S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citizens

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citizens

Postby eyeno » Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:46 pm

Saturday, November 26, 2011
S. 1253 will allow indefinite military detention of American civilians without charge or trial
Coming soon to the U.S.?
Madison Ruppert, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

A sinister bill has quietly been introduced, so expansive in scope and dangerous in nature that it makes the PATRIOT Act look like the Bill of Rights.

This bill, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012, or S. 1253, has received tragically sparse coverage and I must admit that I was not aware of it until a reader emailed me about it.

If you think the PATRIOT Act is bad, just wait until you check out sections 1031, 1032, 1033, and 1036 of this horrific bill.


The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) wrote a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 1st of this year, addressed to the Chairman of the Committee, the “Honorable” Patrick Leahy, and Ranking Member of the Committee, the “Honorable” Charles Grassley who strongly decried the bill.

The title of the four-page letter itself reveals the truly dangerous nature of this legislation, “Judiciary Committee Should Assert Its Jurisdiction Over Those Aspects of the Detention Authority Provisions in S. 1253, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Sections 1031, 1032, and 1036), That Affect Civilians Who Are Otherwise Outside of Military Control, Including Civilians Within the United States Itself.”

If these provisions are enacted, it would give the federal government the explicit power to imprison civilians, including American citizens, indefinitely with no charges or trial.

This would include individuals apprehended both inside and outside of the United States, meaning that this could give the federal government the ability to openly detain American citizens for their entire lives without so much as a single charge.

While the federal government already murders American citizens abroad based upon the decision of an unlegislated secret death panel within the National Security Council, this would be the first time since 1950 that Congress has explicitly authorized indefinite detention of Americans without charges or a trial.

This provision includes people who had absolutely no role in the attacks of September 11th, 2001, or any hostilities whatsoever and would mandate military detention of certain civilians.

This includes civilians arrested within the United States who would otherwise be outside of military control while also transferring all responsibilities to the Department of Defense.

Instead of the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, National Security Division, or the United States Attorneys, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Prisons, the Marshals Service and/or the state attorneys general handling the prosecutorial, investigative, law enforcement, penal and custodial authority, the Department of Defense would handle it all.

That means that all control would be taken out of the hands of civilians and put into the brutal grip of the American military, essentially meaning a military takeover of our so-called justice system.

All they would have to do is classify you as a terrorist, no need for actual charges or participation in hostilities; you could be locked up indefinitely for any reason or no reason at all if the Department of Defense saw fit under this NDAA.

This is so fundamentally un-American, the ACLU can’t help but write that the provisions are “inconsistent with fundamental American values embodied in the Constitution and in the country’s adherence to the rule of law.”

These provisions of the NDAA are so radical that they actually remove much of the protections American citizens have had since 1878 under the Posse Comitatus Act and the Non-Detention Act of 1971.

Section 1031 of S. 1253 would be the first time in more than 60 years that our so-called representatives in Washington would allow indefinite detention of American citizens with no charges or trial without Congressional authorization.

Since 1971 the Non-Detention Act has stipulated, “No citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an Act of Congress,” but S. 1253 could make this a thing of the past.

The ACLU points out that while Subsection 1031(c) of S. 1253 claims that it does not apply to lawful residents of the United States or citizens “on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States except to the extent permitted by the Constitution,” glaring loopholes remain.

If the government’s track record is any indicator, we can expect these loopholes to be exploited at every possible opportunity.

Just as the federal government has used the PATRIOT Act’s so-called “Sneak-and-Peek,” or delayed notice, warrants for over 1,600 drug cases and only 15 cases of terrorism in 2006-2009, we can expect the government to use S. 1253 for detaining people for completely illegitimate reasons.

These loopholes allow suspects to be imprisoned without charge or trial, especially citizens or lawful residents who are suspected of some sort of wrongdoing outside of the United States.

The most unsettling aspect is that the deciding factor in determining if an individual can be detained indefinitely is not any proof of guilt, but instead entirely by officials in the Executive Branch, which, according to the ACLU would be “following some future agency regulations.”

This, just like the unlegislated death panel that resulted in the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old son, leaves it up to the Executive without any guidelines whatsoever.

It is quite shocking how much the federal government is attempting to push us towards a dictatorship with no legal protection whatsoever from being locked up with no hope of a fair trial or even charges.

Indeed the legislation would allow American citizens to be imprisoned “until the end of hostilities” under 2001's Authorization for Use of Military Force, or S.J. Res. 23.

Yet this represents no concrete timeframe whatsoever, and Section 1031 would allow American citizens and non-citizen civilians who had no role in 9/11 or any other hostilities whatsoever to be detained who would otherwise not be detainable under the laws of war.

Section 1032 puts civilians who would otherwise not be subject to military control into military detention, thus removing the protections of the Posse Comitatus act.

Like Section 1031, this would include indefinite imprisonment of civilians apprehended inside of the United States. Section 1032 does not authorize the military to detain civilians without charge or trial, it in fact it mandates it.

The protection against the government using the military for law enforcement activities within the United States under Posse Comitatus would be eliminated under Section 1032 and the ACLU points out that, “all state and federal law enforcement would be preempted by the military.”

Previously the state and local law enforcement agencies and the Department of Justice had the primary responsibility to enforce anti-terrorism laws within the United States.

The NDAA would, in the case of many civilian suspects, remove federal state and local law enforcement from the process of investigation, arrest, criminal prosecution and imprisonment and hand said powers over to the military.

The ACLU “strongly urges” the Senate’s Judiciary Committee to conduct hearings on sections 1031, 1032, and 1036 and assert their jurisdiction to mark up these sections before the NDAA makes it to the Senate floor.

They say that the Judiciary Committee should assert their jurisdiction over these provisions in order to prevent civilian law enforcement against civilians who would otherwise be out of the purview of the military to fall into the hands of the military.

The ACLU’s letter does not, however, cover Section 1033 which Human Rights Watch claims would apply to the many detainees already being held for years without trial who have been cleared for release.

In a form letter with the subject, “Stop Militarization of Law Enforcement” they write that Section 1033 would, “force the administration, for example, to continue to hold a Guantanamo detainee simply because they were from a country of an accused terrorist.”

I highly recommend that you send out this form letter along with a note written by yourself to all of your supposed representatives, along with as many phone calls as you can afford to make it clear that you do not support the United States being turned into a total militarized police state.

While we are already in dire straits in terms of civil rights in this country, codifying indefinite military detention into law is one of the most dangerous developments since the introduction of the PATRIOT Act.

If you even remotely care about the principles of freedom, liberty and justice which this nation is supposed to stand for, you will do us all a favor and stand up against this wholly unacceptable legislation that could represent the end of America as we know it.

Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at admin@EndtheLie.com

http://www.activistpost.com/2011/11/s-1 ... .html#more
User avatar
eyeno
 
Posts: 1878
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 5:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens

Postby elpuma » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:30 am

Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They Define as Being Right Outside Your Window

Image

While nearly all Americans head to family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, the Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.

Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians without charge or trial.

The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.

The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?

The answer on why now is nothing more than election season politics. The White House, the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney General have all said that the indefinite detention provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act are harmful and counterproductive. The White House has even threatened a veto. But Senate politics has propelled this bad legislation to the Senate floor.

But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.

In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in.

In response to proponents of the indefinite detention legislation who contend that the bill “applies to American citizens and designates the world as the battlefield,” and that the “heart of the issue is whether or not the United States is part of the battlefield,” Sen. Udall disagrees, and says that we can win this fight without worldwide war and worldwide indefinite detention.

The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown. That is an extreme position that will forever change our country.

Now is the time to stop this bad idea. Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senators-demand-military-lock-american-citizens-battlefield-they-define-being
User avatar
elpuma
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 4:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citize

Postby Bruce Dazzling » Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:44 pm



Indefinite Military Detention of Citizens on US Soil Still in Pentagon Spending Bill
November 29, 2011
Steven Rosenfeld
AlterNet


A fast-moving defense authorization bill in the Senate would grant police powers to the military to indefinitely detain American citizens and legal aliens suspected of aiding terrorists anywhere in the world – including on U.S. soil – without charges or the right to a trial in the criminal justice system.

Though top military and national security officials in the Obama administration oppose the detention provisions—and the White House has threatened a veto—opponents of expanding the military’s reach onto U.S. soil were unable to amend the bill on Tuesday.

“The Supreme Court has ruled that citizens can be held,” Sen. Carl Levin, D-Michigan, who helped craft the provision, said moments before voting on the amendment to remove the language. “We can and must deal with the Al Queda threat.”

More at the link.


Related...

"Arrogance is experiential and environmental in cause. Human experience can make and unmake arrogance. Ours is about to get unmade."

~ Joe Bageant R.I.P.

OWS Photo Essay

OWS Photo Essay - Part 2
User avatar
Bruce Dazzling
 
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Yes
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citize

Postby hanshan » Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:20 am

...


it's a wrap...

http://cryptogon.com/?p=26295


Senate Votes To Let Military Detain Americans Indefinitely

December 1st, 2011
Via: Huffington Post:

The Senate voted Tuesday to keep a controversial provision to let the military detain terrorism suspects on U.S. soil and hold them indefinitely without trial — prompting White House officials to reissue a veto threat.

The measure, part of the massive National Defense Authorization Act, was also opposed by civil libertarians on the left and right. But 16 Democrats and an independent joined with Republicans to defeat an amendment by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) that would have killed the provision, voting it down with 61 against, and 37 for it.

“I’m very, very, concerned about having U.S. citizens sent to Guantanamo Bay for indefinite detention,” said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the Senate’s most conservative members.
Paul’s top complaint is that a terrorism suspect would get just one hearing where the military could assert that the person is a suspected terrorist — and then they could be locked up for life, without ever formally being charged. The only safety valve is a waiver from the secretary of defense.

“It’s not enough just to be alleged to be a terrorist,” Paul said, echoing the views of the American Civil Liberties Union. “That’s part of what due process is — deciding, are you a terrorist? I think it’s important that we not allow U.S. citizens to be taken.”
Democrats who were also concerned about liberties compared the military policing of Americans to the detention of Americans in internment camps during World War II.

“Congress is essentially authorizing the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens, without charge,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who offered another amendment — which has not yet gotten a vote — that she said would correct the problem. “We are not a nation that locks up its citizens without charge.”

Backers of military detention of Americans — a measure crafted by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) — came out swinging against Udall’s amendment on the Senate floor earlier Tuesday.
“The enemy is all over the world. Here at home. And when people take up arms against the United States and [are] captured within the United States, why should we not be able to use our military and intelligence community to question that person as to what they know about enemy activity?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said.

“They should not be read their Miranda Rights. They should not be given a lawyer,” Graham said. “They should be held humanely in military custody and interrogated about why they joined al Qaeda and what they were going to do to all of us.”

Posted in Atrocities, Dictatorship, False Flag Operations, Social Engineering | Top Of Page



...
hanshan
 
Posts: 1673
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 5:04 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citize

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:41 am

Senate ready for showdown with Obama over bill with detainee language
By Jeremy Herb - 11/30/11 08:20 PM ET

The Senate voted to end debate Wednesday on a defense spending bill, setting the stage for a showdown between Congress and the White House over the bill’s controversial provisions for detaining and prosecuting terror suspects.

The White House has threatened to veto the legislation because of language that mandates military custody of terror suspects, but Wednesday’s 88-12 cloture vote signals that the bill — which could pass as early as Thursday — will likely have the detainee provisions included in the chamber’s final legislation.

“If [President Obama] were to veto this bill, it would be saying that giving rights to terrorists is more important than passing the defense authorization, which has many other important provisions,” Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) told The Hill.

The White House is standing by its veto threat, a White House spokesman said in an email to The Hill Wednesday.

While the Senate bill still must go through conference committee, the current legislation would force the White House to decide whether to follow through on its veto threat.

Since he took office, President Obama has fought with Congress about how to detain and prosecute terror suspects, beginning with the president’s desire to close Guantánamo Bay.

But the defense spending bill has passed for 50 years straight. The White House would be left open to charges it is playing politics with the nation’s security if Obama were to veto what is considered must-pass legislation.

Ayotte said it would be a “big mistake” for Obama to veto it.

The Senate on Tuesday rejected, by a vote of 38-60, an attempt from Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), an Armed Services committee member, to strip the detainee provisions from the bill. All but two Republicans voted against the amendment, and 16 Democrats joined them to help defeat it.

The fight over detainees heated up just before Thanksgiving when Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and ranking member Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) brokered a compromise on the detainee language.

The defense bill mandates military custody for terror suspects while granting the executive branch a waiver to prosecute terror suspects in civilian courts.

The Obama administration says this is an unacceptable burden for law enforcement counterterrorism efforts, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and FBI Director Robert Mueller have all written letters to senators expressing their opposition.

Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) have also opposed Levin and McCain’s compromise, sparking an open disagreement among Democratic committee chairmen.

Udall, Feinstein and Leahy, who voted for cloture, were still hoping they could change the detainee provisions in the bill through amendments before it reached a final vote.

None of the senators were tipping their hands as to whether they would support the final bill with the detention rules still included.

Feinstein offered two amendments that would ban indefinite detention of American citizens and provide more flexibility for counterterrorism investigations.

“I don’t know whether we can win this or not, but I think it’s important we try,” Feinstein said on the floor Wednesday. “I have no doubt this is going to be litigated.”

As the Senate prepared to vote on dozens of amendments Wednesday, the most contentious debate focused on whether American citizens could be held indefinitely in military custody, a provision that has united some Democrats with libertarian Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in opposition.

Udall warned that holding citizens in military custody indefinitely “cuts directly against principles we hold dear: innocent until proven guilty.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) argued that al Qaeda members are enemy combatants and should be held and prosecuted by the military. He and fellow Republicans have been critical of reading terror suspects Miranda rights.

“When they say, ‘I want a lawyer,’ you tell them, ‘Shut up,’ ” Graham said. “ ‘You don’t get a lawyer. You’re an enemy combatant, and we’re going to talk to you about why you joined al Qaeda.’ ”

The administration’s statement of its policy said that military custody inside the U.S. “would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets.”

If the Senate bill passes, it would still need to go through conference with the House legislation, which contains some similar provisions on terror suspects. The House bill doesn’t include the Senate’s mandatory military detention, but House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) has introduced similar stand-alone legislation, making him an unlikely candidate to remove the detainee language in conference.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citize

Postby Bruce Dazzling » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:03 pm

/\/\/\

“If [President Obama] were to veto this bill, it would be saying that giving rights to terrorists is more important than passing the defense authorization, which has many other important provisions,” Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) told The Hill.


Image
"Arrogance is experiential and environmental in cause. Human experience can make and unmake arrogance. Ours is about to get unmade."

~ Joe Bageant R.I.P.

OWS Photo Essay

OWS Photo Essay - Part 2
User avatar
Bruce Dazzling
 
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Yes
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citize

Postby Jeff » Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:42 pm

George Takei wrote:
Never Again
I grew up in an internment camp, and no one American ever again should have to

Nearly 70 years ago, Executive Order 9066 authorized the U.S. military to remove any person from designated "military zones" without charge, trial or any kind of due process. This Order led to the forced evacuation and internment over over 120,000 Japanese Americans, two thirds of whom, including myself, my siblings, and my mother, were U.S. citizens. I spent over four years in two of America's internment camps, in Rohwer, Arkansas and Tule Lake, California, simply because I and my family happen to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor.

Now a bill proposed in the U.S. Senate, S. 1253 (McCain/Levin) would authorize a similar sweeping authority, granted to the President, to order the detention--without charge or trial--of any person even suspected of being associated with a "terrorist organization." I could scarcely believe my eyes when I saw that we hadn't learned from the terrible lessons of the past.

We are a nation of laws, and we have a Constitution that guarantees certain inalienable rights, including the right to liberty, the right to a jury trial, and the right against unlawful search and seizure. And yet, in times of trouble, how quickly these cornerstones of our freedom are abandoned. We must be constantly vigilant against tyranny and injustice of all forms, especially when it isn't politically expedient.

Please share this article and write to your senator, telling her or him to vote against S.1253, and to say loudly and clearly: "Never Again."

--GHT


http://www.allegiancemusical.com/video/ ... gain?p=643
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citize

Postby elfismiles » Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:05 pm


Scott Horton Interviews Marcy Wheeler
Scott Horton, December 01, 2011

http://www.emptywheel.net
http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/11/30/ef ... americans/
http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/11/29/gi ... e-already/

Blogger Marcy Wheeler discusses the McCain-Levin and Udall amendments to the Defense Authorization Act; how the Supreme Court allowed American citizens to be labeled “enemy combatants” and subject to indefinite detention by the Hamdi decision in 2004; why a more restrictive – or revoked – Iraq War AUMF (as proposed by Rand Paul) would more effectively protect citizens than the Udall amendment; why “enhanced interrogation” may be making a (legalized) comeback; and the Obama administration’s opposition to language in the Act that limits Executive power and “flexibility.”

MP3 here. (18:57)
http://dissentradio.com/radio/11_11_30_wheeler.mp3

Blogger Marcy Wheeler, a.k.a. emptywheel, grew up bi-coastally, starting with every town in New York with an IBM. Then she moved to Poway, California, home of several participants in the Duke Cunningham scandal. Since then, she has lived in Western Massachusetts, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, Ann Arbor, and — just recently — Western Michigan.

She got a BA from Amherst College, where she spent much of her time on the rugby pitch. A PhD program in Comparative Literature brought her to Michigan; she got the PhD but decided academics was not her thing. Her research, though, was on a cool journalistic form called the “feuilleton” — a kind of conversational essay that was important to the expansion of modern newspapers in much of the rest of the world. It was pretty good preparation to become a blogger, if a PhD can ever be considered training for blogging.

After leaving academics, Marcy consulted for the auto industry, much of it in Asia. But her contract moved to Asia, along with most of Michigan’s jobs, so she did what anyone else would do. Write a book, and keep blogging. (Oh, and I hear Amazon still has the book for sale.)

Marcy has been blogging full time since 2007. She’s known for her live-blogging of the Scooter Libby trial, her discovery of the number of times Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded, and generally for her weedy analysis of document dumps.

Marcy met her husband Mr. emptywheel playing Ultimate Frisbee, though she retired from the sport several years ago. Marcy, Mr. EW and their dog — McCaffrey the MilleniaLab — live in a loft in a lovely urban hellhole.


http://antiwar.com/radio/2011/12/01/marcy-wheeler-10/

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: S. 1253 indefinite military detention of American citize

Postby AlicetheKurious » Sat Dec 03, 2011 8:47 am

How about this for context.
"If you're not careful the newspapers will have you hating the oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
User avatar
AlicetheKurious
 
Posts: 5348
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Egypt
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests