09-08-2021, 05:41 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-08-2021, 05:43 AM by Alan_Boskov.)
Of course, dealing with stolen art is big money. Heritage documents aren't something that a buyer would have laying on the nearest to the door piece of furniture of which is set up for impressing dinner guests. Therefore, I doubt that these artifacts would command as high an interest as would even postage stamps with Hitler's bust printed onto them, for example.
The main difference in getting cooperation for universal heritage-protection regarding these types of artifacts and getting likewise for stolen art is that stolen art started out being a Jewish problem, despite the fact that the market has branched out into demand for post-War art to be included. This sort of criminal activity which has become the spotlight beginning with Jewish art will certainly enjoy indifference from nations of which choose to connect this form of criminality with Zionist politics, whereas the theft of heritage documents affects every society that uses a written language and is advanced enough to archive such material.
The main difference in getting cooperation for universal heritage-protection regarding these types of artifacts and getting likewise for stolen art is that stolen art started out being a Jewish problem, despite the fact that the market has branched out into demand for post-War art to be included. This sort of criminal activity which has become the spotlight beginning with Jewish art will certainly enjoy indifference from nations of which choose to connect this form of criminality with Zionist politics, whereas the theft of heritage documents affects every society that uses a written language and is advanced enough to archive such material.