[meteorite-list] Legality of Libyan Desert Glass ArtifactsDiscussion Continued

From: Charles Viau <cviau_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri Jun 11 11:45:59 2004
Message-ID: <20040611154555.121723B806_at_ns2.beld.net>

Why make a mountain out of a mole hill on this? My point was simple, and has
Nothing to do with how I view the sanctity of any countries historical
artifacts. The point is, in this case it is unenforceable, just that. The
subject is LDG worked into tools, and that subject only. It is available all
over the world, and with very few paper trails. It is in thousands of
personal collections. If you feel obligated, then take all you have and send
it back to where you think it came from.

Hey, perhaps the US will ask the world for all of it's native American
arrowheads back..

CharlyV

-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of
kaolinite_at_ctc.net
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 11:12 AM
To: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
Subject: [meteorite-list] Legality of Libyan Desert Glass
ArtifactsDiscussion Continued

This has been a quite revealing discussion.

For example, Nicholas Gessler on Thu
Jun 10 21:18:25 EDT 2004 stated:

"Don't we have better things to worry about than
whether Libya is going to spend $100s or $1000s
to repatriate EACH chip, flake or blade of Libyan
Desert Glass?" at:

In a similar vein, Mr. Charles Viau on
Thu Jun 10 21:18:25 EDT 2004 stated:

"Nah, Sounds scary, but still un-enforceable."

In both posts, the comments of the authors, can
be condensed to "...it may be illegal, but so what?..."
and "It may be illegal, but since I can't be
prosecuted, so why worry?" I don't know about Mr.
Gessler and Mr. Charles Viau, this is certainly a
morally and ethically bankrupt position to take.
What both of you are saying is that violating the
laws of another country and participating in the
looting of the their cultural heritage is alright
as long as he or she doesn't get caught either
buying or selling the stolen goods. (If someone
stole the car stereo or tires from either Nicholas
Gessler or Charles Viau, I would regard it as
morally wrong for me buy them even if I knew that
I wouldn't get caught and prosecuted for buying
stolen property.)

Would either Mr. Charles Viau and Nicholas Gessler
be happy if Americans were stealing petrified wood
from Petrified Forest National Park and selling
it to Russians and French dealers to sell to people
in these countries? It be any more legal or ethical
for tthe buyers to excuse this practice because it was
"un-enforceable" or because the American government
wouldn't spend $100s or $1000s to track down and
repatriate each piece of petrified wood?

An archaeologist that I talked to had these comments
about what Mr. Charles Viau had to say in one of his
posts that shared with him.

1. "I think that this is fundamentally
an unethical approach."

2. "In answer to the first question,
export of antiquities made of Libyan
Desert Glass from Egypt without a
specific permit would indeed be illegal.
You might note as well that Libya,
Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco have similar
types of antiquities legislation as are
as far as I know also signatories to the
relevant international conventions."

(Export of anything from Libya without a
permit from the U.S. Customs Service is
also illegal because trade with it is
still embargoed because of its status as
a state sponsor of terrorism.)

and

"The illegal export of cultural properties
is a serious issue world-wide, and it is
gravely damaging the cultural heritage of
a lot of countries. I would hope that
members of your list wouldn't get involved
in it -- and if they are, I hope that they
get caught."
 
Also, the same archaeologist indicated in a private email
that Mr. Charles Viau completely misstated the facts
about the distribution of Libyan Desert Glass artifacts
when he stated:

"It's not just Libya and Egypt, since that
stuff has been bartered all over the
Mediterranean for hundreds of years."

This is a completely false statement. Except for the
scarab in King Tutankhamen's breastplate, Libyan
Desert Glass artifacts haven't been found far outside
the area of the natural strewn field of Libyan Desert
Glass. What Mr. Charles Viau stated sounds to me like
fiction invented and told his customers by a creative
artifact dealer to hide the fact that his artifacts
were illegally exported from either Egypt or Lybia.
  
Finally, some people are not above blaming the victim
for the crime, as stated in:

http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2004-June/141736.html

In this post, mark ford markf_at_ssl.gb.com on Fri Jun 11
03:59:05 EDT 2004 stated:

"One might also take the cynical view, that if
that part of the world looked after its
antiquities better, there would be less chance
for antiquities to go missing in the first place...
and it's not about lack of money, a fence around
a monument costs next to nothing."

If Mr. Ford would take the time to investigate the matter,
it is very hard to build a fence around an area of 6500
square kilometer. in fact, the looting of archaeological
sites by people in that area was one of the major reasons
that the part of western Egypt has been closed to everyone.

Best Regards,

Keith Littleton
St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana


______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Fri 11 Jun 2004 11:45:56 AM PDT