'Peace activist' Norman Kember claims he did not mean to expose the SAS team that rescued him to the serious risks involved. Apparently he went to Iraq without realising it would be dangerous. Is he really stupid enough to believe that if you say 'I come in peace' that is all that is required to persuade people to like you? Has he never heard of Terry Waite, who went to Beirut to negotiate the release of hostages and was, himself, taken hostage? Or did Kember simply not realise that Iraq can be a violent place, with terrorist attacks, car bombings and beheadings? If he didn't know about the violence, why did he think there was a need for a peace activist?
Waite, incidentally, understood the risks of his mission, and bravely undertook them to help others, while making it clear he did not want others to do that for him. He did not want a ransom to be paid or a rescue mission to be mounted.
That's the difference between a peace activist and a 'peace activist'. Waite risked his own life for others. Kember risked others for himself.
