The agent provocateur’s purpose is to cause disruption. Divide and Rule is the well-established modus operandi of those who seek to oppress and control mankind and who operate under fake authority, whether that be of a spiritual, psychological, medical, financial, political, scientific, social, educational or legal kind.

The British Army has even set up a social media presence for this very purpose – the 77th Brigade – and the existence of those who work as agents who gather information on others or spread disinformation in the alternative media, employed by the alphabet agencies, including GCHQ, CIA, NSA, MI5 et al is well documented.

Those operatives are paid to act as agent provocateurs. They are paid to gather information and cause confusion and division:

An agent provocateur may be a police officer or a secret agent of police who encourages suspects to carry out a crime under conditions where evidence can be obtained; or who suggests the commission of a crime to another, in hopes they will go along with the suggestion and be convicted of the crime.

A political organization or government may use agents provocateurs against political opponents. The provocateurs try to incite the opponent to do counterproductive or ineffective acts to foster public disdain or provide a pretext for aggression against the opponent.

Historically, labor spies, hired to infiltrate, monitor, disrupt, or subvert union activities, have used agent provocateur tactics.

Agent provocateur activities raise ethical and legal issues. In common law jurisdictions, the legal concept of entrapment may apply if the main impetus for the crime was the provocateur.” Source: Wikipedia

When the George Soros Foundation fomented civil unrest in Egypt and Turkey  by funding the controlled opposition, it was manipulating a familiar geopolitical game whereby the sides are played off against each other, so that tensions are created that divide the people in order that they be easier controlled.


The fake risings that occurred in those countries and elsewhere (the more one looks into it, the more frequent and blatant it appears) is a game as old as the hills.

In the Freemason Rudyard Kipling‘s  novel, Kim, it is known as the ‘Great Game’  – and it has been historically proven to be highly effective. The aim of the game is to discredit and cause division in order that the people are easier to control.



The Divide and Rule modus operandi of agencies like GCHQ and NSA was ‘leaked’ in 2014:

a GCHQ presentation concerning how the surveillance organization had a “dirty tricks” group known as JTRIG — the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group.”

“Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets;

and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable.

To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums.”


Whatever his motivation may be, when a man falsely accuses another, he is playing a dangerous game, whether or not he realises it.

Such a man maybe unwittingly sewing the seeds of his own demise, for one way or another, sooner or later, he will reveal his true false self.

When he does it via the medium of film, he is leaving himself wide open to a claim for slander:

slander |ˈslandər|
the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person’s reputation: he is suing the TV network for slander. Compare with libel.
• a false and malicious spoken statement: I’ve had just about all I can stomach of your slanders.
verb [ with obj. ]
make false and damaging statements about (someone): they were accused of slandering the head of state.

In a recent matter involving the author and another acquaintance of his, the other man slandered him, naturally enough without just cause or evidence. When asked to provide the material evidence to support his claims, he could not do so on the simple basis he has none.

In this sorry turn of events,  the libel occurred via the title of a video posted on YouTube which served to sew doubt in the minds of others by way of accusatory questioning whether the current author might be an agent for the state, a shill and/or a “blackmailer”.

Libel is defined as:

1 Law a published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation; a written defamation. Compare with slander.
• the action or crime of publishing a false statement about a person: a councilor who sued two national newspapers for libel | [ as modifier ] : a libel action.
• a false and malicious statement about a person.
• a thing or circumstance that brings undeserved discredit on a person by misrepresentation.

This is a demonstrably false accusation and is thus libellous.

The work of RM is based on facts: those facts that can be clearly evidenced by prudent research and/or direct experience.

A mindful perusal of this website will show RM’s position has been consistent on this point – governments have caused the deaths of their own countrymen throughout history and that is one of the reasons he takes an anarchist position and why he revoked his consent to be governed by way of Sovereign Declaration in April 2009.

In the Twentieth century alone, the total deaths caused by government (Democide) has been estimated at over 200 million:

The 200 million deaths attributable to governments were over the course of the entire 20th century, when the average population was far less than what it is now. Population-adjusted, states are probably at least 30 times more deadly than individuals.” Source


RM is one who gives others the benefit of the doubt.

In this specific example, whereby he was harassed, slandered and libelled by an individual who lives in the same town as him and who has stood alongside him on the front line of a number of unlawful evictions in that place, the question of the purpose of the attack and how this might have been engineered arises naturally.

One might reasonably ask why would an individual attack another via the social media of you tube rather than speak with him directly, especially given the fact that both live in the same city and a private meeting had been arranged in a good faith attempt to resolve the matter?

Why would he slander another in those terms when there is not a shred of evidence to support his accusations and claims?

Why would he attack TGBMS, a film which goes to the very heart of a mortgage swindle that afflicts mankind, not just on these lands but across the planet, just before its release?

Why would he falsely claim the producers of TGBMS were charging £10 to watch it on line?

And why would he attack a woman who was there on 02 July 2015 to support the Crawford family and who consequently suffered a miscarriage of justice when he, the false accuser, was nowhere to be seen?

Why would he think he could get away with slander and libel – does he believe he is above the law?
In any event, do his actions serve the interests of Mankind in its attempts to unite against those who would seek to control it?

Or are they an attempt to deliberately cause confusion and division at a time when unity is needed?

In other words, cui bono? Who or what benefits from his actions? Who is he actually serving when he spreading falsehoods?

He was invited to bring along the material evidence in support of his allegations and meet RM privately at a specified location at 3pm on Friday, 20 May, 2016. He failed to attend and at no point in any of his defamatory videos has he produced any facts to support his spurious claims. Why might that be?

With no evidence to support the allegations, the inevitable conclusion is that there is,

No case to answer.

All of which leads one to the inevitable conclusion that the offending videos should be taken down and an unreserved apology be issued.

Thus we are back to the question of who and what it is the enemy that Man is up against?

In the simplest of terms it is all those who attempt to control and/or influence him by way of falsehoods.

Be wary of the snake in the grass, for it may be well camouflaged.

Be wary too of all those who attack others by way of logical fallacy – the ad hominem – name calling.

Discernment is thy god given gift, the purpose of which is to enable one to think critically in the face of attack.

Be very wary of those who are wrongdoers and be assured that, in the end, they will reveal their true nature:

Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Matthew 7:16-20King James Version (KJV)

Footnote: RM wishes to thank all those with the eyes to see and the ears to listen and each of those who has supported him throughout the travails of the last years. You know who you are. Much love to all.


PS Each and every donation is gratefully received – a big thank you to ‘Aeon Aton’ for his of April 2016 – it is truly appreciated.

Email this to someoneShare on Facebook151Share on Google+0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn0


  1. Haining is a snake in the grass. Best rid of his aquantance. When can we see the film? looking forwards to it

    1. Hi, Sally and many thanks for getting in touch. It is indeed best to step away and cease our acquaintanceships with those who act out of ill-will towards us or undermine our efforts by way of their lies and distortions. The film is due out within the next week or so, please watch out for the notifications as to when and where it may be viewed. Blessings to you and your kin.

    1. Hi, Anthony. This latest article contains an image of the current ‘cabinet’ that purports to ‘govern’ the people of these lands. Each of them is a millionaire. How and why would a group of such wealthy individuals be interested in changing the status quo? What would be the benefit for them? Are they interested in justice or simply in lining their own pockets and maintaining their wealth? Notwithstanding that, thanks for dropping by and keep up the good work. All the best, RM

As of January, 2016 comments are open... cheers!