MR PRIOR
I'm simply drawing the Committee's attention to try and understand what motivated these attacks.  If one follows the rationale that there was a political decision and the military action was to further the political objective, then one understands it because then those acts are understandable within the context of the amnesty process - one of the criteria are, that here has to be some
link - there's got to be some consequence but where that political objective seems to break down - on their own evidence, then the applicants are saying simply: "We are carrying out orders".
	Whether it was to liberate the country, whether it was to kill White people, whether it was to do whatever, is immaterial because they're saying: "We acted on orders"