US Court Does not Buy Coin Collectors' Conspiracy Theory: Disallows Intrusive Snooping

Concerning a recent case, Lobboblogger Tompa informs his readers: "The Government's motion is available on-line for those with a "Pacer" account with the federal court system". Thanks to a tip-off, I can inform mine that if they follow this link they will find a much more interesting text by Marimer Matos:

'Feds Didn't Shortchange Coin Collectors on Info', courthouse News Service, Thursday, June 14, 2012 

The State Department did not illegally conceal coin-importation regulations from collectors, a federal judge ruled. In a 2007 complaint, three coin-collecting associations claimed that the U.S. State Department had blown off their eight requests for information on the restrictions surrounding ancient coin importation. The collectors said the government would not reveal limitations on importing ancient coins from Cyprus, Italy and China, and it also refused to explain how the regulations were created.

As my readers will know, to their eternal shame, the ACCG were after emails sent to the DoS  by the late Dr. Danielle Parks, an archaeology professor. The coin fondlers think intrusive snooping of this type acceptable, the US court does not: "This court finds, based on the evidence provided by State, that there was a demonstrated expectation of confidentiality between the parties and that the redacted portions of the e-mails have been appropriately withheld under exemption". The court ruled excessive and unreasonable the other demands of the Professional (sic) Numismatic Guild, the International Association of Professional (sic) Numismatists and the Ancient Coin Collectors' (sic) Guild.

UPDATE 16th June 2012: Despite the court not accepting the intimations of the PNG, AIPN and ACCG that there was some kind of a cover-up of a conspiracy going on, their Lobboblogger - instead of issuing an apology to the dead woman's family - still insists there was. Disgusting and disturbing.

"It's Your own Fault": Chasing Aphrodite on the Significance of the Weiss Investigation for Militant US Coineyism

.
The "Chasing Aphrodite" blog has some details of the allegations against Arnold-Peter C. Weiss in relation to transactions involving two Greek coins from Sicily. After noting that the investigation was in its early stages, the blog authors surmise that "given Weiss’ prominence in the numismatic community" (the former treasurer of the American Numismatic Society, chairman of the board at Rhode Island School of Design’s art museum and on the collecting committee of the Harvard Arts Museums), the case:

bears some early similarities to the criminal case against Fred Schultz, the head of the national antiquities dealers association, who was convicted in 2002 of knowingly trafficking in looted antiquities from Egypt. The Schultz case proved a watershed in the art world, underscoring the fact that trafficking in looted antiquities was a violation of American law.

The blog's authors also note the "on-going battles over whether coins should be included in bilateral agreements between the US and foreign nations aimed at preventing the traffic in looted antiquities" and suggest that if brought to court, this case could potentially have a profound effect on the US discussions on this topic. As they note:

Numismatists have long argued that coins should be exempted from import restrictions. As the American Numismatic Society states on its website, “…Because most coins in private collections have been traded and held without any provenance, it is unreasonable to assume that a coin is stolen, illegally exported, or illegally imported merely because the holder cannot establish a chain of custody beyond receipt from a reputable source.” That position may be more difficult to maintain in the face of a criminal case against Weiss, who was treasurer of the ANS from 2005 – 2009.

There is as yet no mention of this series of events in the "News" section of the Ancient Coin Collectors' Guild website, which is a bit odd, isn't it? Certainly, given the intransigence of the ancient coin collecting (scil. dealing) community led by lobbyists employed by the PNG, IAPN and ACCG to attempts to clean up the US numismatic and antiquities market, and their blatant and damaging opposition to US policies on the matter (including an attempt to sue their own government), a high profile arrest or two were on the cards. I guess collectors will be left waiting to know whether there will be any more, and who is next. Who could be on the watch list?

There is an interesting coincidence in the timing of this event. As all coineys will know, midnight of January 3rd was the deadline on the Regulations.gov website for the final public comments to existing laws on import controls on unlawfully exported artefacts from Cyprus (including coins like those many of the people expressing their objections themselves collect). I suppose conspiracy theorists might wonder whether there was a connection between this and the rather late intervention of Federal law enforcement authorities in this matter - also on 3rd January (but at two in the afternoon, rather late for the news to reach all those planning to voice their support for the import of unlawfully exported coins on the last day). Could there have been an ulterior motive for the delaying of the intervention? That might give some coiney conspiracy theorists pause for thought, I guess.

Two US Lawyers, Two Approaches to CPAC Comments

.
It is quite instructive to look at the approach of two US cultural property lawyers to the public commenting on the Cyprus MOU renewal. It seems that there were a total of 338 comments electronically submitted regarding Cyprus’ request but only 23 comments regarding Peru’s request. Rick St Hilaire gives a sampling of the range of arguments offered for and against the Cyprus renewal (I note he could not avoid having to use "(sic)" in the two coiney examples he selects) - Comments Submitted to CPAC in Cyprus and Peru MoU Extension Requests.

The lawyer who is a paid lobbyist of the coin trade associations however totally ignores Peru and concentrates on the percentages of the comments "for" and "against" the renewal of a bilateral agreement with Cyprus and how many mention coins - 77% of Posted Comments Against Renewal of Cypriot MOU. He makes no mention of how many of the coiney replies actually refer to the criteria mandated as the theme of CPAC deliberations. According to the figures on this blog, 20% of respondents were supportive of the idea of the US continuing to monitor imports of artefacts from Cyprus for documentation of lawful export, but 77% were against it (3% were comments wholly off-topic):

This breaks down over the coin issue thus:
Those against the renewal that mentioned coins: 71%
Those against the renewal that did not mention coins: 6%
Those for the renewal that mentioned coins: 8%
Those for the renewal that did not mention coins: 12%

These percentages of course do not add up. Turning them into numbers and calculating the percentages properly reveals the following:

Those against the renewal that mentioned coins: 92%
Those against the renewal that did not mention coins: 8%

Ninety two percent of the Philistine comments were written by coin collectors and dealers. None of their names appears on the list of those commenting on the Peruvian request.

Two Coin Dealers Associations Want to See Metal Detectorists "Targeted"

.
At the November 16th Public Session of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee it emerged that a split is developing within the ranks of the representatives of the international numismatic trade on the subject of metal detector use to recover collectables. The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), an organization governed by American dealers in ancient coins and with a broad base of collector membership, who awarded Roger Bland of England's Portable Antiquities Scheme its "Friends of Numismatists Award" (which to his shame he accepted), stands for the cloning of this system all over the world. The idea behind this dealer-based initiative would be liberalising the antiquities preservation legislation everywhere to allow metal detector and spade-wielding collectors free access to a larger part of the archaeological record than is the case today. At the Nov. 16th Washington public meeting Kerry Wetterstrom presented the ACCG standpoint on this. He suggested that:

it would be a better approach if Bulgaria were to adopt a scheme similar to the Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) in England and Wales. Under such a scheme, metal detectorists would be allowed to operate and would be encouraged to report their finds to the authorities, which may in turn record or remunerate them for their finds.

So in effect to pay them for looting the archaeological record! Attorney and coin collector Peter Tompa serves as an officer of the ACCG too, but is also a lobbyist representing the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) and the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG), two international trade organizations for dealers in ancient coins. On their behalf he opposed any measure to control the illicit trade in smuggled items, but instead indicates that his organization favours getting tough with those that bring fresh material to the market, singling out metal detectorists as the root cause of the problem of illicit finds. Tompa:

stated that metal detectors should be targeted as as opposed to collectors.

I wonder whether metal detecting forums in the UK and US are writing about this. The two major coin dealing associations, the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) and the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG), are both calling for an end to some of the - already limited - freedoms their hobby currently enjoys. I would imagine the members of such forums taking a resolution to consider applying a boycott and not selling any material to dealers affiliated with either of these trade organizations until they specify more clearly their policies towards the definition of what constitutes responsible and irresponsible artefact hunting in relationship to their closer definition of their own policies for the responsible trading of dugup artefactual material. These collectors are excluded from their codes of ethics for example.

It is odd though that one will find such a split over the issue of metal detecting among the officers of the most active dealers' lobbying group, the ACCG concerning whether metal detectorists are to be encouraged and rewarded (the Wetterstrom-PAS approach) or punished (the Tompa-numismatic dealers approach). So what is the ACCG's actual policy towards metal detecting, and the purchase of artefacts which derive from metal detecting? In the light of the discrepancies over this fundamental issue, can we expect some kind of definition of ACCG policies applicable to metal detecting everywhere (in the USA as well as the source countries of the dugup ancient coins ACCG dealers and collectors handle)

Egyptian Antiquities Allegedly Smuggled From Dubai to US

.

"This office will continue to vigorously enforce cultural property laws that restrict the unauthorized movement of antiquities, Antiquities dealers and collectors are on notice that the smuggling of cultural patrimony will not be tolerated." U.S. Attorney Loretta E. Lynch

Four people have reportedly been charged by US authorities today with illegally trafficking in Egyptian and Greco-Roman antiquities (as well as money laundering). The antiquities concerned were allegedly smuggled past US Customs and Border Protection officers including a Greco-Roman style Egyptian sarcophagus, a unique three-part coffin set belonging to Shesepamuntayesher from the Saite period (26th Dynasty, c. 664-552 B.C.) as well as Egyptian funerary boats and limestone figurines. In addition to Egyptian antiquities, other Middle Eastern and Asian artifacts along with more than a thousand antique coins have been recovered. They were exported from Dubai in the United Arab Emirates in a scheme that spanned from October 2008 to November 2009 and packed to avoid official scrutiny at American ports, officials said. US customs law allows for less stringent inspection standards for goods valued at under $2,000. Although the artifacts were worth more than that, the consigners lied to customs officials about their origin and value. They were mislabelled as “antiques", "wood panels” or as a “wooden painted box”. A middle sarcophagus and part of an outer sarcophagus arrived on board a cargo ship at Port Newark in 2009 where they were seized by law enforcement agents, officials said. A civil complaint seeking forfeiture of Egyptian sarcophagi, Iraqi artifacts, cash, and other items seized in connection with the government's investigation was also unsealed this morning in Brooklyn federal court.

Unusually for cases of this nature, the four people charged by Brooklyn federal prosecutors with conspiring to smuggle antiquities into the US have been named. Several sources state that the allegations concern:

Mousa Khouli, Salem Alshdaifat, Joseph A. Lewis, II and Ayman Ramadan

Mousa "Morris" Khouli, 37, is the owner of Windsor Antiquities (website currently offline?) on E. 56th St. in New York. The gallery specializes in Etruscan, Roman, Egyptian and Near Eastern antiquities and ancient coins dating back to 1000 B.C. This dealer features on the recommended dealers list disseminated through Tim Haines' Yahoo "Ancient Artifacts" discussion group - recommended for what though? Readers of this blog might recall the dealer selling one of the "Wenneb" shabtis I was discussing a while back, that story potentially takes on a new significance now, especially as one of the other defendants in this case was also selling them at the same time.

Agents recovered a sarcophagus in Khouli's Brooklyn home, which he falsely claimed was part of his father's collection and "that he had owned it for a long time," court papers state. Federal prosecutors say Khouli purchased that coffin from Ramadan in 2009 and are seeking the forfeiture of all the items so they can be returned to Egypt.

Khouli, 37 will be arraigned Thursday before Magistrate Judge Andrew Carter in Brooklyn federal courthouse. The case is U.S. v. Khouli, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, no. 11-340. (For the U.S.: Assistant U.S. attorneys Karin Orenstein and Claire Kedeshian. For Khouli: Gerald Shargel of the Law Offices of Gerald Shargel.)

Joseph A. Lewis II, a collector from Virginia has been mentioned in this blog (and Looting Matters) as the individual that is reported to have attempted to import an Egyptian sarcophagus (of Imesy) from Spain, and when it was challenged, apparently abandoning it (the coffin has now been returned by US authorities to Egypt). See here, and here. Initially the man was named (by two Florida lawyers) as Joseph A. Lewis III, but in a later draft of their paper they amended it to Joseph A. Lewis II, their carelessness leading to some confusion). A search of his home in Chesterfield Virginia by ICE agents reportedly revealed a Greco-Roman sarcophagus, Egyptian funerary boats and limestone figures, these were seized.

"Lewis allegedly purchased a Greco-Roman style Egyptian sarcophagus, a nesting set of three Egyptian sarcophagi, a set of Egyptian boats and Egyptian limestone figures (collectively, "Egyptian antiquities") from Khouli, who purchased those items from Alshdaifat and Ramadan. Each of these antiquities was exported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and smuggled into the United States. Khouli allegedly provided Lewis with false provenances which stated that the Egyptian antiquities were part of a collection assembled by Khouli's father in Israel in the 1960's when, in fact, both Lewis and Khouli knew that Khouli acquired the Egyptian antiquities from other dealers"

This is precisely why collectors who buy objects trusting they are from an "old collection" are unwise to even consider the transaction before ascertaining that this claim can be verified, documented and proven. Lewis will apparently be arraigned Thursday before Magistrate Judge Andrew Carter in Brooklyn federal courthouse. It is reported that he is represented by Peter Chavkin and Bridget Rohde of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo.

Now Salem Alshdaifat is an interesting name. He is a V-Coins dealer (Holyland Numismatics, West Bloomfield, MI), also an ACCG Benefit Auction donor dealer. I have raised the question here of where the coins he deals in have come from, and it is interesting to see his name brought up in this context. With or without his name figuring in court, one might legitimately wonder about for example about a recent offer on V-Coins (you know, the "ethical" one?):

"500 uncleaned coins from the Middeleast and Egypt,
1,000.00 COINS available.

uncleaned coins, Greek, Roman, Judaean, Provencial, Byzantine, Islamic, and some rings. some small coins might have some Rare Emperors, we found befor Johannes, Leo, Zeno, Marcian and rare Vandalic coins in such lots, this lot is mostly uncleaned completly and some are cleaned in the edges or completly cleaned. plz note that just for this lot, we will ship only to USA, shipping will be Via Registred mail only.

Old collection, no doubt. As are the other bulk lots of Alexandrian and Ptolemaic coins he has on offer tonight. Some other Ptolemaics here too. None of the ones I looked at say which old collection they were in before they arrived in the coin shop - so where and how did they "surface"? Alshdaifat was arraigned Wednesday before a federal judge in Detroit Federal Court.

Now "Holyland" is a "wholesaler", that is somebody who has supplied bulk lots of soimilar coins to dealers. A number of his offerings on V-Coins are clearly marked dealer lots, and the "items sold" section of his V-Coins shopfront contains many more. So basically, if a dealer has bought one of these bulk lots and split them up into individual sales, sometimes sharing them with business partners, there must be a large number of collectors who have in their homes and cabinets coins originating in "Holyland Numismatics" dealer lots, and therefore sharing with them any issues of the provenance. Alshdaifat quite clearly has had access to high volumes of antiquities, especially coins, so where did they come from? A lot of them (but not all) are types that could well have been found in Egypt, particularly in the northern part of the country. The question has to be asked, how would they have left the source country in bulk?

Ayman Ramadan, a Jordanian national living in the United Arab Emirates, is a bit of a shadowy figure. He is noted by the newspapers as "an antiquity dealer from Dubai, United Arab Emirates". It turns out he runs the outfit I mentioned in an earlier post here, Nafertiti Eastern Sculptures Trading Co " (P.O Box: 111301 Bar Dubai, Dubai. United Arab Emirates). He is now is considered by (US) authorities to be a "fugitive".

Of course at a time when the question of artefacts looted from Egypt in the wake of the recent political disturbances there is very sensitive, this is not a good time for somebody to be caught with freshly-surfaced Egyptian antiquities on their hands. Note that also seized seem to be some from Iraq.

ICE Special-Agent-in Charge James Hayes, Jr., called the investigation "ground-breaking", he says this is "the first time an alleged cultural property network has been dismantled within the United States". Indeed it probably is. Most of the time antiquities stopped at the border are seized and sent home with fanfare, reaping political and foreign relations kudos, but rarely investigating the sender or addressee to any degree that would comprise any kind of investigation of the links in the illicit transfer of ownership of the artefacts concerned. Let us hope this case is a harbinger of a more pro-active policy on prosecuting the illicit artefact trade. It is gratifying to see that it involves coin dealers, as it is this milieu that has been most vociferous in recent years about so-called "collectors' rights" to material obtained and transported in defiance of cultural property laws. I doubt though that the investigation and seizures will give them pause for thought (indeed, I'd be very surprised to find them even discussing it at all on their forums and blogs). In any case, although "if convicted, the defendants each face a maximum of 20 years in prison", we all know that the four will just get slapped wrists from the court and told (asked nicely) not to do it again, like the Four Corners two dozen - if the American judicial system can't even deal with archaeological looting in their own country, what hope is there that they will actually deal with a case involving looting and smuggling outside the US? I do not see how Mr Ramadan can be brought to a US court.


Sources:
ICE News Release: July 14, 2011 - "ICE makes arrests and seizes cultural artifacts stolen from Egypt Set of Sarcophagi more than 2,000 years old" 14th July 2011.

Mitchel Maddux, 'Feds bust 4 in Brooklyn-based Egyptian antiquities trafficking ring', New York Post 14th July 2011.

John Marzulli, 'Feds bust group trying to smuggle Ancient Egyptian mummy coffins', New York Daily News, 14th July 2011.

Jessica Dye, 'Feds accuse 4 of smuggling Egyptian artifacts', Thomson Reuters News & Insight, 14th July 2011;

Kate Tayl o r, '4 Charged in Smuggling Egyptian Antiquities', New York Times July 14, 2011;

Keith Johnson, 'Alleged Antiquities Smugglers Busted', Wall Street Journal, July 15, 2011.

See Also: Looting Matters, Dealers Charged Following Egyptian Seizures

Vignette: A pair of bronze inlays (from a sarcophagus?) representing eyes sold by
Holyland Numismatics, where did they come from?
[yes, the dealer photographed them upside down]
.

Coiney "Guilds" Want Access to Deceased Archaeologist's EMails

.
The sad saga of the legal challenge by coiney trade organizations the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN), and the Professional Numismatists Guild, Inc. PNG to US government restrictions on the import of illegally exported coins continues. Much to their shame, these groups (collectively known in the latest court document as the "Guilds") are fighting US implementation of the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property and making a dreadful and expensive mess of it. At the same time they are showing the world as clearly as could be wished by their preservationist opponents, the basis of the no-questions-asked international trade in dugup antiquities such as coins.

There has been a new development in their long-running Freedom of Information challenge which is one of the two prongs of their strategy in this attack on decency. An attack for which dealers and collectors are willing to donate thousands of dollars, raised through the sale of hundreds of decontextualised dugup ancient coins. The dealers' associations appealed a court ruling upholding the State Department's justifications for supplying the information they did on the basis of the malicious FOI request of the dealers. A verdict from the appeal court has just been released. A link to the document is published on the ACCG website. It is described there briefly thus:

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment of the U.S. District Court in the ACCG-IAPN-PNG FOIA case. The Court affirmed most of the withholdings, but reversed the District Court’s decision on one document, and also ordered a more thorough search for certain material. The Plaintiffs are reviewing the ruling to ascertain whether any further action on the appellate level is warranted.

The court's verdict contains such appellate court legalese such as "The Guilds' evidence falls way short", "we need not worry about the implications of "limited" disclosure", but having ploughed through it, readers will discover that the implications of one document on which the court actually reversed the decision of the District Court leave a very bad taste in the mouth:

’This withholding involves various redactions from six separate emails exchanged between the late Danielle Parks, a professor of archeology who did field work in Cyprus, and Andrew Cohen, an employee of the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs. To justify their withholding, Ms. Grafeld said, "These emails contain some information that was provided in confidence by Danielle Parks, an individual in the private sector, to a staff member of ECA's Cultural Heritage Center in connection with the then-upcoming Committee meetings regarding potential extension of the bilateral cultural property agreement" with the government of Cyprus. [...] On remand, State may provide additional reasons for its belief that Parks provided information in confidence. But its explanation in the record before us is inadequate.

The ACCG, IAPN and PNG are after private emails of a deceased person? Private emails? What are they going to do, seize her computer? How low can the coineys stoop? So it seems from this that Parks wrote to Cohen and there are internal hints in the mails that she expected this to be an exchange between her and Cohen, and the coineys received some of that information and want to see the whole of those emails? Why? What possible relevance can they have to their case, that ACCG, IAPN and PNG dealers in the US should not be prevented from importing coins illegally exported from Cyprus?

The other minor victory of the ACCG, IAPN and PNG also refers to old emails. They argue that "State failed to show the adequacy of its search, because it didn't address its employees' archived emails and backup tapes" [which "might contain emails no longer preserved on staff members' computers"]. In particular it seems although emails written to and by the Bureau's Assistant Secretary and CPAC were presented as a result of the FOI request. They complain that no mention is made of the search of all these backup tapes (which of course will not be organized for retrieval of individual documents or files, but rather for purposes of disaster recovery) for email correspondence which might be additional to that released.The recent ruling reads:

Nowhere does State explain whether it possesses email archives for Bureau employees other than the former staff member, whether there are backup tapes containing staff member emails and, if so, whether such backup tapes might contain emails no longer preserved on staff members' computers. It may well be that searching additional emails archives and backup tapes would be impossible, impractical, or futile [...] We also note that Ms. Grafeld states, after a 12-page review of what State had searched, "There are no other places that if searched would have a reasonable likelihood of containing additional responsive material." [...] given that the Guilds raised the issue of backup tapes before the district court, we think this a gap that State needed to fill in order to carry its burden as to the adequacy of its search. Specifically, under the circumstances it is reasonable to expect State to inform the court and plaintiffs whether backup tapes of any potential relevance exist; if so whether their responsive material is reasonably likely to add to that already delivered; and, if these questions are answered affirmatively, whether there is any practical obstacle to searching them.

Apart, that is, from how much that is going to cost the US taxpayer so that coin dealers can fight for their "rights" to import illegally exported coins?

You know, if I were a coin collector, I'd be blogging away and posting to the forums that this kind of activity, dredging around in dead people's email correspondence, is not something I'd want dealers to be doing in my name, ostensibly in "defence" of the kind of hobby I would want to be involved in. I would tell them this is just gross and unnecessary, and ask them to stop and just get on selling me coins that they can document have been legally imported instead of making a big show about how the dealers still want to fill the market with illegally exported items. But then I am not a coin collector, and they do not. And you would not see it anyway because they hide their discussions away from public view as though they were involved in something less-than-legal.

I just hope that, since they started this, one day soon we are going to see the seizure of some computers of ACCG, AIPN and PNG dealers and that they will have no objections to some Freedom of Information in having their hard-discs and 'backup tapes' searched for emails from suppliers and collectors which may have been 'deleted' to try and hide the network of movement of the coins they handle. And then have some investigators go and visit some of the recipients and senders of those emails. That would be far more revealing than anything Dr Parks wrote to Mr Cohen. Let us see some real 'transparency'; let's have a proper audit and let investigators find out just what these people are trading and buying that they are so concerned about these regulations which only concern illegally exported artefacts.

Vignette: the late Dr Danielle Parks R.I.P., coin dealers want to see all of her old emails to Mr Cohen.

Coineyleaks: US State Department Transparency and Coin Dealers

.The no-questions asked coin collectors and dealers' lobby group the ACCG together with the PNG and IAPN are currently engaged in a court case with the US government to force the US State Department to be more "transparent" about its dealings with foreign governments in policy matters concerning cultural property.

Wikileaks also has begun making State Department transparency a reality by releasing documents about its dealings with foreign governments in a whole series of matters. Suddenly the Constitutional right to free speech becomes a double-edged sword. Calls have reportedly been made by US politicians for one of the people who created wikileaks to be assassinated.

Citizens of foreign countries are learning what has been going on behind their backs, what US diplomats are reporting back to Washington and what directions they are receiving, some of which involve deceitsignificant matters.

The Polish missile affair is a case in point. I think there are some things we, and the people these officials claim to represent, do have a right to know despite the efforts now being made to shut Wikileaks down by fair means or foul. (Are the US government really involved in the DDoS attacks on the site? - what implications does that have for the computer owners whose machines are involved?)

I hope the US collectors now hounding the State Department to reveal the ins and outs of what China and Cyprus actually asked for and what was done with that request are seen in the context of that other fight for State Department transparency.

It seems to me that whether the phrase "and coins" is or is not in a document and whether it matters pales into insignificance compared with certain other doings of the US government in the wider world. Are those now clamouring for the State Department to show the world what foreign governments sent them in trust any better than Mr Assange?

In the light of the severe difficulties ahead of the US to retain its credibility on the international diplomatic scene now, we may look differently at the erosive and destructive efforts of the international antiquity dealing community to expose the activities of the State Department even further and bog it down in a time-consuming court case when it has other more pressing matters to deal with - matters which some argue concern national security. Are these activities in the long term interests of the American people or are the dealers' and coin collectors' activities anti-American?

Coineyleaks began here.
.

"Internationalist" collectors Urge US Not to "Prop up the Status Quo in Greece"

.
As readers will know, last week in Washington, there was a public session of the CPAC on a bilateral agreement between Greece and the US over the movement of illegally exported cultural cultural property. The lawyer who represented the dealers' organizations there (the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild) has just posed what he sees as the "ultimate question". Given the country's current economic and political differences:

should the US help prop up the status quo in Greece?

or should the collectors and dealers Tompa represents import antiquities from that country without attention to whether they are licit or not? The aim would be to further destabilise "the status quo" and force changes upon the foreign government. That's "Internationalist" revolutionary talk there. In effect, Tompa's suggestion is for dealers and collectors to carry on stealing from the Greeks while they are still less able to respond. There is clearly an opportunity here for the collector, which they are being urged to make use owhile they can - like Lord Elgin. After all, as Tompa says (following Roger Bland's pal, Rick Witschonke), its all in support of the legal rights of the Greeks themselves. After all there is nothing in the IAPN and PNG codes of ethics about not attempting regime change in source countries.

So the lawyer retained by both the IAPN and PNG is suggesting stealing from the Greeks to give the Greeks a taste of good old western values; it's called "kicking a man when he is down" Mr Tompa.

Vignette: Cultural property banditry in action: the cowboy dealer's code, kicking a man when he's down (from the magazine "Life")

Stunt Coin Supplier stung?

On Sunday, January 10 Peter Tompa asks whether it was "just a coincidence" that:

"the dealer who sold the ACCG coins for its test case had his coins delayed at Customs for some four days. This meant he missed almost half [of some New York coin] show. [...] the dealer in question also indicates that other shipments to the United States have also been delayed since the ACCG imported its coins back in April.[...] is it all just a coincidence? If not, it certainly does not speak well for officials at the US Customs Service."

On the contrary, it speaks very well for their vigilance.

First of all for there to be a "test case" the coins had to be seized as imported in infringement of the new requirements of US law, in other words as illegally imported. This is what the coins were actually bought for (and we can only assume that those responsible in the ACCG informed the hapless dealer what their intention was). I'd say if a dealer was sending coins to the US and unaware that the law concerning that particular kind of coin had changed, then his further transactions should also be examined, as who knows what else he is doing unawares? Or if he knew (how could anyone in the trade not know?) and was ignoring that requirement, then even more should he be subject to careful scrutinty. Would you buy a coin from this guy? (We note Tompa refuses to name him, presumably for that very reason).

As I have pointed out here several times, according to US legislation, all the seller of these dug up coins actually had to do was to provide the purchasers (importers) with one piece of paper signed by himself affirming the coins imported through Baltimore in the ACCG coin stunt were legitimately obtained according to the requireements of US law. He failed to do that. I would say it is precisely this kind of dealer, who fails to fulfill even such a minimum requirement which should be under very close customs scrutiny, whether they are a member of the PNG or the IAPN or not. Let him learn by his mistake of associating with the ACCG dealer lobby and getting involved in their self-serving stunt. He made his bed, let him lie in it.

Coin in America

Unlucky Thirteen: The ACCG Baltimore coin stunt – time is up

Today is the thirteenth of July. The CPIA allowed 90 days for the ACCG to show that the coins that they imported into Baltimore in April were (as required by US law in such cases) purchased from somebody who had legitimately imported and then exported them. By my reckoning today the ninety days is up. Unless there is some piece of breaking news I have missed, no such paperwork is reported to have been presented to US Customs. The ACCG, PNG and IAPN has embarked on a process of confrontation with the US government in an attempt to overthrow conservation-orientated laws. They have an uphill battle ahead of them, their FOI request has not produced (and seems unlikely to produce) the documents they need to fight the legality of the Cyprus and China MOU. Public opinion is increasingly turning against antiquity dealers who try to bypass measures which allow the trading of illicitly obtained portable antiquities. Reputable dealers and ethical collectors are stressing their adherence to good practice and the law in line with the overall aim of day of reducing this trade. Yet a small group of collectors (who claim to be acting in the name of all the ancient coin collectors of the USA) is bucking the trend, they are trying to reverse the trend to a more ethical collecting of portable antiquities. For this they deserve to be condemned and shunned, together with all the antiquity dealers that support them.

ACCG Misleading its Members: Twenty Days Left

Coin collectors in the US should take note that there are still twenty days for the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG) and International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) to call off their stunt involving using their members' money to fight a case brought on by an attempt to illegally import ancient coins without the requisite paperwork. This goes against the codes of ethics of these three organizations, a fact that all those who thought they actually meant something should note.

There has been some confusion introduced into the discussion which is failing to take place in no-questions-asked collecting circles over this. About ten days ago I made a post here in which any interested coin collectors and other observers can learn for themselves what piece of paper is missing to make this ACCG import legal and above board. It's not a particularly onerous task to get it. I even copied out the relevant paragraphs of the CPIA for them so they do not have to tire their mouse-clicking fingers overly to look at it.

Coin dealer Dave Welsh however says something different. On Moneta-L yesterday he informed members:

But to read what Barford said about this test case in his blog, you would think that this is an unethical gambit on the part of the ACCG.

[I must interrupt him here, actually, there is absolutely NO question about it, it is (even by the weasel-worded ACCG code of ethics... which is thereby shown to be worth nothing) an unethical gambit, it is also supremely mis-timed, but more of that later]

He harps upon the "piece of paper" that is all that has to be presented to secure the release of the coins, never of course mentioning that this document is not a packing list or other easily obtained bit of paperwork, but is instead an official export permit that cannot be obtained in practice.

Now that is sheer nonsense, since in my post I very clearly define what this missing piece of paper consists of. Very precisely. It is as easily obtainable from a reputable (note that word) dealer who is exporting these items, and it has nothing to do at this stage with "export licences". I find this comment on a numismatic forum from one of the officers of the main organization involved in this stunt extremely odd. Unless this is deliberate misinformation, it firstly suggests he apparently does not - as an importer of ancient coins - actually know in any detail what the laws of his own country at least say. That is shocking. Secondly the tracking widget over in the margin of this blog shows that somebody in Goleta California (which is where his Classical coins business is based) has been reading those specific posts about the ACCG illegal import stunt where I write quite clearly what this piece of paper should look like. (If its not Dave Welsh, and the person responsible is reading this now, give him a ring and tell him what you read).

But that's not the end of the misinformation, John Hooker who the ACCG is now increasingly relying on to produce "ideologies" for collecting (he's going to start up a "conservation spoof" blog soon and write some ideological bit about Jung) has joined in the effort to misinform "Monetans". He too says that I do not understand why there cannot be an "export licence". John, read the CPIA for yourself. We are not talking now about export licences.

Mr Hooker tells Monetans that the law is being broken by those involved:

to fight unreasonable U.S. import restrictions. The only way that this can be done under U.S. law is through an actual case and in the courts.

Well, first of all a detailed reading of the CPIA actually shows it gives such leeway to importers to be virtually meaningless (which was probably the intent of its authors), so I really think in the circumstances that the coineys' claim that these are "unreasonable U.S. import restrictions" is simply laughable. Secondly of course even in the US there is no need to break a law to get it repealed or rewritten. There are other mechanisms. The ACCG has however decided to flaunt the law to influence international policy.

Fine, but let them be totally honest and open with their members about what this is about. What kind of piece of paper is it Mr Welsh? Answers on Moneta-L please.

Photo: astronomical clock. Time is running out... .