By the end of this article you'll have an undeniable timeline and tangible facts on how "free media" manipulates the masses by holding them on a tight leash as a pup and feeding the misinfo for years, only to set them loose years later as full grown rabid dogs. Ok, maybe not the best analogy but I couldn't think of anything better so without further ado, let's get straight to the point:

I was very involved in the Libya and Syria wars when the issues started there in 2011. I just finished watching Zeitgest 3, not as eye opening as this first two but still quite impressive. It's crazy how much the Zeitgeist series influenced so many of us to think more independently and question the narratives laid down by our authorities as absolute truths. And even though Peter Joseph distanced himself from the more debatable parts of the Zeitgeist series and dared to admit he might have been wrong, it is in my opinion to date still a must see. For me, the desire to understand why the Libya war was going so differently than e.g. the Iraq war, and subsequent follow up on why the Syria war was going so differently than Libya is what got me started in all this. Questioning this just seemed logical to me because all these "civil" wars involved the people and army on one side, vs. Nato and certain self proclaimed "rebel leaders" on the other. All these wars were de facto illegal as the UN council had veto power nations who voted against them, one of the nations that consistently voted against all these wars was Russia, who's now involved in it's own illegal war but more on that later. The point is, if you'd paid attention to the developments, the "sanction Russia" rhetoric started not when the Ukraine war escalated completely in 2022, not when the Ukraine war started in 2014, not when the Syria war started in 2013, but went as far back as 2011. Something China noticed as well when they criticized the recent sanctions against Russia: "Since 2011, the United States has imposed sanctions on Russia more than 100 times, but we can all think about it calmly, have U.S. sanctions solved the problem?" So, what exactly is "the problem" here? What was so important in 2011 that most of us missed? Let's elaborate:

For those that don't remember, there weren't any Libyan children dying from starvation or lack of medicine as hundred thousands of Iraqi children did prior to the war. Libya was one of Africa's most developed and prosperous nations turned into a war zone overnight divided in separate regions with three different governments who are too busy fighting for complete power to notice the slave markets set up in the country. The main reason why Nato almost immediately went in to murder the head of state in Libya is because of it's location. You see, sanction Libya the way you did Iraq would mean Gaddafi would almost immediately abandon his agreement to keep refugees out of Europe who all traveled from all across Africa to Libya for the sea route, meaning the sanctions would backfire in a matter of weeks. As a matter of fact, when they started their war against Libya, Gaddafi made his last prediction that rings true to this very day: "Listen you, people of NATO. You’re bombing a wall which stood in the way  of African migration to Europe, and in the way of  Al Qaeda terrorists. This wall was Libya. You‘re breaking it. You’re idiots, and you will burn in Hell for thousands of migrants from Africa and for supporting Al Qaeda. It will be so. I never lie. And I do not lie now."

Now, to put things in perspective, the EU was willing to pay scraps to Libya in order for them to secure Europe's borders and keep refugees out, but Gaddafi demanded more. Some say this is the reason they eventually decided to get rid of him, other say it was due to his plan to replace the Dollar in all of Africa with the golden Dinar. Oh, and Nato claims it was because they read Gaddafi's mind and knew he was about to slaughter thousands of peaceful protesters who just wanted democracy, so they spend millions of Dollars, violated UN law, came in to bomb his convoy and save the day. Whichever version you believe, we may never know the real reason why they thought their Libya war was a good idea, but we have the power of logic and ability to collect some very telling puzzle pieces from around that time in hopes of seeing the bigger picture. You see, soon after the Libya war, the Syria war started. But key difference in the geography here is that there wasn't a sea separating the war from Europe, but a nation who's in the EU member waiting room for over a decade now: Turkey. Did Turkey allow itself to be used as a tool and safeguard EU's borders without being in it? **** no, and they even took it to the similar levels Gaddafi did. Now to be fair this could be viewed as extortion, but on the other hand the refugees did not have Libya or Turkey as their final destination, so to them they weren't really a bother. The EU demanding them to stop the refugees from reaching their borders was more of a bother and what would cost them time, money and effort, and it also gave them leverage over the EU. How did the EU and Nato handle the sequel to the Libya/Gaddafi refugee saga when it came to fellow Nato ally Turkey and Erdogan?

Aghh, nonsense some say. "The West had nothing to do with that, they are friends with Turkey". Well if that were the case, how come they were all more vocal regarding Turkey's response to the coup rather than the actual coup attempt?

The following isn't completely relevant and also denied by those involved, but nevertheless too important to leave out. Remember during the Turkey coup attempt, Russia and Turkey's relations were at a dangerous low with the shooting of the SU24. But despite all that there are reports Turkey handled the coup quite easily because they were warned in advance. And the most telling twist of all was when Ankara arrested numerous people in it's public, private and military sectors after the failed coup, and it was then revealed two of the pilots that were involved in the failed coup were also involved in the shooting of the Russian SU24 at the Turkey-Syria border.

So conclusion: Turkey is still the same and getting paid billions of Euros annually by the EU for keeping Syrian and some Iraqi refugees out and Libya's three governments are collectively sharing the scraps left to them from Brussels for doing the same with complete disregard for human rights and the refugee's well being btw. 👈Be sure to read the article, compare the money Libya gets with what Turkey gets and tell me again how it's not all about power and money but "human rights and democracy".

But how does Russia fit into all this? Well, before they sanctioned Turkey, Syria or Libya, there was Russia. Again, we may never know the full scope and reasons why it all escalated to this point, but we do have very, very telling puzzle pieces that we can put together hoping we can then see the complete picture. What where the key developments leading up to 2011 when they started their sanction war against Russia?

One very telling puzzle piece is their mindset:

The sheer fact that this Afghanistan terrorist commander was an advisor to the Obama admin in 2010 is very crucial indeed. But what was it that made them panic so much in 2011? The fact that Yanukovich won the 2010 Ukraine elections might have had plenty to do with it. Following this, there was the arrest and sentencing of pro-Nato politician Yulia Tymoshenko for corruption, there was the Crimea naval base lease renewal for 25 years, and remember the final days of the pro-Western Yushchenko government when he signed a decree making a racist and actual Nazi collaborator "hero of Ukraine"? Yanukovich almost immediately undid that when he was elected. All of this was signaling to the EU and US that Yanukovich wouldn't continue down Yushchenko's path. Though these aren't really reasons for the West to panic so much since as we discussed before, Ukraine had a neutrality law and was even on an economic level itching more towards the EU than they were towards Russia. But again, take these puzzle pieces and try to see the entire picture, because we again stumble upon the core reason for wars and conflicts: It's always about power and money. You see, Yanukovich was not anybodies stooge, he went into negotiations with the EU from a position of strength, because if they didn't offer Ukraine a fair deal Yanukovich could always turn to Russia to get a better and more prosperous agreement for his country. Which he eventually did after the EU, much like with Gaddafi, refused to treat other nations fairly. But before they got rid of Yanukovich he fortunately for us said the quiet part out loud and offered us another crucial puzzle piece:

In here lies the core reason why countries like China or Russia's sheer existence is a threat to the certain countries' neo-colonial mentality and why they use their media to push the enemy narrative on their citizens. Don't agree? What if I told you that very same Gaddafi had next to the refugee deal, also issues with the EU for not offering him a fair trade deal? During which he even said "Africa can look to any other international bloc such as Latin America, China, India or Russia". Still not convinced? Then go out for yourself and read Koyagbele's detailed report on what went down in Central African Republic in the late 2000's. In there he very explicitly speaks of how France was behind the removal of elected president Bozize using "African terrorist militias" because Bozize "turned to the Chinese for a better deal" regarding extraction from the discovered oilfields. What better deal you ask? Well, one that wouldn't have the foreign nation get a staggering 90% of CAR's oil as France wanted, leaving the already impoverished CAR with merely 10% of their own natural resources. Koyagbele had first hand experience on how the French operated since he was approached by them as well with the threat "if you ever want to become president, you'll accept our conditions regarding the extraction". The bigger crime here is CAR's population is 50% Christian and 15% Muslim, who had been living relatively peacefully together before France's imperialist meddling. The infighting is going on to this very day. The latest in this saga is Iran after the US withdrew from the nuclear agreement. After which Iran rejected the EU's demands for an alternative Dollar agreement and stated, now pay close attention to the same level of anger and word use: "Humiliating conditions set by the EU".

It's difficult to put all this to words and make the reader understand the full scope of everything that's been going on the past 20 years in a chronological order and I often digress from what I initially wanted to say because there's just too much ground to cover in 1 article, but let's give it another attempt: Russia sanctions 2011. I'm probably missing a few, but the largest anti-Russia campaign I remember was regarding the Russian "Gay propaganda law" that passed in 2013. Yes all the way back in 2013, no wars involving Russia, no Ukraine coup yet, no Crimea taken, no nothing except the Libya war which Nato already had left before 2013 and de facto became a man-made disaster. Remember gay people across the West poring English and EU owned vodka brands empty in the sewer as they saw the media and their camera crew suddenly had an exaggerated interest in the gay community? I'll let you in on a little secret: It had nothing to do with the gay community, but everything to do with who passed the law. The countries who had geo-political ambitions merely just used it as they use every other opportunity to antagonize their citizens against what they perceive as the enemy. Where I come from that's called being played as a chump. So I was very confused back then how so many would blindly follow such obvious propaganda and manipulation. Wasn't it obvious to them that there was something bigger going on? Wasn't it obvious war was on the horizon in Syria where Russia had a naval base and the trade agreement showdown with Ukraine was incoming? So yeah, this 2022 "ban Russian vodka" thingy isn't exactly new and neither are it's reasons. The only new thing is the depths they are taking it and quite frankly it's (borderline) racist. But now that they have taken that step, another problem emerges. You see for years they've been threatening to use their "nuclear option": Cutting Russia off from Swift. But now that they've done it, what's left? What else can they do when Russia starts retaliating? The only non-war measure they can take is attempt to change the core of the United Nations and the permanent member seats. Because the UN is located in Washington and there have already been numerous examples of the US using this to refuse visas to diplomats they had petty differences with, so it can be a realistic possibility. If that happens, diplomacy has officially died and we should very well be preparing for WW3 because there's no way other nations who are not in Nato's sphere of influence won't see the writing on the wall. And while we're on the topic of censorship, why not engage in diplomacy with those that disagree with your views? Why not allow other media that are critical of you and your media? The same people that imprisoned Julian Assange because he reported too many truths, are blocking Russia Today because "they spread disinfo". I'm sorry but both sides can not be true and if you don't see how dangerous that is, then you're probably not really in favor of press freedom or free speech but just those that suit you.

Last but certainly not least and this is something us crypto people will be able to very easily relate to: Remember when the Kiev cookie monster aka Victoria Nuland gave a speech in which she publicly concluded that "The United States has invested in total over 5 billion Dollars in Ukraine since 1991....to assure a prosperous democratic Ukraine". Not only did she say that with a straight face after working the streets of Kiev with her security team to take some photo ops with anti-Yanukovich protesters that wanted to coup it's government, but the connection I want to make is, why do we "invest" in crypto? Sure, we believe in it, believe in the technology and think it has potential, but ultimately, we "invest" because we expect more in return later do we not? What happened to the United States in Ukraine when the people fairly elected a more Russian leaning Yanukovich in 2010, was equivalent to being rug pulled for a mere 5 billion Dollars after waiting for it to moon for 20 years. I guess someone should have told Washington to DYOR regarding the people of Ukraine🤔

And there it pretty much is. Ever since 2010 the narrative was slowly but surely set that now in 2022 all Western media, politicians, talk shows or their deranged "influencers" blindly follow without even fully understanding why. And let's get this out of the way as well, they are not all "CIA agents". I'm not saying spies and provocateurs don't exist and by no means want to be disrespectful, but it's ignorant to say all brain dead actors or deluded "influencers" who repeat what they hear on their freedom TV, that now has media from four separate countries blocked entirely so only one narrative can be heard, are all "CIA agents" and not just poor deluded saps with no understanding whatsoever on economics, current events and geo-politics.