David Wilcock: "Back In Action"

[Mozart]

http://divinecosmos.com/start-here/davids-blog/1095-backinaction


I know that many of you no longer take David Wilcock seriously, but I suggest that this kind of attitude towards David is in error.


Here's an excerpt:



NOT EXPECTING DOOM AND GLOOM

I am not expecting a cataclysm or disaster. December 21st, 2012 is very likely the end of a 25,920-year cycle that over 30 ancient cultures had "encoded" into their mythologies -- by some source unknown to mainstream science.

These ancient cultures had no tangible, physical way to connect with each other across time and space -- and yet two top historians in the 1960s, Santillana and von Dechend, made a very compelling case of the worldwide appearance of this cycle in mythology.

The technical name for this cycle is "the precession of the equinoxes." I first learned about its prevalence in ancient cultures by reading "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock in 1995.

This cycle is heavily discussed in The Source Field Investigations, my videos, and many other articles on this site.

This 25,920-year cycle isn't just a feature of mythology -- it represents the apparent motion of the stars in the night sky, which drift by 1 degree every 72 years when you look at them on the same day each year -- such as the Winter Solstice.

[gooty64]

Hi Mozart, Can you give us a summary of David's article?
His articles are usually so long that I have stopped reading through them.
Is there anything in his recent article that we can take to the bank -so to say?

[Mozart]

Hi Mozart, Can you give us a summary of David's article?
His articles are usually so long that I have stopped reading through them.
Is there anything in his recent article that we can take to the bank -so to say?


Hi Gooty,


My summary of this particular article would be about as long as the article itself, as it's very brief and there's nothing new in it. It's basically a small summary of the data of the precession of the equinoxes that pertains to the Dec 21 date.


My personal expectation is that from Dec 21st and on, our natural timeline -- "Timeline Zero", per Daniel's PDFs -- is likely to fully assert itself, leaving the other two artificial timelines in the dust bins of history. Once our natural timeline is fully manifest, we can expect to see a rapid series of very positive changes to happen very quickly.

[doodah]

My personal expectation is that from Dec 21st and on, our natural timeline -- "Timeline Zero", per Daniel's PDFs -- is likely to fully assert itself, leaving the other two artificial timelines in the dust bins of history. Once our natural timeline is fully manifest, we can expect to see a rapid series of very positive changes to happen very quickly.

I'm with you 100% on this, Mozart. May it be so!

Love and peace,
Doodah

[Kimberley]

I too am with you Mozart & Dodah!!! and everyone else that is working on manifesting the loving, peaceful positive time line that is propelling us forward.

Much love to us all!! :grouphug:

[andrewgreen]

He has some great research and subsequent ideas and concepts. Its just a shame he mixes it with elaborate stories so he can make extra money. First rule of media is to give the people what they want, which is brilliant stories whether true or false. Based on this David is a fantastic journalist, I'm sure he would be working for Murdoch if Murdoch could match his income.

[Wind]

I love the stuff that he brings out even though that he is just "borrowing" info from other sources like Graham Hancock, but someone has to do it! Someone has to educate the masses even if it makes you a laughingstock. It's actually a shame that many people don't even know who Graham Hancock is even though his information is groundbreaking. Because this world is full of lies and hidden agendas everything is a mess. We have lost our connection with the spirit and totally forgot our real past. I believe that humanity will soon remember everything because it has to. We are at a crossroads as a species... The other timeline is total chaos and the other is a fantasy come true.

[sigma6]

I love reading David's material when I get the chance, he has an incredible ability to research material and present it with a high level of interpretation. The man is a creative genius imo. But I have to be careful who I express my appreciation for, ie not too loudly (don't want to draw any detractors 'hiding under rocks', hehe) Anyhow, glad to see that I am not the only one that supports David's work. Wonder what is going on with his movie project? It should be really good, just imagining his research and ideas combined with a hollywood writer's scripting technique!? - wow, that has got to be a winning combination. Can't wait to see if and when he is able to make that happen.

OWN NOTHING, CONTROL EVERYTHING

Also after seeing how quickly and how far he went into researching Fulford's material which culminated in his eventual interview with Winston Shrout, the man who consulted on Keenan's legal proceeding, completely blew me away. Nothing ever convinced me more that he definitely has a powerful intuitive capacity then when he did that interview. Further, I would love to see him direct his research deeper into the Birth Certificate as a corporate person, and in particular our relationship to it, and how all this operates from the point of view of a non-statutory trust interpretation.

Winston makes reference to trust, but doesn't hide the fact that he operates in commerce as a 'first language' which by definition is still fraught with dangers since he is ultimately still operating in a statutory realm. (ie. one still has to be a skilled navigator of a vessel that is sailing on the seas of (statutory) commerce, since that is literally the metaphorical model that commercial law operates upon)

But, when one learns how to express the trust and thus rebut all presumptions/assumptions - in particular the constructive trust (or presumptive trust might be a better way of articulating it) ...then one escapes being straight jacketed with the presumed trustee position of the constructive trust, and in my new understanding (oh yeah) one has simply removed themselves completely from that equation... period. (ohhh yeaaaaahhhh.... but that is another story...)

Anyhoo... point is, there is no question in my mind that the key lies in a non-statutory trust interpretation. And the real champion on non-statutory-trust interpretation is Christian Walters. I had to let him go a year or so back because I couldn't keep up. He has since archived probably over a 1000 hours of audio in the last 4 years (approx) And went through dozens of books on trust in his presentations, including the Corpus Juris Secundum (A Legal Encyclopdia). It takes dedication to follow him (many hours, harder then Winston, since he quotes from text and gets right into technical interpretation of what he is reading) but when he hits a nugget, it is truly mind blowing. I have gleaned some of the most powerful ideas from his presentations/interpretations/extrapolations. He is literally the toughest act to follow. (true trust law is not for the faint hearted... update: it is deceptively simple, more about subtle and relative, trust relationships can be reversed in a heartbeat by simply rebutting a pre-existing presumption for example)

But here is the kicker, I was corresponding with one of his insiders, and she updated me on their current status. It appears they have reached a critical milestone in their research, since the days he did his first audios on Dezert's Owl's therealpublicradio.net website (my has it been that long? ;[) ... anyhow, what she was trying to tell me is that CW has finally made some huge breakthroughs in understanding, if he hasn't completely cracked it!

As a result they now have a basis of understanding that focuses in on 30 of his audios, 3 specific books, and 13 maxims! The implications of this is game changing btw!...

Let me put this into perspective:
30 audios means that CW has cut down his 1000 hours of audio to approx 60 hours practically! (I'd say his average presentation used to be 2 hrs (min) Also, the fact he is now satisfied that 3 books best reflect his ideas is another laser targeting cut, compared to the dozens of books he was going through previously, (consider a typical treatise on trust can range from 750 pages to 1500 easily, and yes the man is a relentless animal when it comes to trust law research!) And that he has clearly identified what he feels are the 13 maxims that one needs to operate in equity is absolutely mind blowing!

Consider the implications - which would you rather study, learn and live by? 13 maxims or 60 million statutes!? (codes and regulations, etc) Imagine studying approx 60 hrs of someone's lectures to leverage his 4 years of research. Now at the time of our correspondence she didn't exactly tell me what the 13 maxims were (true to their style, and a frustration for me...) but she did unload over 300 text files on me (that I am still going through) And remember too, this is a guy that even Winston makes highly regarded references to in his material.

And btw, she did give me the 3 absolute must read books that he now works of off:

Gilbert's on Trust (12 ed, I think) and
Gibsons' Suits in Chancery,
Pomery on Equity.

12 Maxims of Equity:
1. Equity will not suffer a wrong without a remedy.
2. Equity follows the law.
3. Where there is equal equity, the law shall prevail.
4. Where the equities are equal, the first in time shall prevail.
5. He who seeks equity must do equity.
6. He who comes into equity must come with clean hands.
7. Delay defeats equities.
8. Equality is equity.
9. Equity looks to the intent rather than the form.
10. Equity looks on that as done which ought to be done.
11. Equity imputes an intention to fulfill an obligation.
12. Equity acts in personam.


And they have also had an unequivocal success in court according to my contact. When you understand and can invoke equity, you are operating in trust, and the courts are now irrevocably in the fiduciary trustee position, no ifs, ands or buts... and they know it...

So if you are out there oh great pumpkin, please send this message to David Wilcock! because I think he would "get this" if he hasn't already been speculating about it already... (and I think he is...) (and I also believe that Jordan would definitely 'get this' too)

Sorry for going so long, but this was a bit of a flash, when I think about David's work, which makes me think about his Winston interview (my head is spinning!) I will have to figure out a place to flesh this out more, (because I think I have come across a break through (not just CW's work, it triggered it, by way of confirmation of certain ideas (yes believe it or not, I am actually not in total agreement, that is the "other story" part...) ok I AM stoppin here (ahhhhh....)

hint: Rockefeller was absolutely correct when he said "own nothing, control everything"



links for my own reference:

previous:


following:
Missing 35 Plus Trillion Dollars in Bonds
Own Nothing, Control Everything, What Does This Mean? (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?51689-Missing-35-Plus-Trillion-Dollars-in-Bonds-and-Certificates&p=604249&viewfull=1#post604249)

[modwiz]

His articles are usually so long that I have stopped reading through them.


Sometimes thought I might stop breathing first. LOL
It's helpful to skip over personal reports about his heath and how much sleep he hasn't had.

I'd like him a whole lot better without all the drama. I guess when you've been all the famous historical people he's been.................

He is like a rock band. He has followers who wait for his next album. What I think of him is irrelevant. (Creaky old man voice) "Darn kids, listenin' to that reincarnated David fella."

[Maunagarjana]

I thought it interesting what David said about our sun orbiting a brown dwarf. I'd like to know more specifics about why he thinks so. I watched the "2012 Crossing Over - A New Beginning" documentary the other day and Santos Bonacci was talking about how he thought the sun was somehow in orbit with the Sirius system.

A couple things that sprang to mind is what Onyxknight had to say, that the Sol system is binary and that there is a Sol B, though I can't find if he said that was a brown dwarf or not. Also, Onyx said there is a Sirius C that is a brown dwarf and that it is the center of the Sirius system.

[donk]

Its just a shame he mixes it with elaborate stories so he can make extra money.

I think it is unfair to assume his intention like that, especially when to me if I were going to assume anything--the evidence to me seems closer to modwiz's suggestion...it's the drama he seems to attract/transmit, whether he is conscious of it or not.

Just because we are enslaved by the $ doesn't mean our primary intention is to obtain it...it's a necessary evil, so to speak--at least where I am from, where I was not given the opportunity to live a life where I was not dependent on it. Do all the haters/critics really think he does it all for the nookie? Did he ever say that, or is there evidence for it, other than him charging for his services?

[SilentFeathers]

This forum is proof that Wilcock has the ability to constantly draw in people's attention regardless if they believe in what he claims or not.

Odds are he'll be wrong and wrong again like most of us are most of the time....perhaps he should write a book about why people can't never get it RIGHT!!!!

[Maia Gabrial]

Love attracts love. His messages seem to be more loving. I can feel it sincerely radiating from him. I don't hold it against him that he needs money to keep divine cosmos going. Or that he has bills to pay or a staff to support? Until it's no longer part of this reality, money is still needed to take care of our needs. Don't blame the man for plugging his books... See the heart of the man and then his words will touch your hearts, too...

He still holds creditability with me....

[donk]

I find consuming information is like smoking god’s finest “trees”:

Sure, it would be awesome if it all came from friends packing completly free, cup-winning crystally banger all the time.

And it’s really really painful when your all excited and overpay and wind up with a purposely laced sack of pencil shavings from some creep.

But those are the extremes: some distributers can afford to practically give it away, others charge more than market value whether it to enhance their own experience in this lifetime or perhaps to support themselves/their family, and quality varies according to availability.

So I hate when DW is painted as schwag dealer profiting off the dumb kiddies. It doesn’t mean he’s Jack Herrer doing charity work either.

He—or others for him—distributes a lot of dank nuggets for nothing or next to nothing--just look around the web. You can pay premium and get the ultra mind-blowing head exploding top shelf pieces…not to say it’s the ultimate out there, or that it is completely free of stems or even the occasional broke morsel—that’s all flash and no substance….but that’s how it goes.

He’s human, and it seems people put inhuman expectations on the dude—whether that’s his own “fault” or not.

Just my two cents…put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[kemo]

I agree with what others have said. DW does some very good work it seems to me and some rather suspect work, relying on dreams and other fanciful interpretations. But the fact is if you put your head above the parapet whether it be DW, Greer etc some people are going to criticise you for it. So what? I can't imagine what some people think DW has done to them personally that they have to sometimes resort to insults. If you don't want to buy his stuff then don't. I do wish he that he wasn't so concerned about himself all the time, and would stop praising his own work, but I'm always interested in what he has to say. I think he's going to add to the piece - as health, sleep etc permits of course - and I'm sure he is bound to have some take on the next couple of weeks' events (or non-events as the case may be).

[donk]

So what? I can't imagine what some people think DW has done to them personally that they have to sometimes resort to insults.

Well said!! That's what I was getting at...thank you!

[sigma6]

David is a classic geek in my mind (that is a real compliment btw) as some of my best friends were geeks and I learned so much from them. I don't follow all his stuff, I thought the Edward Cayce thing was fascinating, but I think it detracts more then helps. My interest in him is mostly to his recent conspiracy research on China and Benjamin Fulford. I first saw him from that 2012 presentation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1Hw8DVLw-A), and then that lead to Camelot (or something along those lines) Anyhow his Fulford research inevitably lead to researching international commerce, which leads to people like Jordan Maxwell ( Occult World of Commerce (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCsjzGYD2pE) ) and Winston Shrout, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlFP9oGTzBo) and back through history to HJR 192 and Edward Mandell House's famous letter. (http://freedomclubusa.com/banker_s_manifesto_of_1892) All this leads to the Birth Certificate, and it's my conviction that the only key that solves that is a non-statutory trust interpretation...

(ie. there IS a key to this whole thing, has to be by definition, because they couldn't implement House's idea literally as it would have been treason, (and we have clear evidence they didn't register people but corporate persons) However they very likely did re-fashion it using a trust model to make it work. They just needed a mechanism to attach the physical man to the corporate person by construed consent. Which is why there has to be a remedy) I would just love to see David interview Winston Shrout some more, maybe get a hold of Christian Walters (and I could think of a few others) then start crunching the data. Just to see what he comes up with. I am sure he wouldn't disappoint.

Ok, here is another biggie, David did an audio interview (I think I lost it, and am still looking for it again) that I didn't realize the importance of at the time. He was talking about the Georgian attack on Ossetia that occurred on the first day of the Beijing Olympics, (08/08/08) and in it he claimed that it was a pre-meditated covertly planned attack by the US/Isreali governments. Of course Western media was spinning it the other way blaming Russia. But only David seemed to have an inside story on it. He specificly claimed the CIA and Mossad were behind it. Now as titillating as it sounded at the time (ie it seemed like pretty wild stuff!) it was also very consistent, as the US and Isreal WERE in Georgia supposedly acting as military consultants for Georgia's entry into the EU or something along those lines... so I was very open to the possibility, I just had no way to confirm it at the time. And then, as fate would have it, would you believe I came across a seminar by Winston Shrout in LA (http://www.wssic.com/storews/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=36). On the last CD a man says "You know that WW III is going to start during the Beijing Olympics? Winston didn't disagree, but declined to comment on the record. But essentially this is an American stating on a recorded medium, that he has intel about a specific event which is going to happen a year later! That seminar was in 2007!

(btw if anyone can source this audio (David's Georgian Attack On Ossetia) interview please contact me, I need a copy)

There is no way that could have been faked, and no way that it could be a "coincidence" (as some subversives on this site like to counter with... lol) I can't but admire David's ability to research and find information. Nobody was saying what he was saying and I haven't heard it since, and I don't know anybody who saw the connecting point between these two dots. And who can blame them, they are so far removed and not connected to each other any other way except for the prediction. This was years before Wilcock even knew anything about Winston Shrout. And the man's statement is just 30 seconds of recorded media in a 16 hour audio Weekend seminar...

Think on this... David somehow was in contact with sources researching it, and as crazy as it sounded did the interview and shared it with the world, that is courageous, that is gutsy, I simply have to respect the man. That one piece of datum (the man recorded on Winston's seminar) is undeniable. And proves to me that David is a serious researcher, does have viable connections and is willing to put the truth out there no matter what.

I think a lot of what other people are doing is just biasing and prejudicing this guy. I follow a lot of people who are "working on problems" and as the years go by their views change. I see this as a sign of their commitment, others charge they are being mislead. Yet these people have never taken up the task of doing research and learning themselves by their own efforts. Truth is just as much a process, as it is a final destination. If the facts available dictate that you must now re-arrange your present theory and understanding, by all means it must be done. I think this is where people are getting David wrong. Ok, maybe he should be more upfront about that? (neither here nor there...) But he is a seeker imo, and a worthy source of information.

[Maunagarjana]

I wish people could just focus on the information he's talking about rather than him. If anyone has anything positive or negative to say about David, I really don't care. At this point I just ignore it and focus on the data. It should be able to stand on its own merits no matter who is the messenger.

[sigma6]

His articles are usually so long that I have stopped reading through them.


Sometimes thought I might stop breathing first. LOL
It's helpful to skip over personal reports about his heath and how much sleep he hasn't had.

I'd like him a whole lot better without all the drama. I guess when you've been all the famous historical people he's been.................

He is like a rock band. He has followers who wait for his next album. What I think of him is irrelevant. (Creaky old man voice) "Darn kids, listenin' to that reincarnated David fella."

Modwiz, my good man, you know I love you man!
and you remind me of that jello commercial "Hey you kids! get out of that jello tree!" LOLOL

I think you are referring to his Fulford/China/Lien business articles, and I really believe he put himself out of joint when he created those articles. He must have been studying, researching, and writing 18 hours a day to deliver them. Imagine what it must have been doing to his mind, as he was uncovering this stuff to boot? Just consider how much effort it takes to just read them! (lol) I am staggered to disbelief, that he produced that much material on the subject, in the time frame he did... And if we consider the info in them is in fact solid, then he had to go through huge amounts of materials and research, learning an entirely different model of the world he thought he knew. I really believe that those articles may have even been a turning point for David. Because I think he has now been opened up to an entirely new world he didn't know existed. some of that was indicated in his interview with Winston (ie. the very Matrix Jordan and his friend introduced to the world in his Cracking the Code books, which were monumental works at the time)

I mean, how many 'big names' have ever made it to front door of the "rabbit hole" let alone actually jumped in?

[Mozart]

I would just love to see David interview Winston Shrout some more, maybe get a hold of Christian Walters (and I could think of a few others) then start crunching the data. Just to see what he comes up with. I am sure he wouldn't disappoint.



Great stuff, sigma6!


Thanks for sharing.


After doing the editing on the Shrout/Wilcock interview, I agree that interviewing Shrout more would be a great thing.


Once we revert back to our natural timeline, I do think that many talented, knowledgeable people, like Shrout, would come out of the woodwork and help us re-establish our Organic Constitution, minus the fatal flaws in it that killed our Republic.


Then with so many people connected and inter-connected, it would be hard for any dark bastards to fool us again.


Fool us once, shame on you; fool us twice, shame on us.


~Mozart

[sigma6]

David is a classic geek in my mind (that is a real compliment btw) as some of my best friends were geeks and I learned so much from them. I don't follow all his stuff, I thought the Edward Cayce thing was fascinating, but I think it detracts more then helps. My interest in him is mostly to his recent conspiracy research on China and Benjamin Fulford. I first saw him from that 2012 presentation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1Hw8DVLw-A), and then that lead to Camelot (or something along those lines) Anyhow his Fulford research inevitably lead to researching international commerce, which leads to people like Jordan Maxwell ( Occult World of Commerce (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCsjzGYD2pE) ) and Winston Shrout, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlFP9oGTzBo) and back through history to HJR 192 and Edward Mandell House's famous letter. (http://freedomclubusa.com/banker_s_manifesto_of_1892) All this leads to the Birth Certificate, and it's my conviction that the only key that solves that is a non-statutory trust interpretation...

(ie. there IS a key to this whole thing, has to be by definition, because they couldn't implement House's idea literally as it would have been treason, (and we have clear evidence they didn't register people but corporate persons) However they very likely did re-fashion it using a trust model to make it work. They just needed a mechanism to attach the physical man to the corporate person by construed consent. Which is why there has to be a remedy) I would just love to see David interview Winston Shrout some more, maybe get a hold of Christian Walters (and I could think of a few others) then start crunching the data. Just to see what he comes up with. I am sure he wouldn't disappoint.

Ok, here is another biggie, David did an audio interview (I think I lost it, and am still looking for it again) that I didn't realize the importance of at the time. He was talking about the Georgian attack on Ossetia that occurred on the first day of the Beijing Olympics, (08/08/08) and in it he claimed that it was a pre-meditated covertly planned attack by the US/Isreali governments. Of course Western media was spinning it the other way blaming Russia. But only David seemed to have an inside story on it. He specificly claimed the CIA and Mossad were behind it. Now as titillating as it sounded at the time (ie it seemed like pretty wild stuff!) it was also very consistent, as the US and Isreal WERE in Georgia supposedly acting as military consultants for Georgia's entry into the EU or something along those lines... so I was very open to the possibility, I just had no way to confirm it at the time. And then, as fate would have it, would you believe I came across a seminar by Winston Shrout in LA (http://www.wssic.com/storews/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=36). On the last CD a man says "You know that WW III is going to start during the Beijing Olympics? Winston didn't disagree, but declined to comment on the record. But essentially this is an American stating on a recorded medium, that he has intel about a specific event which is going to happen a year later! That seminar was in 2007!

(btw if anyone can source this audio (David's Georgian Attack On Ossetia) interview please contact me, I need a copy)

There is no way that could have been faked, and no way that it could be a "coincidence" (as some subversives on this site like to counter with... lol) I can't but admire David's ability to research and find information. Nobody was saying what he was saying and I haven't heard it since, and I don't know anybody who saw the connecting point between these two dots. And who can blame them, they are so far removed and not connected to each other any other way except for the prediction. This was years before Wilcock even knew anything about Winston Shrout. And the man's statement is just 30 seconds of recorded media in a 16 hour audio Weekend seminar...

Think on this... David somehow was in contact with sources researching it, and as crazy as it sounded did the interview and shared it with the world, that is courageous, that is gutsy, I simply have to respect the man. That one piece of datum (the man recorded on Winston's seminar) is undeniable. And proves to me that David is a serious researcher, does have viable connections and is willing to put the truth out there no matter what.

I think a lot of what other people are doing is just biasing and prejudicing this guy. I follow a lot of people who are "working on problems" and as the years go by their views change. I see this as a sign of their commitment, others charge they are being mislead. Yet these people have never taken up the task of doing research and learning themselves by their own efforts. Truth is just as much a process, as it is a final destination. If the facts available dictate that you must now re-arrange your present theory and understanding, by all means it must be done. I think this is where people are getting David wrong. Ok, maybe he should be more upfront about that? (neither here nor there...) But he is a seeker imo, and a worthy source of information.

Ha! I found that audio recording I was looking for, it was hiding right in our own backyard LOL... for some reason I was so zoned on what he was saying about Georgia and Ossetia, I completely blanked on everything else... including that it was both Bill and Kerry doing the interview with him! :o And I could have sworn it was a shorter interview too, I was looking for a 40 minute interview for some reason. I just started going back to searching Google and ended up back on the Camelot website, then starting checking for dates and came across an audio download link for David on this page:
http://projectcamelot.org/audio_interviews.html
under David Wilcock (Sept 9, 2008) right where it should be... right under my nose the whole time. Anyhow it was kinda cool to see all the great interviews, that was truly a 'golden era' - the stuff that was happening. I can't believe all the work that Bill and Kerry managed to do in these last 6 years! opening so many minds to a larger universe... Hats off to you two for changing the world... cheers and my blessings, and this was a great audio interview going back to it.

[Carmen]

I've just finished reading "The Source Field Investigations" by David Wilcock and have a whole new respect for him. It is a very readable, well researched book and a great asset to those studying the truth of things. His personality does not attract me but his work is excellent. I can ignore his personality. He also has great courage to put himself out there and present the material he has. All credit to him.

[DeDukshyn]

I've just finished reading "The Source Field Investigations" by David Wilcock and have a whole new respect for him. It is a very readable, well researched book and a great asset to those studying the truth of things. His personality does not attract me but his work is excellent. I can ignore his personality. He also has great courage to put himself out there and present the material he has. All credit to him.

I agree -- his research and books are excellent and thorough. He just needs to stop trying to be celebrity, and stop hanging out with that "drake" guy. ;) ;)

[Bassplayer1]

And credibility with me too. I need only say that for anyone in doubt and hasnt had the chance yet - read The Sourcefield it is excellent - full of stuff which has already led me to discovering lots of exciting ideas which are new to me and could so easily have passed me by. So I'm grateful to David.

[sdv]

Just my two cents' worth, but I think DW is more effective when he sits and thinks and questions and figures things out for himself and then presents hypotheses, rather than passing on information from 'whistleblowers'. The latter is media hype, instant gratification stuff, and the former is using the gift of his mind to question and explore and then to share that with enthusiasm (have a look at some of his earlier presentations and you will see this geeky delight in discovery and exploration and questioning - I found it inspiring).

[Wind]

I too have to agree with the posts above. I'm not sure if he is Edgar Cayce reincarnated and it really doesn't matter to me. David is a phenomenal researcher, but when he started to consider himself as a guru or a celebrity he got somewehat sidetracked. That's what happens when your ego takes over you... It can happen even to the best of us, it's just a part of us humans unless we're enlightened beings as some are. That kind of gurus don't even seek attention, the students seek out the guru! I can see that his intentions are sincere, but he should be more open and not consider the people who follow him as customers.

The Sourcefield Investigations is an amazing book, he should really stick to stuff like that and not some silly financial tyranny stuff, because it will be as meaningless as money will be soon.

[The Lawnman]

I love reading David's material when I get the chance, he has an incredible ability to research material and present it with a high level of interpretation. The man is a creative genius imo. But I have to be careful who I express my appreciation for, ie not too loudly (don't want to draw any detractors 'hiding under rocks', hehe) Anyhow, glad to see that I am not the only one that supports David's work. Wonder what is going on with his movie project? It should be really good, just imagining his research and ideas combined with a hollywood writer's scripting technique!? - wow, that has got to be a winning combination. Can't wait to see if and when he is able to make that happen.

Also after seeing how quickly and how far he went into researching Fulford's material which culminated in his eventual interview with Winston Shrout, the man who consulted on Keenan's legal proceeding, completely blew me away. Nothing ever convinced me more that he definitely has a powerful intuitive capacity then when he did that interview. Further, I would love to see him direct his research deeper into the Birth Certificate as a corporate person, and in particular our relationship to it, and how all this operates from the point of view of a non-statutory trust interpretation.

Winston makes reference to trust, but doesn't hide the fact that he operates in commerce as a 'first language' which by definition is still fraught with dangers since he is ultimately still operating in a statutory realm. (ie. one still has to be a skilled navigator of a vessel that is sailing on the seas of (statutory) commerce, since that is literally the metaphorical model that commercial law operates upon)

But, when one learns how to express the trust and thus rebut all presumptions/assumptions - in particular the constructive trust (or presumptive trust might be a better way of articulating it) ...then one escapes being straight jacketed with the presumed trustee position of the constructive trust, and in my new understanding (oh yeah) one has simply removed themselves completely from that equation... period. (ohhh yeaaaaahhhh.... but that is another story...)

Anyhoo... point is, there is no question in my mind that the key lies in a non-statutory trust interpretation. And the real champion on non-statutory-trust interpretation is Christian Walters. I had to let him go a year or so back because I couldn't keep up. He has since archived probably over a 1000 hours of audio in the last 4 years (approx) And went through dozens of books on trust in his presentations, including the Corpus Juris Secundum (A Legal Encyclopdia). It takes dedication to follow him (many hours, harder then Winston, since he quotes from text and gets right into technical interpretation of what he is reading) but when he hits a nugget, it is truly mind blowing. I have gleaned some of the most powerful ideas from his presentations/interpretations/extrapolations. He is literally the toughest act to follow. (true trust law is not for the faint hearted... update: it is deceptively simple, more about subtle and relative, trust relationships can be reversed in a heartbeat by simply rebutting a pre-existing presumption for example)

But here is the kicker, I was corresponding with one of his insiders, and she updated me on their current status. It appears they have reached a critical milestone in their research, since the days he did his first audios on Dezert's Owl's therealpublicradio.net website (my has it been that long? ;[) ... anyhow, what she was trying to tell me is that CW has finally made some huge breakthroughs in understanding, if he hasn't completely cracked it!

As a result they now have a basis of understanding that focuses in on 30 of his audios, 3 specific books, and 13 maxims! The implications of this is game changing btw!...

Let me put this into perspective:
30 audios means that CW has cut down his 1000 hours of audio to approx 60 hours practically! (I'd say his average presentation used to be 2 hrs (min) Also, the fact he is now satisfied that 3 books best reflect his ideas is another laser targeting cut, compared to the dozens of books he was going through previously, (consider a typical treatise on trust can range from 750 pages to 1500 easily, and yes the man is a relentless animal when it comes to trust law research!) And that he has clearly identified what he feels are the 13 maxims that one needs to operate in equity is absolutely mind blowing!

Consider the implications - which would you rather study, learn and live by? 13 maxims or 60 million statutes!? (codes and regulations, etc) Imagine studying approx 60 hrs of someone's lectures to leverage his 4 years of research. Now at the time of our correspondence she didn't exactly tell me what the 13 maxims were (true to their style, and a frustration for me...) but she did unload over 300 text files on me (that I am still going through) And remember too, this is a guy that even Winston makes highly regarded references to in his material.

And btw, she did give me the 3 absolute must read books that he now works of off:

Gibsons' Suits in Chancery,
Gilbert's on Trust (12 ed, I think) and
Pomery on Equity.

And they have also had an unequivocal success in court according to my contact. When you understand and can invoke equity, you are operating in trust, and the courts are now irrevocably in the fiduciary trustee position, no ifs, ands or buts... and they know it...

So if you are out there oh great pumpkin, please send this message to David Wilcock! because I think he would "get this" if he hasn't already been speculating about it already... (and I think he is...) (and I also believe that Jordan would definitely 'get this' too)

Sorry for going so long, but this was a bit of a flash, when I think about David's work, which makes me think about his Winston interview (my head is spinning!) I will have to figure out a place to flesh this out more, (because I think I have come across a break through (not just CW's work, it triggered it, by way of confirmation of certain ideas (yes believe it or not, I am actually not in total agreement, that is the "other story" part...) ok I AM stoppin here (ahhhhh....)

hint: Rockefeller was absolutely correct when he said "own nothing, control everything"



links for my own reference:

Own Nothing, Control Everything, What Does This Mean?
Missing 35 Plus Trillion Dollars in Bonds (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?51689-Missing-35-Plus-Trillion-Dollars-in-Bonds-and-Certificates&p=604249&viewfull=1#post604249)

Here are the maxims as outlined by Charles Phelps in his work: Juridical Equity: Abridged for the Use of Students.

http://ia600400.us.archive.org/33/items/cu31924085500928/cu31924085500928.pdf

He breaks them down into two distinct groups - Enabling and Restrictive

Enabling Maxims
1) No Rights with out a Remedy
2) Equity regards substance rather than form
3) Equity regards that as done, which (in good conscience) ought to be done.
4) Equity imputes an intention to fulfill an obligation
5) Equity acts in personam
6) Equity acts specifically
7) Equity prevents a multiplicity of suits
8) Equality is equity

Restrictive Maxims
1) Equity follows the law
2) Between equal equities, the law prevails
3) Between equal equities, priority of time prevails
4) He who seeks equity must do equity and come with clean hands
5) Equity aids the vigilant

Christian Walters has worked hard to get people to understand that their substantive rights are only cognizable in courts of equity jurisprudence. He has resurrected the "Beneficial Rights Movement", and is teaching others how to gain access to the equitable side of the courts where our substantive rights reside. Courts of Equity are governed by the equity maxims, not the (62) million statutes and codes. This jurisdiction allows the Chancellors to do what is right, just and fair sans the restrictions and harshness of the law. And after all, isn't this what we all want; justice, righteousness, and fairness?

This is his favorite quote, "Law is nothing without equity and equity is everything, even without law. Those who perceive what is just and what is unjust only through the eyes of the law, never see it as well as those who behold it with the eyes of equity. Law may be looked upon in some manner as an assistance for those who have a weak perception of right and wrong, in the same way that optical glasses are useful to those who are shortsighted, or whose visual organs are deficient. Equity, in its true and genuine meaning, is the soul and spirit of the law; positive law is construed, and rational law is made by it." John Bouvier - Institutes of American Law 1882, Vol. 2, s. 3724, para. 4.

[gripreaper]

Anyhow his Fulford research inevitably lead to researching international commerce, which leads to people like Jordan Maxwell ( Occult World of Commerce ) and Winston Shrout, and back through history to HJR 192 and Edward Mandell House's famous letter. All this leads to the Birth Certificate, and it's my conviction that the only key that solves that is a non-statutory trust interpretation...


Sigma, you have a grasp of the big picture. Gibson and Pomery, as outlined by Christian Walters, Winston Shrout, and others ( Carl Miller, Howard Griswold, etc) is making the distinction between the sovereign soul, and the indentured slave. The idea of filing declarations, rescinding one's adhesion contracts, and fully standing sovereign, does not address how to operate in commerce, since all commerce is commercial and part of the fictional realm.

If you have listened to Winston Shrout in any capacity, then you must be aware of the "accepted for value" discharge of the public debt instruments, and you may have heard chatter about how to access your treasury direct account, which is attached to your beneficial interest in the trust which is the earth and it's resources. Some have claimed to have been able to do this, but I see no clear path.

So, although we are taught how to stand sovereign in court and invoke jurisdiction, remain outside the admiralty statutes and regulations, rescind and sever the connection between the free and sovereign to the corporate fiction, how does one operate in commerce once you are no longer part of this fiction?

All commerce is admiralty, and all admiralty is commerce. Without Federal Reserve Notes, as a medium of exchange, how do I buy groceries for this week?

[sigma6]

Here are the maxims as outlined by Charles Phelps in his work: Juridical Equity: Abridged for the Use of Students.
http://ia600400.us.archive.org/33/it...4085500928.pdf
He breaks them down into two distinct groups - Enabling and Restrictive
Enabling Maxims
1) No Rights with out a Remedy
2) Equity regards substance rather than form
3) Equity regards that as done, which (in good conscience) ought to be done.
4) Equity imputes an intention to fulfill an obligation
5) Equity acts in personam
6) Equity acts specifically
7) Equity prevents a multiplicity of suits
8) Equality is equity

Restrictive Maxims
1) Equity follows the law
2) Between equal equities, the law prevails
3) Between equal equities, priority of time prevails
4) He who seeks equity must do equity and come with clean hands
5) Equity aids the vigilant

Christian Walters has worked hard to get people to understand that their substantive rights are only cognizable in courts of equity jurisprudence. He has resurrected the "Beneficial Rights Movement", and is teaching others how to gain access to the equitable side of the courts where our substantive rights reside. Courts of Equity are governed by the equity maxims, not the (62) million statutes and codes. This jurisdiction allows the Chancellors to do what is right, just and fair sans the restrictions and harshness of the law. And after all, isn't this what we all want; justice, righteousness, and fairness?

This is his favorite quote, "Law is nothing without equity and equity is everything, even without law. Those who perceive what is just and what is unjust only through the eyes of the law, never see it as well as those who behold it with the eyes of equity. Law may be looked upon in some manner as an assistance for those who have a weak perception of right and wrong, in the same way that optical glasses are useful to those who are shortsighted, or whose visual organs are deficient. Equity, in its true and genuine meaning, is the soul and spirit of the law; positive law is construed, and rational law is made by it." John Bouvier - Institutes of American Law 1882, Vol. 2, s. 3724, para. 4.

Cool lawman, finally someone who has some trust knowledge, will look forward to any of your interpretations... I am writing a series of posts, connected by previous and following links from Dec 10, to present (although I will string them back as far as I have been making posts on this topic) I haven't followed Christian for over a year, but get a brief update occasionally. I think I created a monster when I showed him how to respond to questions by using questions (I felt he was losing control with the open mike sessions lol). And I both couldn't keep up (many hours per week back then) and was beginning to not get questions answered. For a time they were chasing the beneficiary, then the strawman, going round in circles, trying to nail our position in the trust. How the trust mechanism was operating, and to be honest it was really overwhelming me. I originally started following him back in the summer of 2009 (I still have the Pre Nov 7th Lectures, before his "breakthrough" of going all trust...) I was more interested at the time on how he explained what was really going on in the court. I was studying how annotating signatures with "without prejudice, all rights reserved, putting by: for or per: before the signature, vi coactus, etc) And he was explaining the court process using these terms and introduced constructive, resulting trust and expressed trusts. And finally how they were related to Acceptance for Value. I was hooked. Even though he has bypassed these concepts as "debtor/creditor" (commercial) I still think they have validity in certain contexts. Anyhow I would love to pick your brain sometime. Someone who can keep me posted on their latest research, etc.

Question: these 13 maxims that you have posted, are these the 13 that Christian and Lisa are making reference to? As I see you have referenced them from a Charles Phelps' book and I would have thought that they would be making use of the 3 books they are now basing their interpretation on. Please get back to me on that, thanks

[sigma6]

...you may have heard chatter about how to access your treasury direct account, which is attached to your beneficial interest in the trust which is the earth and it's resources. Some have claimed to have been able to do this, but I see no clear path...


Where to start... Winston operates in Commerce, as he clearly states, but it is dangerous still because you are operating essentially as a pirate on the seas of Admiralty... a worthwhile study, but not the whole answer... I don't believe in a treasury direct account, that was a misinterpretation of Winston trying to explain how everything has already been paid for... and people took it literally, he was speaking more theoretically. As all money created and borrowed by all corporations comes from the labour of the people. Therefore everything created was created with our money. The money they are charging could be considered interest on the loan. Therefore its our interest, as we are the source of all credit. I believe if one operated perfectly in trust, everything would zero account on the commercial side.

Barton Butz was big on this idea too I think, but he definitely got sidetracked somewhere. Winston talked more about accrual accounting. It is about credit. We all have (almost) unlimited credit, because we all have unlimited potential to create wealth out of our productivity our whole lives. Accrual accounting is necessary in a bankruptcy because it's all about accounting of funds that don't exist immediately but will be promised to be paid at some future date. Or promises to be paid for something that will be paid (at some future date) It's all accrual accounting. Fiat currency. I do believe they take the Birth Certificates and use them in the bond market market as the basis to create how much 'money' should be accrued into bonds which are then loaned to the government by the bankers.

Wow I just had a weird thought... what if the bankers, well the bankers actually are creating all this wealth based on these BCs, means it's actually ALL our 'money' and therefore so is the interest. They are just acting as supertrustees, WOW! Which all gets back to who controls the trusts that are referred to by the BC's that we hold (but are too stupid (including myself) to know how to utilize to access our credit (my whole mission))


So, although we are taught how to stand sovereign in court and invoke jurisdiction, remain outside the admiralty statutes and regulations, rescind and sever the connection between the free and sovereign to the corporate fiction, how does one operate in commerce once you are no longer part of this fiction?

not sure about 'standing sovereign' although I think we would perhaps gain some if we operated in trust... invoking jurisdiction? doesn't make sense. You argue jurisdiction. Who has it, who they have it over, whether you consent to it or not and how to do that.... update: I am trying to invoke equity so that the courts have to protect the NAME in a manner that recognizes our superior interest and therefore our instruction... and I am doing this by recognizing they are holding the NAME and that we must make notice of correction of the mistake of signing as owner, when the owner IS the NAME. We are all operating in a trust environment, and must therefore


...All commerce is admiralty, and all admiralty is commerce. Without Federal Reserve Notes, as a medium of exchange, how do I buy groceries for this week?

I think that is right, and we still may have to work, but with a different understanding and some unusual new powers. I have to admit Commerce has some necessary functions that seem to be missing from trust. Like a model of distribution (currently an inefficient unfair and abused one albeit, but it does serve the market for now) Then again they may work together in some interwoven fashion...

Re: the Holy Grail question... I think you are asking the wrong question Grip, this isn't about short cuts, it's about gaining an understanding that will eventually leverage you into a world of potentially unlimited credit. But think of the implications. With such credit comes great power, there also has to be some counter balance to all that... some responsibility. ie. If all you want to do is buy 10 monster trucks and build a pizza parlour next to your house for example, there has to be measures to stop that. (If I have to explain why, then there is no point in explaining...) So what that looks like I am not sure yet. For now you have to slave for a few FRN's and buy them like everyone else...

I have thought about controls, and perhaps the only solution was to make it so complicated, as if to correlate it with high education (elitism) or great determination , ie. those devoted to educating themselves (near impossible when you realize the books you may need access to) would figure it out... at least it certainly looks that way from where I am standing right now... But also I think there is remedy for those who study the Bible as well, since it is an expression of trust interpretation (amongst many other things as well, but it would have to be to a very high intense level. Look at all the contexts you need to get there. General education, logic (reasoning) philosophy, history, law, and I absolutely believe the last door is trust. Which literally is all these things when you think about it. (full circle) To me it's like figuring out a fairly complex 'operating system' more complex then mac, windows or maybe more like unix (because of the unlimited number of combinations of commands that can be created) and right now I am focusing more on how to understanding how to 'move titles' in trust as CW calls it, thereby extinguishing all public debts created by government, and then controlling property held in trust.

I should add: I also think, that like a computer, once you get a handle on what is going on, that it will also be fundamentally simple, that is, it is difficult only because it is 'hidden'. The complexity part is more of a 'relative' term, complex only because it is something so foreign to our current understanding. i.e something that most people, if given the proper information and training, could learn with basic study just like anything else.