Where does this Coiney "Journalist" do his "Research"?

The hapless Richard Giedrojć has been listening to Wayne Sayles again rather than finding out things for himself. Anyway his latest alarmist text: UNESCO, Nationalism, Collectors Clash talks of "The 1970 UNESCO agreement to which the United States is not yet a signatory..." and notes that the ACCG is " actively apposing (sic!) having the United States sign the UNESCO agreement..."and how he read in Sayles' column in "Celator" (a popular US coiney magazine) about "...the impact the agreement would have on coin collectors should the United States become a signatory to the agreement". According to Sayles/Giedrojć

All coin collections could be impacted should the UNESCO agreement be signed by the United States. The bottom line for world coin collectors is that even such commonplace coins as Chinese cash coins issued prior to 1911 may be able to be legally seized and returned to the country in which they originated or were initially discovered if the UNESCO agreement becomes effective in the United States. If you don’t want to see that happen perhaps you should support ACCG and others trying to avoid the ratification of the agreement.

Perhaps somebody should send the poor chap a link to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Cultural Property and in particular a list of the States Parties (clue, look at the 1983 entries), and while they are at it a copy of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act of January 1983 (where the CPAC is initiated) and explain to him what the connection is between them. Then and only then might he be ready for reading the text of the MOU with China about the import of fresh pre-Tang cash coins to the US and what it REALLY says.

UPDATE 16/2/10:
It appears its not just the coineys that are confused. Someone has just sent this to an artefact collectors' forum. After telling collectors that the 1970 Convention exists (duh), Bob Dodge of Artemis Galleries (he of the mummified foot sale discussed here earlier) tells them that "We do not recommend that you read or study this important document, but it is critical to understanding its basics". According to him, those basics are "In a nutshell, the UNESCO Treaty makes it illegal to export items of cultural heritage from a country after they have signed the treaty...". Well, as an antiquities dealer, Mr Dodge really ought to read and study that document, because from what he says on his website, he obviously has not the foggiest idea what it is about. Not the foggiest. What is the matter with these people? Does selling and collecting ancient artefacts rot the brain and affect reasoning abilities? The more time I spend reading what artefact collectors both sides of the Atlantic write the more the conviction grows that this might be the case, something for medical science to look into maybe.