Gibson Under Attack by U.S. Justice Department
Illegal fingerboards? Maybe, according to the Justice Department's peculiar interpretation of Indian law.
Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz was a guest yesterday on The Dana Show and explained what led to the raid this week at two Gibson facilities where armed federal agents seized guitars, wood and company records, forcing Gibson to send hundreds of workers home. Due to the disruption in production at four factories, the company lost $1 million this week.
In the radio interview, the Gibson CEO first pointed out that this is not the first time the company has been subjected to a government raid. In 2009, the government seized $500,000 of Gibson's property, but the company was never charged with any offenses and Gibson is now suing the government to get its property back.
The current allegation is that Gibson has obtained illegal, partially finished, wooden guitar fingerboard blanks from India. Under Indian law, wood products have to meet certain minimum "India content" requirements before they can be certified for export. Then the exported wood and documentation from India has to be cleared by U.S. Customs. In this case, all of the legal requirements by the Indian government were met, legal paperwork accompanied the wood to the U.S., and the materials and accompanying paperwork were then approved by the U.S. government before delivery to Gibson.
But now the government is apparently claiming that according to its peculiar interpretation of Indian law, Gibson's fingerboard blanks don't have sufficient "Indian content," and the guitarmaker is in violation of Indian law.
In the radio interview, the Gibson CEO first pointed out that this is not the first time the company has been subjected to a government raid. In 2009, the government seized $500,000 of Gibson's property, but the company was never charged with any offenses and Gibson is now suing the government to get its property back.
The current allegation is that Gibson has obtained illegal, partially finished, wooden guitar fingerboard blanks from India. Under Indian law, wood products have to meet certain minimum "India content" requirements before they can be certified for export. Then the exported wood and documentation from India has to be cleared by U.S. Customs. In this case, all of the legal requirements by the Indian government were met, legal paperwork accompanied the wood to the U.S., and the materials and accompanying paperwork were then approved by the U.S. government before delivery to Gibson.
But now the government is apparently claiming that according to its peculiar interpretation of Indian law, Gibson's fingerboard blanks don't have sufficient "Indian content," and the guitarmaker is in violation of Indian law.
The Gateway Pundit summarized it well, "Gibson is under attack by the the Obama Justice Department for accusations that the company broke
Watch a press conference below with Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz (Note: It's outside and there's a lot of background wind and airplane noise):
HT: Juandos
51 Comments:
Is it time to dress like native Americans and dump tea into the harbor yet? Just let me know whe the party will start.
Unchecked, unbridled, federal government power ....
and the vice president of the U.S. has the temerity to call the TEA Party terrorists?
I am sure most manufacturers in right to work states are secret terrorist agents. What other explanation could there be?
Surely it is not the unions' generous contributions to the democratic party.
First it was lemonade stands. Now is it guitar fingerboards. What's next ... fake vomit manufacturers?
Depressed in Drippin'
The irony of this story is that if Gibson had paid a bribe to Indian authorities then this would have not been noticed by the enforcers.
Very interesting link there buddy...
Thanks...
well ... Reuters is reporting a slightly different story:
"In an affidavit, authorities indicated they are weighing charges against the company or its executives for illegally importing wood under a U.S. law barring importation of endangered plants and woods."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/25/industry-us-gibsonguitar-probe-idUSTRE77O7KC20110825
"Wednesday’s raids at Gibson Guitar’s factories in Memphis and Nashville could be connected to the demise of a rare animal nearly 10,000 miles away."
" Experts say there are probably only a few hundred adult silkies in the wild and none have ever successfully been kept in captivity. Scientists say the silky sifaka is one of the most endangered species on Earth. The three-foot-long animals live in a narrow region in Madagascar and have the unfortunate luck to share their habitat with species of endangered ebony and rosewood that are illegally harvested."
http://downtown.wmctv.com/news/news/58234-endangered-lemurs-could-be-connected-gibson-raid
so it appears to me that the fish and wildlife people are suspecting that the wood shipped from India came from Madagascar... which was the focus of the 2009 investigation.
Some won't accept the endangered species argument either but the point here is to encourage a little more accuracy on issue.
there's more to it than just what the blog thread implied.
"Some won't accept the endangered species argument either but the point here is to encourage a little more accuracy on issue"...
Accuracy like reality hundreds of people losing their job to the possibility that some miserable tree rat might become extinct?
well .. just accuracy... that's all...
this is the same law that is used to prevent the importation of Tiger hides or Elephant Tusks...
it's debatable.. I totally agree
but it's not what the article seem to be implying... that it was about the US agents enforcing an Indian law....
how about a little honesty in reporting the issue?
If one is opposed to the law that restricts the importation of materials related to endangered species.. then argue on that basis.. not some trumped up misinformation...
Well Larry G if you're really interested in the facts than why do you go to Reuters?
Hey Larry G consider the following blog posting: UCLA Professor: Without Media Bias the Average US State Would Vote Like Texas or Tennessee (Video)
@ Larry
you are looking to reuters for integrity in reporting? that is a laugh fest.
actually there are several other news outlets including FOX reporting the facts... guys...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/26/feds-environmental-enforcement-on-guitars-leaves-musicians-in-fear/
I don't understand you folks.
it's almost as if you PREFER lies...and propaganda...
:-)
Larry,
You reference a report that says the Feds are "weighing charges".
How about if armed federal agents come into your house, remove valuable items that you have paid for and acquired legally (and have paperwork to prove it). When you complain that the items you paid for have been taken from you, the federal agents say they are "weighing charges" against you.
Remember, it's not an investigation with the cooperation of the guitar company. It's a federal raid with armed guards.
it's a continuation of a 2009 incident of which the Feds apparently do not believe was settled..... or else they would not have come back..right?
so it sounds like in 2009 Gibson was directly importing wood from Madagascar... and that was considered illegal and that perhaps he then decided to have India get the wood from Madagascar and ship it...
the article said that Gibson was "working with the Rainforest Certification folks"...
the question is was he actually complying ... as companies like Home Depot and Lowes do....
the debate here is basically if you disagree with the law - can you ignore it - and then claim the govt is coming after you unfairly?
can't have it both ways.
Gibson could come right out and say he disagrees with the law and he's going to fight it ....
or he can pretend he doesn't understand....and imply to others that he's been targeted by the Feds who are - not following the law but using their authority to harm him.
in most cases like this.. it often turns out that the guy knows he's breaking the law.. he just disagrees with it.. and then he tries to win the issue in front of the public...
All I'm in favor of here is - the truth about what actually happened.. rather than playing PR games...
If Gibson disagrees with the law.. then fine.. and if he wants to break the law and suffer the consequences then that's a principled position one can respect even if they disagree with it....
but to play stupid PR games... so all the right-wing blogs can go high order on anti-govt red meat...
when you GOOGLE this.. you have to wade through all the rabid anti-govt blogs to get to some simple fact-based articles...that really get to the truth of the matter.
"if he disagrees with the law"
What law has he broken? He has not been charged with breaking a law.
Remember Larry, they are "weighing charges".
re: "weighing charges"...
yup... you're right...
but
if the police suspect you of breaking the law - they can raid you to get evidence...
right?
so if someone asked Gibson if he was importing Madagascar wood through India... what would he say?
Here's what would convince me.
Gibson holds a press conference and the Rain Forest Alliance and Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is sitting beside him and defends him.
that would totally make the govt look like bad guys , eh?
"Some won't accept the endangered species argument either but the point here is to encourage a little more accuracy on issue."
Why do you think this report is any more accurate than others?
why I do I believe one report over another?
first.. it's the fish and wildlife people involved on THE core complaint - not the Justice..
second. in 2009.. it was about importing wood that violated the endanger species laws....
third - more than a few usually objective news sources have reported that it's STILL about the endangered species issue
only the right wing sites have herded together to paint this as something it is not.. as usual..
and they parrot it almost word for word... in fact...
it's getting to the point that as soon as you figure out a site is right-leaning..(which is pretty quick) you realize they're going to twist the issue.... pro forma these days for most right-leaning sites...
Larry,
Here is part of the statement from Gibson regarding the detailed steps they go through in purchasing this wood species:
"The wood the Government seized on August 24 is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier and is FSC Controlled, meaning that the wood complies with the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council, which is an industry-recognized and independent, not-for-profit organization established to promote responsible management of the world’s forests. FSC Controlled Wood standards require, among other things, that the wood not be illegally harvested and not be harvested in violation of traditional and civil rights. See www.fsc.org for more information. Gibson has a long history of supporting sustainable and responsible sources of wood and has worked diligently with entities such as the Rainforest Alliance and Greenpeace to secure FSC certified supplies. The wood seized on August 24 satisfied FSC standards."
Still taking the side that the raid was justified?
ZERO evidence
ZERO charges
does the Forest Stewardship Council concur with that statement?
If they do.. I change my view about his position...
but the reporting of it is still divided into two distinct perspectives... one that deals with the real issue of the endangered species and the other falsely inflaming by saying that our DOJ was trying to enforce Indian Laws...
this is why I want the facts...
there are too many folks with axes to grind who are more than happy to twist something into something it's not.
in this case - if the FSC and Rainforest Alliance people publicly support Gibson.. then the govt..at the least appears to be a bunch of scum suckers.
Larry, the big picture view of this is a law has empowered Federal authorities to seize property based on suspicion that international species protection laws may have been violated. Was Gibson given an opportunity to cooperate and demonstrate compliance prior to the raid? I have not found a source that mentioned this. So what was the point of this raid, exactly? Take documents and materials that have already been submitted for inspection at customs? So is Gibson being investigated for bribery?
This raid and evidentiary gathering procedure smacks of tyranny to me.
The basis for the raid is another example of a troubling trend of laws that put everyone at risk of breaking some arbitrarily interpreted statute and having the marshaled resources of the Federal government applied against them at any moment. Have any antique wood furniture, Larry? Know its origin? How about any collectable foreign coins? Not knowing the total lineage, material makeup and ownership history of these things is breaking the law...Think of how insane that is.
The fact is the LAW is the problem. It is manufacturing crime where there is none.
well what we do know is that the reports that he was being investigated for breaking Indian laws is not the truth... and it actually involves importing wood that is alleged to be in violation of our laws.
so the right wing herd was once again propagandizing... in my view
do I think the law or the actions of the fish & wildlife folks was "tyrannical" - any more or less than I think the govt is that way when it comes to illegal drugs or cigarettes or tiger hides or elephant tusks?
the govt has the right to execute a search warrant and seize your stuff.. they can do that even if they suspect tax fraud.. ask Bernie Madoff...
if you find yourself in favor of the law when tiger hides/elephant tusks are involved but opposed when rare wood is...
then you essentially agree with the concept of the law but differ on specifics...
that's what legislators and judges do....
I don't like the way the law essentially traps 18 year olds selling crack... and I don't really think the law against drugs is good either ....but if we have a law.. it does give LE the right to get a search warrant and seize your stuff...
I suppose some would think that ANY invasion of your privacy is tyrannical... but some of the same folks seem to have no problem with imprisoning someone without due process if we suspect they are a terrorist, eh?
is that tyrannical?
so Mr. Gibson did not get scooped up and held incognito for his alleged crimes, eh?
:-)
but the law can come to your front day and tell you to stand aside while they search your place..
it's perfectly legal for them to do that...as long as they specify the nature of the alleged crime and the materials they seek to investigate.
I realize this is what frustrates the hell out of the average person (including this person) who thinks we have way too many laws to start with and the enforcers of such laws are more than willing to wield the powers of govt to go after folks.
But I strongly suspect there is more to this story than first meets the eye the two certifying organizations are not out in front defending him... that bothers me a bit but in terms of executing a search warrant- LE is allowed to do that.... for a wide, wide variety of reasons...
"well what we do know is that the reports that he was being investigated for breaking Indian laws is not the truth... "
How do we know that? Neither Fish and Game nor the Justice Dept. have commented, and no charges have been filed.
"so Mr. Gibson did not get scooped up and held incognito for his alleged crimes, eh?"
That's because Orville Gibson died in 1918. No one is interested in "scooping him up". There has been no person named Gibson associated with the company since then.
To be taken seriously you need to address the business entity as Gibson Co., or just Gibson, not Mr. Gibson. If you want to name a person, Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz is one of the three owners of the company, and is the name in the news these days.
"t's a continuation of a 2009 incident of which the Feds apparently do not believe was settled..... or else they would not have come back..right?"
That's like saying "He must be guilty, or the police wouldn't have arrested him." remember innocent until proven guilty?
"so it sounds like in 2009 Gibson was directly importing wood from Madagascar... and that was considered illegal and that perhaps he then decided to have India get the wood from Madagascar and ship it... "
You have to ask yourself why, if Gibson was doing something illegal in 2009, there were no charges filed. a raid was conducted, based on a search warrant, just like now. Think about what that means. Justice convinced a judge that they had sufficient evidence, probable cause, to justify a search warrant. If, in fact they did, and the raid produced additional evidence for them, which after all is the purpose of the raid, why were no charges filed at that time? And if no charges were filed, why was the material seized in the raid not returned to its rightful owner?
Whether Gibson has done anything wrong or not, the Feds are acting in a tyrannical and unlawful manner. They should be able to file charges based on the allegations in the search warrant. That was the reason for the raid, after all. They can't just keep raiding the company and taking their stuff.
"first.. it's the fish and wildlife people involved on THE core complaint - not the Justice"...
Hmmm, I find it truly amazing that people will fall back on some drivel emanating from the federal government (depending on the politics of the situation and the individual with an agenda) and treat it as Moses bringing down the tablets from Mount Sinai...
"I don't understand you folks"...
Well actally Larry in my own particular case it depends on when the lie started and in the case of 'federal tree huggers & root kissers' the lie was the making of such a department in the first place...
There's no clause for it in the Constitution...
"but the law can come to your front day and tell you to stand aside while they search your place..
it's perfectly legal for them to do that...as long as they specify the nature of the alleged crime and the materials they seek to investigate."
Yes, they can, based on probable cause, having convinced an impartial judge of the strength of their allegations, and the likelihood that a search will produce evidence supporting those allegations. When that seized evidence doesn't support the allegations, they need to return it. Why wasn't that done after the 2009 raid?
File charges, or give back the stuff. The Feds can't just keep fishing over and over hoping to catch something.
"How do we know that? Neither Fish and Game nor the Justice Dept. have commented, and no charges have been filed."
because it's a speculation made by people who also don't know....and have chosen to assert something false that aligns with their anti-govt agenda rather than anything to do with known facts.
the simple bottom line here is that the govt can, with cause, search your premises and seize your records and anything else they deem relevant to their investigation - per the law.
suspected violation of importation laws is one of hundreds of reasons....
it's no more "tyrannical" with a drug or fraud investigation or tiger hide.. than it is with this one...
unless of course you believe it's justified for some laws but "tyrannical" for others...that you disagree with....
as far as I know.. when the police knock on your door... and show you a search warrant.. you're not allowed to say - "you can't search me because I don't like that law"?
well you can... but then you'd sound like Ron here...
"the simple bottom line here is that the govt can, with cause, search your premises and seize your records and anything else they deem relevant to their investigation - per the law."
You need to read more carefully, and comprehend what you have read, so you can respond to the subject being discussed, rather than just repeating something you've already written in a previous comment.
perhaps you need to read if I have to repeat it Ron..
:-)
"first.. it's the fish and wildlife people involved on THE core complaint - not the Justice"...
Hmmm, I find it truly amazing that people will fall back on some drivel emanating from the federal government (depending on the politics of the situation and the individual with an agenda) and treat it as Moses bringing down the tablets from Mount Sinai...
"I don't understand you folks"...
Well actally Larry in my own particular case it depends on when the lie started and in the case of 'federal tree huggers & root kissers' the lie was the making of such a department in the first place...
There's no clause for it in the Constitution.
is there a clause in the Constitution about waterboarding people held in incognito without due process guy?
the law says that the govt can search your person and premises and seize your stuff if they have sufficient justification.
Is that in the Constitution?
does the constitution say that the govt can declare drugs illegal and jail people?
my point here is that the govt has the right to search and seize....on a wide variety of reasons including trafficking in declared contraband.
if you think the general idea is tyrannical no matter what the specific reason is - then that might be a principled (but ineffective) position..
but if you disagree with only SOME of the reasons the govt would exercise this power then you're really supporting search and seizure for some things but not others.
which is it?
"first.. it's the fish and wildlife people involved on THE core complaint - not the Justice"...
Hmmm, I find it truly amazing that people will fall back on some drivel emanating from the federal government (depending on the politics of the situation and the individual with an agenda) and treat it as Moses bringing down the tablets from Mount Sinai...
"I don't understand you folks"...
Well actally Larry in my own particular case it depends on when the lie started and in the case of 'federal tree huggers & root kissers' the lie was the making of such a department in the first place...
There's no clause for it in the Constitution.
is there a clause in the Constitution about waterboarding people held in incognito without due process guy?
the law says that the govt can search your person and premises and seize your stuff if they have sufficient justification.
Is that in the Constitution?
does the constitution say that the govt can declare drugs illegal and jail people?
my point here is that the govt has the right to search and seize....on a wide variety of reasons including trafficking in declared contraband.
if you think the general idea is tyrannical no matter what the specific reason is - then that might be a principled (but ineffective) position..
but if you disagree with only SOME of the reasons the govt would exercise this power then you're really supporting search and seizure for some things but not others.
which is it?
"is there a clause in the Constitution about waterboarding people held in incognito without due process guy?"...
Do you have any credible evidence Larry G that someone was waterboarded without due process or is it another one of your fairy tales like man-made global climate change?
"does the constitution say that the govt can declare drugs illegal and jail people?"...
Why yes it does though you and I may not agree with it...
Then again just how hard have we worked to change that situation?
"my point here is that the govt has the right to search and seize....on a wide variety of reasons including trafficking in declared contraband"...
Yes the government does but apparently there's a legal process for search and seizure and the 'federal tree huggers & root kissers' seemed to have had some very questionable reasons for their raid, hence the reason Gibson Guitar will be going to court to get their property back...
you mean we did not waterboard people BEFORE they were tried and found guilty?
wow!
I could have sworn that they were held without charges, no?
FWIW - that's a lot closer to tyranny than what happened to Gibson.
When it's perfectly legal for the govt to knock your door down and haul you off to Gitmo because THEY THINK you are a terrorist...
"you mean we did not waterboard people BEFORE they were tried and found guilty?"...
Well where's your credible evidence this happened Larry G? Obviously the operative word here is, 'credible'...
"I could have sworn that they were held without charges, no?"...
Well who are you talking about?
People from Yemen, Bosnia, Saudia Arabia shooting at American soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq?
"FWIW - that's a lot closer to tyranny than what happened to Gibson"...
Is this line your idea of joke?!?!
"When it's perfectly legal for the govt to knock your door down and haul you off to Gitmo because THEY THINK you are a terrorist.."...
On what planet has this happened on?
"When it's perfectly legal for the govt to knock your door down and haul you off to Gitmo because THEY THINK you are a terrorist.."...
On what planet has this happened on? "
The Washington Post reported on August 24, 2005 that fifteen Uyghurs had been determined to be "No longer enemy combatants" (NLECs).[6] The Post reported that detainees who had been classified as NLEC were, not only still being incarcerated, but were still being shackled to the floor. Five of these Uyghurs, who had filed for writs of habeas corpus, were transported to Albania on May 5, 2006 just prior to a scheduled judicial review of their petitions. The other seventeen obtained writs of habeas corpus in 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_detainees_at_Guantanamo_Bay
...
" The US Supreme Court decided Monday not to hear the appeal of a group of Uighurs, members of an ethnic group from western China, who have been held without charge at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, for eight years."
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/0301/Supreme-Court-dismisses-appeal-by-Uighurs-held-at-Guantanamo
want more?
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_detaine"...
LMAO! Wiki is your idea of credible?!?!
I can see why you have commie leanings, you like that collectivist crapola!!
Almost a nice try though...
ROFLMAO!
You lefties really have no sense of shame, do you?
This comment has been removed by the author.
I think if you look, you'll see no less than 124 footnotes and references... to substantiate the material.
you righties - at the end of the day - you discount nearly every source EXCEPT your right wing blog herds and media....
but the point is if you want to talk about tyrannical gov .. I think there are better examples than Gibson... who was never detained and never had to file Habeas corpus - unlike some that have had to...
so "tyrannical" is a big puffed up.
"I think there are better examples than Gibson... who was never detained and never had to file Habeas corpus - unlike some that have had to.."...
The people you're whining about were NOT American citizens and NOT soldiers of a foreign army in uniform...
They have no rights regardless of what the weak of character and backbone claim (lefties all of them)...
The people at Gibson Guitar on the other hand were treated as if they were terrorists, they are no longer drawing their paychecks and now have to use their own money to fight this questionable invasion of federal parasites and the only obvious reason is that the president of Gibson Guitar is a Republican donor...
So regardless of all your silly blather about footnotes and so forth in your weak wiki link the fact is you don't do your own homework and you want talking points fed to you in small bites...
If you had actually done some real homework you might have learned something...
juandos
"The people you're whining about were NOT American citizens and NOT soldiers of a foreign army in uniform...
They have no rights regardless of what the weak of character and backbone claim (lefties all of them)..."
I hate to sound overly picky here, but in my copy of the Constitution, the bill of rights mention "the people", and "persons". There is no mention of citizens. I think it's intended to apply to everyone regardless of nationality.
It was a big mistake to take prisoners at all. Those engaged as enemies battling US troops should have been shot on the spot, and that would have been the end of it.
"I hate to sound overly picky here, but in my copy of the Constitution, the bill of rights mention "the people", and "persons". There is no mention of citizens. I think it's intended to apply to everyone regardless of nationality"...
No Ron H, you're perfectly on target, the target I wanted Larry G to understand...
I kept waiting for Larry G to finally understand what the constraints and permissions of the federal government are and where they came from...
"It was a big mistake to take prisoners at all. Those engaged as enemies battling US troops should have been shot on the spot, and that would have been the end of it"...
Amen! Couldn't agree more...
Good on you Ron H!
juandos
"I kept waiting for Larry G to finally understand..."
I hope you brought your lunch.
and Padilla and the others who were not bearing arms when renditioned?
on the battlefield - yes
how about OFF the battlefield where many others were picked up...?
and not even on US soil..?
"and Padilla and the others who were not bearing arms when renditioned"...
So now what are you confessing to Larry G, your inability to understand the phrase, 'aiding & abetting'?
I mean we already knew that Padilla was a criminal (funny how lefties really love the criminal element in society) with a history...
BTW Larry G what do you think Padilla was doing for those three months in Yemen?
A tourist paradise it isn't!!
Jury Verdict Form in Terrorism Support Trial
U.S. v. Jose Padilla, Adham Amin Hassoun,
and Kifah Wael Jayyousi August 16, 2007
well you asked me who had been imprisoned without due process...
and he is an example..
no question he is a bad dude.
are you justifying the govt actions to detain for years without charges
and to perhaps use torture to elicit the info needed to be able to charge him?
where is the Constitution guy?
are we allowed to bypass it if we are "sure" the guy is a bad guy?
"where is the Constitution guy?
are we allowed to bypass it if we are "sure" the guy is a bad guy?"...
ROFLMAO!
How many convicted felons have lost some of their constitutional rights?
How many convicted felons have lost some of their constitutional rights?
do you not understand that first you are charged and then you are convicted BEFORE you LOSE your rights?
or is it okay to take those rights away if we "think" you are a bad guy?
"do you not understand that first you are charged and then you are convicted BEFORE you LOSE your rights?"...
My gosh you're clueless!!!
Don't you ever do any homework before you commit your abysmal ignorance to comment?
Padilla already had a track record as a felon...
so if you have been previously convicted of prior crimes - from that point on you can be detained without charges for any future suspected crimes?
so every convicted felon in the US can be held without charges?
I missed that part..can you point me to where it says that in the Constitution?
you're so smart guy... I'm very impressed with your intelligence and demeanor!
"so if you have been previously convicted of prior crimes - from that point on you can be detained without charges for any future suspected crimes?"...
Did you know that felons out can't associate with other known criminals?
You still have explained away the the three months that Padilla spent in Yemen...
You're truly pathetic...
so if you have been previously convicted of prior crimes - from that point on you can be detained without charges for any future suspected crimes
especially if you've been hanging around other felons?
I missed that part..can you point me to where it says that in the Constitution?
Post a Comment
<< Home