Another “Lord of War” character on Trial

lordofwar-n-tm.jpg

Lordofwar N
Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage) and André Baptiste Jr. (Sammi Rotibi)

Charles “Chuckie” Taylor Jr, son of former Liberian leader Charles Taylor, on whom the character André Baptiste Jr. in the movie “Lord of War” is based is now on trial in the US on eight offenses, five or which are for torture.

He is depicted in the film testing his newly acquired arms, sold to him by Yuri Orlov (aka. Viktor Bout), on civilians at a nearby camp.

Andre Baptiste Jr.: Can you bring me the gun of Rambo?
Yuri Orlov: Part One, Two, or Three?
Andre Baptiste Jr.: I’ve only seen Part One.

His father, also depicted in the movie is on trial for war crimes at the Hague and Bout is facing an extradition hearing in Thailand.

If you have not seen Lord of Ware I highly recommend it. It is one of my favorite movies.
BBC reports.

Related

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


More In: News


Advertisement

  • Blog Reader

    I’m curious why you like the “Lord of War” movie. I saw it “edited for television” last month, and I’ve gotta tell you that it seemed more like an anti-gun film. I came away thinking that the film would have us believe that the firearm and ammunition manufacturers themselves are to blame for the slaughter of innocents.

  • dogon1013

    Didn’t “André Baptiste Jr” get killed in the movie? how close to reality was the movie? I’m sure some artistic license was taken, but were all the characters based on real people?

    PS
    I liked the movie too and did not think it was anti-gun. It seemed to be neutral to me, with a main point being that guns will always get to the people that want to buy them, no matter how hard the authorities try to stop gun trafficking. (Just like with drug trafficking).

    It seemed to me that the people that slaughtered the innocents were the ones to blame for slaughtering the innocents.

  • jdun

    It was pure anti-gun. The movie was advocating on banning of firearms worldwide.

    The genocides in Africa was done mainly with blade and blunt type weapons and not guns.

  • http://www.therealgunguys.com/blog/ Yuri Orlov

    I’ve always felt the movie was pretty neutral on the topic. To me anyway, it’s pretty obvious that it was the bad guys who were responsible for the death and carnage. Before they got the guns, they were killing with machete’s or whatever was at hand. The weapon used was inconsequential.

  • http://www.thefirearmblog.com Steve

    I have watched the movie multiple times and I did not get that impression at all. I am *very* sensitive against movies that blame guns for the worlds problems.

    The movie has a distinct social message: illicit arms trafficking to supply dictators and criminals causes a lot of misery. Most of the significant events in the movie are based on facts, although they did not necessarily involve Bout.

    This kind of illegal trafficking and immoral exporting happens regularly. The recent shipment from China of RPGs and ammo to the utterly corrupt Zimbabwe dictator: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/04/20/south-african-dockers-are-refusing-to-unload-chinese-ammo-and-rpgs/ and the supply of arms to Iraqi insurgents are examples.

    Yes, a lot of bad stuff happens with sticks, stones and machetes but the argument in the movie is not about banning guns in Africa, it is about the supply of weapons, including mortars, surface to air missiles, RPGs, explosives for IEDs etc., to psychopaths. Be they the serial killer and serial rapist who is now living next door to you, or a dictator in Africa.

    With the exception of the opening scene little if anything is made of ammunition and arms manufacturers. Most of the arms sold are stolen.

    I agree with the previous comments. Like drug trafficking arms smuggling will continue as long as there are people willing to pay for the arms and/or corrupt regimes willing to supply them to terrorists and rebels. Also I did think they were blaming the characters for the destruction, not the guns.

  • jdun

    Here the thing. The majority of killing was done with machetes, blade, and blunt weapons. A small factions of the killing in those conflicts actually use firearms and heavy weapons.

    What the movie implied that these arm traders are causing the war and suffering in Africa. IIRC the movie never mentioned that the majority of smalls arms are homemade and not imported by these traders. In Africa as well as other third world countries you have craftsmen making all type of weapons and firearms to sell in the local market.

    In the USA there are AK build parties. A bunch of guys just go to somebody house or shop and start building their own AK. I build AR as a hobbies in my home. In Africa there are kids that building AKs in huts to support their family. It isn’t hard to produce small arms.

    Factually there are so many thing that is wrong with that movie but then again it is a movie. All movies should be taken with a grain of salt.

  • http://www.thefirearmblog.com Steve

    jdun, you are defiantly right: edged weapons are used in conflict in Africa, the recent riots in Keyna are a classic example where sticks, stone, spears, machetes and even bows and arrows were being used.

    But small arms and heavy weapons are used in just about every conflict. Rebels are not carrying around homemade .22 zip guns. The genocide in Sudan is being carried out with firearms backed by Hind helichopers. All the African rebels groups I know about are armed.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/09/23/weapons-and-tactics-of-the-niger-delta/

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/05/24/armed-men-on-horseback-stole-un-weapons/

    I do respect your opinion about the movie. I think we could both agree is was a lot better than the movie Babel ;) I still can’t believe I paid money to watch that anti-gun nonsense. If you have not seen it, the whole movie is about the worldwide ripple effect of a .270 rifle being shot in northern africa.

  • jdun

    African small arms problem is over blown. Sure Rebels have weapons but like we both agree the majority of killings was done by edge weapons. Heavy weapons like Hind are bought for the most part legally and from illegal arms dealers.

    The Hinds in Sudan was bought legally by Sudan government before the sanctions. Just like Kenya bought a whole bunch of T-90 tanks (that was hi-jacked by pirates few days ago). It is extremely hard for any arm dealers that is not in the system to get their hand on those heavy weapons.

  • jdun

    Edit:
    and not from illegal arms dealer. (first paragraph last sentence)