Sharm el-Sheikh Summit where they vowed to end attacks on each other. In addition, Sharon agreeing to release 900 Palestinian prisoners and withdraw from West Bank towns. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) refused to be parties to the agreement, arguing the cease-fire was the position of the PA only. Five days later Abbas reached agreement with the two dissenting organizations to commit to the truce with the proviso that Israeli violation would be met with retaliation. Schachter addressed the difficulties in deciding when this intifada ended. He reasoned that suicide bombing was the best criterion, being arguably the most important element of second intifada-related violence, and that according to this criterion the intifada ended during 2005. Cause of the Second Intifada The Second Intifada started on 28 September 2000, after Ariel Sharon, a Likud party candidate for Israeli Prime Minister, made a visit to the Temple Mount, also known as Al-Haram Al-Sharif, an area sacred to both Jews and Muslims, accompanied by over 1,000 security guards. He stated on that day, "the Temple Mount is in our hands and will remain in our hands. It is the holiest site in Judaism and it is the right of every Jew to visit the Temple Mount." This visit was seen by Palestinians as highly provocative; and Palestinian demonstrators, throwing stones at police, were dispersed by the Israeli Army, using tear gas and rubber bullets. A riot broke out among Palestinians at the site, resulting in clashes between Israeli forces and the protesting crowd. Some believe the Intifada started the next day, on Friday, 29 September, a day of prayers, when an Israeli police and military presence was introduced and there were major clashes and deaths. The Mitchell Report The Sharm el-Sheikh Fact-Finding Committee (an investigatory committee set up to look into the causes behind the breakdown in the peace process, chaired by George J. Mitchell) published its report in May 2001. In the Mitchell Report, the government of Israel asserted that: The immediate catalyst for the violence was the breakdown of the Camp David negotiations on July 25, 2000, and the "widespread appreciation in the international community of Palestinian responsibility for the impasse". In this view, Palestinian violence was planned by the PA leadership, and was aimed at "provoking and incurring Palestinian casualties as a means of regaining the diplomatic initiative". The Palestine Liberation Organization, according to the same report, denied