**Here is a video of this same stuff if you are more of a watcher than a reader**

In some of the videos that I’ve made about the Galactic Center, and even in some of the blog posts I’ve done about the GC, I have made comments about the GC having a similar feeling that Out of Bounds (OOB) planets have. OOB Planets have a Uranian flavor to them, probably due to the nature of the OOB planet not being under the domain of the Sun anymore (the orbit of the OOB planet is beyond that of Earth’s orbit with the Sun). This makes the planet function in a more wild, unusual, or unpredictable manner – and really, with OOB planets, you can end up with the genius, with the renegade, with the unorthodox, and even sheer madness. The way the OOB planet will “go” isn’t as “set” as planets that aren’t OOB – sometimes it kind of feels like a coin toss. The chart itself will probably give clues as to HOW this planet ends up functioning, but even then the OOB planet can be kind of a wild card. There is also a sense about the planets that fall OOB and not “knowing any bounds.” Planets that are OOB don’t tend to let things limit them- a planet in bounds knows what it’s limits are and typically sticks to those. OOB planets, on the other hand, don’t stick to any limits that are “imposed” on them. It’s this notion of not “doing” the limit thing, and of the “changing” of the way the planet functions, that feels very GC-ish to me. The GC definitely seems to “change” planets that it comes in contact with (specifically the conjunctions and the oppositions). IF the GC is actually the source of all creation, a lifeline to other dimensions (and maybe even to aliens and shit ^_^), then the GC is limitless in a similar kind of way to OOB planets. The GC feels like it knows no limits – we don’t even KNOW where that mother fucker goes on the other side (that in and of itself feels pretty fucking limitless). I mean, really take a minute and THINK about that. WE DON’T KNOW WHERE THIS MOTHER FUCKER ENDS OR WHAT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE! Am I the only one who gets a fucking thought boner about that? I can’t be, right?

I have a couple of blog posts here and here (and a video here) that go into more detail about the logistics of OOB planets (I’m not gunna do that in this post), but I will say that a planet that is considered OOB when it is beyond 23-degrees 26-minutes North and 23-degrees 26-minutes South in declination.

In the research that I’ve looked into so far dealing with famous whistleblowers, truth-tellers, and even conspiracy theorists, I have talked about several things in relations to their charts and the GC, but I hadn’t (until now) looked to see what, if any, planets happen to be OOB in their charts. I’m glad I did because there does seem to be a correlation. Thus far I have looked at 14 people in the blog posts and/or videos, and out of the 14 that I’ve looked at, 10 of the people have OOB planets in their chart (this would come in at 71% of people I’ve looked at so far). Here are the people that DO have OOB planets and what planets they are:
**Edward Snowden – Mars OOB (Mars is conjunct the GaC)
**Chelsea Manning – Mercury and Uranus OOB (both are conjunct the GC)
**Jeffrey Wigand – Mercury and Venus OOB (both are loosely conjunct the GC)
**Erin Brockovich – Venus OOB (conjunct the GaC)
**Karen Silkwood – Mars and Pluto OOB (neither conjunct the GC or GaC)
**Bill Cooper – Venus and Pluto OOB (Venus is conjunct the GaC)
**Donald Trump – Mercury & Pluto OOB (neither is TECHNICALLY in the window of orb that I’m looking at for conjunctions to the GC and the GaC, but fuck me, Mercury’s close to that window)
**Mark Whitacre (mentioned in a video) – Mars OOB (Mars conjunct the GaC)
**Colleen Rowley (mentioned in a video) – Mercury OOB (Mercury conjunct the GC)
**Alexander Litvinenko (mentioned in a video) – Mercury OOB (loosely conjunct the GC using the December 4, 1962 DOB)//Mars OOB (loosely conjunct the GaC using the August 30, 1962 DOB). There are some questions on which date he was actually born.

As you can can see, a majority of the people actually have the planet that is OOB fucking (conjunct) the GC or the GaC. I don’t think that it has to be this way for the OOB planet to matter (I think OOB planets matter to the GC whether they are fucking the GC (or the GaC) or not just because the energy between OOB planets and the GC feel so similar), but I do think it’s interesting that a lot of these people have their OOB planet (or planets) fucking the GC or the GaC.

What I also find really interesting are the people that DON’T have OOB planets in their charts and the connections that these people’s charts have to the GC/GaC axis in the first place.

1. Julian Assange has no planets OOB in his chart. I think this is interesting because he was one of the only people that I looked at that did NOT have ANYTHING conjunct the GC. He has Venus opposite the GC (conjunct the GaC) – so while he does have a GC contact via the opposition, he doesn’t have something fucking the GC. Assange himself made an interesting comment about his own role in Wikileaks (and even, life in general, maybe?) back in 2010 to Anorak News:
   
   “We always expect tremendous criticism. It is my role to be the lightning rod….to attract the attacks against the organization for our work, and that is a difficult role. On the other hand, I get undue credit.”
   
   The notion of him being a “lightning rod” is interesting here – or rather the notion of the area opposite the GC (the area that composes the GaC) being a hypothetical “lightning rod” of sorts. The area opposite the GC being one that is struck and charged by the GC, but by way of taking the hit from the GC (perhaps, so everything around the GC, planets there or not, isn’t completely decimated. It kind of gives another flavor to how I’ve talked about the GaC being an area where we are “blinded” due to the bright ass star that is close to the GaC in space. Maybe it’s not just the blinding from that star – maybe the area across from the GC is also the area where the “lightning” from the GC strikes – and lightning is bright as fuck, too. Without a planet conjunct the GC, though, and just a planet opposite the GC (planet conjunct the GaC), there is nothing conjunct the GC to kind of “absorb” some of the charge – meaning the fucking lightning striking a planet conjunct the GaC (without a planet conjunct the GC, too) feels like it would be massive.

2. Alex Jones and Gary Webb are two people who also have no OOB planets in their chart. I mention them together because they both have the North Node conjunct the GC (Jones ONLY has the North Node conjunct the GC, and Webb has the North Node and Ascendant conjunct the GC). Now, in both cases, we aren’t talking about a tangible body in the sky being conjunct the GC (the North Node is a hypothetical point and the Ascendant is a Cardinal Point/Major Angle/Personal Sensitive Point/whatever term you prefer). The North Node is also something that we don’t come into this world “understanding” or “comfortable” with – our mission is to move into it and understand it (so I think it’s interesting that these two have no OOB planets for this reason). They both have oppositions to the GC (Jones has Saturn and the South Node conjunct the GaC and Webb has the Descendant and South Node conjunct the GaC). This also gives them this “lightning rod” quality – and they both have been lightning rods in different ways (Webb with his writings about the CIA’s involvement with the drug trade to fund the Contras and Jones, well lol, doing what Jones does best).

3. Frank Serpico is the last of the people that doesn’t have any OOB planets, and his is the one that throws me the most. Now he does HAVE all the other things that I’ve been focusing on in the research – he has a conjunction to the GC (Jupiter), he has Jupiter RX in his natal chart, and he has a trine from the GC to the Sun, Mercury, and Uranus. I was actually kind of surprised that he didn’t have anything OOB considering all the others who DO have conjunctions to the GC seem have OOB planets (this far in the research on these well known people, anyway). Why might this be the case? Well, one thing that I notice is that his North Node is at 6-degrees (or 7-degrees) Capricorn – I mention both degrees since I’ve seen it as both. THIS is a little wide to be considered conjunct the GC, but if the North Node IS at 6-degrees, it would be within the window of orb that I’m looking at for conjunctions (even if wide, it’s there). This would make him more inclined to have been comfortable coming into this world with the energy of the GaC per the loose South Node conjunction, needing to move towards his North Node (though having the push from Jupiter RX to help this happen). I wonder, if like in the case of Jones and Webb, he just wasn’t as acquainted with the GC energy when he made his debut in this lifetime. I do think that this is an interesting correlation, though.

The Nodes of the Moon can play into having OOB planets – the closer that the North Node is to 0-degrees Aries (and the South Node is to 0-Libra) in a chart, the higher a chance that the person has of having OOB planets. Since my North Node is at 0-Aries, this would probably help to explain why I have 3 OOB planets in my own chart – the Moon, Venus, and Uranus. On the flip side of that, the closer that the North Node is to 0-Libra (and the South Node is to 0-Aries), the less of a chance the person has of having OOB planets. It doesn’t HAVE to go this way, though – not as common, but there are people with their North Node closer to 0-Aries that don’t have any planets OOB and people with their North Node closer to 0-Libra that might have a couple OOB planets. This doesn’t really help to explain the situations with Jones, Webb, and specifically Serpico, since their Nodal Axis is in Gemini/Sagittarius or Cancer/Capricorn.

I will have to flesh this out even further – but there does seem to be some correlation between the GC and OOB planets people (all 10 of the other people have OOB planets). There also just feels to me that there is a correlation between the GC and OOB energy in general.

……and lightning rods. Fuck, now I have lightning rods on my mind.