A defense witness for Charles Taylor today claimed he did not see Liberians among the Sierra Leonean rebel forces which attacked the country in 1991. He also dismissed allegations that Sierra Leonean rebels subjected civilians to forced labor during the country’s 11-year civil war.
Fayia Musa, a former Spokesperson and Agricultural Officer for the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebel group, today told the Special Court for Sierra Leone that claims that Mr. Taylor’s Liberian fighters were part of the RUF fighters who invaded Kailahun district in eastern Sierra Leone in 1991 are false. His account contradicted that of his fellow defense witness, John Vincent — also a former member of the RUF — who had previously told the court that Liberian nationals constituted a huge percentage of the RUF group which invaded Sierra Leone in 1991.
Prosecution counsel Nicholas Koumjian pointed out to the witness that his account differed from that of Mr. Vincent. Mr. Musa, while still casting doubt on Mr. Vincent’s account, explained that his account was based on his personal contact with the RUF in 1991. (Mr. Musa has previously told the court that he was a teacher in his hometown of Kailahun who joined the rebels voluntarily when they attacked and captured him).
“The reason I have to doubt it [Vincent’s account] is the fact that those who captured me, those who captured us in Kailahun, were not NPFL. The group which met us in Kailahun, they told us they were RUF, they spoke to us in our language in Mende, most of them, some of them spoke to us in Kissi,” Mr. Musa said.
He added that “I cannot really say that Vincent, I cannot tell whether he was lying or not, but the group which met us was RUF.”
Prosecutors have alleged that Mr. Taylor was involved in a joint criminal enterprise with RUF leader Foday Sankoh and that in pursuit of such enterprise, Mr. Taylor provided support to the RUF through the supply of materials and man power to attack Sierra Leone in 1991. Prosecutors say that this support continued throughout the conduct of the war which only ended in 2002. Mr. Taylor, while denying the prosecution allegations has said that he only provided minimal support to the RUF in 1991 when he realized that a rival rebel group, the United Liberation Movement for Democracy in Liberia (ULIMO), was attacking him in Liberia with help from the government of Sierra Leone. He then joined forces with the RUF, who were fighting to dislodge the Sierra Leonean government, as they had a common enemy at that time, Mr. Taylor said. The former president said that his association with the RUF ceased in 1992.
Also in his cross-examination today, Mr. Musa denied allegations that the RUF subjected civilians to forced labor. The charges against Mr. Taylor include forced labor against the civilian population of Sierra Leone by the RUF. Prosecutors say that the RUF subjected civilians to forced labor for mining and farming purposes during the country’s civil war. It is alleged that Mr. Taylor knew of the forced labor but continued to support the RUF. Mr. Taylor has denied these allegations.
Mr. Musa, who served as Agricultural Officer of the RUF told the court that civilians were never forced to farm but that they went to the farm willingly as a means of sustaining themselves.
Mr. Koumjian who sought to get more form the witness put to him that “the people that lived under the RUF control, they felt like slaves working for the RUF. That was the common feeling in Kailahun, isn’t that true?”
Mr. Musa disagreed.
“That is not true. I have started by telling you that when all of us were captured, for the sake of the people of Kailahun who were not able to escape, I offered my services to organize them so that they will not starve to death and the reality on the ground was that we had to work in order for us to eat.”
Mr. Musa told the court that as Agricultural Officer and spokesperson for the RUF, he did not take part in military activities. He was not part of the military wing of the rebel group and so cannot say much about the RUF’s military operations, he said.
Mr. Musa’s cross-examination continues tomorrow.
I don’t think this witness contradicted Mr. Vincent testimony. If we should go back to the testimony of one of the defense witnesses who happened to be a Liberian under a protedted measure, that witness stated that when they left from camp nama, some of them were kept behind when the attack on Sierra Leone took place in March of 1991.
What happened was that Mr. Sankor kept the Liberian national behind to protect he Mr. Sankor and maintain control over areas that were captured by advancing RUF forces. The Liberian fighters started fighting along the RUF in late 1991 by then, the news of the formation of ULIMO came up. There will be a witness who will tell your in detail.
I can tell you right now the names of former fighters who were fighting for RUF whose parents are both Liberian and Sierra Leoneans who were involve including an uncle of my called Moses but I will not say his last name because he could be a witness in this case. For example, few weeks ago someone posted a link about pictures of some fighters in Liberia in 2003 and claim that those pictures were Mr. Taylor Soldiers. The facts is that those were pictures of LURD fighters.
If anyone here don’t believe it, they should go Robertfield highway around the area where the Chinese are doing the rock crushing.
Before getting to the actual site where the Chinese people are, you will pass a place where people are doing rock crushing. Take that picture there, you will see some of the people who are on that picture crushing rocks right there.
Jacone, you seem to have participated as your explanation sounds like one who is giving first hand information of not only what Sankor may have been thinking, but accounts on who stayed behind, and etc..correct me if I am wrong, Jacone..because I do follow your posting since you have all those vast military experiences and could possibly be a General in the next West Africa Peace process..you already got my vote!
FALLAH, I DIDN’T HAVE TO FIGHT IN ORDER FOR ME KNOW SOME OF THINGS THAT WENT ON IN LIBERIA! I WAS THERE FROM START TO END MY BROTHER. THAT IS FROM DECEMBER 24, 1989 TO JULY 19, 1997. I WANT YOU TO FIND MY FAMILY IN CAREYSBURY, IN A TOWN CALLED MULLEH AND ASK ANYONE ABOUT US. IF ANY OF US TOOK PART IN THE WAR. MY FAMILY IS THE LEADING FAMILY IN THAT TOWN.I HAVE TOLD YOU BEFORE THAT NOT AFRAID FOR YOU OR ANYONE ELSE TO KNOW WHO I AM BECAUSE I DIDN’T TAKE PART IN THE WAR AND EVEN THE US GOVERNMENT KNOWS THAT. BUT I HAD OTHER EXTENDED RELATIVES WHO TOOK PART AS I HAVE TOLD YOU BEFORE.
IF YOU’RE FOLLOWING THE TRIAL, YOU SHOULD KNOW BY NOW THAT THE FIRST LIBERIAN WITNESS WHO TESTIFIED UNDER PROTECTIVE MEASURE STATED THAT THEY WERE LEFT BEHIND TO PROTECT SANKOR AND MOVED INTO AREAS THAT WERE CAPTURED BY ADVANCING RUF FIGHTERS, SO THIS NO SECRET!
I DO SERVE IN THE WORLD MOST POWERFUL MILITARY, I DON’T NEED TO BE A GENERAL FOR WEST AFRICAN PEACE PROCESS WHATSOEVER. THE FACT IS THAT, THIS TRIAL IS POLITICAL AND AS SUCH, IT CAN’T BE FAIR. I HAVE MADE MY POSITIONS CLEAR SO MANY TIME.
I HAVE SAID BEFORE AND I WILL ALWAYS SAY THIS…. MR. TAYLOR NEEDS TO PROSECUTED FOR WHAT HAPPENED IN LIBERIA IF HE SHOULD BE PROSECUTED, PLANE AND SIMPLE! IF YOU WANT TO CALLED REBEL FOR SAYING THAT AS YOU HAVE ALWAYS DONE, IT’S NO PROBLEM.
This is what we call a true independent witness testimony.
This individual was not spoon fed with answers and statements.
End the case…..set the man free.
Yes, Musa, there were no “force labor” applied on you and your country men,traitor! However, there are countless photos, oral accounts, documentations from aid workers, Medeciene Sanrfrontier, the UN, ECOMOG, and living witnesses, who earlier testified. Your testimony here is not the final that will free taylor! You have only made yourself become a traitor to your own country and victims who happen to be predominantly fellow men, children, women, your mother and sisters from Sierra Leone. Thank you for this great disservice to your country, musa taylor gankay the 2nd!
Where will you place Pres. Kabbah??? According to the last prosecutor’s witness, his limbs were cut off by SL Army. Are you mad because we have on the stand someone who was a TRUE insider, someone who knew MORE than anyone we have seen on the stand???
If you ask me, the prosecutors should sought him out to get some REALITIES before bringing those charges that seem to be MAKESHIFT job….
Dear Cee — thanks for your note of April 21 at 9:02am. Unfortunately I cannot post it as it focusses personally on another reader and not the issues arising from the trial. If you can rephrase it to focus on the trial and resubmit, I will happily post it. You can find our policy for comments here: http://www.charlestaylortrial.org/2010/02/02/an-update-what-is-our-policy-for-comments/
There we go again! another key contradictions amongs Charles Taylor’s witnesses first John Vencent’s testimony that he and other Liberians were among the RUF when they enter & captured Kono district in 1991 and Fayia Musa’s testimony that no Liberian were involved in the attack/capture of Kono district in 1991. Frankly this is another desperate attempt to erased self inflicted damage created by Charles Taylor in his attempt to discredit Prosecusion witness Suwandi Camara ( a Gambian ) fighter who told tis court that he and other Liberian Fighters were sent by Charles Taylor to fight alongside the RUF. This man Charles Taylor has lied and refused to come clean and level with this court and instead chosen to hang his fate in the hands of contradictions, which spelled Quilt & QUILTY! it is….
Musa said he saw NO LIBERIANS…there could have been but from his postion, he saw NO LIBERIANS….where is the contradiction??
Musa said there were no liberians in the attack on sierra leone, when the prosecutor told him his statement contradicted that of an earlier witness, was when he said he saw no liberians or was captured by sierra leoneans. Don’t try to twist it to make Charles Taylor look good bra. Don’t worry if you want him to rule Liberia again he’ll do, as long as Liberians accept his rule from prison.
FOLKS, I AM JUST READING AND NOT WRITING. TO THOSE OF YOU WHO WANTED TO HAVE RESPONDED TO JOSE RODRIGUEZ OR WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING AND WAS AFRAID TO BE COUNTERED BY MY METHODICALLY PROCESSED REPONSE, NOW IS THE TIME.
This sound like retreat, Jose Rodriguez, I dont’t think you really quiting at this point. We got long way to match, warrior. Musa is spitting his guts out to free taylor at last..free at last!
Lies, lies, lies Mr. Musa; Where where you when the RUF and her NPFL cronies use to force civlians to head-carry goods between villages and towns. How about the bundles of catrages heavy enough to be transported by vehicles yet civilians were made to carry? Where is your conviction , your spirit of guilt and your moral obligation to humanity?
Remember you are enjoying the gift of a civliized community which you once conived to destroy.
Your lies will never achieve its purpose, Musa .
“General Fix it”(GREAT JOSE)
They are afraid. Will not encounter you. They will not face you, but rather act like bunch of girls cheer leading stunts ready to parade… CHARLES TAYLOR FORVEVR….
Why didn’t make yourself to the prosecutors?? Shouting to the screen won’t make any difference.
Don’t blame Mr Musa….he is telling his side of the saga and he seems BELIEVABLE.
He seems believable to you and colleagues (if you know what I mean). But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize this man is lying. So are you trying to tell me that all those victims lie when they say RUF did this or that to them? Let’s put this court case aside for a minute. Are some of those former RUF rebels in sierra leone lying when they themselves claimed they killed and maimed civilians?
Don’t get me with me….just telling it in REAL TIME….here read and I hope these words of Mr. Koumjain will help you see what he and I see in this witness….ready, set. go
“You see Mr. Witness, I believe you told us the truth” said Mr. Kaoumjain
I REST MY CASE.
Mr Fayia Musa consistently maintained that those that captured him in Kailahun Town were RUF and not NPFL. But the testimony by Mr Vincent was that the NPFL captured Koindu Town before handing over to the RUF who continued on from Koindu with the war. Mr Vincent in his testimony did not specifically say that the NPFL captured Kailahun Town he said they captured Koindu Town. And as far as I know, Mr Vincent did not say Kilahun Town was captured by the NPFL. So I do not see any inconsistency here since Kailahun Town is different from Koindu Town. Mr Fayia Musa was not part of the invading force of the RUF so anything he says in respect of how the RUF invasion srated until it got to Kailahun Town were he was captured will be pure speculation. He cannot authoritatively talk about what he did not see or talk about events he was not a part of.
Looking at the sumary of the testimony of Mr Fayia Musa provided to the court by the defence, you will find out that his testimony was to be about the activities of the RUF external delegation which he was a part of and the foreign trips Foday Sankoh took in order to raise funds for the RUF. So he was not called as a witness by the defence to testify about how the invasion of SL was carried out by the RUF. He only was asked about who captured him in Kailahun during direct testimony in the context of knowing how he came to be a part of the RUF. So he was not brought to court to testify about the initial invasion of SL by the RUF. I believe that there are other defence witnesses lined up to testify extensively on how the initial invasion of SL was carried out by the NPFL/RUF in 1991.
Are Kailahun Town and Koindu Town the same?? I believe they are TWO different towns…and there I see most getting CONFUSED over his testimony.
This coached testimony is not working.
Sometime ago I quoted the celebrated Nigerian playwright, Chinua Achebe, that “things are falling apart and the center is no longer holding.”
Is this witness’ testimony diametrically opposed to those of his fellow brother, John Vincent, and others who testified to the involvement of Liberians representing the NPFL in the initial phases of the invasion of Sierra Leone?
Wonders never end somebody said.
I hope these guys have a tramp card given these inconsistencies and explicit coached testimonies from former mass killers.
Ok, witness Musa. Try again…I am all ears.
I sincerely thought that you were making unbias analysis of the event heres. But I seem to be wrong. And do correct me. This witness testimony is coherent and consistent. Alpha has once again taken witness statement out of context. As I heard the witness say, combatants who attacked their home community were ruf. Alpha misrepresented this as combatants who initially invaded or initially launched attacks on Sierra Leone as a whole and not the village that Mr. Musa was residing in.
This is soviet union style disinformation. It is unacceptable. We can draw anology between Alpha’s reports, the berkeley documents and opponents of taylor’s comments.
The intent here is simple. The defense has done so much damage to the prosecution that a media campaign is necessary again in order to win public favor. This is unacceptable.
So nothing is falling apart. No one, not even taylor is disputing that Liberians were part of the invading forces in Sierra Leone. Musa said those who came to his home town were sierra leoneans and not liberians.
Now if Musa was not at the border, how could he testify on who invaded or did not invade Sierra Leone. Come on guys, this is not rocket science. Outright bias would not encourage dialogue here.
Hi Andrew — can you please tell me the exact sentences/quotes that you think is incorrect and out of context? I had understood his report to be talking about the rebels who attacked Mr. Musa’s hometown of Kailahun and thought that this was quite specifically stated in his report. Do you disagree?
If you can point us towards the inaccurate sentence(s) we will double check it against the court transcript.
Are you stating here that there is no difference between the forces invading Sierra Leone as a country and Kailahun as a province or chiefdom? Do clarify . I read the overview of the “experts” at Berkeley and I would like to know being that they are friends of your society if that summary is their personal opinion and on the issue of rape. Are they saying categorically that the prosecutions allegations on the Nelson Taylor story is true ? If so, was any evidence produced? Why was no mention made on the attitude of Ms Hollis towards the court and indeed the bench? On the takeover of Justice Sebuntinde, are they insinuating that Mr Taylor being the accused was given unnecessary latitude by Justice Lussick? And that he ( Lussick) was a pushover? If so, what authority do they have to make that in-objective observation. What questions always require a yes or no answer? Do respond to these questions please as I have let my previous ones pass without reply. Thanks.
Hi rgk007 — thanks for your note. On the question regarding Sierra Leone and Kailahun, the issue was purely an editing decision (please see my earlier response to Andrew Jlay on this issue). On the Berkeley monitor’s report, I cannot speak on their behalf as they wrote the report as monitors who have been observing the trial and reading the transcripts, and reflected their views within it. You have asked interesting questions, but unfortunately I am not in a position to answer them myself as I was not involved in the report writing.
Review the very opening statement of Alpha’s April 19 post that I provide below for ease of reference.
“A defense witness for Charles Taylor today claimed he did not see Liberians among the Sierra Leonean rebel forces which attacked the country in 1991.”
Although the transcript is not available as yet, I believe that Alpha should have contextualized his report to the witness’ home town incident. In my view Alpha extrapolated the the statement to include all of Sierra Leone. that is the basis of my assertion.
And reports of this nature grant lead-way to the likes of Davenport to make incendiary comments.
Hi Andrew — ah I see. Well in that case, I must take the blame. I had shortened Alpha’s introduction during the edits because I felt the issue was contextualized further down and for an opening journalistic paragraph, we did not necessarily need the context in the first sentence as it was explained later on and not every reader would be familiar with that particular town and it would be too wordy to explain it up front. So there was no intentional misleading, just an editing choice on my part. I know not everyone will agree with these choices, but I am glad when you and other readers bring your concerns to our attention.
Thank you for the explanation, but in this business first impression counts. When the damage is done no one cares much about the details and the devil.
Moreover, we expect you and Alpha to exercise care because you are dealing with clashing views here. My support for Taylor is basically a support for justice. One cannot take a sitting president, try him on flim-flam evidence and hear-say, especially at the international justice level. All evidence should be watertight. If they are not, Taylor should be set free because the judges should not do the work of the prosecution.
While we accept the premise, we urge caution in subsequent endeavors.
Thanks for your note Andrew. I understand your point.
Now I understand how it came about that the report seemed inaccurate. Well you just need to be taking more care expecially in the choice of words. I do not personally think the Open Society for Justice is biased in this case since I have no evidence todate to suggest such biase exist. so keep doing the good Job.
Okay, thanks Sam.
You got it just very very right. The whole berkely report is a prosecution PR, absolutely bias to an unthinkable degree. They think we don’t know wha’s going on…Who cares if the even bring up Obama report on this case, the fact of the matter is that, they have miserably failed. FAILURES THEY ARE……….LONG LIVE CHARLES GHANKAY TAYLOR…..
Hi Noko5 — I would be interested to hear what you think is specifically biased in the Berkeley monitors’ report. I thought they were providing an overview of Mr. Taylor on the stand and describing what happened. I’m curious what you disagree with them about?
We watched the trial and to read some of the POINTS….I was wondering if we’re looking at TWO different trials.
I might dialogue with you later on this but in the mean time leave Alpha out of this…let us stay with one another and leave out the monitors and legal analysts. I am referring to your comments:”Alpha misrepresented this as combatants who initially invaded or initially launched attacks on Sierra Leone as a whole and not the village that Mr. Musa was residing in.”
Great day, Andrew.
Friend, calm down now…let us not go on off on tangents and make this conversation personal. Please reference a statement made by me to you that is personally incendiary? Making such statements are not part of my dialectic DNA but I welcome your swing at me.
Peace, brother, peace to you!
Tracey, please post this and delete the other version sent a minute ago to my brother, Andrew. Resend # 2.
I am not sure if i am following you on this one especially when you are raising the issue of my predisposition couple with the alleged “consistence” and “coherence” of this witness’ testimony.
I am also not sure if I promised anything beyond what I have articulated in the past and now. I think independently and dialogue with the issues…and most of my dialogues are critical, analyzed, and experiential.
Sure you follow me on this. You claimed that testimony is coached. You also asserted that the witness’ testimony was opposed to that of other defense witnesses. You also claimed that things were falling apart.
Yes you do follow. You jumped on the misrepresentation of the witness not seeing liberians during the attack on his hometown, as inferring that the witness said liberians were not involved in the invasion of Sierra Leone. You and I know that Mr. Taylor has said he is not denying that Liberians were not involved in the invasion of Sierra Leone, but he taylor was not aware.
This whole thing about coaching does not resemble analysis to me, especially from someone who is well schooled. Coaching as used appears as an opinion that is far removed from the truth.
So sir, you do follow.
And how does that present a personal incendiary situation for you? Are you suggesting that you get hurt by what is said about CT or his defense witnesses? Speak some more!
I hope this will HELP you thru……Are Kailahun Town and Koindu Town the same?? I believe they are TWO different towns. Mr Musa was in a town with NO LIBERIANS and Mr. Vincent was in another town with LIBERIANS.
Now when I started learning SCIENCE in 19 we we, the very FIRST science word I learned was MATTER. Do you want me definding it for you Davenport???
I am a bit skeptical about posting comments on your site. I realised at one time I posted that it was immidediately removed. A site like this needs to be objective in all forms. You cannot just feed us what you want us to know. It is right for you to know what we feel and think about what you feed us to know!
I pray honesty about the intention of the message to reach us is made known to us to stop us from any presuptions!
Hi Chez Winakabs — I understand your frustration. The same thing has happened to me and also to other contributors to the site. It often happens when there is a link contained in the comments although some links seem to be fine). We are not sure why it happens – there seems to be a glitch in the software — but we did have our tech guys look into it but it seems the problem is still not fixed. I am sorry to hear that it is still happening. I can assure you, however, it is not an intentional effort to try to erase comments.
Thanks for your patience, and hopefully you won’t be affected by the glitch again in future.
AM sorry I think I just got myself confused with the names of these towns. Please keep the first comment that of April 20, 2010 at 5:34 am and delete the second one referencing Buedu Town.
Okay — no problem Sam.
No problem Sam.
Well done Faya Musa alias Soro Silicate Of N’jala University College, University of Sierra Leone. For those who may not know Faya Musa, here is a brief resume of him. Faya Musa a kissy by tribe from Kailahun calling himself a former agricultural officer and and spokesperson for RUF is a disappointed and frustrated man and in fact he was among the rebels that attacked N’jala University and burnt it down including killing people. Here is the full story.
After passing the West African school certificate examination he was enrolled in the Faculty of agriculture to pursue B.Sc. in General Agriculture for four (4) years. Two years Faya Musa could not make it up at his first year and having not the required repeating grade, he was dropped out of program for been not academically fit for the course. He went back to Kailahun as a frustrated individual and latter he was employed as untrained and unqualified pupils teacher.
Therefore joining the RUF willingly was a means of revenge against his friends who were provoking him as an academic failure and also lecturers whom he felt were the causers of his termination from the University.
Let it be known that Faya Musa will never return to Kailahun. He knows what he did. On the issue of NPFL-RUF separation no body can tell the court the truth. The issue was the killing and eating of human flesh by the NPFL fighters who were mainly Liberians and Bukinabes. It came to a point, some of the top inner members of the RUF became unhappy and protested to their leader, Foday Sankoh. Three of them were latter executed by Foday Sankoh. This was because, they said “we have come to liberate our people from bondage but not to kill them and eat their flesh as your Mercenaries are now doing” Faya Musa is aware of this but he would not say it.
Can Faya Musa tell us what he meant by the word “lion Den” when he was captured because of be trial of the course of the RUF. You will be surprised to know that when he was captured he was taken to Liberia where he served his jail sentence until when his god father Charles Taylor came to his rescue otherwise he was going to be killed. So therefore, one good turn deserves another. Bravo!! Faya Musa, a well done job for you master.
Fuad, it is this type of detailed accounts we are interested of getting rather than angry denials and with no substatial, nor convincing points to back it up! Taylor support group has made a point of distortion of any fact that seems to undermine their papay’s credibility.Too late for them..this guy will definitely face the full weight of the law! As for Fayia Musa, he sounds like one out for revenge! No questions about it, except that I did not understand his motives initially until you gave this clear background information that is very useful for my reseach!
Can we set up another website to report the actual story and unbias analysis? Or can’t anyone make analysis other than Alpha? I listened to the trial and here one thing and when I get on here to read, I hear a whole different story – basically, from Alpha’s view. point. The wost of all, opponents of the defense seem to be going by Alpha analysis as opposed to what actually transpired in the courtroom. This is a complete deception.
They need to know that public relation’s deception is not going to be of any more help to the prosecution. No not no more, t-h-e p-e-o-p-l-e e-y-e-s a-r-e o-p-e-n-e-d. The best it did was dragged CT to jail, but it can not win this case. The defense has filed. So too those who crafted the indictments. It is a shame to still be wasting resources behind this trial when they know that there is no victory for the prosecution.
If the money spent on this trial was to be used for other meaniful purposes, there would have been a pave road between Bo-Water Side and Kenema or safe driniking water for good pacentage of the populations of both countries or big hospital along the borderline. I just feel this is a complete joke on the part of the crafters of the indictments, the defense team, Mr. Alpha and all those that keep think the prosecution is doing great. I got something for you all…………..NO DEGREE OF PUBLIC RELATION’S DECEPTION CAN CHANGE THE TREND SO FAR.
Hi Crown-Hill Peking — I’m sorry to hear you feel that way about our reporting. You are most welcome to start up another blog on the trial if you do not agree with the approach taken here, though we would be sorry to lose you.
Well we simply believe this trial’s benefits by far out matches its costs.
You said the cost of the trial should have been spent on building road between Bo-Waterside and Kenema as well as hospitals ; Well the civilized world simply can not until Mr. Taylor pays Justly for destroying the previous road he elondated with his RPGs, BZTs and Howitsers , moreover, we can’t aford to live him, unhindered by the deu process of Law, only to go back and kill the remaining people in the hospitals you talked of. We seek tangible peace in the subregion and not a cusmetic one. We stand against a repetition of a meaningless war that cost us irrepairable losses ; This time, it’s not going to be ‘ur leave my papay’ ,rather it’s a call to justice for the poor, the dead , the victims and the voiceless.
While I understand your point of view, I think on the whole Alpha is trying his best to present a reasonably accurate account of what happend in court though sometimes I disagree with the way he reports them. You know its human nature to be a little biased sometimes so no matter how one tries, sub consciously sometimes one’s choice of words may reveal such biase although unintentionally. So man, Apha is only human like the rest of us he is doing his best in the circumstances. What I will suggest is you too try and do what I always do when I disagree with an aspect of Alpha’s report– I simply post what I think is the actual account of what happend in court for others to read too so that the readers can get a balanced account of what actually transpired in court.
I want you all to note that the initial attack by the RUF was in Kailahun District and not Kono District. When making your comments just be aware of this fact. Kailahun was first attacked before Kono
I am starting to think that we may never know for sure whether or not Liberians were fighting in the RUF simply because of the difficulty in ascertaining the identities of soldiers in west Africa. I think the defense is using this to their advantage.
Comments are closed.