It seems that the pirates over on the Yahoo antiquities collecting forum are a bit moved by my comments about laundering by misdescription of artefacts sent through the post. In a text callesd 'Misdescription? ' posted on Fri Apr 28, 2017 5:44 pm (PDT) by none other than Dealer Dave deep in Trump's US we read that ' respected dealer (and group member) Ken Dorney is unfairly and unreasonably pilloried by the Warsaw "collector's friend" for alleged "misdescription" of shipments, as though that were an ethics violation'. As if? Well, it would seem to me that calling one thing another to hide its true nature is exactly that. 'Representations of innocent youth for pleasure purposes' may escape customs scrutiny, but it is still kiddie porn whatever you want to call it - and describing it as such to 'avoid 'carelessly attracting unwanted, unwarranted and unnecessary attention from governmental officials and postal/customs thieves' makes it no more or less unethical to try and sneak it through the postal service.
|'Tubular metal mechanisms for |
I describe ancient coins sent outside the USA either as "metal stampings" or "numismatic specimens," adding the words "for examination and study," which fairly and accurately describes their real character, and avoids the risk of their being mistakenly thought of as modern current coinage.Or ancient artefacts subject to export controls and scrutiny of the importing country to make sure all procedures have been followed. Have they Mr Welsh?
What, actually, do these people think we have customs declarations for?