Senate moves to prevent return of Jewish archive to Iraq

[Jesus Malverde]

Source: LA TIMES

Some lawmakers are trying to prevent the return to Baghdad of a cache of Iraqi Jewish community records, which were seized by the U.S. military during the Iraq war and occupation.

The Senate on Thursday unanimously backed a bipartisan resolution introduced by Sen. Patrick Toomey (R–Pa.) that urged the State Department to reconsider returning the artifacts to Iraq.

Senate leaders are now seeking a leader to push forward similar legislation in the House, according to a staff member.

The 2,700 books and 10,000 documents had been confiscated by successive Iraqi governments from Jewish families who left the country in droves since the 1930s. In May 2003, U.S. troops looking for weapons of mass destruction chanced upon the cache in the flooded basement of Saddam Hussein’s intelligence headquarters in Baghdad.


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-congress-jewish-archives-iraq-20140210,0,968909,print.story

[JI7]

1. i didn't read the whole article so maybe there might be a good reason

to not give it back.

but i can't think of any. this kind of reminds me imperial nations stealing from their colonies.

[melm00se]

3. from the article

The 2,700 books and 10,000 documents had been confiscated by successive Iraqi governments from Jewish families who left the country in droves since the 1930s

It's not like these were in private hands or donated (voluntarily) to an archive. It appears that they were seized by the Iraqi governments and the applicable people families no longer live in Iraq.

[JI7]

5. ok i can see why not to give it back

[Jesus Malverde]

28. Here are the more interesting items according to the national archive

A Hebrew Bible with Commentaries from 1568 – one of the oldest books in the trove;
A Babylonian Talmud from 1793;
A Torah scroll fragment from Genesis - one of the 48 Torah scroll fragments found;
A Zohar from 1815 – a text for the mystical and spiritual Jewish movement known as "Kabbalah";
An official 1918 letter to the Chief Rabbi regarding the allotment of sheep for Rosh Hashanah (the Jewish New Year);
Materials from Jewish schools in Baghdad, including exam grades and a letter to the College Entrance Examination Board in Princeton regarding SAT scores;
A Haggadah (Passover script) from 1902, hand lettered and decorated by an Iraqi Jewish youth ; and
A lunar calendar in both Hebrew and Arabic from the Jewish year 5732 (1972-1973) - one of the last examples of Hebrew printed items produced in Baghdad.

http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2014/nr14-07.html

[Nihil]

2. I'd rather that they returned the archeological artifacts that they "liberated" at that time ...

... but, no doubt, that would be against the wishes of a significant number of political donors ...

[leftynyc]

9. Did you read the part about

how the Iraqi government got those things in the first place? Confiscated them from Jewish families fleeing Iraq. Don't give them back - they'll probably just make a bonfire out of them.

[Nihil]

10. Yes I did and I fully agree with your comment.

I simply wish there was a suitably powerful "pro-archeological lobby" to obtain
justice for the looting that took place during the empire building of Bush the Lesser.

[leftynyc]

13. Agreed

But I honestly don't know those treasures would be in a better situation now with all the sectarian violence.

[marble falls]

4. Extremely mixed feelings. I don't want to be looting any country, but.... Send it back. Iraq had...

curating it and there's no reason that it couldn't still keep it protected. A lot of countries have laws about culturally significant object leaving the country.

Interesting article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Jews

http://www.solveisraelsproblems.com/pictures-of-jewish-communities-in-iraq-early-20th-century/



Jewish scribes at the “Tomb of Ezekiel” near Babylon, Kefil,Mesopotamia (Iraq) (Credit: Keystone-Mast Collection, California Museum of Photography at UCR ARTSblock, University of California, Riverside)



Jewish Cobblers Repairing Shoes for Arabs, near Mosul, Mesopotamia”



Inside Ezekiel’s Tomb (circa 1931, Libraryof Congress). Also view Israel Daily Picture feature on Ezekiel’s Tomb



Persian ceiling of ancient synagogue at Ezekiel’s Tomb (Credit: Keystone-Mast Collection, California Museum of Photography at UCR)


More really wonderful photographs at the site.

[Jesus Malverde]

16. Great pictures thanks!..nt

[former9thward]

19. Send it back?

Was that the position when the Nazis stole art all over Europe? The Iraqi neo-fascist Baath Party stole this stuff and a lot more as they drive Jews from the country.

[marble falls]

44. Again. The Iraqis have been curating and eshibiting these treasures. Most countries not only ....

have laws regarding objects of national cultural value, they also have laws against the importation of it from second countries. Where else do Iraqi national treasures belong than to Iraq?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Iraq

[geek tragedy]

6. good call these were being kept as intelligence snooping on Jews, not

for cultural reasons.

goodness knows with the looney bin that country has become, those documents deseve to be in a safe place where the Jewish families who created them can view them.

[Jesus Malverde]

31. Do you have any links? My understanding is...

These materials have been called the “Iraqi Jewish archive,” but the name is somewhat misleading. An “archive” usually refers to a collection of papers that were saved, organized and made available for future use because of their historical importance. The Iraqi Jewish archive is more like what you might find in a Geniza, a repository in a synagogue or Jewish cemetery for Hebrew books that are no longer usable but cannot be thrown away because of their sacred character. These papers and books were left behind, probably in a Baghdad synagogue, by Jews as they fled Iraq; the majority—120,000—departed in 1950-51, in the mass migration called “Operation Ezra and Nehemiah,” which was facilitated by an Israeli airlift. The Iraqi state forbade Jewish emigrants to take much in the way of personal effects, let alone communal property. Rather than destroy the books and documents, emigrating Jews left them in the synagogue where they remained until they were seized by the Iraqi secret police in the 1980s. Two sets of hands thus put this collection together: Jews unable to bring them along on their journey from Iraq but unwilling to destroy them; and the regime that persecuted them, drove them out and, once they had gone, confiscated their property. (Why the regime didn’t destroy the papers is anybody’s guess. Of course, Saddam Hussein would not be the first dictator to seize the treasured books and papers of the Jews he persecuted, hoarding them away in a secret location long after their owners had fled.) Neither the Jews themselves nor the state that seized their books and papers ever expected they’d become an archive in the sense that scholars use the term.

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/147736/iraqi-jewish-treasures

[happyslug]

7. The problem is by INTERNATIONAL TREATY these belong to IRAQ

You can NOT take property from one country and give it to another. Now, that was legal up to and including WWII, but one of the changes the UN pushed through post WWII was the rule that a country that conquers another country can NOT redraw the lines of that country nor take any property from that country without its permission, permission that can ONLY be given when the conquered country is no longer under the occupation of the country that conquered it.

This came up with the oil of Iraq. The US Occupational Government set up a system to confiscate and privatize the Iraqi oil industry. Then the oil industry's attorneys told the US occupational government that such a sale was illegal under international law and thus they would not participate in it. The Solution was for the occupational government to pass a law that the Iraqi Government, when it was no longer under US "Occupation" was to pass a law selling the Iraqi Oil fields. Part of the Peace Treaty between the US and Iraq was for Iraq to pass such a law. It has failed to do so, and no one brings it up anymore.

I bring this up for these pictures are in the same legal framework, they are the property if Iraq that the US must return to Iraq. As a post WWII removal of property, it is illegal for the US to do anything else.

Now, the US can say it is holding the property till the Country it should return the property to has a government supported by the people of that government. This was the justification for the US to hold onto the Crown of Hungary till 1988.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Crown_of_Hungary

On the other hand to transfer it to a third country would be clearly illegal, if that country wants to claim it as they own as opposed to holding it for later transfer back to Iraq.

Now, you may say, these pictures and other property was taken by the Iraqi Government from the Jewish people. That is correct, but when taken the Jews were citizen of Iraq and any country can take any property of any resident within their borders. Even the US Constitution recognize this right of any government in the form of restriction such confiscation to property that is used in a criminal action OR if just compensation is paid for it (Eminent domain). Many other countries do NOT recognize the need for the Government to PAY for what it takes, and that remains a right of those countries as to its own residents. Thus the taking of these pictures by the Iraqi Government was legal and they remain the property of the Iraqi Government. Property that by international law must be returned to Iraq.

http://www.princeton.edu/jpia/past-issues-1/2008/5.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Cultural_Property_in_the_Event_of_Armed_Conflict

http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

[warrant46]

29. International Law ? How Quaint ?

Imagine you have a Drone a 750 Pound Bomb and a citizen who has been corrupted by infidels who is making fun of you in a foreign country.

Do you worry about International Law or do you just blow up him and Kill his family in his house, in the foreign country with your drone and its bomb ? ?

[happyslug]

46. We are talking about items of property, not lives

And International Law is aimed more at protecting property then lives. Thus the issue of these Jewish religious and personal items was decided by international law and the US will follow that law for it wants a clean title to anything it steals. It would be embarrassing if the US took something and on displaying it in Germany, the Germans refuse to return it for it was the property of Iraq. The US could threaten Germany with drones, but the Germans will just say "where are you launching them from?" and the answer would be Germany. Thus the Germans can veto the use of Drones or other military hardware against Germany. We still could hit the Germans, but Corporate America will object, for that would mean destruction of their assets in Germany and they will not tolerate that.

Sorry, when it comes to property, the international community is much more picky then when it comes to mere lives. People can be replaced, but property? You have to rebuild it, and that costs money.

[warrant46]

48. I absolutely understand your point

Mine was off topic and I admit it was meant more as sarcasm.

I especially understand that property stolen by a government or thieves must ALWAYS be returned to its rightful owner.. Thanks

[TheMathieu]

8. I hope the vote passes. nt

[starroute]

11. There's a complex and murky back story on this

Here's Miller's account from 2003 of the discovery -- a story that has never quite added up and that inspired a number of conspiracy theories a couple of years later when Miller played a role in the Plame affair.

(On edit: I notice looking up at the OP that the LA Times story has it wrong. They didn't chance on these documents while looking for WMDs. They allegedly chanced on potentially incriminating Iraqi intelligence documents while looking for an ancient Talmud. Which is why the story is so weird.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/07/international/worldspecial/07FIND.html?ex=1129780800&en=895e8c6118182400&ei=5070&th&oref=login

Iraqi Documents on Israel Surface on a Cultural Hunt
By JUDITH MILLER
Published: May 7, 2003

What began today as a hunt for an ancient Jewish text at secret police headquarters here wound up unearthing a trove of Iraqi intelligence documents and maps relating to Israel as well as offers of sales of uranium and other nuclear material to Iraq. . . .

The discoveries, which American military officers called significant but which did not by themselves offer documentary evidence of direct Iraqi links to terror attacks on Israel, were the serendipitous byproduct of one of the strangest missions ever conducted by MET Alpha.

The search began this morning when 16 soldiers from MET Alpha teamed up with members of the Iraqi National Congress, a leading opposition group headed by Ahmad Chalabi, to search for what an intelligence source had described as one of the most ancient copies of the Talmud in existence, dating from the seventh century. The Talmud is a book of oral law, with rabbinical commentaries and interpretations. . . .

Slogging down the dank hallway, the soldiers reached a room where they found hundreds of books floating in the foul water. There they rescued three bundles of older Jewish books, including a Babylonian Talmud from Vilna, accounting books of the Jewish community of Baghdad between 1949 and 1953 and dozens of more modern scholarly books mostly in Arabic and Hebrew — "Generals of Israel," by Moshe Ben-Shaul; David Ben-Gurion's "Memoirs"; and "Semites and Anti-Semites," by the Princeton scholar Bernard Lewis. But no seventh-century Talmud.

[bemildred]

12. I want to know why the goverment we spent so much to install in Iraq

is not a fit custodian for what are clearly Iraqi records. If they are not fit, why did we piss away all those lives and dollars? And if they are, give them the records.

[leftynyc]

14. Clearly Iraqi records?

They were confiscated from Jewish families fleeing Iraq. Perhaps finding those families would be the more honorable thing to do.

[bemildred]

15. Clearly Iraqi records.

Here is the back story:

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/02/world/la-fg-iraq-artifacts-20131202

Iraqi officials say the current government has no connection to abuses Jews suffered under Hussein. They say they want the materials returned, as U.S. officials promised to do when they were taken out of the country for preservation, in order to document the country's rich Jewish history. Several Iraqis are being trained by the National Archives in proper handling of the materials, and U.S. officials say Iraq has promised to carefully protect the archive and make it publicly available.

We signed an agreement, and we must keep it. This is not to say that we should not make what efforts we can to restore items to their families, but that is not going to be possible in many cases.

[leftynyc]

17. I'm sure those Jewish families

that were ripped off will be thrilled that "we signed an agreement" to give THEIR stuff back to the people who stole it.

[happyslug]

18. The next time you sell your home, remember it was stolen from Native Americans.

Yes, at times we went through the motions of "buying" the land from the natives, but in effect we told them the land was ours and here some beads and if you don't like it, we wipe you out. Thus every time an American sells his land, he is selling what was stolen from a native Americans.

If you took your logic and applied it to America, every time someone purchased a home in the USA, he should pay Native Americans for that land, not the registered land owners. Try doing that the next time you try to buy a home and see how far it gets you.

I can see you do not like the idea of the persons who has ownership today received ownership under something less then ethical, but that is the law in the US and is the law in regards to domestic property to this day. The issue is that under International treaties since 1954 such confiscation is NOT permitted. Under the 1954 Convention this belongs to Iraq. Thus the law accepts the use of force when it comes to domestic confiscation, but since 1954 such confiscation can NOT be done in regards to the property of defeated countries.

[bemildred]

20. Thanks, I really didn't want to wade through all that again.

The constant subject hopping to avoid observing their own hypocrisy gets tedious.

[EX500rider]

21. So really, every inch of America was Indian "owned"?

Coast to coast they lived on every inch?.....who exactly do you think owned the barrier island I live on on the west coast of Florida? Lots of Indians in Death Valley were there?
Weren't the majority of the tribes nomadic?
The Spanish killed off most of the Florida tribes through disease and enslavement long before I was here...am I responsible for that too?

[bemildred]

23. It sure as heck was not owned by Europeans.

It was taken by force and deceit from peoples who had lived there for thousands of years. "Because we can."

And then we enslaved millions of them, but they were not good slaves, so we put them in reservations, and we enslaved millions more from Africa and dragged them here to work our plantations. We stole everything from those people, everything they had.

And then some sanctimonious fool comes along all angry and offended like somebody did something to them by pointing those facts out.

[EX500rider]

25. "sanctimonious fool comes along all angry and offended"

Well I am neither of those things, just pointing out the Indian's didn't live everywhere, barrier islands being one of those, so no, my house's land wasn't stolen from anybody. Esp. nomadic tribesmen 4 centuries ago.

[bemildred]

26. Yeah, they pretty much did live everywhere, they lived off the land.

They didn't operate on our notions of property, property was communal, so we just ignored theirs. Communal property was actually pretty normal, and that's what a public corporation is too. Community property for people with money to invest.

But don't worry, we're not coming for your house. Sounds like a nice place to live except for the occasional storm.

[EX500rider]

55. So everywhere they ever camped is theirs forever? wow..

.....I've been camping lots of places!!

[EX500rider]

27. "It was taken by force and deceit from peoples who had lived there for thousands of years"

"Because we can."
You mean much like the tribes who were here had pushed out or eliminated earlier tribes? Wasn't Candyland here before the Europeans.
When the Lakota Sioux moved westward from the Eastern Woodlands they waged war against Plains residents and seized their land and killed or drove them off or enslaved or tortured them to death...but it's probably OK if they do it?

[bemildred]

32. Sure, Europe's history is largely war and deceit too. So what?

As far as I can see that does not mean the American natives had some property rights in Europe, and it does not mean that the Europeans had any property rights in the Americas.

[EX500rider]

34. In general Nomadic tribes have no property rights..

....as they own no property.

[bemildred]

37. INDIGENOUS AND TRIBAL PEOPLES’ RIGHTS OVER THEIR ANCESTRAL LANDS AND NATURAL RESOURCES

55. The unique relationship between indigenous and tribal peoples and their territories has been broadly recognized in international human rights law. Article 21 of the American Convention and Article XXIII of the American Declaration protect this close bond with the land, as well as with the natural resources of the ancestral territories,[135] a bond of fundamental importance for the enjoyment of other human rights of indigenous and tribal peoples.[136] As reiterated by the IACHR and the Inter-American Court, preserving the particular connection between indigenous communities and their lands and resources is linked to these peoples’ very existence and thus “warrants special measures of protection.”[137] The Inter-American Court has insisted that “States must respect the special relationship that members of indigenous and tribal peoples have with their territory in a way that guarantees their social, cultural, and economic survival.”[138] For the IACHR, the special relationship between indigenous and tribal peoples and their territories means that “the use and enjoyment of the land and its resources are integral components of the physical and cultural survival of the indigenous communities and the effective realization of their human rights more broadly.”[139]

http://cidh.org/countryrep/Indigenous-Lands09/Chap.V-VI.htm

That's the OAS there.

[EX500rider]

42. Was that in effect 200 years ago? n/t

[EX500rider]

43. So your neighbors can kill you and take your land but not somebody further away?

How does that work?

[happyslug]

36. As I said before, that is all no longer LEGAL under International Law.

It was LEGAL before 1954, thus Germany's borders were changed in 1945. The Russians were permitted to take a lot of German property home to replace property the German Army had destroyed. but all of that is pre 1954. That is the date of the Convention, every country in the world has signed except as follows:

Algeria, Mauritania and Western Sahara in Northwest Africa,
Ethiopia, Somalia, Kenya, Central Africa Republic in East Africa,
Mozambique, and Zambia is South East Africa,
Republic of Congo, Brazzaville and Namibia in South West Africa.
Nepal and Bhutan in the Himalayas

Four Counties have signed but NOT ratified the treaty:
UK, Philippines, Ireland, and Andorra.

I use "Republic of the Congo, Brazzaville" (pre 1960 French Congo) to differentiate it from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (once called Zaire, pre 1960 the Belgium Congo).

Thus bringing up Lakota is a weak argument. the use of Force to gain new lands was legal back then. It is NO longer legal under International Law and that is the law we have to operate under today.

I brought up Native America lands to show the difference between what countries can do to their own residents and the property of those residents, which includes taking all of their property, and what countries can do when it comes to property of residents of other countries in those other countries. International law does NOT address what a country can do internally to its resident's property, but when it comes to invading a country, International law since 1954 FORBIDS giving that property to anyone but the country that owned it.

[happyslug]

30. Ely Parker said it best when he told some Native Americans "You have the rights the white man grants

I believe Ely Parker said that to the Osage (I can NOT find the exact quote at the present time) but Ely Parker, a full blooded Seneca, was informing his fellow Native Americans what they rights were. Those rights were what the Whites were willing to give to them, no more, no less for the Native Americans were to weak to fight for more.

Ely Parker became a General during the Civil War and served in U.S. Grant's staff. Grant later appointed him the First Native American Head of the Indian Bureau (A job he resigned two years later over accusations of corruption, proved false at that time but he still had to resign. The accusation were made by people who disliked his and Grant's policy of peace with Native Americans.

For more on Ely Parker

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ely_S._Parker

The military agents were to prepare Indians to submit to the inevitable change of their mode of life to pursuits more congenial to a civilized state. You will endeavor to keep constantly before their minds the pacific intentions of the government, and obtain their confidence by acts of kindness and honesty and justly dealing with them, thereby securing the peace which it is the wish of all good citizens to establish and maintain.

http://mbuggieh.hubpages.com/hub/ELY_PARKER_NATIVE_AMERICAN_HISTORY_CIVIL_WAR

http://mms.newberry.org/html/Parker.html

[bemildred]

33. Yeah, the killed the buffalo to starve them into submissiom.

Food has always been a weapon.

[happyslug]

24. I was just pointing out the problem the writer had with returning the property to Iraq

International law does NOT question HOW a sovereign nation obtain ownership of something from its own residents. Thus International Law does NOT care who owned your barrier island. Ownership is an issue of NATIONAL LAW. How Iraq obtain these records, like how you obtain ownership of your home, does NOT come into play when it comes to international law.

International law only comes into play if an anther country takes your home and moves it some where else. Under International law that other country can NOT do that. On the other hand the US Government can take your home at any time. Under the US Constitution you must be paid the value of your home, but if the US Constitution did not require such payment, the Federal Government could take your home and pay you nothing. If you would complain to any other country, they would tell you that your claim is against the US not them, even if they end up with your home.

Notice the difference. If a third country takes your home, they must return your home under international law, but if your own country takes your home and gives it to a third country, that third country does NOT own you anything under international law.

That the point of law here, these Jewish text may have been stolen from Jews living in Iraq, but that is something to be decided by an Iraqi Court for it involved then residents of Iraq and the Iraq Government. On the other hand, the US invaded Iraq and found these documents, held in an Iraqi Government facility. These are clearly Iraqi government records and as such the property of the Iraqi Government under International Law. The US has to follow International Law, and thus must return these papers to Iraq, who under International law can do with them as they see fit, including burning them or setting up a museum for Jewish items. That is up to Iraq to decide not the US.

[U4ikLefty]

47. Indians live in India.

They probably owned very little here at the time of the Native American genocide.

[EX500rider]

51. Really, never heard the term "American Indian" have we? n/t

[U4ikLefty]

52. Yes, it is a person of American heritage who was born in India.

Do you call Obama a member of the "Democrat" party as well?

[EX500rider]

53. Right, 'cause if u use the term American Indian u HAVE to be a right winger...lol n/t

[EX500rider]

54. Indigenous peoples of the Americas...

"Indigenous peoples of the United States are commonly known as Native Americans or American Indians."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas

[Xithras]

22. Every nation, including Iraq, has laws preventing people from taking cultural artifacts.

If you are British, and your family has a 500 year old family sword that has been passed down from generation to generation, and you try to move from London to New York, the British government isn't going to let you take the sword with you. Even though it was bought by your ancestor and technically belongs to you. Britain, like Iraq, the United States, and virtually every other nation on the Earth, has laws in place prohibiting or heavily regulating the export of historical artifacts.

The Jewish population of Iraq and Babylonia stretches back thousands of years and is part of the cultural history of modern Iraq. When the Jewish emigrants were leaving Iraq, that nation did exactly what any other nation would have done...it verified that the emigrants weren't taking any of the nations historical or cultural artifacts. While it may not fit with the semi-racist meme that the "mean old Muslims" stole these items from the "hapless Jewish emigrants", the reality (as recognized by treaty and by the laws of nearly every nation on Earth) is that the Iraqi government simply prevented those emigrants from leaving the country with artifacts that it legally deemed to be valuable to the nations culture and history.

There is no honest, non-racist way to claim that these items were stolen. If the United States keeps the archives, then America will be committing cultural theft, and will be no better than any other imperialist nation that has looted the treasures of its conquered lands.

We have a treaty, and we are a nation of laws. The items must be returned.

[JI7]

35. they should return it to the Jewish Families it belonged to

[happyslug]

38. By law it belongs to Iraq

Remember under International law, the only law covering these items, is first, domestic law of Iraq for this relates to property of citizens of Iraq at the time of any confiscation by any Iraqi Government.

The International Treaty says if one takes property, during a war, it must be return to the country that it was taken from, in this case Iraq. Iraq can return it to the families or even Israel, but that is Iraq's choice NOT the choice of the US.

[JI7]

39. from what i understand these were not things given to the Iraqi Govt by these families

they were taken from them without permission.

[happyslug]

45. Taking property from your own citizen is PERMITTED under international law

It may not be permitted by National Law, but that is up to each nation as to the property of the people living in that nation. Thus Iraq had the LEGAL RIGHT under international law to take any property from its own residents. That is NOT is dispute.

International law FORBIDS a country that occupies another country to take property from that occupied country. That is what the US did when it took these items, the US stole them from Iraq. Under International law they must go back to IRAQ. If you believe they should go back to the original owners, go to IRAQ and make that argument within the Iraqi court system. That is what international law says you have to do IF YOU BELIEVE IRAQ SHOULD NOT HAVE THESE ITEMS.

The ONLY court that has jurisdiction to decide that these items should go to anyone but the Iraqi Government is the Iraqi Court System. You may not like it, but that is the law under the 1954 Convention that covers these items. Iraq, Israel and the US are all signatories to that convention and must follow it.

[sulphurdunn]

41. Maybe they should,

but that is a moral argument, not a legal one. Legally, I believe the Iraqi government owns them. Since that position is being questioned, the issue should be resolved in a court, not a legislature.

[sulphurdunn]

40. Regardless of who actually owns this stuff,

they're lucky it was stashed in Saddam's basement and not in the National Museum.

[bemildred]

49. +1.

And also lucky our blind pigs found the truffle instead of blowing it up.

[snooper2]

50. We sent blind pigs to Iraq?

now THAT wasn't very fucking nice!

[Pterodactyl]

56. I hope the Jews who fled have the right of return.