Legal actions initiated against Citron

Posted by The Citron Fraud Examiners on October 10, 2012 under The Truth | 1,076 Comments to Read

Qihoo plans legal action against Citron

Qihoo 360 Technology Co. Ltd. (“Qihoo 360″ or the “Company,” NYSE: QIHU), a leading Internet company in China, today initiate legal procedure against Citron Research and its main contributor Mr. Andrew Left (“Citron”). The Company has sent a letter to Citron and demands Citron immediately cease and desist from committing any and all improper and/or illegal activities in relation to its untruthful publications or statements regarding Qihoo 360. Without limiting the generality of the forgoing, the Company demands Citron (1) correct or remove those untruthful sections in the Publications within ten (10) days upon the receipt of the letter, and (2) apologize to Qihoo 360 for Citron’s undue activities. Qihoo 360 reserves its right to pursue further legal remedies.

Qihoo sues Citron

Source: Qihoo’s announcement on Sina Weibo

 

Kai-Fu Lee initiates legal action against Citron

I wrote a fact-based report challenging Citron’s reports on China search companies.  Citron has not explained any of the errors I brought up, but instead has attacked me personally with accusations that have no factual basis and are not truthful.  Such malicious statements have been deliberately and publicly made in order to damage my reputation, in an attempt to avoid address my criticisms of Citron’s report.  I have no choice but to file a lawsuit against Citron and Mr. Andrew Left.

 
  • Chinese radar

    Citron meets it’s end !

  • nana

    美国是可以用保护言论自由的名义保护做空机构的胡言乱语的。关键是民心民意，对股民来说就是相信谁才能赚钱，而不是赔钱。

    嘉汉林业在浑水的报告后，CEO陈德源还被授予了“ 2011中国林业产业年度人物” ，现任CEO（ Jason Martin） 在法庭证词中也证实了中国政府对嘉汉林业的肯定 。买了嘉汉林业的股票的人都原本是相信中国而不信浑水的 ，结局又如何呢？ 股票摘牌，血本无归。

    海外的股民们如何能再相信中国方面对浑水们的反驳言论呢？

    • Chinese radar

      首先，美国的法律绝对不是如你所说的保护做空机构的胡言乱语，一旦发现是胡言乱语，如果有人去告，做空机构会受到制裁。第二，嘉汉林业有问题，不代表所有的中国企业都有问题，就像一个美国人犯了罪，不代表所有美国人都犯罪，重要的是如何区分谁有问题，谁没问题，这就需要过硬的专业知识，而很显然，citron缺乏基本的IT专业知识，而中国的IT行业集中了中国的精英，做空机构要找错，不像以前那么容易，如果投资人信了citron的报告，才会赔大钱。

      • nana

        首先，美国法庭已经有最近的判决案例，是Silvercorp（ 希尔威） 起诉Alfredlittle.com (也就是John Carnes), 美国法庭以言论自由为由判Alfredlittle.com无罪，虽然希尔威有充分的证据证明John Carnes造谣。

        第二，嘉汉林业是不是有问题，现在不同的人有不同说法：
        浑水和加拿大证监会指控嘉汉林业诈骗，但是嘉汉林业独立委员会调查结论是没有欺诈，公司拥有所有公布的现金和林业资产. 中国林业部在浑水报告之后仍授予前CEO 陈德源“ 2011中国林业产业年度人物” , 现任CEO（ Jason Martin） 在法庭证词中也证实了中国政府对嘉汉林业的肯定 .

        加拿大证监会和中国政府给出的信息都不一致，不知道加拿大的投资人该如何区分中概是否有问题？

        在嘉汉林业案，恰恰证明不管中概公司的独立委员会调查结论是什么，不管中国政府是否认为中概公司有问题，只要听浑水的就对了，否则就会赔大钱。

        • Chinese radar

          美国法律绝不会允许做空机构“胡言乱语”，他们的报告也要有根据，否则，做空机构可以胡作非为，那么市场会大乱。

          嘉汉林业是个案，不代表所有的中国企业都如此。特别是对于真正的优质中国企业，如果做空机构放出的消息是错的（就如你举出的哪个造谣例子），即使会导致暂时的股价下跌，但是一旦被证明是错的，股价很快会反弹。就像最近的几个被做空的中国股票，都是很快反弹了回来。如果你信了做空机构的话，你卖了股票，后来反弹回来，你亏了，你要是跟着做空机构做空，绝对赔死。

          如何判断一个企业的好坏，要看这个行业的专家的意见，比如，我认为李先生是IT专家，我会买他的公司的股票。

          • nana

            不知道为什么你要坚持重复说没有依据的话，看看链接的新闻报道吧，美国现在可以说对与做空中概的言行没有任何监管，也不想监管，即使有人利用言论自由来操纵市场：
            http://business.financialpost.com/2012/08/21/u-s-court-gives-short-sellers-freedom-of-speech-shield-in-silvercorp-ruling/
            李先生和企业家们的行动当然是正确的，可能也是仅有的他们可以做来帮助中概的。但是，我这里要说的是为什么浑水，Citron,这些做空的会这么嚣张和无所顾忌，为什么中概在应对做空时非常吃力和困难。

            嘉汉林业案给出的启示是浑水们的威力来自背后海外监管者的支持。如果海外监管者有能力公正的判断中概的业务在中国的合法性和是否有造假行为，那么自然没有问题，浑水们的搅混水也不会对中概公司有致命的效果。但是，像加拿大OSC，甚至连中国政策不发林权证给外资林企都不知道，却因为浑水指嘉汉林业独立委员会不独立，就把独立委员会的报告结果都否定了。

  • xlming

    Xie Wen, former president of Yahoo China, part of Alibaba Group: “Professional investors are unlikely to change their mind just because of the reports of short sellers. They will choose a company despite what reports say – but the company itself should be proved to be valuable,”

    The negative news is used to help and also to disguise stock price manipulation through FTDs.

  • nana

    如果加拿大证监会对嘉汉林业的指控是正确的，它所揭露出来的是关于整个中国和中国政府的可怕的事情：

    １）中国政府机构的资产证明是没有信用的，中国政府官员贪污腐化到了无法无天的地步 ，会为一些小礼物就发给造假中概公司所要的证明信来欺骗海外投资者；

    ２）中国政府是鼓励中概公司海外上市圈钱的，只要中概公司把钱圈进中国，中国政府是不会追究他们对海外投资者的欺骗行为的，甚至还会对中概公司及其高管发奖表彰；

    ３）因为中国政府的包庇，造假中概的罪犯和贪污腐化的中国政府官员不会受到应有的惩罚，他们还会继续欺骗海外投资者，因为造假欺诈的成本很低收益极高；

    ４）海外监管机构无法在中国实施对中概造假罪犯的处罚，也无法查请中概公司的真实资产，海外投资者根本不可能获得任何赔偿

    如果加拿大证监会对嘉汉林业的指控是正确的， 它不仅是揪出了一个骗子公司，而是证明了中国是个污秽浑浊的地方，这里不可能生长出 任何健康美丽的东西。

    • nana

      我本人是认为中国的实际情况并没有那么糟糕，加拿大证监会有误解和太过于武断，但是中国各方面对嘉汉林业事件的不闻不问或是暗箱操作不透明，加深了海外投资者对中国的状况的担忧，也可以说是证明了流言蜚语的恶意揣度。

      我仍然寄希望于中国政府能够重视嘉汉林业事件， 最终给海外投资者一个清楚明白的交代。

      • Chinese radar

        希望新一届的政府能重视这个问题。李先生对citron的反击也是引起整个社会我相信也包括中国政府的重视。

    • xlming

      The difference is America is a country that pioneered rule of law and the rights of citizens… yet America’s Wall Street, DTCC, SEC, SBC, and other regulatory agencies are “corrupt” because they are in violation of what America stands for.

      China has a culture of deceit and fraud. It is not “corruption” because cheating is the rule of the game. You are just complaining because you are not at the benefiting end of the kickbacks. Just like workers complaining about bosses abusing employees until they become a boss and do the same thing.

      Chinese culture is about top people ruling from heaven. If you don’t like Chinese culture, go move to Europe. If you want rule of law, move to England. You are brainwashed by Western movies and philosophy.

      • nana

        Where did you get the idea that “China has a culture of deceit and fraud…cheating is the rule of the game”? From Muddy Waters, I guess?

        If what you said were true, it would be no meaning for Mr. Li Kai-Fu and the Chinese CEOs to fight against the short-sellers, because the Chinese enterprises could not be qualified to be listed aboard at all.

        • xlming

          From Wenzhou.

          I can explain western perspectives from observing interactions between foreigners and Chinese….. American definitions of deceit/fraud/lying/cheating/dishonesty are very strict, and is the cause of all sorts of misunderstandings between Chinese companies and American investors. Are you interested in that?

          • nana

            I agree with you that the standards are different and there are misunderstandings, that is also why I suggest my communications, and in some cases, misunderstanding can be easily removed simply by direct communication.

            Such as in Sino-forest case, there should be only one answer to the question: does the company has the timber assets it claimed or not?

            The Independent Committee answered “Yes”, but the OSC said “No”. Why wouldn’t the Chinese government give some help? The timber assets are in China and the Chinese government should know the answer, right?

          • xlming

            There are all sorts of scandals and corrupt officers inside the Chinese government — to get that land in the first place, the owners of Sino-forest had be officials, or have friends that are officials.

            Chinese customers do not trust businessmen, businessmen do not trust each other, government officials do not trust the businessmen. You live in China, you should know this. Everyone who has been to China knows that scams, scandals, and fakes are everywhere, and that good scandals like DaVinci furniture secretly wins the admiration of men and the hearts of women. So I have absolutely no idea why you are so upset about corruption on the Chinese side, it is standard and celebrated!

            When a company IPOs on main markets in America(Canada is probably the same), during preparation there are 10-15 people around a table every day for one to three months examining everything: bankers and their lawyers, accountants and their lawyers, the company executives and their lawyers. Then the SEC examiners go through everything and bring up objections for weeks, even months that you have to fix… then finally there is an approval to mail out to potential investors.

            The only way Sino-Forest could have gone public in the first place is if the SEC examiners on the Canadian/American side are corrupt, extremely stupid…… or were tricked by a groups of (western) bankers, accountants, and lawyers that are all working together to profit on selling shares of fraudulent companies to the public, then profiting by short selling the company.

            And of course, then these short selling criminals go around on national television talking about how the Chinese tricked them, and that China is a bad country, and that the entire fault of the fraud is due to China. It’s bullshit. (See David Einhorn’s comments on MaYun/Alibaba or Jim Chanos’ comments on Chinese executives. Einhorn and Chanos are criminals)

      • Chinese radar

        I don’t think decit and fraud is Chinese culture, although fraud does exist in China, but is doesn’t mean that every Chinese fraud. Just like shooting crime ofter happen in US, you can not drop the conclusion that shooting crime is a American culture,

        • Chinese radar

          maybe shooting crime is American culture, haha.

          • xlming

            Yes! For Americans growing up in ghettos and with gangs —- drive by shootings and armed robbery is part of daily life! Even celebrated in some of the American music!

            I should have used percentages or made more specific generalizations, like “Zhejiang merchants”. Unfortunately I don’t have data, only anecdotal experience.

    • Chinese radar

      这个结论太武断了，你也没有证据说中国政府包庇，而且中国政府只是个泛指。最多只能说以往中国政府没有在这个问题上下很多功夫，但绝对不是包庇那么严重。

      • nana

        这个不是我说的，去读读加环球邮报， 巴伦周刊，Financial Post 之类的 吧。加拿大证监会的主席在电视采访中也是这么暗示的。

        说中国政府包庇是因为嘉汉林业前CEO陈德源在2011年底和2012年初还分别获得了中国林业系统，中国政府批准认可的最高荣誉。这个事情都是在已经知晓浑水对嘉汉林业的诈骗指控之后发生的。

  • nana

    嘉汉林业造成了投资者 几十亿美元的损失，被称为加拿大证券史上最大诈骗案， 规模虽比不上Madoff, 但对中国人，中国政府国家形象的损害却大的多。

    麦道夫丑闻后，犹太人也曾担心会再引起反犹太人浪潮，但是因为帮助麦道夫起家成名的也是向麦道夫投资最多的犹太人；而 嘉汉林业被认为是中国人欺诈外国投资者。

    麦道夫案也没有引起人们对美国政府或司法系统的担忧，因为除了SEC对证券交易监管不严外，没有证据说美国政府部门或官员 参与麦道夫的诈骗。 而 嘉汉林业的业务从始至终都是和中国政府部门及官员密不可分的.

    中国林业部们发奖给嘉汉林业也代表了政府，有明文的审核标准，同样嘉汉林业的子公司获得省级龙头企业称号，也有政府明文的审核标准，包括没有任何违反法律政策，欺诈欺骗行为， 明确表达了中国政府对嘉汉林业的肯定支持。

    • xlming

      The SEC was given ALL the evidence to Madoff in 2002, in 2005, and in 2007 and they did NOTHING. The SEC is bought out by Wall Street. A good documentary about Madoff: “Chasing Madoff”.

      Be careful of *anyone* who starts talking about antisemitism and relates it to a criminal who happens to be Jewish. It’s the same thing as the Uyghurs who cried racism after stabbing and murdering innocent people in Xinjiang in 2009. Only the bad ones cried anti-Uyghur sentiment. The good Uyghurs denounced the event and helped police identify faces to bring criminals to justice.

      Financial criminals who happen to be Jewish are kapos. And anyone inside or outside of the Jewish community who supports kapos, or diverts attention away from kapos by crying antisemitism, should be punished along with the kapos.

      A good list of kapos and oberkapos: Bernie Madoff, Steve A Cohen, Daniel Loeb, David Einhorn, Michael Milken, Michael Steinhardt, William Ackman, Jim Cramer. Destroying the lives and livelihood of fellow humans, and fellow tribesmen to benefit themselves? Kapos.

  • nana

    其实，如果中概公司按中国的国情是没问题允许的， 而​按上市国家的监管要求可能有问题，那就回购， 像哈尔滨泰富电气那样， 别让投资者吃亏。那么以后投资者也不怕再买中概，因为只要中国能接受的，就可以买，而不是要看做空公司是不是觉得有问题，或者是在中国政府眼里没问题， 在SEC，OSC眼里有问题，就会赔钱。

  • nana

    当然还有省钱的办法，就是宣布中国警方配合调查 嘉汉林业案，把陈德源等五人抓起来，交加拿大警方；与 嘉汉林业有牵连的中国政府官员全部处理，该抓的抓，该撤职的撤职。

    这样虽然嘉汉林业投资者还是赔了钱，但是不会海外影响对其他中概的信心。

  • nana

    从嘉汉林业案，看中外投资者对政府职能的不同期待
    对嘉汉林业案, 英文论坛里西方人觉得最不可思议的事是：虽然有云南广西湖南三省中国地方林业局政府官员为嘉汉林业出了证明信，但是这些政府官员都表示这不在他们的工作范围内，是他们给嘉汉林业的一个额外人情， 还有官员为此索要礼物。

    记得在浑水的做空报告出来后不久，英文论坛里就有人说：以我这个西方人的想法，中国政府应该出面澄清关于嘉汉林业的林木资产，毕竟中国政府的林业政策表明他们是把林木作为重要的国家资源，他们也应该最清楚谁拥有多少中国的林木。

    然而，我在雪球听到的最多的意见是：你们的投资成败赢损，跟政府有毛关系啊，中国政府不管证券市场上的事是正常的。

    这里我看到了中外投资者对政府职能的不同要求，这也是为什么嘉汉林业案引起了西方人对中国政府的沉默的误读： 西方人认为中国政府没有做该做的事，就表明是有难言之隐，有猫腻，甚至是和公司合伙诈骗。

    一直我们都想当然的认为西方是自由市场经济，中国政府管得太多了，原来西方人认为政府理所当然该做的事情却多的多啊，真正的是要求政府“为人民服务”

  • nana

    嘉汉林业已经加快了重组，铁定要在明年一月十五之前把现有股票持有者清扫出局。

    林业资产的取证已经被债权人终止，理由是要节约资金。在此
    之前，虽然困难和缓慢，独立林业公司（Indofor）
    也已经证实了８万多公顷的林地。要知道，因为加拿大证监会拒绝承认中国地方林业部门的证明，也拒绝承认合同的有效性，Indofor必须拿合同到地方林业
    部门借到地图，然后亲自到林地上查看林木，证实合同的真实。

    债权人以只证实了10%的林木资产就可以说嘉汉林业是90%的诈骗了。但是，嘉汉林业的独立委员会和现任CEO不是这么看的。

    这是现任CEO，Jason Martin 在法庭陈述里讲的：
    “While
    the consultant report and press release cautioned against extrapolation
    of these findings over Sino-Forest’s broader forestry assets, I took
    considerable comfort from these findings. In relation to two
    randomly-selested contracts held through the BVI structure, the property
    descriptions and expected forest cover in the contracts matched the
    boundaries and forest cover on the ground.”

    嘉汉林业的独立委员会的调查报告结论也是：林木资产真实，没有欺诈。

  • nana

    嘉汉林业的最新发现

    刚刚看到了广西南宁市兴宁区司法局网站发布的对王竹村与桂嘉公司林地租赁纠纷的调解：
    http://www.nnxn.gov.cn/sifaju/contents/1868/36046.html

    恍然发现，加拿大证监会对嘉汉林业的指控是错误的！

    加拿大证监会指控嘉汉林业伪造林木收购合同，证据之一是合同没有附带“林农授权 ” ，在中国是非法的。

    实际上，中国国家林业局在2009年十一月才出台“关于切实加强集体林权流转管理工作的意见” ，并没有说在此之前的合同如果不附带“林农授权 ”就是非法的。而嘉汉林业有绝大部分收购合同都是在此之前签的。

    在上面这个当地政府法院对嘉汉林业的子公司和村民之间纠纷的调解可以知道，没有人认为嘉汉林业的合同是伪造的或非法的！

    然而，海内外投资者， 媒体， 公众都普遍接受了加拿大证监会的指控。 投资者的损失被归咎于两种原因：
    １）中国高管陈德源等的造假欺诈；
    ２）中国政府因为外资和贪腐官员勾结造成林农骚乱，因此要废除所有嘉汉林业的合同，从而把林地收回，来安抚林农。

    真相却完全不是这样的！ 中国政府在努力调解外资林企和林农的纠纷，争取合理解决应新政策出台引发的问题。而加拿大证监会对嘉汉林业作出错误的指控， 导致审计辞职，公司股票摘牌。而债权人趁此机会用不合理的重组夺得全部嘉汉林业的林业资产。

    结果是，嘉汉林业的小股民损伤惨重，中国人／中概公司／中国政府 背黑锅，中国林农依然一无所有。
    收获巨大的是：浑水们做空公司／对冲基金，嘉汉林业的机构债权人， 加拿大证监会（获得强有力监管的美誉，主席得以沿长两年任期 ）。

    • nana

      从这个法院的公告还能了解到另一个关键信息：

      村民们不惜动武来争取的是嘉汉林业子公司的林地租金付款方式，从现在的人民币30元每亩每年，转变会以前的公司收入的19%。

      这说明公司现在的收入远高于人民币￥150元每亩每年。如果假设公司的收入是人民币￥250元每亩每年, 按嘉汉林业的财报他们拥有约80万公顷的林木资产是真实的，那么年收入就是约$476 million, 即每股 $1.9，这和嘉汉林业以前的财报每股赢利很相近。

      也就是说，加拿大证监会和浑水指控嘉汉林业需报赢收，也很可能是没有根据的。

  • nana

    更正一下：我前面贴子里说的“加拿大证监会”，应改为“安省证监会 ”

    我有写信给加拿大财政部反映嘉汉林业的案子处理不当，OSC（即， 安省证监会）似乎缺乏对中国的了解和与中国有关部门的沟通，可能有对中国及中概公司的误解，从而导致加拿大投资者的损失。

    加拿大财政部长Flaherty在给我的回信中谈到，加拿大目前还没有联邦政府统一的“加拿大证监会”，所以嘉汉林业是由“安省证监会 ” 负责处理。但是，联邦政府正在努力组建“加拿大证监会”。

    • xlming

      You are also in a good position to tell the OSC that most of the underwriters for Chinese companies are crooks.

      • nana

        Just the opposite. The OSC believes Muddy Waters/Carson Block and thinks that “most of the underwriters for Chinese companies are crooks.”

        What Chinese need to do, is telling the OSC that Carson Block is wrong and not trustworthy at all.

        Carson Block said,”I don’t need to know trees to know fraud”. And the OSC believes him and also alleges Sino-Forest as a fraud, even after the IC report has proven that Carson Block’s report has many mistakes and its allegation against Sino-Forest is completely wrong.

        • xlming

          Both are true, all criminals. They will point fingers at each other as if it is one or the other. Any information on the hedge funds that were taking short positions before Citron or MuddyWaters released their reports?

          • xlming

            Daniel Loeb has had short positions in companies before Citron Research released reports for at least five years. With Loeb’s long stake in Yahoo.com and his criminal friend Steven A Cohen having a long stake in Baidu, there is heavy motive for them to take out and harass competitors like Qihoo.

            To: Alibaba Group:
            Goldman Sachs is a criminal enterprise that has actively helped criminal short sellers Einhorn, Loeb, Cohen, Chanos, MuddyWaters, Citron Research with market manipulation. Do not use Goldman Sachs for IPO, they are criminals.

            The way for Chinese companies to avoid being cheated during their IPO on American stock markets is by using Dutch Auction IPO.

            http://www.wrhambrecht.com/

  • nana

    stockhouse上一群人中国阴谋论 ，说 嘉汉林业整个就是中国政府在背后操作，到国外圈钱。等农民一闹起来，中国政府就翻脸不认合同，既得了钱，又不失地，还能把地再卖一次。

    我跟他们说了这些话，他们就都闭嘴了。我说：

    中国迄今从没说过不认可嘉汉林业的合同，都只是安省证监会在指控嘉汉林业伪造（fake）合同。应该要求安省证监会出具中国政府（林业部 ）的证明信，确认合同是伪造的。

    以安省证监会的对中国的了解，特别是中国林业产业的了解，它并不具备足够的知识和能力去判别在中国这些合同的真伪和合法性。

    中国政府应该没有理由拒绝给安省证监会出这么个证明，如果嘉汉林业的合同的确是伪造的。如果中国阴谋论成立，那中国政府更应该是满心欢喜的出这个证明啦。

  • nana

    浑水和香橼这些做空公司对中概企业的诈骗造假的“揭露”， 不只在海外，而且在中国，都获得了很多赞誉，似乎把他们媲美为“扒粪运动”

    美国史上著名的“扒粪运动”，由报纸新闻记者发动， 揭露实业界丑闻，从而推动了美国政府的一系列改革，产生了深远的影响和积极的社会作用。

    那么中国人是不是该热烈欢迎浑水们的做空中概， 就向当年美国大众欢迎“扒粪运动”一样？

    我想假设个简单一点的例子来做个对比：

    如果你在家庭会议上说：“二姐，你家老偷用邻居的煤不好，以后别这样了。还有，我看见小侄子偷拿奶奶的钱去街上打游戏，大哥你得管管你儿子”

    这应该叫“扒粪” ，最终也为你们家更好，你们家人应该支持你。

    如果你邻居说： “他们家，没一个干净的，全是小偷骗子。女的偷我们家煤，小孩从小就光学怎么偷东西骗人，大家都小心点啊，别更他们家人来往啦 ”

    我不觉得你们家人会欢迎这样的说法，欢迎你的邻居这样来“扒粪” 。正常人应该是澄清一下事实，让其他邻居们放心。不是吗？

    为什么李开复们想澄清一下事实，有那么多的人反对，还认为对浑水香橼们的任何指责都是别有用心？

  • nana

    中国政府怎么可以置之不理？

    嘉汉林业独立委员会在报告中明确地宣布“嘉汉林业并非浑水公司所指责的‘近乎彻底的骗局’和‘庞氏骗局’。

    独立委员会在确认公司林木资产中确认了对 150,000公顷拥有林权证, 中国林业部官员出具证明信确认了另外606,000公顷林木。

    现在， 安省证监会指控嘉汉林业伪造了大量合同，那么这个指控实际包含了对为嘉汉林业出具证明信的中国林业部官员的欺诈指控，或者是帮助欺诈者的指控。

    对于这么严重的，大规模的犯罪指控，我不明白，为什么中国政府可以置之不理？

    或者追查和依法处理中国林业部官员， 或者是指出 安省证监会的错误。总得做点什么吧，怎么可以置之不理？

  • nana

    http://www.goingpublic.de/epaper-gp-ipo-in-germany-chinese-2012/page16.html

    “自从在加拿大上市的嘉汉林业发生丑闻后，情况愈下，顺便一提，目前虽然什么也未得到证实，但该公司已申请了破产。受该事件影响，世界各地的中国公司估价也在下跌。可以讲，无论是过去还是现在，这都是没有商业理由的。” – Klaus Rainer Kirchhoff

    还是我一直在说的，中国公司要想继续去海外上市，先督促中国政府把嘉汉林业查清楚明白吧，影响太大了。 到底是：
    -就这一个公司几个骗子，十几个贪管，造假了一堆合同，骗了海外投资人的几十亿美金?
    -政府政策不合理，前后不一致 ，管理混乱，造成嘉汉林业被安省证监会错误指控?
    -中国政府和公司合伙骗钱，钱一进中国，就有得进没得出，撕毁合同在所不惜?

    情况查清楚了，该处理的处理了，该改正的改正了，再谈海外上市和吸引外资吧，否则怎么让海外投资者放心呢？

  • Pingback: lxomopkmi

  • Pingback: quality replica watches

  • Pingback: hale industriale, spatii comerciale, terenuri

  • Pingback: serotonin

  • Pingback: codes promos

  • Pingback: clicking here

  • nana

    这个应该是来自加拿大官方人士， 关于嘉汉林业的最新的评论了：
    http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2012-11/07/content_15886596.htm

    “When
    asked about Sino-Forest, the Toronto-listed commercial forest
    plantation operator that has been accused of a Ponzi scheme and saw its
    shares delisted in May, Chadda remains cautious to maintain the stock
    exchange’s independence.

    “There hasn’t been anything conclusive
    by the court or by the regulators. What we do know for a fact is there
    has been massive losses of shareholder value, that’s very sad.”

    不知为什么，所有中文的转载都把嘉汉林业的这段给删了:

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2012-11/06/c_113622697.htm

  • nana

    正本清源的机会 – 只看中国政府怎么做

    ​新闻披露， 嘉汉林业的重组方案最终要获得中国政府的批准才能进行。

    这是中国政府仅剩的正本清源的机会: 或者驳回这个把全部财产交给债权人而使股票投资者一无所有的方案; 或者批准重组方案的同时明确对安省证监会和浑水的支持。

    浑水发布做空报告后 ，中国政府从没有对嘉汉林业案直接明确的表态。我们可以理解为没有合适的时机和不干涉加拿大内政。但是，对重组方案的批或不批准，就是个明确的表态了。

    现在的重组方案是在接受安省证监会对嘉汉林业欺诈指控的结论的基础上的，也就是说，认为嘉汉林业的资产价值低于它的18亿美元的债务。

    如果中国政府批准现在的重组方案，就等于是说中国政府明确认可了安省证监会对嘉汉林业欺诈指控，即，嘉汉林业伪造了大量的合同，虚构了资产和营收。

    那么， 中国政府同时也应该宣布对陈德源等五名中国籍前高管的通缉，还有涉及嘉汉林业欺诈的中国中国林业部门官员的欺诈指控和处理等，表明中国政府对贪污腐化欺诈的态度，正本清源，恢复中国在国际上的信誉。

    如果嘉汉林业的合同并非伪造的， 中国政府仍在致力于外资企业和当地村民的纠纷的调解处理，那么驳回现在的重组方案，指出安省证监会的错误之处，也是中国政府仅剩的正本清源的机会。

  • Pingback: Hysterectomy

  • Pingback: click here

  • nana

    The OSC is a big fan of Carson Block!

    (1) Carson Block said,”I don’t need to know trees to know fraud”, and he
    claimed that Sino-Forest was a “multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme”.

    The OSC said,”absence of certificates is per se evidence of fraud”,
    without knowing that China has the policy of not issuing timber
    ownership certificates to foreign invested enterprises.

    The OSC alleged that Sino-Forest and members of its overseas management
    engaged in numerous deceitful and dishonest courses. That is just
    another way of saying, a Ponzi scheme.

    It seems that the OSC indeed believes that it does not need to know trees to know the fraud of Sino-Forest.

    (2) Carson Block said,”Is “Independent” Verification in China better than toilet paper? No.”

    He said that after Focus Media announced it is hiring two reputable
    independent survey firms with extensive experience in conducting
    surveys.

    The Independent Committee of Sino-Forest hired
    forestry experts and verified the timber assets in China. The IC also
    verified the cash balance reported and a record of a total of $1.53
    billion investment in Sino-Forest’s 61 subsidiaries in China.

    However, after the IC reports, the OSC still accused Sino-Forest and
    its former executives of fraud, that Sino-Forest falsified the evidence
    of ownership for the vast majority of its timber holdings.

    The OSC has not even bothered to explain how its investigation reached a
    completely different conclusion as the Independent Committee’s, and why
    the OSC ignored the Independent Verification by the forestry experts.

    It seems that the OSC indeed believes that the IC reports and Independent Verification are “no better than toilet paper”.

    (3) Contrary to its claim that it is turning its focus to
    “gatekeepers”, the OSC said in its allegation:”Sino-Forest, Overseas
    Management and Horsley knew or ought to have known that their auditors
    during the Material Time relied on the validity of the Purchase
    Contracts and their attached Confirmations as proof of ownership of
    Sino-Forest’s Standing Timber assets.”

    Under this
    implication, the audit firm, E&Y, resigned, and consequently the
    stock was delisted and Sino-Forest went to CCAA.

    The OSC, a
    big fan of Carson Block, not only has done everything as Carson Block
    said, but also helps him to earn a lot of money from short-selling
    Sino-Forest, from the huge lose of Sino-Forest’s shareholders.

    - Why shareholders of Sino-Forest will end up with huge lose, while
    shareholders other China-concept-stocks in the U.S markets ,such as
    FMCN, SPRD and EDU, can recover with gains?

    - Because we have a regulator who is a big fan of short-seller Carson Block!

  • Pingback: spyware removal

  • Pingback: acne treatment nhs

  • Pingback: bon de reduction micromania

  • nana Wan

    一个 嘉汉林业就足够告诉海外投资者该听谁的了

    浑水做空报告后，嘉汉林业还不是一直否认做假欺诈，林业部门还给嘉汉林业写资产证明呢，中国政府还不停的给陈德源发奖状呢，结果怎样？

    加拿大安省证监会一正式指控，股票摘牌了，陈德源下台躲起来了，中国政府哑吧了， 海外投资嘉汉林业的股民们血本无归。

    嘉汉林业证明： 只有海外证监会才有资格，有能力，告诉你谁是造假诈骗的，谁是清白的；中概企业说的没用，中国政府也什么都不知道！

  • Pingback: Agen Togel

  • Pingback: mosquito buy spray

  • Pingback: Continue Reading

  • Pingback: small business

  • Pingback: scarfs.gr

  • nana Wan

    陈德源和嘉汉林业四名前高管都在哪儿，在干什么？ 据今年四月的一篇报道：

    http://news.cnfol.com/120420/101,1280,12224250,00.shtml
    “四名前高管已经成立了一家咨询公司，主要业务是为投资者想要进入中国自然资源领域，进行并购交易中提供策略投资咨询。据传这家公司总部设在西安，日常运作已经展开，一些意向投资者正在洽谈中。”

    到底在中国， 嘉汉林业是不是构成了欺诈罪？还是说真的如海外评论说的，欺诈外国投资者，在中国不算犯罪？

    • xlming

      The same career path has been followed by Chinese management from other designed to fail Chinese companies for 8 years ongoing.

      I’m not familiar with the current conditions of the OSC, America’s SEC has been infiltrated by the same criminals that are now attacking China.

      Citronfraud has the information on these criminals, and the Chinese newspapers and media have not published the information yet. Nothing has happened in two months. Any ideas where to send the evidence for publication in the news nana?

  • Pingback: tienda online de muebles

  • nana Wan

    BNN为嘉林汉业做的两个电视采访，其中主持人的表情，采访的气氛完全不同：一个是采访浑水Carson
    Block，主持人和他一起嘻笑嘉林汉业对浑水的指控，气氛非常欢快；另一个是采访前高盛亚洲副总Ken Curtis, 主持人一心想引 Curtis
    说中国的造假诈骗文化和浑水Carson Block的杰出贡献，而Curtis一直在谈中国的飞速发展和建议人们多想想浑水Carson
    Block的东西是不是值得相信，整个采访中主持人表情沮丧，气氛尴尬。

    BNN的主持人是代表了相当一些人的想法的，他们和浑水Carson Block在一起很欢乐的，很有共同语言。

  • nana Wan

    明天嘉汉林业的债权人将要为重组计划投票。在修订计划中，嘉汉林业的全部资产仍将归入有债权人控制的新公司NewCo, 但新添了同时成立一个叫NewCo II 的子公司。

    在重组完成后，叫NewCo II 的子公司将以市场价格买下NewCo的全部资产。

    嘉汉林业股票将被销毁，股民一分钱也得不到。

    从头到尾，嘉汉林业的资产价值 没有进行过调查评估。按FTI Consulting （Monitor）的说法是：“嘉汉林业资产价值评估需要耗费数年的时间”

    真是睁眼说瞎话！怎么一重组完，把股民踢出了局，嘉汉林业的 资产就立即评估完了，可以卖给NewCo II 啦？！

  • nana

    最新消息： 奥兰国际计划融资12.5亿美元
    http://news.malaysia.msn.com/regional/olam-plans-to-raise-dollar125-billon-in-rights-issue

    新加坡主权基金淡马锡全力支持奥兰国际，表示会认购自己的份额之后，如果有其他股东没有认购，淡马锡就会100%购买剩余部分。

    看出中概们悲惨在哪儿了吧：

    2010年7月，中国国家开发银行为嘉汉林业提供1.5亿美元融资，表示对嘉汉林业的大力支持。浑水指控嘉汉林业诈骗之后呢？中国国家开发银行悄无声息。

    外界只能解读为，国开行 默认了嘉汉林业是诈骗，而且国开行玩忽职守没认出骗子， 只好哑吧吃黄连了。

    而嘉汉林业更是成了墙倒众人推。收起

  • Pingback: Read More

  • nana

    今天安省证监会发布对安永在嘉汉林业的审计中失察和违反证券法的指控

    公布的指控理由和指控嘉汉林业的公告中已经提出的一样，实际没有一条是站的住脚的理由：

    (1) 林权证

    中国的政策不发给外资企业林权证。这个安永审计时候过问了也没用，没有林权证也根本不能是嘉汉林业诈骗的证据；

    (2) 村民授权表决书

    中国国家林业局也是在2009年十一月才下达建议，要求购买林木林地的合同要附带村民授权表决书；而嘉汉林业在此之前已经购买了几十万公顷林木，并签定了几份大的长期的购林框架协议。不认为中国国家林业局会一下就作废掉以前所有没有附带村民授权表决书的合同

    (3) 地图

    中国的确有不太成文的规定，私制地图违法。而且， 嘉汉林业独立委员会聘请林业专业公司(Indofor) 已经按照购买合同找到并确认了林木（抽样调查 ），只需要拿着合同找当地林业部门借出地图，用完归还就行了。

    所以，安省证监会所说的，“没有详细的位置资料（地图 ）如何能买卖林地？如果 嘉汉林业随便指一片林木说是他们的，安永也无法确定是不是真的嘉汉林业所拥有的林木” ，是不成立的。

    (4) 现金流动的记录证明

    这个是和VIE结构面临的问题相似的，嘉汉林业用BVI模式，无法确保公司赢利可以顺利出境到投资者控制中， 完全通过中间商买入卖出林木。
    但是，如果能够证明嘉汉林业现在拥有的林木的价值，这个问题也可迎刃而解。

    (5) 只使用一家森林资源调查公司

    这个肯定是胡说。连我都知道至少有两家：一个是邵阳市林业调查规划院，网上搜一下就能看到，他们有比较详细的报告为嘉汉林业在云南的森林资源调查，另外还提到以前在湖南省的也做过。

    另一家是湛江南方林业工程质量监理有限公司&漳洲南方森林资源资产评估中心 ，创办人 祁述雄先生， 我国现代桉树事业的开拓者， 1994-2003 曾在湛江申办湛江嘉汉科技中心并任主任。

  • Pingback: δισκοι

  • nana

    有想收购嘉汉林业的, 快啊嘉汉林业大股东要求法庭推翻重组计划或至少推迟一个月， 法庭将在下周一作出决定。

    我这里有很多证据可以证明中国政府仍然承认嘉汉林业的林木合同和资产，根本不是浑水和安省证监会说的什么大骗局和伪造合同。

    虽然因为嘉汉林业是最早开始投资林业的，它当初的大合同定的林木收购和租地价格相对较低，与村民有些纠纷，但是当地法院和政府都在尽力调解，并没有简单粗暴的作废掉嘉汉林业的合同。

    以嘉汉林业现在的状况，想收购的人还是很好谈到一个理想的价格的哦。

  • Pingback: TV TS shemale escort london

  • Pingback: SBoBet

  • nana

    有那么多钱有什么用：
    国开行总资产破7万亿
    http://www.21cbh.com/HTML/2012-10-22/4MNTg5XzU0NDM4MA.html

    浑水发报告之前，国开行刚刚给嘉汉林业1.5亿的贷款，还兴高采烈的宣布很高兴和嘉汉林业的合作，要大力支持嘉汉林业在中国的经营。

    浑水指控嘉汉林业诈骗后，国开行就再没发出什么声音。这是对浑水多么大的支持啊，快跟Paulson抛光嘉汉林业的股票一样的力挺浑水了。

    有这么有力的支持者，浑水能不火吗，在对待中概股上还有人敢不听浑水的吗？

    再看看人家新加坡的淡马锡对奥兰国际的支持，浑水想在新加坡牛轰轰的就没那么容易吧。

    • xlming

      More on criminal John Paulson for Nana.

      Paulson’s good friend and Harvard roommate, Manuel Asensio:
      “Before a jury found Manuel Asensio had illegally defamed a company whose demise he would profit from, and before securities regulators barred him from employment in the banking industry for the rest of his life, he used to take down companies with savage reports under the banner of his investment bank, Asensio & Company. Then, as an “activist” short seller, he would compile damning research on a business, take a market bet its stock would go down, publish his report, and profit when it did go down.”

      “He is the king of [counterfeiting shares] and his modus operandi has been: pick small, thinly traded companies, sedulously create the illusion that the company is corrupt or committed fraud, then make a bundle on his shorts when the stock tanks. He doesn’t stop at smearing a company, but will also zero in on those who might finance it.”

      Activist short seller Daniel Loeb traded in front of the reports of Asensio. Activist short seller Daniel Loeb traded in front of the reports of fraudulent analyst and short seller “Anthony” Amr Elgindy

      Who are the “activist” short sellers negative on China?
      Who are the ones trading in front of reports released by MuddyWaters, Citronfraud?
      Who are the “activist” short sellers attempting to get the American SEC to delist Chinese companies?
      Manuel Asensio, John Paulson, Daniel Loeb, David Einhorn, David Rocker, Jim Chanos, Steven A Cohen, Jim Cramer. Goldman Sachs enables them to counterfeit shares.

      They were exposed in America. Now they are attacking Chinese ADRs. Kaifu use contacts in government to have these criminals jailed on entry to China.

      • xlming

        Criminal short seller Daniel Loeb owns 1% of Alibaba Group through his holdings of Yahoo.com. China and Mayun will be interest in Loeb’s friend “Anthony” Amr Elgindy:

        “Anthony Elgindy, a former Encinitas resident who operated a Web site for penny stock traders, was convicted yesterday on charges that he used confidential information about criminal investigations from an FBI agent to profit illegally in the market.

        “Prosecutors said he also made thousands of dollars by trading ahead of those subscribers in some of those stocks, or selling shares short in anticipation that the disclosures about them would send their prices lower.”

        “The prosecutors also said Elgindy and his associates threatened to disclose bad news about several small companies unless they were given free or deeply discounted stock.”

        “he was convicted on 11 counts of securities and wire fraud, conspiracy and extortion.”

        Daniel Loeb: a friend of Anthony Elgindy
        Daniel Loeb: subscriber to Anthony Elgindy’s service known as “Mr Pink” and “4″
        Daniel Loeb: AKA “Mr Pink” on Yahoo message boards smearing companies and company executives he holds short positions in.
        Daniel Loeb: has contacts in the SEC who launch investigations into Chinese companies he is shorting
        Daniel Loeb: good friend of the UK’s second largest convicted insider trading criminal David Einhorn
        Daniel Loeb: Indirect owner of Alibaba Group…

      • nana

        Thanks for the information about Manuel Asensio and his relationship with John Paulson.

        Carson Block was asked if he had contacted Paulson before he issued the allegation report against Sino-Forest, but Block refused to answer.

        Sino-Forest requested RCMP to investigate Carson Block and the hedge funds right after the MW report, however, RCMP only listened to the OSC and launched investigation against Sino-Forest.

  • Pingback: gluten

  • nana

    好像就在不久前，有人说做空潮已经过去了，开始憧憬中概股的春天什么的。看一下今天的彭博社文章吧：
    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-12-09/carson-block-goes-short-unafraid-as-gangsters-in-china-chase-him#p1

    美国的媒体正在把浑水的布洛克塑造成反中国式欺诈的英雄，有SEC的支持配合默契，有嘉汉林业的战绩， 中国企业家的微弱的声音和政府自卫措施也只能被归类为对这个打假英雄的威胁恐吓，没看到有好的效果。

    真正能赢得投资者的行动，还是要花钱的，让支持中国企业的投资者赚钱，至少不亏光血本。

    特别是嘉汉林业这样的，在中国运营17年，６个分公司都是各省审定的林业产业龙头企业，CEO陈德源多次获得政府颁发的奖励； 在浑水报告后还获得林业产业系统的最高奖项，中国国家林业局时任局长贾治邦， 副局长赵树丛（现任局长 ）都有出席颁奖仪式。

    嘉汉林业的海外投资者，如果最终结局就是血本无归，叫他们（我们 ）如何再相信中国和中国的企业？

  • Pingback: make money online

  • Pingback: הזמנות לחתונה מחירים

  • Pingback: Local Sniper

  • nana

    当嘉汉林业被浑水和加拿大指控诈骗的时候，中国政府表彰陈德源为”2011中国林业产业年度人物”（中国林业系统的最高奖项 ），同时却拒绝给嘉汉林业出具有法律效力的资产证明, 漠视因此导致的嘉汉林业的摘牌破产。什么意思？？

    对血本无归的海外投资者们，就只能有唯一的解读：中国政府在表彰陈德源成功的诈骗了海外投资者，空手套白狼的拿到巨额美金献给了中国政府的贪官们。

  • Pingback: Local Sniper

  • Pingback: homepage

  • Pingback: Sklep z kawą

  • xlming

    American SEC refuses to jail executives of criminal company TheStreet.com.

    “TheStreet, and the executives engaged in a scheme in 2008 to artificially inflate the company’s revenue and mislead investors.”

    “The two co-presidents of a company subsidiary and a former chief financial officer of the company agreed to pay a total of about $409,000 to settle the SEC charges.

    The two co-presidents, Gregg Alwine and David Barnett, were barred for 10 years from serving as officers or directors of any public company. The former CFO, Eric Ashman, was barred for three years.”

    TheStreet.com is also known for financial criminal Jim Cramer and fraudulent short seller David Rocker. Jim Cramer was caught trading shares of TheStreet.com on inside information seven years ago too. No penalty. He continues today pumping and dumping stocks on American television (CNBC). Corrupt SEC.

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/100325213

  • Pingback: my link

  • Peter Lee

    I had a feeling that Citron looks like the famous but notorious Chinese idiot — Fang zhouzi…who just attacks different people by guessing. if he wins, he wins, if he fails, he lost nothing..感觉这个citron很像中国的方舟子，整体靠猜测来攻击名人。有时候会赢，但是输了也没有任何成本。

    • xlming

      For Citron, it is not guessing, it is a strategic attack.

      Fraudulent hedge funds:
      1. pay Citron to attack a company with negative news,
      2. criminal hedge funds build short positions before the news is released,
      3. criminal hedge funds manipulate the share prices to create negative impressions,

      4. then the hedge funds funds cover, and buy into the news release.
      5. They also
      a. have friends at the SEC launch investigations into the companies
      b. pay fraudulent law firms to launch class action lawsuits.
      c. pay people to get jobs at the target company to disrupt the company and give them information

      The group of criminals attacking China: David Rocker, David Einhorn, Daniel Loeb, Steven A Cohen, Jim Chanos, William Ackman, Jim Cramer, John Paulson, Goldman Sachs

  • Pingback: Fast Commissions

  • xlming

    For the Baidu executives that were not born yesterday, they will be pleased to see that the American FBI is finally moving in on Wall Street criminal Steven A Cohen.

    Cohen has a minority stake in Chinese company Baidu up to 7%. He has used this position has to manipulate the share price and to trade on privileged information for over 6 years.

    After 20+ years of insider trading and securities fraud, the American FBI has caught up to Steven A Cohen.
    .Smaller criminal associates of SAC are being arrested for insider trading schemes. .Plea bargains are given to SAC associates if they testify against their boss, but because Steven A Cohen is part of organized crime it has been difficult to find get people to testify against him.
    .Jail time is unlikely: Cohen’s gang routinely buys off or threatens politicians, judges, and juries.

    Smaller SAC criminal Mathew Martoma profiled:
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-19/sac-indictment-deadline-may-show-u-s-hand-on-cohen-deal.html

  • Pingback: monocouch

  • Pingback: site here

  • Pingback: Full Article

  • Pingback: view document

  • Pingback: туроператор по израилю

  • nana

    嘉汉林业林木资产又一新官方证明
    人民网刊登湖南省省长给网友村民的回复，证实嘉汉林业子公司在湖南邵阳市洞口县月溪乡禾力村收购的11000亩集体山林，转让程序合法：

    http://leaders.people.com.cn/n/2012/1225/c178291-20003549.html

    尊
    敬的领导： 我是邵阳市洞口县月溪乡禾力村村民，现就向您汇报，恳请政府部门处理，以此来维护村民的集体合法利益！
    1、我村集体山林买卖权是属村委会还是全体村民?
    2010年我邵阳市洞口县月溪乡禾力村集体山林上万亩成材杉在没征得民主同意的情况下，村委会私自将万亩成材杉木和林地以650万低价转卖给他人40年；
    分给村民4000元/人以堵村民之口，剩余250万落入村委会下落不明；其中村委会有备留部分成材杉林地做后续使用，时隔一年，这些林地被村干部以自买自
    卖的方式瓜分私有。

    网友您好： 您所反映的问题经省林业厅、省国土资源厅、省农办调查处理，现答复如下：
    一、关于集体山林转让问题。2007年9月，禾梨村以82万元价格向嘉鼎木业有限公司（以下简称嘉鼎公司）转让该村29片山场2000余亩集体山林。
    2008年5月，又以650万元价格向嘉鼎公司转让了161个山林小班约9000亩集体山林（2010年1月，经禾梨村村民代表大会讨论决定，同意将转让
    价款降为600万元，并于同年8月修订了转让合同）。禾梨村先后两次通过招标方式转让村有山林，应获转让款682万元，因嘉鼎公司在支付600万元转让费
    时未能一次性付清，拖欠150万元于2010年付完，需支付利息7.4万元，总计689.4万元。由于后来出现少许山林纠纷，禾梨村集体山林转让费实际到
    账687.4万元。根据省林业厅调查的情况，禾梨村集体山林转让事项，经过了全体村、组党员干部及村民代表会议讨论通过，并征得全村18周岁以上80%村
    民成员的同意，所得款687.4万元直接分配给村民639.444万元，其余用于补贴村民医疗保险开支、村基础设施建设与村级活动管理开支等公益性事业支
    出，其转让程序和资金使用基本合法。

    真希望安省证监会能收回对嘉汉林业伪造收购合同的指控， 至少先好好实地考察一下。 最关键的还是先停止重组，小股民们才有望得救。

  • nana

    安省证监会为什么会错判嘉汉林业
    安省证监会对嘉汉林业的指控明显没有考虑中国国情，不符合 《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》和《民事诉讼法》规定的基本原则： “以事实为根据，以法律为准绳”。

    比如关于林权转让合同需附带村民授权书的规定，安省证监会就认为，中国有这条规定，那么嘉汉林业的收购合同没有附带村民授权书，就是非法合同，是伪造的。

    而我们看到前面湖南省政府在处理洞口县月溪乡禾力村的山林转让纠纷时，“根据省林业厅调查的情况，禾梨村集体山林转让事项，经过了全体村、组党员干部及村民代表会议讨论通过，并征得全村18周岁以上80%村民成员的同意” ，判其转让程序合法。

    在
    中国的山林权属纠纷调处办法条例中也有规定， “第九条 权属纠纷的调处，以当事人提出的已经依法确定权属时的有效法律、法规、规章的规定为依据”，
    林权转让合同需附带村民授权书的规定是中国国家林业局在2009年11月才出台的规定，所以，安省证监会对嘉汉林业的“
    收购合同没有附带村民授权书就是非法伪造的合同” 的判定也是不妥当的。

    冒似只是一个很小的理解偏差，但是，安省证监会对嘉汉林业的错判却导致了投资者几十亿美元的损失，和国际社会对中国企业的极大的不信任，中国政府信誉完全被破坏。

    还有救吗？希望渺茫。 因为安省证监会主席极度自信，认为他自己是 在依法办事，他的支持者们更是强调嘉汉林业在加拿大上市就需按加拿大法律处理，无需考虑中国的国情或法律规定。

  • Pingback: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLsp5-k5T4c

  • Pingback: Business Joomla themes 2013

  • Pingback: free photography wordpress themes download

  • Pingback: Free Jigoshop WordPress Themes

  • xlming

    Corrupt and criminal official Mary Jo White nominated to lead American SEC.

    Mary Jo White helped buy off SEC regulators to kill an investigation showing insider trading by Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack. She also reviewed a Presidential pardon of criminal Marc Rich and found nothing problematic (Marc Rich was caught illegally trading with Iran and Libya then fled America becoming a traitor — Marc Rich is friends of: Michael Steinhardt, Jim Cramer, Daniel Loeb, Steven A Cohen)

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/new-sec-chief-mary-jo-white-thinks-the-government-should-bring-cases-to-a-point-20130130

    When a victimized Chinese company asks the SEC
    to look into the suspicious trading activities, news releases, and research reports, they often find themselves to be the target of a “retaliatory investigation”. The result of complaining to the SEC is the binding and gagging of the Chinese company making it look like there is no problem.

    This is exactly what is happening with Kaifu and Citronfraud: For other Chinese companies, whatever you do don’t complain to the SEC. Know that criminals are manipulating your stock with the compliance of corrupt American regulators. Mary Jo White is a criminal and belongs in jail.

  • Pingback: Raymon Haber

  • nana

    嘉汉林业的一位股民打电话给安省证监会，问他们说, “浑水的报告, 比如有关ONP, SPRD FMCN, 已经被证明有大量的错误，虚假信息，你们怎么可以还以他的东西来说事啊?”
    安省证监会接电话的Jeffrey Fennell, Senior Inquiries Officer, 居然说，”我们不知道有这么会事，你如果有证明浑水的报告有被证明是错的，可以把证明寄给安省证监会”.

    分众和新东方的知情人 ，或许可以帮助一下安省证监会:

    Jeffrey Fennell
    Senior Inquiries Officer
    Ontario Securities Commission
    inquiries@osc.gov.on.ca
    416-593-8314
    1-877-785-1555

  • Pingback: Alaina Somer

  • Pingback: http://www.impactdoingchurchdifferently.org/index.php/member/10438

  • Pingback: http://zuluonlincoln.com/index.php/member/20625

  • Pingback: xbox 360

  • Pingback: penisadvantage

  • Pingback: mike geary truth about abs

  • Pingback: qualitywebhostings.com

  • Pingback: www.bumperstickerquotes.org

  • Pingback: penisadvantage

  • Pingback: buy edu links

  • nana

    The OSC alleges that Sino-Forest has faked the majority of its contracts, giving four reasons in the SOA:

    (1) No Certificates;
    (2) Backdated via quarterly documentation process;
    (3) No Farmers’ Authorizations;

    (4) No Maps

    Now we have this letter from the Governor of
    Hunan Province, confirming that Sino-Forest legally owns the 11,000 mu
    timber assets in Dongkou County, Hunan province, publishing on People.com.cn, the official website of the People’s Daily, an organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China :

    http://leaders.people.com.cn/n/2012/1225/c178291-20003549.html

    I think that should be enough to be considered as an evidence, even by the OSC, right?

    Then, would you please compare this contract (whose legitimacy
    has been confirmed) with the contracts which have been alleged as faked
    by the OSC:

    (1) Certificates: obviously there is no certificates. It is impossible because of China’s Policy;

    (2) Documentation Process: has this Dongkou contract been documented via
    another different documentation process? Quite unlikely.
    (3)
    Farmer’s Authorization: there is no Farmer’s Authorization attaching to
    the contracts, but the investigation has shown that over 80% farmers
    agreed with the deal, therefore the contract is legal. No Farmer’s
    Authorization should not be the reason to allege fraud or faked
    contract.

    (4) Maps; No mention of maps in the case. However, the IC report
    revealed that the Forestry Experts (Indofor) has successfully located
    the timber assets by borrowing maps from the Forestry Bureaus after
    showing them the contracts.

    In summary, the OSC’s allegation might be quite wrong and
    Sino-Forest actually legally owns over 800,000 hectares timber in China.

    I think the OSC surely has the right to say that
    Sino-Forest’s documentations do not meet Our Standards and therefore
    cannot list on Toronto Stock Exchange, however, the OSC should be more
    cautious to allege fraud and faked contracts, which causes the
    shareholders’ losing all investments.

  • Pingback: hostgator 1 cent coupon

  • Pingback: free ipad

  • Pingback: best led tv 2013

  • Pingback: penis advantage scam

  • Pingback: buy cheap backlinks

  • Pingback: xbox giveaway

  • Pingback: best portable dvd player

  • Pingback: truth about six pack abs

  • Pingback: the truth about six pack abs

  • Pingback: penis advantage review

  • Pingback: penis advantage

  • Pingback: Alberto Mingrone

  • Pingback: Edmond Wortham

  • Pingback: edu link building service

  • Pingback: hostgator coupon code

  • Pingback: win a free ipad

  • Pingback: penisadvantage

  • Pingback: backlink building service

  • Pingback: free xbox 360

  • Pingback: portable dvd player reviews

  • Pingback: mike geary truth about abs

  • Pingback: does penis advantage work

  • Pingback: Johnathan Bobson

  • Pingback: Neomi Pinnell

  • Pingback: Thalia Vogds

  • Pingback: Thalia Vogds

  • Pingback: Dannie Wardrop

  • Pingback: Trinity Orea

  • Pingback: Chong Spizzirri

  • Pingback: Delmar Hudek

  • Pingback: Amberly Mcwayne

  • Pingback: Barbie Duffer

  • Pingback: Carolann Meehleder

  • Pingback: Roy Hequembourg

  • Pingback: Irvin Canela

  • Pingback: Marcus Botdorf

  • Pingback: Phil Yochem

  • Pingback: Delphine Santangelo

  • Pingback: Roy Hequembourg

  • Pingback: Sue Plyer

  • Pingback: Huey Cluff

  • Pingback: Ivory Ionescu

  • Pingback: Johnathan Gadwah

  • Pingback: Delphine Santangelo

  • Pingback: Deja Tuell

  • Pingback: Cassandra Robbert

  • Pingback: tao of badass scam

  • Pingback: tao of badass reviews

  • Pingback: Zona Schaufelberge

  • Pingback: Claretta Rusert

  • Pingback: Jerold Auter

  • Pingback: Flossie Zupancic

  • Pingback: Beverley Waldrep

  • Pingback: Princess Guidaboni

  • Pingback: Darin Wathen

  • Pingback: Major Ramsby

  • Pingback: Jake Caneva

  • Pingback: Lindy Gamage

  • Pingback: Rico Bethel

  • Pingback: Pedro Billet

  • Pingback: Theola Dike

  • Pingback: Tillie Dungan

  • Pingback: Darnell Galayda

  • Pingback: Lavelle Ferrini

  • Pingback: Angelo Baltruweit

  • Pingback: Rosario Mavromatis

  • Pingback: Ignacia Toolsiram

  • Pingback: Renato Whittie

  • Pingback: Waldo Branam

  • Pingback: Shelby Rasbury

  • Pingback: Josefina Lampman

  • Pingback: Son Heckle

  • Pingback: Talitha Mlynek

  • Pingback: Danyell Armocida

  • Pingback: Lorenzo Yach

  • Pingback: Lilla Merk

  • Pingback: Annamaria Neylon

  • Pingback: Roy Omeara

  • Pingback: Marc Duran

  • Pingback: Glinda Behymer

  • Pingback: Corey Jobe

  • Pingback: Byron Brisendine

  • Pingback: Jerry Funchess

  • Pingback: Maya Roehrman

  • Pingback: Katherin Tipple

  • Pingback: Dusty Wamboldt

  • Pingback: Kelsi Beames

  • Pingback: Taisha Jolissaint

  • Pingback: Gina Dumay

  • Pingback: Elanor Tusa

  • Pingback: Ashley Spinosa

  • Pingback: Micheal Ashbach

  • Pingback: Mario Arguellez

  • Pingback: Gilma Wellbrock

  • Pingback: Jann Perrins

  • Pingback: Wendell Hourihan

  • Pingback: Delia Recchia

  • Pingback: Nga Liszewski

  • Pingback: Sophie Piccinone

  • Pingback: Marcos Tassin

  • Pingback: Elliot Artibee

  • Pingback: Karan Delgado

  • Pingback: Sheridan Malfatti

  • Pingback: Willene Icardo

  • Pingback: Euna Straw

  • Pingback: Antony Ianniello

  • Pingback: Charmaine Semple

  • Pingback: Shelby Orrego

  • Pingback: Lucio Conedy

  • Pingback: Jame Tefera

  • Pingback: Conrad Arizmendi

  • Pingback: Carin Steinhorst

  • Pingback: Edmund Boos

  • Pingback: Orville Fuschetto

  • Pingback: Lisha Netley

  • Pingback: Ji Phanord

  • Pingback: Emelina Holsworth

  • Pingback: Leigh Merkle

  • Pingback: Star Dewees

  • Pingback: Meg Nemard

  • Pingback: Ron Farkus

  • Pingback: Duane Czyrnik

  • Pingback: Devora Fland

  • Pingback: Quinton Racanello

  • Pingback: Noel Knoke

  • Pingback: Karine Donivan

  • Pingback: Glen Mallo

  • Pingback: Krishna Dealmeida

  • Pingback: Harold Staubin

  • Pingback: Gayle Jereb

  • Pingback: Zackary Couper

  • Pingback: See Jackowski

  • Pingback: Rolando Trachtenberg

  • Pingback: Kim Sanos

  • Pingback: Mira Trentini

  • Pingback: Adrienne Romanov

  • Pingback: Wm Magda

  • Pingback: Benny Hazim

  • Pingback: Ulysses Buote

  • Pingback: Tawana Manternach

  • Pingback: Willis Sheats

  • Pingback: Merlin Geringer

  • Pingback: Noel Purl

  • Pingback: Garnett Birchard

  • Pingback: Shyla Vanvliet

  • Pingback: Deshawn Rotundo

  • Pingback: Miguel Polit

  • Pingback: Benito Etringer

  • Pingback: Liana Loreto

  • Pingback: Fumiko Pedraza

  • Pingback: Cleotilde Tallant

  • Pingback: Christian Sever

  • Pingback: Dalton Kodama

  • Pingback: Star Dewees

  • Pingback: Gretchen Torello

  • Pingback: Sharda Tuorto

  • Pingback: Denny Mcspadden

  • Pingback: Adolph Villalvazo

  • Pingback: Matthew Scanlon

  • Pingback: Karine Donivan

  • Pingback: Eugenio Trifiletti

  • Pingback: Harold Staubin

  • Pingback: Herb Bernardon

  • Pingback: Lue Blackstone

  • Pingback: Hyo Horigan

  • Pingback: Fernanda Trigo

  • Pingback: Lorean Tkach

  • Pingback: Glen Fitzen

  • Pingback: Sol Yagues

  • Pingback: Michale Chritton

  • Pingback: Michel Larabell

  • Pingback: Andrew Truman

  • Pingback: Anjelica Hoffelt

  • Pingback: Fern Ghazal

  • Pingback: Taren Varady

  • Pingback: Katelyn Shirah

  • Pingback: Lorraine Willets

  • Pingback: Dean Kimmey

  • Pingback: Kathe Godsman

  • Pingback: Vashti Kobler

  • Pingback: Mitch Sleeper

  • Pingback: Sallie Lichtenfeld

  • Pingback: Toccara Whitenack

  • Pingback: Miles Tomehak

  • Pingback: Ira Teig

  • Pingback: Drew Cherrette

  • Pingback: Waldo Cordas

  • Pingback: Kelly Hartl

  • Pingback: Dwain Scaringe

  • Pingback: Ashleigh Limbaugh

  • Pingback: Rod Nosis

  • Pingback: Milford Mcilroy

  • Pingback: Bernard Burdex

  • Pingback: Brigitte Prioletti

  • Pingback: Shirlene Willamson

  • Pingback: Cedric Nesspor

  • Pingback: Dominick Pring

  • Pingback: Ian Verville

  • Pingback: Willy Mashek

  • Pingback: Rashida Errico

  • Pingback: Dominic Molter

  • Pingback: Mattie Zimlich

  • Pingback: Deon Hudnall

  • Pingback: Kalyn Odoms

  • Pingback: Marcela Riggs

  • Pingback: Ty Lawther

  • Pingback: Glen Preuitt

  • Pingback: Chauncey Parra

  • Pingback: Jackson Carnighan

  • Pingback: Wayne Boglioli

  • Pingback: Jolanda Dealmeida

  • Pingback: Raymon Looby

  • Pingback: Antwan Glimp

  • Pingback: Vinita Luebbert

  • Pingback: Jacques Krawetz

  • Pingback: http://65-60-111-27.static-ip.telepacific.net/groups/memoforallemployees/wiki/294b3/Just_what_One_and_all_Ought_to_Find_out_about_the_Truth_about_Six_Pack_Abs.html

  • Pingback: Susannah Lamunyon

  • Pingback: Deborah Demara

  • Pingback: http://servbsr.com/groups/livrettest/wiki/c007b/Just_what_exactly_Every_one_Should_Understand_about_the_Truth_about_Six_Pack_Abs.html

  • Pingback: Dorsey Aboudi

  • Pingback: Ena Wrisley

  • Pingback: http://appwp02.tcd.ie/groups/ipad/wiki/4ff9e/Unlock_your_fantastic_new_music_expertise_considering_the_most_effective_defeat_doing_computer_software.html

  • Pingback: Gillian Doak

  • Pingback: Allen Sequra

  • Pingback: Ferdinand Pinault

  • Pingback: Anamaria Alberg

  • Pingback: http://058177216022.ctinets.com/groups/testingwikiserver/wiki/b8c24/What_exactly_Every_body_Should_Understand_about_the_Truth_about_Six_Pack_Abs.html

  • Pingback: Phillis Ackerson

  • Pingback: Junior Trundy

  • Pingback: http://www.walleye-mn.com/groups/testwiki/wiki/4aefa/Just_what_Every_body_Really_should_Understand_about_the_Truth_about_Six_Pack_Abs.html

  • Pingback: Dovie Ahlheim

  • Pingback: Freda Strazisar

  • Pingback: Tommie Bartron

  • Pingback: Brett Wolsky

  • Pingback: http://64-52-8-67.client.cypresscom.net/groups/metiritalk/wiki/fb77d/The_magic_of_constructing_approximately_obtain_your_ex_again.html

  • Pingback: Drema Chowenhill

  • Pingback: Jenae Sprouffske

  • Pingback: Matilde Lorenzano

  • Pingback: Clifton Dubay

  • Pingback: http://podcasting.jessamine.kyschools.us/groups/beerstechsupport/wiki/73bcd/The_magic_of_constructing_approximately_get_the_ex_back_again.html

  • Pingback: Nydia Nicolo

  • Pingback: Gita Nowell

  • Pingback: Mitchel Goike

  • Pingback: Elke Elnicki

  • Pingback: Marcelene Baraban

  • Pingback: Shelli Feely

  • Pingback: Monique Stofko

  • nana

    终于有重量级的西方人开口批评安省证监会不了解中国国情鲁莽行事 ，造成了嘉汉林业的崩溃：
    http://business.financialpost.com/2013/03/05/pdac-2013-ned-goodman-blames-regulators-for-sino-forest-collapse/
    “Ned
    Goodman, the CEO of Dundee Corp., places the blame on regulators, who
    moved quickly to cease-trade the stock and launch wide-ranging probes
    following allegations by a short seller.”

    安省证监会一直以法律限制为由，没有公开任何指控嘉汉林业的证据， 只有获得授权的人可以从一个信息库看到 更多的资料。一众的局外人都基于对安省证监会的信任，认为安省证监会一定是已经拿到了指控嘉汉林业诈骗的确凿证据。

    我一直对此持怀疑态度，因为安省证监会从一开始就表现出对中国一无所知，包括中国的林业政策，发展变化等等，并且急功近利到忘了安省证监会自己的法律权限而勒令中国籍高管下台。

    现在Dundee的Ned Goodman开口批评安省证监会，证明安省证监会确实是没有什么“确凿证据”，因为Dundee作为有关连的机构应该是有权接触信息库的资料的。

  • Pingback: Isaias Hubble

  • Pingback: link

  • Pingback: Abdul Schlessman

  • Pingback: Lenny Bernstein

  • Pingback: Christopher Naas

  • Pingback: Dalila Zieba

  • Pingback: Kasey Vandeberg

  • Pingback: Bruce Ciancio

  • Pingback: Frederick Clarno

  • Pingback: Sheldon Nickleberry

  • Pingback: Orville Burgees

  • Pingback: Nola Yerke

  • Pingback: Miguel Klepchick

  • Pingback: Andy Thiara

  • Pingback: Erlinda Zarek

  • Pingback: Dane Wrightington

  • Pingback: Stefan Etherington

  • Pingback: Rolf Scarrow

  • Pingback: Gregg Zuwkowski

  • Pingback: Quentin Jahosky

  • Pingback: Jose Bernardon

  • Pingback: Oscar Tenny

  • Pingback: Brigette Berthelsen

  • Pingback: Edmundo Machak

  • Pingback: Jacinto Epperly

  • Pingback: Brice Strother

  • Pingback: Kaycee Bechtold

  • Pingback: Tayna Woollard

  • Pingback: Abe Hooker

  • Pingback: Rina Wince

  • Pingback: Anibal Orochena

  • Pingback: Shanelle Scharler

  • Pingback: Leigh Rollinson

  • Pingback: Myles Abler

  • Pingback: Rupert Yero

  • Pingback: Brock Mckenty

  • Pingback: Quinton Folkes

  • Pingback: Merrill Lishman

  • Pingback: Cinderella Graefe

  • Pingback: Tod Alegre

  • Pingback: Xochitl Lindberg

  • Pingback: Babette Lattig

  • Pingback: Ryan Wittlin

  • Pingback: Mitchell Sokotowski

  • Pingback: Ellyn Seckinger

  • Pingback: Abram Torti

  • Pingback: Delores Hainley

  • Pingback: Luis Cossett

  • Pingback: Keven Nirenberg

  • Pingback: Christoper Spangenberg

  • Pingback: Lewis Lafferty

  • Pingback: Damon Journell

  • Pingback: Hung Desroberts

  • Pingback: Nereida Akery

  • Pingback: Rafael Planas

  • Pingback: Kara Boundy

  • Pingback: Brittney Shalhoup

  • Pingback: Annalisa Douin

  • Pingback: Manuela Soldavini

  • Pingback: Rozella Losinski

  • Pingback: Alexis Sitz

  • Pingback: Moon Luetmer

  • Pingback: Patricia Bowlick

  • Pingback: Jesse Bachert

  • Pingback: Jule Grajek

  • Pingback: Shelby Losh

  • Pingback: Shalanda Halajian

  • Pingback: Fred Fonda

  • Pingback: Danilo Belton

  • Pingback: Angelo Leven

  • Pingback: Lelah Shelkoff

  • Pingback: Belen Echenique

  • Pingback: Stan Nate

  • Pingback: Aubrey Lohmeyer

  • Pingback: Jasper Biedekapp

  • Pingback: Rogelio Difabio

  • Pingback: Maryalice Amsdell

  • Pingback: Kiera Nantanapibul

  • Pingback: Garret Fruit

  • Pingback: Billie Scouten

  • Pingback: Chuck Blindt

  • Pingback: Domitila Meridieth

  • Pingback: url

  • Pingback: Errol Costella

  • Pingback: Antonio Be

  • Pingback: Kenda Strock

  • Pingback: Traci Sporleder

  • Pingback: David Renova

  • Pingback: Zachariah Fogler

  • Pingback: Margarett Leuthe

  • Pingback: Katherine Cly

  • Pingback: Jack Trotter

  • Pingback: Gennie Plaskett

  • Pingback: Lloyd Brank

  • Pingback: Laine Pillow

  • Pingback: Bradford Ortea

  • Pingback: Una Roudybush

  • Pingback: Corazon Dadds

  • Pingback: Talitha Littlefield

  • Pingback: Lucien Angton

  • Pingback: Verlie Oliff

  • Pingback: Willie Smalarz

  • Pingback: Lorrie Wahlund

  • Pingback: Christopher Sutkus

  • Pingback: Kenda Klimesh

  • Pingback: Mel Provitt

  • Pingback: Augustus Mckanic

  • Pingback: Patricia Perper

  • Pingback: Micheline Flatness

  • Pingback: Joseph Rolack

  • Pingback: Sol Korth

  • Pingback: Jerald Laude

  • Pingback: Brady Handsaker

  • Pingback: Nell Schwantes

  • Pingback: Erin Debernardi

  • Pingback: Lou Retka

  • Pingback: Sabina Sherron

  • Pingback: Stanford Lacy

  • Pingback: panic away review

  • Pingback: Sharolyn Hoelzel

  • nana

    致中国驻加拿大大使馆公开信我们强烈呼吁中国驻加拿大大使馆, 中国政府和中国国家林业局，就嘉汉林业案与加拿大政府，特别是安省证监会，举行会谈。两国政府在嘉汉林业案中截然相反的表达已经引起海外投资者对于两国关系的担忧：

    （１ ）安省证监会2011年8月26日暂停嘉汉林业股票交易，指控原中国籍高管诈骗和勒令原CEO陈德源下台；

    　中国国家林业局分别于2011年11月和2012年2月，两次表彰嘉汉林业原CEO陈德源，授予了他中国林业产业最高奖；

    （２ ）安省证监会指控嘉汉林业是财务欺诈，虚构营林业务，实际只是把资金在关联子公司之间周转来伪造营业额；

    　中国五省（广东广西福建湖南安徽 ）各级林业部门总共为嘉汉林业出具了六十多万公顷林木的证明信；嘉汉林业独立调查委员会还证实公司另外拥有十五万公顷林木的林权证；

    （３ ）安省证监会指控嘉汉林业伪造了绝大部分的合同，理由是公司没有林权证＋ 采用了（欺骗性的） 季度存档＋ 合同没有附带村民授权书＋ 以及合同没有附带地图；

    　中
    国湖南省省长在回复村民的来信中，详细介绍了湖南省政府处理洞口县月溪乡禾力村的山林转让纠纷的过程，“根据省林业厅调查的情况，禾梨村集体山林转让事
    项，经过了全体村、组党员干部及村民代表会议讨论通过，并征得全村18周岁以上80%村民成员的同意” ，判其转让程序合法。”
    这与安省证监会因合同没有附带村民授权书而判合同伪造，完全不同。

    嘉汉林业诈骗虽然未经证实，但是嘉汉林业重组后， 原嘉汉林业股东的巨大损失已经成为事实。这些已经严重破坏了中国政府特别是中国林业局，地方林业部门的信誉，甚至使海外投资者质疑中国政府是否帮助了嘉汉林业的诈骗行为。

    希望中国国家林业局尽快就嘉汉林业在中国的林木资产进行调查，发布公告澄清事实。同时，中国驻加拿大大使馆应及时与加拿大政府部门特别是安省证监会沟通，尽可能减少嘉汉林业一案对中国国家信誉和形象的损害。

    加拿大华人及嘉汉林业原股东

  • Pingback: Tamesha Irick

  • Pingback: Terence Hunkins

  • Pingback: Debora Tetter

  • Pingback: Cedrick Eckmeyer

  • Pingback: Valorie Orendain

  • Pingback: penis advantage review

  • Pingback: Jacque Blanks

  • Pingback: Heriberto Ziyad

  • Pingback: Cesar Seiffert

  • Pingback: dubturbo review

  • Pingback: the magic of making up review

  • Pingback: Russ River

  • Pingback: Elisha Beloate

  • Pingback: Fernande Tiemeyer

  • Pingback: Winston Frohwein

  • Pingback: Gerald Piertraccini

  • Pingback: Nolan Feazelle

  • Pingback: Juan Gotham

  • Pingback: Boyd Danesh

  • Pingback: Edmond Tabler

  • Pingback: Sheri Losier

  • Pingback: Burl Zanter

  • Pingback: Sun Faeth

  • Pingback: Francisco Mulanax

  • Pingback: Cruz Aliaga

  • Pingback: Jordan Husni

  • Pingback: Daren Sinagra

  • Pingback: Vince Sholl

  • Pingback: Jackie Kuka

  • Pingback: Caroll Dulmage

  • Pingback: Tommy Pesto

  • Pingback: Rickey Mabon

  • Pingback: Sheilah Vonschriltz

  • Pingback: Oliver Lenihan

  • Pingback: Jeremy Traut

  • Pingback: Digna Uvalles

  • Pingback: Brice Leath

  • Pingback: Wanita Luckie

  • Pingback: Jade Growell

  • Pingback: Sydney Sherren

  • Pingback: Portia Polosky

  • Pingback: Bobette Reho

  • Pingback: Sherryl Combass

  • Pingback: Jose Tolhurst

  • Pingback: Benjamin Antao

  • Pingback: Rubie Scantlebury

  • Pingback: Ashley Dominiquez

  • Pingback: Virgilio Fresh

  • Pingback: Vena Coaster

  • Pingback: Rema Vastardis

  • Pingback: Berry Skapura

  • Pingback: Lucile Jeffords

  • Pingback: Marilynn Bognuda

  • Pingback: Scarlett Banasiak

  • Pingback: Craig Lawyer

  • Pingback: Nickolas Gustitus

  • Pingback: Tomas Leymeister

  • Pingback: Lindsey Bargar

  • Pingback: Manuel Karstetter

  • Pingback: Dwain Beras

  • Pingback: Eda Farnsworth

  • nana Wan

    嘉汉林业前CEO陈德源于2011年11月获得中国林业产业突出贡献奖。

    国家林业局发布的 《 林业产业突出贡献奖管理办法》有如下规定：
    …..
    对已经获得突出贡献奖的单位和个人，若发现其弄虚作假等重大问题，突出贡献奖主办单位将组织有关人员进行核实并提出书面报告，情况属实的，取消其突出贡献奖资格，在媒体上公布并追回奖状、证书。
    …..

    现在因为嘉汉林业在加拿大被安省证监会指控诈骗，股东投资者都已血本无归。国家林业局是否“将组织有关人员进行核实并提出书面报告”？ 是否会 “在媒体上公布并追回（ 陈德源的）奖状、证书” 如果弄虚作假情况属实， 或者通告安省证监会，如果诈骗指控不属实 ？

  • Pingback: Shiloh Tasso

  • Pingback: Lupe Donatelli

  • Pingback: Kellee Feagins

  • Pingback: Damion Wedemeyer

  • Pingback: Beverly Borzillo

  • Pingback: Bettie Laclair

  • Pingback: Nakesha Bausman

  • Pingback: Halley Hyppolite

  • Pingback: Kent Caito

  • Pingback: Cordie Kostelnik

  • Pingback: Wilbert Moorman

  • Pingback: Julio Gattison

  • Pingback: www.freeares.org

  • Pingback: Wilber Promise

  • Pingback: Galina Keba

  • Pingback: Rubi Eyubeh

  • Pingback: Clarisa Rini

  • Pingback: 1300 number

  • Pingback: Amado Carrillo

  • Pingback: Hazel Lazaga

  • Pingback: important source

  • Pingback: Kenisha Reagans

  • Pingback: vertical jump workouts

  • Pingback: Larhonda Reisen

  • Pingback: Bennie Jelinek

  • Pingback: Ada Roumeliotis

  • Pingback: Edward Cembura

  • Pingback: Filiberto Bring

  • Pingback: Dorthea Leghorn

  • Pingback: Hedy Spahr

  • Pingback: Fae Oleary

  • Pingback: Margarette Austell

  • Pingback: Derek Lapin

  • Pingback: Dinah Curling

  • Pingback: Cathy Millraney

  • Pingback: Gertude Blasl

  • Pingback: Clay Mario

  • Pingback: Della Haverty

  • Pingback: Marion Rameau

  • Pingback: Amos Salak

  • Pingback: Lenny Galas

  • Pingback: Arletha Riggle

  • Pingback: Wm Blackwell

  • Pingback: Willard Zolty

  • Pingback: Domenic Leonardo

  • Pingback: Meghan Penninger

  • Pingback: Kira Buisson

  • Pingback: Marlin Keyon

  • Pingback: Meghan Penninger

  • Pingback: Humberto Nivar

  • Pingback: Bobbie Rizer

  • Pingback: Gilbert Leard

  • Pingback: Jamaal Smither

  • Pingback: thepremierhost.com scam web host

  • Pingback: Natacha Giarrusso

  • Pingback: Luvenia Lawrenz

  • Pingback: Rolf Woofter

  • Pingback: Janet Newball

  • Pingback: Tracey Boye

  • Pingback: Ira Minyard

  • Pingback: Clement Hightshoe

  • Pingback: Lazaro Petrauskas

  • Pingback: Avis Yanagawa

  • Pingback: Shirlene Grizzle

  • Pingback: Joline Jamerson

  • Pingback: Marian Almsteadt

  • Pingback: Annamarie Batchelor

  • Pingback: Maurita Molino

  • Pingback: Casey Wurzbacher

  • Pingback: Domingo Jhanson

  • Pingback: Tisa Gillet

  • Pingback: Alicia Mihal

  • Pingback: Jody Nwakanma

  • Pingback: Foster Ibach

  • Pingback: Tisa Biscoe

  • Pingback: Victorina Senters

  • Pingback: Karole Rinehardt

  • Pingback: Suzi Weatherspoon

  • Pingback: Shanon Cassani

  • Pingback: Wai Jost

  • Pingback: hostgator

  • Pingback: Lorna Beylotte

  • Pingback: Jonathan Kurkjian

  • Pingback: Ray Zlotnick

  • Pingback: Toby Rivenburg

  • Pingback: Moises Therriault

  • Pingback: Melodee Trippet

  • Pingback: Osvaldo Tarr

  • Pingback: Saul Piedmont

  • Pingback: Franklyn Butta

  • Pingback: Gus Kearin

  • Pingback: Stacy Struckhoff

  • Pingback: Zack Almasi

  • Pingback: Maryln Minchella

  • Pingback: Vasiliki Espada

  • Pingback: Mckenzie Bridjmohan

  • Pingback: Mike Rillera

  • Pingback: Cody Deeks

  • Pingback: Carmen Isgrigg

  • Pingback: Willard Jarrard

  • Pingback: Louann Gillie

  • Pingback: Rodrigo Rofkahr

  • Pingback: Luke Varel

  • Pingback: Lanelle Oger

  • Pingback: Svetlana Johal

  • Pingback: Leda Ufford

  • Pingback: Lizette Retz

  • Pingback: Marcia Behanan

  • Pingback: Qiana Lindman

  • Pingback: Shalonda Borunda

  • Pingback: Levi Yoshihara

  • Pingback: Erlinda Merrihew

  • Pingback: Conrad Cataldi

  • Pingback: Dallas Digilio

  • Pingback: Piper Eversmann

  • Pingback: Margert Comiskey

  • Pingback: Emelda Sather

  • Pingback: Blair Valseca

  • Pingback: Roberto Nordwall

  • Pingback: Shera Wyman

  • Pingback: Merlin Rosoff

  • Pingback: Sean Yater

  • Pingback: Rudolph Raia

  • Pingback: Sofia Oseguera

  • Pingback: Alvina Linzy

  • Pingback: Theo Pince

  • Pingback: Emanuel Moreshead

  • Pingback: Nicolas Madrano

  • Pingback: Russell Schlichting

  • Pingback: Soila Mineconzo

  • Pingback: Damian Sanson

  • Pingback: Mechelle Sharples

  • Pingback: Levi Marshman

  • Pingback: Julianna Smtih

  • Pingback: Diego Kannenberg

  • Pingback: Loren Roope

  • Pingback: Colton Vig

  • Pingback: tesc 789

  • Pingback: Margit Thede

  • Pingback: Floy Mecham

  • Pingback: Stephane Baseler

  • Pingback: Harvey Mcbryar

  • Pingback: Pierre Terazes

  • Pingback: Carmella Brawer

  • Pingback: Antonina Guinasso

  • Pingback: Porter Pody

  • Pingback: Arnulfo Mattiello

  • Pingback: Merrill Okelly

  • Pingback: bet365 sportwetten bonus

  • Pingback: Roseanne Gerace

  • Pingback: Shonta Bearded

  • Pingback: Lanette Dymond

  • Pingback: Elia Kornbluth

  • Pingback: Christina Lorino

  • Pingback: Chloe Giuliani

  • Pingback: Jerlene Mangels

  • Pingback: Lawerence Mena

  • Pingback: Jade Morawski

  • Pingback: Lazaro Vonniederhaus

  • Pingback: Arianne Langsam

  • Pingback: Chiquita Bidding

  • Pingback: Aurore Cossio

  • Pingback: Mallie Hedrington

  • Pingback: Neal Gordin

  • Pingback: Fifa 13 ultimate team coins

  • Pingback: Taylor Reglin

  • Pingback: Brittani Sandersen

  • Pingback: Thanh Stettler

  • Pingback: Son Mick

  • Pingback: Emil Sthole

  • Pingback: miumiu 財布

  • Pingback: Trevor Fairly

  • Pingback: Ellis Kampen

  • Pingback: Kenny Lenger

  • Pingback: Omar Marturano

  • Pingback: Otto Sawina

  • Pingback: Hollie Wernett

  • Pingback: Ashlea Torkildsen

  • Pingback: Moises Pirkle

  • Pingback: Nashville seo

  • Pingback: Bette Klier

  • Pingback: Dewitt Jansen

  • Pingback: Timothy Sully

  • Pingback: Barrie Pomeroy

  • Pingback: Lou Goderich

  • Pingback: Abraham Bear

  • Pingback: Johnathon Verrue

  • Pingback: Jeraldine Reprogle

  • Pingback: Leonel Johannes

  • Pingback: Mervin Bostic

  • Pingback: Willia Amerine

  • Pingback: Sommer Bandemer

  • Pingback: Arianna Parrino

  • Pingback: Elvin Delsavio

  • Pingback: Elroy Dimicco

  • Pingback: Bryon San

  • Pingback: Antonio Lineback

  • Pingback: Jamal Ritchey

  • Pingback: garage door opener repair charlotte

  • Pingback: Cyrstal Jentzsch

  • Pingback: Loma Kretschmer

  • Pingback: Will Diangelo

  • Pingback: Lindsay Mccalop

  • Pingback: Hung Salzar

  • Pingback: Frances Scee

  • Pingback: Reed Recla

  • Pingback: Ted Pedri

  • Pingback: Isidra Crater

  • Pingback: Edgardo Beliveau

  • Pingback: Devon Althoff

  • Pingback: Alla Reinert

  • Pingback: Lucien Betry

  • Pingback: Felix Durnin

  • Pingback: Brigida Preece

  • Pingback: Tessa Galimberti

  • Pingback: Kylee Cruson

  • Pingback: car dealerships in Madison tn

  • Pingback: Andy Villada

  • Pingback: Randy Mofle

  • Pingback: Aleta Rivkin

  • Pingback: Wallace Marksbury

  • Pingback: Kristy Paylor

  • Pingback: Salvatore Reimers

  • Pingback: Dorris Hoffnagle

  • Pingback: Maren Cosentino

  • Pingback: Vicente Buege

  • Pingback: rumah minimalis rumahku

  • Pingback: Henry Emanus

  • Pingback: Kathaleen Espenscheid

  • Pingback: Luther Homs

  • Pingback: Rachal Virelli

  • Pingback: Man Amela

  • Pingback: Odilia Bon

  • Pingback: eDxYeImE

  • Pingback: bCJKZMUX

  • Pingback: OhSGsQry

  • Pingback: BfpOzbLq

  • Pingback: Nashville private investigator

  • Pingback: surveillance in Nashville

  • Pingback: Dion Mintken

  • Pingback: Gricelda Ramsuer

  • Pingback: Stefan Yono

  • Pingback: Justin Vales

  • Pingback: Owen Houseworth

  • Pingback: Fran Beyett

  • Pingback: Alisia Luhmann

  • Pingback: Cordie Sandos

  • Pingback: Laine Relles

  • Pingback: Woodrow Bergfeld

  • Pingback: Juliane Morcos

  • Pingback: Lanell Khemmanivong

  • Pingback: Eusebio Goodger

  • Pingback: Lakenya Ziemann

  • Pingback: Lakenya Klinich

  • Pingback: Obdulia Pengelly

  • Pingback: Lon Taranto

  • Pingback: car alarms in Nashville

  • Pingback: Giovanni Gelerter

  • Pingback: Tommy Kuttner

  • Pingback: Frankie Finkenbiner

  • Pingback: Kimber Graveline

  • Pingback: Wilbur Chapen

  • Pingback: Eusebio Surprenant

  • Pingback: Darin Casteel

  • Pingback: Darrin Roesch

  • Pingback: Criselda Wulff

  • Pingback: Aretha Dielman

  • Pingback: Ardella State

  • Pingback: Rudolf Greaney

  • Pingback: Yessenia Maymi

  • Pingback: Bob Fullem

  • Pingback: Lanell Marsaw

  • Pingback: Cassaundra Dollak

  • Pingback: Trina Kassab

  • Pingback: Tonda Oien

  • Pingback: Lizabeth Downes

  • Pingback: Hong Manganelli

  • Pingback: Johnathon Radom

  • Pingback: Damion Beckel

  • Pingback: Torri Buxbaum

  • Pingback: Terrence Gerkin

  • Pingback: Lacy Symanski

  • Pingback: Lawrence Bettino

  • Pingback: Carmelita Watcher

  • Pingback: Isreal Winters

  • Pingback: Kristin Hanagan

  • Pingback: Lucas Mccollester

  • Pingback: Jacob Margulis

  • Pingback: Roderick Sillas

  • Pingback: Norbert Didlake

  • Pingback: Louie Beaulieu

  • Pingback: Neal Wary

  • Pingback: Theo Bahrs

  • Pingback: Myrl Panakos

  • Pingback: Rosalyn Kridel

  • Pingback: Reda Burnsworth

  • Pingback: Richelle Hok

  • Pingback: Alexander Seawell

  • Pingback: Christoper Liebelt

  • Pingback: Tyler Kupres

  • Pingback: Marivel Dragun

  • Pingback: Janie Miskell

  • Pingback: Soraya Dhein

  • Pingback: Issac Himber

  • Pingback: Johnnie Trollope

  • Pingback: Mayra Mcclearen

  • Pingback: Jung Urankar

  • Pingback: Darryl Newburg

  • Pingback: Nellie Wirth

  • Pingback: Dallas Rielly

  • Pingback: Germaine Halmes

  • Pingback: Sally Gaskamp

  • Pingback: Larraine Stamer

  • Pingback: Carlotta Dizer

  • Pingback: Twanda Margosian

  • Pingback: Shera Santio

  • Pingback: Clyde Burgees

  • Pingback: Sherwood Wedemeyer

  • Pingback: Darius Formisano

  • Pingback: Branden Wedd

  • Pingback: Meryl Ivery

  • Pingback: Eugene Levans

  • Pingback: Jasper Florea

  • Pingback: Ann Fremming

  • Pingback: payDay loans

  • Pingback: Vickey Kops

  • Pingback: Verdie Herbig

  • Pingback: Alva Groover

  • Pingback: Mikaela Hillburg

  • Pingback: Anitra Cabag

  • Pingback: Giovanna Sangren

  • Pingback: Cyril Parsell

  • Pingback: Johnie Belknap

  • Pingback: Albertine Sorgatz

  • Pingback: Barton Kulas

  • Pingback: Teressa Rautenberg

  • Pingback: Rufus Bartenfield

  • Pingback: Debbi Startin

  • Pingback: Richard Benamati

  • Pingback: Melanie Moralez

  • Pingback: best high definition wallpaper

  • Pingback: Candelaria Cepero

  • Pingback: Renee Klahn

  • Pingback: digital art tutorials

  • Pingback: Jesus Goeing

  • Pingback: Buddy Swamp

  • Pingback: Floy Grays

  • Pingback: Shayna Fire

  • Pingback: Lawrence Kite

  • Pingback: Reba Moel

  • Pingback: Eda Devoto

  • Pingback: Stephen Senseney

  • Pingback: Isaias Euton

  • Pingback: Edgar Muzzey

  • Pingback: Genevie Fiorella

  • Pingback: Otha Monckton

  • Pingback: Ira Walvoord

  • Pingback: Norine Kaloudis

  • Pingback: Archie Heaviland

  • Pingback: Antione Lascody

  • Pingback: Trey Bayliff

  • Pingback: Arie Jackley

  • Pingback: Sharee Siddens

  • Pingback: Brad Manigault

  • Pingback: Arcelia Klaiber

  • Pingback: buy here pay here in Madison tn

  • Pingback: gurtredlop

  • Pingback: My Fun Life

  • nana

    由于加拿大和中国两国政府对嘉汉林业的不同态度，现状是：

    加拿大政府对散户股东说， 嘉汉林业是诈骗，你们投资买林地的钱都鸡飞蛋打了；中国政府对中国农民说， 嘉汉林业是合法经营，它买林地的合同是合法的，你们别闹了；

    我们散户股东把中国政府给农民说的话转给安省证监会和其他加拿大政府部门，都只被告知信息收到，却没有作出任何反应；

    如果中国农民不知道加拿大对嘉汉林业的判定，不去要回他们的林地，那中国政府就肯定是一言不发的默许汉青木业(Emerald)接手这些林地，实际效果就是两国政府把巨额资产输送给了汉青木业背后的有钱有权的大佬们。

    当然，如果两国政府是黑箱密谋了的， 中国农民也会和我们一样什么也要不到。我觉得应该不是个阴谋，是两国政府外交的失败，几乎没有交流，造成的。

    所以， 中国农民还是很有希望拿回林地，而不是让汉青木业代替了嘉汉林业继续租用，合同合法，或者非法，不可能二者都成立呀

  • nana

    终于找出嘉汉林业案错在哪里啦！！
    根据中华人民共和国森林法第二章第十七条：
    　　 单位之间发生的林木、林地所有权和使用权争议，由县级以上人民政府依法处理。
    　　个人之间、个人与单位之间发生的林木所有权和林地使用权争议，由当地县级或者乡级人民政府依法处理。

    加拿大安省证监会根本不具备判定嘉汉林业在中国的林木资产所有权的法律资格。嘉汉林业出具了它在中国收购林木资产的合同，如果安省证监会对嘉汉林业的林木资产所有权有异议，它理应向中国相应的地方政府提出，要求人民政府依法处理，而不是自己作出裁定。

    当
    然，安省证监会拥有合法权利来裁定嘉汉林业是否具备在加拿大证券市场的上市资格。但是，只是取消上市资格
    （比如，因为所提供的文件格式不符合安省证监会要求等
    ），和被指控诈骗，伪造绝大部分合同，差别巨大。如果是前者，股东们至少还拥有私有化后的公司，而不是血本无归。

    在已经由中国各级地方政府处理了的有关嘉汉林业子公司的五个 林权纠纷案中，嘉汉林业／子公司／代理商 还从没有被指控有任何非法诈骗行为：

    (1)江西省赣州市瑞金拔英乡红门村林权纠纷
    http://www.chinareform.org.cn/economy/agriculture/report/201007/t20100712_35339.htm
    争议两方：村民与曼图林业（江西）有限公司 （2010年被嘉汉林业收购 ）
    处理部门和时间 ： 瑞金市人民政府，2008年8月
    处理结果： 曼图林业江西有限公司拥有两万多亩山林的49年经营管理权；另外一万亩有边界争议的山林将由瑞金市林业工作站各小组代表一起划清林地界限。

    {参见：”All about Sino-Forest – 嘉汉林业” # (16) }

    (2) 湖南省道县横岭瑶族民族村林权纠纷
    http://cpws.flssw.com/info/39129448/
    争议两方：村民与永州永高林业有限公司嘉汉林业代理商 ）
    处理部门和时间 ： 道县人民政府，2011年6月
    处理结果：
    - 民族村村委会2人因伪造林权流转合同上村民的签字被捕;
    - 道县林业局横岭林业管理站前工作人员3人被裁定犯玩忽职守罪，免予刑事处罚;
    - 道县林业局干部1人被裁定犯玩忽职守罪，免予刑事处罚;
    - 林权流转合同终止，因为合同上村民的签字是村委会2人伪造的.

    {参见：”All about Sino-Forest – 嘉汉林业” # (41) }

    (3) 广西省南宁市兴宁区五塘镇王竹村合同争议
    http://www.nnxn.gov.cn/sifaju/contents/1868/36046.html
    争议两方：村民与广西桂嘉林业公司 (嘉汉林业子公司 ）
    处理部门和时间 ： 兴宁区五塘镇人民政府，2011年6月
    处理结果：广西桂嘉林业公司林木砍伐是合法经营行为，任何人不能以群众运动的方式阻扰; 合同争议问题，若协商不成的应依法起诉解决，而不应采取过激行为.

    {参见：”All about Sino-Forest – 嘉汉林业” # (48) }

    (4) 湖南省张家界市桑植县谷罗山乡牛洞口村林权纠纷
    http://222.240.131.232/mainAction!showGSDetail.action?model.email.ID=HN20121105LH229J18
    争议两方：村民与永州市永高林业公司(嘉汉林业代理商 ）
    处理部门和时间 ：张家界市人民政府 ，2012年6月
    处理结果：林权流转合同被登报终止, 相关林权证注销, 因为嘉汉林业在2011年6月支付了60%的费用，但是至2012年5月已经 一年以上末付清林地和林木转让费.

    {参见：”All about Sino-Forest – 嘉汉林业” # (50) }

    (5) 湖南省邵阳市洞口县月溪乡禾力村林权纠纷
    http://leaders.people.com.cn/n/2012/1225/c178291-20003549.html
    争议两方：村民与邵阳嘉鼎木业有限公司(嘉汉林业子公司 ）
    处理部门和时间 ：湖南省人民政府 ，2012年12月
    处理结果：林权流转合同合法, 因为流转经过了村民讨论和80%以上村民同意，其转让程序和资金使用基本合法.

    {参见：”All about Sino-Forest – 嘉汉林业” # (59) }

  • Pingback: replica hermes belt

  • Pingback: Alopecia

  • Pingback: at this

  • Pingback: Homepage

  • Pingback: Cheryll Droze

  • Pingback: Augustus Darrough

  • Pingback: Berna Kara

  • Pingback: Shae Kirchhofer

  • Pingback: Erasmo Ducklow

  • Pingback: Jerry Etchells

  • Pingback: Ramon Cocomazzi

  • Pingback: Devon Mory

  • Pingback: Chi Mercado

  • Pingback: Mana Cobham

  • Pingback: Zachary Gizzi

  • Pingback: Jewel Faby

  • Pingback: Talisha Trotti

  • Pingback: Ezekiel Guerrouxo

  • Pingback: Maynard Balish

  • Pingback: Jamison Mehtani

  • Pingback: Wilbur Whybrew

  • Pingback: Vallie Rohan

  • Pingback: Darren Huell

  • Pingback: Roderick Oieda

  • Pingback: Casimira Flash

  • Pingback: Rogelio Teehee

  • Pingback: Kazuko Sellmeyer

  • Pingback: Cornelia Sackrider

  • Pingback: Rodney Segal

  • Pingback: Gregg Fornicola

  • Pingback: Jesse Banghart

  • Pingback: Pearlene Bialas

  • Pingback: Vicky Ottem

  • Pingback: Samantha Lattanzio

  • Pingback: Brian Hollinghurst

  • Pingback: Jamie Dinovi

  • Pingback: Ernest Wentcell

  • Pingback: Ira Stavrositu

  • Pingback: Grover Michele

  • Pingback: Fermin Askins

  • Pingback: Reginia Harriman

  • Pingback: Rosio Fune

  • Pingback: Arnulfo Mazzei

  • Pingback: Seymour Mathiason

  • Pingback: Melodie Dember

  • Pingback: Enola Braga

  • Pingback: Boyd Mckindra

  • Pingback: Keena Nuffer

  • Pingback: Nubia Waymire

  • Pingback: Gregg Neuweg

  • Pingback: Alonso Precise

  • Pingback: Fabian Cavalier

  • Pingback: Quinn Ojala

  • Pingback: Jarrett Desamparo

  • Pingback: Danette Whited

  • Pingback: Jeromy Justiniano

  • Pingback: Sharyl Ku

  • Pingback: Paula Gertken

  • Pingback: Luciano Vandenbos

  • Pingback: Giuseppe Arisumi

  • Pingback: Preston Feiertag

  • Pingback: Nathan Deisch

  • Pingback: Gavin Gadd

  • Pingback: Richard Wohl

  • Pingback: Samuel Vandall

  • Pingback: Usha Dellibovi

  • Pingback: Edmundo Toline

  • Pingback: Fletcher Dagostino

  • Pingback: Sharilyn Culbreth

  • Pingback: Miss Leeks

  • Pingback: Karan Demich

  • Pingback: Kirk Pecci

  • Pingback: Rolando Homan

  • Pingback: Elisabeth Rodeman

  • Pingback: Weston Clampett

  • Pingback: Monte Sulfridge

  • Pingback: Richard Ohotto

  • Pingback: Mindy Farrant

  • Pingback: Karan Lartigue

  • Pingback: Valrie Bizcassa

  • Pingback: Chi Burden

  • Pingback: Rudolf Lowthorp

  • Pingback: Alta Niese

  • Pingback: Casey Hagenbrok

  • Pingback: Elvis Harsey

  • Pingback: Frank Inscoe

  • Pingback: Suk Lippoldt

  • Pingback: Royal Sack

  • Pingback: Francis Praska

  • Pingback: Francie Villane

  • Pingback: Eloy Shawhan

  • Pingback: Wei Nicewarner

  • Pingback: Candelaria Gareau

  • Pingback: Karan Castile

  • Pingback: Fabian Graughard

  • Pingback: Pasquale Rivenbark

  • Pingback: Raul Dietel

  • Pingback: vpn connection

  • Pingback: Armandina Minkowitz

  • Pingback: anonymous browsing

  • Pingback: Burton Haverland

  • Pingback: Shon Glory

  • Pingback: Stacy Renouf

  • Pingback: Tomas Ordas

  • Pingback: Shondra Chadsey

  • Pingback: Jerrod Gissler

  • Pingback: Eula Theodoratos

  • Pingback: Leonardo Jungwirth

  • Pingback: Sarina Lum

  • Pingback: Harold Forchione

  • Pingback: Emile Huckleberry

  • Pingback: Jefferson Lochotzki

  • Pingback: Nicholas Escalet

  • Pingback: Rogelio Casciato

  • Pingback: Theresa Killeen

  • Pingback: Burl Enrique

  • Pingback: Bill Denardo

  • Pingback: Desire Winokur

  • Pingback: Rosario Thammorongsa

  • Pingback: Bridgette Kruis

  • Pingback: Terese Beske

  • Pingback: Scottie Praml

  • Pingback: Benito Smithen

  • Pingback: Cher Baruffi

  • Pingback: Norberto Leven

  • Pingback: Clay Cirone

  • Pingback: Robert Leos

  • Pingback: Hong Wabasha

  • Pingback: Derrick Kara

  • Pingback: Roxy Friedstrom

  • Pingback: Mary Eckles

  • Pingback: Winnie Bartch

  • Pingback: Gerry Felan

  • Pingback: Merle Handlin

  • Pingback: Sherman Onan

  • Pingback: Nathanial Abramson

  • Pingback: Mason Ahnell

  • Pingback: Gerald Huslander

  • Pingback: Michel Negrisor

  • Pingback: Magen Snorden

  • Pingback: Vella Megown

  • Pingback: Cortez Morta

  • Pingback: Mamie Alexanian

  • Pingback: Fatima Prosper

  • Pingback: Walton Fedie

  • Pingback: Kiersten Hehl

  • Pingback: Luci Isacson

  • Pingback: Cherrie Deford

  • Pingback: Debora Lebouef

  • Pingback: Cornell Raid

  • Pingback: Wm Lumbra

  • Pingback: Deangelo Coberley

  • Pingback: Thad Bergmeyer

  • Pingback: Genaro Aristizabal

  • Pingback: Josue Darras

  • Pingback: Stephan Bernardez

  • Pingback: Jed Guzek

  • Pingback: Jc Zebrowski

  • Pingback: Jessie Ahuja

  • Pingback: Bryant Handley

  • Pingback: Emily Shulda

  • Pingback: Lavera Stokel

home top