I am not a fan of El-Rufai. In actual fact I think the only thing the dimunitive figure has going for him is his divisiveness. But Rtd General Azubuike Ihejirika got it wrong. El-Rufai passed a message, and even if we do not know his motive, he (El-Rufai) was not the source. A more resourceful approach would be to admonish Stephen Davies the Australian negotiator (who is the primary accuser) to provide proof of his allegation, or for Ihejirika himself to provide proof of his innocence. We have been regaled with stories in the past of Generals dealing with millitants for cash in exchange for arms, not only with Boko Haram, but also with MEND. But we have also witnessed how otherwise responsible Governments and individuals have told lies that have sometimes lasted decades. One chief example that comes to mind was how the West murdered Patrice Lumumba of the Congo in the 1960s and made the whole world to continue believing it was a local action that brought the then Mobutu Seseko to power, only for the Belgian Government to officially admit in 2010 (50 years later) that the order for the assassination came DIRECTLY from Brussels (Belgium), with Britain ready for a back-up plan of murder had Belgium failed. That country has never really progressed since that time. Most of what we see on the surface may be entirely different when we dig deeper. Until I see a smoking gun, its probably going to be one persons word against another. But I think on this case, El-Rufai should not be a target, unless Ihejirika has proof of his own allegation that El-Rufai is actually a Commander of Boko Haram, then he would do well to tell us why he kept silent all these years.
Posted on: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 06:01:02 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015