet kart åpnerfor norsk krav i Canada (MORTEN ANDERSEN)
18 March 2007
"Sverdrup wanted Norway's flag to wave in the [Canadian] North, but he settled for $67,000 [CAN$] Instead (By Randy Boswell - The Ottawa Citizen Saturday, Nov.15, 2003)"The author of a new book about Canada's quest for Arctic sovereignty has unearthed letters from the 1930s that shed new light on how Canada acquired three major islands from the Norwegian explorer who had discovered and claimed them for his own country. Historian Gerry Kenney says the documents make clear for the first time that Canada essentially purchased the islands -- covering a total area larger than Nova Scotia -- for $67,000, in a thinly disguised cash-for-land deal aimed at maintaining the appearance of unchallenged Canadian control over its northern frontier.The islands were discovered during an 1898-1902 Arctic expedition led by the Norwegian explorer Otto Sverdrup. He had dreamed, he once wrote, of journeying to the "many white spaces on the map which I was glad of an opportunity of colouring with the Norwegian colours."To this day they are known as the Sverdrup Islands, and each of them was named after one of the expedition's chief sponsors: the Norwegian consul Axel Heiberg, and two brothers from a wealthy brewing family, Ellef and Amund Ringnes.Last week, Canada Post and its Norwegian counterpart announced an upcoming joint issue of stamps commemorating the 150th anniversary of Sverdrup's birth, his Arctic discoveries and the "common bond" between Canada and Norway that his expedition symbolizes.But when the islands were found more than a century ago, much different feelings were in play. Sverdrup's discoveries shocked the Canadian government, and officials in a host of ministries -- not to mention (Canadian) prime minister Wilfrid Laurier -- became concerned about the strength of our territorial claims in the Arctic. Britain's possessions in the far North had been transferred to this country in 1880, but Canada had done almost nothing to assert its control over the vast region. Having a Norwegian explorer announce the discovery of new lands in Canada's North was an embarrassment and a wake-up call.Several Canadian expeditions were organized in the early 1900s to help cement this country's avowed ownership of hundreds of Arctic islands. Those voyages and their leaders are at the centre of Mr. Kenney's book, Ships of Wood and Men of Iron, which is to be published early next year.Canada even devised what it called "the sector principle" to attempt to justify its supposed sovereignty over all territory between the northern coast of mainland Canada and the North Pole.But apart from the Soviet Union, which had its own expansive northern coastline, no other country accepted the logic of the sector principle. Norway and other nations argued that the discovery, occupation and use of land were more important features of sovereignty than geographical geometry.By the 1920s, a worrisome question mark still hung over the Sverdrup Islands. In Norway, the aging Sverdrup was pushing his government to send police patrols to the islands as a demonstration that they were, in fact, Norwegian possessions.The Canadian government -- like Norway -- was reluctant to spend much money to assert sovereignty over islands with little apparent value. The islands, partly covered by glaciers, were home to no Inuit at that time, no significant numbers of muskox or other Arctic wildlife and no known mineral deposits worth retrieving.But allowing Norway a territorial foothold in North America was viewed as an unwanted political complication for Canada. And acknowledging Norwegian sovereignty over the islands might have undermined other Canadian claims in the Arctic at a time when Americans and Scandinavians were regularly exploring the polar region without seeking permission from Canada.So, in the mid-1920s, Norway and Canada began formal discussions about the sovereignty of the Sverdrup Islands. Unwilling to spend money to assert its control over such remote and barren lands, but under pressure from Sverdrup not to renounce ownership, Norway gradually began pushing for a negotiated settlement.It wanted Canada to pay Sverdrup, the Norwegian government and other sponsors of the 1898-1902 expedition a total of $100,000 in exchange for Norway assenting to Canadian sovereignty. Canada initially offered $25,000 but wanted Norway to accept the validity of the sector principle.In the end, Norway agreed to recognize Canadian sovereignty over the islands but emphasized this was "in no way based on any sanction whatever of what is named 'the sector principle.'"In return, Canada agreed to pay Sverdrup $67,000. Ostensibly, the payment would be made for Sverdrup's original journals and maps. The money would not be publicized as being part of an exchange that gave Canada unchallenged title to the Sverdrup Islands.Now, Mr. Kenney says he's found unassailable proof that Canada basically bought sovereignty of the islands."Although the official record indicates that the grant to Sverdrup was for the delivery of his original maps, records and diaries, several pieces of official correspondence show that Canada was in fact purchasing much more than mere pieces of paper," Mr. Kenney writes. "It was to maintain a continuous, unbroken thread of sovereignty from 1880, when the British Crown ceded the Arctic to Canada, right through to 1930 and hopefully forever after. The continuity of the thread gave it its strength and Canada did everything in its power to demonstrate that the thread had never been broken."The "real motive" behind the $67,000 payment, Mr. Kenney says, is revealed in an Oct. 17, 1930, letter from O.S. Finnie of Canada's department of the interior to O.D. Skelton, the powerful undersecretary of state for external affairs."The main objective of entering into our negotiations with Sverdrup was for the purpose of securing from the Norwegian Government a recognition of the British Sovereignty in that portion of the Arctic north of the North American continent," Mr. Finnie states bluntly.Sverdrup, who reluctantly consented to give up his islands in exchange for Canadian cash, didn't have much time to enjoy his belated windfall.He died on Nov. 26, 1930, barely two weeks after the deal was made."
12) Måtte bindes til flysetet (KURT HAUGLI) 30 March 2007
13) Gruvearbeidere reddet ut etter ulykke i Canada (NTB/AFP/REUTERS)
14) Blackberry kommer til Norge (KLAUS BØRRINGBO) 16 October 2006
15) Garanterer USA-endring senest i 2009 (OLE MATHISMOEN) 11 Dec. 2007
16) Ti romantiske reisemål (FREDRIK LARSEN) 27 December 2007
17) Gutta på tur (PÅL V. HAGESÆTHER) 12 March 2008
In this story the Norwegian journalist writes: "Montreal: Jazz, festivaler, fransk sjarm og delikatesser fra alle verdenshjørner. Den nest største byen i Canada er en miks av Frankrike og USA, og har en stor homobydel som er en turistattraksjon for folk i alle filer." France and USA?? Is Norway a mix of German and Swedish? Or Danish and Swedish?? This is another example of how many Norwegian journalists don't give Canada proper credit. Montreal is a great Canadian city, the largest French speaking city in Canada, the second largest French speaking city in the world after Paris, and the second largest Canadian city. It lies in Canada, has French colonial roots, with Canadian, British, and influences and style. The city is a mix of French-Canadian, European and Canadian style for the most part, not American. Many cities in Mexico, Canada, and the USA have similar style, but this is a North American style, not just American. Montreal was founded in 1632. This would be like a Canadian journalist writing Norway is a mix of Danish and Swedish style, and not bothering to recognise Norwegians for it for being Norwegian.
18) Sport på amerikansk (By KURT HAUGLI ) 23 September 2008
In this story there are photos available under the heading "Sport på amerikansk," but the last two pictures are of a Canadian sport, not American sport, with three Canadian teams and Canadian players, not American. The game of hockey is a Canadian invented game frm 1800s, as well as the NHL is a Canadian founded league from 1917, expanded into the USA in 1923. The game of hockey is a Canadian sport, not American as the journalist writes. And posting pictures of this Canadian sport and giving the Americans credit for this sport is wrong. Why do the Americans get credit for a Canadian sport when it's not American? Especially when the two NHL games are from Canadian teams from games played in Canada? The other sports photos you have posted American football, and American baseball are American, but the hockey you posted is a Canadian sport with Canadian teams playing in Canada. not American. The one picture with the Buffalo Sabres is an American team, but in the USA they play Canadian hockey, so can it possibly be called a sport invented in Canada as American? If there was posted a picture of two Norwegian football teams from say Molde and Oslo should the heading above the title saying "Swedish Sports" or "German Sports," especially if the game is played in Norway? If there is posted a picture of two Norwegian XC skiers should it be stated as a Swedish or German sport? Should credit go to the Swedes or Germans for what is a Norwegian sport? The photo of Vancouver and Edmonton playing was not even played in the USA, it was played in Canada! An e-mail was sent several times to the Kurt and Aftenposten, but a reply was never received, and a correction was never made. This is another example of how Canadian content is changed or lumped in with American content to be made to look American to Norwegian readers.
19) Få deg en e-post-dytt (KLAUS BØRRINGBO) 11 December 2006
20) Brukte klær mer trendy (SOL GABRIELLE LARSEN) 1 December 2008
In this story the journalist writes about a Canadian from Toronto in Canada. She writes: "Jeg har alltid elsket vintage på grunn av moten, ikke på grunn av prisen. Men etter at jeg flyttet til Oslo, har jeg kjøpt brukt på grunn av prisen, sier Kilgour som opprinnelig er fra Toronto i USA, men som nå studerer på Blindern i Oslo." In USA?? Wrong country. The Canadian city of Toronto is located in the country of Canada, not in the USA as the journalist writes. What this journalist has written is like a Canadian journalist interviewing a Norwegian from Oslo and writing Oslo is located in Germany or Russia. Later she also writes: "- Det har den siste tiden blitt mer viktig for folk å kjøpe brukt, spesielt i USA. Folk har ikke råd til å kjøpe dyre klær lengre. Da kan man heller handle på bruktbutikker, kanskje kommer man også over gamle designklær der, sier hun." But is this correct? Is she talking about Canada or the USA? She quotes a Canadian that moved from Toronto in Canada, but she writes USA? Toronto is a Canadian city with a population of 4.5 million people, and is not and has never been located in the USA. Is it not clear in Norway that there are three countries in North America (Canada, Mexico, USA) and not just the USA? After two days and five e-mails to Aftenposten, including three to the author, the story was corrected.
21) Det amerikanske forsvaret følger nissen (KLAUS BØRRINGBO) 23 Dec. 2008
In this story the Norwegian journalist writes: "Det amerikanske forsvaret følger nissen." This is not correct. The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) is not just American as the journalist writes in the story title, it is North American. To be specific, it is a defence organisation of two countries in North America - Canada and the USA, that work together for the common air space defence of North America (except Mexico). The title should state: "Det canadisk og amerikanske forsvaret følger nissen." NORAD it is both run by both Canadians and Americans. If Norway and Sweden had a joint programme to protect Norwegian and Swedish airspace this would be like a Canadian journalist headlining "Det svenske forsvaret følger nissen" and not bothering to recognise Norwegian ownership of the programme. Give Canada some credit is due, and stop making what is also Canadian look American. NORAD is called "North American..." for a reason. In addition the journalist writes: "Julenissen følges fra minutt til minutt på radar av amerikansk forsvar på julaften." This should say: "Julenissen følges fra minutt til minutt på radar av amerikansk og kanadisk forsvar på julaften." NORAD's website states: "The fourth system is made up of fighter jets. Canadian NORAD fighter pilots flying the CF-18 intercept and welcome Santa to North America. In the United States, American NORAD fighter pilots in either the F-15 or the F-16 get the thrill of flying alongside Santa and his famous reindeer: Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Donner, Blitzen and, of course, Rudolph." What's wrong with giving Canada some credit where credit is due?
22) Riisnæs svarte leserne (Fredrik Larsen) 25 June 2007
23) Milliarder fordunster (BRIT MYHRVOLD) 4 October 2001
In this story the journalist writes: "Resultatvarsel fra amerikanske Nortel Networksble oppgitt som en av årsakene til at teknologiaksjer falt i Europa." American?? Wrong nationality. Nortel is Canadian, not American, and is from Canada, not from the USA.
24) Hannah Montana på kinotoppen (TONE B. VÆRVÅGEN) 11 May 2009
In this story the Norwegian journalist writes. "I USA har Star Trek dratt inn 76, 5 millioner dollar åpningshelgen." In the USA?? It was a North American release, not just the USA. This is the North America total. It should say: "I Nord-Amerika (ikke Mexico) har Star Trek dratt inn 76, 5 millioner dollar åpningshelgen." The amount is Canadian sales in Canadian Theatres in Canada, and American sales in American theatres in the USA. The amounts do not include Mexico, even though they are in North America. The amount of 76.5 millioner is for two countries - Canada and USA, not just the USA as the journalist states.