RUF Salute Report Made No Mention Of Help Received From Charles Taylor

A key military intelligence document, written by and for high level Sierra Leonean rebel commanders summarizing their group’s activities during a brutal time in the Sierra Leonean war, made no mention of any assistance by the then Liberian President, Charles Taylor, the Special Court for Sierra Leone heard today. 

Mr. Taylor’s lead defense counsel, Courtenay Griffiths, today read from a ‘Salute Report’ written by former Revolutionary United Front (RUF) commander Sam Bockarie to his returning leader, Foday Sankoh.  The report was written after Mr. Sankoh’s absence from the rebel group between 1997 and 1999, while he was imprisoned by Nigeria . The document provided a detailed account of the RUF’s activities while Mr. Sankoh was gone.

Reading from the report, the defense sought to rebut prosecution allegations that the RUF was controlled by Mr. Taylor during Sierra Leone ’s war while Mr. Sankoh was imprisoned in Nigeria , and that during this time, Mr. Taylor promoted RUF commander Sam Bockarie to the rank of Brigadier General. Witnesses have further testified in the trial that diamonds mined by the RUF were taken to Mr. Taylor and that in return, he supplied the rebels with arms and ammunition. Mr. Taylor has denied these allegations.

Asked by his defense counsel whether there was any mention in the report of him giving orders for the RUF to join the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC)–a group of Sierra Leonean soldiers who overthrew the government of President Ahmed Tejan Kabbah in May 1997–Mr. Taylor said “No. I was not privy to any of this information. From what I got, this was an instruction from Sankoh on tape that was played on radio.”

On his promotion to the rank of General in the RUF, the Salute Report quoted Sam Bockarie as saying “I was promoted to General by Johnny Paul Koroma [former leader of the AFRC].” Mr. Taylor buttressed this point by saying he never promoted Mr. Bockarie to such rank, saying that “in fact to the best of my recollection, when I met Bockarie, he was already a General.”

In his testimony today, Mr. Taylor told the judges that the Salute Report detailing the RUF’s activities in Foday Sankoh’s absence makes no mention of diamonds handed over to him.

“If they are sending diamonds to Taylor , why did they not say so in the Salute Report? This is because it never happened,” he said.

Mr. Taylor also told the judges that the Salute Report submitted to Mr. Sankoh talks about arms and ammunition that were purchased from United Liberation Movement for Democracy in Liberia (ULIMO)–another Liberian rebel group which fought against Mr. Taylor’s National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL); the sale of diamonds to Lebanese businessmen; and Mr. Bockarie’s order to fellow RUF commander, Superman, to move with rebel fighters as reinforcements for the January 1999 attack on Sierra Leone’s capital Freetown. Mr. Taylor said that all these issues fall within the prosecution’s allegations against him but that there is no mention of his involvement in them based on the Salute Report.

Mr. Taylor again blamed Western Powers for the state of affairs in Liberia after he became president in 1997. He said the western powers encouraged him to disarm all fighting forces in Liberia , burning all arms and ammunition and thereby rendering him powerless only for the Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) rebels to launch an attack against him.

“It ended up with an insurgency by LURD after we were led to burn our arms. After we burnt all our arms, LURD attacked,” Mr. Taylor said.

The young men and women who had been disarmed became vulnerable since they had no jobs or food.

“We did not have job for these young men and women who had fought. They had not been properly demobilized. They were available to fight. There is nothing to do when people take advantage of these young men and women,” he said.

Mr. Taylor said that Liberia therefore became a ground for mercenaries and many of these former fighters became recruits for conflicts in Sierra Leone , Angola and Congo .

He said that with all these events, the issues he faces now were bound to happen. “The Charles Taylor incident was an accident waiting to happen,” he said.

Mr. Taylor’s testimony continues on Monday. For the duration of Mr. Taylor’s testimony, there will be no court hearings on Fridays.


  1. As the prosecution’s case continue to fall like a pack of cards. it is becoming increasingly clear, that this trial is a mere witch-hunt against a man who simply refused to dance to the tone of certain world powers.

  2. This case should now be thrown out by the Judges. What else do they need to hear. This Salute Report alone exonerates Mr. Taylor of the charges levied against him. To all the people on this forum who have been saying Mr. Taylor controlled the RUF. What more proof do they need of his innocense? I guess they will now say he knew he would be indicted ten years in the future so he had Bockarie write this.

  3. The Sierra Leone TRC Final report stated on it’s purpose: “It is to be hoped that this report will clarify and resolve debates about the conflict. Possibly the Special Court for Sierra Leone will find that the impartial historical record established by the Commission is of value in its own proceedings. The historical record is based upon a variety of sources, including testimony in public hearings, private interviews and the examination of documents and other sources. Where available and relevant, existing historical accounts of the conflict and the period that preceded it have been consulted.

    An excerpt from Sierra Leone TRC Final Report, Volume II, Chapter 2, Page 31, para 28, stated: “The Commission holds the NPFL and the RUF responsible for planning and executing military ops against the state of Sierra Leone. In particular, the Commission finds that the leaders of these organizations, Charles Taylor and Foday Sankoh, played pivotal roles in bringing bloody conflict to Sierra Leone”. This is not from a western back international court, but from the Sierra Leone TRC itself, based on thousands of testimonies to include influential players with firsthand knowledge.

    Further, in Vol II, Chapter II, Page 36, para 127 states: “The commission finds that the RUF deliberately included civilian settlements w/in the scope of offensive operations and holds the orchestrators, planners and commanders of these operations responsible for grave and systematic breaches of international humanitarian law. In particular, Charles Taylor, the leader of NPFL, and Foday Sankoh, leader of the RUF, are found to have ordered such operations as part of their joint strategy of conventional “target” warfare.”

    Reading some of Mr. Taylor’s defense counsel arguments reminds me of former President Clinton stating, “It depends on what the definition of “is” is?” Come on, a salute report is not always a comprehensive or all inclusive intelligence document.

    1. Timothy,
      That’s the REPORT; Today, we’re in court and the EVIDENCES presented are what we are going by. The prosecutors had this very report, why didn’t they present it in court??? Mr. Taylor did, he told us what Pres. Kabbah said about Liberians that were involved in Sierra Leone.

      Plus, what was the report based on??? Hearsays to some degree!!!!. Were Taylor, Bockarie, Sankoh, Koroma who were the MAIN INNERS interviewed as to know FACTUAL FACTS??? NO!!! So how comphrensive is this report when MISSING are key factors??? What was Pres. Kabbah roles if you won’t mind telling us…..Chapter and pages please; maybe you can tell us WHY wasn’t he on trial when his deputies are in jail.

      The “IS” “is” in this case has been answered; Mr. Taylor told us the relationship in terms of START TIME and END POINT….todate, the prosecutors has yet to disprove that….go figure.

      Now we have the words of Bockarie without a gun to his head, reporting back to his leader the activities of RUF while he was in jail and you telling us “NOT ALWAYS COMPREHSIVE”?? What was/were missing you think Timothy??? Did the prosecutor know about this report during her show time?? YES!!! So then, why didn’t they bring it in as evidence??? Really, what is your HONEST guess???

      Timothy, this SALUTE REPORT sealed the case against the man….what more are we hear before it comes to the END. If you were on trial, do you think you should be convicted on HEARSAYS when you’re providing DOCUMENTS upon DOCUMENTS to state your case??

      1. Dear Noko4, I agree that Kabbah has much to answer for…as do many, many others. However, it is ashame that you believe that such an important document as the Sierra Leone TRC report, constructed using specific methodologies, is rubbish. I did not listen to the Sierra Leone TRC testimony first hand, but I listened first hand to many of the key players in the Liberian Civil War testify before the Liberian TRC, and testified not to reconcile, but to claim innocence or rewrite history. BTW…a salute report is limited in time and scope, and I would advise not to base innocence or guilt based on one report. What was the time period of this SALUTE report? Did it cover RUF activities from inception to end? I will save my judgement until all the evidence, arguments and cross examiniations are complete.

        1. Tim,
          Please okay…..where did I say the Reoprt was “RUBBISH”??? You did your best to DOWN PLAY the words(Salute Report) of Mr. Bockarie….like it was lacking some ingredients and all I was doing was letting you know that some KEY PLAYERS were left out of the SL’s TRC Report also.

          Was Mr. Taylor called in for interview???

    2. Hey Timothy

      If Mr.Taylor name was mention in this salut report it was going to be comprehensive to you right but without his name it is worthless.
      Do you know why Mr.Taylor name was not mention? His name was not mention because he did not have anything to do with the RUF that is while.
      The Sierra Leonean TRC report is not a flaw free document meaning that it can be challenged in court but it do not make him guilty in anyway and secondly Charles Taylor was never a part of this TRC process so information form this report can not be banding if it were then the prosecution was going to you it extensively.

      By the way Timothy thank for shearing these information but it is worthless sorry.

    3. Timothy,

      Thank you for your post. I believe the Special Court on Sierra Leone is capable of reaching an independent conclusion on what external materials it can entertain as extraneous evidence in an attempt to reach a fair and impartial verdict. How the introduction of such materials will be reconciled with the court’s rule of evidence and procedure is another matter.

      Maybe this report will provide another avenue of exploration for the prosecution. If you can recall, the prosecution has modifified the indictment three times and 6 years after the original indictment was served, the prosecution seems to be in search of evidece as though the case began yesterday. How prepared were they for this adventure?

      The other issue I see with your excertp is that the duration of the Sierra Leonean civil war is not under consideration here. It is only the timeframe that Mr. Taylor was president of Liberia that is being considered in this case.

      The third point is the commission of crime. There must be showing that Mr. Taylor intended to commit crime and that he instigated, planned, organized and carried out the commission of the crime or gave orders for the commission of the crime or he knew that the crimes were being committed and he had the means and authority to prevent the commission but chose to do nothing about them. Your prosecution in the Hague has not laid firm bases for these condition after 6 years of preparing its case.

      1. Dear Andrew, thank you for your objective reply, and I concur with all your points except one..which is your last sentence when you state “Your prosecution in the Hague”. My friend, I have not formed an opinion on Mr. Taylor’s innocence or guilt regarding the charges he is facing in the SCSL. I prefer to listen to ALL the evidence, arguments, and cross examiniations, before forming judgement. On that note, I think it is paramount that we understand the significance of each individual piece of evidence, not only in and of itself, but in the context of all other evidence. For me, the single SALUTE report the defense has provided does not exonnerate Mr. Taylor just because his name was not mentioned. I understand the limitations of a SALUTE report…to include time (as you accurately point out).

        1. Timothy,

          apologies for the use of the wrong pronoun. no offense. Just that it is sad, piecing from what Taylor defense has presented thus far, taht Taylor was vigorously involved in the search for peace in Sierra Leone. Yet that side of the man has been hidden. The conclusion is Taylor was searching for peace and at the same time undermining the peace- preposterous, isn’t it?

        2. Both counsels have painted two very different narratives – I imagine the truth overlaps both narratives. It will be very interesting to see how the judges will rule.

  4. It’s important to know the purpose and limitation of the SALUTE report. Just because some information is not in the report does not mean it is not occuring, which is what the Taylor defense team would like you to believe. Here is an excerpt from a document talking about the purpose of a SALUTE report, which is deliberately limited in scope: “Intelligence Report Dimensions We now turn attention to the dimensions or attribute of intelligence report data. We start with the dimensions defined by the SALUTE format for spot reports [3]: Size: the number of observed enemy soldiers and vehicles, which can be equated with echelon level (e.g., squad, platoon, company); Activity: what the units were doing (e.g., emplacing mines in the road); Location: the location of the observed units in terms of latitude/longitude or UMT; Unit: either the specific unit designation (e.g., 1st Plt, B Co, 3rd Bn, 1st Inf.) or its unit function type (e.g., reconnaissance, supply or combat); Time: the time of the observation; Equipment: a list of all the observed equipment the enemy is wearing or using (e.g., tracked vehicles, protective masks) SALUTE format is intended for spot reports by troops in the field…”

    1. Timothy,
      Please STOP making SMOKE when there’s NO FIRE. What that report was stating were the MAIN ACTIVITIES of RUF. Yes, there are some little littles but they were NOT important….the MAIN POINTS were detailed and you cannot down play that.

    2. Timothy,

      You are grabbing for straws ! The case has been won in the court of justice. You may still have a chance since this is a political trial and nothing else. I myself still have confidence in the judges that based on the evidence before them Mr. Taylor should be found not guilty.

      1. Dear Aki,
        You have made your mind up before hearing all of the evidence; I pray the judges will keep a more objective perspective and listen to ALL the evidence and arguments before coming to conclusions.

        1. Timothy,

          I have listened to all the evidence the Prosecution has presented. Remember in a court of law the burden is on the prosecution to prove guilt. The Defense does not have to prove anything. Based on what the prosecution has provided there is is no way an un biased set of judges can say there is not reasonable doubt. As you are aware where there is reasonable doubt the defendant must be found not guilty.

        2. Dear Aki,
          Apparently the judges have a different opinion of the prosecution evidence, otherwise they would ruled in favor of the defense motion regarding Rule 98. I wait to hear all testimony, see all evidence presented and watch carefully cross examination before making judgement.

        3. Tim,
          Whatelse there to heard??? The prosecutors have RESTED on HEARSAY…..all they can now do is pluck holes in Mr. Taylor’s testimony. But they have to some back with FACTUAL FACTS and not some…..someone told John, John told Sue, Sue told Mary and Mary said to this court…..I won’t work.

          The defense is doing what they should have done…..present DOCUMENTS.

    3. Timothy, what do you want to prove? Who do you want to impress about your military knowledge? We can care less. First of all, you have failed to define SALUTE REPORT MILITARILY. SALUTE REPORT simply mean the following: S is for size of the enemy. A is for the activities of the enemy. L is for the location of the enemy. U is for what uniform the enemy is wearing. T is for time and E is for equipment. This SALUTE REPORT is done when you are reporting on the enemies. You are mixing so many military acronyms that are not relavent to this trial. The bad guys just exonerated President Taylor from the false accusition levy against him. Still focus.

      1. Dear Jose, perhaps you did not read my entire posting, for I do break down what the SALUTE accronym stands for. It is merely one report, it is not a comprehensive document. One report does not exonnerate Mr. Taylor because his name was not mentioned. It is certainly daming of ULIMO-K and its supporters. My point is, this single report is not a Rosetta Stone. I will wait to make my personal judgement of Mr. Taylor’s innocence or guilt after all evidence has been presented and the due process is complete. However, I think evidence should be looked at in the context of all evidence presented, not just in and of itself.

    4. Timothy,

      You seem to be filandering like the prosecution. In this Salute Report there was the mention of purchase of arms and arrangements to buy additional weapons as well as the sale of Diamons clearly outlined as taking place. If as stated by the Prosecution Taylor was the man in Charge of the RUF and Directing their actions, this would have to be mentioned because it is indeed a pertinent point.

      Do not forget the Prosecution is claiming that Taylor was the main supplier of arms in exchange for diamonds. If this were the case, you would have seemn it stated clearly that appreciation need to be given to Mr. Taylor for his assistance. Let’s be realistic here; we are not idiots. You may hate the man but show us the beef. Which documentary evidence has been presented that provides an ioata of concrete evidence that Mr Taylor provided these weapons in exchange for diamonds? on the contrary the Defence has presented numerable documentary and factual evidence to the contrary.
      So if you were neutral you would know that the Defence is doing their due deligence while the prosecution played games by presenting a bunch of circumstantial and heresay evidence.

      The prosecution’s case has been unravalled face it!!

      1. Dear Helen, actually, I do not hate Charles Taylor, in fact I am personal friends with some of his supporters. I am merely trying to keep the singel SALUTE report in its proper context. I understand what the defense is doing…and they are doing a very good job defending Mr. Taylor. However, I would not proclaim Mr. Taylor innocent of all charges just because his name was not on a single report for a specfic narrow time frame. Yes, I do agree with you, that if Mr. Taylor’s name was actually mentioned in the report, it would be a boon for the prosecution. It will be interesting to view the cross examination. Dear Helen, let me be clear, I have not heard all the evidence, arguments or cross examination. The due process is not complete…then, and only then, will I come to an opinion of Mr. Taylor’s guilt or innocence regarding the specific charges he is currently facing in the SCSL.

        1. Timothy,

          Let us agree that the prosecution problem is linkage. There is Taylor the accused and therere is alleged crime scene and victims. The challenge is to connent the two beyond reasonable doubts. No all doubts but reasonable doubts, doubts that an ordinary person is inclined to consider.

          As it stands now can we affirm that the prosecution case passed that test?

  5. Now we know who was the RUF ARM SUPPLIERS. According to documentary evidence displayed in the court today August 13, 2009, ULIMO, was the supplier of arms to RUF. President Taylor is innocent. Free this innocent man.

  6. Why the US Government through Dr. Susan Rice Assistant Secretary of States applauded President Taylor effort in helping to bring peace to Sierra Leone? President Taylor is producing more facts, documents, and evidences than the prosecution. The truth will always over power falsehood. Go Ghankay!!!

  7. Mr. Alpha Sesay, I must thank you very much for this report because i just can’t help my self at all without you. the links just does not work!

    I hope this link problem is not a plan to shut it down els BIG TROUBLE!

    Am done

  8. The pice of evidence displayed in court is another master pice. We all know from facts not hearsay, that AFRC promoted Sam Bockarie to the rank of general not Mr. Taylor as being alleged. Now that RUF Salute Report has made it clear that ULIMO supplied arms to the RUF what next? Go on Ghankay expose them.

  9. Let ue agree that arms and ammunition were given to the RUF and the AFRC, but where did these arms and ammunition come from? Does any country around us here in Africa have factories that manufacture arms and ammunitions? LET US SHINE OUR EYES TO SEE THE TRUE.

  10. Elements of complicity or exoneration in Mr. Taylor’s testimony:

    1. 1991 – 1992 NPFL formed alliance with RUF to neutralize ULIMO considered as common enemy. (1991 – 1992 does not fall within the trial period)
    2. Invited Sam Bockarie to Liberia and offerred US$2000.00 as gift
    3. Foiled the supply of military hard wares designated for RUF in Monrovia, expelled two individuals in connection with the syndicate.
    4. Declared unilateral ceasefire on behalf of RUF
    5. Facilitated the release of Johnny Paul from RUF custody in exchange for the release of UN peacekeepers taken hostage by the West Side boys of AFRC.
    6. Appointed permanent representative of the Government of Liberia in Sierra Leonean peace negotiation In Lome.
    7. Signed the Lome Agreement as MORAL GUARANTOR.
    8.Advised Foday Sankor to drop arms and formed a political party.

    Now, Mr. Taylor earlier in his testimony informed the Special Court for Sierra Leone that upon taken office as President of Liberia, he had enormous tasks to fix Liberia and could not have concerned himself with planning and directing war in Sierra Leone. Whether the chronological events of engagement given by Mr. Taylor were not as enormous as fixing Liberia is debatable. But, I think Mr. Taylor had vested interests in the Sierra Leonean conflict contrary to claim by him that he was so obsessed with Liberian affairs.

    Andrew, Noko4, Noko5, bnk, Daniel, etc. please show me in any of the peace agreements reached during Liberian peace process that another sitting President within the MRU, ECOWAS, AU or UN was made to sign any of these instruments as “MORAL GUARANTOR”. What does that role tell you, that Mr. Taylor has considerable command and INFLUENCE in the Sierra Leonean conflict?

    1. Musa,
      Here is what you asked for on Liberia’s peace Accord called the Abuja Accord….

      Witnessed By:

      Dr. Obed Asamoah
      For and on behalf of His Excellency Flt-Lt. Jerry John Rawlings, President of the Republic of Ghana and Chairman of ECOWAS

      Chief Tom Ikimi
      For and on behalf of His Excellency General Sani Abacha, Head of State, Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian Armed Forces

      His Excellency President Canaan Banana

      OAU Eminent Person in Liberia

      His Excellency Anthony B. Nyakyi

      UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative to Liberia

      1. Noko4,

        Your exhibit shows that Dr. Obed Asamoah, Chief Tom Ikimi and others signed the Abuja Accord as WITNESSES. On the other hand, Mr. Taylor signed the Lome Accord as MORAL GUARANTOR. By definition, a witness is an observer, onlooker, spectator, bystander while a guarantor is a backer, sponsor, underwriter. You see the contrast. Mr. Taylor played a “special role” in the Sierra Leonean conflict. That special role was so conspicuous that he had to sponsor, back or underwrite the Lome Agreement in order for the Agreement to have force and effect.

        1. Gentlemen,

          How do you consider the events leading to the serving of the indicment on Mr. Taylor? The so-called indictment was sealed March 2003, announced June 2003 but copies delivered to selected parties in april 2003 – two months before the indicment was served and the seal was broken. this must be strict compliance with and observance of legal proceedings.

          Following the indictment, the crafter, Mr. David Crane boasted that he intended to humiliate and humble Mr. Taylor before his peers. So it was no longer cause of safeguarding of and respect for international humanitarian laws. It was no longer the interest of victims of the crises in Sierra Leone. They were just pawns.

          Africans have to look beyond these ploys.

        2. Musa,
          Here is the list to the WITNESSES of the Lome Accord. I don’t want to believe Mr. Taylor was the ONLY HEAD OF STATE signing off…..I hope you will go and read the Accord before jumping into conclusion.



          The present Agreement shall enter into force immediately upon its signing by the Parties.

          Done in Lomé this seven day of the month of July 1999 in twelve (12) original texts in English and French, each text being equally authentic.

          Alhaji Ahmad Tejan Kabbah
          President of the Republic of Sierra Leone

          Corporal Foday Saybana Sankoh
          Leader of the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone

          His Excellency Gnassingbe Eyadema
          President of the Togolese Republic
          Chairman of ECOWAS

          His Excellency Blaise Compaore
          President of Burkina Faso

          His Excellency Dahkpanah Dr. Charles Ghankey Taylor
          President of the Republic of Liberia

          His Excellency Olusegun Obasanjo
          President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces
          of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

          His Excellency Youssoufou Bamba
          Secretary of State at the Foreign Mission in charge of
          International Cooperation of Cote d’Ivoire

          His Excellency Victor Gbeho
          Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Ghana

          Mr. Roger Laloupo
          Representative of the ECOWAS Special Representative

          Ms. Adwoa Coleman
          Representative Organization of African Unity
          Ambassador Francis G. Okelo
          Executive Secretary of the United Nations Secretary General

          Dr. Moses K.Z. Anafu
          Representative of the Commonwealth of Nations

        3. Hey Musa

          Shame on you my man you don’t know what a moral guarantor is?
          Let me help you with this first of all moral guarantor is not a word but a term used in diplomatic, political and hostages negotiation.

          If you look at it as guarantor which is the business context you will be wrong and of course you are wrong.

          Moral guarantor is a term given to a person or a group of people in charge of a particular negotiation to keep check and balance

          This term means that you should have the so responsibility in making every party in an agreement to live up to the standard of that agreement and you should maintain contact and pressure if necessary on any party that do not comply with their obligation.

          So by Mr Taylor signing as Moral Guarantor in no way make him a leader or commander of any party in the conflict.

          I will provide you with few links to show you what a moral guarantor is


          In short my brother moral guarantor is just a check and balance persons.

          So get this straight that is not evidence


      1. Aki,

        If I may add to the well articulated comment made by Timothy on the Salute Report, let me dissect a little bit on what I see as a contradiction in Mr. Taylor testimony.

        1. Mr. Taylor informed SC-SL that the then NPFL formed alliance with RUF to combat a common enemy which happened to be ULIMO back in the years 1991 – 1992. I wonder when this common enemy of NPFL and RUF transformed into an arm supplier of the RUF. The Court and audience will need a little detail on this transformation.

        2. If you read further down, you will see that Mr. Taylor says the Western Powers encouraged him to disarm ALL FIGHTING FORCES in Liberia, burning arms and ammunition and thereby rendering him powerless for LURD to launch an attack against him. ULIMO was certainly part and parcel of the disarmament and disbandment exercises of warring factions leading to the general and presidential elections in 1997 during which Mr. Taylor emerged victorious. A disbanded organization could not have supplied arms and ammunition to RUF. Think about this, Aki.

        1. Musa,

          You bring up some point that the Defense will have to clarify. However the arms you mention about have been explained by Mr. Taylor already. He supplied those limited amount of arms but mostly ammunition as he said sometime between 1991 thru 1992. This period is outside of the indictment.

      2. Aki,

        Let me dissect a little bit on what I see as a contradiction in Mr. Taylor testimony.

        1. Mr. Taylor informed SC-SL that the then NPFL formed alliance with RUF to combat a common enemy which happened to be ULIMO back in the years 1991 – 1992. I wonder when this common enemy of NPFL and RUF transformed into an arm supplier of the RUF. The Court and audience will need a little detail on this transformation.

        2. If you read further down, you will see that Mr. Taylor says the Western Powers encouraged him to disarm ALL FIGHTING FORCES in Liberia, burning arms and ammunition and thereby rendering him powerless for LURD to launch an attack against him. ULIMO was certainly part and parcel of the disarmament and disbandment exercises of warring factions leading to the general and presidential elections in 1997 during which Mr. Taylor emerged victorious. A disbanded organization could not have supplied arms and ammunition to RUF. Think about this, Aki.

        1. Musa,

          I do not believe that you expect Taylor to provide clarification on a report that he did not author not did he know anything about its authorring. It was Bockarie who narrated in the report that RUF has been purchasing arms from ULIMO. So I really do not believe you can get help here if you have serious doubt that to accept the information as it is until cross-examination.

          Second point you seem to mix ULIMO and LURD. By the time of the burning of the arms, ULIMO and other factions had been demobilised and ECOMOG had carried search and seizure operations to recover hidden or unreported arms.

          But LURD was not in the picture at this time. If you followed the Liberian crises, after the election, it LURD that launch it attacks from GUINEA.

          Following Taylor’s trial, we will launch a special court on Liberia in order to try Lasana Conteh and other who destroyed the peace and first free and fair elections.

    2. Musa,

      We were able to review the case transcript of August 11, 2009 and no where did we see the word “declared” in reference to the RUF unilateral ceasefire.

      I will continue to put the remind us of the timeframe under consideration here. This case is limited to the time of Mr. Taylor’s Presidency. Let us not dwell on invalid periods only for the sake of argument.

      Musa, did you read in the transcript that following Sankoh’s release from jail, Togo and Nigeria prepared envelope for him so as to get him started. Leaders do favors of this nature from time to time and this is not outside norms.

      I will have to research your last point and revert.

      1. Where is Musa???

        PLEAE READ:
        “The Special Court for Sierra Leone was set up jointly by the Government of Sierra Leone and the United Nations. It is mandated to try those who bear the greatest responsibility for serious violations of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law committed in the territory of Sierra Leone since 30 November 1996”.

        Do you see the word “MANDATED”, “SERIOUS VIOLATIONS” and “SINCE 30 NOVEMBER 1996”. Oh yes you do… tell me with ALL the documents Mr. Taylor has presented, do you truly believe he should convicted on HEARSAYS???

        To help you out, this case is about few witnesses telling the court that Mr. Taylor signed a PACK with RUF in ’94. No one has seen any documents relating to this but because the US and Britain wanted to teach Mr. Taylor a lesson, they created this court in the shadow……made a deal with Pres. Kabbah to accept it. For accepting his kangaroo court, he, Pres. Kabbah, will NOT be prosecuted for any crimes committed by him, DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY. Now you see WHY he is out FREELY while his deputies are in jail.

        So it came to down HOW do we bring in these witnesses to tell the world without any DOCUMENTS showing the PACK??? Oh well, the US and Britain then decided to amend the RULES of this court to allow HEARSAY.

        Do you now see mess been created just to punish one man???? Unfortunately for them, this one man is NOT a fool like many that have come before this court. He DEMANDED equal asset to ALL materials and funds. He fired his first lawyers and picked this group. He made sure before leaving Liberia, he brought out ALL his papers. Can you imagine what could we be saying without those papers??? I will tell you….GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY!!!!

        Let me know if you want more insight to this case.

      2. Noko4 and others,

        Admittedly, I must commend you for excellent research on Mr. Taylor’s role in the Sierra Leone peace process as “MORAL GUARANTOR”. The research has remarkably clear my doubt on this issue. I agreed with your exhibit.

        On the issue of the Salute Report prepared and submitted by Bockarie to Foday Sankor, I think Timothy has sufficiently dealt with it and I am in agreement with him.

        Like I said in one of my posts, the final determination of Mr. Taylor trial will be based on the weight of evidence adduced by Prosecution and rebuttals or defense made Mr. Taylor through his Defense Counsel.

        I will not want to jump to a NOT GUILTY or GUILTY opinion until I follow the entire proceeding in the case. Remember, Mr. Taylor will face cross examination of what he made in his defense. Good weekend, gentlemen.

        1. Musa,

          Thanks for the concession. We are all awaiting the cross examination of Taylor, the focal point of this case. But not only that we are also awaiting the proof of Taylor’s $5 billion dollars bank account. We are also awaiting proof of Taylor’s intent to commit the crime, planning and execution of the crime, or proof of his knowledge of the crime and his failure to prevent the crime from happening. This is the heart of proof of allegation of a crime.

          Oh and Musa, another thing, the defense has said it does not know what the indictment is against Taylor because there are so many versions. Maybe we can review the various versions and appease ourselves of the underlying justifications for so many revisions to an issue that should be clearcut.

          Maybe we can ponder these points on the week-end and engage afterwards.

        2. Musa, hope your weekend was great; one thing I know is that even if the facts were written in BLUE AND PINK, which would be unusual, but just to make you happy,my man you will still not agree. those points that are neccessarily evident have been presented in black and white and I think any sensible person would accept written evidence as compare to HEAR SAY !!! OR THEY>>> . The facts have been laid on the table by mr. taylor. there is no need for trial anymore. It’s a wate of time and resources that the world could benefit from in other ways. LET MTHEM use the trial funds to help the goverment of sierraleon learn wealth management. CUZ trus me, that goverment is very CORRUPT>>>

    3. Musa,

      For the interest of our audience I have copied and pasted the section of the LOME ACCORD that established the moral guarantors of the Accord. I hope you can review the accord so that we can all be in consonance on this issue.




      The Government of the Togolese Republic, the United Nations, the OAU, ECOWAS and the Commonwealth of Nations shall stand as Moral Guarantors that this Peace Agreement is implemented with integrity and in good faith by both parties

    4. Well done Mr. Musa. This is what we need here! people who make sense of what they are trying to convey. Not those who blindly and prematurely declare victory to their chief even before the trial ends! The justices are seeing how ignorant most followers of tyrants usually behave. Except in this case we see most of these blind followers of taylor are ex rebel fighters who have no place in today’s civilized world where they cannot live by the power of the gun and must therefore work. However, with little education earned under the leadership of their chief, they are left with nothing except to follow him to hell! Thank you Musa! Don’t you see how they compose their thoghts in writing? Very little education!

      1. Tracey,

        I believe we have encourage participant on this site to demonstrate respect for others in their postings. I take exception to some of the comments in the above posting of August 14, 2009 at 8:39p.m. that is found under the name J.fallah menjor. these are the comments that i object to:

        1. most of these blind followers of taylor are ex rebel fighters who have no place in today’s civilized world

        2. with little education earned under the leadership of their chief, they are left with nothing except to follow him to hell!

        I do not view these lines as addressing issues. In believe they mete insolence and I think I should register my concerns to you.

        1. Dear Andrew,

          I am glad you brought this to my attention. I agree with you that we all need to keep our postings respectful of others on the site and stick to the issues. We have had some excellent debates and discussions on this site when people have focused on the trial itself and the questions and arguments that emerge from it.

          I might take this opportunity to note that we have actually not approved a few postings in the past few days because they have attacked other readers personally and individually. This is against our policy for site usage. We should also avoid making generalizations about groups of people that could cause offense. For those who do not see their comments on the site, please do resubmit them but please make sure they are in line with our rules — we have very few rules as we want to foster as much debate and hear as many ideas as possible — for those few rules we do have (which basically boils down to the principle of focusing on the issues, not each other) I would ask our readers to continue to respect them. If comments are resubmitted and focused on the substance of the issues the trial raises, we will be happy to post them.


        2. We must thank Tracey……if not, this site was going to be like ALL the other sites you find Liberians……SILLINESS and FOUL WORDS that are not needed in any discussions.

  11. Musa,

    Based on the Mr. Taylor’s testimony so far what sort of a character do you think he is? This is not a catch 22 question. I am sincerely attempting to obtain an objective view from you. I will give you my take. I see a Taylor who has transformed himself from a warlord into a strong political figure. He is involved in shuttle diplomacy with all actors in the Sierra Leonean Peace process(, the factions, Kabbah, other presidents, UN, etc.). I see a genuine effort to forge the peace in Sierra Leone(providing safe haven in Liberia, facilitating travels, establishing and facilitating communication contacts, etc). I see significant and honest effort to restore peace in Sierra Leone. For Liberia own stability in contigent upon genuine progress in Sierra Leone.

    Opponent of Mr. Taylor might dismiss these effort as mere hypocrisy. So how do we perceive Taylor thus far given his disclosures. Was he just a double-standard, double-crossing uncoof individual? One day he negotiates with Blaise, Eyadema, Obassanjo, Kabbah, UN etc and the other day he is planning murder and mayhem for Sierra Leone. Please give me your take.

  12. Noko4,

    Excellent research. I believe that nowhere did this document designate the title moral guarntor to Mr. Taylor. I understand that some language can be employed during discussions and litigations. We have to investigate the context in which phrase “moral guarantor” was used as it relates to the trial and subsequent discussions. May be Musa can assist with the research.

  13. Friends,

    Charles Taylor trial is a political trial. The TRC report on Libria has been release with recommendations calling for the banding of some Liberians from holding public offices, while others are exnorated, but still prosecution called for others for various breached of Intenational Humanitarian Laws. It it was not just to get at one persons, there should be strong international support the Liberian TRC report and its recommendations.

    Hope the truth shall prevail in the end and Charles Taylor would be done justice.

  14. This debate is generating a lot of excitement; it has also brought into light a clearer depictions of the two sides of the trial; the prosecution that went to a landmark trial armed with speculations, and a defense team that believe in the presentation of the facts,

    Like the trial it self, on here, people who seem to be against Mr. Taylor continue to base their analysis on speculations. Whenever they tried to apply facts, those facts appeared to be out of scope and the indictments. I see people saying “Charles Taylor should go to jail for the mayhems he caused in Liberia”; “CT rebels looted our villages in Bomi or Bong or other places”; “CT has already stated that he collaborated with the RUF so he’s guilty”, etc; the emotions to prejudgment is overwhelming. Yes, CT may have caused mayhems in Liberia but, this trial is not about Liberia; his rebels looted your various villages in Liberia, but this is not what the trial is about; he stated that he collaborated with the RUF in 1991/2; legally, this timeframe lies outside of that of the indictments.

    I see Musa came up with what should have been a smoking-gun, for the purpose of the debate on here, but again, it appeared as if he allowed his emotion to supersede his ability to make proper judgment. If he had done it the other way around, he would never have misquoted a peace accord that is online in it entirety. I see Fallah, who seems like he didn’t take his time to look at the accord, but chose to agree with Musa in totality; this is a complete reminiscence of the events that led to the indictment it self, and is very sad.

    On the other hand, I have come to admire the sound judgment and analytical thoughts of the guys backing the defense, and their abilities to keep focus within the scope of the indictments. Like the actual defense team, they keep making fool out of their opponents on here by virtue of their willingness to be legally schooled to the facts and the trial, even though Fallah says they are uneducated or have little education. Fallah, I am interested in knowing who are “The justices” that “are seeing how ignorant most followers of tyrants usually behave”? Are you referring to the ones at the SCSL? If so do you think they are monitoring the debate on here?

  15. Hi,

    My name is Bartu Taylor, Jr., and after following all of the discussions on this forum for a period of time I deemed it necessary to drop a little comment about certain issues raised by some of the good contributors to this forum.

    I must deny some allegations made by certain individuals with little or no knowledge about the Taylor family.
    1. The Taylor families are living luxurious life stile in the USA (Staten Island) and around the world.
    2. The Taylor family travel extensively around the world.
    3. The Taylor family attend expensive schools in Europe and the USA.
    4. The Taylor family have within their accounts enormous amount of money looted from Sierra Leone.

    I must begin from accusation number one of my agenda as follows:

    1. I must start with myself as a nephew to the man in discussion here today, Mr. Charles McArthur Ghankay Taylor, Sr. I am a struggling Liberian like every other Liberian or west african living in the west.
    I work for a salary like any other person trying to make life easy. I work for $9.65USD an hour for 8 hours for 6 days a week before tax.

    2. My passport has become a black snake in the eyes of immigration authorities in the west and, as I writ to you, my passport is even expired and that I can not use it to travel as the Liberian Embassy has refused extending or renewing it validity on grounds of a United Nations Traveling Band listed as an associate.

    3. Yes, I have the right to school as any other person trying to catch up with civilization so I go to school but remember, schools in the west are not like schools on the African continent which require payment before study. I am on a scholarship all due to my hard work in school as a serious minded student.
    Remember, I am still indebted to my school upon my finishing.

    4. My account is fully monitored by the authorities, both in the private and public sectors as I am examined by the government on how I spent money and how I earn money.
    I tell you a circumstance where MoneyGrams had refused me payment after a friend of mine sent me a $1000.00USD to buy him some shoes and jeans to sent it to him in Liberia and up to this time that money has been seized by the bank and to no avail until this date.

    I am made to sign certain documents under oath before I am employed, is it a human right? I can not talk on the phone freely as my conversations with people are recorded.

    I am not allowed to sent a dollar to anybody except for e-bay shopping on very essential or basic need.

    Now, about the trial: My Uncle is not guilty because even the little man sitting close to a chop bar listening to the conversation on the trial can see the senseless continuation of the trial as it lacks merits.

    Please note: this is only my statement as an individual and it does not represent the Taylor family, neither do I speak as a spokesman for the Taylor. Hold all of my comments against me only.

    1. Bartu,
      Thanks for the INSIGHT……hang in there. We may NOT like what your uncle did but we are on a different level here…..A COURT!!! And in a court, FACTS and NOT HEARSAYS should be what a case should be judge on.

      As of today’s date, I still have NOT seen a piece of CREDIBLE FACTUAL EVIDENCE presented by anyone to convict. Like I said earlier, if the prosecutors don’t do a AIR TIGHT examination on him, this case is OVER.

      Extend my greetings to the rest of the family.

    2. Bartu Taylor, Jr.
      That was a touching story from your end. Where ever you are am very sure the good Lord will take care of you.

      I MUST say and NOTE here that you are not responsible for the actions and the in-actions of Charles Taylor, so please have your peace and be at peace but I know that you will have many backlashes because of the name.

      I will plead with you not to be responding to forums like this since you cannot do anything to change the mind set of people. If you decide to continues responding to forums like this you will be calling for more hate at you since victims of the war in Sierra Leone and even Liberia will come at you very hard because if you hear their stories, theirs are very horrible.

      They can also raise arguments that you have the opportunity to be in the west and schooling with a scholarship and they cannot find food to eat, lost both parents etc. So please am talking to you as a brother.

      PLEASE! DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS FORUM AGAIN. I hope it goes down well with you

      1. Dear Nii,

        I do understand the message that you are trying to send to Bartu, and I also know that this trial is an emotionally charged one, as you point out – but we also must remind ourselves that this blog remains open to everyone to post and contribute to the discussion, as long as they abide by the few rules we have set for participation in this discussion (which is to essentially focus on the issues rather than on the other individuals posting).


      2. Nii,
        Are you for real??? Since when were you posted as the GUARD as to who speaks on here?? The man is telling us what he and other family members are going thru and it shouldn’t be a concern?? So what did he do to have his every move WATCHED??? Been a TAYLOR??? Is that RIGHT and CORRECT???

        For some of us that will want to know how he is holding up, what are we to do since you don’t want him posting?? Here my advise to you….. DO NOT READ HIS POSTINGS….case close.

        1. @On August 16, 2009 at 2:07 pm, Noko4

          You comments is well noted, but my advice to Bartu Taylor, Jr is a harmless one and was done as a brother.

          God Bless

  16. Mr. Bartu Taylor Jr.

    I am very sorry for your ordeal with they are true and correct. I hope God grants you the mental courage and physical strenght in all your endeavors. Although this forum is public but some of the points that you raise are personal, I do not feel it is prudent to comment on them. However, I would like to advice you that if a moneygram money transfer is not claimed by the recipient, the sender can withdraw the principal amount. So if you do get in touch with whomever sent you the money I am sure he or she can reclaim it and send it through another person or abandon the effort.

    Good luck brother.

  17. Hey to all;
    I am pleased that we are having these healthy conversations about the former liberian presedent’s trial. well let me caution all, we must all stand tall to the legal release of mr. Taylor. congradulations for all your informative opinions and facts on this all important trial in world history.
    Finally, light and darkness have no relationship as we can see in the display of hard core information by the defense team of mr. Taylor’s. hope the prosecution is preparing to accept defeat and don’t delay the trial anylonger.

  18. Thanks ,

    I understand the fact that individuals are entitled to their right to comment on how they feel and think.

    According to Tracy, I have the right to express my view on this trial but I also wish to make the fact clear that my action or comment on this forum is only decided upon me as a person not as a family spokesman as I have said previously yesterday.

    I do listen and accept the powerful advices from all of you about my paticipation in this forum as you have made a wonderful and sound suggestion.

    My condolence to the wonderful people of Sierra Leone on the harvoc they underwent by the conflict in Sierra Leone.
    I will also ask that you re-examine within your hearts, as the trial goes on and understand that the fingers were pointed at the wrong direction.

    Long live Sierra Leone and Long live Liberia as we all seek God’s blessings in unity.


    Peace to all.

    1. God Bless You Bartu Taylor, Jr. The good Lord will be there for you! your fight will be his.

      Take good care

  19. Bartu,

    You are such a courageous young man! I hope your words would be well received by the people of Sierra Leone, at least by those that come across them. The war in that country was gloomy, and history will remember it as one of the worst in recent human account – at such, it’s imperative that all of us hearts go to them for what they encountered during the darkest period of their existence, since slavery.

    But I will also say to them that whilst it’s vital for them to pursue justice against those that perpetrated the butchery that took place in their country, they should demand their fullest participations in bringing to book those responsible, and not few people or foreign influences to suggest. This has caused, as you said, “the fingers” pointing “at the wrong direction”.

    I see the whole trial as a mockery to the people of Sierra Leone. The people responsible for the establishment of this court need to get back to the sketching board; change the mandate (if they have changed indictments several times, they can also do this) so as to expunge the phase “people with greatest responsibilities” and just say people responsible. I am saying this because the individuals that committed the actual amputations, rapes, killings, destruction of properties, etc, are walking freely somewhere in Sierra Leone.

    A crime is a crime! When I look at this trial, all that comes to my mind is somebody is being accused of telling others to go commit crimes, which the instructions were followed and implemented to the fullest. Then the authority decided to waste resources – to put the ones presumed to have given the instructions to trial, and let’s go the actual doers. I think they all should face justice, down to Kaba – because he directly and openly supported the militia that committed some of the carnage.

    What kind of justice is this? This is the first time I have seen any justice system works like that; if this was the way the justice systems actually functions, the world would be in total chaos, filled with resentments; all we would have seen will be extra-judicial activities (where people will be taking laws into their own hands), and until justice is allowed to be done to all men, this trial will continue to be a mockery of the people of Sierra Leone, because the people who actually cut their hands and legs, who raped them, who killed them and destroyed their properties are walking freely and unpunished, right within their midst. How long can they afford to live together with them? Anyone can take a guess, that’s why fingers are been pointed in the wrong direction.

    Peace Bartu!

  20. Crown Hill Peking,

    Your comments are duly noted.

    I am adviced to give you guys the chance to carry on the discussion on this forum and watch the outcome and I have reasons to belief that it is the right advice.

    Long Live Sierra Leone and Long Live Liberia, let’s not give room to the west to divide the love and friendship we had had over the centuries.

    Oh, ok, I just found out today that my father got some education in Sierra Leone some few years back.

    Peace and Love to all

  21. Timothy,
    You are right that we must listen to all evidence before drawing conclusions. I must admit I was somewhat surprised that the Judges did not throw out some of the charges upon the Prosecution resting their case. This being said I stil believe the Defense has presented a much stronger case than the prosecution. Unless Mr. Taylor severely falters on cross examination or his other witnesses are discredited he is in the driver’s seat.


Comments are closed.