"The entire world knew that when Buhari took over from Jonathan, 29 May 2015, a fifty-thousand square kilometres land area in the Northeast of Nigeria was occupied and declared a Caliphate by Boko Haram."
Comment: True!
In your first comment you asked, "Could the author not have addressed your worry by supplying the source of his claim?" Your question is extravagant because the author referred to his relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram as the source of his claim.
In your second comment you wrote, "This is a shocking allegation that is prejudicial." Since the author gave the source of information being peddled by him as his relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram, it is neither an allegation nor a prejudice to infer that the author's relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram are the fat cats in the military still exploiting and feeding fat on the misery of the foot soldiers.
For writing that the war is still lingering on because the author's fat cat military relatives and friends fighting Boko Haram are profiting from the war, you declared it a spurious/unfounded claim in your third comment. Are you suggesting that the author's relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram as claimed by him are ordinary foot soldiers?
You agreed in your fourth comment that it is true that Boko Haram is no longer in possession of any land area in Nigeria after the ascension of Buhari to the Presidency. Does that not tell you that the claim of the author that his relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram had told him that nothing had changed in the past three years in the war except that propaganda and media management have become more effective must be false? The author's claim of relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram must be a fiction, if not empty self-aggrandizement.
In your fifth comment, you declared as fallacious my claim that because the corrupt Nigerian judiciary had granted bails and indefinite adjournments to previous war profiteers on their cases in courts, the relatives and friends of the author he claims are fighting Boko Haram are also inclined to be war profiteers. My claim will be fallacious if, and only if, the claim of the author that he has relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram as informants on the prosecution of the war, is fallacious. Remember that the (fictitious) relatives and friends in the military fighting Boko Haram did not know that Boko Haram no longer have a Caliphate on Nigerian territory.
S. Kadiri
No comments:
Post a Comment