So says an Iraqi official based on unnamed sources. But Iraqi sources were also the basis for the now widely discredited claim that ISIS has netted $36 million from one site in Syria alone.
So, is this new claim as well as other unsupported claims that there must be warehouses full of material looted by ISIS to be believed? Or, is it possible that ISIS came up with far more "dry holes" than artifacts to be put into "cold storage?"
If the 2003 Iraq war proved anything, it was that "experts" could be dead wrong not only on the existence of weapons of mass destruction, but on the nature and extent of looting. So caution should be warranted-- particularly where such information is being used to justify the creation of a new State Department bureaucracy and new import restrictions on all things "Syrian."
Meanwhile, on the ground in Syria, Palmyra, another UNESCO World Heritage site, is under threat of capture by ISIS. What is needed is not more talk or even legislation, but concrete action to save the city from ISIS or at least a cost to pay for anyone who seeks to destroy its ruins.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
One would think, judging from the girlish shrieks of Messrs Gill, Barford, Swift, and Knell (sounds like a DC law firm) that they would set an example and take up arms against ISIS to protect the ancient sites.
If they are short of cash, I would happily donate to send them to fight ISIS. Surely, they don't expect others to do the dirty work for them, do they?
Neither can I imagine Barford slinging the kind of insults he uses against collectors when face-to-face with ISIS knifeman, known as 'Jihadi John'.
Best wishes
John Howland
England
peter,what is needed is for the USA and turkey to stop arming these islamists[which they have been doing for years] and give the people of syria a free reign to wipe them out,which they can do if we stop meddling.before we got rid of saddam and than gaddafi there was no isis in syria or iraq now we want to also get rid of assad. we sow what we reap.the people in charge of US foreign policy have got it all wrong and have been choosing the wrong people to back for decades.none of those dictators were perfect but they were all secularists.christians lived without fear in all their countrys.now we have an exodus of biblical proportions from the middle east,soon there wont be any christians left and i put the blame squarely on the USA.thank god our parliament voted against bombing the assad regime because after damascus,isis would have gone to beirut than amman and after they fell they would have been at the borders of the EU and israel.it still may happen.
kyri.
Yet another supreme example of utter humbug and amusing twisted heritage logic from The Master of the genre, the undistinguished Paul Barford:-
"Over here in Europe, we [...] urge British MPs that the UK needs to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention. We really have no grounds for criticising anyone else for violating its principles when we've not signed it ourselves. Yet more evidence of a lack of commitment of Britain to actually do anything concrete to look after any heritage they can't make tourist money from."
One might be forgiven for wondering what all this 'We' business is about, seeing as how he rejected democratic Britain in favour of living under, sucking up to, and working for Polish Communism in 1986 - where he still lives.
Evidently you can take Communism out of Poland, but not Communism out of Barford? Seems he imagines himself an 'Internationalist' striding the World's heritage stage.
I and others see him as a tragic/comic figure whose archaeo-political views set him apart from what is generally considered as reasonable or democratic.
His unending campaign of insults and ad hominen abuse waged against others opposed to his odd-ball views is a Cross we have to bear.
He's simply the useful barrel down which the bullets made by far cannier operators are fired.
Warm regards
John Howland
England
Hi Kyri- I agree there are allegations that Turkey is arming ISIS or at least looking at the other way when ISIS rearms and/or passes recruits through the country. On the other hand, Turkey seems to be doing somewhat better trying to control the situation. I disagree that the US is arming ISIS. In fact, its bombing it and arming its enemies. The problelm of course is that sometimes its hard to tell ISIS from non ISIS and some US weapnory has obviously fallen into ISIS' hands, most notably when the Iraqi Army collapsed in N. Iraq.
John, as for Mr. Barford, I don't doubt he's sincere in his views (something I respect) and that he sometimes makes good points, but they are hard to find amongst the personal attacks. We all should try to do better, though admittedly its hard not to respond in kind.
Kyri,
I believe that your perspective regarding Middle Eastern dictators distills down to "Morality-based policy decisions are wrong and decisions should be based only upon practical assessment of realities."
Practical assessment of realities is always important. However, I question whether it is ever wise for the US to support bloodthirsty dictators such as Gaddafi, Hussein and Assad. To ignore morality in foreign policy would in my view be a worse mistake than to at times misjudge practicality.
The problems in Syria and Iraq can be traced back to the seventh century origins of the Sunni-Shia schism and disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, whose partitioning in the Versailles Treaty irresponsibly ignored serious religious, ethnic and tribal conflicts.
The most recent precipitating factor in the development of this instability was the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979. The Shah was an enlightened and liberal ruler compared to Hussein, Assad and Gaddafi, but he committed the fatal error of alienating the Shia clerics of Iran.
The fall of the Shah and the Khomeni fundamentalist clerical regime that succeeded him precipitated the Iran-Iraq war, and successors to Khomeini are still pursuing his divisive and fanatical religious visions.
This is in my view the real root cause of the present disaster. US policy has not been the cause, but has instead failed to effectively counter the divisive and destructive foreign policy of Iran.
You seem to believe that the US should not attempt to be the policeman of the world. Our present President clearly agrees with that perspective. What is happening today in Iraq and Syria is exactly what can be expected when there is no international policeman to preserve order.
It seems to me that it is wrong to blame the US for this situation. Our people don't really want the role of international policeman, and have only supported US foreign policy initiatives in that role because they perceived that the alternative would be disaster.
There is clearly a need for an international policeman or police force to restore and keep order in such situations. Perhaps you could present constructive thoughts as to how this is to be done if the US doesn't want that responsibility.
Dave Welsh
hi dave,i actually agree with your statement
"I question whether it is ever wise for the US to support bloodthirsty dictators such as Gaddafi, Hussein and Assad. To ignore morality in foreign policy would in my view be a worse mistake than to at times misjudge practicality"
but the problem is,in reality,the US has supported more "bloodthirsty dictators" than i have had hot dinners.we certainly dont need any lessons on morality from the US.the US were big supporters of hussein in the 80s and said nothing when he gassed the kurds.its only when he went into kuwait that things changed.as with ISIS, as long as they were in syria ,we supported them and even wanted to act as their air-force and its a FACT that turkey was arming them with arms supplied by the US up to about 2 years ago,its only when they went into iraq we suddenly realised that we got it all wrong.as for gaddafi,getting rid of him was the worst thing that could have happened in libya.we handed the country over to islamists and the very people the US wanted to help turned against them,look at what happened in benghazi with the attack on the US ambassador,the US lost a good man in chris stevens all because of bad foreign policy decisions.we took hundreds of years to develop our democracy in the west,hear in the uk women have only had the vote for not even 100 years yet we think we can impose democracies on these people in a matter of a few years.lets stop meddling and let them develop at their own pace.yes the shia/suni enmity has been going on for years but people like assad and gaddafi kept a lid on it what the US has done by promoting "regime change" policies all over the middle east is to destabilize the whole region.
kyri.
ps,there wasnt much policing done in rwanda[no oil]??anyway,this is a cultural blog and we have gone a bit off topic.
>>"Yet another supreme example of utter humbug and amusing twisted heritage logic from The Master of the genre, the undistinguished Paul Barford:- "Over here in Europe, we [...] urge British MPs that the UK needs to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention."<<
We in EUROPE it says. I live in Europe, in the EU. And the UK has since (once again) agreed under pressure to ratify the Convention. We note that very little of that pressure came from the pro-collecting lobby. Where for example is it postulated in this blog?
>>"he [Paul Barford] rejected democratic Britain in favour of living under, sucking up to, and working for Polish Communism in 1986 - where he still lives" well, first of all I can hardly "live" under a Communism that disappeared in this country in 1989 can I? Mr Tompa, you are responsible for the veracity of the facts which you approve for publication and public dissemination on your blog. Please then state your reasons for asserting I worked for Polish Communism" in 1986. In what manner was I,a British citizen, employed? You work for an employment law firm, tell us what you know about Polish employment law in 1986 with regards foreigners. I did not "work" for any communist government. You have once again published an untrue statement, please remove it and any similar unverified and false statements made about me from your "Cultural Property Observer" blog.
Full name: Paul Barford - Warsaw, Poland - basis for interest: person mentioned above.
Mr. Barford, you have no sense of humor. You may disagree with Mr. Howland, but if you want your background to be made clear, the best way to do so is to post your CV.
I'm closing comments to this blog post, but if you put up your CV I will put a link to it on my blog.
Post a Comment