Tuesday 29 November 2011


I can always count on Northerntruthseeker to find something exciting to post when it comes to true history, the unrevised truth, not what we were told by the winners of the wars. And yes, the Zionists and bankers won WWII, they never lose really, whatever the outcome so we have been treated to their propagandized version of events ever since.
Regarding Hitler, when the Judaic MSM vilified him as they did, common sense tells you also had some redeeming features, perhaps did some excellent things. As we have seen recently with Qaddafi and Saddam, who were cast lower than pond scum, things are not all black and white as things are portrayed. We also know that men like Kissinger and Obama get called great peacemakers when we know the very opposite is the truth.
So on to more truth.
NTS says:
I have always said that our so called "recorded" History that is constantly fed to our children in our disastrous education system is nothing more than a pack of lies.   More and more, thanks to facts coming forward through the Internet, we are finding that what we have been told, and taught in our school systems is nothing more than lies and falsehoods.   I personally have made it my job to present factual history here for everyone to see for themselves.

One piece of history that always perplexed me about World War II was the German invasion of Soviet Russia that started on June 22, 1941, under the code name: "Operation Barbarossa".   I was always curious throughout my years in the failed education system as to why a small nation such as Germany would suddenly gamble away any chances of winning its war for survival by launching a campaign against the massive Soviet Union.   It seemed at the time to be insanity and backed the false claims that Adolf Hitler was a meglomaniac....

But for the last 20 years or so, much of the truth about the Russian-German war on the Eastern Front in World War II had finally come to light, and I want to share one major piece of that intriguing puzzle right here for my own readers to view.  I want to present the following article that comes from Jim Marrs, through the Rense website at www.rense.com, entitled: "Did Adolf Hitler Save Europe From Communism".    I have some additional comments to follow:

By Jim Marrs

Excerpted from his book The Rise of the Fourth Reich 


By 1941, the international order had turned against Adolf Hitler. Germany's Blitzkrieg had shocked the ruling elite as first Poland then the rest of Europe came under Nazi control. Britain was helpless to stop Hitler, who was already making preparations for a pre-emptive attack on the Soviet Union. Hitler was getting out of hand. German inventiveness and efficiency as well as financial support from western financiers ~ had brought Hitler's Germany to the zenith of its power.

Germany was preparing to strike Russia and Hitler did not want a two-front war, the very situation which caused Germany's defeat in World War I. Hitler wanted England as an ally against communism. "With England alone [as an ally], one's back being covered, could one begin the new Germanic invasion [of Russia]," Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf. In other words, Hitler needed peace with Britain before undertaking an attack on Russia.

Securing peace on the West Front may have become an urgent priority for Hitler. According to former Soviet military intelligence officer Vladimir Rezun (writing under the pen name Viktor Suvorov) Hitler was forced to launch a pre-emptive assault against the Soviet Union in June, 1941, to forestall an attack on Western Europe by Stalin in July.
Suvorov's work has been published in 87 editions in 18 languages, yet has received virtually no mention in the U.S. corporate mass media despite the fact that his assertions turn conventional history upside down. Most people have been taught that Stalin naively trusted Hitler and was totally surprised by Hitler's attack.
Admiral N. G. Kuznetsov, who in 1941 was the Soviet Navy minister and a member of the Central Committee of the Soviet Communist Party, was quoted by Suvorov as stating in his postwar memoirs,
"For me there is one thing beyond all argument ~ J. V. Stalin not only did not exclude the possibility of war with Hitler's Germany, on the contrary, he considered such a war ... inevitable ... J. V. Stalin made preparations for war ... wide and varied preparations ~ beginning on dates ... which he himself had selected. Hitler upset his calculations."
While Suvorov's conclusions grate against the conventional view of Hitler's attack on Russia, he has provided a compelling argument. Suvorov pointed out that by June, 1941, Stalin had massed vast numbers of troops and equipment along Russia's European frontier, not to defend the Motherland but in preparation for an attack westward.

Stalin's motive was to bring communism to Europe by force, a plan he expressed in a 1939 speech.
"The experience of the last 20 years has shown that in peacetime the Communist movement is never strong enough to seize power. The dictatorship of such a party will only become possible as the result of a major war," stated Stalin.
Noting that when the German attack began on June 22, 1941, they could field a mere 3,350 tanks, mostly lightly armored and gunned, as compared to the Russians 24,000 tanks, many of superior armor and armament, retired U.S. Department of Defense official Daniel W. Michaels wrote,
"Stalin elected to strike at a time and place of his choosing. To this end, Soviet development of the most advanced offensive weapons systems, primarily tanks, aircraft, and airborne forces, had already begun in the early 1930sThe German 'Barbarossa' attack shattered Stalin's well-laid plan to 'liberate' all of Europe."
ED: It seems today’s “bring democracy” is the yesterday's “liberate” as used by Stalin.

Suvorov supported his contention by pointing to the fact that Russian troops were prepared to attack, not defend, which led to the early German victories; that Russian troops had been issued maps only of Eastern European cities, not for the defense of Russia; that Russian troops had been issued Russian-German phrase books with such expressions as "Stop transmitting or I'll shoot;" and that none of Stalins top commanders were ever held accountable for the "Barbarossa" debacle since they had all merely followed Stalin's orders.

Suvorov concludes,
"Stalin became the absolute ruler of a vast empire hostile to the West, which had been created with the help of the West. For all that, Stalin was able to preserve his reputation as naive and trusting, while Hitler went down in history as the ultimate aggressor. A multitude of books have been published in the West based on the idea that Stalin was not ready for war while Hitler was."
He also said the resources of Stalin's war machine have been underestimated.
"Despite its grievous losses, it had enough strength to withdraw and gather new strength to reach Berlin. How far would it have gone had it not sustained that massive blow on 22 June, if hundreds of aircraft and thousands of tanks had not been lost, had it been the Red Army and not the Wehrmacht which struck the first blow? Did the German Army have the territorial expanse behind it for withdrawal? Did it have the inexhaustible human resources, and the time, to restore its army after the first Soviet surprise attack?"
Perhaps the best support for Suvorov's claims came from Hitler himself.
"Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation of the build-up of Soviet Russian military power in the East during a period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces bordering Soviet Russia.

Only a blind person could fail to see that a military build-up of unique world-historical dimensions was being carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was being threatened, but rather only to attack that which seemed incapable of defense ... I may say this today: If the wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion against the Reich, Europe would have been lost," the Fuehrer stated in his speech on December 11, 1941, when he declared war against the United States.
Of course, the victors always write history, so whether Hitler's attack on the Soviet Union was sheer aggression or a necessary pre-emptive strike will probably be argued for many years. But, if it proves true that Hitler was merely forestalling an imminent attack by the Soviet Union, it places the history of World War II in an entirely different context.

It would certainly go far in explaining Hitler's otherwise inexplicable actions in starting a two-front war, the very situation he had warned against in Mein Kampf. It also would help explain why Franklin Roosevelt, at the bidding of the globalists, was arming the Soviet Union in blatant violation of the Neutrality Acts of 1935, 1936 and 1937. By the end of 1940 with all Europe under German control and Britain threatened, they may have determined to stop Hitler.

Hitler clearly indicated what he saw as the machinations undertaken to prevent any negotiated end to hostilities in 1941. In a speech to the Reichstag less than week before Hess's arrival in Scotland, he declared,
"All my endeavors to come to an understanding with Britain were wrecked by the determination of a small clique which, whether from motives of hate or for the sake of material gain, rejected every German proposal for an understanding due to their resolve, which they never concealed, to resort to war, whatever happened."
Some researchers have even argued that Seelowe or Sea Lion, the code name for the proposed German invasion of England, was a "sham right from the beginning", an effort by Hitler to distract Stalin by feinting west when he actually planned to strike to the east.

It was merely a cover for the mobilization of men and equipment needed for the invasion of the Soviet Union. One clue that this tactic was in play can be seen in the fact that Hitler, who was known for constantly interfering with his generals on the smallest of details, never showed any real interest in the plans for an invasion of England, according to German military historian Egbert Kieser.

These authors, along with other historians, explain Hitler's strange order to halt the German advance at Dunkirk allowed the British Army to escape the continent. Hitler wanted his future ally intact. 

To buy Jim Marrs brilliant book, go here: 

Or read it in PDF form here: 
NTS Notes:  This article fully vindicates, and backs up all of my comments and statements, in previous articles where I stated that Hitler launched a preemptive strike against Soviet Russia on June 22, 1941, because his intelligence reports showed clearly that Josef Stalin was amassing an incredibly massive force of some 5 MILLION+ combat troops along the German/Russian border to launch his own evil campaign against Germany code named: "Operation Thunder" that was to be launched as soon as July 5th, 1941.    

What Hitler basically did was allow the Russians to build up their offensive forces and wait until the last possible moment to launch his campaign against Russia.  In doing so, Hitler's forces were able to smash the entire Red Army, and capture some 3 million OFFENSIVE forces in the first weeks of the Barbarossa campaign!   True history should show this as a very remarkable achievement, but of course our history is written by criminals and the so called "victors" in any war.

For all my naysayers, and those who question this writing....I personally look upon Adolf Hitler as no saint.   But what he did by stopping the Russians from possibly conquering Europe early in World War II may eventually come down in future and factual history as one of his greatest victories for all of the European nations.

Another piece of real history coming to light... As more historical facts do come forward, I will be presenting them here for everyone to see and judge for themselves... Stay tuned..

More to come



  1. I admit I'm not terribly knowledgeable about that huge swath of history prior to 9/11, revisionist or otherwise, but I've seen plausible accountings such as this which refute the usual talking points about Hitler being a willing tool of Jewry. Is it conclusive? No, but it is enough to cast serious doubt on the claim. When people who purport to be truth seekers claim they know beyond a shadow of a doubt that their version is the absolute truth it just aggravates me. What is the point of laboring to uncover a basic outline of factual reality if you're just going to throw it all out the window when you cover certain topics? We are expected to be rational and open-minded, but only about certain things. If there's one thing I will not do it is endure a barrage of obvious bullshit. Thanks for posting this Noor.

  2. Having grown up and lived many decades under the jew mind screw,getting over the hitler bogeyman was wierd,the hard part was finding ther real history but once on the trail it comes in.well he didnt save all of europe from the bolsjie jewzand really since roosenfelt and dunghill shakeveli/stalinwere all in the same league boat,mind. he didnt save us either, but he was the latest best hope for european cockasians as it were but insteadonce again they got us to murder each other while they conso,idate power,wealth and take the "floweer of youth"britsin intentionally massacred its own in ww1 well didnt thy all.anyways i read the sanme shit on him at all libraries bascaklly from same books there were no others, untill......then i find he was rather a failed saviuor abnd abnything written about him for vcommon condumption was either a lie a damned lie or pure blatherand specualtion that said more on the speculater than herr hitler.he was head and shoulders above an leader of the timeand he was a good strategist knowing the waging of economic warfare it was the genreals who wanted to take over ad hold ckties where as heetler saw no value to it and it resulted in disasters foer the whermacht.tada


If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.