Formerly missing items which have been recovered are, therefore, no longer missing. The article you posted said that only 38 items are now known to be missing. The one I posted said the number was 27. Not a big difference.
The article did not say "MANY more were missing, and not yet recovered" - that's what YOU read into the article. What the article actually said was they "suspect additional pieces MAY have been stolen, they declined to speculate on the scope of the additional uncatalogued items that MAY have been looted". You otoh were happy to speculate that "MANY more WERE missing", despite that you live on another continent and have no personal knowledge, I think, of the situation.
Since you can speculate, I will feel free to do a little also. I would think that a museum would catalogue or inventory most of what it has. Businesses keep inventory records and one would think that a museum would keep some sort of record or documentation of the artifacts it has as well. You work in a bank I believe. Surely your bank keeps records of its assets and deposits, doesn't it? Well, why shouldn't we assume the Iraqi museum would do so as well? After all, Mesopotamia is the birthplace of writing. You'd think the museum employees would be literate.
Let me ask you - do you think museums fail to catalogue or inventory most of the artifacts which they acquire? I don't, but feel free to say so if you disagree.
Also we do know only 27 or 38 or thereabouts of the museum's catalogued items are missing. So if MANY items are missing, it would mean that the looters were selective and did most of their looting of uncatalogued items vs catalogued ones. Of that recovery efforts were pretty effective for catalogued items but very uneffective for the uncatalogued itsms. Now does that sound logical? Of course not.
So now who'd doing the disinfo? |
