Unposted Comments to Gill Posts

One would think if one is going to do a blog critical of another, one would at least have the courtesy to allow that person to comment.

Apparently, however, archaeological blogger David Gill does not think so. I thus post my comments here to his following blogs:

For this one: http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/02/misleading-washington-lobbyist.html

David- Please link to posts you comment on. It is only common courtesy. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2010/02/archaelogist-fails-to-uncover-truth.html

The post should make clear that I found your press release misleading because it said nothing about the actual allegations in [the] Complaint-- which of course are the heart of any lawsuit.

I believe you had some other press releases that touch on this test case, hence the reference to "another."

Peter Tompa

And for this one: http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/02/false-claims-made-over-caari.html

David,

ACCG's Complaint speaks for itself. Look at paragraphs 45, 53,72, and 77. The reader can decide for themselves whether this suggests "behind the scenes lobbying" or not. I should also note that Ms. Herscher has previously claimed that CAARI does not "lobby" at all. http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/08/caari-vp-ellen-herscher-response-to.html

Peter Tompa