Mongoose: Alert Reader on Anna von Reitz


Alert Reader writes in:

I just saw the YouTube interview you did with Anna, and am glad that you have now “addressed her work,” as well as given your readers links to her books.

I agree with your comments near the end of the video that:

“I absolutely respect your knowledge, and even though I don’t understand it, I have a gut-level appreciation for your intelligence, integrity and imagination, and your voice needs to be heard.”

I felt your pain when you said “…my head hurts. Anna von Reitz, let me say, with absolute clarity, I think you are a very important person, you have done some very important research, and somewhere in our future we need to factor in everything you’ve brought to the table.”

From self-reflection, I think the source of that pain is cognitive dissonance. The core of the knowledge Anna seeks to impart to the public is not technically difficult to understand, but it has been masterfully obscured by the most powerful tools available to the architects of the multi-generational fraud she has helped to uncover: semantic fraud and deception. Beyond the tower of Babel, where multiple languages made communication near-impossible, these architects have corrupted the meanings of words within languages, and given entirely different meanings to words and phrases simply by changes in capitalization. Thus, we are led up blind alleys and into brick walls with signs saying “No Left Turn,” “No Right Turn,” “No U-Turns,” and “No Stopping, Standing or Parking.”

We can walk into what we think are “our” courtrooms, stand before judges, and  lose before the trial begins when we “state our names”—because , by doing so, we unknowingly allow the judge to make the legal presumption that we are consenting to “represent” the Trojan-horse names we were “gifted” with shortly after our births, which were registered, trademarked, patented and traded as securities as various kinds of legal-fiction trusts, legally dead and treated by the Queen as “disregarded entities,” unprotected by any of the three Constitutions protections because those entities “are not a party” to any of them. We might learn later that all of our present “courts” are actually military district tribunals still persisting 150 years after our “civil war.”

We have been taught to believe that all Americans are “United States Citizens,” so we are unaware that most of us have birthrights as “American State Nationals.” We are taught (by omission) that there is only one Constitution (not 3), and only one entity with the (partial) name “United States” (not 3), that our government services are (and must be) funded by taxes, that the stuff in our wallets and bank accounts is “money,” that “government” expenditures always come from “the budget,” that our “courts” are not really OUR courts, and many other misconceptions.

No wonder that most of us, most of the time, literally don’t know what we are talking about.

It will take a major paradigm shift (or two) before we can start talking sense to ourselves and others. We are being tripped up by our own cognitive dissonance.

I still have to remind myself of this fact in my own day-to-day internal dialogues. It’s always easier to see this dissonance in others than in oneself.

I see much of this dissonance in reading your blog (where you provide a venue for other writers), but also in your own writing and projects (like #UNRIG). On the one hand, you correctly portray our phony “2-party system” as “One bird, two wings, same shit.” This portrayal is correct, within the context of what goes on in “our government.” Nevertheless, many blog posts focus on which wing of that bird is telling the truth, or should prevail on this issue or that.

In my own political life, I have been a supporter at different times of Republicans, Conservatives, Berniecrats, and Greens for government offices. However, until I encountered Anna’s work, I did not know enough to ask the question, “which government?” The Municipal United States, the Territorial United States (both incorporated subcontractors), or the employer of each, The United States of America (unincorporated)? The new paradigm changes everything.

The latter (unincorporated) United States, The United States of America, while it never ceased to exist, has no elected officers until We The People finally do  the job of Reconstruction (promised, but never accomplished, after the illegal mercenary conflict which most Americans think of as the American Civil War).

A paradigm shift, indeed. This long-delayed “Reconstruction” is Anna’s final step in restoring the America of We The People to actual self-government. The prerequisite steps are 1) repopulating, in sufficient numbers, The United States of America (unincorporated) with American State Nationals (those who have completed the process outlined at, reconstituting our actual governments l(state, federal and local) via assemblies, and finally electing the first government of, by and for the people in over 150 years.

This paradigm shift will make many projects you and I have embraced in the past (to borrow a word from the Watergate era) “inoperative.” For example, #UNRIG. American State Nationals can volunteer to as American State Citizens, but neither qualify to vote in “elections” of the Municipal or Territorial United States, on any level (as “State” and “Local” “governments” were effectively turned into franchises of the Territorial US when they accepted “revenue sharing” contracts). As a consequence, I will not be voting again until I can vote for a candidate in the reconstructed governments.

I believe even Anna is not immune to cognitive dissonance. She hopes that “The Orange One” will do the right thing, and “choose to occupy the power position of President of The United States of America” (as opposed to mere CEO of the US, Inc.) since he, and the Congress, can and do wear more than one hat. Sadly, The Orange One only knows how to wear one hat (the red one that says “MAGA”). Likewise, you hope that 45 will pay attention to one of your “big ideas” (at and “Triumph in 3 Moves,” even though you’ve observed that he’s an extremely poor listener (because he must pretend to himself and others that he already knows everything).

For my part, I will follow Anna’s master plan, detailed at

Ahh, politics without cognitive dissonance!

Repeating your quote from the fourth paragraph above,

“I absolutely respect your knowledge, and even though I don’t understand it, I have a gut-level appreciation for your intelligence, integrity and imagination, and your voice needs to be heard.”

You and I are more than smart enough to understand the core of Anna’s work. The problem she presents is that accepting the new paradigm requires, for anyone willing to do so, abandoning a tremendous investment in what turns out to have been in error. I look at all the work you have done to change the world for the better and can hardly imagine your anguish at this prospect.

Perhaps we should adopt the attitude of the monks who spend countless hours at crafting beautiful and intricate mandalas of sand, then brush that sand back into one small container (or let it be blown to the four winds). Such is life; such is progress. Admittedly, an UNRIG motor home is more costly than a handful of colored sand, but it could be rebranded and/or repurposed.

Referenced interview:

See Also:

Anna von Reitz @ Phi Beta Iota