Gibson raided by the feds:

[the stranger]

[video=youtube;O_-taqM5Sk0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_-taqM5Sk0

[the stranger]

Excellent interview. Parallels many issues. Major props to Henry Juszkiewicz, Chairman and CEO of Gibson Guitar Corp, for taking this opportunity to address the bigger picture.

[Anderton]

There are already several threads about this, but I'll add my voice: This is ridiculous. Gibson was raided in 2009 and no charges were ever filed. The fact that the agents were armed is absurd - what were they expecting, people attaching nuts to necks to pull out AK47s and start a firefight?

 

What's more, like in 2009, Gibson has not been charged with wrongdoing.

 

Regardless of your opinions regarding Gibson, IMHO this is outrageous. If we don't fight this now, then the next time you take your guitar across state lines and you don't have paperwork PROVING that all the materials in it are legal, expect to have it confiscated.

 

For more information on the Lacey Act, read the guest editorial in Harmony Central Confidential #118 by Brian Majeski. We published this - our first-ever guest editorial - last May because we thought it was a significant topic of great interest to musicians. We had no idea that the Lacey Act would be enforced in such a non-sensical and heavy-handed manner only a few months later.

 

I wonder if the Feds have considered taking action against the factories in China producing Gibson counterfeits.

[Peter Doubt]

 

If we don't fight this now, then the next time you take your guitar across state lines and you don't have paperwork PROVING that all the materials in it are legal, expect to have it confiscated

 

 

 

Yo'll get my J45 when you pry it's fretboard from my cold, dead hands!

[the stranger]

There are already several threads about this, but I'll add my voice: This is ridiculous. Gibson was raided in 2009 and no charges were ever filed. The fact that the agents were armed is absurd - what were they expecting, people attaching nuts to necks to pull out AK47s and start a firefight? What's more, like in 2009, Gibson has not been charged with wrongdoing.

 

How is it in the "land of the free", you can be raided, have property confiscated, yet not charged with any crime? The same exact tactics have been used against activist groups under the guise of "fighting terrorism". The Feds are out of control. And it's reaching dangerous level or far past it, depending on where you stand. And it's more than just about a guitar, it's about your rights and liberties. Tomorrow they take your guitar, then what happens next week?

 

If you can't see the slippery slope we're on, you are either in denial or enjoying the ride.

[Anderton]

Interesting article:

 

http://landmarkreport.com/andrew/2011/08/ceo-of-gibson-guitar-a-republican-donor/

 

Stranger, IIRC you're an Alex Jones fan. Well, it sure looks like all the stuff he's talking about is present in this case - armed Federal agents, guilty until proven innocent, globalist viewpoint on the law, big brother tactics, etc.

[the stranger]

Interesting article: http://landmarkreport.com/andrew/2011/08/ceo-of-gibson-guitar-a-republican-donor/ Stranger, IIRC you're an Alex Jones fan. Well, it sure looks like all the stuff he's talking about is present in this case - armed Federal agents, guilty until proven innocent, globalist viewpoint on the law, big brother tactics, etc.

 

I actually gave up on AJ some time ago, due to the constant fear mongering minus any constructive solutions. I think AJ's job is to push people's buttons (right-wing types) until they start shooting. And I followed AJ enough to see his tactics. All hysterical reaction. 88% of what he says never even pans out. And he's staged these "Oh, they're censoring me" routines so many times...I just get a bad vibe about the guy. And I always trust my intuition.

 

And I also think that real answers are in the middle, not these far left and right extremes. And AJ represents an extreme. But yes, this story does involve all those aspects AJ is so fond of screaming about. I don't really have an issue with global viewpoint/interpretation of the law, but the law should be clearly written and applied fairly. Otherwise, it just opens the gates for the theorists to spin these webs of b.s.

 

I'm not a "fan" of any figureheads. Most of them just poison the well with bull{censored} and disinfo. I am a fan of music, skateboards, art, computers, etc.

 

I don't know about the donor conspiracy angle*, but considering his thoughts I think Henry's wasting good money donating to those clowns.

 

* Seems bogus...he follows typical donation trends, iow he donates to the obvious winners in races. He's donated to Dems also, according to somebody in the comments [i didn't verify this myself, but considering the amounts the article talks about was chicken feed, I'm assuming it's probably true].

I'm open to any other far out theories, but this one seems bogus.

 

Anyway, Henry elaborates further about the complete lack of due process in this audio interview:

 

[video=youtube;2RnIdhb2iXg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RnIdhb2iXg

[the stranger]

Craig's got me rambling...I already did like twelve edits on that post.

 

Another thing I learned from following the right wing for a while is that they always tout the benefits of of a "free market" and "deregulation" but how can you buy into an ideal that, in practice, is demonstrating serious issues. Let's just say I have a serious problem with the anarcho-capitalists. I think that's what we have now! Capitalist anarchy! In capitalism, there is no law!

 

Rewind back to Reagan...and then fast forward through all the deregulation that's happened since then until what you see now. A few major entities dominating the entire economy through gross monopolization. It's been trending that way since then, no matter which team was in. I stopped using the term "free market" to describe what I seek and now use the term "fair market". Because from where I'm standing, a free-for-all isn't too cool.

 

Call Dave. Remember how many debates we had about regulation and I towed the "free market" de-regulation line? It's a great ideal, in practice it's a whole other ball game. No I'm not going to start voting Democrat, but I do think (e-gad, it hurts to type the following) we need sensible regulation.

 

I bet they take away my anarchy merit badge.

[Goobers]

 

 

 

This is the first time I've ever heard Teller talk. I gotta say, I like him better with Penn.

[sventvkg]

Interesting article: http://landmarkreport.com/andrew/2011/08/ceo-of-gibson-guitar-a-republican-donor/ Stranger, IIRC you're an Alex Jones fan. Well, it sure looks like all the stuff he's talking about is present in this case - armed Federal agents, guilty until proven innocent, globalist viewpoint on the law, big brother tactics, etc.

 

 

Yea, Alex is completely right on this. You saw what I said about it in the other thread http://acapella.harmony-central.com/showthread.php?2818976-Why-do-Gibsons-Cost-so-Much

[ATOMIC SKUNK]

There are already several threads about this, but I'll add my voice: This is ridiculous. Gibson was raided in 2009 and no charges were ever filed. The fact that the agents were armed is absurd - what were they expecting, people attaching nuts to necks to pull out AK47s and start a firefight? What's more, like in 2009, Gibson has not been charged with wrongdoing. Regardless of your opinions regarding Gibson, IMHO this is outrageous. If we don't fight this now, then the next time you take your guitar across state lines and you don't have paperwork PROVING that all the materials in it are legal, expect to have it confiscated. For more information on the Lacey Act, read the guest editorial in Harmony Central Confidential #118 by Brian Majeski. We published this - our first-ever guest editorial - last May because we thought it was a significant topic of great interest to musicians. We had no idea that the Lacey Act would be enforced in such a non-sensical and heavy-handed manner only a few months later. I wonder if the Feds have considered taking action against the factories in China producing Gibson counterfeits.

 

 

what were they expecting, people attaching nuts to necks to pull out AK47s and start a firefight?

 

 

The Feds got wind of these models and got skerd.

 

 

 

 

 

 

?

[the stranger]

Gibson legally imported some wood from India that was legally cut down and the non-profit industry watch group Forest Stewardship Council said was legit. Gibson violated an Indian law that states that the wood must be finished by Indian workers. So, the US government is now the business of protecting the jobs in India while hurting the jobs in America? - comment from this techdirt.com article

 

This is exactly what Henry said. So, is the main issue here the fact that Gibson bought wood that was less-than finished? Is Gibson paying a price for refusing to out-source labor? That's the basic gist I'm getting from all of this. Of course, when the government won't even provide a clear answer as to why Gibson is being targeted, I guess all we can do is speculate. Some vague reference to the Lacey Act resulting in massive seizure with no ability to respond to these charges or be given any sort of due process is absolutely ridiculous.

 

This is the new federal stance on everything. The most fundamental principles of our government and the law have been stripped away and replaced with whatever is most expedient for the federal government. And considering the way the federal government just takes anything it wants through pure force (oil, gold, countries, you name it), I wouldn't be surprised if they just wanted to get their hands on the rosewood. It's rare, it's a resource, and it's worth a lot of money. And it is highly valued in many art forms, not just the guitar. The only reason I even entertained the idea was because some article I read said the Libyan reserve was sitting on like 4 trillion dollars worth of gold. The whole trick is when you go in to "stabilize" a government (overthrown dictators, harboring terror, etc), you also assume that government and by extension assume all their assets and resources.

 

Call it a conspiracy or whatever deflection works, but the reality is that blatant criminals have taken over the system. So if some Joe Blow speculates the feds are going around robbing people, I'm not going to have a hard time seeing their point of view.

 

Most of my problems aren't with the system, it's the people in the system. Sorry to be jumping on my soapbox again, but this goes way beyond the political forum or even politics itself. Politics is the problem, not a solution.

 

Why do you think Coaster is so frustrated? Because people like him and I have been screaming upon deaf ears for years and provided a million concrete examples to demonstrate that we are not extremists, we're just concerned people who see an obvious long running pattern of criminality and nobody (collectively) wants to do anything about it. People divided by whatever trivial methods the powers that be use...politics, religion, race, class, etc.

 

If you want to drive yourself right off the cliff, we'd appreciate it if you would stop and let us out.

[techristian]

This is unbelievable. Gibson never bought ELEPHANT TUSKS for their tuning pegs or endangered lizard skin for their veneer!

 

The Feds just picked on Gibson. This almost sounds like THE MOB justice. "You don't wanna come over to our side? Well we'll fix ya !"

 

Dan

[WRGKMC]

I was reading some of those import laws last week as well as the transportation permits to travel with a guitar.

its enough to make you dizzy. When you figure every country has its own inport export laws and its own businesses

with workers ignorant to the law, it just multiplies the possible mistakes can be made.

 

Gibson has been dealing with imported woods for a long time so I'm sure they have a good proceedure for following the law.

Whose to say that some new office worker at gibson didnt follow all the proper proceedures due to lack of experience dealing with

all the various import laws. Having wood finished? WTF is that. Sounds like one of those "oh by the way" obsure laws noone knows about

and countries keep in their back pocket when they need to squeeze more cash out of a buyer.

What does finished mean,does the wood need to be cut, Sanded, treated, or actually have a finish applied to it?

 

I dont know. I agree with others that its not in Gibsons best interest to intentionaly break the law. With all these countries on a major

conservation binge and an administration here in the US looking to have any accomplishment, no matter how small that hurts big business,

It sure smells of something more than sawdust.

[Coaster]

i appreciate your perseverance stranger. i've decided for myself there are just some folks you just cant reach.

[ggm1960]

I took a hell of a beating in the BSWTB forum last week over this but held firm in my defense of Gibson.

[Jeff da Weasel]

 

With all these countries on a major conservation binge and an administration here in the US looking to have any accomplishment, no matter how small that hurts big business, It sure smells of something more than sawdust.

 

 

Well, the administration in question was the McKinley presidency in 1900, when the Lacey Act was signed into law. More recently, it was revised/expanded to its current form in May 2008 under the Bush administration.

 

You all know what to do if you want to change a law: write to your representatives and let them know why it's wrong. Talking about it here may help raise awareness, but that and $4 will get you a latte.

[Geoff Grace]

 

Well, the administration in question was the McKinley presidency in 1900, when the Lacey Act was signed into law. More recently, it was revised/expanded to its current form in May 2008 under the Bush administration.

 

It seems like there ought to be a good joke here about Bushes wanting to protect plant life, but I'm too lazy to make one up.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[the stranger]

Well, the administration in question was the McKinley presidency in 1900, when the Lacey Act was signed into law. More recently, it was revised/expanded to its current form in May 2008 under the Bush administration. You all know what to do if you want to change a law: write to your representatives and let them know why it's wrong. Talking about it here may help raise awareness, but that and $4 will get you a latte.

 

If normal people weren't talking/reporting it, I wouldn't even have known. So your insistence that talking in public forums doesn't do any good is incorrect. I also think everybody here is well aware of the basic instructions of government. How do you get the most people to call/write their reps/etc? By talking about it and spreading the word and forming a consensus.

 

I'm aware of the history of the Lacey Act. I'm also aware of who is running the justice department right now. Bush this, Bush that. I'm talking about right now. Blame Bush, but also blame who's running the game now. At the moment, I'm more concerned with Bush III, than Bush II.

 

I fail to understand your insistence with coming into discussions and adding nothing other than these useless condescending tidbits you offer up. It honestly appears that you do not want me or others to be bringing our opinions in the forum.

[WRGKMC]

 

Well, the administration in question was the McKinley presidency in 1900, when the Lacey Act was signed into law. More recently, it was revised/expanded to its current form in May 2008 under the Bush administration. You all know what to do if you want to change a law: write to your representatives and let them know why it's wrong. Talking about it here may help raise awareness, but that and $4 will get you a latte.

 

 

Do you mean the 288 billion dollar pork bill Bush Vetoed because it was way too expensive and negatively impacted poorer farmers, then yes,

the dems overrode him and passed it. I'm not political nor against protecting endangered species, But that was a bad bill like the one before it in 2001.

It also continued the Ethenol act which hasnt done jack for gas prices and only and raised the cost of food across the board.

So you can say the pigs bellied up to the troath in that farm bill and ate well.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food,_Conservation,_and_Energy_Act_of_2008

[Jeff da Weasel]

If normal people weren't talking/reporting it, I wouldn't even have known.

 

That's why I said that it raised awareness. Now you have to actually do something. Are you going to? You're the activist. Be active.

 

Blame Bush, but also blame who's running the game now.

 

I blamed McKinley. Scroll up.

 

It honestly appears that you do not want me or others to be bringing our opinions in the forum.

 

It's my assumption that in 99% of the cases, nothing goes further than expressing an opinion. Do you give a {censored} enough about this to do something, or not?

[lsits]

The latest:

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dburge/2011/08/28/new-scandal-at-doj-as-illegal-guitars-end-up-in-hands-of-mexican-drug-lords/#more-509232

[Jeff da Weasel]

By the way... talk about a double-edged sword (an overused but fitting analogy here).

 

When you come out against the perceived selective or unfair enforcement of a law, you run the risk of having the law itself overturned. Well guess what? The Lacey Act is a good thing, if you give a crap about the planet. It was, in fact, the first federal law to protect wildlife. Would I be happy about having to prove the origin of the ebony on my Martin? Of course not! But do I want to start removing the few laws we have that stop assholes from hunting species into extinction, and otherwise screwing up the environment worse than they already have? No, I wouldn't.

 

If you're into fast and easy answers, this might not be the right fight to pick.

[Goobers]

I could use this.

[Anderton]

 

When you come out against the perceived selective or unfair enforcement of a law, you run the risk of having the law itself overturned. Well guess what? The Lacey Act is a good thing, if you give a crap about the planet. It was, in fact, the first federal law to protect wildlife.

 

 

But the problem is that from everything I've read, it wasn't about environmental issues. It was about American workers finishing legal, approved wood purchased from India, where Indian law requires that wood be finished by Indian workers. Yet India did not lodge a complaint or request the raid.

 

I haven't seen anything yet that says Gibson was doing anything wrong from the standpoint of US law, and the idea that a US company can be raided for (at least in theory) violating the law of a foreign country whose citizens sold legal wood legally, and that made it through customs will all the proper paperwork, seems pretty bogus. I mean, if someone in the Gibson plant who'd purchased materials from Iran committed adultery, would they be stoned to death because that's the penalty in Iran? Not the best analogy in the world, but you get my point.