It is currently Sun Nov 23, 2014 7:21 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Is it morally right — or legal — to extradite a native citizen to a foreign country?
Yes 36%  36%  [ 8 ]
No 64%  64%  [ 14 ]
Total votes : 22
Author Message
 Post subject: The long, long arm of US Law Enforcement
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 11:42 am 
Offline
SPCR Reviewer

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 11:23 am
Posts: 1847
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
In the Vancouver Sun this morning:

A longtime marijuana seed seller was arrested today for extradition to the US. No Canadian charges have been laid, the seller is being held at the request of US authorities (the FBI enforcing the DEA). He has been doing business peacefully and openly in our city for ten years.

Under US law, there is no doubt that he is guilty, but Canadian law is not so clear cut, and he has been doing business in a legal "grey area" for some time.

My question is, how can the FBI extradite a Canadian citizen (NOT an American) to the US to face American charges? This, to me, seems quite plainly wrong.

I know very little about extradition law (and the treaties that make it possible), but I was under this impression that it is designed to make possible the deportation of people who try to hide in another country to escape a crime committed in their own. But this is not what has happened here. As far as I can tell, this is an instance of US authorities enforcing American law for Canadians on Canadian soil. Can anybody tell me if there is any legal or moral justification for doing this?

Part of the problem is that a large part of his business was by mail order to the US, which is obviously the reason for the FBI getting involved, but surely American authority stops at the border. If American customs is doing its job, none of his packages should be getting through anyway. I would even support Canadian authorities helping to prevent packages from being shipped to the US. However, I find it hard to believe that Canadian authorities are willing to arrest him on foreign charges and deport him to a foreign country.

There are plenty of worse crimes committed by foreigners that would run afoul of American and Canadian authorities — child prostitution and hate crimes, for example — but we do not try and enforce our own law in these other countries no matter how morally reprehensible the crimes. If we really feel so strongly, we do sometimes step in, but this is an act of war, not a legal bargain. Right now I feel violated by American law enforcement and betrayed by Canadian authorities.

So, once again I have to ask: Is there any justification — moral or legal — for this?

P.S.: Please keep responses on topic. If this thread shows signs of degenerating towards topics that have already been covered elsewhere, it will be locked/deleted.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 11:49 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 11:34 pm
Posts: 889
Location: Finland -- Folding For SPCR
Quite shocking. It would be similar if I was suddenly shipped to Sweden to face charges. Very odd.

However, you say this guy is canadien citizen, but is he from some other country originally? I mean is there a some sort of a treaty, that changes the scemario if the person if a foreigner, but has a canadien citizenship.

Even in that case, seems very strange. Although, some finnish members probably remember this, but a court in eastern Finland gave a rapist a shorter sentence, because the rape didn't last long. :shock: :evil:

_________________
Just because I didn't respond to your post doesn't mean you were right. It just means I was speechless as to how to reply to such an idiotic statement

[MainRig][HTPC][Playground]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:07 pm 
Offline
SPCR Reviewer

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 11:23 am
Posts: 1847
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Aleksi wrote:
However, you say this guy is canadien citizen, but is he from some other country originally?


No, as far as I know, he was born and raised in Canada ... could be wrong I suppose, but at any rate, he's not American.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The long, long arm of US Law Enforcement
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
Devonavar wrote:
My question is, how can the FBI extradite a Canadian citizen (NOT an American) to the US to face American charges? This, to me, seems quite plainly wrong.

I know very little about extradition law (and the treaties that make it possible), but I was under this impression that it is designed to make possible the deportation of people who try to hide in another country to escape a crime committed in their own. But this is not what has happened here. As far as I can tell, this is an instance of US authorities enforcing American law for Canadians on Canadian soil. Can anybody tell me if there is any legal or moral justification for doing this?

I know this is the off-topic section, but this is probably way outside the expertise of the posters on this forum.

Since you asking questions about Canadian extradition law, why don't you ask this question on a legal newsgroup such as can.legal. If you don't have a newsgroup account, you can use Google Groups.

I do know that if an American citizen went to Canada and committed murder, and then went back to the US, then they normally could be extradited back to Canada to face charges. I don't see a problem with that, although the circumstances of the case you mention may be somewhat different. But only a legal expert knowledgeable in Canadian-US extradition laws/treaties could tell you whether it was legal in this case.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 7:55 pm
Posts: 235
I would like to see more information. We cant change someone in another country with breaking an american law. Unless this guy was importing selling stuff into america.

And we couldnt actually go into canada and arrest the guy either. Canada and the us have a recropical agreement to hold the fugutives and turn them over to each other so criminals can just jump the borders to avoid being caught.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The long, long arm of US Law Enforcement
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 3:58 pm
Posts: 2057
Location: Toronto
m0002a wrote:
I do know that if an American citizen went to Canada and committed murder, and then went back to the US, then they normally could be extradited back to Canada to face charges.


Remove the part about him going into Canada to do the murder, ie suppose he used a mail bomb, for a more accurate analogy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:42 pm 
Offline
SPCR Reviewer

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 11:23 am
Posts: 1847
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
slipknottin wrote:
Unless this guy was importing selling stuff into america.

And we couldnt actually go into canada and arrest the guy either. Canada and the us have a recropical agreement to hold the fugutives and turn them over to each other so criminals can just jump the borders to avoid being caught.


Yes, he was exporting seeds to the US. Shouldn't this be enforced by US Customs though? He didn't have a physical store on US soil though, it's all mail order. I certainly don't think he should be able to continue doing this; the FBI is well within their rights to prohibit him from doing busines with US customers. I just don't see how they can shut down his Canadian business for having American customers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 3:58 pm
Posts: 2057
Location: Toronto
Here's the situation everyone wants to avoid: if it's up to Canada to prosecute him, Canada has to make a decision between arresting him themselves, or giving the US the finger.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 1:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 7:55 pm
Posts: 235
Devonavar wrote:
Yes, he was exporting seeds to the US. Shouldn't this be enforced by US Customs though? He didn't have a physical store on US soil though, it's all mail order. I certainly don't think he should be able to continue doing this; the FBI is well within their rights to prohibit him from doing busines with US customers. I just don't see how they can shut down his Canadian business for having American customers.


Exporting the drugs into america isnt a legitimate canadian business. The FBI did not shut him down, canadian police did. If american businesses were exporting certain drugs into canada, then we would shut down their business and send them to canada to face charges, or hit them with charges here. Usually the plan is to send them wherever they will face the most serious charges.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 10:31 am
Posts: 520
Location: Las Cruces, NM
mathias wrote:
Here's the situation everyone wants to avoid: if it's up to Canada to prosecute him, Canada has to make a decision between arresting him themselves, or giving the US the finger.


Choose to give the US the finger, we usually deserve it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The long, long arm of US Law Enforcement
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
mathias wrote:
Remove the part about him going into Canada to do the murder, ie suppose he used a mail bomb, for a more accurate analogy.

If an American sent a mail bomb to Canada that injured or killed someone, then I would assume that the person could be extradited to Canada to face charges.

If someone really was interested in the legalities of Canadian extradition law, then experts in that field should be consulted.

BTW, most crimes in the US are covered by state laws, and police have no jurisdiction outside of their own state. A criminal captured in a state other than where the crime was committed has to be extradited back to state where the crime occurred. Obviously, this does not apply to federal crimes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
Elixer wrote:
Choose to give the US the finger, we usually deserve it.

So what happens if a US citizen commits a crime in Canada and returns to the US? Does the US give the finger to Canada? Extradtion treaties are bi-lateral agreements and are in the best interests of both countries.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 3:58 pm
Posts: 2057
Location: Toronto
m0002a wrote:
So what happens if a US citizen commits a crime in Canada and returns to the US? Does the US give the finger to Canada?


You mean commits a crime against Canada from the US? Or are you saying the US would escalate the tension?

It could be a slippery slope either way, in the other hypothetical direction the RIAA would be going on a lawsuit rampage here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
mathias wrote:
You mean commits a crime against Canada from the US? Or are you saying the US would escalate the tension?

It could be a slippery slope either way, in the other hypothetical direction the RIAA would be going on a lawsuit rampage here.

Let's not confuse civil suits with criminal suits. Extradition usually only applies to criminal cases where an act is illegal in both countries.

There are copyright and patent laws that can be enforced internationally for those countries which have signed such international agreements. But I don’t know if someone could be extradited for violations of such laws.

Regarding you first question, If someone located in the US sends a mail bomb to Canada, and kills a person in Canada (a crime in both countries), then I assume the person would be extradited to Canada to face charges. I don't know any other way to explain it. I don't understand what "tension" you are talking about.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 3:58 pm
Posts: 2057
Location: Toronto
m0002a wrote:
I don't understand what "tension" you are talking about.


By escelating the tension, I mean America retaliating against Canada refusing to extradite someone who commited a crime against america from canada by refusing to extradite someone who comited a crime against canada in canada.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 3:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
mathias wrote:
By escelating the tension, I mean America retaliating against Canada refusing to extradite someone who commited a crime against america from canada by refusing to extradite someone who comited a crime against canada in canada.

I wasn't aware that there was any such tension or failure to abide by extradition treaties between the US and Canada (I did not read the article). But if one country violates a treaty, it is not reasonable to expect the other country to comply with it. Treaties are bi-lateral agreements for the benefit of both countries.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 3:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 3:58 pm
Posts: 2057
Location: Toronto
m0002a wrote:
I wasn't aware that there was any such tension or failure to abide by extradition treaties between the US and Canada (I did not read the article). But if one country violates a treaty, it is not reasonable to expect the other country to comply with it. Treaties are bi-lateral agreements for the benefit of both countries.


That's just one POV, that Canada is breaking the treaty. Another is that America is bending the treaty in its favor(to toughen canada's obligation). So if america thinks canada is bending the treaty, they could try to bend the treaty further(to lighten thoir own obligation), or they could accuse canada of breaking the treaty, and break the treaty themselves.

This is getting away from the point I was making, so I'll clarify it. By Canada giving the finger to the US, I meant Canada having drug laws which America doesn't like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
mathias wrote:
That's just one POV, that Canada is breaking the treaty. Another is that America is bending the treaty in its favor(to toughen canada's obligation). So if america thinks canada is bending the treaty, they could try to bend the treaty further(to lighten thoir own obligation), or they could accuse canada of breaking the treaty, and break the treaty themselves.

This is getting away from the point I was making, so I'll clarify it. By Canada giving the finger to the US, I meant Canada having drug laws which America doesn't like.

I don't know anything about any accusations that Canada is breaking any treaty with the US. I certainly did not make any such accusations.

I personally have no idea whether the extradition is the case mentioned above is legal according to Canadian law or whether it is covered by the treaty. As I suggested earlier, one might want to consult with better qualified experts on this subject to understand the legal issues involved. I suspect there are a lot of marijuana users on this forum who have preconceived notations about what is legal in this case, but I would rather consult legal experts.

I do know that treaties are bi-lateral agreements, and unless both countries are satisfied with the cost/benefits they get from a treaty, then the treaty may be revoked. Same thing happens when people get divorced.

The main point I made earlier is that it does happen that a citizen of one country can be extradited to a foreign country if they committed a crime in that foreign country. It does not happen for all countries, and only happens where extradition treaties exist. But the idea that someone can only be extradited back to a country where they are a citizen (and where they committed a crime) is not always true.

The biggest obstacle to this kind of extradition back to the US is in cases where the country where the criminal is currently located does not support the death penalty, and the US (or state) may seek the death penalty for the crime. In these cases, many countries will not extradite people back to the US if the death penalty is a possibility. This is true regardless of whether the criminal is a US or foreign citizen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:33 pm 
Offline
SPCR Reviewer

Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Posts: 3998
Location: Phoenix, AZ
It's clear that he was breaking the US law...that part is simple. What the article doesn't say, and I'm only hypothesising, is that he is also breaking a Canadian law. If not, I doubt the Canadian authorities would give two shakes about making the DEA happy. If he wasn't breaking a canadian law, Canadian police wouldn't have legal grounds for placing him in custody.

If someone wants to do some digging, I'd bet that his act of exporting the seeds to the US is in some matter illegal under Canadian law. It could be something as trivial as "exporting agricultural products without a license". A likey suspect would be "customs fraud". I really doubt he was filling "Marijuana seeds" in the Content blank on the customs forms. :lol: Lying on those forms is a crime in both countries after all.


And an even better analogy than pipe bombs is the transborder shipping of toilets. Yes, toilets. Canadian toilets don't have the silly 1.6G per flush US EPA requirement. Here in Michigan that's a booming grey-market commodity.

_________________
Senior Contributing Writer, SPCR


Last edited by Rusty075 on Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
So what are the toilets being declared at in the customs forms? Modern sculptures?

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 7:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 404
Location: Illinois, USA
I have only one thing to say about this matter:

51st state.

Just kidding. You have to remember that even the people enacting and enforcing the laws don't always know them. So it's possible that Canadian authorities really shouldn't have extradited the guy, because they didn't know the international laws - or even because the laws weren't distinct on the matter. Remember the Elian Gonzalez fiasco? The US government just kind of made that one up as they went along.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:02 am 
Offline
SPCR Reviewer

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 11:23 am
Posts: 1847
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Ok, I'll accept that it is probably legal. I still don't understand exactly how, but at the very least I was mistaken about how extradition works.

For me, that leaves the question of whether it is moral. I would agree that Canadian authorities have an obligation to prevent his exports to the US, but the crime is not committed by the exporter, but the importer. US law can prohibit the importing of controlled substances, such as marijuana seeds (BTW, slipknottin, I disagree that seeds = drugs, although I suppose that if US law prohibits seeds then it may end up being the same). However, it cannot prohibit the exporting practices of businesses in other countries. This is where I see the FBI overreaching its authority. At best, US authorities should be able to request that the RCMP prevent his exports from being shipped to the US. However, if he is allowed to sell seeds in Canada (and he has been doing so unharrassed for ten years — other drug-related charges nonwithstanding) I see no moral justification for the FBI to stop him doing this. Keep in mind that although his customers are in the states, he is doing business in Canada, where he has not been charged with any crime. He is not the one importing in the US; those are his customers. And if exporting marijuana seeds is illegal under Canadian law, he should be arrested and tried in Canada.

This is what is bugging me: If it's illegal in Canada, why isn't he being charged under Canadian law? If it's only illegal in the US, why does US law apparently apply when he is operating in Canada? Believe me, the RCMP should have no problem finding charges to lay if he's really violating Canadian law. I've already mentioned in passing that he has a history of drug-related charges, but his business has survived all of these, which suggests to me that, even if it's not technically legal, Canadian authorities don't care that it exists.

Emery is facing charges for "conspiring to distribute marijuana seeds" under US law. And, what I can't figure out, is why he is being charged under US law when his crime (if any) took place in Canada. Yes, he was distributing marijuana seeds, but he was doing so in Canada. Although the seeds were available in the States, they needed to be imported on the American side. He was not (AFAIK) running an American business.

Realistically, I realize it's not practical for the FBI to prosecute all of his customers, so I understand why they went to the RCMP. My problem is that Emery should have been charged under Canadian law, perhaps with the hypothetical "exporting without a license" that Rusty suggested. If he was granted a license, it would have been an error by Canadian authorities, and the license could easily be recinded.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Posts: 1162
Location: UK
Devonavar wrote:
This is what is bugging me: If it's illegal in Canada, why isn't he being charged under Canadian law? If it's only illegal in the US, why does US law apparently apply when he is operating in Canada?.

I don't know the specifics of this particular case, but I'm guessing there's a MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) in operation between the USA and Canada which covers drugs related crimes such as this even if no crime has technically been committed under Canadian law.

There was a fairly high-profile case a while ago where the FBI seized servers in London and carried out arrests in Switzerland for supposed copyright infringements which fell under the scope of the (American) Digital Millennium Copyright Act, even though no British or Swiss laws had been broken. The people concerned could theoretically have been extradited to the US to face charges under the DMCA, but I don't think they wanted to push it that far for such a relatively trivial offence, as the political fallout would have been counterproductive. If I recall correctly, an MLAT between the UK and the USA was invoked to facilitate this - it allows law enforcement bodies from the US to act directly in the other signatory country so long as they don't break any local laws.

MLATs were supposedly originally designed to make it easier to chase and apprehend terrorists without getting tied up in cross-border legal complications, but they're being (ab)used to further all sorts of powerful vested interests.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:56 am
Posts: 96
All your bases are belong to us.

Yeah, marc emery is being charged because Canadians don't stand behind their citizens enough. You think that we would allow you guys to extradite people to canada for excercising our rights? Noway! Maybe canadians don't have the desire and power to protect it's citizens? Eitherway, Marc has been a great guy and I hope they don't give him life under federal law for distribution to make an example of him. The only thing that can stop this is good old canadian outrage if there ever was any. Good luck guys.

Quote:
Is it morally right — or legal — to extradite a native citizen to a foreign country?


No, it's a loop hole that allows countries to get out of political pressure to convict it's citizens of laws that the public doesn't agree with. Again, what are you really going to do? That's the sad part about democracy, you can't do anything as the government only needs to win the majority. :roll:


Last edited by merovingian on Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:32 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 7:13 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Bristol, UK
The poll is worded badly. I would vote Yes, but in the context of the man in question I say no - the people he's selling to are breaking laws by importing illegal goods and they are at fault. It may be in US law that you cannot export drugs, but he isn't in the US, he's in Canada, and if he isn't breaking their law I don't see how the US has any right to do this. (However, I doubt he told the truth on all those customs forms... well, you'd hope not anyway, as that would be even worse!)

_________________
It's coming back


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Posts: 1162
Location: UK
StarfishChris wrote:
It may be in US law that you cannot export drugs, but he isn't in the US, he's in Canada, and if he isn't breaking their law I don't see how the US has any right to do this.

I thought I explained that above... ? :wink:

I've read the article now and it seems an MLAT has indeed been invoked:

"The search was requested by the U.S. government through the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, a federal law administered by the Department of Justice."

Another link here...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 7:13 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Bristol, UK
A lesson to all: before posting, use preview and see if there are more replies! :)

_________________
It's coming back


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 4:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:56 am
Posts: 96
StarfishChris wrote:
A lesson to all: before posting, use preview and see if there are more replies! :)


The cholcolate starfish stickes again! :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 5:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
Just because he has been selling seeds in Canada during the last 10 years and never arrested for doing it, does not mean it is legal to sell marijuana seeds in Canada. Canada has been moving to decriminalize possession of marijuana, but it is still generally illegal to sell it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 5:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
nick705 wrote:
I don't know the specifics of this particular case, but I'm guessing there's a MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) in operation between the USA and Canada which covers drugs related crimes such as this even if no crime has technically been committed under Canadian law.

There was a fairly high-profile case a while ago where the FBI seized servers in London and carried out arrests in Switzerland for supposed copyright infringements which fell under the scope of the (American) Digital Millennium Copyright Act, even though no British or Swiss laws had been broken.

It is not legal to sell marijuana in Canada (unless for medical purposes, and then it is regulated). Since when do the British and the Swiss not abide by international copyright infringement laws?

These claims are mostly urban legend and have no basis in fact.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group