Okay, I admit it.

I've been a bit naughty.

This article isn't actually about exposing David Icke, but rather, the provocative title is to illustrate a key point about human psychology: that this article will get far more views than my articles normally do, purely due to the "big name" invoked in the title.

Equally, my most popular articles, by some considerable margin, are those centring on "big names" involved in "big events", namely, the fake assassination of Charlie Kirk, and various members of the Royal Family pretending to have cancer.

Conversely, my articles on far more unfashionable subjects, such as the Amish (although I personally think their sartorial choices have quite the charm), get a fraction of the views or shares.

Is this because my Amish article was less interesting or well-written than the "big name" pieces? No (or at least, I don't think so, although I'm sure my hate-fans will be quick to correct me if I'm mistaken) - rather, it's because of how profoundly influenced we all are by what (and who) is perceived as being popular and significant.

When a story - or a person - is amplified by the news media, we pay attention to it, purely by virtue of the fact it is prominent, and regardless of how significant it actually is in reality.

For example, we were all caught up in the whirlwind of the supposed 'meningitis outbreak" a few weeks ago, even though precisely two people were reported to have died, which is no different to the meningitis death toll every year, and far more youngsters would have died in the same period in car accidents.

In short, the hysterical headline fanfare given to this meningitis "outbreak" in no way reflected the reality of how serious or significant the situation really was. If it's not headline news every time a youngster is killed in a car crash (it isn't), why all the lockstep, crowd-whipping, attention-seeking splash over these particular deaths?

Were the youngsters who apparently succumbed to meningitis more special, more valuable, or more loved than the dozens of children who died in car accidents during the same time period?

Is meningitis (annual death toll: 20-40) more of a threat to the nation than road accidents (annual death toll: over 1,500)?

Obviously not, so this reveals something very interesting to us about how propaganda works, and we can apply it not just to the news media, but to alternative media and "the truth movement", as well.

In 2020, the social architects in control of all "world events" pulled off one of the biggest psyops of all time, by convincing millions of people of the existence of "a deadly virus" that they needed to inject themselves with poison to prevent - as well as shutting down their businesses, isolating themselves from their family and friends, and engaging in weird rituals, involving saucepans, stickers, and Scotch Eggs.

Obviously, the devious world stage directors behind this farcical production knew it would, to use the twee vernacular, "wake people up". That was a given, and they counted on it: after all, how could it not? Whilst millions fell for it, millions more saw through it and realised "covid" was simply a media production and psychological operation, not a real pandemic.

So, of course, with a huge contingent of new people suddenly awakened to the fact that their government, and all governments, lie to them outrageously in order to manipulate, poison, and kill them, the establishment knew they had to manage these people. Otherwise, they had a very real risk of revolution on their hands.

Enter stage left, a coordinated cabal of "thought leaders" who all arrived on the social media scene at exactly the same time in 2020, saying all the things the newly awakened were desperate to hear: covid's a big scam, the government is lying, don't take the vaccines.

Even though these people appeared from nowhere, they instantly enjoyed significant prominence, visibility, and influence - and not for any clear reason. These weren't "special" people - celebrities, or "experts", whose significant visibility and clout would be understandable. They were - so we were led to believe - "just ordinary people".

Yet ordinary people with massive influence and visibility who were controlling the narrative of the entire "truth movement"...

As someone wrote to me recently [names redacted by me, so as to not confer further publicity on these people]:

Hi Miri

I’m highly suspicious of anyone with an abnormal follower number for the type of content they post. It’s totally inorganic. “Normal people” don’t amass these vast number of followers. You should do one of your deep dives on it 🙂

G___ K___ - 33k followers. How?! Posts nothing of any interest really... Distinctly average account.

N__ A___ - 98k followers?!
An absolutely insane number for a nobody.
Her account also disappeared for ages.

J___ S___ - 254k WTF level. Plenty of celebs have less than this!!
She’s just a woman... Regularly appears on GB News. How and why?!

A___ B___ - 438k
Also regularly on GB News. Seems nice enough, but absolutely insane number of followers.

S___ T____ - 42k. Vile woman. Very rude.

Y___ L___ - 80k

S___ D___ - 90k

F___ - 43k

D___ L___ - 58k

You get the idea: what my correspondent is expressing here is very sensible scepticism about seeming "nobodies" (as in, not celebrities or significantly accomplished people whose high visibility would make sense) getting huge traction and being given huge influence in "the movement".

Why?

You realise why when you see they all go lockstep on the same agendas, which was first exposed in their reaction to the Lucy Connolly fiasco.

I'm sure regular readers are very familiar with this character, but for newer ones, "Lucy Connolly" is a British woman who allegedly "went to prison for a Tweet", following writing some intemperate remarks on social media following the fake Southport stabbings.

Many of us smelt a rat about this story at the time, and increasingly felt it smacked of an intelligence agency psyop being used to manipulate the dissident right, and, when we started to express our suspicions, the "thought leaders" circa 2020 all went nuts and started subjecting us to the most extraordinary abuse.

At first, we could make no sense of it. Why had our "friends", who had been so charming and lovely up to this point, who we had had so much in common with during "covid", suddenly all turned on us like a rabid (and highly coordinated) dog pack?

Well, now we understand it. It is because the establishment seeded an interlinked unit into the truth movement in 2020 to manage and control the newly awakened class. This unit gained the trust of the newly awakened by saying all the "right things" during covid, and became viewed as authoritative and significant because of how prominent they were, and how popular they were perceived to be - always referencing and backing each other up, to further enhance the idea of an authoritative consensus view.

Hence, whenever one of us not in their gang went off script, they would be tasked with aggressively hounding us with endless smears and insults to try and a) exhaust and demoralise us into silence, and b) make it appear to their huge followings that people challenging their consensus view are crazy, paranoid "maggot c**ts" (as one charmer described Lucy Connolly sceptics, and they as a class are especially fond of the c-word).

I'm writing about them today because their malevolence and manipulations have recently stepped up a gear. They have been particularly abusive and intolerant of different views these last few days (even publicly disseminating "warnings" to those who cross or challenge them, whilst simultaneously calling those people "nuts" and "irrelevant").

This leads me to believe there is a very big, very significant, and very, very fake operation coming up, that they desperately need the dissident right / "conspiracy" class to believe in. They are already setting the stage to frame sceptics of this upcoming op as lunatics, nobodies, c***s, etc., and using threatening language to get them to back down, so this suggests the significance of what they are soon to push is extremely high.

The fact is that social media (particularly Twitter) is to dissidents and conspiracists what the mainstream media is to "normies" - a very powerful propagandist tool which shapes and controls their views. So, just as the establishment controls the normie view through the MSM, and what (and who) it uses MSM vehicles to promote, so too the same establishment attempts to manage and manipulate the dissident class through alternative and social media, and who it promotes there.

It would, quite frankly, be a completely crazy conspiracy theory to believe the establishment wouldn't infiltrate and dominate social media in this way.

So it's important to recognise why and how they do it, in order to immunise ourselves from its effects.

Or, to put it another way, if Lucy Connolly is attacked in an antisemitic terror attack by an illegal Muslim immigrant shouting Allahu Akbar the day before the elections... it's not real.

Thanks for reading! This site is entirely reader-powered, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, making it truly independent. Your support is therefore crucial to ensuring this site's continued existence. If you'd like to make a contribution to help this site keep going, please consider...

1. Subscribing monthly via Patreon or Substack (where paid subscribers can comment on posts)

2. Making a one-off contribution via BuyMeACoffee

3. Contributing in either way via bank transfer to Nat West account number 30835984, sort code 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA (please use your email address as a reference if you'd like me to acknowledge receipt).

Your support is what allows this site to continue to exist and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.