Marwan Barghouti

[Coyote]

Because of comments, made elsewhere in another thread....I thought this could make an interesting discussion.

Could Barghouti be the one that might be able to turn the Palestinians around from their perpetual impasse? Could he unite them under one voice? Would he be able to negotiate for a two-state solution?

From Israeli perspectives (rightwing and leftwing)

Meet the next Palestinian president

In the interim, Barghouti’s associates have nominated him as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize, with the help of Nobel laureates from Argentina and Tunisia, and are trying to brand him as a Palestinian Nelson Mandela. He is, of course, nothing of the sort. He was an integral supporter and orchestrator of the armed Second Intifada, including suicide terror attacks after his comrade Raed al-Karmi was eliminated in Tulkarm in early 2002.​

His new plan may declaredly focus on nonviolent protest, but he is emphatically more radical than Abbas — hence the trust Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders place in him. His ostensible preference may be for a two-state solution arrived at via talks, but unlike Abbas, he believes that if talks do not work, the next recourse must be to take action — in other words, an intifada.​

In rare court appearance, Marwan Barghouti calls for a peace deal based on 1967 lines

However, in recent years Barghouti admitted that the Palestinians made a grave mistake by turning to terrorism. In countless interviews he said he supports "popular resistance" – that is, unarmed resistance.

Israelis will probably claim these are nothing more than tactical statements meant to expedite his release from prison. Whether this claim is right or not, Israel faces a greater problem in the near future: the Tanzim leader's intention to run for president, and likelihood he will get elected. According to all public opinion polls conducted in recent years, Barghouti is the only Fatah member who can easily beat any Hamas contender. In fact, the only scenario that can harm his chances to be elected is if Abbas decides to run again.​

From an outside perspective (BBC):

Profile: Marwan Barghouti - BBC News

The prospect of Barghouti's release has divided Israel, with some cabinet ministers arguing that as a reformist who could unite the rival Palestinian factions, he offers the best prospect for peace should Mr Abbas step down, and others saying someone convicted of five murders should never walk free.​

Ayman Odeh

“The thing I fear the most is that the Palestinians will grow so desperate about the impossibility of two states that they ask for one state,” Odeh said as we talked politics in the car. “Then the Israelis will say, ‘See, now they want Jaffa and Haifa!’ But all that will happen is that the two-state solution will be lost, and we will not gain a real one-state solution, either. It’s a one-state reality now, with parts of it being a military regime with an almost unimaginable gap socially.”

In Palestinian circles, the great unknown is who and what will follow Abbas, who has threatened repeatedly to resign. The usual candidates mentioned are flawed. Muhammad Dahlan, once a popular figure in Gaza, is widely considered corrupt. The head of intelligence, Majid Faraj, is unknown to most Palestinians. Salam Fayyad, the technocratic former Prime Minister, has great support in places like the International Monetary Fund but not on the streets of Jenin and Nablus. Finally, there is Marwan Barghouti, the most popular political figure in the West Bank. The only glitch is that Barghouti has been in prison since 2002, serving five life terms (plus forty years) for five counts of murder, including a role in the bombing of a restaurant in Tel Aviv. Not long after Odeh was elected to the Knesset, he visited Barghouti in prison. I asked him why.

“Barghouti is an interesting example of the different perspectives on the two sides,” he said. “I didn’t just visit him once. I visit him regularly. I see him as a real leader, the most loved Palestinian leader at the moment. But let’s be honest: Amir Peretz”—a former Israeli defense minister and deputy prime minister—“also visited him. Remember, even Nelson Mandela used arms. The worse crime is the occupation. I have no question that peaceful struggle is the way.”​

 

[DarkFury]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

 

[Hossfly]

Because of comments, made elsewhere in another thread....I thought this could make an interesting discussion.

Could Barghouti be the one that might be able to turn the Palestinians around from their perpetual impasse? Could he unite them under one voice? Would he be able to negotiate for a two-state solution?

From Israeli perspectives (rightwing and leftwing)

Meet the next Palestinian president

In the interim, Barghouti’s associates have nominated him as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize, with the help of Nobel laureates from Argentina and Tunisia, and are trying to brand him as a Palestinian Nelson Mandela. He is, of course, nothing of the sort. He was an integral supporter and orchestrator of the armed Second Intifada, including suicide terror attacks after his comrade Raed al-Karmi was eliminated in Tulkarm in early 2002.​

His new plan may declaredly focus on nonviolent protest, but he is emphatically more radical than Abbas — hence the trust Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders place in him. His ostensible preference may be for a two-state solution arrived at via talks, but unlike Abbas, he believes that if talks do not work, the next recourse must be to take action — in other words, an intifada.​

In rare court appearance, Marwan Barghouti calls for a peace deal based on 1967 lines

However, in recent years Barghouti admitted that the Palestinians made a grave mistake by turning to terrorism. In countless interviews he said he supports "popular resistance" – that is, unarmed resistance.

Israelis will probably claim these are nothing more than tactical statements meant to expedite his release from prison. Whether this claim is right or not, Israel faces a greater problem in the near future: the Tanzim leader's intention to run for president, and likelihood he will get elected. According to all public opinion polls conducted in recent years, Barghouti is the only Fatah member who can easily beat any Hamas contender. In fact, the only scenario that can harm his chances to be elected is if Abbas decides to run again.​

From an outside perspective (BBC):

Profile: Marwan Barghouti - BBC News

The prospect of Barghouti's release has divided Israel, with some cabinet ministers arguing that as a reformist who could unite the rival Palestinian factions, he offers the best prospect for peace should Mr Abbas step down, and others saying someone convicted of five murders should never walk free.​

Ayman Odeh

“The thing I fear the most is that the Palestinians will grow so desperate about the impossibility of two states that they ask for one state,” Odeh said as we talked politics in the car. “Then the Israelis will say, ‘See, now they want Jaffa and Haifa!’ But all that will happen is that the two-state solution will be lost, and we will not gain a real one-state solution, either. It’s a one-state reality now, with parts of it being a military regime with an almost unimaginable gap socially.”

In Palestinian circles, the great unknown is who and what will follow Abbas, who has threatened repeatedly to resign. The usual candidates mentioned are flawed. Muhammad Dahlan, once a popular figure in Gaza, is widely considered corrupt. The head of intelligence, Majid Faraj, is unknown to most Palestinians. Salam Fayyad, the technocratic former Prime Minister, has great support in places like the International Monetary Fund but not on the streets of Jenin and Nablus. Finally, there is Marwan Barghouti, the most popular political figure in the West Bank. The only glitch is that Barghouti has been in prison since 2002, serving five life terms (plus forty years) for five counts of murder, including a role in the bombing of a restaurant in Tel Aviv. Not long after Odeh was elected to the Knesset, he visited Barghouti in prison. I asked him why.

“Barghouti is an interesting example of the different perspectives on the two sides,” he said. “I didn’t just visit him once. I visit him regularly. I see him as a real leader, the most loved Palestinian leader at the moment. But let’s be honest: Amir Peretz”—a former Israeli defense minister and deputy prime minister—“also visited him. Remember, even Nelson Mandela used arms. The worse crime is the occupation. I have no question that peaceful struggle is the way.”​

May just as well release Barghouti and let him give it a try. Hell, the unwashed here want Hillary for President and her crimes are no lesser than Marwan Barghouti's. I say go for it.

 

[Coyote]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

 

[RoccoR]

Coyote, Hossfly, DarkFury, et al,

The mere fact that the Palestinians are coming to grips with the need for a reasonable "single voice" that represents a unified Palestinian policy and diplomacy program is very encouraging. But if he can do it, he would become a modern day "Ibn Saud" and very worthy of a place in hisotry.

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

I haven't got a clue as to whether Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti has the prerequisite Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSAs) to unite the people of Palestine (alla 1988). But, being a leader and a craftsman for peace, also means that whatever he accomplishes, must have a bit of permanency and stability to it. It must be something that will be advantageous to both sides. And it is for that reason that I don't holdout much hope for the potential. And of course, I merely question his KSAs; I'm haven't addressed yet the tendency for Palestinian Leaders to almost immediately distance themselves from the hard decisions and compromises that will be necessary (on both sides) to make any meaningful progress.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, Hossfly, DarkFury, et al,

The mere fact that the Palestinians are coming to grips with the need for a reasonable "single voice" that represents a unified Palestinian policy and diplomacy program is very encouraging. But if he can do it, he would become a modern day "Ibn Saud" and very worthy of a place in hisotry.

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

I haven't got a clue as to whether Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti has the prerequisite Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSAs) to unite the people of Palestine (alla 1988). But, being a leader and a craftsman for peace, also means that whatever he accomplishes, must have a bit of permanency and stability to it. It must be something that will be advantageous to both sides. And it is for that reason that I don't holdout much hope for the potential. And of course, I merely question his KSAs; I'm haven't addressed yet the tendency for Palestinian Leaders to almost immediately distance themselves from the hard decisions and compromises that will be necessary (on both sides) to make any meaningful progress.

Most Respectfully,
R

I think the fact he is looking beyond violent solutions is a step in the right direction. I think when you combine it with Palestinian opinion polls that still show most still wanting a two-state solution, as well as being exasperated and tired of their own leadership and the status quo that leadership represents, then I think there is a potential for success and hope. But the other side of the coin is Israel - would Israel be willing to work with the Palestinians in a genuine effort to negotiate? They didn't with Abbas and I think part of the problem was Israel never gave anything to Abbas to try and help him sell the hard decisions to his people - they just kept building settlements.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestinian Presidential Elections

http://carnegieendowment.org/files/brown_palestine_elections.pdf

The Palestinian Basic Law

2003 Amended Basic Law | The Palestinian Basic Law

 

[Humanity]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter...

I'm not too sure how many people, today, would consider Mandela a "terrorist"!

 

[montelatici]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

 

[Coyote]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

So, are freedom fighters and terrorists the same then, in your dictionary?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

So, are freedom fighters and terrorists the same then, in your dictionary?

Freedom fighters get more terrorism than they give. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

 

[Coyote]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

So, are freedom fighters and terrorists the same then, in your dictionary?

Freedom fighters get more terrorism than they give. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

The problem is - that isn't much of a distinction and it ignores certain realities such as targeting civilians and a right to self defend.

Mandela WAS a terrorist. The fact that his cause was just doesn't change that. I admire Mandela, not for his terrorism but for what he did afterwards but that doesn't erase the fact that he was a terrorist.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

So, are freedom fighters and terrorists the same then, in your dictionary?

Freedom fighters get more terrorism than they give. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

The problem is - that isn't much of a distinction and it ignores certain realities such as targeting civilians and a right to self defend.

Mandela WAS a terrorist. The fact that his cause was just doesn't change that. I admire Mandela, not for his terrorism but for what he did afterwards but that doesn't erase the fact that he was a terrorist.

And Israel is a terrorist state. Israel commits mass terrorism while the Palestinians commit a piddly little bit.

Israel has always been the aggressor while the Palestinians are expected to sit on their hands.

 

[Coyote]

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

So, are freedom fighters and terrorists the same then, in your dictionary?

Freedom fighters get more terrorism than they give. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

The problem is - that isn't much of a distinction and it ignores certain realities such as targeting civilians and a right to self defend.

Mandela WAS a terrorist. The fact that his cause was just doesn't change that. I admire Mandela, not for his terrorism but for what he did afterwards but that doesn't erase the fact that he was a terrorist.

And Israel is a terrorist state. Israel commits mass terrorism while the Palestinians commit a piddly little bit.

Israel has always been the aggressor while the Palestinians are expected to sit on their hands.

Is targeting civilians acceptable?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

So, are freedom fighters and terrorists the same then, in your dictionary?

Freedom fighters get more terrorism than they give. Israel calling the Palestinians terrorists is like the coal mine calling the kettle black.

The problem is - that isn't much of a distinction and it ignores certain realities such as targeting civilians and a right to self defend.

Mandela WAS a terrorist. The fact that his cause was just doesn't change that. I admire Mandela, not for his terrorism but for what he did afterwards but that doesn't erase the fact that he was a terrorist.

And Israel is a terrorist state. Israel commits mass terrorism while the Palestinians commit a piddly little bit.

Israel has always been the aggressor while the Palestinians are expected to sit on their hands.

Is targeting civilians acceptable?

Of course not but it has to apply to both side. You can't expect the Palestinians to stop while giving Israel a free pass. It is Israel who refused to have both sides stop attacking civilians.

The main question was about the settlers: Are they civilians or not? According to the Geneva Accord they are not. Even according to the Israelis they are not.
In 2003 we went to Cairo. The Egyptians asked whether Hamas is ready to stop the martyrdom operations or not. We gave the Egyptians a better offer. We were ready to have an agreement to stop targeting civilians [on] both sides. The army is supposed to fight, but civilians should be out of it. The Egyptians agreed and passed it on to the Israelis.

Ariel Sharon sent Efraim Halevi, who was the head of Shin Bet at the time. The Egyptians, who were the mediators, negotiated with Halevi. When we reached the definition of civilians, we accepted the definition put forward by the Geneva Accord. The Israelis were surprised, as they did not expect that. We said that the settlers are not civilians and the answer was, yes, they are not.

Halevi went back to Israel, but Sharon rejected the proposal. He said that he is not giving us the chance to kill his soldiers while his hands are tied behind the back because he retaliated against civilians.

A Dialogue with Hamas - Part 1 - Worldpress.org​

 

[Daniyel]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

Mandela was a freedom fighter. Only the West and the Apartheid regime considered him a terrorist. Oppressed people can no longer fight oppression without being called terrorists these days.

You people can't have it both ways. Those that resisted the Nazis, like the French resistance, were terrorists under those conditions.

So, are freedom fighters and terrorists the same then, in your dictionary?

Freedom fighters fight for freedom, terrorist is a one intended to terrorize others into his own ideological belief.
I'd say the line is whether there is a discrimination or right that has been taken from the group of individuals (such as racial discrimination, religion based discrimination, etc.) versus forcing others into your own view (terrorize another group of individuals based on race, religion, etc.)
So if we want to determine about Marwan Baragutti we simply need to judge if he fights for something unjust or because of something unjust.

 

[Phoenall]

Because of comments, made elsewhere in another thread....I thought this could make an interesting discussion.

Could Barghouti be the one that might be able to turn the Palestinians around from their perpetual impasse? Could he unite them under one voice? Would he be able to negotiate for a two-state solution?

From Israeli perspectives (rightwing and leftwing)

Meet the next Palestinian president

In the interim, Barghouti’s associates have nominated him as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize, with the help of Nobel laureates from Argentina and Tunisia, and are trying to brand him as a Palestinian Nelson Mandela. He is, of course, nothing of the sort. He was an integral supporter and orchestrator of the armed Second Intifada, including suicide terror attacks after his comrade Raed al-Karmi was eliminated in Tulkarm in early 2002.​

His new plan may declaredly focus on nonviolent protest, but he is emphatically more radical than Abbas — hence the trust Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders place in him. His ostensible preference may be for a two-state solution arrived at via talks, but unlike Abbas, he believes that if talks do not work, the next recourse must be to take action — in other words, an intifada.​

In rare court appearance, Marwan Barghouti calls for a peace deal based on 1967 lines

However, in recent years Barghouti admitted that the Palestinians made a grave mistake by turning to terrorism. In countless interviews he said he supports "popular resistance" – that is, unarmed resistance.

Israelis will probably claim these are nothing more than tactical statements meant to expedite his release from prison. Whether this claim is right or not, Israel faces a greater problem in the near future: the Tanzim leader's intention to run for president, and likelihood he will get elected. According to all public opinion polls conducted in recent years, Barghouti is the only Fatah member who can easily beat any Hamas contender. In fact, the only scenario that can harm his chances to be elected is if Abbas decides to run again.​

From an outside perspective (BBC):

Profile: Marwan Barghouti - BBC News

The prospect of Barghouti's release has divided Israel, with some cabinet ministers arguing that as a reformist who could unite the rival Palestinian factions, he offers the best prospect for peace should Mr Abbas step down, and others saying someone convicted of five murders should never walk free.​

Ayman Odeh

“The thing I fear the most is that the Palestinians will grow so desperate about the impossibility of two states that they ask for one state,” Odeh said as we talked politics in the car. “Then the Israelis will say, ‘See, now they want Jaffa and Haifa!’ But all that will happen is that the two-state solution will be lost, and we will not gain a real one-state solution, either. It’s a one-state reality now, with parts of it being a military regime with an almost unimaginable gap socially.”

In Palestinian circles, the great unknown is who and what will follow Abbas, who has threatened repeatedly to resign. The usual candidates mentioned are flawed. Muhammad Dahlan, once a popular figure in Gaza, is widely considered corrupt. The head of intelligence, Majid Faraj, is unknown to most Palestinians. Salam Fayyad, the technocratic former Prime Minister, has great support in places like the International Monetary Fund but not on the streets of Jenin and Nablus. Finally, there is Marwan Barghouti, the most popular political figure in the West Bank. The only glitch is that Barghouti has been in prison since 2002, serving five life terms (plus forty years) for five counts of murder, including a role in the bombing of a restaurant in Tel Aviv. Not long after Odeh was elected to the Knesset, he visited Barghouti in prison. I asked him why.

“Barghouti is an interesting example of the different perspectives on the two sides,” he said. “I didn’t just visit him once. I visit him regularly. I see him as a real leader, the most loved Palestinian leader at the moment. But let’s be honest: Amir Peretz”—a former Israeli defense minister and deputy prime minister—“also visited him. Remember, even Nelson Mandela used arms. The worse crime is the occupation. I have no question that peaceful struggle is the way.”​

Every time peace is mentioned it is always to 1967 lines, when what they mean is 1949 lines that are a proven impossible position for Israel. If they insist on 1967 lines then it must be the ones agreed in 1967 that give Israel most of Jerusalem and most of the west bank. No one in their right mind wants gaza so that can be the capital of new Palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

No he did not he died as he lived a terrorist killing his own for political ambition. After he took over the murder rate of blacks in South Africa rose 5000% and the nation went rapidly into decline. Now it is on the list of "Not to travel here" for most countries.

 

[Phoenall]

Palestinian Presidential Elections

http://carnegieendowment.org/files/brown_palestine_elections.pdf

The Palestinian Basic Law

2003 Amended Basic Law | The Palestinian Basic Law

That went out of the window in 2007 when hamas took control and became dictators. Now Palestine stands on a crossroads with only one way out, watch them choose the wrong way.

 

[Phoenall]

Mandella was not a peaceful man. He invented the "burning necklace". Mandella was a terrorist. If you truly want to look for peaceful then look at Sadat.

Of course he was killed by islamic terrorists for his work.

Mandella was a terrorist, but - he also moved past that and accomplished something great - peace and reconciliation. Anwar Sadat and Yitzak Rabin were both great advocates for peace who were cut down by extremists on their own side.

Thing is - if anything is to be accomplished here, you need someone who can unite the Palestinians.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter...

I'm not too sure how many people, today, would consider Mandela a "terrorist"!

Far too many for your comfort, if the truth was told about his activities right up to the day he died.