By Andrew Bieszad
A startling claim that the west is on course for war with Russia has been delivered by the former deputy commander of Nato, the former British general Sir Alexander Richard Shirreff.
In a book published on Wednesday, 2017 War With Russia, Shirreff argues that the events in Crimea have destroyed the post-cold-war settlement and set the stage for conflict, beginning next year.
In a chilling scenario, he predicts that Russia, in order to escape what it believes to be encirclement by Nato, will seize territory in eastern Ukraine, open up a land corridor to Crimea and invade the Baltic states.
Shirreff, who was deputy supreme allied commander Europe from 2011 to 2014 and before that served in Northern Ireland, Iraq and the Balkans, is risking his reputation by making such a bold prediction. But he claims his narrative is closely modelled on his Nato experience of war-gaming future conflicts.
His scenario is specific, naming Latvia as the first of the Baltic countries to be invaded, in May next year. Such specifics open him to potential ridicule.
At the book launch at London’s Royal United Services Institute, he heavily caveated the scenario by saying it was still avoidable provided Nato took the necessary steps to pre-position forces in large enough numbers in the Baltic states. Nato is planning to make a start on just such a move at a Nato in Warsaw in July.
Now in most cases, I really do not care about secular predictions about what the future holds. The future is unknown and, as we all know, anything can happen.
The only reason why I bring this “prediction” up is because of a topic which I have been writing a lot about, and that is the events of Fatima.
I did a piece last week entitled Is Your Soul Ready? Divine Justice Follows Divine Mercy, And The Year Of Mercy Ends In 6 Months. It re-emphasized many points I have brought up about Fatima because, based on what I know and understand, we are on the edge of something big and terrible and it involves the Third Secret of Fatima.
Fatima is a very controversial topic in the Catholic Church, and without going into a lot of detail, there are basically two issues which cause the controversy:
1) Was the third secret of Fatima revealed or not?
2) Was Russia consecrated to the Immaculate Heart Mary per Our Lady’s instructions?
When it comes to these questions, there are likewise two group. The one group which says “Yes” to both questions, and the other group which says “No.” And the two do not meet.
Talking about Fatima is a great way to isolate yourself and get yourself uninvited from parties, especially if you are of the view that the Fatima consecration was NOT done, and that is because of the frankly horrible conclusions that one must draw from it. Among the many assumptions if one answers “No” is to say that (a) every pope since 1917, each who has read the third secret, has refused to follow Our Lady’s instructions and that (b) certain members within the Vatican have used their authority to silence under obedience people who have read the Third Secret while at the same time have been invovled in a disinformation campaign- outright lying– to the average Christian “in the pew” about the Fatima message.
The three Fatima Children- Jacinta Marto, Francisco Marto, and Lucia Dos Santos
The result has been that for every statement the Vatican makes about Fatima, the fewer questions are actually answered the the more questions come up that necessarily merit more explanation. In other words, the more one looks to find the proverbial “end of the rabbit hole,” the further one goes down the rabbit hole because this hole just does not end.
Several years ago, I did some work with the late Fr. Gruner, who was one of the leading proponents of the “No” camp I referred to above. Without going into detail, a this weekend a Catholic Publisher and longtime friend, Steve Skojec of the blog One Peter Five, who I have also blogged with about Islam, encountered this very problem when it came to a “official statement” about Fatima with regard to certain article he and one of his colleagues, Dr. Maike Hickson, had been putting out. You can read the full text of the article here, but the issue that he encountered was essentially that as the Vatican was “rebutting” certain statements that he had recently published, the more questions were actually being raised:
It is, in itself, a strangely perfunctory communique, and is presented in a way that prompts questions about its provenance and completeness. It is not a full, unabridged statement from Pope Emeritus Benedict; nor does it bear his signature. We are presented instead with pull quotes attributed to Benedict, and lacking the full context in which they originally appeared. Neither is it given to us to know who conducted this apparent interview with him, or how the questions were phrased.
We are, in other words, asked to take it on faith that the statement contains the authentic, complete, and ratified sentiments of the Pope Emeritus on the matter.
It is noteworthy that when we presented the words of Fr. Dollinger as reported by Dr. Hickson, we were accused by some of reporting unverifiable hearsay. But now we are given partial statements attributed to Benedict by an unnamed member of the Vatican communications staff — statements which implicate us, and also Pope Benedict’s old friend, Fr. Dollinger, in willful deception — and we are asked to believe that the matter is therefore settled?
I hope you will forgive my skepticism.
I have two questions about the semantics of this carefully-constructed statement. I believe they merit consideration.
First, I would like to draw attention to the portion which states, “the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter ‘are pure inventions, absolutely untrue’.”
Dr. Maike Hickson, who personally called Fr. Dollinger, attests to the truth of what she recounted from that conversation. Inasmuch as the Vatican statement accuses her of “attributing” statements which are “inventions” to Fr. Dollinger, it is false. She did not imagine the conversation she had with Fr. Dollinger, shereported it, and I stand by her testimony with full confidence in her integrity, both as a journalist and as a faithful daughter of the Church.
Further, this morning Dr. Hickson telephoned Father Dollinger with the news of the Vatican statement, and at that time he again confirmed to her emphatically and clearly his previous remarks. In other words, he stood by his story.
Second, the communique quotes Pope Benedict as saying that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”. This is very cautious language, in a legal sense. If the Vatican has already published all that it intends to publish about the Third Secret of Fatima — even if there is more that they do not intend to publish— one would be technically correct in saying that “the publication is complete.” It does not in any way dispel the notion that a text written by Sister Lucia at the prompting of Our Lady as a means of interpreting the symbolic import of the Third Secret may yet exist.
As I stated in my followup to our original article, one needn’t assume that the popes who have potentially concealed additional information relating to the Third Secret have lied to us; if they fear that the information it contains will cause severe damage to the Church in some way, they may be using broad mental reservation in their concealment of the portion of the text in question. There is also the issue, raised by Marco Tosatti, of internal questioning within the Vatican apparatus about which portions of an additional explanatory text, if it exists, can be attributed to Our Lady, and which to Sister Lucia. If there were sufficient doubt, one could conceivably conceal such a text while remaining technically correct stating that the full secret (ie., the portion that they were confident came from Our Lady) had been revealed. The legalistic sense, therefore, is noteworthy in this regard.
I believe that beyond the questions raised by the text of the communique, there are other known facts which simply do not add up in this statement as attributed to Pope Benedict. The language is strong, even harsh, and it seems uncharacteristic in that regard. Benedict has a reputation for kindness and gentleness, and the source of the information he is refuting comes from a long-time friend – a friendship that his statement does not deny.
And as Steve concludes,
There is a great deal that does not add up. There are many questions left unanswered. We offer our sincere prayers for the Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and our gratitude that he broke his silence to address this open question.
At the same time, we are being asked to believe that we are being lied to by our sources. That we are being deceived by individuals in the last years of their life, with nothing apparent to gain. Individuals who have established strong reputations as noteworthy and orthodox Catholics, and whose reputations have now been put on the line by presenting an alternate version of events.
This is a great deal to ask, and we must respectfully request, therefore, that we be given a complete response — a full, unaltered, and witnessed statement from the Pope Emeritus himself. The filtered words of the Vatican Press office do not suffice.
The point I am getting at is the more one looks at Fatima, the more questions one asks, the more questions, and with more dire consequences, one must look at.
Which brings me to the issue of this War with Russia.
Again, I do NOT have inside information in this matter. However, among the relevant things to this matter, I know three things.
1)The Fatima revelations began in May 2017. This is basic historical knowledge about the events.
2)Sr. Lucia herself said that if Fatima was not consecrated, the Pope would follow the example of the “error of the King of France,” which refers to the fact that on June 17, 1689 St. Margaret Mary Alacoque was told that the King of France had to have France consecrated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and he had 100 years to do so. He did not, and on that exact day- June 17, 1789- 100 years later, was when the king was stripped of his power and the French Revolution began:
As Sr. Lucia said in a message she received from Our Lady in 1931:“Make it known to My ministers that, given they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My command, they will follow him into misfortune. It will never be too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary.”
Like the Kings of France who disobeyed the heavenly King’s command by delaying the solemn consecration of France for 100 years, the ministers of the Lord who do the same in regard to the collegial consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary “will follow the French king into misfortune.”
3)The Third Secret, while the text is not known, is said to have the same- but more dire– message as Our Lady of Akita in 1971. The Message of Akita is that if man does not turn from his sin, the world would be destroyed by fire
As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests.
“The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres (other priests); churches and altars will be sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.
“The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them.
What makes all of this particularly interesting is that this is the “Year of Mercy”- the first ever of such- in the Catholic Church. As I wrote about in my articles before, mercy always comes before justice.
So, will there be war with Russia next year? I do not know. I hope not.
All I know is that nothing in life happens by accident. And then I see this General, talking about war in May 2017, exactly 100 years after Fatima’s revelations began, even going so far as to risk his reputation by doing so.
Watch. Pray. Prepare.
Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
The Five Wise and Five Foolish Virgins from Scripture.
Who are you?