Connect with us

Taking Stephen Davis Stories With A Pinch of Salt: Questions Seeking for Answers


Taking Stephen Davis Stories With A Pinch of Salt: Questions Seeking for Answers

Na-Allah Mohammed Zagga

Taking Stephen Davis Stories With A Pinch of Salt: Questions Seeking for Answers.

The latest revelations by the SSS about the hostage negotiator Stephen Davis have heightened my scepticism about his stories. Who’s funding Stephen Davis activities in Nigeria? Is he driven by sheer altruism in his role as a hostage negotiator? How much does he actually know about the financiers of Boko Haram? How much connection does he really have with the real Boko Haram militant leaders? Why is the mainstream international media not giving too much credence to his story? Why is the Cable News always the source of Davis stories? Why are his allegations mainly focused on Ihejirka and Sheriff when in, fact, terrorism financing is more extensive than meets the eye? Which terrorists movement or organisation would trust any outsider strong enough to reveal the identity of their financiers just like that? Do terrorists have a record of betraying their sponsors even under the severest interrogation methods? Comrade Shehu Sani, who has some measure of closeness to the Boko Haram leaders, himself doubted the possibility of terrorist commanders revealing the identity of their sponsors to a complete stranger like Stephen Davis. According to Sani, once a negotiator begins to ask terrorists the names of their financiers, they might automatically suspect him of being a spy, thereby destroying any basis for trust. While Stephen Davis has refused to divulge the identity other alleged Boko Haram sponsors in Nigeria for a so-called “legal reasons”, why did he readily ignore the same legal reasons and named Ihejirika and Sheriff as sponsors without restraint? Don’t they deserve the same treatment for legal reasons? What happened the so-called Boko Haram commanders Davis was dealing with are not apparently known or recognised by the fighters actively involved in the current terrorism? How much credibility do they have to be taken seriously? Should we swallow Davis account uncritically when the picture is bigger and more complex than it seems? Is Davis account so unassailable that we cannot subject it to scrutiny? Should we ignore these credibility issues when there are more questions than answers? In the light of the recent botched ceafire with Boko Haram, “brokered” by another fake contact or an influence peddler, how can we credulously trust the credibility of the so-called Boko Haram commanders Davis has met? Who is paying for Davis services since the Nigerian government is not paying him? If he is sponsoring himself or someone else is bankrolling him, why? Which terror group would be foolish enough to cut off its financial supply lines by betraying its sponsors before a negotiator or a complete stranger just like that? The questions can go on and on…

Continue Reading
You may also like...
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

More in Columns

To Top