Response to Antoine Raffoul – What is the Iron Wall?

April 10, 2010
Response to Antoine Raffoul's missive 'The Persistence of a Palestinian Family'
1948 LEST WE FORGET is an excellent website, and its conversational historical narrative with pertinent quotations is easy to read for those unfamiliar with the theft of Palestine, as is of course your missive above. Thank you for sharing the idea of “Persistence”, and your personal family story. It is both heartening, and empowering.
I am at a loss to understand something however, and I hope you would address it. I noticed an omission of emphasis on LEST WE FORGET, and therefore, a complete mis-diagnosis of the “invisible” force which is the first-cause prime-mover of the dispossession of the Palestinians.
While LEST WE FORGET accurately narrates the overt history of the theft of Palestine, it does not address its core prime-mover (unless I missed it). A force which is so immense, and so ubiquitous, that even the Balfour Declaration was issued in its name. A force so old that it created Reform Judaism in 1828 which set the stage for Zionism 70 years before Theodor Herzl. A force so potent that it today controls all the private central banks of G-7 nations, and of course only coincidentally controls them from the same location as the first Declaration of Der Judenstatd in 1897. And a force so diabolical that it has funded, inter alia, the new Israeli Supreme Court to administer 'chosen people's Justice in Zion and its outer appendages – when that transpires.
Yet, the only mention of the name “Rothschild”, and only in its limited historical context, appears as follows :
“It all started in a small way as the first Zionist settlement in Palestine was founded with the financial help of Edmond James de Rothschild (1845-1934), a French financier who assisted a small group of the Russian Bilu Jewish Society to immigrate to Palestine in 1882. This Philanthropist sponsored a few more tiny settlements at the time such as Gai Oni, Roch Pina, Zichron-Ya’acov and Rishon Letzion with settlers from around Eastern Europe.” —
“Before the dust had settled on Allenby’s advances into Palestine, and on the 2nd of November 1917, the British Government published what has been notoriously known ever since as the 'Balfour Declaration'. This took the form of a letter from Arthur J Balfour (1848-1930), a Conservative politician and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, addressed to Lord L Walter Rothschild (1868-1937) a British banker and member of the wealthy Rothschild financial dynasty. It read: …” —
And this, despite almost appreciating the momentous significance of the ambiance of the Declaration:
'This Declaration may be considered the most extraordinary document of any government. What makes it extraordinary is the fact that, in the words of Arthur Koestler (Jewish novelist 1905 – 1983), “one nation solemnly promised to a second nation the country of a third”. Even more extraordinary is the fact that this third country (Palestine) was still part of the empire of a fourth (Turkey). Britain had no business offering the nation of one people to the people of many nations.' — Ibid.
And that's it!!! No other mention of Rothschild.
Yet much emphasis is given to the visible 'errand boys' who did a lot of the spade-work no differently than the lower echelon of the US State Department might do for the American President in any American International mission for instance:
"This Declaration came about after extensive lobbying from the Zionist leadership whose spokesman and tireless lobbyist Chaim Weizmann never missed an opportunity to prepare the grounds to secure this Declaration. For instance, in one letter he wrote to a friend in December 1914, he said:
“I saw Balfour on Saturday [mid December 1914] and the interview lasted one and a half hours. Balfour remembered everything we discussed 8 years ago [1906] and I gave him a brief summary of what has happened over these years…He listened for a long time and was very moved – I assure you, to tears – and he took me by the hand and said that I had illuminated for him the road followed by a great suffering nation [the Jewish nation], and expressed his opinion that the question of Palestine would remain insoluble…until there was a normal Jewish community in Palestine. He asked me whether I wanted anything practical at present. I said no, [but that] I would like to call on him again…when the roar of the guns had stopped [meaning, WW1]. He saw me out into the street, holding my hand in silence, and bidding me farewell said warmly:
'Mind you come again to see me, I am deeply moved and interested, it is not a dream, it is a great cause and I understand it'”." — Ibid.
And I have to ask this again and again, but receive no response, almost as if the question itself is inconvenient, almost like a nuisance, why does this fellow keep bringing it up: are Palestinians fundamentally unable to perceive that Jabotinsky's “protection of a force independent of the local population – an iron wall which the native population cannot break through” is not fundamentally ‘an iron wall of bayonets and Jewish armed garrisons’ as is noted on LEST WE FORGET, although that is surely among its many manifestations, but rather, the prime-mover force which is “independent of the local population”?
What is that prime-mover which is independent of the the native population and which the natives consequently cannot breach? What is the prime-mover which can orchestrate entire world-wars to achieve any end? Which can then preside in Peace Processes which invariably follow to submit their demands to the side they help win the world war?
That un-breachable Iron-wall is surely not the guns and bayonets!
It appears so un-breachable that most Palestinians can't even see it!!
This question is further formulated in my Response to Ismail Zayid: Breaching the Iron Wall.
I hope you can address this omission. Do you disagree with it – then refute it. If you are unfamiliar with this idea that Zionistan is a Rothschild family mission as the Khazar 'king of the Jews', then that's an avenue for research.
In general, I look forward to a deeper examination of the “Protecting Power” by Palestinians themselves – the power which has lowered that un-breachable but very real “iron wall” around their homes, their lives, their memories, and which is the first-cause of their dispossession and their suffering. A deeper examination which can automatically lead to a refocus of narratives, of politics, of demands, of quests, so that, ultimately, the suffering and dispossession can actually end in a fate other than the ones meted to the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
Today, apart from stories and narratives, the Palestinians have nothing that can scare the hectoring hegemons. I earnestly believe that going in that direction, a beleaguered people potentially acquire a weapon which if wielded astutely and with full knowledge of political science, can be game changing.
Zahir Ebrahim

Response to Antoine Raffoul – What is the Iron Wall? By Zahir Ebrahim April 10, 2010