Category Archives: Sierra Leone

The Empire Never Left Africa | Jerm Warfare – PD Lawton

Angola, British Financial Empire, EO, History Modern, Liberia, mozambique, Sierra Leone, South Africa, ,

I discuss the creation of synthetic revolutionaries like Julius Malema and the RUF in Sierra Leone. South Africa`s treasonous role on the continent historically and current in its support of anti-government forces. Angolan war – UNITA and the role of Executive Outcomes in Angola and Sierra Leone – how South Africa, the West and the UN tried to destroy Executive Outcomes because they were WINNING WARS

Source: UK Column and UK Column News

The Empire Never Left Africa | Jerm Warfare

17 July 2026

Jerm and PD Lawton argue that Africa’s chronic instability is not accidental, but the product of a centuries-old financial network — centred on the City of London, Wall Street, and mining giants like Anglo-American and De Beers — that has kept the continent unsovereign since Cecil Rhodes. They cast figures like Julius Malema as synthetic evolutionaries built to divide and destabilise, frame events like Marikana as false flags designed to manufacture political outrage, and suggest that institutions like the UN and IMF deliberately perpetuate conflict to enable corporate looting. The throughline is that South Africa was never truly liberated in 1994; the empire simply went covert, swapping overt apartheid for debt bondage, regime change, and the slow privatisation of the state itself.

South Africa: Gateway for Africa`s Terrorism?

British Financial Empire, DRC, Liberia, mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa,

South Africa: Gateway for Africa`s Terrorism?

Part 2 of :

South Africa`s Economic Collapse: Mafia State or Globalist De-Industrialization Policies? And why is Pres Trump attacking it?

by PD Lawton               10 January 2026

South Africa is very much a part of the City of London`s Empire. It always has been. There are key dynasties that are the facilitators of its policies, including such names as Harry Oppenheimer and Cecil John Rhodes.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Ephesians 6:12

During Apartheid, South Africa destabilized much of Southern Africa. In Mozambique, it financed and trained RENAMO who fought against the FRELIMO government. In Angola, South Africa financed and fought alongside UNITA against the MPLA government. The purpose was destabilization and followed the orders of Henry Kissinger. South Africans were told they were fighting communism (and yet UNITA was led by a flagrant communist, Jonas Savimbi). South Africa lost many good soldiers in those wars and the country did not benefit from all those border wars in any way. DeBeers (Oppenheimer dynasty) benefitted from the lucrative diamond contract with UNITA and the City of London benefitted through DeBeers. It is said diamonds have paid for all of Africa`s insurgencies and civil wars. Diamonds certainly paid for civil wars in Angola, Liberia and Sierra Leone. It benefits to this day as much of Central Africa, northern Mozambique and numerous other regions remain destabilized. The ISIS operation in northern Mozambique ( Cabo Delgado) is running off the old RENAMO network. (Please read “Mozambique: Common Interests in Conserving Lawlessness and Terrorists Herd Goats” by PD Lawton on this website)

Since the end of Apartheid, South Africa under the ANC government, has continued to conduct an un-sovereign foreign policy. It did not stop destabilizing. Instead it has protected the mining investments of Anglo American – DeBeers and their subsidiaries in Eastern DRC and Mozambique.

South Africa is a safe haven for some of the continent`s most extreme and barbaric terrorist groups such as M23, ADF, Boko Haram, Al Shebab and the LRA. The South African government is fully aware of these groups having `offices` in South Africa, their members regularly coming in and out of the country, of their training camps within South Africa and of the links to criminal networks that fund them and launder their money.

It is for this reason that President Trump has stopped aid to South Africa, humiliated President Ramaphosa and highlighted the plight of the white minority.

USAID money was being `outsourced` to ngos and npos who have funded terrorism instead of countering terrorism:

https://www.tftc-istehdaf.org/news/terrorist-financing-targeting-center-hosts-capacity-building-workshop-protecting-non-profit

other links:

https://www.africanews.com/2023/06/13/south-africa-a-hub-for-jihadism-funding/

https://www.voaafrica.com/a/experts-suggest-extremist-groups-are-conducting-military-training-in-south-africa/7727346.html

https://www.hudson.org/national-security-defense/the-counterterrorism-conundrum-exploring-the-evolution-of-south-africa-s-extremist-networks

South Africa’s Terror Financing Crisis: The Unchecked Flow of Extremist Funds

Africa’s Most Powerful Military Strategist Speaks Out

Angola, British Financial Empire, Central African Republic, DRC, History Modern, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Uganda, ,

Angola, Sierra Leone, Boko Haram: Nigeria,  Lords Resistance Army: Uganda……civil wars/insurgencies ended by pmc`s under Eeben Barlow . Why does the UN not want war in Africa to end?

Source: Not A Grayman

(Part 2/3) Executive Outcomes Founder & CEO: Africa’s Most Powerful Military Strategist Speaks Out

12 Dec 2025

Welcome to the Not A Grayman Podcast, where your host, RK Gray, speaks with her unique network of professionals who have stepped out of the shadows and are NOT “Graymen”. Among them are today’s guests, Eeben Barlow, the Founder, Chairman and CEO of Executive Outcomes—one of the world’s first modern private military companies (PMCs). He has worked across the African continent to help stabilize nations facing insurgencies and civil wars. He advises and trains African armed forces, advocating for African-led solutions to African challenges. He is a prolific author and, while he has at times been an outspoken critic of foreign interference in Africa, his mission is rooted in a deep desire to see Africa thrive through strong leadership, strategic self-reliance, and ethical security frameworks. While in the SADF, Eeben served in the South African Army’s elite 32 Battalion Reconnaissance Wing. Eeben has also provided assistance to the private sector in strategy, business intelligence, and countering economic espionage.

 

Part 3: The Securing of Sierra Leone : Tony Blair`s Good War

British Financial Empire, DRC, EO, History Modern, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone

Part 3:  The Securing of Sierra Leone: Tony Blair`s Good War

This series of articles applies to the present: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Nigeria, Mozambique, and the Sahel; where Africa is being kept at war with itself using the same program and the same players…

by PD Lawton           11 December 2025

A deliberate attempt to drive up the price of peace.

By 2005 the United Nations had adopted the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) which in effect legalized the invasion and occupation of countries by the NATO axis under the new `humanitarian` international  law. The Twin Towers-9/11 disaster justified their War on Terror. And the invasions of Iraq and Libya followed allowing for the complete breakdown of law and order across the Maghreb and Sahel with the predicted explosion of extremist Islam, drug trafficking  and legalized human trafficking which is referred to as Europe`s migration crisis.

1997 was the year Tony Blair became British Prime Minister. Bill Clinton was the US President at the time. Clinton and Blair would front the political theatre for the events that unfolded in Central Africa. The Anglo American network would use Rwanda to destabilize eastern Congo and maintain 30 years of utopian level deregulation for its multinational corporations.

image: Tony Blair and  President Paul Kagame in  2009. Blair set up his AGI office in Rwanda as he did in Sierra Leone

“President Kagame today at Urugwiro Village met with Tony Blair, former British Prime Minister and founder of the African Governance Initiative, a charitable organisation which aims to assist African leaders to effectively deliver their vision for their countries. Mr Blair, who is on the Presidential Advisory Council (PAC) and a regular visitor to Rwanda, is here as part of the partnership with the Government of Rwanda in which AGI has been providing capacity building support since 2008. The meeting today follows Mr Blair’s earlier visit in May and marks AGI’s second year in Rwanda. Professionals from AGI are currently working side by side with officials in the Office of the President, the Office of the Prime Minister, Ministry of Public Service and the Rwanda Development Board, to assist in delivering on key priorities for Rwanda’s development, promoting investment and advising on government capacity building strategy.” Source

image: children in IDP camp outside Goma, DRC in 2024 : the ngo run Misery Industry

Under Tony Blair, Britain`s version of USAID was formed and was known as the Department for International Development (DIFD). The logo was” UKAID , Aid from the British people”. Under  DIFD, British foreign development aid was outsourced to the NGO network which like USAID became a money laundering exercise  . DIFD was closed down in 2020 and remerged with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

image: Goma 2024 . The DRC`s version of the RUF , Rwandan controlled M23, create `consumers` for the Misery Industry

In 2011, independent journalist, Linda Polman, published `War Games` which exposes the theatre of the humanitarian aid industry, run through a veritable sea of non-government organizations, for what it is.

Polman interviewed RUF commander, Mike Lamin, who was the star of Philip Diaz`s documentary `Empire in Africa`. Lamin accused Polman and the likes of her, i.e. the West, of ignoring the country and its need of peace. He said that the RUF increased their amputation campaign of mutilating women and children, to get the world`s attention. Because with the world`s attention comes bags of money in humanitarian assistance which begs the question of who is the more insane?

“Two hundred thousand dead in ten years of civil war, hundreds of thousands wounded or deliberately maimed half the population of over 4 million displaced or in exile, hundreds of villages and towns burned to the ground. Not a single telegraph pole in the country has been left standing and there`s hardly a bridge that hasn`t been dynamited. The war has gone down as the cruellest and most destructive in the modern history of west Africa. Many experts dismiss the warriors in sierra Leone’s bush as drug-fuelled maniacs, but some suspect that a rational, calculated strategy lay behind their destructive frenzy and thirst for blood- they suggest it was a deliberate attempt to drive up the price of peace. “ pg. 152 War Games

Why did the UN Force EO to Leave?

In late 2000, British civil service agent, Alan Doss joined the UN peacekeeping mission in Sierra Leone. (UNAMSIL) and would then go on to work for the Kofi Annan Foundation as a Senior Political Adviser   . Kofi Annan as Secretary General of the United Nations was known as `Nes- Kofi` as it was under his tenure that the United Nations and multi-national business community became even more interlocked. Helmut Maucher, CEO of Nestlé said at the time “ We`ve achieved what we wanted! We now find ourselves at the centre of the debate.” In other words, the UN is controlled by its donor multi nationals.

Alan Doss as head of UNAMSIL knew what EO had achieved in Sierra Leone. He stated at the time of EO`s expulsion:

“It is UN policy to discourage mercenaries. We do not think this is an appropriate form of armed intervention anywhere, involving any group. And if there is to be a peace keeping operation it should be duly authorized by the International Community and regional bodies that have that responsibility. And that was the case here in Sierra Leone with the establishment of the United Nations Peace Keeping Mission. That is the job of the International Community.” Alan Doss, head of UNAMSIL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBjmSH4VG_k

“In Sierra Leone the UN mandated force reached 17 000 men. That did not prevent the RUF from starting again. 17 000 United Nations `blue berets` were incapable of stopping what barely 100 did in Sierra Leone, 100 Executive Outcomes employees.”- War Correspondent Jim Hooper

image:young  victim of RUF brutality. Photo BBC

Within 3 months of EO`s departure, the RUF had broken the peace agreement and kidnapped 500 blue berets. The terrorism on civilians continued and the RUF took over Freetown resulting in an estimated 6000 deaths and tens of thousands of people mutilated, raped and traumatized.

“In Sierra Leone, Executive Outcomes deployed for 22 months, from 1995-1997. Over that time frame, the average cost was exactly $20 million per year. The subsequent peace keeping force, not peace enforcement – people in the front line, peace keeping force deployed by the United Nations, numbered at its peak about 18 000 personnel at the cost of about US$ 1 billion per year. “- Michael Grunberg pmc consultant

EO has yet to be paid in full for its services.

Media Smear Campaign

Executive Outcomes became the target of a formidable media disinformation campaign when it began working for the MPLA government of Angola, contracted to train the Angolan military to bring an end to the civil war being fomented by the opposition party, UNITA. EO`s quick success in restoring stability to large parts of Sierra Leone, fuelled the torrent of lies that were spread across the world about them, from journalists in the South African press to top ranks of the UN, the opinion was unanimous : White racist South African mercenaries destabilizing poor African countries in exchange for diamonds and mining concessions.

The media smear campaign became so far-fetched, so ludicrous, so imaginative that it is reminiscent of Graeme Greene`s novel `Our Man in Havana`. Greene was himself a British intelligence agent and wrote his classic to mock intelligence services, especially the British MI6, and their willingness to believe reports from their local informants. The novel is set in Cuba where an informant is under pressure to produce espionage reports of Cuban collusion with the Soviets. The informant cannot find enough `dirt` to satisfy his MI6 handler and resorts to adapting a diagram from a vacuum cleaner manual and presenting it as secret document of a military installation.

“The methodology of the Stratcom (Strategic Communications Operation/disinformation campaign) devised and implemented by the DFA (Department for Foreign Affairs), MI (Military Intelligence), and others vying for their place in the sunshine of our rainbow nation was simple: if you tell a lie often enough, people will start believing it.” Once it is believed, it becomes their reality. The technique involved generating fake intelligence, leaking it to the media to publish, and then submitting intelligence reports that referenced the media articles. This created a Gordian knot of misinformation layers deep as stories mutated with each telling, and eventually conglomerated into a single pervasive myth with Executive Outcomes at its centre.” Page 706 ` Executive Outcomes : Against All Odds` by Eeben Barlow

Behind the `leaked intelligence` reports, that were inserted into the media worldwide, were the DFA and MI. The Military Intelligence bureau of post apartheid South Africa was comprised of a number of the `old guard, high ranking military officers who one can presume were prepared to use EO as target to deflect from their own involvement in foreign interference under the National Party which ran  destabilization operations across Southern Africa. They were also desperate to ingratiate themselves with the new ANC government. Under President Mandela, Military Intelligence of the new South Africa excelled itself in being a purveyor of disinformation and lies.

The irony is that the disinformation had in some reports, substantial elements of truth. For instance one leaked MI report dated 6/04/95 said:

“EO has a group of members that are used as provocateurs in countries where they wish to establish contacts. The provocateurs make a study of strong and weak points of country like Nigeria. When they have established the weak points, these are exploited to cause unrest in the country. When this happens `brokers` arrive and offer EO`s services to certain large companies to protect their property against payment. Once EO has commenced protecting companies, they offer their services to the government to bring about peace. According to …this was a general tactic amongst Special Forces members during the bush war in Namibia. As soon as the war was `going a bit slow` they would attack RSA bases in order to escalate the war.” Pg 678 `Executive Outcomes : Against All Odds`

Liars are known to use `projection` which is apparently especially common among people with personality disorders – sociopaths and psychopaths, narcissists and borderlines. When someone is accusing you of doing something that they’re doing, they are engaging in the psychological defense mechanism of projection.

The disinformation being leaked to the press worldwide, was describing what the Anglo American network comprised of the City of London and Wall Street multi nationals and their banking institutions, their Israeli and South African diamond dealing networks have been doing across large parts of the `Third World` for decades.

Executive Outcomes Founder & CEO on War, Intelligence, and his LEGACY | ft. Eeben Barlow

Angola, Current African News, EO, History Modern, Sierra Leone, South Africa

well done to this podcaster for interviewing an African who is legendary for all the right reasons. This man and his company have, despite United Nation`s heavyweights and the media propaganda and lies written about them, conducted warfare on the continent in the name of Africa, saved tens of thousands of lives, stopped civil wars and acted for the sovereignty of legitimate African governments

Source: Not A Grayman

(Part 1/3) Executive Outcomes Founder & CEO on War, Intelligence, and his LEGACY | ft. Eeben Barlow

3 December

Welcome to the Not A Grayman Podcast, where your host, RK Gray, speaks with her unique network of professionals who have stepped out of the shadows and are NOT “Graymen”. Among them are today’s guests, Eeben Barlow, the Founder, Chairman and CEO of Executive Outcomes—one of the world’s first modern private military companies (PMCs). He has worked across the African continent to help stabilize nations facing insurgencies and civil wars. He advises and trains African armed forces, advocating for African-led solutions to African challenges. He is a prolific author and, while he has at times been an outspoken critic of foreign interference in Africa, his mission is rooted in a deep desire to see Africa thrive through strong leadership, strategic self-reliance, and ethical security frameworks. While in the SADF, Eeben served in the South African Army’s elite 32 Battalion Reconnaissance Wing. Eeben has also provided assistance to the private sector in strategy, business intelligence, and countering economic espionage. DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this episode are solely those of the guest and do not necessarily reflect the views of the host or this platform. Statements made by the guest have not been independently verified and should not be taken as facts. Viewer discretion is advised, especially regarding sensitive or potentially controversial topics.

TIMESTAMPS (Part 1): 00:00:01: Preview 00:04:30: Intro & Eeben’s origin story in 32 Batallion 00:13:37: Apartheid Era, Cold War Geopolitics in Africa, and interests 00:26:00: Competing Strategic Interests in Africa – Minerals, Resources, and the view from Africa 00:36:00: NGOs, aid groups, and the UN in Africa 00:38:14: Apartheid, patriotism, and the South African experience 00:52:00: African militant groups, piracy, child soldiers, etc. 01:04:00: Eeben Barlow on founding Executive Outcomes, composite warfare, and ending the war in Angola

To be continued…..

 

Part 2: The Securing of Sierra Leone: Tony Blair`s Good War

Angola, British Financial Empire, DRC, EO, History Modern, Liberia, Sierra Leone, South Africa

Part 2 of     

This series of articles applies to the present : the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Nigeria, Mozambique,and the Sahel; where Africa is being kept at war with itself using the same program and the same players…

                The Securing of Sierra Leone: Tony Blair`s Good War

by PD Lawton, 8 December 2025

By 1995, the RUF had gained control over the interior of Sierra Leone and were on the point of taking Freetown. The Sierra Leonean military were proving ineffective, lacking in training, discipline, leadership and pay. Many would later find it more profitable to work by night posing as rebels and living off the proceeds of crime.

President Strasser contracted the South African private military company, Executive Outcomes, having heard about their successes in Angola working for the MPLA government of Angola. They came highly recommended from General João De Matos, Angola`s First Chief of Staff. An Australian rutile mining firm trying to operate in Sierra Leone contacted Tony Buckingham, oil and diamond executive, who initiated contact between Strasser and EO. Contradictory to what is widely reported; neither Tony Buckingham nor Simon Mann had anything to do with the founding of EO. With the Sierra Leonean Government Treasury empty, it was Tony Buckingham, the Australian rutile mining operation and other investors who secured payment for EO`s services.

The Sierra Leonean government contracted EO to assist the army in driving the RUF from the vicinity of the capital, Freetown, and to train and assist the army in stabilizing the country, in particular the diamond areas of Kono. The RUF were paying for their international support and weapons, medical and technical supplies in diamonds at the same time depriving the government of revenue from legal diamond trade. Securing Kono was vitally important as depriving the RUF of diamonds was to remove their power.

“We realised only too well that diamonds were being smuggled out of Sierra Leone, not only by rebels, but also by elements of foreign governments and large multinational business corporations. Such players would not be at all happy about EO`s arrival; after Angola they had to know it would only be a matter of time before they lost access to cheap `conflict` or `blood` diamonds.” Page 459 Executive Outcomes: Against All Odds

Renier Hugo, EO member, who was appointed commander of the mobile strike force recalled the dilapidated condition of the equipment EO was provided with, that being the same equipment available to the Sierra Leonean army, 1 old land rover, 2 worn out BMP-2 infantry combat vehicles and 2 aging Bedford trucks. The EO strike force assimilated into the RSLMF and wore their uniforms as they had done in Angola working for the MPLA government. The EO force numbered no more than 200 men at any time. In many of their missions they would number from as few as 2 personnel to 40.

Air support in war-torn terrain is essential for obvious reasons but in West African jungle terrain it is of paramount importance as rebel force positions can only be located from above. The Sierra Leonean army only possessed one Mi-24 attack helicopter which had been supplied with 2 Ukrainian pilots who were on hire. MI24s are the `godfathers` of air support due to the titanium undercarriage. EO later flew up from South Africa two Mi -17 utility helicopters which are transport helicopters. Sierra Leone is roughly the same size as the Czech Republic, a large country with minimal infrastructure and dense jungle vegetation. It was a formidable task to patrol vast areas with minimal air support.

image: EO members with `Rhino` the country`s one and only attack helicopter

Col. Roelf van Heerden was appointed the senior command of operations in Sierra Leonean. A Namibian national, Roelf van Heerden published his memoirs of EO during the Angolan and Sierra Leonean contracts. His book was published in 2012 `Four Ball One Tracer`. It is a fascinating and informative account that describes in detail the military campaigns and unique style of warfare that EO mastered in countering anti- government forces. The author relates many experiences through which the reader comes to realise the full extent of national sentiment held for the men of EO.

Col van Heerden worked extraordinarily hard to restore trust and societal cohesion wherever the strike force was active. He gained the high respect of traditional elders, community leaders and the Kamajors who were the forest hunters and village armed protectors who acted as the community civil defence force. To this day there are Sierra Leonean children named after EO members as a mark of respect for them.

The Kono District in the east is the diamond rich region with Koidu being the capital. As mentioned, it was deemed of paramount importance to secure Koidu in order to cut off the RUF`s financial support. Before undertaking the liberation of Koidu, other strategies were considered.

“ The first option that was developed during the planning cycle provided for a speedy end to the war by attacking the RUF headquarters base in the vicinity of Joru, to the southeast of Kenema in the hilltops inside the Gola Forrest. After having neutralized the main headquarters, area operations could then be conducted in the country`s southern districts and then move progressively from east to west within each district. On the other hand, the concept of operations outlined by the second option provided for operations to secure the central areas of the country along the main routes towards the eastern and southeastern districts. This would allow the focus of main effort to move progressively eastward in order to conduct attacks on the priority target areas occupied by the RUF. Once this had been achieved the expansion of operations to other priority conflict areas could take place. The final option provided for operations aimed at clearing the RUF from the west of the country by neutralizing the threat in the eastern proximity of Freetown, and thereafter penetrating to the east until the RUF were forced into the forest area of the Gola Forrest on the border of Liberia. “ pg 150 `Four Ball One Tracer`by Roelf van Heerden

Under Col.  van Heerden and with only 40 EO soldiers and a contingent of trained RSLM forces, the military convoy left Freetown. The only equipment at their disposal was 6 operational military vehicles. The convoy was followed by 120 civilian vehicles this being the first secured convoy to travel to the town called Mile 91 and on to Koidu in nearly 10 years. When the convoy reached Mile91 the roads were lined with people who having been effectively cut-off from the capital for years and living under continuous insecurity and acts of RUF atrocities, were over- joyed to see their government forces and alongside them, the South African soldiers. The convoy continued on from the town of Mile 91 to the regional capital, Koidu.

Having encountered a number of RUF ambushes on the route to Koidu and having suffered a few serious causalities but no fatalities on their side, Van Heerden and the strike force arrived in Koidu to be met with a deserted town that was usually inhabited by 20-30 000 people. A roundabout which is the point of entry to the town had been decorated with severed heads with the rotting corpses having been thrown into the centre of the roundabout. Evidence of brutality and atrocities were everywhere and decomposing bodies littered the town. Only two living souls were found by EO and these were abandoned handicapped children who were later flown to Freetown and put in the care of the Catholic Church. The surviving inhabitants of the town began returning sometime after news had spread of its liberation from RUF.

With the progression of EO and the ultimate securing of the eastern region, as well as Freetown, the RUF were taking a serious challenge both to their numbers as well as the morale of the `troops`. However, a new challenge became increasingly evident and that was the complete lack of discipline and morality among a large element of the Sierra Leonean army who used their positions of power to steal from and intimidate the civilian population, on some occasions even posing as RUF. They would take advantage of the temporary ban on diamond mining to work by night in the diamond fields which they were guarding.

Col van Heerden had formed a good relationship with the Kamajors who became increasingly needed to guard the villages from RUF and rogue Sierra Leonean soldiers. Reporting the bad behavior to the higher command or reporting it to the local police had little to no effect.

Van Heerden in his book refers to the ill-disciplined soldiers as `sobels` meaning `soldier rebels`.

“Our actions against the sobels only served to bolster the image and perception of EO amongst the local inhabitants to the extent that they demanded the presence of EO throughout the area as this had become the only way to achieve any semblance of safety and stability. What these actions failed to eradicate was the sobel attitude amongst the RSLMF and incidents and reprisals still took place. “

EO would later be accused of arming the Kamajors who were falsely accused of then attacking civilians. This fabrication from certain quarters of the Western media was particularly insulting as the opposite was the case.

“Our actions also led to a meeting with Randolph Filly Faboi- veteran politician and former APC party member- who was the current Kamajor administrator in Koidu. He wished to convince me to issue those AK-47 rifles that we had recovered during contacts with the RUF to the Kamajors. His justification lay in the argument that the rifles would lend that little extra firepower to the antiquated arsenal of Kamajor shotguns of which the ammunition had become old and unserviceable. I also calculated that I was justified in assisting the Kamajors to defend themselves, especially if the sobels became aware that the Kamajors did in fact have AK-47 rifles.” Pg 203 Four Ball One Tracer

image: Chief Sam Hinga Norman

Van Heerden became exceptionally well respected by the community elders and writes highly of the Kamajor leader, and the man later appointed by President Kabbah as Defence Minister, Chief Sam Hinga Norman.

Van Heerden wrote of him:

“What amazed me as a representative of EO was the manner in which he respected and revered the people. This absolute respect was reciprocated by the people wherever he went. “ pg 229 Four Ball One Tracer

This good man, Chief Sam Hinga Norman, would later be accused of crimes against humanity by the UN-backed war crimes tribunal, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission for Sierra Leone. The special court was the first of its kind to sit UN-appointed judges alongside local judges, in the country where the crimes were committed.

Africa saw this happen again in Rwanda where honourable and incorruptible men and women or those who knew too much were silenced. We will see it again in the future in Congo where the Mai-Mai and Wazalendo will be taken to court for the crimes of protecting their communities. The Serbians of Yugoslavia were subjected at this time to similar treatment.

Chief Sam Hinga Norman would die after a medical procedure awaiting indictment by the ICC in 2007.

His trial and that of 2 other Kamajors was selected as the first trial conducted under Chief prosecutor David Crane, at the Special Court for Sierra Leone which would prove to be a court of selective justice.

The Syrian Civil Defence Force under former President Assad were accused in the same manner and their Western backed counterpart, the White Helmets, were applauded with international awards and a Netflix airing. (See research of British journalist Vanessa Beeley)

EO member Renier Hugo would take command of the air strikes. The RUF used the dense jungle canopy as cover. Locating the RUF bases was done by GPS coordinates obtained by relentless searching from the air in a Cessna flown by Renier Hugo.

“We made sure these horror stories and the chopping off of hands and the killing of innocent women and children, the recruiting of 12 year olds and putting them on drugs, all of that stopped and that progressed so quickly in Sierra Leone that the population actually supported us wherever we went and whatever we did.” Lafras Luitingh, former CEO of Executive Outcomes

The video link below is age restricted. It is one if not the only unbiased reporting from the time. It was produced for the History Channel. You can locate it on James Peterson chanel, titled : Executive Outcomes – Sierra Leone 1995

https://youtu.be/SBjmSH4VG_k?si=a8YNV54zbe7JKhCq

In January 1996, General Julius Maada Bio deposed Valentine Strasser in a bloodless coup. (Julius Maada Bio is the current president of Sierra Leone). By March 1996 civilian government was restored, with former United Nations Development Program official, Ahmad Tejan Kabbah, elected president.

The UN`s stipulation to the new government was the immediate removal of Executive Outcomes and negotiations with the RUF under which the RUF would become a political party and be given representation in Parliament. They had demanded 8 seats in Parliament but were allocated 2. Foday Sankoh was to be Vice President and given control of the mining sector.

By this point in time EO had secured most of Sierra Leone and the RUF were on the point of becoming a nullified threat.

Predictably, the RUF made full use of the ceasefire during negotiations which predictably dragged on.

“As we had predicted, the RUF had violated the ceasefire agreement on a number of occasions in order to infiltrate their units into positions that would enable them to commence offensive operations immediately, should the negotiations fail. Rebel sightings were being reported from all over the country.” Pg 234 Four Ball One Tracer

By December EO`s contract was terminated early and they departed Sierra Leone by 3 February 1997.

“What really saddened me in Sierra Leone to this day I do think about it is that we told the president when he told us to leave, we told him that RUF will take over the government or will try and take over Freetown again. And we knew precisely what was going to happen. And because of the influence on him , you know I would say, close to intimidation on him, he had to let us go.” Lafras Luitingh, former CEO of Executive Outcomes

UK Ambassador to Sierra Leone at the time, Craig Murray, recounted the chaotic farce of the negotiations:

“The negotiations were a grim game. The essential points of the peace plan were these. All fighting would cease immediately. There would be a general amnesty, but not for “crimes against humanity.” The RUF would disarm and enter the process, becoming a political party. There would be a government of national unity until elections a couple of years later. The RUF would have ministers in the government of national unity. They would get some funding to transform themselves into a political party and help to develop their policy programme. They would get offices and office equipment in return for guns. There would be scholarships for their young leadership to be educated. The fighters would be disarmed and go to camps. There would be training programmes, and counselling for child soldiers. A percentage of the RUF fighters would be reintegrated into the national army.” Craig Murray – `The Catholic Orangemen of Togo`

 

The Abidjan Accord was not long signed when in June 1997 Major General Johnny Paul Koroma and a faction of former RSLM military, rebranded as the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) deposed Tejan Kabbah in a coup took control of the government for the RUF, abolishing all political parties. Major General Johnny Paul Koroma announced to the world (included in Philippe Diaz`s misleading documentary) :

“The problem we have in Sierra Leone is that there are too many De Beers seeking control of our diamonds.”

With his sunglasses and AK47, Koroma was a typical `Westside Boy`, a cool killer with his pockets stuffed full of diamonds.

The AFRC and RUF returned to their former tactics and began retaliation against any seen as government, ECOMOG and especially EO sympathizers. At this point there were nearly one million displaced persons living in camps around Freetown. The RUF and Koroma faction of the Sierra Leonean military conducted their `cleansing program` across Freetown. Operation “No Living Thing” raped and mutilated civilians and in a week accounted for 6000 deaths.

Away from Freetown the killing spree campaign of terror across the countryside took back control of the diamond fields.

“ The Kono district, where EO had worked so hard and achieved so much, was hit the worst and the AFRC/RUF coalition exacted special retaliation on the population for what had befallen the rebels during the EO period. The town of Koidu was razed to the ground. Not a single roof stood and not a single well was without its fair share of bloated , floating corpses. For the RUF it was payback time. What a shattering end to such a promising beginning.” Pg 242 Four Ball One Tracer

Prior to elections, Tejan Kabbah had allowed people to give their vote verbally, not due to illiteracy but due to the sheer number of people who had suffered amputation of both hands. This particularly sadistic act was all the more barbarically cruel in a country of people who only had farming as a way of making a living. The RUF then turned to cutting out the tongues of the amputees so they could not vote.

A month later, June 1997, ECOWAS, Economic Community of West African States, led by Nigeria, approved the use of force to restore the Kabbah government. The West African region had by then 243,000 refugees who had fled to camps in neighbouring Liberia and Guinea. ECOMOG ( Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group) retook Freetown and restored President Tejan Kabbah but were incapable of securing beyond the capital.

The war continued until January 1999 when the International Community negotiated once again between the elected government of Kabbah and Foday Sankoh`s RUF. The Lomé Peace Accord was signed in March 1999 granting the Vice presidency to Foday Sankoh and control of the mining sector in return for cessation of hostilities and disarmament of the RUF. Other RUF leaders were granted government posts. The UN deployed the peace keeping operation UNAMSIL, United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone to monitor the process. By May 2000 the RUF, displeased about power sharing, continued to violate the ceasefire and by May 2000 were once again advancing on Freetown.

“17 000 United Nations `blue berets` were incapable of stopping what barely 100 did in Sierra Leone, 100 Executive Outcomes employees.” – Jim Hooper, honest American journalist on History Channel documentary

The U.S. Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright visited Freetown in October in 1999 and promised $55 million in aid and $65 million in debt forgiveness. She was widely criticized for supporting the amnesty and RUF positions in government.

image: Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of State weighs in on West Africa

In May 2000, the RUF took 500 UN peacekeepers hostage and Britain decided to send British troops under Operation Palliser. In June the UN Security Council banned the sale of diamonds from conflict zones and extended sanctions to include Liberia. Under international pressure Charles Taylor is forced to close Liberia`s border with Sierra Leone and renounce his support for the RUF. The war is finally declared over in January 2002 and President Kabbah and his party win the election. Foday Sankoh is charged with war crimes and is killed in prison while awaiting trial. The U.N. peacekeeping forces leave Sierra Leone in December 2005.

Taylor`s Liberia is Made the Scapegoat for the War to Deflect from International Players

The following is the statement given by the Liberian Foreign Minister, Monie R. Captan, to the UN Security Council 4264th Meeting (AM & PM), SC/6997 in 2001. It is republished in full here because it proves the point that Liberia was made the scapegoat and Charles Taylor probably has some very interesting stories to tell if he were permitted to do so. The statement is very interesting as among other matters it mentions the black-market diamond trade was widespread :“Smuggling was endemic to the global diamond industry and was not limited to Sierra Leone.”

It also mentions the `donations` of armaments to the RUF by UNAMISL and ECOMOG forces which is currently happening in other African war zones such as MONUSCOs `donating` of armaments to M23 as well as  EAC ( East African Community) and SADC ( South African Development Community) `donating` technical and armaments to M23.

“MONIE R. CAPTAN, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Liberia, said that it should be recalled that the involvement of his country in the resolution of conflict in Sierra Leone had been the result of an ECOWAS mandate, issued in Bamako. In addition, his Government could not have been an uninterested bystander. Liberia and Sierra Leone shared common historical, cultural, and family ties, as well as a common border. Liberia was hosting more than 100,000 Sierra Leonean refugees, as a result of the civil conflict. There could be no peace and stability in Liberia until there was enduring peace and stability in Sierra Leone and other neighbouring countries.

He said that it should also be recalled that, at the request of ECOWAS and the United Nations, the Liberian President had negotiated the release of more than 500 United Nations peacekeepers that had been taken hostage by the RUF. In addition, Liberia had permitted RUF delegations going to ECOWAS-sponsored meetings to transit through its territory. It had also permitted RUF officials to hold meetings on its territory with officials of ECOWAS and the United Nations. Moreover, the appointment of a new interlocutor and RUF leadership had been the result of an initiative of the Liberian President. Those efforts, among others, by Liberia’s President, had been undertaken with the sole objective of furthering the peace process in Sierra Leone.

Notwithstanding those initiatives, he said, the Liberian Government had been and continued to be the “target of grossly unsubstantiated allegations” of diamond smuggling and gun running with the RUF. On the diamonds issue, his Government could neither deny nor confirm that the war in Sierra Leone was being financed by the sale of conflict diamonds. It could confirm, however, that it was not connected, nor was it a party to, the illicit diamond trade of Sierra Leonean diamonds. If, as claimed in the report, his Government was exporting and selling $217 million worth of diamonds annually to Belgium, the Panel had failed to provide evidence of a trail of financial transactions implicating his Government.

In addition, he said, no one familiar with the diamond industry would agree with the Panel that the pre-conflict value of Sierra Leone’s annual production was anywhere near $450 million. Smuggling was endemic to the global diamond industry, and was not limited to Sierra Leone. Historically, his country had faced the problem, and previous governments had been unable to adequately address it. Liberia found itself in a much weaker position, having recently emerged from a disastrous seven-year civil war that completely destroyed basic national infrastructure. The problem had been further exacerbated by the Government’s lack of resources and personnel, including customs, immigration, transport and communications.

Depending on which figure was used, between 80 and 90 per cent of Liberia’s domestic diamond production was smuggled out of the country, he went on. That should refute the conclusion reached in the report that “it is not conceivable that so much of Liberia’s own diamond production could avoid the detection of Government”. With regard to arms supply to the RUF, the Panel had erroneously concluded that virtually all of RUF’s weapons had been obtained from external sources, specifically, Liberia. At the same time, the Panel had found that, among the considerable amounts of weaponry seized from the Sierra Leone Armed Forces, a “significant” number of those weapons had been seized from a Guinean UNAMSIL unit. Other Guinean units serving under the Economic Community of West African States’ Monitoring Observer Group (ECOMOG) had also previously been disarmed during ambushes and seizures.

In addition, he continued, the RUF had obtained weapons directly from the Sierra Leone Army inventory when the Armed Forces Revolutionary United Council had assumed power in May 1997 and entered into a power-sharing arrangement with the RUF. The Sierra Leonean Government might also have been a source of supply to the RUF when it requested two waivers of the provisions of the ECOWAS Protocol on the Moratorium on Small Arms on 18 and 23 June 2000. The waivers were to permit the importation of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ammunition rounds. Given the pattern of events in Sierra Leone, it was not unreasonable to assume that a “substantial portion” of those shipments also ended up in the RUF’s hands.

Continuing, he said that the report confirms that additional arms shipments were received by the RUF from neighbouring Guinea based on RUF diamond sales made to “mid-level Guinean military officers”. It further admitted that the RUF had received weapons captured from ECOMOG forces that had fallen victim to various ambushes. Given all of those well-documented non-Liberian sources of arms received by the RUF, it was “unfair and erroneous” that the Panel would conclude that the primary supplier of arms received by the RUF was Liberia and that such an arms flow was the result of official Liberian policy.

He said his Government acknowledged that it maintained a training base in Gbartala, Bong County, Liberia, which provided much-needed training facilities for its internal security organizations, including the unit that provided protection of foreign embassies and sensitive government installations. His Government was currently engaged in discussions with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to provide workshops on humanitarian law at the training base. It must be re-emphasized that his Government did not train any foreigners at that facility.

The Liberian Government had reacted to allegations of illicit activities on its border by making concrete proposals to the United Nations to ensure proper monitoring and verification, he said. On 22 January, it had decided to ground all Liberian-registered aircraft and requested the ICAO to notify the civil aviation authorities of all Member States of that action. The Government had also revoked the appointment of all agents acting on its behalf in matters of aircraft inspection and registration. Those measures were taken in recognition of the fact that many aircraft flew the Liberian flag without the knowledge or authorization of the Government, which had sought the assistance of ICAO in providing technical assistance to improve its capacity in air traffic control and surveillance.

While it was his Government’s desire to continue to be constructively engaged in the search for peace in Sierra Leone, he said that it was equally true that the Government could not continue engagement in the “midst of the grave allegations levied against it” by the Experts Panel, especially the charge that Liberia had not played a constructive role in Sierra Leone. Thus, his Government had embarked upon an alternative policy of disengagement from Sierra Leone. Consistent with that policy, all RUF members had been asked to leave Liberia and all had done so, with the exception of Sam Bockarie whose return to Sierra Leone had been rejected by the RUF leadership.

Cognizant of the ongoing constructive dialogue between the RUF and UNAMSIL, the confidence-building visits into RUF-held territory, the opening of roads,
and ongoing discussions concerning the deployment of UNAMSIL forces into RUF-held territory, his Government – occasioned by the return of Mr. Bockarie – had engaged the ECOWAS Chairman in discussions aimed at identifying a third country to accept him. The transiting of RUF members through Liberian territory would no longer be permitted, nor would they be allowed to attend meetings on Liberian territory. The Liberian Government was prepared to take further actions to close its border with Sierra Leone, and to recuse itself from all discussions on the peace process, should the international community deem that necessary.

Furthermore, he said that his Government, cognizant of the complex problems associated with the monitoring and control of diamond trading on its territory and the subregion, had decided to seek the assistance and cooperation of the United Nations in putting into place an appropriate mechanism for the control and monitoring of the diamond trade. Ongoing cross-border armed incursions within the Mano River were also a matter of grave concern for his Government, which had suffered four different attacks on its territory form neighbouring Guinea.

He said that, as a result, an ECOWAS Committee set up to investigate the incursions, had recommended that a military observer mission be deployed at the borders of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone, and that dialogue ensue among the heads of States of those countries. His country called upon the United Nations to urgently facilitate the implementation of those recommendations by assisting ECOWAS with its logistical requirements. Furthermore, his country unequivocally condemned all dissident activities within the Mano River Union, including the recent attacks in Guinea.

He expressed additional concerns of his Government, including the view that the Panel had exceeded its mandate by proposing punitive measures, rather than a strengthening of measures already imposed by the Council. The extreme prejudice of the Panel was demonstrated in its recommendation to impose a travel ban on Liberian officials and diplomats. There was no basis in the United Nations Charter to deny Liberia the opportunity to conduct its external relations as a sovereign Member of the United Nations. In addition, the proposed ban on the export of Liberian timber was intended to deny the Government substantial revenue that funded social programmes in the areas of education, health, and social welfare.

Moreover, he said, the Panel’s claim that timber revenue was used to purchase arms for the RUF was a contradiction of its submission that the revenue from diamond sales “is more than enough to sustain its military activities”. In light of the very serious charges made against Liberia and the concrete decisions taken by his Government to address the concerns of the international community, the Government requested the cooperation and support of the Security Council. That approach, coupled with regional initiatives of ECOWAS, would yield far greater positive results than the imposition of punitive measures.”

source of above excerpt:

https://press.un.org/en/2001/sc6997.doc.htm

continued in Part 3

Diamond Cartel Wins Victory with Kimberley Process (Conflict minerals – Blood Diamonds)

The Securing of Sierra Leone: Tony Blair`s Good War

Angola, British Financial Empire, Central African Republic, DRC, EO, History Modern, Liberia, mozambique, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Africa, The Sudan,

The Securing of Sierra Leone: Tony Blair`s Good War

Part 2 of the series: The Right to Wage War, an in- depth look at the perpetuation of conflict on the continent of Africa. 

This series of articles applies to the present : the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Nigeria, Mozambique,and the Sahel; where Africa is being kept at war with itself using the same program and the same players…

Part 1    Nigeria:          Boko Haram: a Commercial Venture?

by PD Lawton          7 December 2025

 Why does the United Nations which appears to be dominated by the Anglo-American network have such a track record of either `resolving `conflicts in favour of anti-government forces or of allowing conflict to continue and thereby favouring anti-government forces? Why do the anti-government forces have predictable links to mineral resources and certain multinational corporations? And how is it that the liberal media never fails to legitimize them in the name of political correctness?

image:current  poverty in Sierra Leone. courtesy of cocorioko.net

Violence for Economic Control

“Clearly, the arms and diamonds industries have spawned a very profitable war economy, such that the diamond industry, which was the resource for the arms, has in turn generated an arms industry to protect the diamonds. It is a stalemate that has a high price: violence for economic control…”- Statement given by Ms. Lee of Singapore to UN Security Council , Feb 2001. – Page 440 Executive Outcomes : Against All Odds by Eeben Barlow

“I was sick and tired of the international hypocrisy that was so evident when it came to Africa and a few countries beyond it. Defeating the rebels, criminals, or terrorists in those countries was apparently considered to be bad form. As long as these forces of evil continued to operate, the UN had a reason for being in Africa, as did several NGOs. Similarly, certain governments, companies, and corporations were able to gain control over certain resources and then use those resources to fund anti-government forces.”-  Page 664 Executive Outcomes: Against All Odds 

In 1995 Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone, was about to be overrun by the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), a terrorist group so depraved that they burnt out the eyes of little girls, amputated their hands and raped them. The City of London Anglo American network spear-headed by the Oppenheimer diamond kings of South Africa, De Beers, along with Muammar Gadhafi were the financiers of the RUF. It profited the black-market diamond trade for the wars in both Liberia and Sierra Leone to continue as long as possible. Sierra Leoneans and Liberians were the perpetrators of some of the worst atrocities the world has ever seen. Following the carnage and chaos, Tony Blair would set up  office for his African Governance Initiative along with the Adam Smith Institute inside the carcass of the new government of Sierra Leone`s headquarters. Britain and the United Nations would take the credit for restoring peace in what became known as Tony Blair`s Good War.

The RUF`s insurgency created the chaos that preceded the UN`s first humanitarian intervention which set the template for the NATO invasions of Iraq and Libya. Tony Blair lied to the UK Parliament claiming Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Respected British bioweapons expert, Dr. David Kelly paid with his life in refuting these claims.

This is the story of the men who will always be remembered in Sierra Leone for their extreme courage and determination to rid the country of one of the vilest insurgencies Africa has ever experienced. It is the story of the multinational network that created the RUF from within Liberia and the network`s manipulations to get the RUF into government under United Nations auspices of peace keeping.

The most outrageous crime of this episode in modern day African history, is not the well-known story of foreign destabilization and nor is it the connection of the criminal networks to the highest positions of power. It is the simple fact that when the RUF insurgency was effectively challenged, the Western press, the ANC government in South Africa and the United Nations denounced those responsible for securing peace and stability. This had been the same reaction to the resolution of civil war in Angola previously and would be the same reaction in 2015 in Nigeria when Boko Haram was effectively wiped out within 4 weeks.

Professor of Global Conflict Studies, Christopher Blattman is an American political scientist working on conflict and international development. The unfortunate professor is singled out here as emblematic of the veritable sea of think tanks, institutes and academic departments that keep a rotten ship afloat with ceaseless pontifications. Blattman and his academic ilk exist as `chatter `, chatter for the City of London`s Chatham House. Their careers depend upon the continuation of war so that empty soundbites can resonate throughout the Ivory Towers, maintaining a constant chatter about the resolution of global conflicts. Unfortunately for him, a Sierra Leonean national, Kambale Mawa, responded to a written attack he made about the role of the South African private military company, Executive Outcomes, in Sierra Leone.

Mawa responded:

You sir, have no idea what you are talking about.For goodness sake,  ….. You have as much life experience as a potato. You have seen nothing of the world but HBO and MTV, and heard of your cohort’s accolade.

You sir killed my family. You came and cut my father’s hands off, smashed his foot with a truck, and laughed about it. Then while he we were tied to posts my sisters and mother was raped repeated till they bled to death. Then they were burned alive.

You did that sir. I was there and watched you do it. Maybe you had a different face, and skin color – but might as well been you. It was your and your buddies’ words that let the beasts loose. You think you know better.

I will never forget those years I spent in slavery because of you and your ilk. Every day I wake up and do not look into the mirror. I scare little children on the street. You did that to me.

When EO was here, we were safe. They came through; they were real *gentlemen*. You sir, do not have the right to even mention their names without prostrating. Narcissism is an illness. You should have that looked at as it spreads.

Source:

https://eebenbarlowsmilitaryandsecurityblog.blogspot.com/2014/01/telling-it-like-it-is.html

The RUF insurgency originated in Liberia under the since convicted Liberian warlord, Charles Taylor. Taylor was a US intelligence protégé. The Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) admitted to this during his ICC trial. He was part of the coup d’état in 1980 under Samuel Doe that took power from President William Tolbert.

Taylor worked as a government minister under Samuel Doe but was accused of embezzlement of government funds. In 1984 Taylor sought asylum in the USA but having escaped the detention centre where he was being held whilst fighting extradition to Liberia, miraculously escaped the USA and ended up in Libya where he was trained in revolutionary warfare. He would lead a coup against Samuel Doe and wreak havoc on Liberia before becoming president in 1997. He had financial ties with the TV Evangelist Pat Robertson in gold and diamond mining. Robertson defrauded Americans out of millions.

Taylor`s revolutionary methodology terrorized civilians into `political action`. The RUF, under Fodah Sankoh, replicated his `politicization` technique.

image: Charles Taylor with the Khans and Naomi Campbell, welcomed by President Mandela

Some of the RUF were trained in Liberia by South African ex-military personnel under the auspices of training Liberia`s Presidential Guard at a  training base in Gbartala, Bong County, Liberia, which provided training facilities for  internal security organizations, including the unit that provided protection of foreign embassies and sensitive government installations. This was the conduit for the black-market diamond trade to South Africa and elsewhere. Once he became president, Charles Taylor was met with open arms by the International Community, and particularly in South Africa.

 

Africa`s anti-government Jacobin Forces

 

The French Revolution, inspired by its forerunner the American War of Independence of 1776, was hijacked by the City of London and turned into a bloodbath. The forces that London used were the mobs that were manipulated by liberation ideology. The ruthless radicals were known as the Jacobins who took control of the Republic and carried out a reign of terror. Mass killings were conducted in the name of liberty. Their leaders promised equality and freedom to justify their manipulation of political institutions but they controlled through terror.

West Africa`s version of Jacobin revolutionaries sought to form a regional power bloc with Cote D`Ivoire, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Their ambitions were cultivated by the Anglo American network which seeks payment in gold, diamonds and minerals along with the ultimate goal, that of destabilization using the tried and tested City of London-Wall Street tactic of `Gangs and Counter Gangs. Those same forces were behind the `Death of Reason` during the French Revolution.

In 2006, journalist Philippe Diaz produced a classic disinformation documentary called Empire in Africa. Diaz painted the RUF in a favourable light. That he did so is shocking. It continues to mislead audiences.

The documentary is met with disgust and revulsion by Sierra Leoneans who do not see the RUF as ever having been freedom fighters.

The film claims that “the RUF only wanted one thing and that was to claim the riches of the land for its people”.

“The rebels who started the civil war in Sierra Leone 15 years ago wanted only one thing: to reclaim the richness of the country from foreign corporations in order to end the exploitation of its people. In response, the international community decided to wage a war on this country, with bombs, executions, torture, rigged elections and manipulation of the international media. This created one of the worst humanitarian disasters of the 20th century. (Cinema Libre Studio)”

At the same time Empire in Africa was screened at the Cannes Film Festival, Hollywood came out with Blood Diamonds directed by Edward Zwick. Blood Diamonds provided propaganda regarding the role of Executive Outcomes which the film portrays in a very poor light. The characters of `Colonel Coetzee` and `Danny Archer` are both based on Eeben Barlow. The film portrays Barlow and Executive Outcomes as `diamond-crazed , ruthless mercenaries equipped with state of the art air defence. The film portrays the Kamajors as rural fools and Tony Buckingham`s lookalike, Simmons as another diamond-crazed evil doer. As for the journalist, `Maddie Bowen`, the film portrays the media as playing a brave and positive role when in fact with the odd exception, it was the opposite. The South African and Western media lied barefaced about what was going on.

 

Hollywood would also give a `human face` to Victor Bout whose character was played in Lord of War by Nicholas Cage. It was Victor Bout who supplied the East German and Soviet ammunition, arms, and medical supplies to the RUF as he did in Angola.

image: President of Liberia Charles Taylor 1997-2003. source Wikipedia

The RUF made itself known in 1991. It numbered around 15 000 and was comprised of many Liberian rebels trained by Charles Taylor. Foday Sankoh, former corporal of the Sierra Leonean military, was the leader of the RUF within Sierra Leone however Sankoh was a sociopath with minimal intelligence. It was Taylor who gave the orders.

image: sociopath Foday Sankoh, leader of the RUF . source Wikipedia

By 2002 when the war finally ended, between 50 000 – 70 000 civilians had died out of a population of 4.5 million, At least half the population had been displaced and national trauma unleashed by acts of torture on a terrifying scale. The RUF took control of the “riches of the land” early on in the war that being the diamonds fields of Koidu which is in the eastern region, bordering on Liberia.

image: map of Sierra Leone showing Koidu in the east and capital city of Freetown in the south

The Koidu diamond fields were a key source of revenue for the government of Joseph Momoh. Mining of Sierra Leone`s very large alluvial diamonds was conducted under the National Diamond Mining Corporation and was the largest source of revenue. Due to mismanagement and the shrinking economy, the once mostly legal diamond industry degenerated further and further into the black-market trade.   Unable to pay for the machinery of State, President Momoh was ousted in a bloodless military coup in 1992 led by his disgruntled and unpaid army, the RSLMF (Republic of Sierra Leone Military Force) . Captain Valentine Strasser took office after the coup. He was a 25 year old and had not wished for the role. The military had wanted to air their grievances rather than initiate a coup. Strasser was president until 1996.

The new government under President Strasser undertook to seriously wipe out the RUF which by 1994 had gained in strength occupying the eastern region thus restricting trade and safe movement from Freetown and to the Liberian border. The legal diamond trade as well as the rest of the domestic economy was grinding to a halt with RUF ambushes regularly attacking the roads and ever increasing widespread atrocities on civilians. By January 1995 the RUF were 30 km from Freetown on the point of over running the main Sierra Leone military training camp of Benguema. ECOMOG, the military peace-keeping deployment of ECOWAS (Economic Community of West Africa) had began assisting the Sierra Leonean military in 1994. ECOMOG was mostly comprised of Nigerian forces. Despite the assistance of ECOMOG, it was obvious that the RUF were about to take control of the country.

The British sent out a private military company called the Gurkha Security Guards Limited under command of former and well respected Rhodesian SAS operator, Lt Col. Robert MacKenzie with the mission to train the Sierra Leonean army command. During an operation soon after, Lt Col MacKenzie and a number of his force were killed by the RUF. Their bodies have never been recovered and their fate was mostly likely that they were eaten by the RUF given their cannibalistic practices.

Freetown, capital of Sierra Leone had been up until then a popular holiday destination for Europeans as it has beautiful beaches and a pleasant, if humid, climate but by 1995 everyone who could leave had left. With a mounting sense of dread, Sierra Leoneans were facing hunger, mass displacement and chronic fear of what would happen should the country be run by such an acutely barbaric force.

Sierra Leone`s infrastructure, state apparatus and education was on a par with Britain`s when colonialism ended. First Prime Minister Milton Margai led the country to peaceful independence in 1961. After his death only 3 years later, successive governments launched the state on a downward spiral.

 

South African PMC Contracted

Background to Executive Outcomes

Executive Outcomes was founded by Eeben Barlow, a Zambian born South African national who served in the 32 Battalion Reconnaissance Wing of the South African Defence Force. After 1994 and the end of Apartheid the military was scaled down. Hundreds of men, both black and white from the South African Defence Force found themselves with uncertain futures and no employment. Barlow`s founding idea of Executive Outcomes was to provide employment for retrenched servicemen doing what they were exceptionally good at – counter insurgency. Within their mandate, EO would work only for legitimate governments in supplying training to their armed forces, undertaking hostage rescues, countering insurgencies and ending civil wars.

Africa`s first private military company would prove far too effective in conflict resolution, far too inexpensive compared to United Nations Peace Keeping operations and within a few years it posed a formidable threat to the powers that be in our world who clearly profit from a destabilized African continent. The company would be slandered and its name dragged through the dirt with allegations made against its members created out of lies, on a shocking level. The lies largely played the racism card as the world had been propagandized into viewing white South Africans as less human. The media ignored the reality that EO had Angolans and black South Africans in its ranks selected on merit not to fulfill any diversity target!

The members of EO, contrary to the lies reported of atrocities against civilians, went way beyond any call of duty in alleviating the suffering of communities in Angola and Sierra Leone in supplying water sanitation and very large amounts of medical supplies at their own expense. In Sierra Leone they delivered that many orphaned and maimed children into the hands of the church and local orphanages that the Papacy of Rome wrote to them and thanked them. They were later asked to stop bringing the children in as facilities in Freetown were overwhelmed, so much for the behaviour of cruel, ruthless mercenaries.

image: EO attack helicopter pilot Neil Ellis “Gunship Ace” singlehandedly kept RUF from Freetown after EO team forced to leave. source; Wikipedia

When the company was made to leave Sierra Leone in 1997 one of its pilots, Neil Ellis, opted to resign from EO and remain working for the beleaguered Sierra Leonean forces. He continued flying the attack helicopter for a year without pay. If it were not for his actions, the RUF would have been able to slaughter its way through Freetown at will. When asked why he stayed he replied – “because I like these people.”

For those who were saved by, experienced working alongside and know about this company, respect and admiration remain to this day. The company`s founder, Eeben Barlow, having resigned and EO having closed its doors due to insurmountable external pressure, continued his work but as the Chairman of the international security company STTEP. Under his command Boko Haram were all but defeated in Nigeria in 2015 when the incoming president cancelled their contract and Joseph Kony`s LRA (Lord’s Resistance Army ) that terrorized Central Africa were on the point of being neutralized when the financer of the mission was forced to stop the funding.

continued in Part 2

on Qatar Peace Deal and Ceasefire between DRC and M23

Angola, British Financial Empire, Current African News, DRC, EO, Rwanda, Sierra Leone,

re posted from                        EEBEN BARLOW `S MILITARY AND SECURITY BLOG

DO CEASEFIRES PROLONG WARS IN AFRICA?

by Eeben Barlow,
December 5, 2008

War is an ugly, brutal and bloody business – as any soldier can testify. Despite the ugliness and destruction a war causes – along with the collateral damage – it does have a desirable outcome: it ultimately leads to the resolution of an armed conflict and thus, in due course, brings about peace.

But, war is simply a continuation of politics, albeit politics that have gone very wrong. However, when the situation deteriorates to the extent that a nation enters into a war, beit cross-border or localised, it ought to have one final aim: the complete and total destruction of the enemy. This defeat can be brought about either through total exhaustion of the opposing forces or their total destruction on the battlefield. To achieve this, the political leaders and the government need determination and courage to see the conflict through to its final conclusion.

By prematurely interrupting a war with a ceasefire (and the usual follow-on of UN peacekeepers) only gives the opposing force an opportunity to recover its losses, re-arm, re-strategise and then simply continue the war again. (Examples of such occurrences are Angola, Sierra Leone, DRC and such). Furthermore, an internationally imposed ceasefire does not allow the antagonised government to negotiate from a position of strength – a position that is vital to secure a lasting peace. It merely puts a lid on the pot and allows it to continue simmering, usually with tragic results.

The ceasefire also gives credibility to the opposing forces as they are formally recognised and given a sympathy they do not always deserve. Therefore, a ceasefire invariably prolongs the conflict instead of ending it. Peace, on the other hand, can only take root once a war has run its course and been finalised by one of the warring parties. (Hence the comment I made back in 1994 – there can be no peacekeeping if there is no peace).

For that simple reason, the foremost principle of war is “the selection and maintenance of the aim”. The primary aim of war is to achieve a decisive victory over the opposing force – militarily, economically and politically. The opposing force cannot be allowed to believe that they may just win the conflict and therefore its will to fight must be destroyed as well. But when the aim is poorly formulated or selected to be politically correct, disaster is inevitable. Without achieving the aim, the government is unable to negotiate a sustained peace. But, when politicians meddle with the plans of battle and dictate military strategy and tactics, the commanders are usually unable to achieve the aim.

For a government’s military machine to achieve the aim requires – apart from a well-trained, disciplined and well-led force – lightning-strikes on enemy rear-areas and logistical supply lines, destruction of enemy training bases, decisive battlefield confrontations on ground of its choosing, maximum use of the air weapon, skilful propaganda, good intelligence and more. For all of the criticisms levelled at governments engaged in armed conflict, the truth is that they do want to end it as soon as possible, for a host of reasons, but often don’t have skills or the resources. But, war is good for some corporations and organisations, especially some of those involved in resource exploitation and “humanitarian” work. In Africa, wars are often started due to international meddling and corporate greed.

When a ceasefire is imposed by outside parties such as the UN, EU, AU and so forth, it prevents the government that is protecting its territorial and political integrity from achieving its aim. A ceasefire, additionally, merely protects the opposing side from the consequences of its action of starting the conflict. It furthermore gives breathing space to the opposing force and thereby legitimises its actions. Taken a step further, it gives major corporations access to areas where profit maximisation can take place – as instability allows them to buy products/resources cheaply and sell those products/resources at grossly inflated profit margins with minimum input costs.

Africa is littered with examples where ceasefires have simply prolonged the conflicts and added to the misery of those caught up in the conflict. Along with the ceasefire usually comes a large, ineffective, money-eating UN peacekeeping force. Their book of success in especially Africa is very, very slim indeed.

The arrival of so-called peacekeepers simply compounds the problem as the local population develop a false sense of security – and instead of fleeing the combat zone, they actually remain there, believing the peacekeepers will protect them… a big mistake as witnessed in Rwanda, Bosnia, DRC and elsewhere. Furthermore, the ability of the UN’s peacekeepers to switch support from one side to another in order to refrain from having to take any decisive action leads to the local population’s distrust and dislike towards them. The frequent stoning of UN convoys by the locals in the DRC is illustrative of this statement.

A too early ceasefire not only creates uncertainty and it invariably leads to a rapid escalation in crime – usually violent in nature. With no effective policing in place, this leads to the brutalisation of the local population who are mainly innocent bystanders. But the ceasefire is also a source for fresh fighters. In Africa, this has resulted in the forced recruitment of children as young as 8-years old to take sides with the warring parties. The trauma of these child-soldiers is not something that will disappear within a year or two.

Trailing behind the peacekeepers are some (not all) NGOs whose sole aim is to perpetuate themselves by using the media to give their organisations credibility and visibility and thus attract donations and other forms of funding. (Despite the claims, I have yet to meet a member of an NGO who worked for no salary). The camps these NGOs establish for the refugees fleeing the area are very often strategically placed to ensure maximum media access and coverage to ensure that the world is kept abreast of their good work. But more than often these camps are a breeding ground for resentment and hatred – and thus become a ready source for more fighters, to say nothing of anger, disease and squalor.

Many NGOs have also been known to provide support to the warring factions on both sides, thus again simply prolonging the conflict. Their reason for serving both sides is often the claim that they cannot be singled out by one side as favouring another. Thus, all are welcome at their table. Whereas their support to the displaced persons is indeed noble to the uninitiated, their too-early insertion into a conflict zone serves no positive role and indeed becomes another cog in the logistical supply line of the warring parties.

But the truth is that some NGOs benefit from war and benefit even more from ceasefires. In fact, they call for ceasefires in order to fill their financial coffers – as does the UN and its peacekeepers. Without ceasefires, the UN’s peacekeepers would have no cause for existence. In fact, they won’t make money. The longer the ceasefire continues, the more money the peacekeepers make. Small wonder they want ceasefires to continue for years. The media “strategists” are of course keen to propagate the ceasefire and thus aid and abet the opposing force, sometimes unwittingly and so, invariably, the media reporting becomes subjective – even more so when the media becomes the mouthpiece of the rebel forces.

Ceasefires are good for business. If there were no ceasefires, there would be no need for the massive but ineffectual UN peacekeeping efforts and the billions of dollars required to sustain them. Nor would there be a requirement for some of the NGOs that trail in their wake. Likewise, several corporations would be denied access to “cheap” resources.

Whereas ceasefires may be good for business, they are bad for governments engaged in wars as the government is denied the opportunity to achieve the fundamental aim of war. Instead, the problem simply continues to simmer and boil below the surface until it eventually erupts into war again.

Source:

Neocolonialism in Africa : Covert Action Africa Webinar

African High Speed Railway, Angola, British Financial Empire, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, DRC, EO, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Zambia, ,

American Neocolonialism in Africa : Covert Action Africa Webinar

Featuring : Dr Jean-Marie Vianney Higiro, Ann Garrison, Milton Allimadi, Lawrence Freeman, Jeremy Kuzmarov and PD Lawton

I had the pleasure of joining this excellent Africa webinar hosted by Jeremy Kuzmarov of Covert Action Magazine. Due to technical errors my part of the discussion and the first segment of Dr Jean-Marie Vianney Higiro was not recorded. I spoke on the topic of The Right to Wage War in which I covered the role of the United Nations Peace Keeping Department and how it perpetuates war in Africa. I spoke about what has been done to General Eeben Barlow and his private military company Executive Outcomes and how every effort has been made to hinder and halt the company`s efforts to restore peace, stability and law and order, as written about in 2 recently published books by General Eeben Barlow : Executive Outcomes, Against All Odds and The War For Africa , Conflict, Crime, Corruption and Foreign Interests.

20 Sept 2025

 

USAID in Africa

Angola, British Financial Empire, Central African Republic, Chad, Current African News, DRC, EO, History Modern, Sierra Leone, South Africa,

The career of Major General Eeben Barlow and the private military company he founded, Executive Outcomes, is the story of Africa`s battle for sovereignty, peace and progress against the monolith of USAID and malign intent from the Western Rules Based Order

Executive Outcomes -Against All Odds

by Eeben Barlow

The War for Africa – Conflict, Crime, Corruption & Foreign Interests

by Eeben Barlow

available HERE