But we have already seen the prosecution case and it did not show no valid evidence except emotionalism concerning the abuses of people in SL. No one has any doubt about crimes committed in SL but the question has not been answer by the prosection whether it was Mr. Taylor that committed those crimes.

Thanks for the link — but I can’t seem to get it to go to the actual story itself. Is it the one about the prosecutor’s press conference in Liberia? If it is, I think we can also get there by going to http://www.frontpageafrica.com if anyone else has the same trouble with the link. The title of the article is “Guilty Verdict Awaits Taylor in The Hague, Prosecutor Stephen Rapp Declares” (please correct me, Bnker, if I am leading people astray to the wrong story — it just seemed like it was the most relevant one when I went to the main page).

Best,
Tracey

Though all might not agree with your point of views, you are welcome to comment. I will however suggest that your arguments be objective. There are some who would take CT testimony as the truth and others (like yourself) would take them as lies. I personally don’t have a problem with these divergence of views, but objectively looking at the case, there seem to be many loop holes and surprises. CT informed the courts that several individuals know about these events, lets wait and see if the defense will produce documentary evidence or witnesses that can substantiate these statements. Do I think everything he is saying is true? no way, still I think there is some truth and some distortion of the facts. I am not privy to all the evidence and neither you, but based on what we have seen and testimony given, no case. Let’s look at things from this prospective, any one of us could be accused wrongly (we’ve seen people jailed because of over zealous prosecutors and misinformed jury). If you were the accused, would you rather have a case based on lies or facts? I want truth. Until the evidence can support the charges, I would hate to see ANYONE go to jail based on falsehood. So, I beg all, lets be objective and base our discussion on facts. We all understand the emotionally charged nature of the debate. Many have been hurt directly or indirectly from CT war in Liberia; lets keep in mind, that the trail is on Sierra Leone. I openly protest my disdain for CT activities in Liberia (where I still think he needs to be tried), yet I try not to let my emotions cloud my judgment to think wisely.

That said, what I find troubling about the refuge given to 400 RUF fighters was that they were given citizenship and placed into the military. These were hardened murderous individuals. This power brings to remembrance one of Andrew’s thread, where he suggested that the executive branch had and continues to have much power (in Liberia). This was a clear example where the executive powers overshadowed the legislative puppets in the Taylor led government.

So my friend lets post, but lets be balance….and Andrew, gosh, you are harsh on the poor guy. There are some who thinks CT is telling the truth, so they shouldn’t post either…play nice! You know we don’t agree all the time, but hey, we still keep things civil….be nice to the guy….Menjor, sorray yah Kpa, but hey you entered the kitchen; its hot in this “joint”–smile!

In response to your question, whether Taylor did not know that Bokarie and his men had committed crimes, I will say it was not an established fact that the RUF was the sole entity responsible for the crimes in SL at the time. Do not forget during that time there had been a general amnesty declared for all combattants in that crises. So technically these men were forgiven and therefore could live among people as free men.

How do you understand the words “General Amnesty” as was stated in the Lome Accord? Do you think that Taylor should have allowed these men to remain in SL so that the fighting could perpetuate? What was the bigger picture there? Peace or what?

Now as to why they were inducted in the ATU, do not forget that by thus time there was a lot of factional fighting going on in Liberia. You had LURD coming in from Guinea and MODEL coming in from Ivory Coast., Was it wise for Taylor to have had 200- 300 ex fighters from SL just sitting around doing nothing in Liberia when they could have likely been recruited by either the LURD or MODEL to further destabilize Liberia? It is more logical to keep these men in a more structured environment of a military unit be it ATU or whatever so as to avoid them carrying out mischief. That is common sense.

If you don’t know, soldiers who have just seen action have an insatiable desire for more action. If you keep them dormant, they create problems in the environment. It was probably the only alternative Mr. Taylor had for dealing with these men since the international community had misled him to extract them and then left him on the limb to dry. They were not forthcoming with assistance for these men.

Now regarding the issue of Chucky Taylor, first of all be aware that it was not about any love for the people who were alledgedly tortured by Chucky that this action was taken against Chuchky. It had to do with getting back once again at the father of Chucky, Charles Taylor. Remember this was a law that had been on the books of the US for ages. Why was Chucky the first for it to be used on? Was what he was accused of any more grave than the atrocities committed in Iraq or Afghanistan by US soldiers? Go figure.

I know you may hate Taylor but do not be blinded t logic here. This sight is about facts as presented not blind bitterness.

READ
http://www.frontpageafrica.com/newsmanager/anmviewer.asp?a=9684&z=3