Friday, September 20, 2013


Updated 9/20/13 Forgot my reply to Wendell... what can I say... it was late at night. I also fixed some spelling errors... -Bill

By American Kabuki (Bill)

This summer has been an odd time. Amazing new insights, and the impatience with with what we still have to endure in this world.  People suffer.  Bills aren't getting paid. That can't be denied.  Can't we get this over with already? What the fuck...another chemtrail?...another war?...another "deranged" killer shooting random people? False flags, black flags, pirate flags, fringe flags and parade flags.  Maybe we should just ban flags altogether?  Guns don't kill, flags do! They separate! Flags separate people one from another.  This country loves flags and hates fags. But even they have a flag! TWEET!!!! EVERYONE OUT OF THE POOL!!!  Can you hear yourselves?

Frustration is being directed at those are making changes rather than the ones who cause the suffering.  That's disbelieving you have the power to change your reality, when you get angry at those working to change theirs. 

There's Brinkmanship in economic, political and covert circles.  The ones who insist nothing has changed are working overtime to make sure it doesn't.  The chess pieces in various realms trade moves. Agents infiltrate, tell fibs, sow discord, draw followers to economic, spiritual and political factions.  Same old template, polarize, divide, conquer. Pick your dogma, each has one. "Believe in me and I will set you free! And by the way, I read all your akashic records!"  How about believe in yourself and find the answers within? Its all there you know! 

I was reading David Wilcock's blog this week and something just jumped out at me.  Its what prompted me to write this article.  I don't think David even realized what he wrote.  But its been popping up in my vision everywhere since like a crazed bouncing jack-in-the-box.  I love David Wilcock, but ever since he got spooked by a purported death threat (and what blogger in this field hasn't had those?) he's been off his game. I loved the Source Field Investigation book! Pure genius! Financial Tyranny was well researched, except for the part on primary market banking...  but this jumped out at me...  


LOVE WITH BOUNDARIES????  DAVID DID YOU HAVE ABUSIVE PARENTS?  Lots of parents withhold love until the get what they want from the kid... its kind of a sick level of immaturity but it happens.  If parents can't show unconditional love where else are the kids going to learn it?  Happens between mates too.  I've lived through it. I knew a Belfast couple once that fought like cats and dogs!  But they had a rule between them, that no matter what happened during the day in their daily Irish bickering (honestly it would have exhausted me the first week!), it never carried over into the bedroom where love could be used as weapon of denial.  They stayed happily married and deeply in love with each other until he died of an illness.

To be honest, I have less trouble with Ben Fulford making promises of unleashing the asian hordes of dragon ninjas on the cabal cause at least I know Ben is consistent in his logic.  Ben doesn't claim to love them at all!!!  Straight up guy Ben! That is...when he gets his facts straight and doesn't have me misplaced in Ethiopia looking for the Ark of the Covenant while being chased by purported CIA assassins that never existed...perhaps the WDS can hire Ben a fact checker in exchange for a box of 1934 FED bonds cause I don't think they are going to get any gold for those things.

Don't get me wrong... I don't agree with Ben's approach, because a lot of innocent people are going to get killed.   And there's lots of people in "team contrast" (as we like to call them - cabal is becoming so cliche now that Keenan uses it) who are in a real bind, they are extorted, they got their families safety on the line by their pay masters because those people are the most enslaved of anyone on this planet, well paid slaves perhaps but they do not have freedom.  And a lot of those bloodline families have kids that want no part of their ancestors behavior patterns....even their DNA is changing! THEY ARE HUMAN and part of the diversity of humanity on this planet.

I am really growing tired of the terms LIGHT and DARK.  Might as well use US and THEM.  And like all words it so easy to semantically shift who you are referring to.  Victory to the Light?  Lets change the phrase to "MEET YOU AT THE BEACH IN ONENESS AND HAVE BREWSKY!"

Lots of divines rolling around  preaching love and causing separation... lots of LOVE BOUNDARIES in the cosmos of the divines.... and I got an email today that made me realize this has been going on for some time...its biblical even!  Don't make it right!  

Here's the exchange with a friend from a circle of scholars I have been holding a 15 year conversation with on the nature of Jesus of history (as contrasted with the Jesus of myth). It relates to a fundamental flaw in Western Christian thinking, and that underlies the comment David Wilcock made about LOVE WITH BOUNDARIES: 

Wendell wrote:  I am working on a statement of unconditional. All sorts of things come to mind when tackling this. For instance, in Romans 12 [The Apostle] Paul makes a statement that combines an ethical component and a theological component. He is almost following the same pattern used by Jesus in Matt. 5, but in Paul’s case he is correcting something fundamental in the Jesus version. He does the very opposite of what Jesus did, or rather arrives at the opposite conclusion.

Jesus presented his radical new non-retaliatory ethic and then said- do this because this is what God is like (the ethical part based on theology). Paul follows the same pattern, establishing the ethic first- do not repay evil with evil- but then presents an entirely opposite theology- for God will repay. As if he is correcting Jesus in the second part, the most important part, the theological basis. And this pattern set by Paul becomes the Christian pattern still followed today. Two contradictory things combined.

Its as if Paul got the core teaching of Jesus, his core gospel in Matt.5, but then felt that he had to correct the fundamental error made by Jesus on theology. Jesus had overturned all past perception of deity. He had undermined all common sense perception of justice.

Note also that Paul says to repay the harm someone does with similar harm to them, is evil. It is wrong for us to do such evil. But God will do it for us. God will do evil in harming others who caused harm. And the harm that God does will be far worse than anything we can do. The evil God will do is far beyond any evil we can do. Huh? Paul just didn’t get it. He correctly stated that revenge, payback, retaliation was evil. But he didn’t get it that God was not evil. Pretty basic muddle, eh.

The Dutch theologian got it right in saying the God is far more humane than any human.

What my friend Wendell just uncovered was the justification the Church used, by claiming to be the Vicar for Christ,  of all the brutality in the name of God!  God will punish!  The line between God and God's agents gets easily blurred in people's minds!  Divine right of kings anyone?  Very clever indeed!  And we see this in thinking to this day.

Do you know what the limit on your BEING is?  Its not vibration level.  Its where your put your boundary of love.  Whom do you exclude?  Whom do deem worthy or unworthy of your love?   Do you withhold love from the homeless? The illegal immigrant from Mexico? What about that person who slipped their own deadline you desperately needed fulfilled to pay your bills? What about that cheap rat bastard boss who outsourced your job to India? Do you withhold love from the "CABAL"?  Its the ONLY hope they got! Otherwise they don't find their way back home.

This was my reply to Wendell which I meant to put in this post yesterday but forgot:

Bravo Wendell!  Its all about limits.  Limits on what we think is possible (religion and conventional wisdom is great at limiting people…but then the great inventions and thoughts always come from the heretics!) , and the limits we experience have a lot to do with the limits we put on our love towards others….

I'm coming to see there's a universal law in this, you could call it responsibility, but that's kind of bass-ackwards way to think of it, when we cease to put limits (exclusions, partitions, polarizations, discriminations, ranks, hierarchies, priests, judgements) on others we automatically lose the limits on what our BEING is capable of DOING (physically, mentally, emotionally, spiritually)…. 

When you can remove the boundary on your love, you remove the limit on your BEING and DOING.   Its really as simple as that.  ALL THE UNIVERSE MOVES ASIDE FOR LOVE. FOR IT IS ALL MADE FROM LOVE.  Densities, dimensions, realms, are all constructs of beliefs and consensus of those that chose to play in the experimental playground of the illusion of separation. THERE IS ONLY the Creator Source and the living perceptions of Creator Source that inhabit its playground of universal mind.


  1. Bill,

    With all due respect, I am afraid you may have misread Wilcock's meaning of boundaries. Boundaries are necessary Nature creates boundaries by giving each and everyone of us a body with sets of organs and a delimiting skin to separate us from our environment and better protect those organs, without which we, humans, cannot survive. Trees have bark. It's a boundary. Animals have feathers and pelt. Boundaries. Boundaries don't mean conditions. They only mean preservation of our material vehicle in this material world.

    I really don't know why the word "boundaries' set you off. Yes, we are one. The same way that a beach is one: sand is made of trillions of grain creating an ensemble. Yet, each grain has its own boundaries. Likewise for forest and trees. Each individual anything, part of a bigger something, has boundaries. Otherwise, matter would be a single blob. Boundaries are what makes it possible to create, do, move, perform. Boundaries are the reason we have arms and legs and hands and heads.

    Please rethink your take on it under that light...

  2. Bill,
    I love your writing, please share more articles.

    I would like to direct you to a very interesting video of our planet's galactic history on Firesky Warriors website. It is the 3hr and 10 min. video by Robert Morningsky.

    It is the native elders knowledge passed down which when taken into consideration as a possible truth deeply resonantes with me.

    For me it explains many questions I have been looking for answers to such as:

    The big Bang theory.
    Is there a Creator.
    Why does Earth hold an abundance of biological life and the moon, Mars and other planets in our solar system appear different.
    Who was Jesus
    What is God's word.
    Was the Garden of Eden real
    Are Angels real
    Are Aliens real
    Are interdimensional being real
    Why Gold, precious metals, diamonds considered of higher value than biological life
    What truly happens after death.

    And many more questions of mine are answered that point directly to the control systems of religion, government and banking.

    It is from 1996 and because a google search bring us so much critism in the form of debunking it makes me believe this native narrative of our galactic history may be true and the PTB want it suppressed.

    I would love you to find time to watch it and post an article of your opinion. I would also love you to pass it on to D and Heather for their discernment also.

    "kindness is Power"

    PS: If we are all part of one Universal Creation started with the big bang...what would happen if multiple big bangs creating mutilple Universal Creations sent waves of new stardust particles sweeping into the other Universes and blasting black holes that allowed these Universes separated stardust particles to flow back and forth with the contracting and expanding "in breath and out breath of God"

    We once thought this planet was flat.
    We once thought we were alone in this Universe
    When you throw multiple big bangs, creating multiple Universes into the mix of knowledge it truly staggers the imagination.

  3. Very well said AK. I get that the Cabal, Bartzis and Wilcock stimulated your thoughts on this. You went on to express love and compassion for the cabal but not so much for Wilcock and Bartzis. Just noticing and appreciating that we are all on this journey. Thanks for creating something for me to notice about me too.

  4. You know Bill I agree with you about David and kind of feel that he has lost his way a little bit. If you read his articles of late there are a lot of I's in there and he's always trying to sell you on the theory that if everyone just buy's his book it could change the world. There is a lot of arrogance in his words of late. I love you David brohand, but how about a little more humility and a little less I.

  5. "Its where your put your boundary of love. Whom do you exclude? "

    There is a wonderful scene with this theme in the film "Chocolat". It's after the Comte has spent so much time and effort to rid the town of Vianne and has caused so much strife that the young priest gives a gentle rant in his sermon about Jesus and the spirit of Easter and that love is about whom we INclude. Can't recall the exact lines, but it's spot on to what you are talking about :-) P

  6. bravo... there is only love or the absence of alignment with it... all else is illusion!

  7. I believe that I interpreted what David Wilcock wrote a bit differently than you did. I believe his "Love with Boundaries" means to love the "perpetrator", without having to love the action; have empathy for the one causing the harm, but not loving, or even condoning, the harm itself.

    Specifically, it would be well worth the effort to fight vehemently against the actions of the cabal, but at the same time sending them love, because we have learned that they are just playing their part in this "play", and really, from a higher perspective, they are us. We are them; we are all one.

    AK (Bill), I am not being critical, or judgmental here. I love your work.


  8. I wonder what David meant? Was that a fopa? I have not read he book but find the syncronicity intriguing. Why? Because I have been pondering "LOVE with wisdom". Sometimes I believe my LOVE gets in the way of wisdom. It's not that I ever put a boundary on my LOVE but rather the way I express it. I LOVE my children so much I tend to protect them and get involved way too much. It leaves me drained. So during meditation one day I was told LOVE and LOVE UNCONDITIONAL and WITHOUT BOUNDARY OR LIMITATION but gosh darn it girl you need to get out of the way sometimes and let others fall once in awhile. Kind of like let go and LET GOD? If David meant what he said then I agree- he missed the lesson somewhere along the line.

  9. Have you ever read the conversation with the Being known as Hidden Hand which occurred in 2008 on the Above Top Secret website? It speaks to this very topic.

    After being sucked into the drama more than I realized, a documentary on the Hover Dam the other night brought this conversation back to mind. Reading it again put some things back in perspective.

    If you haven't read it, may I suggest it. There truly are no coincidences. Your article today is proof, Thank You.

  10. Thanks, Bill. Excellent rant. And I totally missed that insightful observation from the Wilcock piece with respect to the Law of One material, so I really appreciate that.

    I think your hypothesis about David is correct; I'll never forget hearing him cry over the ramifications of his DOing. His long lasting support for Obama as some sort of "savior" springs from the same fear, I think.

    Anyway, this cleared up a lot of fuzziness in my thinking on several levels although I'll probably have to read it a few more times to get the full impact. You rock.

  11. Hi Bill,

    I haven't written a comment on here before so I just wanted to say thank you for all you do. It means a lot.

    I'm not defending David Wilcock here but I do feel that the point he was trying to make (although failed in getting it across) was that you shouldn't allow yourself to be used/manipulated. Many people will take that unlimited/boundless supply of love you send out and will suck it straight out of you over and over again. This can hinder what you are trying to DO and BE. I think he was just trying to say that you should protect yourself and to be cautious when opening up to others in such a way.

    That's not that you shouldn't open up, but until we get to the point where as a collective we are all open and honest with each other, there will be those who use you simply for their own benefit.

    I don't know, maybe I'm not understanding that properly but that's what I felt he meant when I read that. Thoughts?

    Live long and prosper my brother,


  12. So long as we as Love continue to perceive Ourself from multiple viewpoints, as individuals, there will be experienced perceived differences. We as these individuations of Love can perceive pain, and can also perceive the disallowing and rejection of pain we perceive directed at us from perceived others. To disallow and reject that pain is not lacking Love, any more than is accepting and wallowing in it. Regardless of our actions, We are Love. So the quest becomes learning to align with ourself. Aligning with ourself may entail rejecting pain directed at us, no? Surely we can't sit on our asses and hope that thinking happy thoughts will stop a knife-wielding attacker from stabbing us to death.

  13. This makes my heart sing!

  14. The "God meddle" and the God will repay statement, is most literally not a meaning that God endorses evil for repayment, instead it means that "karma happens" to all of us.

    What happens to us when we experience karma for the less-than-loving deeds we have done?


    We have most always come into a better understanding of what love really is.

    With those experiences of ours, wouldn't we "wish" them on others for the purpose of their speedier healing/coming into love?

    I have prayed for people's speedy entrance into their self-created karmic cycle with good results, but I wasn't wishing anything bad to happen, I just prayed/meditated/held space for/wished for justice to prevail in the situation and then watched it unfold with loving appreciation.

    By the way, David's book is not being represented in a fair light with the ripping of his choice of words of 'love with boundaries'.

    That word boundary certainly doesn't mean limits to holding someone in loving appreciation, and I agree in retrospect that another word may serve the concept better - I am now into the 20th chapter of this, David's latest book - especially if one doesn't understand that it is the collective god consciousness that has to say: "this far and no further will this destruction of humanity go", and from my experience, enact the wheel of karma for the evil-doers after - of course - forgiving them.

    Wishing/praying/holding space for justice and therefore karma for the evildoers, is perfectly in line with serving the higher good...which is what the true definition of love really is!

  15. I don't like people putting words in my mouth any more than anyone else does, but maybe David Wilcock meant to say, "love with discernment". Or, a better way to put it would be "love all unconditionally with the expectation the love won't be returned. And that's okay, too".

    Or better still, "It is wise to LOVE everyone unconditionally, but you are not required to TRUST everyone unconditionally. LOVE, I freely give you, but trust still needs to be earned in every case."

    Just my thoughts.


  16. Reminds me of what "Hidden Hand" said in that dialogue - One day, we're all going to sit back and have a good laugh at the incredible job we all did playing our parts. Thanks Bill!

  17. Take it easy on Paul here, some context helps.  Remember Paul was a Hebrew scholar who was converted after the death of Christ, and probably never met or heard Jesus teach in the flesh.  There also was probably not much yet written down, certainly not the Gospel as we know it today.  So it's very unlikely that Paul had even read Matthew chapter 5. 

    But he had read a knew the old testament.  So he was doing the best he could with the scripture he had available.  The Old testament to me is difficult to judge because of so many changes in translations, literary style, and symbolism over the centuries even before the birth of Christ. 

    But, let's look at the scriptures Paul chose.  I see two in Romans 12 that he quotes.  The first is "It is mine to avenge; I will repay" Deut. 32:35. It doesn't say God will exact vengence in some evil way.  To me it says it is God's responsibility.  If God is best conceptualized, as I frequently see on articles here, as the entire living universe, then this concept sounds exactly like Karma, at least to me.

    The other passsage Paul quotes is "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head."  Prov. 25:21,22  Then Paul goes on to say in Romans 12:21 "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."  In practical terms, the way I feel this applies to my life is simply that by setting a good example and letting others see the contrast between their own negative karma and my own positive karma, they may learn to change their "evil" was, and thus "evil is overcome with good."

    I also think you were a little hard on David Wilcock.  I must admit I totally had the same initial reaction to David's "Love with Boundaries" phrase.  I don't like seeing those words in the same sentance.  But then you even manged to quote David saying "We can feel Love for them AND ALSO..." (caps mine for emphasis).  He does not say anything about witholding Love for them UNTIL.  Any good parent will of course love their children unconditionally and still set limits for their own safety and well-being.  I just don't see the inconsistent logic in Wilcock's message, even if his wording was a little questionable.

    The greater message of your article still stands.  The limits that people have placed on themselves and others are frequently due to exactly these types of misunderstandings and/or intentional misinterpretations.

    God bless, and keep following your heart.  I do love the work you do.



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

This blog is supported by ads and donations. If you enjoy this blog please consider supporting it with a contribution via PayPal.