 |
| UK 'policy' is a shameful sham |
And of course the portable antiquities pocketed by each and every participant if they return home satisfied are not without value in themselves. Each and every one of them can, and probably will, be monetised, either by the original 'finder' or his/her heirs. And where does the tax from that income made by these culture-thieving creeps go? Who can check who was there, what they took and how much is realised when it is sold? The Ixelles Six/Helsinki Gang? Shambolic.
If we multiply that by the total number of all the commercial rallies and 'club digs' that happen all year around and we are talking substantial sums of money and substantial commercialised heritage loss... and that does not matter whether the organizers call the rally a 'for charity' one or not. We all know the utter hollowness of that claim. This itself is a misnomer, as the rally organiser/s take their cut first, as 'expenses'. The aim of calling it a charity event is to suggest that their self-centred and acquisition-focussed attendance at such a commercial event 'has somehow benefited someone else, and somehow placated their conscience when removing the ever decreasing material culture, creating 'black holes' in the historic record....'. When are archaeologists going to get up off their butts, pull their proverbial finger out and start looking at this despoliation and call a spade a spade? To pretend nothing is happening and continually fail to take a closer look is simply intellectual laziness and professional sloth.
Hat tip, I think my friend would prefer to remain nameless, metal detectorists are a nasty revengeful lot
.jpg)
4 comments:
OK, lets take a look at a few of your comments. " I was talking the other day to SOMEBODY, and this is what he told me" Whom did you talk to? A rally organiser? An attendee of said rallies? Some guy down the pub? How can this somebody be accepted as a reliable source of verifiable information? " The tax APPARENTLY NEVER gets collected" Show your evidence, the facts and figures. Or was this some thing you heard down the pub? "The fees paid to the farmer are usually cash in hand and its unclear whether tax is paid" Again, where is corroborative evidence? "A lot of the organisers are believed to be tax dodging" You know what I am going to ask for here, right? Proof?? "Each and every one of them can, and probably will, be monetised" Any evidence to back this up at all?? Or do you think you are covered by inserting the word probably? "culture-thieving creeps" I think we are getting the measure of you now. Intelligent, reasoned, analytical and balanced this article surely isn't. You would do far more good for your cause by writing something informative and constructive, rather than this fictional slanderous unimaginative nonsense.
An anonymous "coldplayer" thinks I should name my source. In the post it says "I think my friend would prefer to remain nameless, metal detectorists are a nasty revengeful lot". I leave it to readers to assess the issues raised by events of the type I mention.
Nothing anonymous about me, Coldplayer is a nickname I use on many differing sites! To post comments I have to submit my email address, no hiding there, it has my full name in it. Of course your friend would like to remain anonymous, he is making unsubstantiated, defamatory claims...that is of course if this "friend" is not imaginary? I too will leave that to the readers.
A 'nickname' is an alias a false name used to conceal one's identity, an assumed name. As the blog owner, I do not see your email address. The person who talked about the subject with me did not speak to me under a false name. I do not see your problem with understanding such a simple issue when we are discussing Tekkie Tax Dodgers.
Post a Comment