Anti-American Archaeo-blogger Paul Barford, apparently oblivious to reports from Human Rights organizations, has suggested that US warplanes were behind the bombing of the museum in ar Raqqha, Syria. US warplanes have indeed been active in the vicinity, but no credible sources have suggested that these strikes against ISIS targets were in the area of the museum. Rather, it seems far more plausible that the Assad regime was behind the carnage and damage to the Museum, specifically targeting a nearby market in revenge for recent losses to ISIS and ISIS' executions of Syrian troops.
Barford goes onto rant that CPO is using the Syrian tragedy to attack "conservationists" like himself. But, of course, it is the archaeological lobby that has been using the on-going tragedy in Syria, to not only justify major changes in the law in both Germany and the United States, but additional funding for archaeologists as well.
Meanwhile, "conservationists" seem reluctant to point the finger at the Assad regime for any damage to Syria's cultural heritage at all. But why? The reasons given-- fear for the safety of observers on the ground-- seem contrived when evidence of Assad's war crimes are available from open sources. Perhaps, if it's not a hope to get "back to business as usual" if Assad wins the civil war, it's an unwillingness to do so for fear of undercutting the fundamental UNESCO assumption that UNESCO State Parties are the best stewards of "cultural property." After all, to whom does the archaeological lobby think any "cultural property" seized by German or US Customs should be returned?