Our Established Religion

   The Journal of Historical Review | Sumnmer 1990 | pp. 211-222
   ..............

   "What do you mean, our established religion? We have no established
   religion in this country.  Our constitution forbids any such thing.  Look,
   it says right here in the First Amendment right at the very beginning.
   'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
   prohibiting the free exercise of religion.'  It's contrary to our whole
   tradition of freedom of worship to have anything like an established
   religion."

   My answer to that has to be "De jure", we certainly haven't got any
   established religion, as they do in (say) England, Japan, or Israel--but we
   do have one de facto, although it is not acknowledged openly.  You ask
   what it is? Zionism, as a secular religion, which has by now become a set
   of beliefs which nobody must dare question, and which therefore qualifies
   as established, although unofficially.  You don't believe it?  Well, let's
   look at the matter in more detail--first of all, at what constitutes an
   established religion, and then how Zionism has to be regarded as meeting
   the criteria for being considered as one.
 

   I. THE NATURE OF AN ESTABLISHED RELIGION

   There are, of course, a great many definitions of religion.  For our
   purposes, the best definition would be something like this: a Religion is
   a set of beliefs which do not need objective confirmation but which brook
   no contradiction (dogmas).  Those who adhere to a religion are its
   faithful, its true believers. Adherence to the commonly held beliefs of a
   religion is orthodoxy; unlicensed variation therefrom is heresy and any
   contradiction or denial of orthodox dogmas is blasphemy.  The writings
   which set forth the basis of a religion are its scriptures.  Many a
   religion has its fanatics, who will go to any lengths to enforce its
   beliefs on all, whether faithful or infidel.
 

   An Established Religion Has Three Main Characteristics

   A: Governmental support, both legal and financial.  In England, for
   instance, the Church of England is, by law, the official religion of the
   country, with the ruling monarch as its head.  In Spain and (until
   recently) in Italy, the Roman Catholic faith is the only religion
   recognized by the state.  In Japan Shintoism, with worship of the Emperor
   as its head, enjoyed a similar status until after the war.

   These examples are not typical of the modern world, as a whole, since most
   modern countries have followed the example of the United States in
   abolishing established religion.  In earlier times, it was the rule, rather
   than the exception, for a country to have a monarch, and an established
   religion of which he or she) and the population at large were true
   believers.  In modern times, the only country to set up an established
   religion has been Israel, in which, following the doctrines of Zionism, the
   Jewish religion has been declared in the constitution to be the official
   faith of the nation.

   B: An obligation of the citizens of the country to adhere to the beliefs
   and dogmas of the established religion.  Especially in the sixteenth and
   seventeenth century, during the disputes of the Reformation, the ruling
   monarch set the offical "party line," as it were, which his or her subjects
   were obliged to follow.  This principle was summarized in the Latin
   tag cuius regio, eius religio (whosoever rules the country sets its
   religion).  The citizens are expected to attend whatever worship-services
   the established religion may require, and to make financial contributions
   both as individuals in connection with their membership in the church or
   other type of religious organization, and also through the taxes they pay
   to the state, which are then channeled to the ruling body of the
   established religion.

   C: Dissent is, in theory, prohibited, and sanctions may be invoked against
   any who dare to express disagreement with official doctrines (heretics and,
   on occasion, adherents of other religions).  In earlier times, dissenters
   were punished with extreme severity, which could extend even to the death
   penalty, often inflicted with especial cruelty.  In some instances,
   punishment for blasphemy was extended beyond the individual dissenter to
   his possessions, his family, even relatives and descendants. (This
   procedure has always been repugnant to Americans' sense of fairness and
   legality, so that our Constitution specifically forbids "acts of
   attainder," by means of which the government imposes a "taint' of
   criminality on an offenders family and descendants when they had no part in
   whatever actions may have brought punishment upon him.) In almost all
   civilized countries in modern times, repression of dissent in religious
   matters has been greatly relaxed or almost eliminated.  In England, for
   instance, non-Anglicans are now subject to no disabilities on account of
   their religious beliefs.  In Israel, however, where no religion other than
   Judaism is accorded legal recognition, only adherents of that faith are
   completely free of disabilities or restrictions.

   Censorship is often imposed on the writings of heretics and adherents of
   any other than the official established religion.  In this respect, also,
   ancient and medieval practice was often extremely savage, with legally
   sanctioned seizure of books and destruction of writings, visual
   representations (pictures, statues) and the like.  In modern times,
   virtually all civilized countries have abolished any official censorship or
   criticism in religious matters, even where there is still an established
   church.  In this, also, the state of Israel constitutes a glaring
   exception.  There, for instance, no Christian missionary activity is
   permitted (since, from the orthodox Jewish point of view, Christians are
   minim, "heretics") and it is forbidden to have copies of the New Testament
   available to the public in schools or libraries.

   II. ZIONISM, A SECULAR RELIGION

   Zionism qualifies as a religion on all the counts just mentioned.  Its
   central tenet is that all Jews have a God-given right to regard Palestine
   as their home, the "land flowing with milk and honey" that Jehovah promised
   the Hebrews as they wandered in the desert after their escape from Egypt.
   Not only is this, according to strict Zionism, a right which all Jews have
   by virtue of their (presumed) descent from the ancient Hebrews, but it is a
   duty incumbent on them to adhere to its principles and to further its aims.
   If anyone dares to disagree with its fundamental assumptions and their
   realization in the modern state of Israel, such a person is to be regarded
   as an enemy of Jewry.  A Jew who is not a Zionist is, for the true
   believers of this religion, a traitor.  There are many Zionists for whom
   the supernatural aspect of Judaism is no longer meaningful; for them,
   Zionism is a purely secular religion, an ersatz Judaism, and (as the Jewish
   philosopher Will Herberg pointed out) the state of Israel has become an
   idol.  Zionism has its fanatics, both Jewish and non-Jewish, who are ready
   to attack its enemies without mercy.
 

   III. THE DE FACTO SITUATION

   In the United States and many other countries, however, even where there is
   de jure no established religion, we have de facto such an
   "establishment," " as the Constitution phrases it.  The great majority of
   the public is almost totally unaware of the situation, since we have been
   subjected for almost half a century to an incredibly immense distortion of
   the facts of the situation, imposed on us by the news and entertainment
   media.  Let us take a quick look at the characteristics of an established
   religion, which we set forth in Section I, as they are manifested in the
   status of Zionism in the world in general, and in the United States in
   particular, at present.

   A. The United States has given extensive financial support to both the
   state of Israel and Zionist-related projects in this country and abroad.
   It is well known that Israel has received much the largest amount of
   foreign aid, especially in the supply of aeroplanes and military resources,
   of all the countries to which the United States has given assistance.

   In domestic matters, Zionist propaganda-aims have been extensively assisted
   by governmental financing, for instance in the building and equipping of
   "Holocaust"-museums, and in the wide-spread provisions of courses in
   schools and colleges to spread Zionist disinformation concerning the
   alleged "Holocaust." Similar support for Jewish educational projects
   outside of the United States has been given by government grants.  The most
   notorious of these instances was the proposal, sponsored by Senator Daniel
   Inouye of Hawaii, for an eight-million-dollar subsidy for a "parochial
   school" to be provided for a Jewish community from Northern Africa which
   was located in southern France.  The out-cry over this proposal was such
   that it was withdrawn, but similar grants were made without publicity or
   opposition.  Not only the educational, but the military resources of the
   United States have been placed at the disposition of Jewish groups, such as
   the Falasha of Ethiopia, who were given air transport from that country to
   Israel by the U.S. Air-Force.  That may have been a worthy humanitarian
   project, but one which did not concern the United States at all and to
   which there was no justification for using a service supported by the
   American taxpayers' money.  We might also keep in mind that this was done
   for the benefit of Israel, a country whose air-force had wantonly attacked
   and sunk the U.S. Navy's ship Liberty without provocation at the time of
   the "Six Days' War" between that nation and Egypt.

   B. In not only financial but legal matters as well the United States has
   afforded support for Israeli and Zionist aims.  The notorious "Holtzman
   Amendment" authorized the exclusion from the United States of anyone who
   had been involved in any German actions against Jews during the "Nazi
   period" (an ill-defined concept) and the withdrawal of American citizenship
   from any immigrant who had come to this country in the post-war period and
   had, for any reason, concealed his involvement with the German army or
   other German organizations.  To put these provisions into effect, a bureau
   was established in the U.S. Department of justice, entitled the "Office of
   Special Investigations' (OSI), which collaborated closely with the two most
   efficient, brutal and ruthless secret services of the modern world-the
   Soviet KGB and the Israeli Mossad.  The OSI has thus functioned as if it
   were a branch of the Mossad ensconced in the heart of our Department of
   justice, dedicated to pursuing persons who were non gratae to the state
   of Israel and to the U.S.S.R. (whose desires for unlimited vengeance for
   alleged "war-crimes" seem boundless).

   Using materials (many of them demonstrably forged) obtained from the Mossad
   and the KGB alleged to prove complicity in Nazi anti-Jewish "atrocities" in
   the 1930's and 1940's, the OSI has taken action against a number of persons
   who had come to the United States after 1945 and who had behaved with
   complete correctness from then on.  By the time these actions were
   undertaken, the alleged war criminals were old men, in their late sixties
   or their seventies.  Among the victims of this type of 'railroading' were
   the Ukrainian John Demjanjuk, the Estonian Karl Linnas, and the German
   scientist Arthur Rudolph.  Demjanjuk was extradited to Israel, in violation
   of American law (which provides that a person accused of a crime in another
   country may be sent only to the country where the alleged crime was
   committed, in this case Poland).  He was tried in Israel by a
   kangaroo-court and was convicted, on the basis of obviously faked documents
   supplied by the KGB, of having sent a million (!) Jews to their deaths at
   Treblinka or Sobibor.  It has now become an item of faith in Israel and
   among Zionist sympathizers in the United States that he was one of the
   worst war-criminals of the Nazi period, worse even than Adolf Eichmann.  To
   query this dogma is blasphemy, as was made evident when, in the American
   presidential campaign of 1988, a man named Jerome Brentar was required to
   resign from the staff of the Republican candidate George Bush's
   "nationalities" committee because he considered Demjanjuk innocent.  The
   "Jewish vote" was much more important, in both its numbers and its
   financial support, than that of the Ukrainian-American constituency--or,
   for that matter, any considerations of fairness or justice.

   A similar miscarriage of justice, less bad in that it did not involve
   depriving an innocent man of his life, but putting the United States in a
   bad light with regard to its conduct of international relations, took place
   when the president of Austria, Kurt Waldheim, was denied admission to the
   United States in 1986.  This action was taken by the U.S. Department of
   justice, clearly in line with the principles of the Holtzman Amendment as
   enforced by the OSI, on the grounds that Waldheim had been a member of the
   German army in the 1940's (Austria was not a separate nation at that time,
   of course, having been made part of Germany in 1938), and had knowingly
   taken part in the perpetration of anti-Jewish atrocities.  The documents on
   which these allegations were based were later shown to have been falsified.
   This fact was reported in the German magazine Der Spiegel, but was not
   communicated to the public in the American news-media.  Actually, any
   person who had been in the German army from 1939 to 1945 could,
   technically, have been charged with "perpetrating Nazi atrocities," since
   the Zionist view is that all members of the German armed forces were fully
   guilty of whatever had been done during that period--a sentiment which, as
   we have observed, is wholly foreign to our American view of individual
   responsibility and of fairness.

   C. Propaganda for the Zionist cause is made incessantly in the American
   news and entertainment media, which are extensively under Zionist control.
   The group which determines the over-all policy of the media is largely,
   though of course not wholly, Jewish, as in the case of such major
   opinion-moulding newspapers as the New York Times and the
   Washington Post, as well as several major nationwide chains, and also of
   virtually all the entertainment media (radio and television).  The latter
   are coming more and more under Zionist control throughout the world, as in
   the huge communications-empires of such men as Robert Maxwell (originally a
   Czech Jew named Jan Ludwig Hoch) and Rupert Murdoch (an Australian Jew).
   In this way, so far as the rights and wrongs of the theoretical basis of
   Zionism and the justification for the existence of the state of Israel are
   concerned, only one side of the picture is presented, and the public is
   given the wholly false idea that "brave little Israel" is the only
   democratic state in all the Near and Middle East, with a "special
   relationship" (of exactly the type that George Washington warned against
   two hundred years ago) with the United States.  The maltreatment given the
   Palestinians by the Israeli government and its troops in the occupied
   territories is, by and large, played down and, wherever possible, presented
   as justified punishment for illegal attacks on Israeli soldiers.  From this
   point of view, for instance, it is quite permissible for an Israeli soldier
   to shoot and kill a three-year-old Palestinian boy because he threw a stone
   at the soldier; and this is the only point of view normally presented to
   the American public.  On occasion, the excessive savagery practised by the
   Israelis has been shown on television, arousing protests by Jews and
   non-Jews alike--whereupon the Israeli authorities have forbidden further
   photographing of such scenes and the American television networks have
   obligingly refrained from telecasting anything of the sort any further.

   The strangle-hold that Zionists have on the multi-billion-dollar
   communications-industries has made it possible for them to create a
   widespread, uncritical belief in the rightness of their cause and in the
   unquestionability of Israeli rule in Palestine.  They have also taken
   advantage of the belief of many fundamentalist Christians that the second
   coming of Christ must take place in Palestine among laws, and that
   therefore the existence of the state of Israel is a necessary prerequisite
   for His second coming. (Other Christians, less fixed in the notion that the
   second coming has to come about among Jews, consider it equally likely that
   He might appear on earth as a Bombay street-sweeper, or a Latin American
   carnpesino.)

   To fix these ideas still more firmly in the public's mind, the writers of
   novels and the motion-picture- and television-moguls have flooded the
   market with novels and "docudramas" heavily slanted in the direction of
   Zionism and Jewry in general.  There has been an avalanche of fiction
   purporting to portray the "Holocaust," with an incredible amount of
   emphasis on imaginary details of alleged maltreatment of Jews by Germans
   (all of whom are portrayed as demons, totally inhuman and devoid of any
   decency at all).  The sado-masochism of the cheaper brands of
   "Holocaust"-literature has been such as to arouse revulsion even among the
   more reasonable Zionists themselves.  A lengthy series of fictional
   portrayals of the events of the alleged "Holocaust" has been shown on
   television, including one with the title Auschwitz and another involving
   the reminiscences of "Holocaust-survivors" entitled Shoah.  Sequences
   with staged representations of Jews being herded into gas-chambers have
   been inserted into such evocations of the 1939-1945 conflict as
   War and Remembrance.

   IV. THE "HOLOCAUST" MYTH

   Virtually every religion has a central myth, on which its beliefs and
   dogmas are based.  For religious Jews and Christian ultra-fundamentalists,
   the Biblical story of Jehovah having promised Palestine to the ancient
   Hebrews is sufficient.  For non-religious Jews, however, a basis for the
   secular worship of the state of Israel has been found in the myth (in all
   senses of that term) of what is universally termed "the Holocaust," a myth
   which has by now been so extensively proclaimed and imposed on the public:
   as to be believed by virtually everyone.

   A. The conventional form of the "Holocaust" myth involves the acceptance,
   as a historical fact which is one hundred percent true and beyond all
   questioning, of the story that during the period when the National
   Socialist party was in power in Germany (1933-1945) and especially during
   the wartime from 1939 to 1945, Jews were made the object of relentless
   persecution, placed in concentration camps under inhuman treatment and near
   starvation, and that millions of Jews (the standard figure of six million,
   although numerous other figures are often given, ranging from twenty-five
   million (!)   to one-and-a-half million) were put to death in various ways,
   but       for the most part in gas chambers either constructed for the
   purpose or adapted from crematoria.  Their corpses were, we are told,
   dragged out of the gas chambers immediately after their deaths, and burned
   either in the same crematoria or in immense heaps out of doors.  In Hebrew,
   the word Shoah 'burnt offering, holocaust - massacre' has come to be used
   to refer to this sequence of events, and its translation Holocaust is
   similarly used in other languages.  In the immediate post-1945 period, it
   was claimed and widely believed that there had been mass executions, in
   general with gas chambers, in all regions under German control.  More
   recently it has been shown, and admitted even by such prominent Zionists as
   Hannah Arendt and Simon Wiesenthal, that there were no extermination camps
   at all in Germany.  The entire burden of the "Holocaust" story has thus
   been thrown upon eastern Europe, principally Poland, where, it is currently
   asserted, there were huge murder-installatians at such places as Treblinka,
   Sobibor, and especially Oswiecim (Auschwitz, including the camp at Birkenau
   or 'Auschwitz II").

   By now, the place-name Auschwitz has come to be a universally accepted
   symbol for these alleged mass executions carried out under secret orders
   from the Nazi Führer Adolf Hitler.  The sacred Scriptures on which the
   story of the "Holocaust" is based are principally a batch of self-serving
   affidavits ascribed to "survivors" from various concentration camps (in
   reality, largely fabricated by Soviet disinformation factories for
   presentation at the Nürnberg trials) and the testimonies, down the decades,
   of other individuals, characterized by manifold internal discrepancies and
   mutual contradictions. The universally used expression "the Holocaust"
   contains deceptive linguistic features: the use of the definite article
   the, which tells the listener in advance that whatever noun it modifies
   refers to something which exists or has existed; the use of the singular
   form of the noun, implying that it refers to the only phenomenon of its
   kind; and, at the same time, the vagueness of reference of the term
   Holocaust, which is used with widely varying meanings, to signify
   anything from the entire persecution of Jews between 1933 and 1945 (which
   no-one denies) to the existence of gas chambers, especially at Auschwitz.
   Hence "to deny the reality of the Holocaust' has become a stock phrase,
   used to discredit anyone who questions any aspect of the story.

   B. Heresies and Blasphemies.  Doubts as to the nature and the extent of the
   "Holocaust" surfaced soon after the "war crimes" trials held at Nürnberg in
   1945-1946, which were immediately perceived by many observers as being
   simply 'kangaroo courts" held by the victors to enforce a Russian and
   Jewish vendetta.  As information has gradually been made available over the
   decades, it has become more and more clear that there are "holes" at all
   points in the standard version of the "Holocaust" story. There has arisen a
   sharp conflict between those who believe implicitly that an immense number
   of Jews were massacred ("Exterminationists") and those who consider that
   the traditional story is inaccurate and needs to be revised
   ("Revisionists"). Even among the former group, there has arisen a heresy,
   among historians who consider that, since there is no proof that Hitler
   ever gave any order for mass executions, the initiative for such massacres
   came from individual camp commanders.

   The major threat to the established "Holocausf story has come, however,
   from those who, on examination of available documentation, refuse to accept
   the story at all, and consider it a tissue of falsehoods that has been
   built up over the decades.  The "Revisionists" arguments are based on a
   number of considerations, especially the chemical and electrical
   impossibilities inherent in the descriptions of the gas chambers or other
   installations alleged to have been used for these mass executions; the
   non-availability, in war-time conditions, of the immense quantities of coal
   or gasoline necessary to burn millions of corpses; and the impossible load
   that the transport of all these millions of people to the "death-camps"
   (now restricted entirely to Poland) would have imposed on an already
   tremendously over-burdened railway system.  Definitive proof that there
   were no gas-chambers at all at Auschwitz (including Birkenau) or Majdanek
   has now been furnished by a forensic chemical engineering study made
   in situ by a major expert on execution by gas, Fred A. Leuchter. At
   present, the arguments and attested documentation presented by the
   "Revisionists" are decidedly more persuasive than those of the
   "Exterminationists."
 

   V. THE BLACKOUT

   These blasphemies are of course, in the view of the True Believers, not to
   be tolerated, because if the "Holocaust" myth is shown to be untrue, the
   central support of non-religious Zionism and with it the worship of the
   state of Israel as a secular idol collapses entirely.  As part of the
   unofficial, de facto established religion of Zionism, all dissent must be
   suppressed.  To this end, various measures have been and are being taken,
   in contravention of United States law and our American sense of honesty and
   fairness, but nevertheless with impunity.

   A. Defamation is a widely used practice for silencing any who dare to
   espouse or even report on the arguments of the "Revisionists" (as the
   present writer knows from first-hand experience).  The ADL
   ("Anti"-Defamation League) of the Jewish organization B'nai B'rith is
   especially active in denouncing as "anti-Semitic" (i.e. anti-Jewish) any
   effort at revising current views of the sacrosanct 'Holocaust' story.
   Anyone who suggests that there were no six-million (or any other immense
   number) of Jews slaughtered by the German government during the 1933-1945
   period, or who points out that it has now been shown that there were no
   gas-chambers at Auschwitz (which was in reality a large industrial complex
   with a few crematoria) is immediately denounced as a "Neo-Nazi,' a
   "Fascist," and accused of admiring the late Adolf Hitler and wanting to
   revive his doctrines and perhaps his party. (There are indeed a few such
   people, but to accuse all "Revisionists" of having such ideas is what is
   known in elementary logic as reason by converses, an unsound procedure.) In
   addition to institutions like the B'nai B'rith and the Simon Wiesenthal
   Foundation of Los Angeles, there are always a number of individual
   "Holocaust"-fanatics who are ready to pitch in and help defame any
   blasphemer against the True Faith.

   B. Attacks on persons and property are not unknown.  Individuals known for
   their "Revisionist" activities have been beaten, shot at, and even
   murdered. The most notorious such attack was made on the offices and
   warehouse of the Institute for Historical Review in Torrance, California on
   July 4, 1984, when most of their stock of books was burned in what was a
   clear instance of arson.

   C. Legal action has so far not been possible in the United States, but has
   been taken in other countries.  In Israel, naturally, no expression of
   doubt or contradiction is permitted, and Israeli pressure has succeeded in
   making anything of the kind illegal in West Germany.  Even in countries
   where one might expect the Anglo-Saxon concept of freedom of speech and of
   the press to prevail, such as Canada, "Revisionists" like Ernst Zündel and
   James Keegstra have been hauled into court and prosecuted.  It is illegal
   to bring into Canada such books as Arthur Butz's
   The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, on the grounds that it comes under the
   heading of books which may not be imported if they are treasonable,
   seditious, immoral or obscene (!).  Efforts to deprive American citizens of
   the right to publish, read, or discuss the "Holocaust" have not yet
   succeeded, but we do not know how long the present situation will last.

   VI. THE REMEDY (IF ANY)

   The question that inevitably arises at this point is: What can be done to
   improve matters? Specifically, how can one create a situation in which it
   can be pointed out that we have a de facto established religion, Zionism,
   which has been instrumental in making the United States into a vassal state
   of Israel, in both domestic and foreign policy? (If anyone doubts the
   validity of this assertion, consider the situation in the United Nations,
   where virtually unanimous condemnation of the Israeli anti-Palestinian
   savagery is routinely vetoed by the United States; and our domestic
   politics, in which both major parties vie in their efforts to pander to
   'the Jewish vote.)

   From the short-range point of view, it would seem to be nearly impossible
   to combat the huge political and especially financial forces which support
   the United States' "special relationship" with Israel and the on-going
   saturation of our news- and entertainment-media with the myth of the
   'Holocaust" In these times, it is very hard indeed to fight the
   multi-billion-dollar resources of financiers and liquor-barons.  We must
   take a grass-roots approach, and do our best to arouse a better
   understanding of the facts of the case and of the dangers which face, not
   only the non-Jews, but the Jews in this country if matters suddenly take a
   bad turn and Jews are unfairly blamed for what is, in the majority of
   cases, not their fault. We have all, Jews and non-Jews alike, been lied to
   for the last half-century.  It is time for the truth to be known, even
   though it may take another half-century or more for it to prevail.