Lyssa Royal, an internationally recognized channel whose work is seen regularly in such publications as Connecting Link and Sedona Journal of Emergence! is the co-author of several books including Prism of Lyra, Future Sex, the forthcoming Visitors from Within, and is a featured channel in the Sedona Vortex Guidebook. She has been seen on national and international television and has channeled for thousands across the world in Japan, Australia, the Yucatan and the United States, and was recently featured with other well-known channels at the International Channeling Conference in Crete.
Germane, a group consciousness energy, states that "his" orientation is from a realm of integration that does not have a clear-cut density/dimensional level. The term "germane" in the English language means "significant relevance" or "coming from the same source". Germane therefore chose this term to somewhat personify his energy. Neither male nor female, he views us as evolving to become him as we begin the process of physical, emotional, mental and spiritual integration, which leads us back to the Source of All. For more information, please contact Royal Priest Research, PO Box 30973, Phoenix, Arizona 85046.
NOTE Within this transcript several legal terms are used. Following is a definition of these terms so the information may be clear to the reader. These terms are not interchangeable.
Here are some definitions of emotional sovereignty. First of all, it means liberation, freedom. A state of emotional sovereignty is obtained when a person recognizes, both intellectually and emotionally, that he/she is the total creator of his/her reality and has sole responsibility for him/herself.
These concepts sound like simplistic metaphysics, for many lecturers and channels espouse them. However we are going to take you deeper into the areas where you have not attained emotional sovereignty, areas where there is a disguised play being acted on the stage, and the playbill says one thing but the message the play carries says another. We will point out contradictions in the philosophies on your planet, in your own thinking, and in the systems that you have set up. This is to show you that even though you claim you want spiritual and emotional sovereignty, you are actually perpetuating its opposite.
There are many points we will bring up that, taken separately, may look as if they are not connected. However we're going to link them to show you just how deep is your sense of non-sovereignty and how ancient is this state.
Your mass consciousness has reached out to us, to other levels of consciousness, asking for assistance to move through this most difficult time. This is a time when you can enslave yourselves more deeply or where you can finally achieve your sovereignty. Within the next 50 years you will decide the direction you wish to go. We and others have answered your call, and we give you our perspectives on some of these things to assist you. Should you choose to use these perspectives, that is up to you.
We will, of course, call on those present for assistance with some of the historical facts. We are somewhat limited in the method of channeling that we use with this vehicle to bring through specific historical information that she herself does not possess. Thus if anything we say is historically inaccurate, you may correct us, although historical accuracy is actually irrelevant.
These things are not clearly understood when one enters this contract - but it's important to note that nobody is trying to "get" you. Because of your own deep-seated emotional beliefs, you have created covert ways to keep yourself stuck in these dysfunctional emotional beliefs. What is covert is what you're doing to yourselves. Do you follow so far?
Another example, one written into your Constitution, is the right to drive. When you apply for a drivers license, you give up your right and are thereby granted a privilege. But because you exist under the Constitution, you have a right to drive.
I want to clarify that it is basically a right to travel on the roads. The Supreme Court has ruled that this includes one's personal automobile.
Because that is your right, you don't have to do anything to exercise it other than to exist. However, when you enter into a contract (a drivers license), you relinquish that right and subject yourselves to laws that are made regarding the privilege you are now given. As teenagers you are taught that you take drivers education, apply for a license and then you can legally drive. Of course, when you get your license you are then subject to the laws about automobile insurance, vehicle registration, the laws of the road, etc. Your traveling then becomes a privilege instead of a natural right, correct? You're not taught that you have a choice.
Another example is common-law marriage -- marriage in the eyes of God (never mind the piece of paper) - retaining your rights to educate your children. Or you can sign a contract and thus no longer educate your own children. You and your spouse become legally bound to each other and are given certain supposed privileges. You are not told you have choice, it is taken for granted that you get married and sign the papers. There is seldom conscious thought about alternatives that may better serve your situation.
When you go for your first drivers license, you are not told you have a choice under the Constitution, which your forefathers wrote and which you all co-created. You are not told you have a choice either to retain your natural rights as a citizen or to sign away those rights in exchange for certain privileges and all the laws those privileges are subject to. If you retain, for instance, your common-law rights -your natural rights under the Constitution - even if you are caught by a policeman for speeding there may be a hassle but constitutionally you still have the right to travel. You can be fined or punished only when you have given away your rights in exchange for privileges; then you are bound by the laws. Are we correct?
Not having a drivers license, according to the law, does not give you the right to violate the safety laws. According to the Supreme Court you are still subject to the speed laws and other rules of the road. The punishment for not having a drivers license differs from state to state. In Arizona, as you said, it is simply a fine. In other states it can be jail. So there is a wide variety in the type of crime as well as punishment. A misdemeanor in Arizona could be a felony in another state.
In that case what you call your civil law is not applicable. Civil law (the way you set up your system on your planet) ensures that someone is a victim, that someone must be held responsible because no one is willing to take responsibility for themselves. Your system reinforces the idea that someone is at fault, and therefore there must be someone to punish you - because you are unable or unwilling to take total responsibility for your own reality. Thus victimhood is continually perpetuated. How many times a day do you see an automobile insurance commercial on television where the injured person says, "It wasn't my fault. Don't I deserve something for my pain and suffering?" This is the attitude, the dynamic, that is constantly being perpetuated.
We recognize that you may not want to change overnight - it may be too much of a shock. However, right now the majority of people are unaware that they are perpetuating the cycle of fear, non-responsibility, blame and victimhood. Imagine what it would be like to drive daily and 100% of the time know that you are creating your reality, know that everything that happens to you is created by you for a very specific reason. If you get into an automobile accident, if you hit someone, you take responsibility for it. Even if you are hit from behind, for instance, you recognize that it is within your reality only because you have drawn it there.
Imagine a society that holds these beliefs. It would have no victimhood; it would be a society totally willing to take responsibility for everything that happens to it. You are working toward this, but because you have not recognized the trap you have set up for yourself, it is almost as if you are running on a treadmill trying to get down the street. Once you recognize how deep is the structure you've created, you will be able to start actively changing it.
You then have someone who is angry and decides they're going to buck the system. Let's say they refuse to register their car, get automobile insurance or a drivers license. In their anger, their intent is to make a statement - to cause trouble. This creates resistance toward the very structure they are struggling to pull away from. All it does is balance the intensity of the structure. It will not free them but keep them chained to it. The person never looks at the real reason for the anger - the relinquishment of personal sovereignty - but instead blames that loss on someone else. You can never be sovereign if you blame anyone else for anything. And whenever you do, the structure is kept in place.
There are many individuals on your planet who feel they are engaged in good causes when they are acting in anger. But we tell you that anger will never solve the structural challenges of your society. It can never break the structure. The question is, what will break the structure? First an intelligent understanding of the structure itself, why it was created and how it is kept in place. After that it will be necessary to process any anger, martyrdom or victimhood that you feel, and be willing to act from your own integrity - not from anger or an intent to make a statement, but because it's the only thing you can do in your integrity.
There are people at present who are starting to hear the voice of their conscience, who are processing their victimhood, who are beginning to see the true nature of the structure and how it was put there. And when they realize this in their own conscience, they can no longer keep it intact. They must follow their own integrity. In that choice to follow integrity - cleanly, clearly, with no anger - the structure begins to change. The issue is not the structure that is enslaving you, but the fact that you have allowed it to enslave you. If you can begin to understand why you've allowed this, why you've forgotten you put it here to begin with, then true sovereignty is right around the corner. Comments?
(Audience participant) I would think that anyone daring to create their own reality couldn't participate in the insurance scheme.
If you 100% absolutely believe you create your reality and know it, you cannot participate in the insurance idea.
(Audience participant) I guess I'm bringing it up because it seems to be one of the easiest first steps to take. If someone is ready to regain their sovereignty, to take back their power, it would seem to me that facing this insurance issue would be a good place to start. You just stop paying your premiums.
We understand what you are saying, except the person has to be very clear within. We would never suggest that someone stop paying their premiums, because if they still fear an accident, they will draw the accident to their doorway. They will not go through the process of healing by withdrawing the insurance. What we mean is that you will not heal this issue by withdrawing your insurance first and then processing. You will heal it by processing it to the point of integrity which leads you to withdraw your insurance. You follow?
(Audience participant) I follow, but I don't know if I agree yet. Can we talk about it some more? [My wife] has had several patients who had to maintain irresponsibility because they have insurance that would not pay if they were found responsible.
Exactly. You are rewarded when you're not responsible. (Audience participant) You said if someone is afraid, they haven't fully processed this thing about being responsible. If they maintain their insurance, that automatically keeps them in the state of irresponsibility. It seems to me you have got to take that step first.
Recognize that your reality is not changed by changing the external things in order to get to the internal things. Your reality is changed by changing the internal things, which then affects the external things.
(Audience participant) If someone maintains their insurance because they're afraid they're going to get in an accident or be punished if they're caught without it are you suggesting that they process the fear of the accident or punishment before they stop paying their premiums; that it will be much more effective if they first process the reasons why they feel they need this protection? Wouldn't it be easier to find those issues by taking the step and saying, "The insurance isn't doing me any good. it is keeping me from my sovereignty," and stopping the insurance, allowing those issues to come up even more clearly?
Some people may choose to do it that way. However, if you removed the physical thing [the insurance], they will simply transfer their inner feelings to something else. It won't solve or change anything.
(Audience participant) The distinction, then, is that if they're not on the path, the insurance shouldn't be removed; if they get on the path, then that's another matter. This brings up something else, which is the locking of one's house and car. Obviously, if we create our own reality, then we have to create being robbed. It is amazing that someone could give their power to one piece of metal on a door that when locked makes them feel safe. What you're suggesting is that they should process the fear of being robbed before they leave the door unlocked. Is that correct?
Yes, because if they process the fear first, one day there will be a welling of emotion, a feeling, a shift. The realization will come emotionally that they do not need to lock the doors anymore. That will not come in the same way if the attempt is to change the external before the internal.
(Audience participant) It feels like I'm advocating taking a symbolic action - doing something, leaving the door open - not to hasten the process but to focus the process.
Some people can work that way; the majority do not. Recognize that the human being is very adept at transferring issues, meaning that if they start leaving their doors open they're going to manifest the fear of invasion in another area of their life. It will always be there in various forms until they process the internal dynamics.
We're certainly not disagreeing with you or with any decisions you have made in the past or the future. Obviously they've worked for you. As a whole, our recommendation is to deal with it internally before doing it in the external world.
That means recognizing whenever you reward yourself for pain, suffering, or anything that is not of service to you in a positive, exciting way. Recognize what you are doing, such as letting the insurance companies pay your medical bills only because you were not to blame. You are rewarded by an outside entity if you are not to blame - that concept is totally incompatible with the ultimate concept of common law and of spiritual and emotional sovereignty.
The structures on your planet are in place and you're struggling against them to change them, but you can't see what you're struggling against. The challenge now is to begin, in the darkness, to make out the shape that you have created to enslave yourself. We cannot express to you how powerful the changes will be on your planet when you begin relinquishing these old structures. You will do this layer by layer. Sometimes you may think you're at the end, but there will be another five layers to go. It's a very deep process you've created to protect yourself, believing that you yourselves need to be taken care of, protected, told what to do.
That idea is too dualistic from our point of view.
(Audience participant) I'm involved in a quiet court case about my refusal to get a privilege license from the government to run my business. It doesn't feel like I'm doing it in anger, although four years ago when I was challenging the drivers license issue there was anger and conspiracy and all that this involved. This time it's simply that I cannot agree to pay the government protection money like the Mafia demands for not harassing you. Operating a business is a right, not a privilege. Would you recommend to someone who operates a business to renew their license, or to process this first before they take that step?
Our recommendation is to totally and absolutely feel comfortable processing before any steps are taken, because if it is done with uncertainty or fear, it will add to the strength of the structure instead of helping to dissolve it. That is the way we see it; we are certainly open for disagreement.
(Audience participant) I think there has to be a certain amount of processing that occurs anyway, because this structure has become so ingrained that we have to face the fact that when someone is ready to take back their personal power, to regain their sovereignty, one of the possibilities is jail.
Yes. There is a gray point between the black and the white where the transformation will occur. The consequence for bowing down to the system is that you keep the structure intact There are definitely consequences for pursuing the sovereignty idea, because you may be punished. However, what it comes down to is acting from your integrity. In your own inner searchings, when you find what your integrity is guiding you to do, your sovereignty lies in following that.
As you are soul-searching, one of the key ideas is educating yourself on the Constitution and as much law as you can; educating yourself beyond the textbooks that the structures provide for you, because the textbooks are written within the structure. You must educate yourself from the source. That is where one of the big challenges lie, because many of you have not been able to tell the difference between textbooks written by the structures and "clean" information from the source that leads you into sovereignty. It is a process of discernment.
(Audience participant) You're absolutely correct. The tax system is not even part of the Constitution. The States never ratified it.
Why do you think your early Americans had the Tea Party? Because of taxation without representation. If you do your research, you will find that the taxation system as it is set up now is illegal. You have said that the Sixteenth Amendment was not ratified.
(Audience participant) The Sixteenth Amendment - income tax - was never ratified.
So the premise that patriotic Americans pay their taxes is a distortion of the original intent of the Constitution. The second premise is, "All good Americans go to war when they are called." Think about this Can you ever be of service to yourself or to your country if you are doing something that you believe is wrong? Individuals who unquestioningly follow that premise may be in direct opposition to what they feel. A corollary to the second premise, "All good Americans go to war to fight the enemy," declares that you can be a victim, that there is an enemy, and that there is someone out there you must defeat. This idea of good and bad, enemies and heroes, will not free you from the structure. Instead it keeps you enslaved.
Now, examine day-to-day things. For instance, there are laws that make you wear a helmet when driving a motorcycle - protecting you - because it is assumed that you are not capable of protecting yourself, of being responsible for yourself. So something is imposed upon you. There are hand-gun laws - an attempt to control - because there is the belief in perpetrators and victims. This belief is constantly fed. Keeping drugs illegal is another false attempt to protect "innocent" people.
All of these systems you have set up prevent you from understanding what sovereignty is. Sovereignty is taking total, 100% responsibility for yourself as an individual, for your community and for your planet as a whole.
That has Sirian connections. The Sirians were the ones who originally tried to liberate you.
(Audience participant) A great distrust for Masons has grown among many of the patriot movements around this country and among people who claim to be seeking their own sovereignty. They take issue with the Masons because of the latter's involvement with the Trilateral Commission conspiracy and so forth. There is a dichotomy that has developed. Do you have any comments about the intentions of the Masons, of the Founding Fathers - anything pertinent to the founding fathers' understanding of our sovereignty and what they expected to accomplish with the Constitution?
We have to bring your extraterrestrial forefathers into this because there is a very direct parallel between your Founding Fathers, Masonry and the Sirian group that attempted to liberate you. When the Sirians attempted your liberation, they assumed that you needed help. Right there is a sense of inequality. Yet some of their methods were used by the Founding Fathers as well. Some of the Sirians - the genetic engineers - put certain latent genetic codes in you that will soon be activated. This to ensure that you would eventually be triggered into certain types of understanding.
Your Founding Fathers did the same thing. They were very, very clever. It's not visible to the eye, but the way the Constitution is written, if it collapses in upon itself, if it is perverted in any way, it will eventually turn around and work for your sovereignty instead of against it. Do you follow?
(Audience participant) Is this an example of what you mean? Recently in Arizona the automobile insurance law was changed, and recent statistics show that only 50% of the people have insurance. To register your car now you must actually produce proof of your policy rather than just state that you have it. If you cancel it and are stopped by the police for any reason, they are told to take your license plates. This will occur over the next 12 months as people's registrations come up for renewaL Of course, insurance rates in this state have skyrocketed. The only response I can see to this whole process is that by the end of this year there are going to be so many people ticked off that they will demand their sovereignty. Thus the perversions of this issue will result in an increase of sovereignty, not a decrease. Is that what you're saying?
Exactly. The more oppressive your structure becomes, the more individuals are going to feel the pressure. The more they will be spurred on to do their own research and the more they find out about their rights and their "privileges", then the more they will begin exercising their rights. It's not going to come by rejecting privileges; it's going to come by exercising rights. You see the difference?
(Audience participant) Was the Founding Fathers' shrewdness totally conscious on their part? Let's say they didn't understand it to the point where they could explain it to you. It was a sensing - a knowingness and a guidance. They believed very firmly in what they were doing. It's necessary to understand that there is no bad guy in any of this. The Emancipation Proclamation, the abolition of slavery, has caused some of the shifting in a non-conscious way. You had a group of people who once had special laws written for them, and when they had to be integrated into society, the structure of the laws needed to change. Often the laws were written as an adaptation to a circumstance that had a lot of pressure around it. This adaptation was never checked and balanced with the Constitution; it was a pressured, in-the-moment expedient.
Again, there's no bad guy here. It's just layer upon layer upon layer of distractions that have solidified the structure itself.
Recognize that your forefathers were struggling with some of the same issues then that you are now, and they had not resolved the idea of property rights. It was basically the same as it is now on your world the strongest one --the one with the most toys - wins. In that particular situation you're talking about, the Lyrans did not drive the future Pleiadians away; the future Pleiadians chose to leave. However, had the Lyrans continued their aggressive interactions, they would have eventually driven out those Pleiadians had the latter stayed.
Ownership is based on what you can seize, in terms of this galactic history. Recognize that when people feel they have to take something from someone else, they must in some way believe themselves to be lacking; they must in some way be deficient in their sovereignty. When one is truly sovereign, coexisting with other sovereigns, there are no property disputes, there are no ownership problems. To describe this type of reality is very difficult, because to some people it sounds like communism. But that is not at all what we are speaking of.
(Audience participant) It seems to me that our misperception of our own sovereignty is exactly what the Lyrans wanted us to believe, especially in light of the fact that it was the Sirians that had to come in and free us. There seems to be an extraterrestrial assumption that we are inferior, like the Caucasian assumption about Blacks. Is there an extraterrestrial belief that we don't possess any rights and that we exist as Homo Sapiens only as a privilege granted by our creators (the ETs)? Has our entire pattern as a species been that of existence by privilege and not by right?
Only extraterrestrials who are insecure with their own sovereignty would believe that. However, your forefathers and the offspring of your forefathers have evolved quite significantly since that time.
(Audience participant) We have talked a great deal about the nature of the agreement between the Zetas and Homo Sapiens. If there is an assumption that we exist as a privilege (whether it's our belief or the ETs), this contract, whether it be a contract between us as a species with the Zetas or individual agreements with the Zetas, is similar to the drivers license issue. Is it exercised from our side without conscious knowledge of the consequences?
Absolutely. You have used the term implied consent. Because you believe your existence is a privilege, then your interactions with the Zetas are subject to the laws of that privilege in the masses' belief system, and some of those laws you may not even be aware of.
(Audience participant) Then it is like my having a drivers license and my belief that driving is a privilege granted by a higher authority. This "higher" authority grants me the privilege of using the roads, using an automobile, etc. By accepting that privilege, I've implied my consent; therefore I must agree to have insurance, registration and not let someone else use my car who does not have those things. All of this happens because I have accepted the privilege rather than exercised my right?
When you already have the right to travel automatically. (Audience participant) And so the Zetas, of course, read our unconscious minds and know that we think our existence is a privilege. Therefore when we ask, "Why are you doing this?" they say, "We have the right".
Yes, because you have implied your consent by playing out the role of a helpless species. That's one way of looking at it. If you were sovereign, no one could have rights over you, but since you're not active sovereigns, someone assumes rights over you. There's always hierarchy in a nonsovereign atmosphere, but in a sovereign atmosphere there is never a hierarchy.
As a species, you have the right to interact with your galactic neighborhood, to know your heritage. You have a right to explore all levels of consciousness and reality. You have set up privileges to protect yourself from some of the scary things because you feel nonsovereign. And as you build this elaborate structure (based on privileges and not rights), you start distorting your own version of the universe. Those rights that we just mentioned are always active, but if you are not sovereign, you can't interface with them. Therefore, you will act out your right to interact with other species through the privilege structure you have set up, which will be equal to your belief systems.
To put this in another way, you will always act out your right to travel, but because you are not sovereign, you must act out that right according to the structure of the privileges. Therefore, you act out your right to travel through the privilege of your license, your insurance and your registration. Do you follow? This is a very significant point.
With the Zetas, you will always act out your rights as a species. Your rights will always be there, but you can't see them. You can't know your rights unless you are sovereign. Therefore, you must act according to the nonsovereign privileges, which seem as if they are given to you by someone else. Therefore, because you believe you are not sovereign and can be victimized, you will act out your right to communicate with other species through that belief system and the structure that allows you to be victims.
You are, in fact, always in touch with your rights. You've cloaked them, you've twisted them, you've distorted them into your privileges and have come to believe that privileges are rights, when they are really two different things. In terms of the Zetas, the only framework within which you could interact with them has been one of inequality, hierarchy, manipulation, control or fear because those are the very structures upon which your society is built. Do you follow?
(Audience participant) Obviously, one of the things that keeps us from claiming our sovereignty is our religious structure. This concept that God is sovereign and that we are his subjects agrees with the early ET influence; this is what they wanted us to believe. Can a true sovereign ever have subjects?
No. Absolutely not. If the religious structure broke apart on your planet, every other structure would collapse. No other structure could support itself after that.
(Audience participant) We have played that out in our society. We have called people "subjects." We have called a baron or king a "sovereign," and they have had subjects. However, to some degree you are also interlinked. In only one sense are we saying this You could never truly be sovereign unless everyone else in your reality bubble were also. That doesn't mean everybody in your world, but everyone with whom you interact. This is one way of looking at it. The sovereign king can never truly be sovereign, in the sense that he can't be sovereign if he's dealing with inequality.
(Audience participant) I have something to clarify. Let's say I am truly sovereign and my friend is not. What if I see him as a complete sovereign, even though he is playing the role of a subject?
You see him as a complete sovereign because it's all the sovereignty you can allow yourself to see. Recognize that there's not a point of 100% sovereignty, just like you can't limit yourself to the amount of love you can feel today. There's no end to sovereignty. So your ability to see sovereignty reflected in other people is limited by how much you can see in yourself. It's ever-expanding. Thus you may look at your friend and see a total sovereign. He may not feel sovereign; you are simply mirror reflections for each other. As the entire planet plays out the sovereignty issue, you will help each other. You're all intricately intertwined, though you would like to think you're not. You're not dependent on the other person for your attainment of sovereignty, but at the same time their reflection of sovereignty to you is crucial. Obviously this transformation into fourth density is very much a part of claiming your sovereignty.
Each person will be different, but you can start by identifying the areas of your life in which you are blatantly nonsovereign. Look at those. Understand why that is so. We'll give you some hints First, look at your religious structure. Look at your political structure, your economics and your education system. Then look at your legal system. (Those suggestions are going to open a can of worms.) Each person will go through the process of attaining sovereignty in his/her own way. We would suggest that you obtain any research material you can. There are schools that teach these principles (and we're not referring to metaphysical schools; we're referring to schools that teach common law). That's a start for some people. There's no structure to follow on your planet to become sovereign, because it's not anything you've ever experienced. You are creating the structure as you go.
(Audience participant) Can there ultimately be a structure?
In a sense, there cannot be. Each has to do it in his own way.
(Audience participant) I like the idea of becoming sovereign and I want to begin taking steps. I found blocks to that in my Life that have shown me I am not truly sovereign.
You don't feel truly sovereign, you mean.
(Audience participant) At various times I have found myself in a position of borrowing money, or using certain rationales to renew my drivers license. Sometimes it's very difficult to be sovereign without your own piece of land.
Here is a case where if you forced this on the physical level you would not accomplish anything, because the internal ideas must first be processed.
(Audience participant) That was my frustration. I found myself wanting to take too large a step, which may have been self-sabotage on my part Does that make sense?
Yes, because to some degree the self-sabotage would be the reinforcement of your identity as a failure.
(Audience participant) And as a "subject" using these terms.
Yes. And if you are willing to take specific steps to achieve that, you do what you can. You did some very valuable things internally.
(Audience participant) Internally, but I am concerned about my external reality, because ultimately to be sovereign you must take physical action. I imagine a lot of people are in a situation similar to mine.
You are correct. But there is never a need to force it. Force implies resistance; resistance is what makes force necessary. We would always suggest that you do what you can. What you are attempting to do on your planet with this sovereignty idea is to stop keeping the dynamic of polarity in place. Therefore, when you go inside to process and then take the steps from your realizations, you are not using force. Force is not needed; thus there is no resistance. It is much more thorough, much more transformational. Do what you can. Keep processing. There are small steps being taken. Recognize that the shift in your own belief system is extremely powerful, not only for you but for mass consciousness in general.
Let's give you an example. Let's say you went to war. Which has more impact - 100,000 men burning their draft cards out of protest or 100,000 men shifting their consciousness? It is tempting to say that burning draft cards has more impact, but that is not the case. Those people who burned their draft cards may be burning them out of anger or fear, not necessarily out of a change in consciousness.
(Audience participant) If 100,000 men burn their draft cords and don't go to war, are you saying it is not as effective as a change in consciousness- even though 50, 000 of those men may actually continue to participate in the war (if that's possible with the change in consciousness)? I used to think that the physical demonstration of burning the draft card, for example, was the most important step that could be taken. But you are saying that the change in consciousness of the draftees is much more important than the physical action of burning the draft card.
Yes. The change in consciousness is much more impacting than you can possibly imagine. Let's say there are 100,000 people burning those draft cards. Maybe some men are burning them because they are mad at their fathers, consciously or subconsciously. They don't care if they go to war; they're just mad at their fathers, and this is a way to vent that anger. If they're doing it out of anger they may have no idea why they are angry. If they delve into it, that's when they start changing their consciousness. Someone who gets a drivers license after being educated about rights, privileges and sovereignty has taken an immense step - because now he's not doing it out of denial or ignorance. Instead he is doing it with a shift of consciousness, doing it consciously.
Let's say that 100,000 men burn their draft cards because of a change in consciousness. But in this little story let's say they were forced to go to war anyway. Having those 100,000 men with that change of consciousness in the army will have a tremendous impact on the mass consciousness of the army itself.
(Audience participant) I think we saw that in the Iraqi conflict and that may have manifested as very few deaths on one side. Even though there were lots of Iraqi deaths, there could have been ten times that number.
There was most certainly a shift in consciousness in terms of the troops that went to Iraq. Many went not because they believed in the conflict, but because they felt in some way that their energy, their consciousness, would be useful. Therefore, to judge a man for going to war when you do not know his motivations actually helps to maintain the structure of dysfunction rather than disintegrate it.
(Audience participant) If the consciousness shifts in these 100,000 men before they go off to war, they're not going to burn their draft cards out of anger. Instead they are going to realize precisely what step binds them to the Military. It is not the draft nor the induction, but the taking of the oath.
Which they do voluntarily.
(Audience participant) The insidious thing is that the government and the Military do not point that out. They tell you that it's the induction that turns a Civilian into a Military person.
You are led to believe that, yes. We want to clarify what you said. There may be some confusion, and this is a very important point. You are led to believe, just like with the drivers and marriage licenses, that when you get that draft card and you are inducted, you must serve. However, you are never committed to serve until you raise your hand and take the oath, and the taking of the oath is voluntary.
(Audience participant) Because being forced to take an oath is invalid.
And so, as you said to the channel, there have been men who have not taken the oath and thus were dismissed from the induction and didn't have to serve.
(Audience participant) Yes. It caused quite a commotion, but they were ultimately dismissed. The oath that you take to get into the military is a voluntary oath, and you have not known that. The marriage license is also a voluntary procedure, as is the drivers license. Paying taxes is a voluntary procedure. But you have led yourselves to believe they are not, and that is what is insidious.
Let us go back to the beginning of this session before we close. Emotional sovereignty means understanding your reasons and motivations and healing those denied parts of you, which will eventually lead you to take 100% responsibility for your reality - and the result of that is spiritual sovereignty. You are on the path. You will create it. Have patience and trust yourselves.
Much, much love, and goodnight.
For more information on available tapes, transcripts, books, and videos, contact:
Royal Priest Research
PO Box 30973, Phoenix, Arizona 85046.