optional bonus e1.b
MG
Professor O'Connell
English 101
26 March 2010
After watching Ishmael Beah speak, one’s opinion has strongly
changed from thinking that all individuals involved in genocide should
be annihilated.In his book, Goldhagen states that the United Nations
as it is structured presently, is of very little use when it comes to
the issue of the solution to genocide. The Truth and Reconciliation
Commission Report is much more humanitarian and gentle in its approach
but is still not very effective.
Middle ground is where true and effective solutions can come forth.
Take for example the question of whether or not the problem of
political Islam is as great a threat as Goldhagen proposes it to be.
Is political islam a true threat that should be addressed in the most
serious manner? The answer is an overwhelming yes.
It is Noam Chomsky who needs a political wake up call. The issue
behind the Middle East Conflict is not the west as one tends to think.
Here is how extremist religion comes into play with politics in the
Middle East. The majority of everyday people in the Middle East are
poverty stricken. Unemployment is high and political power runs in the
hands of corrupt governments that keep their people from uprising
against them by brainwashing them with radical Islamic ideas (through
the media, schools, mosques, etc). Why? Merely because these
governments want their people occupied with ideas other than that of
actually seeking freedom and a just government.
A society where children are nursed ideas that the West is the
greatest of infidels and radical Islam should rule in order to attain
more pleasant lives, breeds terrorists. Instead of triggering their
anger at their unfair governments, these people trigger their anger at
the “infidels”.
Now imagine a society like this in almost every Middle Eastern
country. That is millions of angry people that think the West should
be destroyed.
We must bring back our attention though to the main question that
lurks in our minds regarding genocide: How do we deal with genocide?
Individuals like Ishael Beah shed light on the fact that not
everyone involved in genocide is a psychopathic, conscienceless
monster. One must understand that the victims are sometimes the
perpetrators of the heinous
acts themselves. Sure they may have pulled the trigger or stabbed the
knife, but that does not tell us what forced them to. Ishmael was a
child who had no one left in his life. His need as a child for a
family made him meddle with people who took advantage of his fear and
hopelessness.
When dealing with genocide, one must listen to both the TRC and
Goldhagen. It is people behind the hateful ideologies and extreme
political agendas that should be annihilated. Innocent people like
Beah should be spared because they are indeed victims themselves. Self
defense , justice, and mercy is the way to protect innocents from
being slaughtered while at the same time standing up against those who
crave the blood of millions of innocent people.
Works cited
Bordersmedia.com. Ishmael Beah, 2008. Web. 25 Mar. 2010. <http://
www.bordersmedia.com/liveat01/beah>.
Unicef.org. Unicef.org, 2004. Web. 25 Mar. 2010. <http://
www.unicef.org/infobycountry/files/TRCCF9SeptFINAL.pdf>.
Chomsky.info. Islamica Magazine, April & May 2007. Web. 25 Mar. 2010.
<http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/200704--.htm>.
Rosemarie J.
Rosemarie Johnson
Professor E. O’Connell / English 101, Class 3226
March 26, 2010
A Truth and Reconciliation is a worldwide pacifist institution set up
to inquire into past wrong doing by a government or non-state actors.
The object of such a commission is basically restorative justice.
Both sides to an inter or intra state conflict testify before the
commission to the truth of the cause of the conflict as they perceived
it. Victims relate their stories thereby obtaining a measure of
relief in forgiving those who abused them. The end result is closure,
reconciliation and reparations, the prevention of revisionist
accounts, and the assurance that such a conflict will never again re-
occur. As an adjunct to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission
Sierra Leone, a special child-friendly commission was convened to
address the abuses child victims suffered, and to hear testimony of
child-soldiers, abducted and forced to commit atrocities by the
Revolutionary United Front (RUF). Special sensitivity was given to
girls forced into sexual slavery, child amputees, and child soldiers
desensitized by drugs and alcohol. The TRC’s avowed purpose in
including children into the healing process was to ensure that an
otherwise lost generation would receive reparations, counseling,
medical, psychological, and rehabilitative services, and ultimately,
reintegration into a society already decimated by a brutal civil war.
Sierra Leone, recognizing that its children are its future, empowered
the children of war by acknowledging their suffering and entrusting
them with the task of providing a pathway to a lasting peace. Despite
the drawbacks of Sierra Leone’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission,
the child friendly commission drew attention to the atrocities
suffered by children in war, and the global problem of child soldiers
which is at its worst in Africa.
Sierra Leone proved Goldhagen wrong when he said that a state does
not have the will or competence to try leaders of mass atrocities.
Although Sierra Leone’s Special Court was forced to relinquish Charles
Taylor, former President of Liberia, and the mastermind of the RUF, to
the International Criminal Court, Sierra Leone’s Special Court found
three men from the rebel Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC)
guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other serious
violations of international law, including the recruitment of children
under the age of 15 years into the armed forces. The Special Court
became the first ever UN backed tribunal to deliver a guilty verdict
for the military conscription of children. With all its good
intentions of bringing diverse points of view to reconciliation
through forgiveness, Amnesty International reports that to date,
Sierra Leone’s victims have received only $100 each in reparation. A
sustained and vigilant effort is necessary to address the problems of
drug addiction, prostitution and the need for age-appropriate
prosthetic devices for amputees. Amnesty International also reports
that child soldiers suffer disproportionately from Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder and many harbor a desire for revenge. There is also
the problem of training former child soldiers to sustain themselves
economically in a country that has few jobs to meet their skills.
This leaves Sierra Leone with a generation of young adults still
bearing the open and latent scars of war, disaffected and vulnerable
to another conflict.
The effectiveness of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission lies in
the character of the persons who initiate it, and the nature of the
conflict to be resolved. President Nelson Mandela and former
President de Klerk produced a model TRC in post-apartheid South
Africa. Because the conflict had been largely political, amnesty was
granted to over 500 perpetrators, and to the chagrin of the native
people, who saw the TRC as “white man’s justice,” there were no
criminal prosecutions. TRCs have been criticized for their emphasis
on restorative as opposed to retributive justice. This is seen as the
inherent weakness of a pacifist institution held after hostilities
have ceased. They do not prevent or intervene in hostilities but they
may serve as deterrence by drawing attention to the character and
extent of hostilities, and the targeting of states for their mineral
resources. Whereas Goldhagen advocates impractical and drastic
measures, and would probably have dealt harshly with child soldiers, a
Truth and Reconciliation Commission may encourage states to submit
their disputes to the International Court of Justice for mediation,
non-binding arbitration or adjudication. Unfortunately, as the United
States does not recognize the ICJ, it will be left to smaller states
like Sierra Leone to take the initiative.
The United Nations first indentified the use of diamonds as a funding
for war in various African states. In 2000, the UN accused Charles
Taylor, the Liberian President of using diamonds mined by children in
the neighboring state of Sierra Leone to pay for his expansionist and
eliminationist plans in the region. In May, 2000, the United Nations
Security Council Resolution 1295 and the diamond producing countries
of southern Africa met in Kimberley, South Africa to formulate a plan
to curtail the sale of “blood diamonds” and to assure that buyers of
diamonds bought only those certified by the Kimberley Process as not
having contributed to the regional conflict. This while not a direct
result of Sierra Leone’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is a
welcome acknowledgement of the corruption that led to a Sierra Leone’s
devastating conflict. By seriously limiting the use of Africa’s
mineral resources available to dictators and terrorists alike, a
version of Goldhagen’s policy of deterrence has been set in place.
The problem of child soldiers was addressed by the H. Con. Res. 62
(6/15/99) which condemned the AFRC and RUF for their abduction of
children, forcibly providing them with military training, and placing
them on the frontline during military excursion. In passing the
resolution, the plight of Sierra Leone’s people was documented for
posterity, the guilty condemned, and those who rendered aid
commended. Perhaps, posterity will view Sierra Leone’s Truth and
Reconciliation Commission and its child-friendly commission as a
turning point in the resolution of hostilities from their inception,
rather than after hostilities have been suspended or ended.
President Obama on Israel-Palestine Conflict
During his campaign, President Obama in referring to the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict stated that “if missiles are falling where my two
daughters sleep, I would do everything in order to stop that.” This
campaign rhetoric has not changed President Obama’s policy of deceit
towards the Palestinian children being butchered by US arms, Noam
Chomsky claims. President Obama utters empty words designed to
maintain the official US position of resorting to platitudes to
conceal its 30 year old policy of blocking the Arab League’s peace
initiative of a two-state settlement, long a matter of international
consensus. President Obama and his advisors know that there will
never be peace in the Mideast unless there is a peaceful political
settlement which allows Palestinians full autonomy. In the meantime,
Ariel Sharon, the chief architect of Palestinian oppression continues
the US backed actions in the occupied territories: taking over
valuable land and resources and constructing what Sharon called
“Bantustans” for Palestinians. As usual, iIn December 2008, the US and
Israel voted against a resolution supporting “the right of the
Palestinian people self-determination.” The US and Israel opposed the
resolution with evasive pretexts. Meanwhile, President Obama’s
promise, “I will sustain an active commitment to seek two states
living side by side in peace and security” has yet to show any sign of
fulfillment. The US continues to supply Israel with arms, justifying
its actions on Israel’s right to defend itself. For a state to defend
itself by force there must be no alternative peaceful resolutions.
This, of course, will never happen: neither Israel nor the US
recognizes international arbitration. As Israel is our only “friend”
and the only democracy in the Mideast, it remains to be seen what that
friendship entails. During Desert Storm, critically wounded US
soldiers could not be taken to an Israeli hospital for fear that
Israel would be subject to repercussions. Since Chomsky wrote his
article, Israel has shocked the international community by beginning
construction of 1,600 luxury apartments in East Jerusalem, which
Palestine claims as its capital. President Obama and Secretary of
State, Hilary Clinton, have voiced weak protests which have been
countered by a wealthy American Jew named Moskowitz’s offer to finance
additional luxury apartments of which Israel hypocritically promises
the Palestinians 16 units. Friendship implies give and take: the US
which is run by a pro-Israel lobby continually gives, and Israel, the
perennial victim goes on taking. The American people, caught between
Israel’s intransigence and President Obama’s weakness are exposed to
pro-Palestinian threats of terrorism. Goldhagen glosses over the
Palestinian question and Israel’s role in killing women and children,
yet he quibbles about the term genocide and how many have to be killed
to constitute the crime of genocide. For someone who is quick to
indict others and liberal in his demands for reparation, Goldhagen
belongs beside Sharon and Netanyahu in the same gallery of hypocrites.
Religion and Politics
“Political Islam is today’s most dangerous eliminationist political
movement…” Goldhagen claims. This explains Israel’s concern with the
ever present threat of Hamas which came to power in Gaza in 2006.
Chomsky does not believe that religion plays a fundamental role in
politics. Chomsky is more concerned with the abuse of religion as a
political tool. “Religious loyalties may continue to run deep, but
its influence on political goals may still be somewhat ambiguous.”
The major problems of the world, Chomsky claims, are those that appear
in the most powerful states such as the US, which also happens to be
one of the most fundamental countries in the world. “Extremist
fundamental religion may well have a greater hold in the US on the
public than a state like Iran,” Chomsky asserts. We scoff at the
outrageous beliefs of fundamental Islam, and cringe at the fundamental
religious war ethics of Judaism, but a US President cannot be elected
without the blessing of a Television evangelist who subscribes to the
idea that the world was created 6,000 years ago. Pat Robertson’s
assertion that someone should assassinate Hugo Chavez would meet with
Goldhagen’s approval, yet fundamentalism wherever it occurs is a
dangerous concept that depends on fanatics to maintain its existence.
Religious revivalism characterized the Cold War Era, when in answer to
Godless Communism, the US included “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance
and the phrase “In God We Trust.” When liberation theology took root
in Central America with the intention of helping the poor and
disenfranchised, US soldiers quashed the movement, and the Catholic
Church condemned what they saw as a Communist inspired insurrection.
Liberation theology, like Hamas and Hezbollah shared the same goals,
to help the poor. It is notable that in times of economic downturn,
religion becomes the opiate of the people. None of the three
monotheist religions escapes Chomsky’s criticism. The US attitude
towards the Islamic world has always been one of accommodation. The
oldest and most valued ally of the US is the extremist state of Saudi
Arabia, yet the future does not embody what Goldhagen sees as an
Islamic scourge. The real problem is the underlying secular
nationalism that has yet to be addressed. Chomsky does not see Iran
as a greater threat than US politics would have us believe. The US
created the quest for nuclear energy in Iran in order to conserve
Iran’s use of oil. Now that Iran is developing nuclear power, it is
condemned by the US and Israel as a threat to Israel’s existence. The
underlying cause of Political Islam’s agenda is much the same as the
Palestinian’s desire for a homeland. Religion as a smoke-screen for
political and ethnic purposes began when “the first knave met the
first fool.” There is no reason to believe that Israel will ever
concede territory to the Palestinians, and even less reason to believe
that the US will abandon its weather-vane politics.
Alternative Opinion
Little attention has been paid to Charles Taylor, former President of
Liberia as the architect and controlling force behind Sierra Leone’s
Revolutionary United Front (RUF), which was financed by Sierra Leone’s
diamonds mined by children, and manned by children induced by cocaine
and alcohol to commit mass atrocities. Taylor, once one of the most
feared war-lords in Africa, contradicts Goldhagen’s claim that people
do not act out of a desire for gain or that they are not motivated by
a Conradian “heart of darkness.” Taylor had no particularly ideology
other than a lust for power and wealth. To achieve loyalty, born of
fear, Taylor and his followers practiced cannibalism and the
ritualistic drinking of human blood. When Taylor was captured in the
neighboring state of Nigeria, although there was a bounty on his head,
he was immune from extra-judicial execution. Nigeria would not
extradite Taylor to Sierra Leone because there was no extradition
treaty between the two states. It was only President Bush’s visit to
Nigeria that persuaded Nigeria’s President to allow Taylor to be air-
lifted to Freetown, Sierra Leone. Before the Special Court of Sierra
Leone could try Taylor, he was able to marshal 20,000 loyal soldiers
willing to restore him to power in Liberia. Sierra Leone, fearing an
insurrection, requested the International Criminal Court at the Hague
to assume jurisdiction. This court which Goldhagen describes as
bankrupt, will sentence Taylor sometime this year to eleven life
sentences on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
“Intent” is not a prerequisite to a conviction: “Intent” can be
inferred by a consistent pattern of such activity. Britain passed a
special resolution to permit Taylor’s incarceration in the United
Kingdom. Taylor’s case is an outstanding example of the impractical
nature of Goldhagen’s answers to ending the rule of dictators. It
also shows how international organizations can intervene when they are
requested to do so. Without the cooperation of the United Nations,
the International Criminal Court, President Bush and Great Britain
Charles Taylor would have escaped justice. Taylor exemplifies Aaron
in Titus Andronicus. Even today he is unrepentant. (Act V.3, lines
189-190)
“If one good deed in all my life I did,
I do repent it from my very soul.”
References
Staff. (2010). Amnesty International USA. About Child Soldiers.
Retrieved March 23, 2010 from
http://www.amnestyusa.org/children/child-soldiers/about-child-soldiers/page.do?id=1021176
Staff. (2004, July 9). Anti-Defamation League
The International Court of Justice and Israel’s Security Fence
Decision Dismisses Israel’s Arguments, Accepts Palestinian Claims
Without Reservation
Retrieved March 24, 2010 from
http://www.adl.org/Israel/court_of_justice.asp
Chomsky, N. (2009, January 24). Chomsky.Info
Obama on Israel-Palestine
Retrieved March 23, 2010 from
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20090124.htm
Staff. (2010, March). Coalition To Stop the Use of Child Soldiers
Why Children Join
Retrieved March 21, 2010 from
http://www.child-soldiers.org/childsoldiers/why-children-join
Associated Press. (2009, July 14). Guardian.co.uk
Why is Charles Taylor being tried?
Retrieved March 20, 2010 from
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/14/charles-taylor-liberia-faq-war-crimes
Press Release. (2004, July 9). International Court of Justice.
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied
Palestinian Territory.
Retrieved March 24, 2010 from
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pr=71&code=mwp&p1=3&p2=4&p3=6&case=131&k=5a
Chaudary, A. (2007, April-May) Islamica Magazine, Issue 19
On Religion and Politics, Noam Chomsky Interviewed by Amina Chaudary
Retrieved March 23, 2010 from
http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/200704--.htm
Shakespeare. (2000) Edited by Russ McDonald, The Pelican Shakespeare,
Penguin Books, The Penguin Group
Act V.3 p 106, lines 188-190
Payne, D.M. Rep. (1999, February 11). Thomas Library of Congress
H. Res 62, Expressing concern over the escalating violence, the gross
violations of human rights, and the ongoing attempts to overthrow a
democratically elected government in Sierra Leone. (Introduced in
House)
Retrieve March 25, 2010 from
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c106:1:./temp/~c106Tw4J4k:
University of Michigan. (1998, September 12). Science News, Science
Daily
Study of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission
Retrieved March 23, 2010 from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/980912112125.htm
Staff. (2004, October 27). UNICEF
At a glance: Sierra Leone
Retrieved March 25, 2010 from
http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/sierraleone_23937.html
Staff (2010 March) UNICEF
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report for the Children of Sierra
Leone
Child-Friendly version 2004
Retrieved March 21, 2010 from
http://www.unicef.org/voy/explore/rights/explore_1520.html
Staff. (2002, November). United States Institute of Peace
Truth Commission: Sierra Leone
Retrieved March 23, 2010 from
http://www.usip.org/resources/truth-commission-sierra-leone
> Bordersmedia.com. Ishmael Beah, 2008. Web. 25 Mar. 2010. <http://www.bordersmedia.com/liveat01/beah>.
>
> Unicef.org. Unicef.org, 2004. Web. 25 Mar. 2010. <http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/files/TRCCF9SeptFINAL.pdf>.
Jiwon Nam
English 101
#0143
Prof. O'Connell
“Worse than War” by Daniel J. Goldhagen describes the political Islam
and suggests its potential toward eliminationism at chapter 10. Noam
Chomsky’s interview with Amina Chaudary on “Religion and Politics”
expresses concern for the abuse of the powerful countries that lies
before the complex relationship of politic and religion. Chomsky
claims that Christians by imperial power of Christianity were the
most
violent actors of all religions, but it is incorrect because there is
no correlation that can prove that Christianity led those Christians
to act violently. Chomsky also state that US has intervened the wars
of two Islamic countries just for its own benefit to gain power, and
that Hamas and Hezbollah are declared to be enemies because they work
for the poor. These statements are not correct, because US intervened
the Islamic war that were going on for years to stop the destruction
of the both countries and also the surrounding countries that
continued to participate more and more. US helped to stop the war
which was resulting in too many people’s deaths and injuries. Also,
Hamas and Hezbollah have a dangerous belief that leads to
extermination and expulsion of nonbelievers, that will late result as
an act of elimination. This is the reason why they are declared to be
enemies, not because they were standing up for the poor. The
alternative statement represented is to enhance the supervision over
political Islam as they have potential threats leading to
elimination.
Political Islam possesses desire to exterminate all infidels as they
publicly demonizes nonbelievers. Their belief of death even endangers
humanity with potential threat of terrorism. The alternative opinion
is also supported by Goldhagen at ‘Worse than War’ as he mentions the
provision traits political Islam has toward elimination.
Noam Chomsky states, “Christianity… happens to be the religion
of the
major imperial powers. By far the greatest power and means of
violence
in the world happen to be in the Christian states.” This is wrong
because there might have been some complex violence present among or
by Christians, but there is no correlation that the religion of
Christianity led to great means of violence. Also, Noam Chomsky fails
to present any logic or proof for that statement, but is merely
stating the fact which he believes is right. Chomsky also states,
“And
the U.S. actually joined the Iraqi war against Iran, in fact entering
it so completely that when Iran capitulated, it was because the U.S.
had entered the war. Well it was one Islamic state against another
Islamic state – the U.S. ally happened to be a secular Islamic
state.”
This statement is incorrect because the US did not intrude the war to
take power over the situation as it is being described in the
interview. The war between those two Islamic states was going on for
8
years, developing in to a field of biochemical weapon. Millions of
people were dying, the war was expanding itself internationally as
more surrounding countries were being involved, and both countries’
economic state was devastated. That is when at 1988, UN decided to
step up to negotiate Iran and Iraq to an armistice agreement. Noam
Chomsky explains, “This is the same reason why Hamas and Hezbollah
are
enemies: they are working for the poor. It doesn’t matter if they are
Catholic or Muslim or anything else; that is intolerable.” This
explanation is incorrect because the US did not claimed Hamas and
Hezbollah as enemies and as terrorists for them working for the poor.
Hamas and Hezbollah don’t approve Israel, believe that western
colonists should be deported from their territory, and want the
destruction of Israel with the rise of the Kingdom of Islam Empire.
These are some aspects that could lead to act of elimination in the
future.
The alternative opinion being represented is that the movement
of
political Islam should be closely supervised as it contains potential
risks toward humanity. Public demonization of ‘infidels’ leads ways
to
the expulsion and the extermination of the people who don’t share the
same beliefs as they do. Those beliefs thought by Quran, justifies
their desire to annihilate all other infidels. Moreover, their
beliefs
of death allow the terrorists act that result in mass murder. Willing
to blow themselves up and believing it is the pathway to the greater
glory enables political Islam to commit actions that frightens the
whole world. This alternative opinion is supported by Goldhagen as he
states, “Political Islam is currently the one expressly, publicly,
and
unabashedly genocidal major political movement.” Therefore, political
Islam should be under great supervision so they could take no further
steps to act out elimination on other unbelievers.
Work cited
Goldhagen, D.J. Worse Than War. 2009.
Noam Chomsky interviewed by Amina Chaudary On Religion and Politics
on
Islamica Magazine
(http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/200704--.htm)
> Chomsky does not believe that religion plays a ...
>
> read more »
patrick d
#3226
E.1 Bonus
Daniel Goldhagen, calls on to anyone to kill agents of genocide and
mass murderers. He believes that the death of genocide leaders will
put a halt to the mass murders. His idea of resolution is vengeance,
however peace cannot be resolved with another person’s murder. Coming
from war-stricken Sierra Leone, Ishmael Beah believes that war cannot
be resolved in the battlefield. It is amazing how Ishmael , a former
child warrior, conveys to the world his stand on war. He lets us see,
through his eyes, his hands-on-experience in the battlefield, the
desolation war cause people, and the many lives shattered by it. He
calls out for peace. Not even soldiers fighting at war for peace can
be an excuse. As Ishmael said, “the whole idea of fighting for peace
is an oxymoron.” If we’re fighting for peace, we’re killing the peace
immediately.” In any war, it doesn’t matter what idea you are
fighting for, it becomes your life or the other person’s life. I don’t
think we can achieve peace through that…if anything it just separates
us more and more.” ( Beah ) .
Daniel Goldhagen finds the United Nations an ineffective
international community in preventing genocide. He finds shortcomings
in the international community’s promise and pathologies in the
progress of cessating mass murders to occur. His view on the matter
can be contrasted in the case of Sierra Leone’s resolution on
war.Sierra Leone formed the “Truth and Reconciliation Commission to
let people tell the events of war, record their tales, and recommend
specific steps to help people recover”.( Truth ) This commission
served as an outlet of peace, reconciliation and resolution in letting
the people of Sierra Leone, through the children, help the country
find peace. The formation of the commission helped Sierra Leone, be
the country that it is now.
In the latter part of Daniel Goldhagen’s book, Worse than War, he
points out that“ a serious international prevention, intervention and
punishment to stop mass murderers and eliminationists states and
leaders from warring on their people and humanity, and a devoted
international push for democratizing more countries to remove the
institutional, political and cultural basis for political leaders to
even see eliminationist politics as an option as the basis for a more
sure, more global structure that would greatly end eliminationist
politics’ mass violence and vast destructiveness.” ( Goldhagen p, 597)
In this statement, Goldhagen’s take on preventing elimination and mass
murderers soften. As previously stated, he supports the killing of
genocide agents, however if the international community comes through
to their promise, and if the proposition of more democratic countries
flourish, he envisions a more stable, less destructive society.
Works Cited:
Beah, Ishmael. “ A Long Way Gone.” Borders. Borders Media. Web. 25
Mar. 2010.
<http:// www.bordersmedia.com/liveat01/beah>.
Goldhagen, Daniel. Worse than War: Genocide, Eliminationism, and the
Ongoing Assault
on Humanity. Public Affairs, 2009.
“ Truth and Reconciliation Report for the Children of Sierra Leone.”
Unicef. Unicef.org,