Love the very balanced, agenda-free link, Doc Spock.
"President P.W. Botha told Mandela way back in 1985, that he could be a free man as long as he did one thing: Publicly renounce violence. Mandela refused. That is why Mandela remained in prison until the appeaser F.W. de Klerk freed him unconditionally. The bottom line is that Nelson Mandela never publicly renounced violence - and we should never forget that."
Rather a shame that it missed out the the ever-so-slightly crucial and very political point behind *why* Mandela didn't renounce violence, namely that as a prisoner, Mandela had no power, and that to enter into a bargain with Botha would be to sanction Apartheid.
One may not agree with that point, but unless one understands that the situation was a tiny wee bit more complicated than that site's simplistic portrayal, one ends up with a distorted view of the situation and Mandela is reduced to a lazy caricature, not the complex person he actually is (for instance, he was later insistant that the Truth and Reconcilliation Committee was made to properly take account of the ANC's trangressions of human rights, understanding that the process would fail unless it was all encompassing). That's not even taking into account why the ANC moved from peaceful to violent struggle - try looking up the Sharpville Massacre.
"What freedom am I being offered while the organisation of the people remains banned? Only free men can negotiate. A prisoner cannot enter into contracts."