From when we are very small, we are tutored in the idea of the "saviour hero" defeating evil and putting everything to rights. Whether it's the handsome Prince saving Cinderella from her evil stepmother, or John McClane in Die Hard saving the world (again), this is part of our cultural story arc from virtually the day we are born - heroes exist, and they save the day.

Of course, the scriptwriters who write these enduring myths and legends know what they are doing - that we are hardwired to hero-seek, and that we will therefore be captivated and mesmerised by stories with hero-saviours at the centre.

That is exactly why infamous socially engineering Mason, Albert Pike, declared, "whenever the people need a hero, we shall supply him".

What he meant was, whatever people believe in, and on whatever "side" of an argument they fall, they are always looking for great champions to lead the way and "win" on their behalf.

Therefore, it is obvious that powerful social engineers will always insert prominent heroes on both "sides" of every significant socio-political cause, to make sure they are able to control both sides of the debate ("the best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves").

As I've talked about before, it's pretty easy to identify who the controlled "heroes" are - it's those who get significant amounts of publicity in the mainstream media.

In understanding this, it's very important to be aware of exactly what "publicity" means - not the exercise of praising or endorsing something, but merely "notice or attention given to someone or something by the media".

That is from where the phrase "there's no such thing as bad publicity" springs - because it is well known that giving "notice or attention" to something or someone raises their profile, even if that notice or attention is negative. So, for this reason, the media never gives any notice or attention to anything or anyone they don't want you to know about.

The media knows that by doing a "hit piece" on someone - sure, it will cause a few more people to dislike them, or confirm the biases of people who already do - but it will also cause thousands of people to say, "hey, this person is being unfairly persecuted! I'm going to go and support them!"

This is exactly what happened with Russell Brand - whose extensive recent media publicity has made him richer than ever - and is what is happening with "people's hero" (ugh...), Andrew Bridgen, now.

This is one of the most transparent examples of a manufactured media hero I have ever seen, because there was a lengthy and detailed "hit piece" on Bridgen in The Sunday Times this weekend... published in exactly the same 24-hour period he launched his new, all-singing, all-dancing website - and latest crowdfunder.

The Times piece created such phenomenal publicity for Bridgen that his website crashed with the sheer number of visitors - and donors - he received.

If anyone thinks that is an example of the media "destroying" someone, I have the world's entire back catalogue of bridges to sell you...

The media is expertly manipulating us into cheering on and supporting Bridgen, knowing the reaction of many in the "anti-vax" community to The Sunday Times piece is going to be, "well, now the media is being so mean about him, I'm going to support him more than ever!".

If Andrew Bridgen was any sort of legitimate hero - or more to the point, a legitimate threat to the status quo - the media would not publish lengthy sensationalist articles about him in top national newspapers: rather, they would do what they do to all genuine dissidents:

Ignore him.

Because ignoring a cause starves it of the lifeblood it needs to thrive: publicity.

As such, real political dissidents struggling on a shoestring to keep going would give their eye teeth for the reams of MSM publicity Bridgen receives - as I say, including if it's negative, because that doesn't matter. There is no such thing as bad publicity. Indeed, if you're styling yourself as an "anti-establishment hero", then the establishment media coverage you receive has to be negative, for obvious reasons.

That's why the media's uniform strategy with real political dissidents is not to bolster their anti-establishment credentials by publicly criticising them in lengthy, widely-read op-eds, but rather, to completely ignore them.

As I discussed in my interview with the independent mayoral candidate, Jonathan Tilt, real independents have to literally beg the press to pay them any attention at all, and even then, they are almost always ignored (in one of his previous campaigns, Jonathan was seriously considering trying to get himself arrested in a bid to draw some attention to himself).

I can vouch for this, too, having stood as a council candidate three times: the press ruthlessly ignore you (and so for that matter do the other candidates, as "it's a big club"... etc. See here for more about my experiences of going behind the scenes of the political pantomime). And this is just the local press, never mind the big-name nationals.

So it is obvious that all this high-profile mainstream media attention being lavished on Bridgen (the Daily Mail and Express have got in on the action too) the weekend he launches his new website / crowdfunder is coordinated at the highest levels to make him as visible as possible, and to solidify his credentials as "saviour hero fighting the evil establishment (look how mean about him they are!)".

The purpose of this operation, and of hero-saviour psy-ops in general, is simple:

1. To neutralise you into inaction by making you think, "finally, someone with power and influence is doing something! (So I don't have to.)"
2. To ensure your money is funnelled towards controlled establishment assets, rather than going to the genuine grassroots projects who really need it.

The aforementioned Jonathan, for example, has been working tirelessly hard for the last four years to oppose Covid tyranny (he was one of the first likeminded people I met in 2020), and - unlike hero-saviour Mr. Bridgen - was never a lockdown advocate, never publicised and praised vaccines, and most certainly never voted in favour of mandatory vaccines for care workers, all of which Andrew Bridgen has done.

Despite this fact, whilst Andrew Bridgen easily rakes in hundreds of thousands of pounds from supporters, and millions more from private donors, Jonathan's crowdfunder to support his bid to stand as an independent candidate for Mayor of West Yorkshire (a crowdfunder that has been running for months) has currently attracted a total of 7 donors.

Excruciatingly, Andrew Bridgen's estranged wife, who has in the last 24 hours launched her own, widely mocked and ridiculed, crowdfunder, has attracted more supporters.

So can you see the sting here? Genuine independents never get the resources they need to credibly platform themselves as robust opposition (elections being very expensive in terms of the deposit, leafletting, etc), whilst the mainstream media ensures all your attention - and money - is funnelled towards the fake opposition that they control.

The dissident class is therefore mollified as it appears that "someone is standing up for us", whilst, in reality, that person is just there to divert your attention, hoover up your money, and maintain the status quo.

Andrew Bridgen might like to style himself now as the great champion of the vaccine injured, but the reality is that he was instrumental in them becoming injured in the first place, by widely promoting vaccines and even voting for them to be applied by force.

In essence, he has created a problem and then is trying to appoint himself the great crusader of solving said problem.

Meanwhile, genuine alternatives - who never promoted (much less forced) the vaccine and did everything they could to oppose it and protect people from taking it - are starved of the publicity and resources they need to make a real difference.

Imagine what a genuine person or organisation could do with the more than £100k Bridgen raised (most of it in the first few days) to "sue Matt Hancock for defamation".

The ridiculous, futile nature of this frivolous vanity case aside, please note that Bridgen has only accounted for just over £4,000 of the more than £113,000 raised as having been spent on legal fees (not surprising, since, as I've mentioned many times, defamation cases cost on average between £2k and £20k, not £250k as he is seeking). So what has he done with the rest of the money and why - when this trial is now underway - is he still seeking donations for it?

Interestingly, the deeply dodgy platform Bridgen used to fundraise (the same platform used by multi-millionaire Dan Wootton to fundraise for his legal costs - a crowdfunder that has since, along with the money, mysteriously disappeared) has just been taken over by 'Reclaim The Media', which is the media operation fronted by Laurence Fox - meaning that it is bankrolled by Jeremy Hosking, the same multi-millionaire who has recently "loaned" Andrew Bridgen nearly £4 million. It's a big club.... (or, in this case, it would seem, a rather small one).

This is all just so epically frustrating and unjust to witness - all these cynical establishment MMMs (multi-multi millionaires) sloshing money around so they wholly control the narrative - whilst there are so many incredibly genuine people who have put so much into the fight against tyranny, at huge personal cost - and who could really make a difference, were they given the platform and resources to do so. Yet they are, relentlessly, completely overshadowed and relegated into obscurity every time the media monolith manufactures a new 'hero'.

If said 'heroes' were remotely genuine, they would acknowledge all those "small fish" who were doing the groundwork whilst they were swanning around parliament voting for lockdowns and mandatory injections, and give them the helping hand and exposure they need to really become significant.

Why doesn't Andrew Bridgen champion other independent candidates (with a far more consistent anti-tyranny record than his own), rather than using his prominence and platform only to further enrich his own coffers?

Why don't phenomenally wealthy "dissidents" like Russell Brand set up philanthropic "truther" funds where struggling grassroots projects can apply for vital grants to really bring their work to life?

Just imagine the impact projects and people could have if they could afford nationwide billboard campaigns, documentary screenings in every city, a leaflet through every door, and so on.

If any of these high-profile "heroes" were genuine, they'd do all this and more. Part of genuinely wishing to elicit change is helping and supporting the other people who do, which is why I began my 'Miri Meets...' series, to help give more of a platform to some of the vital voices in this fight, who are not as well-known as they should be.

Ask Andrew Bridgen, Russell Brand, Laurence Fox, who the non-celebrity voices they champion are and wait for a very long silence in reply (much like the one that has followed my open letter to Mr. Bridgen....).

Ultimately, these people are all simply performance artists, wolves costumed in sheep's clothing, acting out a drama-filled pantomime to keep us entertained and distracted... and, as all good social engineers have always sought to do, ensuring we pay no attention at all to the man behind the curtain.

(To see further examples of genuine people doing brilliant work, please see the recommendations section on my Substack.)

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

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

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

Find Miri AF on social media via the links below...

Substack, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Twitter (posting there as my other resource, Informed Consent Matters)