6/19/2008

Akinola under protection, but the Mossad?

Archbishop Akinola is in Israel, unable to be in Jordan with the GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference) conference. David Virtue reports that there have been threats on the Archbishop's life - we don't know by whom. So protection is in order, and has come. Virtue reports,

"Nigerian Primate Peter Akinola, who was not given diplomatic clearance to attend the pro-GAFCON theological Consultation in Amman and who is accompanied by a bodyguard from the Mossad because of threats on his life, said “The Lord sent me ahead of you. We have come together like this because it is critical. If we make a list of the things God has done in the last few weeks regardless of persecution we must acknowledge that we have come together...it has happened.”

So, why Mossad, which I understand handles intelligence, security and secret operations overseas? Why not Shin Bet, whose work seems more likely to concern internal security? Well, protection may be well advised. If so I am glad he has it.

On the other hand, remember that the protectors, particularly if Mossad, can have other motives. Who will protect the Archbishop against the protectors, who might wish to limit the Archbishop's activities in Israel.

It will be interesting to see if any visitor / participant in GAFCON, much less the Archbishop of Nigeria with Mossad protectors, will be visiting the work of Palestinian Christians of the Anglican persuasion in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip.

13 comments:

  1. If Archbishop Akinola is under protection by Israeli security it could well be the Shin Bet and not the Mossad. David Virtue is not particularly accurate when reporting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Requires Mossad protection?

    What a drama queen.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well....death threats to vgr seem to be taken more seriously by some....I see Integrity trying to raise $70,000+ for protection for him in England!

    Someone needs to tell them that NOBODY has ever attacked vgr....but I know it is useful politically to claim he is in great danger (with the implications that "conservative" Anglicans could be involved)

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Someone needs to tell them that NOBODY has ever attacked vgr.."

    By that logic, we should save ourselves the tax money and call off the security details of Barack Obama and GW Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  5. christopher+20/6/08 9:17 AM

    I haven't seen or heard the specific death threats against Bishop Robinson (though I recall reports about kindly Quakers responding to death threats against him by offering to stand around him at his consecration), nor have I seen or heard those against Archbishop Akinola. I imagine, though, that there are enough extremists in the world who might like to see either or both killed, and I would wish both bishops the protection they need under the circumstances.

    anonymous,

    Asserting - even subtly - that the danger to Archbishop Akinola is real, while the danger to Bishop Robinson is somehow contrived is not helpful when it comes to ensuring that all of the Anglican Communion's bishops are safe. That "NOBODY" has ever attacked either of these bishops, does not mean that nobody wants to, plans to, or that threats shouldn't be taken seriously.

    Mark,

    There seem to be quite a few unsigned anonymous postings these days, which makes it hard to keep up with who's who. Having been a bit confused about this since the system changed a while back, I just discovered that one can use the "Name/URL" option to show one's identity clearly, even without a URL. Maybe this option will help others, too.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous, this thread is about ++Akinola, not +Robinson.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Is Gene Robinson a "drama queen" also, Malcolm? He declaims regularly on the grave personal threats he faces. On the basis of repetition alone, Peter Akinola would be an understudy, at best, to Robinson.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous (usually another name for coward),

    Perhaps no one has ever succeeded in attacking +Gene because he has taken security precautions.

    You infer by your post that the threats do not exist, that they are lies to elicit sympathy. Perhaps you might clear that to actually be true first by consulting with the appropriate local, state and federal police jurisdictions.

    It is a bit hyperbolic that Big Pete shoots off his mouth negatively about Moslems and then folks are surprised that he invokes threats upon himself when walking uninvited among the very folks he mocks and insults. At least +Gene's security is paid for privately. Why should Israeli taxpayers have to foot the bill for Big Mouth.

    Your own persecution complex is showing. No one infers that the threats to +Gene are from Conservative Anglicans. But I sincerely believe that the threats come from wackoos who are "inspired" by the anti-gay, anti-Gene rhetoric of conservative Anglicans.

    ReplyDelete
  9. John-Julian, OJN20/6/08 12:22 PM

    So from whom might threats come to Akinola?

    Uh, Muslims?

    Uh, Nigerian gays?

    Uh, Nigeria's opposition politicians?

    And what in the world is he doing with a "diplomatic passport"? Is he a representative of the secular government of Nigeria?

    ReplyDelete
  10. (Dan)
    Obviously a ploy. When has a man of color challenging a racist white power structure ever been in need of protection?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Who provides security for Gene Robinson? Has he ever nade outrageous claims on the Secret service?

    Heck, if Peter Akinola is receiving protection from an Israeli state agency, it certaily wouldn't be Mossad in any event.

    Mossad? Hrmph.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Is Gene Robinson a "drama queen" also, Malcolm?"

    Well, I'm not a bishop, or anything particularly important or public, and I've been threatened lots of times over the course of my life.

    Phil, I suggest you walk hand in hand with another man on any street in Dallas County and see what happens. Then you'll have some idea of what +Robinson and his family are experiencing.

    ReplyDelete

OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with comment moderation but with some cautions and one rule:
Cautions: Calling people fools, idiots, etc, will be reason to bounce your comment. Keeping in mind that in the struggles it is difficult enough to try to respect opponents, we should at least try.
Rule: PLEASE DO NOT SIGN OFF AS ANONYMOUS: BEGIN OR END THE MESSAGE WITH A NAME - ANY NAME. ANONYMOUS commentary will be cut.