MUST watch documentary! Ring of Power!

Originally posted by Desolate Cancer
5 hours!!!! are you crazy?

Let me tell you about the age of the internet peoples attention spans are very limited.

Just give me the meat and potatoes, and provide the supporting evidence in a separate video.

I see so many of these interesting and great looking documentaries be it about the NWO or alternative energy or paranormal stuff, but they are always like 2-3 hours long and that is way to long, this one being 5 is just insane.

Say what you want about me, but i just dont have the time to spend 5 freaking hours watching a documentary like this.

Have you ever thought of watching it in parts?

I'm at work at the moment without speakers, so it'll have to wait until I get home, but I'm looking forward to relaxing tonight with a beer and watching a couple of episodes. I'll probably star and flag, but I'll wait to see the content of the documentary first, so as to be fair.

Just seeing this (and the other thread) - I will be watching this entire thing, in the next few days.

Excellent find!

this sounds promising - i'll definitely have to watch this, as soon as i get my personal computer back up and running...

i'm using my half-brother's pc all day to copy stuff from my C drive, which is now an external USB drive, to DVD-Rdl's...

i wish he had speakers on his computer, though, or else i'd probably watch it right now and take a long, long break...

[edit on 10-11-2009 by adrenochrome]

"In 1948 Palestine was once again changed back to Israel, after the Hebrew Zionists slaughtered & drove the Palestinians from their homes, lands & villages."
Atleast we know where she stands on Jews & the Bible. As a Christian I may not be the norm but I try to be very open minded about the interpretation of history. So, given that I still enjoyed the video regardless of her obvious bias.
Is there a grand conspiracy? According to the Bible, ABSOLUTELY!!! So, star and a flag!

Very interesting indeed. Way to go!

reply to post by squiz


Thanks a bunch!

reply to post by Deeep

Summary ... To truely determine the legal status of the area known as
Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza), it is important to understand the
different types of UN resolutions. Once this is understood, it becomes
clear there is no such thing as the Israeli-occupied territories. (If
anything, they are actually Arab-occupied territories.)

One of the most misused, misapplied and misunderstood definitions in the
dictionary of the Arab-Israeli conflict is the term "occupied
territories". The vast majority of people simply do not know the facts or
misinterpret them, thus completely distorting the real picture of the land
distribution between the Arabs and the Jews. The truth of the matter is
that, according to international law, the Jews have the complete and
unquestionable right to settle the territories of Judea, Samaria and Gaza
(collectively known as Yesha). Not a single enforceable international
document exists that forbids them from settling the lands of Yesha.

On the contrary, the only existing enforceable document actually
encourages Jewish settlement. This document was created on April 24, 1920
at the San Remo Conference when the Principal Allied Powers agreed to
assign the Mandate for the territory of Palestine to Great Britain. By
doing so the League of Nations "recognized the historical connection of
the Jewish people with Palestine" and established "grounds for
reconstituting their national home in that country." Article 6 of the
Mandate "encouraged ... close settlement by Jews on the land," including
the lands of Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha).

There is nothing whatsoever in the Mandate that separates Yesha from the
rest of the mandated territory. That means that the right of the Jews to
settle the land spreads to the whole of Palestine. As a side note it is
worth mentioning that the 76% of the territory of Mandated Palestine known
today as Jordan, were [sic] not permanently exempt from settlement by the
Jews either. Article 25 only allowed to "postpone or withhold application
of [this] provision."

With the disbanding of the League of Nations, the rights of the Jews to
settle the territories of Palestine, including Yesha, were not hurt. When
in 1946 the United Nations was created in place of the League of Nations,
its Charter included Article 80 specifically to allow the continuation of
existing Mandates (including the British Mandate). Article 80 stated that
"nothing ... shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the
rights whatsoever ... of any peoples or the terms of existing
international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may
respectively be parties."

Then in November 1947 came time for Resolution 181, which recommended the
Partition of Palestine. Like all UN Resolutions pertaining to the
Jewish-Arab conflict it was not enforceable. It was simply a
recommendation, and the Arab countries rejected it. As the Syrian
representative in the General Assembly stated:

"In the first place the recommendations of the General Asembly are not
imperative on those to whom they are addressed.... The General Assembly
only gives advice and the parties to whom advice is addressed accept it
when it is rightful and just and when it does not impair their fundamental
rights"(1).

If the resolution had been implemented maybe it would be possible to argue
that it replaced the San Remo Conference resolution, which had legitimized
the rights of the Jews to settle in any place in Palestine. However, it
was not only rejected by the Arabs, but in violation of the UN Charter
they launched a military aggression against the newly reborn Jewish state
thus invalidating the resolution. By the time of the ceasefire at the end
of the War of Independence there was still no other enforceable document
pertaining to the rights of the Jews to settle E

Eretz Yisrael - they
remained intact.

Now we approach the most misunderstood aspect of the scope and application
of international documents. In order to resolve the puzzle of the
"occupied" territories, one must clearly distinguish between the different
types of resolutions passed by the United Nations. Misconceptions about
the issue led to the question of a double standard that was constantly
raised by the Arabs after the Persian Gulf War. The Arabs were unable to
understand why from Iraq the UN demanded compliance with the decisions of
the international body while Israel was not forced to comply with UN
resolutions.

On April 3, 1998 Swedish Foreign Minister Lena Hjelm-Wallen, well known
for championing the Arabs' position, in an interview with the London
al-Quds al-'Arabi, gave an explanation of this "paradox." She was asked,
"What about the double standards that the United States and Europe adopt
when it comes to Arab issues?" She answered,

"I understand this view, which is common in many Arab countries.
Nevertheless, the UN resolutions passed on Iraq are different, because
they are binding for all nations according to Article 7 of the UN Charter.
Meanwhile, the resolutions passed against Israel are not subject to
Article 7 of the Charter."

To better understand the way UN resolutions work, it is worth reading an
open letter by Uri Lubrani, coordinator of Israeli activities in Lebanon,
addressed to Lebanon's Foreign Minister Faris Buwayz and published on
February 27, 1998 in the Paris newspaper al Watan al-'Arabi. Although the
letter was written regarding Resolution 425, it talks about all
resolutions pertaining to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Uri Lubrani wrote the
following,

"... There are two types of resolutions in the Security Council. The first
type are resolutions passed on the basis of Chapter Six of the UN charter
that relates to the settlement of disputes through peaceful means. Such
resolutions are considered recommendations. They are not binding, and they
do not require immediate implementation.... The second type of resolutions
are based on Chapter Seven of the UN charter.... This chapter grants the
UN Security Council resolutions an implementative authority and commits
the international community to use force if necessary to implement these
resolutions.... None of the UN Security Council resolutions pertaining to
the Arab Israeli conflict, including Resolution 425, were passed on the
basis of Chapter Seven. They were passed on the basis of Chapter Six of
the UN charter, which is the basis also of UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338."

Since no mandatory UN Resolution exists pertaining to the Arab-Israeli
conflict, we are left with the San Remo Conference decision that governs
land ownership in Palestine. That means that not a single enforceable
internationally valid document exists that prevents or prohibits the Jews
from settling anywhere in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and all the rest of Eretz
Yisrael. Or, to put it differently, from the standpoint of international
law for the Jews it is not an occupied land.

This conclusion was confirmed not long ago by an unexpected (for Israel)
source. It is hard to argue with the fact that James Baker, former US
Secretary of State, was not the best friend of the Jewish state. However,
he categorically rejected the mislabeling of the lands of Yesha. This
happened at the Middle East Insight Symposium in Washington on May 4,
1998. Hoda Tawfik, from the newspaper Al Ahram asked him, "What do you
think is right? That these are occupied Arab territories and not disputed
territories?" Baker replied, "They're clearly disputed territories. That's
what Resolutions 242 and 338 are all about. They are clearly disputed
territories."

All of this means that when the Jews build settlements in Yesha, they are
not building them on "occupied" territories. If one wants, one may call
them "disputed" territories, as Baker did. However, this will still not
change the fact that from the standpoint of international law it is the
very land where the Jews were encouraged to settle.

And as a final note, it should not be surprising that the San Remo
Conference plays such an important role in this particular case. The
majority of the other players in the conflict: Egypt, Syria, Iraq,
Lebanon, Jordan, etc. gained sovereignty over their territories based on
the decisions of exactly the same conference. The Jews finally deserve to
settle freely on their territories as well. It is time to stop labeling
them "occupied".

reply to post by obilesk


In my opinion it's not always about the "truth", because someone always lies and the rest will believe. So I don't think we'll ever find out the "truth", but concepts such as this allows us to think "outside of the box" which can change the world in such beautiful ways. Overall, it's not about being right/wrong it's about teaching us how to think outside of average norm!

Anyhow I never knew there were few states in US that are they're own country.... or the influence of the Egyptians in our past! Very interesting indeed...

Watched the entire video, makes alot of sense. My question is, is there a complete list of these 300 Families?

Originally posted by LiveForever8
Is the producer/narrator of this documentary Kerry Cassidy?

Peace.

You know I'm trying to find out who the narrative is, she sounds so much like this researcher on Coast to Coast am, but not sure. Love to find out some info on her and who she really is! I think some aspect of this video is for sure "biased" but that's her point of view, which some will agree and some disagree.

But lot of research and effort has gone into this documentary and deserves at least the 5 hour of investment. I've once attempted to make a short 15 min. documentary on '___' and it took me over 6 months of research to get the content together, not considering the editing and producing the actual video. Seeking for the "truth" is the only way to free the soul, so I give A for effort, whoever she is...

and heres another 5 hours approx. docu by Amenstop Productions
Part 1:-

Google Video Link

Part 2:-

Google Video Link

hope i've done that right.

s+f for you my friend.

reply to post by freighttrain


are you possibly thinking of Linda moulten howe?..if so i don't think its her.

Allot of good information for newbies but keep in mind that, like all such information, is biased and incomplete.

For example, Christians crusaded and killed lots of people, but nothing is said about the Islamic crusades who did the exact same thing. Women were burned as witches, but nothing is said about the countless men also burned as witches.

But that's the way all of these things are, so go ahead and watch it, but watch allot of other things as well with different perspectives.

Originally posted by survivor
reply to post by freighttrain

 

are you possibly thinking of Linda moulten howe?..if so i don't think its her.

Ya, that's who I was thinking about... ah.. guess not, but she sounds so much like her...

Anyhow another point to mention (part 2 about an hour in: "Hitler never died in WW2 and got away, but the media spin it around to say he burned beyond recognition" I just couldn't help but to think about this article... www.newser.com...
(Skull Not Hitler's; Suicide in Doubt)... this video was released few years before this news started spreading out... very interesting!

[edit on 10-11-2009 by freighttrain]

your right they do sound similar - thanks for posting the hitler story, most intriguing, do you think he might of spent his last days in another country enjoying the sunshine

Originally posted by survivor
your right they do sound similar - thanks for posting the hitler story, most intriguing, do you think he might of spent his last days in another country enjoying the sunshine

A man with that much money and power could have gone anywhere. He build underground highways and hidden chambers/rooms... he was all about being hidden. I think he had many other lands around the world and he took off before it was too late and been living in huge lands middle of no where, got a plastic surgery and still living as an old man somewhere!

Thank you for posting this.

This film corrected me of a couple of errors I believe about 9-11. (prices of the lease, etc)

These are the facts that the ignorant will refuse.

reply to post by obilesk


I pretty much agree with your post. Read about skulls and bones, thebildeberger group, illuminatis, and you have the elite, those cons running the planet. Zionists are not just jews, and most of the elite IS zionist. It has derived from the definition you provide for they are the worst kind of folks that ever walked on the surface of the earth...we are seeing the results today.
Sorry about the race issue, there is only ONE human race. Jews are not a race ! hebrews neither, I don't know where you got this but saying that jews are a race is the same s saying christians are a race. This is totally absurd. Afain ONE race...HUMAN.
The video above is just disinformation. the truth can be found but when you fall into web sites all too well documented you can be sure that it's fake. Well documented supports on 'secret' stuff has nothing secret to it...so, look around and you will find.

There is so much dis info & half truths anymore...
You got to wondered if anyone will ever really know the truth?