No, Albert Pike Did Not Predict World War III

04/14/201919 Comments

Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

It’s 1871. August 15th, to be precise. The eminent American Freemason, Scottish Rite Sovereign Grand Commander Albert Pike, sits down at his desk and, by the flickering light of a candle, composes a letter to his friend and fellow Mason, the Italian politician Giuseppe Mazzini.

“The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism,” he writes (instead of the more conventional, “Hey Giuseppe, how’s the family doing?”).

Then, after gazing a little longer into his crystal ball, he sets to paper some sentences about a conflict seven decades in the future: “The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine.”

Most remarkably, he goes on to inform his friend about another great conflict, one that has yet to come to pass: “The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the ‘agentur’ of the ‘Illuminati’ between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other.”

Then, after licking the envelope and affixing the proper postage, he makes his way to the post office to deliver his letter (not forgetting to pick up some bread and milk from the store on the way home like his wife asked).

Sound familiar? Of course it does, because if you swim in “conspiracy” circles, you’ve heard some (probably more dramatic) version of this story many times before. Most recently, this tale has made its way into the hallowed pages of that most respectable and influential journal of record, The Daily Star, which—in keeping with its reserved and understated manner—gave it a suitably nuanced headline:

Mystery 200-year-old letter revealed World War 3 plans – and final battle against Islam!!!

OK, so I added the exclamation marks. But they do seem to be implied here, don’t they? (Besides, I only borrowed them from some of the Star’s other headlines, like the one about the Coronation Street star spilling out of her “devilishly daring low-cut number”[!]. Truly, journalism at its finest.)

So what do we make of these remarkable predictions? How did Albert Pike make such incredibly precise forecasts of events that were still decades in the future? And what can we learn from his prescient warning about World War III, living as we are in the shadow of the War of Terror and its incipient Clash of Civilizations?

Absolutely nothing, that’s what. Why? Because the letter is complete and utter hogwash, made up by admitted hoaxers and perpetuated by unscrupulous “researchers” who are more interested in getting clicks than telling the truth.

So do you want the real story of this (non-existent) letter? Here it is . . .

Get the real skinny on the WWIII letter that doesn’t exist and where it really comes from in this week’s edition of The Corbett Report Subscriber. For full access to the subscriber newsletter, and to support this website, please become a member.

For free access to this editorial, please CLICK HERE.

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register here.

Existing Users Log In
   

Filed in: Newsletter
Tagged with:

Comments (19)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. HomeRemedySupply says:

    Oops…Typo “walks”
    where it walks about a First World War

    • generalbottlewasher says:

      Homey, in lew of the mysterious subject matter at hand and the devilish revamping of old English by Freemanson Bacon, ” walks” works for me. It has as hidden a meaning as that of a fourteen year old bus boy getting the fish- eye of a lonely middle age woman eating a corndog. I put it down to springtime. The editor in chief had other things on his mind. Remain vigilant as the 500 word limit is a consent nusiance, as is Bacon English.

    • Corbett says:

      Thanks for pointing that out, HRS. Correction made.

      • Robert Smith says:

        hi James, have you read my comments on your amazing positive propaganda video here on your site? HomeRemedySupply reminded me to break up my messages into smaller 500 word comments.
        What do you think of my ideas for solutions along with recommended books?

        • HomeRemedySupply says:

          Robert-Bob,
          My bet is that he did read them. I would likely win that bet, (much better than I do at the Casino). 😉

          This Corbett fella stays pretty dog-gone busy, and he gets a lot of queries from folks on here, emails and at other places. It is difficult for him to answer everyone’s message.

          Every few months, he will have a “Questions For Corbett”.
          You can ask questions there. He doesn’t get to them all.
          Here is the last one he did…
          https://www.corbettreport.com/is-data-really-the-new-oil-questions-for-corbett/
          After you listen to it, you might want to re-post your comment there.

      • Robert Smith says:

        Hey James, have you heard claims about Albert Pike being the founder of the evil infamous Ku Klux Klan?

  2. n4x5 says:

    “After all, there is a reason why the ‘crazy conspiracy loony’ meme that the CIA has weaponized continues to hold sway with such a large part of the population. It’s because there are ‘crazy conspiracy loonies’ (or, more to the point, knowing frauds) who spread easily debunkable garbage, and not enough people in the so-called truth community calling it out.”

    From the perspective of an intelligence apparatus, bundling well-supported conspiracy content together with tenuous or downright nonsensical conspiracy content is an easy — but probably quite effective — method for sowing discord in the ranks of the hoi polloi. Some people will reject it all wholesale, the good along with the bad; others will believe it all, the bad along with the good; still others will actually take the time to parse the material and attempt to sort truth from hogwash (not all arriving at the same conclusions as they do); yet others will simply give up and disengage from the matter altogether. These different groups can become highly adversarial toward one another, further atomizing an already atomized population as the fissures between them deepen. This process, incidentally, appears to resemble the polarization of anti-Catholics and anti-Masons in late nineteenth century Europe fueled by the Taxil hoaxes, as described in the Melanson article.

    I recall seeing on C-SPAN the testimony of a US intelligence “expert” in the midst of the Russian media meddling brouhaha. He described something roughly comparable: the Russians supposedly deliberately put out multiple conflicting versions of a story through various channels — many false versions as well as the true version of events — knowing that this would overwhelm and confuse all but the most intrepid truthseekers. While I don’t doubt that the FSB and SVR employ this technique, I wasn’t surprised that he omitted any discussion of the FBI and CIA doing the same thing.

    • zyxzevn says:

      The intelligence agencies are attacking all logical basis for
      true information that might endanger their narrative.
      They feed the “trusted sources” with false information.
      They use all logical fallacies to divert a discussion.
      But they also make these fallacies seem logical.

      When Hillary stated that Russia hacked them and almost started a war,
      nobody stopped her. It was even repeated endlessly, by CIA narrators.
      The same story was put in European news.
      Logically she should be put into prison, for almost starting a war,
      and for whitewashing money, and more.

      This conflict is part of the narrative, it feeds division and
      conflict with other countries. So instead of pushing a
      corporate agenda, they now shifted to a war-conflict plan.

      The narrative is part of a larger plan, and they try to
      match every story to this plan. But that also includes the story
      of the opposition. They can switch story-lines, to make
      the opposition happy for a moment.

      To control the opposition, other false stories are injected.
      These must be emotionally loaded, to get the majority of
      the opposition in one line. Because the injected stories
      are not logically correct, it also causes conflict within
      the opposition.

      In this case Trump won the election, but he placed
      war-criminals in his government.
      So people that were anti-war are in conflict with people
      that voted for trump.
      The CIA also allowed an investigation to be start into
      Trump, while they knew that nothing was going on.
      Even most of the media knew it.

      The reality is even worse. The NSA knows exactly what
      happened. And their withholding of evidence means that they
      know that there is no evidence of Russian hacking at all.

      Anyway. Now we have conflicts withing two opposing groups.
      And the emotions are strong in these groups.
      This means that they can be manipulated towards any
      agenda.

      The CIA controls all these big groups from within.
      They have puppets and actors everywhere, but also
      real incidents happen by the puppets.

      The real agenda is clear.
      The Russian hacking narrative has been pushed to
      control both the voting-system and the news on the internet.
      I think that the EU fully cooperates with them.

      The news on the internet is now marked as fake or biased,
      when it does not come via the CIA/MI5.
      That is why we do not see demonstrations in Paris,
      or other such problems.

      The voting system has been placed in the hands of
      Homeland security, who have been planned this beforehand.
      This means that the computer-votes are now fully controlled
      by the organization that was setup during 9/11.

      • zyxzevn says:

        So people will “democratically vote” for people that they
        mostly disagree with. But they will be endless in conflict
        with each other about it, due to conflicting narratives.
        They will think that the majority of other people are stupid
        or against them.
        The winning of Trump was already clear in the beginning,
        just look at the people gathering at his speeches, compared
        to those at Hillary’s. The e-mails were not even relevant.
        The conflicts were already setup to make it appear as
        if this was a surprise. The situation was merely used
        to start a new part of the plan.

        Well, these conflicts are already happening now.
        But the CIA does make it seem that these conflicts
        come from the people. But in reality people never want conflicts.
        But people are more and more controlled in the way they think,
        by the pushed narratives and planted stories.

        This full control on news and voting is part of the real plan.
        Welcome the completely fake democracy.

        • Mark K. P. says:

          A good idea would be to stop using democracy, because no modern country has ever had it. They have representative (elected) oligarchies. Democracy is something different to that. The active is confused with the passive in this case, a characteristically English trait

  3. joseph says:

    James,

    As a fellow historian I am wanting your take on something I have read recently. That as a point of global conflict, the first world war could be considered the “War of the Austrian Succession”. The more I understand about this conflict, the sillier the story seems to get. Thoughts?

    • CQ says:

      Joseph, I’ll be listening closely for James to hopefully pose and answer your question on his next Q4C. In fact, I want to hear his reply as much as you do, for I’m not familiar with the “War of the Austrian Succession” angle to WWI.

      • generalbottlewasher says:

        CQ: Have I experienced a Mandella Effect or did I read a now missing comment from early this morning. Something about Bacon ? Hope you can solve the mystery or Im pouring the rest of the Eau De Vie down the drain.

        • CQ says:

          Yes, I can solve the mystery, gbw. You’re not crazy. If you’re able to send an email to my website (just click on the “CONTACT” butterfly), I’ll gladly explain.

          Speaking of mysteries (and not Mandela effects), you wrote a reply to CQ last week that never showed up in the comment section (I saw it only in an email). I can respond to that, too, via email.

          If you somehow can’t get through to me, write to James and he’ll give the address to you. But only to you, gbw! 🙂

          To everyone else on this thread: Please excuse the private exchange. It won’t happen again. I hope!

    • generalbottlewasher says:

      Joseph; the Macgregor and Docherty books were a starting point for me in WW1 and lead me to the source authors of Fay and Barnes. They seem to try to scoop the tribe of revisionists of the time 1919 thur1925. Revisionist in a sence that now we see how the large group were steering the narrative of actual facts to some revised facts that crushed, twisted and deliberatly maintained the English Milner group narrative.
      Fay and Barnes don’t stray in to deep of water but do reveal to the general public that Germany may not have been sole owner of war guilt. They make no mention of the Milner group but focus on Austria in the profidios diplomacy of the Balkens. King Carol and Romania had a lot to do with the lose of Dual Monarchy territory . I can only guess as to what successions of Austria you may be referencing. Germany came to (Almost) despise Austria double dealing and warned them of over reach. The Kaiser really acted as King George VII did to the murderous regime change in the Balkens since the turn of the century. It was as bad as anything Shakespeare could have dreamed up. Austria-Hungury was destined to lose with this rotten territory of Monarchical possession. So possession to succession. And the English were more rotten and played all the actors from Triest to the Blact Sea to annihilating each other.

  4. mik says:

    The same channel that made Ethics (google ai assistant) recommended video produced also

    Google’s AI in Google Maps, Gmail and Assistant: good or bad?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMRFnzvv1Ls

    What they found good?
    People will have less challenges, less thinking.
    Effective way to ensure brain atrophy.

    Something about Ai safety (this guy has lots of this stuff)

    The Orthogonality Thesis, Intelligence, and Stupidity
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEUO6pjwFOo

  5. bangkokdon says:

    So, what did hit the Pentagon? Do we know?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top