http://paul- barford.blogspot.com/2011 /12/focus-on-ccpia- protrection-of-cutur al.html
By Paul Barford
Coin collector Bill Howden would like to see the United states "stop" its International Cultural Property Protection program, he is concerned about restrictions on the "free flow of collector coins [without documentation of lawful export] from one country to another". He urges the CPAC "Please stop it with the [...] restriction on the free import and export of coins [...]".
He says this "is very detrimental to the exchange of cultural information and experiences and will undermined world efforts for better understanding and appreciaiton of other nations, especially among the young. The free export of coins, a movable object that was often meant to flow internationally, does no harm to traditional protrection of cutural heritage treasures. It is a very different matter".
Although the joining-up of the thinking seems to be lacking, the meaning is clear, Howden does not mind people buying dugup coins without documentation of lawful export... Similar sentiments are revealed by another "member of the public" (obviously another coin-fondler):
Renewing this would do nothing but continue to infringe upon my rights as a US citizen. Why are you allowing these people to create MOU's [about the trafficking of artefacts without documentation of lawful export] that don't serve to protect the interests of the US people NOR the people who we are agreeing to have an MOU with? I can bet you that the people of Cyprus DO NOT CARE about ancient coins and other common archeological items. Honestly, this probably doesn't make sense to those making this decision, and I'm tired of typing the same message, so I'll just say that the only decision you should be making is to say NO to this MOU. That is a NO! NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!
a "black market"' would involve the trading of ... well, things like artefacts removed from the country clandestinely without documentation of lawful export. In other words precisely what is regulated by the CCPIA (which the collector surely should be aware contains absolutely no measures to "curtail collecting")
Twelve days into the comment-gathering process, Frank Robinson reveals he too has no idea what the discussion is about ("there are more than enough coins to go around") and thinks refusing entry to the USA of coins without documentation of lawful export is hurting what he calls "honest dealers". That is a new definition of honesty then. Coin collector Mark McGlone posits that "Such prohibitions [on the movement of material without documentation of lawful export] [...] reduce respect for the law" (among collectors, or dealers, or smugglers, he does not say). Collector "Michael" also thinks there are enough coins to go around.
Sam Spiegel suggests, but fails to justify that "the restriction of the importation of coins from Cyprus [without documentation of lawful export] is not consistent with the general interest of the international community".
There are so many coins he says that preventing the smuggling of "the vast majority cannot be considered integral to preserving cultural heritage" because it allows "a wider audience ...] to appreciate them". And a fair number of dealers to make a tidy profit from making them available to collectors who do not really care if they are smuggled or not.
Thomas Brown who collects "private coins" does not want to see coins without documentation [without documentation of lawful export] denied entrance to the US markets this would " limit our trade with Cypriot as well as other foreign dealers". Surely that is exactly the point, to limit the contacts with those in Cyprus and elsewhere selling such material to only those able to supply responsible collectors with coins accompanied by documentation of lawful export. No? Who'd want to enter into business agreements with the other type (in other words, smugglers)? Mr Brown?
Retired administrative law judge Frank Robinson possesses incomparably
greater intellect, knowledge of the law and personal dignity than the
deluded fanatic who has here ventured to criticize him, without having any
concept at all of what the law actually mandates. Any normal person would
certainly gain such an understanding before venturing to comment,
considering that there has for thousands of years been a folk tradition that
if one does not thoroughly understand a subject one should not open one's
mouth, for evil spirits might thereby be able to enter his person and
possess his soul -- which in this case has long since happened.
Possessed by evil delusions and prejudices, archaeo-Goebbels vomits forth an
unending nauseating flood of erroneous and misinformed assertions, filled
with unjustified criticism and unwarranted pejoratives. This incessant nasty
invective far exceeds what any respectable archaeologist might ever consider
saying about collectors and dealers, regardless of the ideological
opposition to collecting he or she might feel. There are socially essential
standards of fair play and decency to observe which no one other than this
man would ever consider violating, even to a small fraction of the extent he
has. Archaeo-Goebbels might best be described as a social arsonist,
constantly seeking to ignite and consume (by the incandescent intensity of
his hatred) the structure and substance of our free society and its
By his own utterances he stands condemned as being what he himself has
warped his hateful personality into -- a deranged caricature of all that
archaeology stands for. Instead of living in the once respectable nation of
Poland [now besmirched by his presence], he should relocate to Pyongyang
where the authorities appear to be much more in harmony with his goals and
This will be my last commentary on archaeo-Goebbels, unless something really newsworthy occurs involving him, such as his appointment to a significant academic position or (hopefully this extremity won't happen) his assassination by an equally deranged fanatic.