re: thoughts on avm/mnut Turner handled the interview poorly in...

re: thoughts on avm/mnut Turner handled the interview poorly in my view. Straight off the bat he was caught lying on camera with regard to Mwanke's involvement in Anvil; and he then decided to reverse himself when, presumably, he realised that Ms Loane knew more about the situation than he first thought.

Overall he was highly evasive and reticent in answering even the most basic questions regarding his knowledge of what happened during that particular time. After continual prodding some specific details were reluctantly divulged, but this merely painted the picture that he does know much more about the whole incident than he is willing to tell.

However, the most damage would be done by his indifferent bordering on apathetic attitude to what happened, namely that the Congolese Army used Anvil's (his company's) assets to carry out breaches of Human Rights Law, numerous treaties on the law of armed conflict, and at a basic level the Geneva Convention. It is this attitude and performance that, in my opinion, draws unecessary heat to the company, and may further spur on an action from the human rights lawyers.

Fair enough the company certainly had had no intention, and probably no knowledge, of what was about to occur but the interesting question is now: What will the company do if something like this happens again and the Congolese Army requests Anvil assets for use in its operations. Will the company say no? Will it impose caveats? Given the practicalities and remoteness of the operation at Dikulushi, the use of Anvil assets is understable. There are no other planes or large people carriers in the vicinity, but that excuses nothing here.

Will this disgrace manifestly affect AVM's bottom line? Probably not. I doubt any legal action would be successful. Is it a an absolutely reprehensible attitude to have to what happened? Fuckin oath. Turner is a dickhead in my view.


Disc: Family members hold AVM on my recommendation. Personally not holding atm