• 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

Catawba said:
Sometimes criminal investigations take years. Again, nothing out of the norm.
Click to expand...

yeah, yeah, yeah....Right....

Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz complains that being in legal limbo with the federal government has had a profound effect on his business.
“While we are waiting to even get charges”, he told Fox News, “they have taken very aggressive action that has hurt our company significantly. And we have no recourse at this point.”
Some former federal prosecutors contacted by Fox News say it’s not unusual for a case – particularly an environmental one – to take a while before a charging decision is made.
But Michael Mukasey – Attorney-General in the last Bush administration says this case should have been decided on long ago.
He told Fox News, “Certainly three years since the 2009 raid and even, going on a year since the 2011 raid is more than enough time. This is not brain surgery.”


Read more: Gibson Guitar case drags on with no sign of criminal charges | Fox News
Click to expand...

They are blocking action in court by Gibson, and dragging their feet on their own case, or charges....This is BULL!

j-mac
 
sangha said:
And your argument would seem disingenously dishonest because the original question did not only ask about the "same types of wood". It also asked about the sources

But you knew that already, didn't you?
Click to expand...

Sanha, I discussed "sources" as being an issue from the beginning. That part of the problem was poaching wood off protected land. <sigh>

Get caught-up for chrissakes, instead of all this willy-nilly posting. :roll:
 
j-mac said:
yeah, yeah, yeah....Right....
Click to expand...

Translation: j-mac has no facts to report



They are blocking action in court by Gibson, and dragging their feet on their own case, or charges....This is BULL!
Click to expand...

Translation: j-mac likes to repeat his blathering and hopes no one notices his lack of evidence
 
Eighty Deuce said:
The EIA is a private organization. Like the Sierra Club. Additionally, it is my understanding from earlier posts that there was not a "ban" on the export of these woods at the time, but that Madagascar imposed the ban after it got caught in cahoots with a crime syndicate over there allowing the harvesting of timber from protected land. That's what Wikipedia says, and its what I was told by my exporter in Madagascar. In fact, there are still recriminations going on in Madagascar over who got caught doing what.

The issue is due process. Can you show us where four years is "due process" ? Just saying so is not convincing.
Click to expand...

The judge did not issue a search and seizure warrant based on the EIA's findings, just so you know. It issued it based on evidence collected by the Fish and Wildlife Agency.

Can you show that a 3 year criminal investigation is some kind of record?
 
sangha said:
I'll add "not understanding what a negative is" to the List of Dishonest Arguments that have been used in this thread

Hint: What is "disturbing to you" does not mean it is not "due process"
Click to expand...

Know what ? You have not brought one valid insight to this thread. Not engaged in a single useful discourse. All I see is trolling, but not a problem. Say "Hello" to my Ignore" list !!

Good riddance !
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Again. That is to prove a negative. Four years without being charged, or a hearing so that there can be a finding, is absurd to me as an American. I know of no precedent for such. It is my belief that this type of crap only exists in the world of eco law.
Click to expand...

Until more information is available, it sounds and smells like a bullying tactic and Gibson was the example to show everyone else what happens.

Al Armendariz said:
"It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean. They'd go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they'd find the first five guys they saw, and they'd crucify them.
"And then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years. "...you make examples out of people who are, in this case, not complying with the law ... and you hit them as hard as you can."
Click to expand...


So true... so true.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Sanha, I discussed "sources" as being an issue from the beginning. That part of the problem was poaching wood off protected land. <sigh>

Get caught-up for chrissakes, instead of all this willy-nilly posting. :roll:
Click to expand...

You did not discuss "sources" in the post I responded to, even though the post you responded to asked about sources.

And now you're trying to use what you said in earlier posts to dishonestly infer that you had responded to the question about sources
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Know what ? You have not brought one valid insight to this thread. Not engaged in a single useful discourse. All I see is trolling, but not a problem. Say "Hello" to my Ignore" list !!

Good riddance !
Click to expand...

You're the one who claimed there was a denial of due process and then refused to back it up with evidence because, according to your inane reasoning, you can't prove a negative

People have proven a denial of due process. In spite of your absurd claim, it's possible to prove a denial of due process, so stop hiding behind the "you can't prove a negative" bull****
 
Ockham said:
Until more information is available, it sounds and smells like a bullying tactic and Gibson was the example to show everyone else what happens.




So true... so true.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's so true that you can't post one bit of evidence that Gibson was singled out :roll:
 
sangha said:
Translation: j-mac has no facts to report





Translation: j-mac likes to repeat his blathering and hopes no one notices his lack of evidence
Click to expand...


I'll take the word of a former Atty Gen, over yours any day....

j-mac
 
Ockham said:
Until more information is available, it sounds and smells like a bullying tactic and Gibson was the example to show everyone else what happens.

So true... so true.
Click to expand...

That is very much my take as well. And as discussed ad-nauseum, the government has enormous leeway with imported flora and fauna. We know from the Keystone Pipeline that the current administratin puts enormous value on its eco-voters.
 
Ockham said:
Until more information is available, it sounds and smells like a bullying tactic and Gibson was the example to show everyone else what happens.
Click to expand...

Based on the limited knowledge you have demonstrated of this case, I'm not surprised you would come to that conclusion.
 
From what I have heard, all of the Guitar makers have to buy their wood from an approved
consortium provider. The provider certifies the wood comes from approved sources.
We can call them woodmart! Gibson, Martin, Alvarez, ect all get their wood from woodmart,
but Gibson's purchase is somehow found to be in violation. All of the other makers use the same source,
but none of their factories were raided, and none of their profits were impacted.
The law only works, when it is applied equally to all.(That's why the statue of Justice has a blindfold on!)
 
Catawba said:
Based on the limited knowledge you have demonstrated of this case, I'm not surprised you would come to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

You have no more knowledge on this case than I or anyone else, suggesting your superiority is laughable on multiple levels. You're faith in eco-nazi bullying is sickening. All I want is a day in court for Gibson --- 4 years to wait is excessive.
 
longview said:
From what I have heard, all of the Guitar makers have to buy their wood from an approved
consortium provider. The provider certifies the wood comes from approved sources.
We can call them woodmart! Gibson, Martin, Alvarez, ect all get their wood from woodmart,
but Gibson's purchase is somehow found to be in violation. All of the other makers use the same source,
but none of their factories were raided, and none of their profits were impacted.
The law only works, when it is applied equally to all.(That's why the statue of Justice has a blindfold on!)
Click to expand...

Gibson did not use the same source.
 
Ockham said:
You have no more knowledge on this case than I or anyone else, suggesting your superiority is laughable on multiple levels. You're faith in eco-nazi bullying is sickening. All I want is a day in court for Gibson --- 4 years to wait is excessive.
Click to expand...

Your delusional belief that 4 years is exceptional is hilarious
 
Ockham said:
You have no more knowledge on this case than I or anyone else, suggesting your superiority is laughable on multiple levels. You're faith in eco-nazi bullying is sickening. All I want is a day in court for Gibson --- 4 years to wait is excessive.
Click to expand...

You don't even know when the raids were made. The fact that you think it has been 4 years and keep repeating it demonstrates that for us.

And you have not shown that 3 years is any kind of record for criminal investigations.
 
Catawba said:
You don't even know when the raids were made. The fact that you think it has been 4 years and keep repeating it demonstrates that for us.

And you have not shown that 3 years is any kind of record for criminal investigations.
Click to expand...


Good GAWD, neither you nor sangha read ANYTHING that is posted differently then your predisposition do you.....? Sad, real sad.


j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom