.
We are supposed to be jubilating that some stolen cultural property is
going back to from where it was stolen ('One Lot of Smuggled Dug-up Ancient Coins from Bulgaria off the US Market, but what of the Importer?'), but surely prevention is better
than cure, why is the importer not facing charges?
I have another more fundamental question. What if ICE had not intercepted this shipment of 546 dugup ancient coins on their way, via the international smuggling network, from culture criminals (looters and middlemen) in Bulgaria to an unnamed US importer?
Well, once safely across the border and in the US (where "no US law would be broken" by their purchase wherever they were from), they would probably have gone (perhaps through an intermediary middleman) to a dealer who would advertise them for sale. Like many hundred other coins he has in stock. And how would the potential purchaser be able to know that had ICE been aware of these particular coins' entry into the US, they would have been seized as illicit? What in today's no-questions-asked US market differentiates the dodgy fresh imports missed by ICE from any of the other coins every PNG, IAPN, ACCG dealer has on sale?
Let me repeat that question, for the benefit of the slow-on-the-uptake coineys: "What in today's no-questions-asked US market differentiates the dodgy fresh imports missed by ICE from any of the other coins every PNG, IAPN, ACCG dealer has on sale?"
I'll anticipate their answer: "nothing".
Vignette: What distinguishes these coins in a stock photo from those seized by ICE in New York?
We are supposed to be jubilating that some stolen cultural property is
going back to from where it was stolen ('One Lot of Smuggled Dug-up Ancient Coins from Bulgaria off the US Market, but what of the Importer?'), but surely prevention is better
than cure, why is the importer not facing charges? I have another more fundamental question. What if ICE had not intercepted this shipment of 546 dugup ancient coins on their way, via the international smuggling network, from culture criminals (looters and middlemen) in Bulgaria to an unnamed US importer?
Well, once safely across the border and in the US (where "no US law would be broken" by their purchase wherever they were from), they would probably have gone (perhaps through an intermediary middleman) to a dealer who would advertise them for sale. Like many hundred other coins he has in stock. And how would the potential purchaser be able to know that had ICE been aware of these particular coins' entry into the US, they would have been seized as illicit? What in today's no-questions-asked US market differentiates the dodgy fresh imports missed by ICE from any of the other coins every PNG, IAPN, ACCG dealer has on sale?
Let me repeat that question, for the benefit of the slow-on-the-uptake coineys: "What in today's no-questions-asked US market differentiates the dodgy fresh imports missed by ICE from any of the other coins every PNG, IAPN, ACCG dealer has on sale?"
I'll anticipate their answer: "nothing".
Vignette: What distinguishes these coins in a stock photo from those seized by ICE in New York?
3 comments:
The real question for ICE and you for that matter is other than the alleged false declarations that prompted the seizure, what differentiates these coins from the hundreds of thousands if not millions openly available for sale in Bulgaria itself?
I'd also note when I last checked the Bulgarian Supreme Court had struck down significant parts of legislation passed by a Government dominated by former Communists and championed by the archaeological community that aimed to crack down on ancient coin collecting in that country.
What differentiates them is of course that the coins collected by Bulgarian collectors are in Bulgaria, while any coins that are smuggled to the US market have been removed from Bulgaria illegally. Once again we find you trying to confuse the argument with a comparison of chalk with cheese.
We went through this just the day before yesterday (in the comments to the Spengler post), admittedly my answer was succinct,and used analogy, and furthermore did not spell it out in words of one syllable. Perhaps that was my mistake. I'll repeat it though, you might think about it a bit before replying:
"do you not see a difference between buying something IN a country and taking it OUT? I have several cats quite legally acquired in the Republic of Poland, but if I wanted to take them to the UK there are procedures to go through. Same with my car. Two different things.".
Got it?
If not,I suggest re-reading the 1970 UNESCO Convention again. It might help if you do not understand it to substitute the word "cats" for cultural property and the word "unlicensed kitten farms" for "pillage" and this should allow you to work out that it is a Convention which regulates movement of objects between countries and not about unlicensed kitten farms.
Let me repeat that question, for the benefit of the slow-on-the-uptake coineys:
"What in today's no-questions-asked US market differentiates the dodgy fresh imports missed by ICE from any of the other coins every PNG, IAPN, ACCG dealer has on sale?"
can Mr Tompa answer that, or will he try to deflect the question again?
Can Mr Tompa or any other ACCG dealer answer that for us? Or will they try to deflect the question?
It seems quite a fundamental question if we are to consider that there exists in this area of commerce such a thing as 'responsible collectors".
Post a Comment