Could natural diamonds be conflict-free?

Today Naomi Campbell does not lack public attention, it seems the only question people want to ask her concerns that 'blood diamond'. What is this diamond and why people are interested in it?

The story about uncut diamond given by Charley Taylor comes back to 1997, when a known super model went to South Africa to be a guest of Nelson Mandela. Charley Taylor is a former Liberian president who is currently accused of 11 offenses including crimes against humanity, sexual slavery, mass murder, child abuse and war crimes - an impressive list, don't you think? There are allegations this very person was the one to present a precious stone to celebrated Naomi Campbell during her visit. Actually, nobody knew about this fact until Mia Farrow, an American actress, told about this in a court during Charley Taylor's trial. She claimed Naomi boasted she was presented rough diamond by Taylor's people.

Currently, this diamond is called 'blood' not just due to the fact it is natural, but that it belonged to a person with such terribly 'blood' reputation. Normally, Naomi does not want to spot her own reputation by possessing such diamond. It seems, such a person as Charles Taylor would not hesitate to do anything (even harm) in order to seize the diamond. So, it's clear Naomi does not want to have something in common with a murder, even if it is a pricey thing. However, her reaction is a bit aggressive: she said she didn't have that diamond, punched a news camera and left the studio.

Well, it's hard to find out the truth in this situation, still one thing is evident - natural diamonds are sometimes involved in conflicts, sometimes blood conflicts, this story is another proof of this assertion.

And what do you think about this?