[Publius6961]

Displaying artifacts in London or Hartford or displaying in Giza or Peru I believe the latter is the proper location venue.

I don't care where they're displayed, or even if.
If you can find narratives of the Elgin Marbles, for instance, written before PC revisionism became endemic, you will find, in plain language, that they were purchased in a quarry (!) where they were scheduled to be ground for the lime and plaster.
In the context of the time, they were sold by the then owners the Turks *.
Judging events of 200 years ago by comtemporary Political Correctness is the triumph of ignorance, and a waste of time.

* In 1801 Elgin obtained a firman , or authority, from the Sultan which gave him permission to take away any sculptures or inscriptions which did not interfere with the works or walls of the citadel.

[GladesGuru]

You bagged 'em right between the eyes.

But, then again, perhaps the cranium was uninhabited at the time?

Out fellow FReeper must have sent his brain out for coffee.

;-)

[Recon Dad]

It takes a lot of arrogance to assume the mantel of protector of all antiquities when a lot of the destruction of artifacts probably came at the hands of the "protectors" in the first place.
I've been to the museum in Cairo and other great museums around the world and I have no problem entrusting the safe care of their relics to their care.

We are not going to agree on this issue so let's agree to disagree. Thanks.