Gibson's press releases are carefully worded so as to be misleading at best.
Do we all still believe that the government's taken no legal action with respect to the Madagascar ebony raid? I don't. I've been reading the affidavits, pleadings, and exhibits in U.S. v. Ebony Wood in Various Forms, Case No. 3:10 CV 00747, still in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division - including Gibson's own answers and motions. (And by the way, Gibson, I don't believe the answer of the German company involved in your purchase of the Madagascar ebony, saying that the government's seizure documents should be thrown out, because they referred to the pieces of ebony in Gibson's factory as "fingerboards," when, according to your cohort, the ebony could have been there to be used for "matchsticks or doorstops.")
And Henry? I've also read the affidavits and other documents involved in the recent raids on your factories in Nashville and Memphis involving East Indian Rosewood.
For the record, Henry, I don't believe the affidavits of government agents as the absolute truth any more than I believe the press release of a financially unstable company that faces economic losses and possible criminal charges for its officers. But when the affidavits give names, flight numbers, dates, street addresses, and contain the emails and interviews with a number of people, they start to become more believable - or at least the kind of things that are more believable than press releases that don't state any backup facts.
I was surprised to learn that the most recent raids started as a result of imports into the 'customs port' (by airline) of Dallas, Texas, involving containers that didn't have the Gibson name on them or any of the identifying paperwork.
Yes, the containers didn't have the Lacey Act paperwork. Yes, when opened, the description on the paperwork didn't match the Indian Rosewood contents inside. Yes, the customs work paperwork left the 'ultimate consignee' blank on some forms, listed a small (10-17 person) company in California on some forms, and on other forms, simply contained instructions to ship the product to another company (a warehouse) in Nashville and to call an employee of the company in California.
Yes, when called to complete the Lacey Act paperwork, the employee of the California firm then 'corrected' the paperwork to show Gibson as the 'ultimate consignee.'
And yes, when the government went to the warehouse in Nashville, they found another shipment of East Indian Rosewood that had come into Canada and been shipped to the warehouse under paperwork listing the California company as the 'ultimate consignee.'
And yes, when the government asked the warehouse company, they produced an email from the California company stating that, for customs purposes, it really wasn't the ultimate consignee, but that Gibson was.
And yes, Gibson has an importer and the government has records showing that Gibson does its own direct importing.
So I assume there was no reason in the world to use all of this subterfuge to get the East Indian Rosewood - incorrect description of contents, listing the ultimate consignee as a company in California but directing shipping to Nashville and/or having that company say it wasn't the ultimate consignee, having shipments come through Canada under the name of another company.
And Henry? I know what an 'ultimate consignee" is. If I'm an import company and I import wood for Gibson, then I'm listed as the importer of record, but Gibson is legally the 'ultimate consignee." I mean, if you want to do it, well, legally.
Henry? I don't trust the Obama DOJ an inch. But it's shame how whatever you say, no matter how incomplete, becomes the gospel truth for conservative bloggers.
Henry? Using labor from Madagascar is different than buying Madagascar Ebony.
If Obama tells us that we should use more transgendered Black union labor, I, for one, wouldn't use that as an argument to justify my purchase of dozens of stuffed bald eagles from a transgendered Black union taxidermist.
So Scoutmaster
Is Gibson importing illegal wood?
Do you have a source for this information of yours? I have seen these same accusations you are given in comments sections of articles but none provide a source.
And why is it that no charges have been pressed against Gibson? Though we have two raids, millions of dollars of materials confiscated, employees interrogated and harassed, private company documentation confiscated as well but no charges.
If this is to be the government operates whereas they just continue to harass and apply pressure to employees and confiscate records and materials to scour over eventually they will create some sort of case against Gibson but that could probably be done against any company if there was a non-stop witch hunt to find a way to charge them with something. Possibly a employee will even help them fabricate something due to the harassment.
But it would be helpful if you could provide a source for these accusations you are making against Gibson.