Former Kaduna Central Senator, Shehu Sani, has sharply criticised revelations contained in a recent New York Times report on the controversial “Christian genocide” narrative linked to Nigeria, describing the episode as tragic, shameful, and deeply embarrassing.
In a post shared on his X (formerly Twitter) account on Sunday, Sani reacted to the report’s claim that the widely circulated allegation of mass killings of Christians in Nigeria originated from an individual identified as Emeka, an Onitsha-based screwdriver trader and operator of a small non-governmental organisation.
According to the New York Times report referenced by the senator, the individual allegedly claimed to have documented the deaths of “125,000 Christians” using Google searches—figures that were neither independently verified nor backed by credible field research.
Sani expressed outrage that such an unsubstantiated claim could gain international traction, reportedly influencing the thinking of United States lawmakers, the presidency, and intelligence agencies, and allegedly contributing to heightened tensions that culminated in airstrikes.
“How such an unverified claim could tense up the US lawmakers, President and the intelligence community… is one of the most foolish and comical historical events in our lifetime,” the former senator wrote.
READ ALSO: Genocide: 30 Christian Groups Beg ICC, UN for Probe, Intervention
He described the development as a sobering reminder of the dangers of misinformation, warning that false narratives—when amplified globally—can have grave real-world consequences for nations already grappling with complex security and humanitarian challenges.
The comments have reignited debate over the sources and verification of international human rights claims concerning Nigeria, with analysts calling for greater scrutiny, responsible advocacy, and reliance on credible data to avoid misleading global audiences and policymakers.
As discussions continue, Sani’s intervention adds to growing calls for accountability in the dissemination of sensitive conflict-related information, particularly when such claims carry significant diplomatic and security implications.