Stumbled upon this article and I thot to share as it does indeed raise salient issues on the BH wahala.

ACF wrongly repackaging Boko Haram
FRIDAY, 10 FEBRUARY 2012 00:00 ONYEBUCHI
ONYEGBULE
The Arewa Consultative Assembly (ACF) is supposed to be the voice of all North. Before speaking for someone, you must know him; otherwise you speak in error. Tambuwal speaks for the House and knows it; Mark speaks for the Senate and knows it; ACF is speaking for Boko Haram but says it doesn’t know it.
Why then speak for people you don’t know, or do you relish speaking in error?

Read: ‘The Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) said the
Boko Haram ultimatum to Southerners living in the
North to quit is a response to a similar threat from
the South-south to Northerners’. (TheNation:2/2/12).
Who told ACF that Boko’s ultimatum is in response to South-south’s call? You get briefed before going
public with such assertion. Who briefed it? Being the custodian of north’s socio-cultural interests, why
didn’t it report the purported South-south’s
misdemeanour to FG but waited till Boko’s
ultimatum, then turned around to explain the killer-
group’s action? If one is instructing and another is
explaining, then it begins to look like a teamwork
where duties are shared.
It even went further to urge the ‘Federal Government to publicly commit itself to guaranteeing the security of leaders of the Boko Haram sect when they come out for dialogue’, and further reminded FG of UN resolution 1963, which urges governments around the world to address underlying causes of civil unrest
and social conflicts, rather than resort to hard
military power’. Inference: government is not trusted, so it must ‘publicly guarantee’. Question is, did ACF publicly guarantee the security of people slaughtered in cold blood in its enclave? What it’s saying is that Jews should publicly guarantee the safety of Hitler when he comes out for dialogue; Musoveni the security of Idi-Amin; Cambodia the security of Pol-Pot; or the United States the security of Osama bin Laden when they come out to dialogue. If security had been an issue before ACF, why has the rest of Nigeria been crying over north’s relative muteness in the face of Boko’s pogrom? Or is ACF coaching Nigerians on how to reward terrorism? All we hear is the high-handedness of security forces as though nothing took them there. Is ACF aware of the motive of Boko?
Read: ‘People underrate us but we have our sights set on [bringing Sharia to] the whole world, not just Nigeria.’ Qaqa. Is this ‘civil unrest’ or Jihad?
Read too: ‘I enjoy killing anyone that God commands me to kill the way I enjoy killing chickens and rams.’ Qaqa. These are the people ACF wants the government to guarantee their security ‘before they come out to dialogue’. One more thing ACF: a red carpet for terrorism. People accuse Jonathan of weakness just for being temperate; now that it’s looking like ‘we can hit and spite you’, there must be a show of bone in the flesh.

Terrorism is no ‘civil unrest’ - ACF’s tone-down for it.
The climax of civil unrest is riot; the climax of
terrorism is mindless destruction. They’re worlds
apart. The government should tell ACF that it
understands the difference. It advised government to uncover the true identity of these people, to be able to determine their demands or grievances and
address those that may be genuine and in
accordance with our laws’. Wrong. In the South-west, a pressure group called the OPC didn’t go killing people and committing mass murder just to make a point. Besides, they showcased points-men:
Fasheun/Adams. MEND didn’t engage in mass
murder to publicise its obvious deprivation. Besides,
they had Okah/Asari/Tompolo. In the East, MASSOB
doesn’t kill at all. Theirs lies in the power of
persuasion via symbolisms. Besides, they have
Uwazuruike. OPC said, ‘don’t alienate us’, Nigeria
gave them the presidency. MEND said, ‘don’t exclude us’, Nigeria gave them the residency. MASSOB is saying, ‘don’t marginalize us’, and all are waiting to see what Nigeria will do. Now Boko says, ‘we want to Islamize Nigeria’. Besides, they have nobody, only ghosts. While the rest engaged in agitations, Boko opted for fundamental, ethno-religiously tilted structural change, careless of others and pursuing it through mass murder, despite the fact its section has had the biggest chunk of the power-quotient in
project Nigeria.

It’s the duty of ACF to identify/articulate the
grievance of its people. It is its duty to fish out Boko-Haram, invite FG and the rest of Nigeria to help clip it. To tell FG to do that and sit back to judge the military’s high-handedness is nothing short of subtle mischief. It’s after these that it can speak and Nigeria will listen. It should be careful; its recent utterance shows streaks of sympathy for Boko. If it continues this way, the Middle-belt may rightly seek its separate voice; others too, and that’s justifiable.