Should the British [and others] Museum give back its loot

should it be returned

  • yes

    Votes: 7 8.2%
  • no

    Votes: 72 84.7%
  • perhaps

    Votes: 6 7.1%

  • Total voters
    85
If it was looted, and the country of origin can prove it, then yes, it should be returned, at the expense of the country of origin.
If it was legitimately aqcuired (and I include stuff we found abandoned on various battlefields), then they can do one, but their citizens would be more than welcome to come and see it.
 
The Elgin Marbles were bought as part of a legal transaction so Athens can feck off.
 
If it was looted, and the country of origin can prove it, then yes, it should be returned, at the expense of the country of origin.
If it was legitimately aqcuired (and I include stuff we found abandoned on various battlefields), then they can do one, but their citizens would be more than welcome to come and see it.

I would add the caveat that those demanding their treasures back also hand over treasures they took from conquered people.
 
of course the Marbels were not exactly "looted" but bought by us BUT at the time i believe the turks were in control of Greece.
 

Ravers

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Didn't some tin pot nation demand their shit back few years ago before being kindly shown the original receipt from when they'd sold it to us.

We bought it fair and square, off you ****.

Also look at what happened to the Cairo Museum, absolutely trashed and looted. ******* savages can't be trusted to look after such treasure. It's much better off here. They should pay us money for looking after it for them and keeping it safe.
 
If anything we should take even more loot from Iraq/Middle East/Egypt cos the locals don't care a hoot for it and would rather sell their history and culture on the black market than take any pride in it, the odious, swarthy cretins.
 
Good idea - including bits of continents?

That might get to messy, although it will be worth it when those Latino types realise that they wont get those Islands since they were uninhabited and therefore not owned by the descendant's of the Spanish invaders that somehow believe they are the true native people.
 
That might get to messy, although it will be worth it when those Latino types realise that they wont get those Islands since they were uninhabited and therefore not owned by the descendant's of the Spanish invaders that somehow believe they are the true native people.
I was thinking more along the lines of bits of North Africa TBH...
 
Ive never been sure quite how the Spanish can make an argument for Gib but deny the same argument for Ceuta.

Obviously its because they're Spanish
 
Didn't some tin pot nation demand their shit back few years ago before being kindly shown the original receipt from when they'd sold it to us.

We bought it fair and square, off you ****.

Also look at what happened to the Cairo Museum, absolutely trashed and looted. ******* savages can't be trusted to look after such treasure. It's much better off here. They should pay us money for looking after it for them and keeping it safe.


Couldn't agree more. Imagine what would have happened to most of the contents of the British Museum, if it had been left in situ.

On the other hand maybe we could have a team of "genuine cockney's" stood around every London tourist site harassing Arabs, by trying to sell them "original" artifacts.
"Best Arab price mate, just for you!"
And when they say no, we can stick them on a Boris bike and charge them for the photo!
 
International law is clear. The proper place for historic artefacts is being blown to bits by the local frothers in its country of origin as an affront to Alan the merciful, the beneficient, the endlessly enraged about some trivial shite or other.
 

Latest Threads

Top