• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US agents raid Gibson Guitar over ebony

I am not familiar with all the detail of the case against Gibson. Perhaps they gave them a break, perhaps they didn't have enough evidence to place charges. Are you betting they don't place charges this time?

yeah, that's probably a purdy safe bet. You be sure and let us know when they charge them with something.
 
Here is further info about the case:

"In June 2011, the United States Department of Justice filed a civil case against Gibson, stating: "Gibson sourced its unfinished ebony wood in the form of blanks (for use in the manufacture of fingerboards for Gibson guitars) from Nagel (in Germany), which obtained it exclusively from Roger Thunam (a supplier in Madagascar). Madagascar prohibits the harvest of ebony wood as well as the exportation of unfinished ebony wood." The filing also made mention of internal emails from 2008 and 2009 that discussed ebony species from Madagascar and plans to harvest it.[SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] The case against Gibson Guitar was the first under the amended Lacey Act, which requires importing companies to purchase legally harvested wood and follow the environmental laws of the producing countries regardless of corruption or lack of enforcement.[SUP][19]"

"[/SUP]The charges against the company constitute a felony, and if proven, the company could face large fines and the executives involved could face jail terms."
Gibson Guitar Corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibson_Guitar_Corporation
[/SUP]
 
Constitutional rights applies to everyone as individuals and corporations, this is how understand, Although I am not a lawyer but the constitution was written for any citizen to understand. I am being consistent, if a man is caught with the smoking gun in hand after a murder then you have probable cause to arrest and hold along with immediately being levied. If one is suspected of a murder without a smoking gun in hand then the state has yet to have proof or can not prove ones guilt, then one must be released until the actual charge with evidence can be justified.

This may surprise you but every legal dispute does not lead to a constitutional issue. "Fed agencies are unconsitutional...", "Federal laws being enforced by the feds is unconstitutional", "Innocent until proven guilty" blah, blah blah..... It's getting boring

In a civil case, either party can petition the court to put a "hold" of some sort on the other parties assets. Bank accounts can he "frozen", and assets can be sequestered.

It happens all the time.

Give us some examples of which Libbo politician that ran on a platform of less government regulation. I await with bated breath.

Clinton in 1992 (welfare reform - "End welfare as we know it" and NAFTA) and 1996 (financial deregulation)

According to the honch as Gibson, he claims to have imported the materials legally and has the docs to prove it.

Can you prove that he's lieing?

And the jails are filled with people who swear they never did it :roll:

Here is further info about the case:

"In June 2011, the United States Department of Justice filed a civil case against Gibson, stating: "Gibson sourced its unfinished ebony wood in the form of blanks (for use in the manufacture of fingerboards for Gibson guitars) from Nagel (in Germany), which obtained it exclusively from Roger Thunam (a supplier in Madagascar). Madagascar prohibits the harvest of ebony wood as well as the exportation of unfinished ebony wood." The filing also made mention of internal emails from 2008 and 2009 that discussed ebony species from Madagascar and plans to harvest it.[SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] The case against Gibson Guitar was the first under the amended Lacey Act, which requires importing companies to purchase legally harvested wood and follow the environmental laws of the producing countries regardless of corruption or lack of enforcement.[SUP][19]"

"[/SUP]The charges against the company constitute a felony, and if proven, the company could face large fines and the executives involved could face jail terms."
Gibson Guitar Corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibson_Guitar_Corporation
[/SUP]

Looks like someones' whining had no basis in reality :lol:
 
Here is further info about the case:

"In June 2011, the United States Department of Justice filed a civil case against Gibson, stating: "Gibson sourced its unfinished ebony wood in the form of blanks (for use in the manufacture of fingerboards for Gibson guitars) from Nagel (in Germany), which obtained it exclusively from Roger Thunam (a supplier in Madagascar). Madagascar prohibits the harvest of ebony wood as well as the exportation of unfinished ebony wood." The filing also made mention of internal emails from 2008 and 2009 that discussed ebony species from Madagascar and plans to harvest it.[SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] The case against Gibson Guitar was the first under the amended Lacey Act, which requires importing companies to purchase legally harvested wood and follow the environmental laws of the producing countries regardless of corruption or lack of enforcement.[SUP][19]"

"[/SUP]The charges against the company constitute a felony, and if proven, the company could face large fines and the executives involved could face jail terms."
Gibson Guitar Corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibson_Guitar_Corporation
[/SUP]

There might be a slight flaw in the Gibson wiki write up, around the point that a civil case does not carry with it criminal felony charges. I could find no docket number for a criminal case nor could I find a filing for a civil case per that Wiki article, or, it may be that the two quotes you posted do not reference each other but reference different raids. As of today, the DOJ has not filed a criminal charges against Gibson.
 
There might be a slight flaw in the Gibson wiki write up, around the point that a civil case does not carry with it criminal felony charges. I could find no docket number for a criminal case nor could I find a filing for a civil case per that Wiki article, or, it may be that the two quotes you posted do not reference each other but reference different raids. As of today, the DOJ has not filed a criminal charges against Gibson.

Show me the basis for your assumption that a civil case precludes separate criminal charges? As referenced in the Wiki article (16):

"Fish and Wildlife Service agent's affidavit indicates charges forthcoming."
Federal agent: Gibson wood investigation likely to result in indictments | nashvillepost.com
 
Show me the basis for your assumption that a civil case precludes separate criminal charges? As referenced in the Wiki article (16):

"Fish and Wildlife Service agent's affidavit indicates charges forthcoming."
Federal agent: Gibson wood investigation likely to result in indictments | nashvillepost.com


First, there has to be proof there IS a civil case pending, which I can find no evidence that there is. Therefore your request is premature. Second, you quoted two different occurrances, the 2009 Madagascar case of the "misbegotten" ebony blanks, and the August 29, 2011 raid of woods from India. Third, a civil case doesn't carry with it criminal charges - a criminal case must be brought against Gibson - therefore your quote leads a reader who's not familiar with the case to believe;

a. There's a civil case (there no evidence of one)
b. That a civil case can result in a felony charge with jail time (which it cannot, only a criminal case can bring a felony charge)

Note: The entire section you pulled the quote from is under review, cites no court cases, reference no docket numbers, etc.etc.etc.


Therefore, it's bupkus. Which is par for the course in your posts. Call me when there's a criminal charge, until then your simply regurgitating misinformation.

:coffeepap:
 
First, there has to be proof there IS a civil case pending, which I can find no evidence that there is.

"Several sources cite a US Department of Justice civil suit filed against Nashville-based Gibson Guitar, for violating the Lacey Act, which prohibits trade in wildlife, fish, plants – and endangered ebony and rosewoods from Madagascar. The DOJ filing reads:

“Gibson sourced its unfinished ebony wood in the form of blanks (for use in the manufacture of fingerboards for Gibson guitars) from Nagel (in Germany), which obtained it exclusively from Roger Thunam (a supplier in Madagascar). Madagascar prohibits the harvest of ebony wood as well as the exportation of unfinished ebony wood.”

Second, you quoted two different occurrances, the 2009 Madagascar case of the "misbegotten" ebony blanks, and the August 29, 2011 raid of woods from India.

Correct.

Third, a civil case doesn't carry with it criminal charges - a criminal case must be brought against Gibson

A civil case does not preclude separate criminal charges. I have quoted a federal agent that said charges are forthcoming. Try to keep your pants on until then.
 
The great majority of criminals claim they are innocent. The investigation will determine if he is telling the truth, or not. We know the Court felt the evidence was sufficient for the raid. Who are we to second guess the Court's decision, and on what basis?

Yes, but if he's got documentation to prove his innocence then he's really jumped the gun, and what are they going to do, spend a month and half a million in forensics to verify the origins of each piece of wood to make sure it's all accurate??

But let's assume that Gibson is guilty, they make friggin GUITARS, it's not like "Gibson guitars and guns", or "Gibsons guitar and crackhouse". Seriously, they could have walked in the front door with 2 agents walked into the managers office, explained the situation and taken whatever actions from there. There's NO REASON to justify an armed raid like this.

First, there has to be proof there IS a civil case pending, which I can find no evidence that there is. Therefore your request is premature. Second, you quoted two different occurrances, the 2009 Madagascar case of the "misbegotten" ebony blanks, and the August 29, 2011 raid of woods from India. Third, a civil case doesn't carry with it criminal charges - a criminal case must be brought against Gibson - therefore your quote leads a reader who's not familiar with the case to believe;

a. There's a civil case (there no evidence of one)
b. That a civil case can result in a felony charge with jail time (which it cannot, only a criminal case can bring a felony charge)

Note: The entire section you pulled the quote from is under review, cites no court cases, reference no docket numbers, etc.etc.etc.


Therefore, it's bupkus. Which is par for the course in your posts. Call me when there's a criminal charge, until then your simply regurgitating misinformation.

:coffeepap:

The exception being that if the court sees evidence in which to lay criminal charges during the case, then a person can face criminal charges for that crime....

But really, you'd think if they are going to raid a place that they at least have the evidence to generate criminal charges... or that there's a REASON to believe that a person is armed and or dangerous. But, this situation is BS, and especially claiming the Lacey act and agenda 21.

They have to use both to even ATTEMPT to pass it off as illegal, because the Lacey act IS only violated by using agenda 21 that says that nations laws apply across nations in circumstances... so, because it's illegal for non-indian gibson workers to take raw wood products and to manufacture the wood, that law applies to the US because of the dealings with the source companies. The catch is, their law is ONLY MEANT TO APPLY in INDIA.
 
Yes, but if he's got documentation to prove his innocence then he's really jumped the gun, and what are they going to do, spend a month and half a million in forensics to verify the origins of each piece of wood to make sure it's all accurate??

But let's assume that Gibson is guilty, they make friggin GUITARS, it's not like "Gibson guitars and guns", or "Gibsons guitar and crackhouse". Seriously, they could have walked in the front door with 2 agents walked into the managers office, explained the situation and taken whatever actions from there. There's NO REASON to justify an armed raid like this.



The exception being that if the court sees evidence in which to lay criminal charges during the case, then a person can face criminal charges for that crime....

But really, you'd think if they are going to raid a place that they at least have the evidence to generate criminal charges... or that there's a REASON to believe that a person is armed and or dangerous. But, this situation is BS, and especially claiming the Lacey act and agenda 21.

They have to use both to even ATTEMPT to pass it off as illegal, because the Lacey act IS only violated by using agenda 21 that says that nations laws apply across nations in circumstances... so, because it's illegal for non-indian gibson workers to take raw wood products and to manufacture the wood, that law applies to the US because of the dealings with the source companies. The catch is, their law is ONLY MEANT TO APPLY in INDIA.

Thanks for your opinion!
 
Thanks for your opinion!

Ya, you've never seen an injustice performed in the name of the environment that you didn't love, so we'll weight your sarcasm accordingly.
 
Ya, you've never seen an injustice performed in the name of the environment that you didn't love, so we'll weight your sarcasm accordingly.

Are you pro-trafficking of endangered species?
 
Are you pro-trafficking of endangered species?

That's a secondary issue... I mean, who is more at fault, the person BUYING wood that was labelled fraudulently, or the person SELLING the wood??

What's more, the wood WAS certified, it was wood that had fallen dead and NOT cut down, the reason why it was a violation of the lacey act had to do with the fact that Gibson was WORKING the wood, which in INDIA (the source of the wood is madagascar, the company selling is from india, let's be clear on this much) is illegal to have non-indians manufacturing goods from wood.

SO, the only law violated is that they were not aware of this law, which India considers the law valid only within their country. (It's pretty ridiculous that they would sell wood KNOWING that the company buying cannot possibly do anything with it... doesn't lead to alot of repeat business). Furthermore, the other major guitar makers in the US ALSO get their wood FROM THE SAME SOURCES, but because the main competitor is a large Obama contributor you won't be seeing them get raided anytime soon.

This is YET ANOTHER examples of environmentalists attempting to do something "good" that just blows up in everybody's face... (remember the push for ethanols?? Hint : Using food for fuel boost the price of food to the point where millions went from a subsistence level to a starvation level existence, and millions more went from starvation level existence to dead.)

Yes, I understand the need to protect nature, but really, let's handle things in an even-handed and level-headed fashion, and not these gestapo like tactics, it's seriously over-the-top.
 
That's a secondary issue... I mean, who is more at fault, the person BUYING wood that was labelled fraudulently, or the person SELLING the wood??

What's more, the wood WAS certified, it was wood that had fallen dead and NOT cut down, the reason why it was a violation of the lacey act had to do with the fact that Gibson was WORKING the wood, which in INDIA (the source of the wood is madagascar, the company selling is from india, let's be clear on this much) is illegal to have non-indians manufacturing goods from wood.

No, it is the primary issue, it was the reason for the raid. As I documented in post #142, "Andrea Johnson, director of forest programs for the Environmental Investigation Agency in Washington, says the Lacey Act requires end users of endangered wood to certify the legality of their supply chain all the way to the trees. EIA's independent investigations have concluded that Gibson knowingly imported tainted wood."

What makes you think you know the wood was certified?
 
No, it is the primary issue, it was the reason for the raid. As I documented in post #142, "Andrea Johnson, director of forest programs for the Environmental Investigation Agency in Washington, says the Lacey Act requires end users of endangered wood to certify the legality of their supply chain all the way to the trees. EIA's independent investigations have concluded that Gibson knowingly imported tainted wood."

Ya, I'm aware, and it's because of agenda 21 that created the violation of the Lacey act. I say it's secondary because the handling of this issue was way over the top, this is continuation of an agenda to attack small business and entrepreneurship.

Well, either the wood was documented and he is the victim of a fraud, or he's not a good businessman to cut corners legally and HOPE to not be caught.


What makes you think you know the wood was certified?

A company like that has lawyers guiding their every action, I don't see that there would be that kind of risk taking. Gibson is a small company that's very successful, companies like that generally cannot take very many hits like this.

That said, he COULD still be guilty, that much is for the courts to decide, but this doesn't change that this law was interpreted in a very draconian way.
 
Ya, I'm aware, and it's because of agenda 21 that created the violation of the Lacey act. I say it's secondary because the handling of this issue was way over the top, this is continuation of an agenda to attack small business and entrepreneurship.

Well, either the wood was documented and he is the victim of a fraud, or he's not a good businessman to cut corners legally and HOPE to not be caught.




A company like that has lawyers guiding their every action, I don't see that there would be that kind of risk taking. Gibson is a small company that's very successful, companies like that generally cannot take very many hits like this.

And yet, in spite of all those lawyers guiding their every action, Gibson had engaged in this illegal behavior before. It take an incredible amount of naivete, or more likely disingenousity, to claim that business won't engage in illegal behavior

That said, he COULD still be guilty, that much is for the courts to decide, but this doesn't change that this law was interpreted in a very draconian way.

That claim of "draconian" is so nonsensical that even you can't back it up by stating how a law that says its' illegal to import this wood is "draconian" when used against a corp that imported this wood illegally :cuckoo:
 
Here is my take on this:

1) Ebony is an endangered wood.

2) Therefore, by law, we cannot purchase ebony from Africa.

3) But Gibson did not purchase ebony from Africa. They purchased it from India. They broke no law.

4) The government is full of idiots. The government is full of idiots. Yes, this beared repeating.

Here is my solution - Gibson should stop manufacturing fretboards with their wood. Instead, they should manufacture baseball bats for a few weeks, and hand them out to musicians, who will gladly use them on government officials. :mrgreen:
 
But Gibson did not purchase ebony from Africa. They purchased it from India. They broke no law.

"Andrea Johnson, director of forest programs for the Environmental Investigation Agency in Washington, says the Lacey Act requires end users of endangered wood to certify the legality of their supply chain all the way to the trees. EIA's independent investigations have concluded that Gibson knowingly imported tainted wood."
 

"Andrea Johnson, director of forest programs for the Environmental Investigation Agency in Washington, says the Lacey Act requires end users of endangered wood to certify the legality of their supply chain all the way to the trees. EIA's independent investigations have concluded that Gibson knowingly imported tainted wood."

Darn those pesky facts!!
 
Darn those pesky facts!!

Gibson and their allies are not going down without a fight. I hope Obama sees him and realizes who he is.

Two weeks after his company was raided by federal agents — for the second time in two years — Gibson Guitar CEO Henry Juszkiewicz will be a guest at President Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress Thursday.

In a statement released this afternoon, Republican U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn said Juszkiewicz will be her “special guest.”

“Gibson Guitar is at the heart of this jobs debate, and is an example of exactly why President Obama has it wrong when it comes to getting our economy back on track,” Blackburn said in a statement. “Maybe if the President spent more time finding real solutions to empowering small business owners and less time hindering businesses like Gibson, we'd see more new jobs being created.

It is obvious that the justice dept. is interpreting an Indian law differently than the Indian government is. The wood obtained by Gibson is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council as having been legally harvested. It appears that the wood would be ok if Gibson contracted to an Indian company to have it finished then shipped to Gibson for installation.

Sounds like a good way to increase American employment to me. :roll:
 
Gibson and their allies are not going down without a fight. I hope Obama sees him and realizes who he is.



It is obvious that the justice dept. is interpreting an Indian law differently than the Indian government is. The wood obtained by Gibson is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council as having been legally harvested. It appears that the wood would be ok if Gibson contracted to an Indian company to have it finished then shipped to Gibson for installation.

Sounds like a good way to increase American employment to me. :roll:

The only thing that is obvious from your posts is that you have no knowledge with which to base your uneducated opinions. I would suggest you wait for more facts to come out, but, I know from past experience that will not stop you, so continue to rant away and roll your eyes if it makes you feel better!
 
Gibson and their allies are not going down without a fight. I hope Obama sees him and realizes who he is.



It is obvious that the justice dept. is interpreting an Indian law differently than the Indian government is. The wood obtained by Gibson is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council as having been legally harvested. It appears that the wood would be ok if Gibson contracted to an Indian company to have it finished then shipped to Gibson for installation.

Sounds like a good way to increase American employment to me. :roll:

The only thing thats obvious is that your posts have no basis in reality. You have consistently mistated the facts
 
"Several sources cite a US Department of Justice civil suit filed against Nashville-based Gibson Guitar, for violating the Lacey Act, which prohibits trade in wildlife, fish, plants – and endangered ebony and rosewoods from Madagascar. The DOJ filing reads:

“Gibson sourced its unfinished ebony wood in the form of blanks (for use in the manufacture of fingerboards for Gibson guitars) from Nagel (in Germany), which obtained it exclusively from Roger Thunam (a supplier in Madagascar). Madagascar prohibits the harvest of ebony wood as well as the exportation of unfinished ebony wood.”

Docket #?

A civil case does not preclude separate criminal charges. I have quoted a federal agent that said charges are forthcoming. Try to keep your pants on until then.
A civil case does not guarantee a criminal charge either... of which there is no criminal charge still - and I doubt a civil court case either. You're "preclude" is a very nice strawman.
 
The exception being that if the court sees evidence in which to lay criminal charges during the case, then a person can face criminal charges for that crime....

But really, you'd think if they are going to raid a place that they at least have the evidence to generate criminal charges... or that there's a REASON to believe that a person is armed and or dangerous. But, this situation is BS, and especially claiming the Lacey act and agenda 21.

They have to use both to even ATTEMPT to pass it off as illegal, because the Lacey act IS only violated by using agenda 21 that says that nations laws apply across nations in circumstances... so, because it's illegal for non-indian gibson workers to take raw wood products and to manufacture the wood, that law applies to the US because of the dealings with the source companies. The catch is, their law is ONLY MEANT TO APPLY in INDIA.
Yes, but the DOJ seems to want to apply Indian law in the United States. I'm still not convinced there is a civil suit pending since I've found (nor has anyone else posted) a case # or docket # against Gibson. What's more interesting is that Fender and other guitar makers also purchase their woods from the same places yet they haven't been raided at all.
 
Docket #?

A civil case does not guarantee a criminal charge either... of which there is no criminal charge still - and I doubt a civil court case either. You're "preclude" is a very nice strawman.

Thanks for your opinion. I prefer facts myself:

"The government has not yet released a statement to the public on the case, but the affidavit filed to obtain the search warrants has been unsealed and is circulating (ref: “Affidavit in Support of Search Warrant #11-MJ-1067 A,B,C,D”). The facts referred to below are based on information contained in this affidavit. The Environmental Investigation Agency urges the FWS to issue further statements in order to help calm the confusion and concern generated among many companies and individuals in the musical instruments industry, other businesses and the media.

The Lacey Act violation in question concerns Gibson’s import of pieces of rosewood and ebony that the government alleges to have been falsely declared both during export from India and during import to the U.S. The sawnwood in question had been exported from India under an incorrect tariff code (HS 9209), allegedly to avoid the Indian government’s prohibition on export of sawnwood products (HS 4407); and had been declared upon import as veneer (HS 4408). The affidavit states that this description “fraudulently presents as a shipment that would be legal to export from India, and, in turn, would not be a violation of the Lacey Act.” According to the affidavit, discrepancies among the paperwork accompanying the shipment suggest that the recipients knew they were purchasing sawnwood."

Background: the Lacey Act and the Fish & Wildlife Service raid on Gibson Guitars
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your opinion. I prefer facts myself:

Then what's the docket # for the civil case? Just to be clear - I'm not looking for a statement to the public from the government about the case, I want the case number. You know... when there's a lawsuit issued in this country it's assigned a court case # and then is put on the docket with a judge. Since you're into facts... what's the case # or docket #?

When you don't provide one... I'll know your facts are just more opinion... and I really don't care about your opinion so I won't thank you for it. :lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom