Unless you happen to be resident on a particularly remote colony of Mars (and frankly, even they probably have WiFi by now, right Elon?), it is unlikely to have escaped your attention that a man named Andrew Tate - who goes by CobraTate online and uses the creature as his own personal emblem - has been arrested for alleged human trafficking.

This is headline news in the Daily Mail, The Guardian, The Sun and literally every single other mainstream media vehicle out there... and yet the utterly unfathomable belief persists in some corners of conspiraland that this man is our friend.

I'm going to say it one more time, and with particularly tenacious tapping of the keyboard this time: *nobody gets this level of mainstream press exposure unless they are in the club*. Nobody. No exceptions. Ever.

The mainstream press is owned by extremely wealthy and powerful social engineers who print only what they want you to know about. They never promote anything unless it is in their interests to do so. And Andrew Tate, and his latest publicity stunt (which is all his alleged "arrest" is, and an exceptionally effective one, at that) are being shoved in the nation's faces for a reason.

Remember all the anti-lockdown protests, with tens of thousands of people in attendance, that the mainstream media completely ignored?

That's because that's what they do when they actually want to crush and silence something. If something or someone is genuinely anti-narrative and anti-agenda, the mainstream press most certainly does not plaster them across the front pages of every newspaper in the country - rather, they completely ignore them. The media knows, just as well as Andrew Tate - or rather, his handlers and press team - do, that there really is no such thing as bad publicity.

I personally would love to have even the smallest fraction of the "bad press" Tate is currently receiving in the mainstream, for the simple and obvious reason that it would raise my profile very considerably and draw many new readers to my blog. Is that ever going to happen? Of course not. I've written to the mainstream papers loads of times - both as an individual and in my former capacity as communications officer for the Freedom Alliance political party - and have always been completely ignored.

Anyone who relies on raising their profile to make a living (such as bloggers and other online content creators) knows you could not buy the level of phenomenal publicity the mainstream media has generously bestowed upon Andrew Tate, as they have launched him from relative internet obscurity to mainstream household name - a global media star who everyone is talking about. Hell, the guy has a Twitter argument with a teenager and it makes headline news. That's the kind of incredible public attention anyone who needs to drive traffic towards themselves as part of their business model can only dream of.

So: is that how the mammoth corporate entity that is the mainstream press treats anyone who is any sort of actual threat to the narrative, a real anti-establishment dissident?

As they say here in Yorkshire - is it 'eck.

Tate - and EVERYONE who gets this kind of blanket coverage and high-profile mainstream exposure (the guy was on Piers Morgan, fur fox sake!) - is just another false messiah, a pied piper, a "hopium"-infused hero.

"When the people want a hero, we shall supply him." - Albert Pike

The mainstream social engineers are not stupid - they are very many things, but not that - and they know there's a very large, and growing, section of society that has not fallen for the Covid (and other) lies, is lost and disaffected, and is looking for a leader, a hero, someone who speaks their language and tells them what they want to hear.

So, of course, they provide that for you, since - as another well known social engineer (V. I. Lenin) once said - "the best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves".

So, I repeat, everyone with a high level of visibility in the mainstream media is an asset, a plant, controlled op, whatever you want to call it.

This includes Elon "let me put a chip in your brain" Musk, Donald "Operation Warp Speed" Trump, Andrew "Cobra" Tate, and all the other "big names" out there. All of them? Yes, all of them! Anyone who the mainstream media has conspired into making a household name - no matter how much they pretend to hate them - has been given that level of colossal infamy for a reason.

Please note here - and this should be a rather obvious distinction, but apparently it is not, so I shall clarify - that, just because I state that all global media star household names are not to be trusted, that is not the same as saying all people are not to be trusted. There are thousands of activists doing all sorts of great work to whom the mainstream media pays no attention whatsoever, and that is where you find genuine and trustworthy people. You never find them, however, in high-profile positions on the world stage.

Never?

Never!

People are not permitted to achieve those kinds of positions unless they are in the club. Anyone genuine would be smeared or destroyed long before they achieved any significant degree of mainstream prominence or notoriety (see what happened to Professor Chris Exley for a salient example).

Tate is playing from the same tired old playbook we have seen so many times before, and I had these exact same conversations with people about Donald Trump in 2016, when they told me he was "obviously the real deal" and "look how much the press hates him" and "he has the cash to be his own man".

To the letter, the exact same things they are saying about Tate now.

As the independent journalist Caitlin Johnstone said (when she was accused of being too thick to understand brain-chip billionaire Elon Musk is a man of the people fighting for our future), "Every few years the right produces a billionaire with extensive ties to the US deep state who poses as a populist hero who is fighting the deep state. Before it was Trump. Now it's Musk. Later on it'll be someone else. But it's just a show to make it look like someone's fighting."

Tate is just another example of this. Like I said, the social engineers who create and control the matrix are not stupid, and they know the disaffected so-called "right wing" want their heroes, so, just as the establishment left-wing has Greta Thunberg, the establishment right-wing has Andrew Tate. They both claim to be independent anti-establishment freedom fighters, stickin' it to the man when, in reality, they're both completely controlled and owned establishment assets.

Their quaint little confected "Twitter spat" (which neither of them probably had any actual role in penning) was nothing but a bit of Punch 'n' Judy showboating for the masses. An utterly fictitious bit of media theatre, along the sportsball and beer, bread and circuses line. ("Andrew Tate and Greta Thunberg: Who's Side Are You On?!" The Daily Mail breathlessly enquired.)

If Andrew Tate was in any way legitimate, someone as world famous as Greta Thunberg (or her handlers and media managers etc.) would never have publicly acknowledged him as she did. The reason she responded to him, and the reason they continued to play out their "dramatic public feud", is because he's a managed establishment asset, just like she is. They're on the same page (and the same pay-roll), and they understand they have to make it look like there's fighting and division on the world stage - that different factions are being represented and are at war with each other - because that is how the Overton Window form of political and social control works.

It's easy for "conspiracists" to see this about Greta, as her views are overtly mainstream, but not as easy to acknowledge about Tate, because he's saying what many of us want to hear. And the social controllers know that by giving you a representative - a "hero" - on the world stage saying what you want said, is how they can neutralise you.

They provide you with various heroes and alleged saviours (Trump, Musk, Tate, etc), who say the right things and promise to "take down the deep state", "drain the swamp", "free the bird" and so on and so forth, because this effectively absolves you from having to do anything yourself. What could little old you with your humble ordinary life possibly do to make a difference, when these Big Daddy heroes are on the scene, using their massive power and influence for good?

"Trust the plan", remember? The whole Q psy-op was a strategic plot by the establishment to neutralise the resistance by convincing them they didn't have to do anything as "the plan" was in place and Saint Donald would save us all.

That worked out well, didn't it?

It's exactly the same thing with Andrew Tate. He's just another fraud and actor on the world stage, like so many before him, and there will be many, many more after him, too. It's imperative we learn this now, otherwise we will keep falling for these false messiahs and their empty promises time and again, and it's really not hard to immunise yourself against it - if someone gets huge amounts of media attention (regardless of whether it's negative - no such thing as bad publicity, remember?) and they become a household name (I'm not talking about a few lines on page 37 of the Swindon Observer - I'm talking about front page headlines in the nationals) - they're in the club and not our friends. It really is that simple.

As for Tate's "message", it's just a vaguely rehashed and slightly more macho version of what Jordan Peterson's been spinning all these years, and (as many critics have pointed out), Peterson is not exactly original. There's nothing wrong with a lot of what they say, and if some of it helps you, great - but it's imperative to be able to separate the messenger from the message. For instance, I read Alex Jones - even though it's plainly obvious he is "controlled opposition" - because he gives a lot of good information - controlled opposition, by definition, has to, or it wouldn't be credible as an opposition force or have any power to influence its target audience.

But know your enemy. The mainstream and the establishment are your enemy, and therefore, anyone they promote to meteoric notoriety is as well - even (and perhaps especially) when they say some things you agree with.

I have opined on Andrew Tate previously, and explained he is a key change agent in the manufactured ultra-conservative revolution that is currently underway. Other establishment-managed assets in this looming cultural shift include Matt Walsh, Candace Owens, Ben Shapiro, and Louise Perry.

I know how satisfying and refreshing it feels to seemingly have our voices represented prominently in the media, after so many years of the domination of the increasingly lunatic "left", but this is precisely why we must remain ultra-vigilant - because our enemies know what gratitude and relief we feel about finally seeming to "be heard", and they use that.

That's not to say these people don't produce valuable and valid offerings - I loved Matt Walsh's "What Is A Woman?" - but can't you see that these people have to appeal to us and have to seem credible to have any sway? They would be useless assets if they were unpersuasive. But if you look into the back stories of these individuals, you all too often find their clear deep state connections. They are saying the right things to gain our trust so ultimately they can flip the narrative - bait and switch. Remember how Serena Joy recruited for Gilead in the Handmaid's Tale - how she promoted "the revolution" in her book and speaking tour - and then how it actually was?

On the subject of Andrew Tate's backstory, it seems quite clear that his father was a military/intelligence asset. Tate's father, Emory Andrew Tate Jr., is described as a high-ranking member of the US Air Force who "excelled as a linguist", becoming fluent in several languages including Russian. That's pretty thinly veneered military code for "intelligence asset" (such people often get put through intensive language courses to better infiltrate different environments) and these military guys seem to just love offering up their offspring for "special projects". Please see the fascinating story behind Admiral James Morrison and his supposed "anti-establishment rebel" son, The Doors' Jim, who was, in reality, a military-managed change agent - like so many of these prominent "heroes" and "rebels" are.

It really is imperative in not falling for these same establishment psy-ops again and again (and they have been going on for very many decades) that we can clearly see what is being done to manipulate us - and, equally, that everyone can clearly see the difference between being aware and discerning, and being paranoid. There's an enormous chasm of difference between being media savvy - understanding that the establishment media never, ever repeatedly draws attention to someone and their views unless it is in in the establishment's interests for them to do so - and, as someone put it on my FB earlier, "not trusting your own shadow".

The people promoted by the mainstream media equate to about 0.0001% of the global population. While I don't trust that 0.0001% at all - ever - that does still leave the best part of 7 billion other people for me to choose from. I trust plenty of people - I have family and friends - and I read and learn from a wide range of learned sources every day. But you're never going to see these people's names plastered across the front pages of the Daily Mail, or have the Guardian breathlessly reporting on their Twitter spats.

Please stop being played by the very machine you are fighting against. Andrew Tate is a plant and he tells you so clearly himself (as he himself has said, those in the club always have to tell you who they really are and what they are really doing). Such high-profile people select their online handles and imagery very carefully, and Tate describes himself, in word and in image, as a 'cobra' - a highly venomous snake. Venom is toxic to all who are infected by it and the definition of 'snake', when it is applied to a person, is "someone who is treacherous and deceitful".

When people tell you so explicitly who they really are: believe them.

(If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy my piece on Jack Monroe, which explores many similar themes.)

Thanks for reading! This site is 100% reader funded, with no advertisements, paywalls, or wealthy corporate backers - making it truly independent. If you would like to contribute to help this resource remain both independent and free to all, please do so through Patreon, BuyMeACoffee or bank transfer to: Nat West, a/c 30835984, s/c 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA. Your support is really appreciated. Thank you.