The Truth and The Lies About Amputations in Sierra Leone

For many years now it has been widely reported that it was the rebels of the former Revolutionary United Front that were responsible for the horrific amputations that occurred during the civil war in Sierra Leone. This was based largely on anecdotal information from human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch (funded by George Soros), Amnesty International, Global Witness, the U.S. State Department, Britain’s Foreign Office, the United Nation and many other institutions have overwhelmingly supported this belief even when evidence to the contrary became known. The amputees of Sierra Leone have suffered greatly and much as everyone would like to blame these terrible atrocities on the barbarism of a rebel movement, as the acts of bad guys against the good guys it is in fact not that easy. That kind of black and white analysis (we call it the cowboy vs. Indian analysis) is not applicable in this situation and every now and then, something happens to dispel the myth of the atrocity of amputation as an RUF exclusive.

Over the past eight years the amputees of Sierra Leone have organized themselves and have been acting together to help themselves. One of their leaders, Alhaji Lamin Jusu Jarka, was once the Chief Security Officer for Barclay's Bank in Freetown, before having both his arms amputated during the rebel invasion in 1999. You would think that their organization would have been ready and willing to cooperate with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission organized after the war, but they were not. In fact, in the beginning, the amputees refused to participate and threatened to boycott the commission until a list of demands were met by the government of Sierra Leone. The demands were simple. They wanted the same reintegration privileges promised (but not give) to ex-combatants--a bag of rice and Le 200,000 (about $100 at the time) to be given to each amputee at the end of every month. They wanted education for their children and free healthcare (hello!). But most of all they, just as everyone else, wanted to return home to the provinces of Sierra Leone and rebuild their lives. At the time President Kabbah of Sierra Leone pleaded for their participation. Without them, there was no Truth & Reconciliation Commission and although their demands were largely unmet they did eventually participate in the commission.

Three years after the institution and findings of the Commission, the amputees are still being ignored. Jarka is still very active in their campaign for reparations and the implementation of the recommendations of the Truth Commission that a “trust fund” be set-up to meet their needs. With those issues in mind Jarka did two interviews with the BBC and Radio France International to illuminated their plight, which is dire.
Unfortunately, President Kabbah did not see it that way. It seemed the President was in the United States at the United Nations General Assembly meeting and was deeply humiliated by the broadcast. Upon President Kabbah’s return to Sierra Leone, Jarka was arrested and dragged to the presidential residence at which time the president remarked that neither he nor the government had any money to give the amputees. And then in the heat of anger he remarked that some of them had been amputated because they were in fact “rebels” and “collaborators”. The president then went on to talk about his own victimization because rebels burned down his home. However, magically the President has built himself several new homes, as have many other government officials in Sierra Leone. In fact there is a regular home building bonanza for the privileged. All with money the government claims it doesn’t have.

So where is the money coming from? More importantly, what were the amputations truly about? Were there politically and economic motivations? The answer is yes. Political and ethnic differences are cultural universals. Africans are no different than other human beings with differences. Were political and ethnic differences used against the people of Sierra Leone for more sinister motives? Yes, the fact is that the organization that benefited the most from these atrocities was the diamond monopoly. The fact is that individuals on all sides of the war were, in the beginning, paid to carry out these atrocities-- in part to discredit a rebel movement but also to scare the population out of the diamond rich areas of the country. Eventually, after economic, political and ethnic hatred had reached its zenith, payment for the atrocities was not necessary and the blood ran hot and red and the human bonfires burned.

Eventually only the most fearless remained in the provinces of Sierra Leone. As a scar tactic amputations were a huge success. For years none but the brave would dare to travel the roads into the hinterlands. This tactic is not unusual or farfetched. Back in the 1980’s and early 1990’s (really since the 1950’s) it was clear that illicit mining was rampant throughout Sierra Leone and Liberia. Any child farming yams could pull a diamond or two up out of the ground. The monopoly would like everyone to believe that it isn’t that easy, but it is and it happens relatively often. Where once thousands of Sierra Leone’s participated in mining their God given natural resource by the end of the 1990’s the only people the monopoly had to monitor were the soldiers, the rebels, and their own security employees which fought regularly to hold their precious diamond rich ground. Many of those soldiers got very rich. If any of you are reading this article, you know who you are (we don’t know of any rebels who got rich but if anyone does please let us know). The monopoly didn’t care. They sent their agents to do business with all sides in the conflict. No taxes or export fees to be paid, no infrastructural promises of electricity and water to be kept, no so called “illicit” miners to chase after and the value associated with cut and polished diamond had increase by 150% in 1998. In addition the monopoly succeeded in having a UN resolution to stop the sale of “Blood Diamonds”.

The concept of Blood Diamonds is an interesting one, but to understand the concept of blood diamonds one has to know the difference between conflict diamonds (those acquired, sold and purchased in the pursuit of conflict or war) and illicit diamonds (those acquired, sold and purchased without the authority of the state). One might argue that the people of Sierra Leone had the right to mine their own land, because the level of corruption in government and the infiltration of the monopoly through bribery and other criminal means prevented the government from fulfilling its fiduciary responsibility to the people. However, because the UN resolution on “Blood Diamonds” included both conflict diamonds and illicit diamonds all mining, purchasing, import, export, and sale outside the monopoly are illegal. Coincidently the monopoly developed and put in place a laser inscription certification that only they do. What a coup (no pun intended). No more free trade of diamonds under the radar of the monopoly. Who has more blood on their hands than the diamond monopoly (or whatever name they’re calling themselves now) and its agents?

With regard to who bares the greatest responsibility for crimes against humanity, it is the monopoly. The Special Court and the so called “Truth” Commission, organized by the United Nations, United States and Great Britain were purportedly born in an attempt to bring those deemed “most responsible” for human rights violations to “justice”. The colonial masters have used their kangaroo courts over the past four hundred years to dehumanize us and justify their rape of Africa’s human and natural resources. They have called us cannibals--that was one of their favorites. They’ve called us barbarians, and devil worshippers. They sent their missionaries to convert us then their armies and their justice to control us. They have used our children as sex slaves, turned our women into prostitutes, and turned our men into "batty boys".

In the court and the commission's investigations it has become clear that all sides in the war are guilty of human rights violations. There are individuals from all sides in the custody of the court. However the reasons for the amputations and other human rights violation, the truth about who bares “the most responsibility” goes un-addressed. They should not be allowed to chalk the reasons up to simple acts of "barbarism by the uncivilized" when it was really much much more than that.

We hope everyone sees where we’re going with this article. The Special Court has not even considered prosecutions for corporate crimes and not a single White man has been arrested. There were many White men involved on both sides of the conflict in Sierra Leone. They mined and traded in diamonds for arms, sold arms, worked as mercenaries, and had no problem with working on all sides of the conflict. Instead they have used their NGO’s and Special Courts to prosecuting the grunts and scapegoats while the real criminals, the ones that supplied the manpower of organized criminals, the arms and financing go free. They are the root cause of the war.

All politics and ethnic differences aside (we Africans need to rise above this stupidity—we need each other in the struggle against imperialism and neo-colonialism) it was a war over a resource that is controlled outside of Sierra Leone. Anything that is bad for business will be attacked by organizations like George Soros’ Human Rights Watch or the British Foreign Office’s, Amnesty International. Soros and his cohorts from the European oligarchy of aristocrats can with a few billion dollars, some NGOs and a wink and nod on “the down low” from the U.S. State department and British Foreign Office bring down any foreign government, political or economic movement or change that is bad for business. They can seize a nation's assets through mortgaging and loans, and even get thanked for their “benevolence”. Soros and his cohorts can even bring down the United States government of George W. Bush. Not because they disagree with the Bush administration’s policies, but because Bush and his overzealous neo-con’s have let the “world domination” cat out of the bag. By making U.S. (and British) ambitions so clear, the Bush gang has committed the cardinal sin of giving the game away. For years, Soros and his NGOs have gone about their work extending the agenda of neo-colonialism so skillfully that hardly anyone noticed. Now a Texas redneck cowboy and a gang of overzealous ruff ridin' neo-cons have blown it". Thank you President Bush!

There is no reason why the people of Sierra Leone (after all the government is not just one administration) should have to bare the burden of reparations for crimes they did not commit. That is what will happen if the government is left with the burden. The monopoly and all its holding companies and juniors should pay the amputees of Sierra Leone, the way Union Carbide was made to pay for Bhopal, India. The way Volkswagen and BMW were made to pay for the Jewish holocaust. The way the tobacco industry has been made to pay. A $500 million dollar trust fund for the amputees would be nothing to the monopoly. They make that everyday. I hope there are some smart and courageous attorneys out there because the amputees of Sierra Leone need some justice and some reparations.