By: Jackie Dudu
There’s a big difference between violent and non violent movements. The first group press home their demands peacefully through non violence means, while the latter believes in shedding human blood to make a political point.
Dr Martin Luther King, Mahatma Ghandi, and a host of others are some of the most celebrated individuals today because of their non violent approach to dealing with crucial issues. They believe that in other for humanity to live harmoniously with one another, it is imperative to make that point peacefully in non violent manner. They championed the cause and set the standard for us to follow: you dont have to be violent to press home your demands to authorities.
That however cannot be said with violent groups. Boko haram for example believe in violence and shedding of innocent blood to drive a point. They believe that violence is the only way they can be taking serious. As a result, hundreds of thousands of lives had been lost through their evil acts.
Dr Martin Luther King, Mahatma Ghandi, and a host of others are some of the most celebrated individuals today because of their non violent approach to dealing with crucial issues. They believe that in other for humanity to live harmoniously with one another, it is imperative to make that point peacefully in non violent manner. They championed the cause and set the standard for us to follow: you dont have to be violent to press home your demands to authorities.
That however cannot be said with violent groups. Boko haram for example believe in violence and shedding of innocent blood to drive a point. They believe that violence is the only way they can be taking serious. As a result, hundreds of thousands of lives had been lost through their evil acts.
Yesterday Buhari was on Aljazeera and pledged his willingness to negotiate with Boko Haram terrorists. Hours later, he sent the DSS to arrest an innocent, non-violent freedom fighter, Nnamdi Kanu.
Looking at the two examples above and examining them with todays happenings in the country, it appears that the reward for violence is more yielding than non violence. It pays to be violent. That’s why it’s only in Nigeria that amnesty could be considered for terrorist groups like boko haram. The same violent jihadist group that were responsible for despicable crimes against humanity. While non violent groups are persecuted, terrorized by security agencies for going about their business non violently. To this government, arresting Nnamdi Kalu is ok but giving Boko Haram amnesty is a venture that must be supported. This notion depicts the highest form of double standard. A fact that we are victims of fundamentalist/ethnoreligious bigotry where it pays to indulge in violence.
Looking at the two examples above and examining them with todays happenings in the country, it appears that the reward for violence is more yielding than non violence. It pays to be violent. That’s why it’s only in Nigeria that amnesty could be considered for terrorist groups like boko haram. The same violent jihadist group that were responsible for despicable crimes against humanity. While non violent groups are persecuted, terrorized by security agencies for going about their business non violently. To this government, arresting Nnamdi Kalu is ok but giving Boko Haram amnesty is a venture that must be supported. This notion depicts the highest form of double standard. A fact that we are victims of fundamentalist/ethnoreligious bigotry where it pays to indulge in violence.
With these facts, from the foregoing, which other proof do you need that Buhari is the Father of Boko Haram?
Like Us on Facebook!
0 comments:
Post a Comment