RUF Trained At Camp Nama in Liberia, But Not With Assistance From Charles Taylor

Sierra Leonean rebel fighters were trained in Liberia but not with assistance from Charles Taylor, a defense witness for the former Liberian president told the Special Court for Sierra Leone today in The Hague.

Mr. Taylor’s seventh defense witness, John Vincent, told the court today that he was part of the original fighters trained as members of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) in Liberia before the group attacked Sierra Leone in March 1991. Prosecutors have alleged that RUF rebels were trained at Camp Nama military training base in Liberia, with assistance from Mr. Taylor, whose National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL) rebel group had already waged a war in Liberia in 1989. Witnesses have testified to RUF fighters undergoing training at Camp Nama under instructions from commanders belonging to Mr. Taylor’s NPFL. The former president has denied helping in training RUF rebels in Liberia, telling the judges during his testimony as a witness in his own defense that he had no knowledge of RUF rebels being trained at Camp Nama.

Today, Mr. Vincent, testifying in defense of Mr. Taylor told the court that he was part of the RUF fighters who underwent training at Camp Nama but that such training was not done with assistance from Mr. Taylor. He told the court that RUF leader Foday Sankoh and some other people  gave them military training at a particular section in Camp Nama called “Crab Hole.” Under direct-examination from Mr. Taylor’s defense counsel, Morris Anyah, the witness said that while they underwent training at Camp Nama, they never saw Mr. Taylor there, nor did they hear of him helping the RUF.

“During the entire period of time you were at Crab Hole, did you ever see Charles Taylor there?” Mr. Anyah asked the witness today.

“No, I did not even know him, not a day,” the witness responded.

“During the time you were at Crab Hole, did you ever hear the name Charles Taylor mentioned?” Mr. Anyah asked again.

“At the time Bong Mines was captured, that was the first time I started hearing about the name Charles Taylor, and throughout Liberia at that time now, we used to hear the name, but there was nothing that was made mention of about Charles Taylor at Crab Hole, no,” the witness explained.

The witness further said that during his entire time at Crab Hole, he never heard of Mr. Taylor visiting Camp Nama. The witness said when the RUF invaded Sierra Leone, he was appointed as the Training Commandant for the entire rebel group.

Also in his testimony today, the witness refuted claims by prosecutors that the RUF recruited and used children for combat purposes during Sierra Leone’s civil conflict. Witnesses have testified to the use of child soldiers in both the RUF and the NPFL, and prosecutors have asserted that Mr. Taylor encouraged the use of children for combat purposes in both rebel groups. One of the charges in the indictment against Mr. Taylor is the recruitment and use of child soldiers in the RUF. Today, while maintaining that the NPFL had no relationship with the RUF, the witness, Mr. Vincent, told the court that the RUF did indeed train children under the age of 17 years at Camp Nama in Liberia but added that such training was not for the purpose of being used for combat.

“What I mean here is that if I am here alone, maybe one of my family members has escaped and am going for training and I have my younger brother, I can’t leave him behind, he will be with me, we’ll train, and when am going for my assignment, he’ll stay at home. That was why those young ones were trained, for their own safety as well so in case of any danger, they’ll be able to get to their people but we were not using them as fighters,” the witness explained.

Mr. Vincent also refuted claims that RUF rebels amputated the arms and limbs of civilians in Sierra Leone. He explained that amputations in Sierra Leone were started by the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC), a group of soldiers in the Sierra Leone army who overthrew the democratically elected government of Sierra Leone in May 1997. The AFRC teamed up with the RUF to establish a government in Sierra Leone but were forcefully removed from power by West African peacekeepers in 1998. According to the witness, a female member of the AFRC, popularly known to date as “Adama cut-hand”, started the amputation of civilians in Sierra Leone. The RUF, he said, did not get involved in amputations.

Mr. Vincent’s testimony continues tomorrow.


  1. Excellent, John Vincent, this is all we need from you; a) that training of RUF, In fact, did take place on Liberian soil, whether taylor knew about it, or not, is for the Jugdges to decide. Or wheter training was at Camp Nama, or Foya District, is for them to read betrween. b) Secondly, whether children were used for real combat or not, does not permit any insurgent groups to conduct such military training to children as per Geneva Convention on Conduct of War! And the clevery claim by Vincent that, perhaps the children were only trained because they would not be left behind by their big brothers and fathers, but rather take them to the battle front, where, according to his logic, was much safer! c) and finally, There is now evidence to be admitted for records that; “in fact hands and limbs were indeed cut off” by the AFRC that later merged for the common good of all. And lastly, taylor stands accused of supporting RUF and all these webs points back to him! Isn’t it?

    1. Now bring it back to NPFL…this witness is telling you about RUF activities and NOT NPFL…

      Yes accused of supporting RUF after Nov ’96….and what time frame is been testified to Fallah??

    2. fallah,
      Please open your mind to the facts and understand that the witness did not say children were trained for combat, but safety. Why are you so batter about this man to the extend that you failed to accept the truth? We all know that no stranger cut off hands, but your own brothers and sisters in Sierra Leone in the name of war. Our war was totally different from that of Sierra Leone. Stop crying wolf the criminals are under your feet.

      Harris K Johnson

      1. Mr.Johnson,

        Fallah sounds as she/he understands something about laws!

        The Geneva Conventions on military conduct prohibit,that insurgent groups conduct military training on children,regardless OF THE PURPOSE for which they were trained!

        Were they trained just to play military games or just to be safe from the horrendous events,happening in the villages…the LAW is silent this matters.

        So…by testifying,that CHILDREN were trained in military camps,runned by AFRC,

        Mr.Vincent admitted,that the rules of the Geneva Convention were violated.

        And that is what the judge wants to hear.

    3. J. Fallah Menjor please go back and read the indictment because it had a special time frame. All actions that took place between the NPFL and RUF from 1991 to 1996 are not part of this case. This case is about Mr. Taylor helping RUF in 1997 to 2003.

    4. Hi Noko5 — I received a comment from you today at 4:46pm which alas I cannot post as it does not fit with our policy for the site. Would you mind reformulating and resubmitting so as to take the focus off another reader? There was an issue with the first sentence, and the third last sentence. I can then publish it.

  2. Now we have Training Commandant of the RUF coming out today and telling us that mr. Taylor did not provide any support the RUF.
    as time goes by we will all know that mr taylor had nothing to do with what happen in the Country.

    1. Victor Weah,

      Do not forget that this is a trial. The prosecution paraded witnesses that support its case including those who saw diamond as large as that of a human skull. I do not know about you, but I have not heard of any such diamond, neither has a diamond expert ever disclosed discovery of such diamond.

      When the largest diamond ever seen was discovered in Sierra Leone sometime ago, it was announced on BBC.

  3. Quick question revisited:

    Under whose military jurisdiction and military surveillance was Camp Nama under the period in question? AFL? NPFL? INPFL?

    If NPFL, with its reconnaissance superiority at that time (something the NPFL advantageously and masterfully used to fast track the march to oust Doe) and military tentacles (something that was conspicuously and densely spread over virtually all of Liberia but the peninsula of city of Monrovia), will such training evade the watchfulness of the commander in charge of that area as well as the leader of the faction????


    1. Davenport.noko7,

      Based on Mr. Griffiths comments, the defense strategy is being implemented. The defense is targeting witness that will support their theory and issues that are of paramount concerns.

      We can observe that the first two witnesses refuted claims that taylor knew sankoh in tripoli and that they had common plan. The next three have said that sierra leaoneans did train in liberia but not with taylor’s knowledge. They have also said that taylor did not provide arms to the ruf in the timeframe that the indictment cited.

      We therefore see the defence’s stragety of tackling specific issues.

    2. More questions:
      Will such major “military” training facility not be sanctioned by those at the pinnacle of leadership of the NPFL? Wasn’t this military facility captured and then used to train its recruits?…and yet “the power that be” will have no knowledge of it or sanctioned it?


    3. Noko7,
      Depending on the TIMELINE firstly and how much control secondly. CIC Doe was President of Liberia, but did he have FULL CONTROL of all of Monrovia??? The surrounding areas around Monrovia?? Montserrado County??

      I hope you find your answer amongst those question.

      1. Cousin,

        Yes! Doe did until 1990 when the land mass of Monrovia became a theatre of war and practically factionalized by war barons and the AFL. Thereafter, he had no real control of the entire city except pockets of places.

        This particular camp (Nama) like all the other military camps was captured and then used by CT to train recruits and I will think that should some clandestine military training of a high numeric proportion of non-Liberians was to occur at such important military facility without CT sanctioning it, it will counter what most Liberians know of the superiority and impeccability of the spy/reconnaissance network or machinery that was largely responsible for the rapid successes of the NPFL.


  4. Folks,

    The repetitiveness and similarity of the last three testimonies could make our discussions appear redundant. These witnesses are responding to leading or controlling questions and given identical answers that give us restricted leverage to open up discussion on newer thematic grounds.
    Since this is this current scenario, I will revisit the age issue to prompt exchange of ideas: Culturally (I am here referring to the Liberian culture and no other culture), it is not complicated to distinguish a Liberian child from a Liberian adult.

    When we grow up in a culture, it does not take the skills of a developmental psychologist, doctor, or biologist to distinguish who adolescents in the community are from children. Probability are that with no any formal academic, medical or psychological education, when ask, we are 99.99 percent (unless we have some impairment that would impede our ability to make such simple distinction) likely to accurately identify a Liberian child from a Liberian adolescent. This is a priceless knowledge that we possess; knowledge based on various factors including culture. I will submit that a few of these factors are our distinctive social location, formative years experience, interfacing with our neighbors, observation, and an extensive breadth of experiences exclusive and particularistic to our culture. This shapes and informs us relationally and in many ways becomes our best tools for interfacing with our local communities and country. This is also important tool for helping us indentify a boy from a girl (please don’t bring transvestite into the gendering picture I am here portraying as it is tricky to handle) in our culture and a child from an adolescent.
    Now, the issue of distinguishing a 17 year old again as this witness, John Vincent, claims from a 16, 15, or 19 year old is complicated simply because developmentally folks in this group share similar phonotypical and physiological as well as voice, motor, cognitive, and behavioral similarities exclusive to this group; in essence, this is a transitional period that has biological (pubertal), social, physiological, and psychological changes. Thus, typically, unless they tell us, or ID is shown, or unless a scientific method of ID is employed, we can not deduce with 99.99 percent accuracy that an individual in this age bracket is 17, 16, or 18. What specific scientific method was used by the RUF to distinguish a 17 year old from a 16 year old? Did folks who came to join the RUF rebellion or who were forcibly conscripted required to present birth certificates or national ID cards to with their date of birth on it?



  5. Back to age and the use child soldier.

    From what I am reading the presupposition is that the use of child soldier to persecute war is horrendous, criminal, and pathetic. To deny the use of child soldier presupposes such method is unlawful and evil. If this is the case, why war barons took pleasure in the use of child soldiers in the first place?

    The red eyes, triger happy, unkempt, ragtag, odor smelling, jittery, berretta tooting child soldier who ordered me at gun point in 1990 to drop my pants in the presence of my family to search for boots marks on my legs, was not “at home” or “left behind” by his big brother CT or Putu Major unless “left behind” is a metaphor for being on the front line. That kid was battled hardened, explicitly in control, and prepared to execute me and my family. The shot he fired that whiz pass my ear sent shocked waves to my soul – it “disturbed my inner soul.” The condition I observed that kid in at that moment, he could have shot us dead without a second thought.

    Again, as stated earlier perhaps my case was localized or isolated but it is a story etched in my memory…now you can argue all you want; one thing I know: my would-be executioner was a child soldier.

    That said these war barons have left us with a younger generation that feasted on the pleasure of death, blood, violence, drug, rape, and crime. If these kids are not wholistically rehabilitated, our society braces itself futuristically for an avalanche of social ills, moral vices, and mental retardation as direct consequences of those dysfunctional and exploited kids turned adults. It will be like “chicken coming home to roast”…and we will be compelled to build more prisons and mental facilities.


    1. Noko7, that’s why we say grab all “those that bear the greatest responsibility” including Ellen, Sawyer, Fahnbullah, Brownie Samukai, Harry Greaves, Prince Johnson, and ect.

  6. I think the prosecutors are shock, from the witnesses the defense are bring out. As the saying goes not all that is black is the devil. As bad as they the prosecutors painted Mr. Taylor black not everyone is against him. I believe they thought no one for in the rank of the RUF was going to testify on Taylor behalf. What a surprise in this case, the persecutors are caught unaware I think. Fallah and other is this other witness John Blamah Vincent lying as well. You guys need to face the facts.

  7. Jose R

    Why do you always refer to CT as President Taylor, this man is not a president, he’s a former president. Man that is so annoying, I know you’re a Taylor supporter but for the sake of literacy please use the proper prefix.

    1. john thompson,
      Once a president always a president. We will never stop calling him President Taylor even to his grave. If this pains you we are sorry, but please allow our freedom of expression. finally, please don’t go looking for President Taylor supporters we are right here to stay. President Taylor yesterday, President Taylor today, and President Taylor forever.

      Harris K Johnson


        1. Aye!!!!!!!! my boy WIL-i-am,
          Pekin you send my whole soul way, way, back. Thats the song, for those who decided to lie in it. I hope this time , you will learn this great song forever.

    2. John Thompson,

      The side that you are on, is not putting up any logical fight here within the context of this case. Quite frankly John, I am feeling de-motivated right now with the kinds of response and post that I am seeing from your side, including your post. Anyways, let me address your concern of why I refer to President Taylor as I do. President Taylor is President Taylor. However, the word President is a title given to someone who has been democratically elected as President and as the head of a government. It is also the Chief Executive of a government. And President Taylor fits that profile. However, once a president, will always be a president. Even you yourself called him president in the identical post that I am responding to. The difference between you and I is that, you qualified what kind of president he is. However, you said “former president”. “Former” in that sentence is an Adjective used to describe the Noun President. So, he still bears the title of a president according to your own standard of measurement. Look John, if you truly believe in democracy and the rule of law, you will accept all that come with it; even if, the outcome does not favor you. Nevertheless, I said the same thing to Teage couple of days ago, and I am saying it to you and Noko7. If you believe in democracy, accept all that come with it, such as the rule of laws. But some of you guys don’t. For example, the prosecutors told us that they are charging this innocent man from November of 1996 to 2002. However, they have failed miserably to present evidence to back up their case. On the other hand, President Taylor has graciously conceded of having dealings with the RUF from 1991 to 1992 and his statement has been corroborated by witnesses in this court. Why are you guys acting as though 1991 is the same as 1996-2002? This is just an act of desperation on the part of you guys and there is no other way to put it. Nonetheless, the prosecutor brought their charges against this man. They brought the TIMELINE OR TIME FRAME that they were comfortable with and thought it was the right thing to do. They brought him to court. They brought 11 counts against him. They did everything unfettered and unchallenged. Why now you guys don’t want to play by your own rules?

      Seriously, I am feeling weak with the kinds of arguments that I am seeing. John, no strength in the prosecution supporters argument. Please find something meaningful to engage me on. Please make me to think John. But this one is so easy that even a “CAVE MAN CAN DO IT.”

  8. Davenport you are always writing long post without nothing really to me. Taylor forces were in control of that very camp. I also agree with you that some of Taylor generals were in that area. Not just you alone with wonder on this, why Taylor will not know about such a training was taking place. That is fair of you and even myself. My question to you did you ever hear that some of the trusted generals of the NPFL were executed because when it got to Taylor attention? If no then I will say to at the time he knew he took action and those that were involved, were arrested and tried and found guilty and executed. Maybe I am not saying the fact but someone will help you more on this story.

    1. Leroy,

      I do not have the burden to convince you on anything that challenges your perception, nor write in a mode that makes meaning to you, nor make you feel happy that we belong to the same harmonic that is passionately reciting the mantra: CT is innocent! Free CT! This has and will not be my objective as far as this trial is concerned. Besides, it might constitute literary and intellectual suicide to even contemplate such. Frankly, you could always hop my posts, if they are long for your reading pleasure or if they seriously challenge your views and I will not be offended.

      I must note though that we, like others, have perceptual difference and let us celebrate that then to entertain low level squabble ( cf you wrote “Davenport you are always writing long post without nothing really to me.” March 26, 2010 at 3:16 pm). Since you are, as it seems, strongly convinced and audacious that only your views communicate meaning to the rest of us, then that is good for you.

      I guess we are at liberty to communicate with succinct words or a little more words when ever we can…and this is empowerment and freedom.

      To your questions you “may” ( mere suggestion) read my other posts on this thread which speak to your questions. Alright!


      1. Noko7,

        Yes, it is true, that you don’t have the burden to convince anyone about anything. But you certainly have the burden to abide by the tenets of the rule of laws, if you truly believe in democracy. Wouldn’t you agree?

  9. I am a strong supporter of CT and believe Ct is gravity of charges against him but the defense is not helping him also where are the big guy who support CT People like E. Johnson, Muammar Gaddafi and Blaise Compaore

    1. Jeff,

      What do you mean, when you say “CT is gravity of charges against him”? Help me out here, because I don’t understand.

  10. Does Mr. Taylor’s defense team actually expect us to believe that he did not aid the training of RUF troops even though his NPFL, according to an earlier comment, was at that time in control of the area around the training camp? I think the defense is walking a very thin line here. The defense might as well be saying, “Yes, I was at the bank with a ski mask and loaded gun, but I did not rob the bank.” The real question here for the defense is if these troops were not being aided by Mr. Taylor, why were they training in Liberia in the first place? So far, I am happy that the prosecution, despite its flaws, has at least forced the defense to acknowledge more facts.

    1. Paivy,

      Thanks ever so much for acknowledging the “FLAWS” of the prosecution. However, the prosecutors DID NOT force the defense to say what they are saying. These witnesses are only corroborating what President Taylor had previously stated of his dealing with the RUF from 1991-1992. Bear in mind now, it is the defense counsel that is conducting this examination in chief of their own witness. However, part of the defense strategy here is to show the world how truthful President Taylor was when he took the witness stand on behalf of himself. So bro, what you are hearing now is just an echo of what was said before.

    2. Paivy,

      Was president Bush aiding the September 11th terrorist who were learning to fly aircraft an an FAA approved school in the United States? Because clandestine takes place in arear under your control does not mean you necesarily know about it.

      1. Akin,

        Excellent post and comparison. However, could you please refer this great post to Noko7 who always talked about some mystical spy superiority of President Taylor? Also ask him about America and Britain spy superiority, but yet can not produce/provide President Taylor supposedly 5 billion dollars. Despite the surveillance superiority of these two big countries, they can not produce one convincing evidence(satellite imagery, radio interception, audio/video recording, ect) that this man was involved with the RUF as charged.

        This is just a blatant display of moral and legal hypocrisy on the part of these guys and they need to have some seizure of conscience here.

        1. Aki, the reason why I said you should refer my question to Noko7, is because the guy responds to almost everybody opposite him but me, Jose Rodriguez.

      2. Aki,

        Let us begin by examining a few falsification of the assumption behind your statement.

        First, the sheer size of the two nations in your statement, Liberia and the USA, makes it almost impractical to make a leveled, balanced, comparative analysis. In this particular scenario, you must have two of the same kind to make a fair comparison. America’s size – approximately 3.79 million square miles and with over 300 million people, and Liberia’s 43,000 square miles with about just under/over 3 million people, tilt the table of comparison. The size differential of the two countries makes a mockery of a balanced, fair, and lucid comparison. In a big country news and rumors do not spread like wide fire; this is not the case with a small country. So the assumption that both countries can be used as ideal paradigms for comparison borders on falsification.

        Second, the folks you mentioned were in the states on student visas and the commercial or private pilot training they got did not violate their visa status; they were not a bunch of 300 plus heavily accented foreigners who were granted students visas, entered the country, and proceeded to train clandestinely at a military base. NO. For this to happen, I will imagine, America would have sanctioned it and it would have to be fulfilled through one of its bilateral or military cooperation agreements but this was not the case as those folks were civilian students in a free country. However, if they had received student visas and amalgamated like the folks did at Camp Nama to train military style, they would have come under the radar. So the assumption that we can compare both groups (students who turned terrorists vs. rebels who were unmasked during their training) is another ground for misrepresentation of the facts.

        Third, although those students you spoke of were fanatics and sleeper cells, they did not train with known weapons of destruction but regrettably seized control of commercial planes and turned them into instruments of destructions – to killed innocent people. What they did with their training was unfortunate and caused incalculable pain and suffering for many; to date the scar remains. Unlike these students, the trainees at Camp Nama used military weaponry – they learned how to kill with instruments made for that very purpose – killing. Although both groups, the trainees at Camp Nama and the students, had a shared ambition – to kill – one of these groups meticulously masked their intentionality while the other did not. When you mask your intentionality, it becomes hard for anyone to discern your intentions. Well, the question is – why mask your identity? You mask your identify because you are afraid of being discovered and possible prosecuted by the authorities. On the other hand, when you do not mask your intention, as was the case with the trainees at Camp Nama, then you are enjoying the freedom from the ‘powers that be.’ You do not fear being discovered because your training is sanctioned, not by some local rebel commandant turned 3 stars general overnight, I suppose, but the ultimate leader and dreaded authoritative figure of the rebellion – CT. In such a small country, things of that nature ( 300 + trainees at a major military based that was captured by the NPLF and used for its own training as well) will reach the ears of the president…but the president in this case probably sanctioned said training. This falsified another aspect of your assumption.

        Fourth, unlike the calm and prosperity the USA enjoyed around 1990 and 2000 as a result of centuries of democratic experimentation, Liberia in 1990 was engulfed in one of the world’s most atrocious conflicts that had genocidal tendencies in many respects as evident in the planned and intentional systematic retributive annihilation of innocent Gios, Manos, Khrans, and Mandingos. In essence, we had a military situation where vigilance and reconnaissance networks were at their peak. The rapid successes of the NPFL were largely on account of its reconnaissance networks; this network provided strategic information and that did not recede at anytime or in any place during CT’s march on Monrovia. This network fed the NPLF war machine. This network was almost impeccable and almost nothing escaped its radar. Like a “living organism” the NPLF breathed on and lived on the gathering of intelligence information from its boy, girl, and adult soldiers who easily infiltrated civil society to gather information for their supreme commander – CT. I will not think for one minute that Lofa county or Camp Nama, when captured went below the radar of the NPFL’s reconnaissance especially when they used the camp to train its very own recruits. Such was the tenacity, effectiveness, and sophistication of this network that CT knew of the training of opposing militias during the 90’s and even LURD before they (LURD) launched their rebellion…that is how good these insurgents were. Again, this exposes and debunks your assumption.

        Fifth, at no time during the military situation ( especially for the periods 1990-1992) in Liberia was Liberia a free country as the USA where folks did whatever they wanted once it was legal and move wherever they wanted without the approval from a G-2 office, check point interrogation, or under a constant watchful eyes of rebels. Nope! Not the USA but that was the case with Liberia. Here again, the case is made that it will be almost impossible to have 300 + folks being train with only the knowledge of a base commander. An assumption underpinning your conclusion is freedom, but only one (USA) of the two countries you listed for comparison enjoyed such freedom at that time and continues to.

        The bottom line: the premise for your assertion is established on falsification and as such lends justification to acts of cruelty perpetuated by a few individuals against the innocent. We must condemn cruelty, torture, and killing of innocent people (non combatants) wherever it occurs.

        Having said that, the issue of the NPLF exercising fullest control of Camp Nama and using it as a training base for its own recruits, yet CT, the supreme dreaded authoritative figure, having absolutely no knowledge of 300 + folks being trained to attack another country raised more questions than answers.


        1. Look Noko7,

          We are talking about your so-call Taylor spy superiority capabilities. And his inability to know about these happenings in Liberia. The comparison given about these two countries is with respect to surveillance spy capabilities. Anyways, I’m running late for work, therefore, I have to run.

      3. what kind of comparison is that? People attend various types of institutions. The hijackers attending civilian flight school leagally and president Bush not knowing about it cannot be compared to military forces training in a security sensitive barracks in your control, and in the state of war and your leader not knowing is lunatic. Your analogy would have better served you if it was phrased like this; The 9-11 hijackers trained at West point military academy and president Bush was not aware. Ofcourse that was not the case.weak comparison, try another one.

        1. Nosirrah,

          I was very clear with respect to Noko7 mystical surveillance spy superiority capabilities of Taylor. I however said, these two big countries can not produce the supposedly Taylor’s 5 billion dollars, despite their spy superiority. I continue by saying they have not provided any convincing evidence such as satellite imagery, radio interception, and audio/video recording against this innocent man as charged. My statement was in comparison to Noko7 false assertion about Ghankay spy superiority.

          I am not sure of what you are talking about. Are you talking to me?

  11. Boring!! this case has turn, there is No real challange to the defense. They’re walking all on the prosecution with No answer

  12. Jose R, Noko4 and Haris

    My statement has nothing to do with the case, all I’m saying is that the proper prefix to call Taylor is “former president” instead of “president”. Its about grammer, not who side I’m on. Noko4, I strongly disagree with you, in any publishing Clinton is always and should be refer to as “former president” if the writer wants to be gramatically correct.

    Now on the other if you hear some on TV or radio calling him president Clinton then that person is wrong. Clinton should be refer to as “former president” Clinton. The tile now belongs to Obama or any current president.

    Jose R. I think you understand what I’m saying, gramatically the correct prefix is “former president”.

    Jose R and other Taylor supporters if Taylor is found guilty would you say the trial was fair or politcally motivated. And if found innocent would you say it was a fair trial or politically motivated or both

    1. Thompson,

      How do they refer to President Carter, Bush, Clinton. Do they always apply “former” ? I usually hear president jimmy carter, etc.

    2. Hi Jose — can I please ask you to reformulate and resubmit your post of March 30 at 11:59am to take the focus off another reader, specifically the last sentence, and I will be in a position to publish it.

      1. Tracey, could you please send all my disqualified posts to me through my email? That way, I can make the necessary correction and resubmit it.

        1. Okay Jose — no problem at all. Please confirm that you receive them. I will send you today’s.

          1. Tracey, I have not seen it yet. Anyways, I will strongly suggest that if my post is unqualified for posting, let it remain on my computer screen with the usual comment of awaiting moderation as oppose to the entire post being erased and there is no trace except you email it back to the poster.

          2. Hi Jose — can you please send me your email address? I sent the comment to you straight away after I posted my reply to you, with the email address that showed up in the moderation queue for you. I will not publish your comment contianing your email address, but simply use it to forward your previous comment to you.

            Good point about the moderation — I will try to do so in future.


  13. Hi Jose,
    I was responding to the comparison post made by Aki on March 27, 2010 at 12:06 a.m. which you lauded. With regards to surveilance and spy superiority, no one satelite sees everywhere at all times. A location has to be tuned-in like a television or radio. However, when the U.S. is ready to declassify whatever they have on Taylor, the world will be made aware. For now it is not in their best interest to do so, so sleep well.
    In light of the stached billions, i am not sure of billions but there was significant amount embezzled by Taylor. Taylor is smart enough to know that in the event he left office, succeeding administration might try to go after his assets, so he used surrogates and that is difficult to prove. I am personally aware of one of those surrogates for his daughter, Charlene. This lady was based in Switzerland and duped Charlene of more than $200.000. This occured in 2000, when Charlene lived in Allentown, Pennsylvania.Therefore, when the stolen billions can’t be found, i am not surprise. Like all of the defenses put up for Taylor, he is a crook that covered his tracks and that includes the siphoned money from liberia, his connection to the RUF and most of his clandestine activities. We will not wavered until Taylor pays for his crimes against humanity. This is also a warning to all warlords and key players in the liberian civil conflict, including E.J Sirleaf. Now the concentration is on Sierra Leone and we( Liberians) won’t have to engaged Taylor, because there is enough evidence in this case to convict him.

    1. Nosirrah,

      I am just seeing your post that is why it took me couple of days to respond. Anyways, thanks for saying nothing. Nonetheless, your admittedly clumsy assertion of why the alleged 5 billion dollars and other vital evidence of importance can not be produced as evidence is just not a winnable rhetorical talk. In fact, your entire post and excuse are just an inexplicably self negating pronouncement. However, you yourself are struggling to make a nonsensical strategy or lies from your intellectually superior and nuanced lawyers. You mean to tell me the prosecution can not produce those so-call evidences in order to prove beyond all reasonable doubts because of the weaselly excuses that you have provided? UNBELIEVABLE. Folks, the reason why they have double down on the 5 billion dollars and whatever they were dead wrong about, is because of the faulty gathering of evidence. It is because they don’t want to be wrong repeaters anymore. It is because they don’t want their supporters to lose the spontaneity of this fake case. It is because their career is heading for the unpromising land. And certainly, they are getting closer to be reunited with reality once more. Folks, the more I read, the more I hear people react to this fake case like in the case of Nosirrah, the more there are huge wins for justice. And certainly, there are indelible events in our history.

      1. Tracey, what is wrong with this post in respond to Nosirrah? I have not seen it being posted. If there is a problem, please tell me.

        1. Tracey, please clear my post in respond to Nosirrah post. Let him not get away with this. however, I asked you if you had a problem with this post and you are yet to respond. What is going on Tracey? Please clear my post ma’am.

Comments are closed.