Letters From a Zionist

A well informed letter to the editor is a way for other people to begin understanding the Middle East."

William K. Langfan

OpEds William Langfan
William Langfan
Letter I: Borders and Tunnels

Dear Editor:

1. Have the advocates of Israel’s return to 1967 lines and the proponents of a two-state solution ever considered the fact that Israel was within the 1967 lines when the PLO and its charter to destroy Israel were created in 1964.

2. Have these exponents ever given any weight to the fact that despite the Palestinian Arab leaders' promises before, during, and after Oslo, that they would eliminate the clauses in their charter to destroy Israel, not one word of the charter has ever been changed?

I now repeat my offer to give a Wells Fargo Bank check for $200,000 to the first person who can present a validly modified charter enacted by the Palestinian National Council (PNC) to coincide with the clauses annulled or changed according to Arafat allegations in his January 1998 letter to President Clinton (clause 33 of the 1968 charter states that 2/3 of the PNC members must vote for any change in the charter.)

3. Have any of these pundits ever reflected on the facts that Fatah, the most important faction of the Palestinian Authority (PA), has a 1964 constitution which also calls for Israel’s destruction and that Hamas has a 1988 charter which not only calls for the destruction of Israel but also calls for killing Jews?

4. Are any of these promoters aware of the tunnels which have been dug into Israel and the potential dangers of additional tunnels from the West Bank into Israel?

5. Would any of these supporters like to fly into or from Ben Gurion airport with missile launchers a short distance away?

6. Are these supporters aware of the fact that there were more Israeli civilian’s deaths from terrorism per year after Oslo than before, until barriers were built?

7. Would the US and allies have relinquished control of Germany or Japan if similar facts existed?

I respectfully ask any of these sincere proponents of a return to 1967 borders to refute the above facts or present facts, not opinions, which would enable an objective person to conclude that the atmosphere in the middle east today presents an opportunity for Israel to gamble with her future by returning to 1967 borders or agreeing to a two state solution.

Letter II: PLO and Hamas Charters


Danish Foreign Minister Lidegaard wants a footnote in history similar to Chamberlain and Daladier by threatening Israel to change the pattern of negotiations.  He should study the result of forcing Czechoslovakia in Munich 1938 to convey control pf the Sudetenland to Germany.

Israel must be ultra careful with any “Peace Agreement” with the Palestinians predicated upon her experiences in Oslo I and II and the Wye River Agreement, all of which were blatantly violated by the Palestinians.

I respectfully suggest that Mr. Lidegaard read the PLO charters of 1964 and 1968, the Fatah Constitution of 1964-1965, the Palestinian National Council 1974 resolution, and the 1988 Hamas Charter before he attempts to follow through on his blackmail threat.  None of these documents which call for the destruction of Israel has ever been modified irrespective of the fact that the PLO engaged in a series of steps of chicanery to deceive the world into believing that they had annulled several clauses of the 1968 Charter. 

I further respectfully suggest that he ask Abbas to present him with a “modified” charter pursuant to the Palestinian vote to reaffirm Arafat’s January 1998 letter to President Clinton in which Arafat alleged and lied that the onerous clauses of the 1968 Charter were nullified.

William K. Langfan 

Letter III : Changing one's Mindset

Dear Editor:

The future behavior of the Palestinian Authority formerly known as the PLO, can be reasonably predicted by their past and present conduct.

The PLO was created in 1964 with its infamous Charter to destroy Israel when Israel was within her 1967 borders.

Their charter was specifically directed only toward Israel.  It declared that the establishment of Israel was illegal and void; the area of the former British Mandate was indivisible; and that they would engage in armed resistance until Palestine was liberated; i.e. Israel was destroyed.  Jordan was in control of the West Bank and so called East Jerusalem, and Egypt was in control of Gaza pursuant to the 1949 armistice.  Article 24 of the charter specifically excluded these areas from their “liberation” of Palestine.

The PLO had no success in their mission to destroy Israel until the creation and the signing of the Declaration of Principles (DOP), also known as Oslo I, in September 1993 when Israel conveyed control of a segment of the West Bank in exchange for peace with the Palestinian leadership.  The PLO promised to eliminate the charter clauses calling for the destruction of Israel; terrorism was to be eliminated; and the Palestinians were to live side by side peacefully with Israel.   

Israel was in the process of negotiating the Interim Agreement (Oslo II) with Palestinian Leadership in the fall of 1995.  Israel was to give control of more land in exchange for Palestinian promises of peace.  At that time Prime Minister Rabin delivered a speech to the Knesset in which he stated that we all are very disappointed that the PNC had not changed the charter in the two years since the signing of the DOP in September 1993.  As a result of this failure, clause XXXI, ¶ 9 of the Interim Agreement (Oslo II) was inserted in the agreement which required the onerous charter clauses to be eliminated within two months of the inauguration of the Interim Agreement.  The Interim Agreement became effective on March 7, 1996.  Article 33 of the PLO 1968 Charter states that the Palestinian National Council (PNC) is the only entity that can change any provisions of the Charter with a 2-3 majority membership vote.

The PNC finally did meet on April 24, 1996.  PNC Chairman Zanoun delivered a speech before the two article resolution was presented to the PNC Members in which he stated that they had to do something and the resolution answers the problem.  “It gives us an extension of six months until the Central Council convenes.”  (The translation of Zanoun’s speech is enclosed in English, and there is also a DVD of his speech available upon request

The resolution consisted of two articles.  Article One states that the PNC has decided to amend the charter pursuant to the September 1993 exchange of letters between Arafat and PM Rabin.  (No specific article changes were mentioned in clause one.)  Article two, authorized a legal committee to redraft the charter and present the new charter to the Palestinian Central Council (PCC).  There is no mention of the PCC in any of the 33 articles of the 1968 charter; nor is there any reference to when the redrafted charter would be presented to the PNC.  There is not a shred of evidence that a legal committee ever redrafted a new charter or that anything was ever presented to the PCC.

Any objective analysis of the two clause resolution would compel anyone to conclude that no change was made in the charter by that resolution.  The PNC resolution was merely a tactic to appear to properly satisfy the Interim Agreement clause requiring the onerous clauses to be annulled within two weeks of the inauguration of the agreement.

The only known document pertaining to the charter between April 1996 and Jan 1998 emanated from the Israel Foreign Ministry in October 1996.  It stated that no change in the charter occurred in the PNC April 1996 meeting.  Thus the PLO has not renounced terrorism nor accepted the right of Israel to exist.

Arafat sent a letter to President Clinton in January 1998 in which he stated that the PNC April 1996 resolution was a comprehensive amendment of the charter which resulted in the annulment of articles 6-10, 15, 19-23, and 30 and the partial annulment of articles 1-5, 11-14, 16-18, 25-27 and 29.

These Arafat alleged annulments and partial annulments never happened; therefore, they were absolute lies.  The fact that the Wye River Accord contained a memorandum of a procedure for various Palestinian Ministries including the PNC, to reaffirm Arafat’s letter to President Clinton, could not magically convert Arafat’s lies into facts.

It took my secretary less than 15 minutes to create the new enclosed WKL Amended 1968 Charter with the alleged annulled clauses.  I did not have her change the alleged partially annulled clauses.  No new charter with the annulment clauses excised and the new language of the partially annulled clauses has ever been published.

Intention is expressed by action.  If there were a real desire to change the charter, the PNC would have met and voted for a resolution with the specific annulments and partially annulments pursuant to Arafat’s letter to President Clinton.

I believe that I have proved that as of this moment, the Palestinians have been incapable of changing their charter to destroy Israel.

The year 2000 PLO inspired intifada; Palestinian Leadership reference to terrorists as “our soldiers”; and many other violations of Oslo I and II too numerous to mention; are further evidence of Palestinian Leadership lack of desire to live peacefully with Israe.

I respectfully ask anyone to refute my unequivocal statement that there has never been a valid nullification of one word of the PLO 1968 Charter to destroy Israel.  If nobody comes forth with a valid refutation, why should Israel enter into any negotiations with the Palestinian Authority which has clearly illustrated that they do not fulfill their obligations?

William K. Langfan