Before now, i had been of the opinion that GEJ will be giving himself a mortal shot on the feet should he proceed with the macabre dance of shoving amnesty down the throats of unwilling terrorists. Terrorists should be killed, not pardoned.

A closer reflection suggests that the offer of amnesty with the condition that the terrorists "unghost" themselves, lay down their arms (Fertilizers, empty beer cans, gas cylinders etc)and promise total repentance, may have been an advice given by a deep thinker just with this reason:

Abu Quaqa led Boko haram doesn't believe in Nigeria as a sovereign country having her members' allegiance.Therefore GEJ is not their Leader neither did they break any law by murdering innocent souls. Accepting amnesty means that the philosophy of Boko haram has been defeated!

Methinks that in an unlikely event that Boko Haram terrorists accepts amnesty, Then they have roundly accepted defeat!

The amnesty is most meaningful if and only if the leader accepts it unconditionally.

At this point, I'm like a sheep confused between two herds.
Should the goverment continue fighting invisible enemies? Thereby endorsinn the continuity of the blood-shed of innocent people of all ramifications
OR
Should they pardon terrorists and safe n secure people lifes and properties??
@OP, answer the above and make a choice of the two OR propound your own solution that solves BH and secure lifes and properties

Okoro2015:
The amnesty is most meaningful if and only if the leader accepts it unconditionally.

Oh! You reply b4 I could...
Why the leader again? GEJ is the president of Nigeria, deal with it
**not one of GEJ's advocates on NL**

laykhorn:
Oh! You reply b4 I could...
Why the leader again? GEJ is the president of Nigeria, deal with it
**not one of GEJ's advocates on NL**

Leader of Bokos i mean.