Hillary Clinton Sponsored Secretive Arab Spring Program that Destabilized Middle East

Great story here about how Hillary Clinton helped fuel the Arab Spring movements in the Middle East.

Some leaked documents also tie into a conspiracy that appears to have stretched from Hillary's Secretary of State term back to Condoleezza Rice and the Bush Administration !!

One person in particular looks like a carry over from Rice to Clinton and ties a program called the Alliance of Youth Movements Summit that may have helped fuel the overthrow of Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak.

Clinton aide Huma Abedin even was involved according to some documents.

The man in question is Jared Cohen, and he is a CFR member and later became a Google employee !!

Very interesting story.

Read the entire article for context.

Hillary Clinton Sponsored Secretive Arab Spring Program that Destabilized Middle East

The U.S. State Department under the leadership of Secretary Hillary Clinton continued a program to embolden foreign, revolutionary, social media activists to agitate for regime change in various parts of the world. The program arguably had major, detrimental consequences for the trajectory of the Middle East.

Recent leaks show a memo that top Clinton aide Huma Abedin sent to her boss stating, “I’m giving you credit for inspiring the ‘peaceful’ protests,” with regard to Egypt, with quotation marks around the word “peaceful.”

The United States government is believed to have utilized a program called the Alliance of Youth Movements Summit, co-founded by a close Hillary Clinton adviser, to provide networking opportunities for an activist plotting to overthrow Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak several years before the “Arab Spring” protests that led to widespread regime change in the Middle East.

a reply to: xuenchen

Humas email to Clinton.

From: Huma Abedin To: Hillary Clinton Date: 2012-09-12 22:21 Subject: SITUATION REPORT NO. 1 09/14/I
UNCLASSIFIED STATE DEPT. - PRODUCED TO HOUSE SELECT BENGHAZI COMM. U.S. Department of State SUBJECT TO AGREEMENT ON SENSITIVE INFORMATION & REDACTIONS. NO FOIA WAIVER. Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739606 Date: 05/13/2015 RELEASE IN FULL From: Abeclin, Huma Sent: Friday, September 14, 20129:21AM To: Subject: Fw:SITUATIONREPORTNo109/14/1(SBU)

I'm giving you credit for inspiring the "peaceful" protests.

Recent leaks show a memo that top Clinton aide Huma Abedin sent to her boss stating, “I’m giving you credit for inspiring the ‘peaceful’ protests,” with regard to Egypt, with quotation marks around the word “peaceful.”

Puts "peaceful" in quotes like it is a joke. ha ha.

Twisted F'n people.


This proves that Obama has the exact same agenda as Bush did and that Hillary will do nothing but continue to advance her handlers globalist agenda.

Thanks for posting this Xuenchen!

Knowing what we now know it puts this little speech into a new light.


Her public 'talk' is ALWAYS hiding a globalist agenda.

Sounds innocent enough until you can look back on it years later and put it in context with revelations like in the OP.

The Middle East is in such great shape now isn't it?

Thanks Hillary.

a reply to: xuenchen

Um. First of all, Breitbart is hardly an unbiased source and has framed this to it's liking and for its agenda. It also makes me wonder if any of it is actually true.

So let's pretend that it is true for a moment.

What do you think "Ambassadors" and "Embassies" do?? In part, it is to create friendly relationships, and in other ways, not so much. This article is only surprising to the naive and those who've never played "Civilizations." lol!

There can be elements of supporting covert operations, including Psyop and other disruptors, in the name of a country's goals. One thinks of the CIA as being the only one's doing this, but from time immemorial, ambassadors and embassies have hosted espionage efforts, as well as other campaigns.

Would you prefer US interests always seek change by means of guns and bombs? Where negotiation is impossible, or fails, or is deemed otherwise inappropriate, do you think we throw up our hands and say, "oh well, I guess that's that!"

To both good and ill effect, we have all seen how, through countless administrations, the US has had multiple ways of spreading its influence, and attempting to shape the world to its benefit.

A better idea than to be shocked about it, or seek to shock others, is to ask "why?" and "who ordered this?" "How did this further US interests?" And also to know that the answers to this question may be very classified, so that we cannot answer them.

It is the way of the world. There are webs within webs and at least Clinton is aware of them.

- AB

Hillary Clinton Sponsored Secretive Arab Spring Program that Destabilized Middle East
page: 1

That I believe more than anything. You got to create a problem before you can 'fix' it.

The war on terror is contrived, heres how they began the process of destabilization of an entire Hemisphere. Keeping tabs, the result we see is the current flow of refugees out of the conflict zones.

Yahoo news. Had a story running that Guccifer2 released a new batch of DNC emails this morning.

Not much different from the Ukrainian 'spring', bought and paid for with the $5 billion to 'promote' democracy.

a reply to: AboveBoard

This article is only surprising to the naive and those who've never played "Civilizations." lol!

True, most of us know that what they tell us is BS and that the real agenda is always hidden.
Does that make it something we shouldn't fight against?

There can be elements of supporting covert operations, including Psyop and other disruptors, in the name of a country's goals. One thinks of the CIA as being the only one's doing this, but from time immemorial, ambassadors and embassies have hosted espionage efforts, as well as other campaigns.

This is a good thing? Especially in other sovereign, Democratic countries?

Would you prefer US interests always seek change by means of guns and bombs? Where negotiation is impossible, or fails, or is deemed otherwise inappropriate, do you think we throw up our hands and say, "oh well, I guess that's that!"

How about we stay out of others countries business?

A better idea than to be shocked about it, or seek to shock others, is to ask "why?" and "who ordered this?" "How did this further US interests?" And also to know that the answers to this question may be very classified, so that we cannot answer them.

This I somewhat agree with, we all need to be asking why.

It is the way of the world. There are webs within webs and at least Clinton is aware of them.

So just move along, Trust Hillary and the corrupt Federal Government to always do what is best for us little people?

I know she is aware of them, she has been a major player in this agenda. I don't view that as a 'positive' for Hillary.

Breitbart. Right...

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: xuenchen

Humas email to Clinton.

From: Huma Abedin To: Hillary Clinton Date: 2012-09-12 22:21 Subject: SITUATION REPORT NO. 1 09/14/I
UNCLASSIFIED STATE DEPT. - PRODUCED TO HOUSE SELECT BENGHAZI COMM. U.S. Department of State SUBJECT TO AGREEMENT ON SENSITIVE INFORMATION & REDACTIONS. NO FOIA WAIVER. Case No. F-2015-04841 Doc No. C05739606 Date: 05/13/2015 RELEASE IN FULL From: Abeclin, Huma Sent: Friday, September 14, 20129:21AM To: Subject: Fw:SITUATIONREPORTNo109/14/1(SBU)

I'm giving you credit for inspiring the "peaceful" protests.

FULL COVERAGE HERE:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

At first I thought it was just about the protests, it came out the protests went off as the pre-planned Benghazi attacks set in motion. The thing stinks top to bottom including (especially) the origins of that crazy "Muslim Movie Trailer" that sparked the riots.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Breitbart. Right...

Yes, but the members here have given you links to the emails released by the State Department, so you can't blame Breitbart.
We know that you won't blame Hillary.
Blame Guccifer #1 for letting the cat out of the bag to begin with.

The destructive legacy of Arab liberals
In fact, and as the following will show, it has been a new brand of Arab liberals — secularists and Islamists (though the former have been far more dangerous) — who have been and continue to be a most dangerous and destructive political force in the post-1967 Arab world.
....
It is with this as background that Arab liberals — secularists and Islamists among them — would emerge during the so-called Arab “Spring” of 2011 as leaders of the revolts of Egypt and Tunisia (and Syria and Libya, Bahrain and Yemen). In the telling case of Tunisia, the liberal Islamists’ (mainly the al-Nahda party) and secularists’ infighting brought about a modus operandi that led to the partial restoration of the ancien régime.

In Egypt, the secularist liberals were transformed into outright fascists overnight and allied themselves openly with the Mubarakist forces, both in government, the military and the business sector against the liberal and neoliberal Muslim Brotherhood, which was only able, during its brief stint in power, to ally itself with the Mubarakist army, which ended up toppling its government.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

December 2010: The Arab Spring
"...was a revolutionary wave of demonstrations and protests (both non-violent and violent), riots, and civil wars in the Arab world... Major insurgencies in Syria, Libya and Yemen resulted along with civil uprisings in Egypt and Bahrain, large street demonstrations in Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Oman, and minor protests even in Saudi Arabia. ...The Arab Spring is widely believed to have been instigated by dissatisfaction with the rule of local governments, particularly by youth and unions, though some have speculated that wide gaps in income levels may have had a hand as well. Other analysts pointed to the fourth stage "Toppling the Regimes" of the Al Qaeda strategy for world domination, described in Fouad Hussein's book published in 2005. Numerous factors led to the protests, including issues such as dictatorship or absolute monarchy, human rights violations, political corruption (demonstrated by Wikileaks diplomatic cables), economic decline, unemployment, extreme poverty, and a number of demographic structural factors, such as a large percentage of educated but dissatisfied youth within the entire population." en.wikipedia.org... en.wikipedia.org...

2011: Clinton State Department approved U.S. weapons shipment to Libya despite ban.
"The State Department initially approved a weapons shipment from a California company to Libyans seeking to oust Moammar Gadhafi in 2011 even though a United Nations arms ban was in place, according to memos recovered from the burned-out compound in Benghazi." www.washingtontimes.com... "Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi Debacle: Arming Jihadists in Libya . . . and Syria" www.nationalreview.com...

February 15, 2011: Libyan Civil War begins

...CONTINUED...

The USA and Britain have destroyed the Arab world, Hilary is part of this process, any state that is deemed not part of our empire/domain has been destroyed or targeted for destruction. Peter Ford the ex High Commissioner in Syria was on BBC this morning saying how disastrous our foreign policy has been and how we should pull back from destroying Syria. He said we had control centers in Jordan and Turkey that recruit Jihadis, train them, then place them in Syria to murder Syrians, he has my upmost respect for speaking out against my governments murderous destruction of ghe Middle East. He said we were backing the wrong side and were complicit in the massacre of Christians from the region. My own government has been hijacked, my star is as bad as the Nazis in creating this genicide. I hate my government for what has happened out there and as Peter Ford said if it wasn't for the Russians defending Syria our mercenaries would destroy Christians in a indescribable massacre. When we went to war to defend Bruts in the Falklands I had total respect for my government, for what it does now o am horrified beyond belief

a reply to: xuenchen

This is not just Hillary Clinton it’s the US government black operation that she helped implement as Secretary of State

This was US government secret BLACK OPERAITON that's still in operation and involves NATO


Indeed going back to Bush as well to 911

a reply to: midicon

Both suffered and became stalemates from the same issues too. Two powerful state players in the region that sought to take advantage and thwart the efforts.

When it comes to Ukraine they could have just waited a few months and used their resources to vote out the pro-Russian pres, but they decided to overthrow him instead. Would have had a much better outcome and thousands of Ukrainian troops would still be alive.

When it comes to the Arab Spring, it would have been successful had the Obama Admin supported the Green Revolution to overthrow Ali Khamenei. But Obama's right hand woman Valerie Jarrett, who is Iranian, is pro Ali Khamenei.

So now the MENA region is burning because the president that got elected had a completely different foreign policy agenda than what was being followed for decades.

It's actually the reason why I think when it comes to foreign policy with known adversaries, the intelligence agencies and military should have veto power over the president and state department when it comes to dealing with those countries. Example being that Iran now has 1.7 billion dollars in cash to spend how they like, most likely being used to support their proxies in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, etc.

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Peter Ford the ex High Commissioner in Syria was on BBC this morning saying how disastrous our foreign policy has been and how we should pull back from destroying Syria.

Thanks for mentioning Peter Ford. I wasn't able to find the BBC interview but I found this one with Sky from a couple of day's ago.

From is POV our presence (UK) in Syria is a disaster, and we are just kow towing to the US administrations policy.

What is said about Boris Johnson flip flopping on the issue now he is foreign sectary just goes to show how they change once they have a position of power.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Somehow I missed that thread, thanks for the link.

a reply to: xuenchen

The man in question is Jared Cohen, and he is a CFR member and later became a Google employee !!

Eric Schmidt and Hillary Clinton are best of buds, Hillary even referred to him as her "partner in crime". It's also why Google was associated with overthrowing Mubarak.

There was a video on Youtube of Debbie Wasserman-Sultz grilling Eric Schmidt and a statement was made about Google's role in overthrowing Mubarak. I tried to find it, but couldn't so it might have been scrubbed.

Eric Schmidt is now also an adviser to the DOD in upgrading their technical policies. If Hillary becomes president there is no telling the kinds of technical and psychological experiments Alphabet(Google) will be allowed to conduct under the cover of a private corporation with military and intelligence applications.

a reply to: stosh64


It sometimes sucks to be the ones who don't know anything, I get that. We are left to form conspiracy theories and spin dark tales of Globalist intrigue out on the web with little to go on but public documents or the occasional hacked email.

I have a question for you, though:

If WE "stop" our "secrets," would other countries (who do the same things) stop acting against us via their own "secret programs?"

True, most of us know that what they tell us is BS and that the real agenda is always hidden.
Does that make it something we shouldn't fight against?

The layer of power we see in the news is more often than not, simply the surface of the ocean, and it reflects the light that is shone on it (i.e. what we are meant to see).

The Chinese are absolute Masters of intrigue, for example. I say this as a compliment -- they are incredibly intelligent and their form of government allows no real penetration of "state secrets" by a "Fifth Estate." We are competing against them while sometimes allying with them (or at least acting in parallel) and the lines between corporate advantage and governmental "players" get tangled and blurred.

The Russians are in the same category as the Chinese, and their government holds its secrets to its chest, and no one dares to question that -- it makes them powerful.

So is the Middle East a nest of intrigue, and these are people who know how to play the games of Courts and Thrones as well as the Chinese, the Russians, the British, the Japanese, and any other Power in the world.

This is a good thing? Especially in other sovereign, Democratic countries?

How about we stay out of others countries business?

So we should simply pull up our skirts, run away, block our windows and doors, build our walls, and hope the world has our best interests at heart and will leave us alone to polish our guns and aircraft carriers in peace? Do you honestly think they will stay out of ours? We are connected globally, whether we like it or not.

Where other governments may have Less in armament, they may have invested More in covert operations, cyber warfare and espionage.

Should we label "government secrets" as simply "BAD" and refuse to see them as integral to our own Homeland Security, ultimately? How do you know it's all simple corruption? There is definitely some-to-a-lot of that from every government, but to claim that it is all corrupt implies you have "secret knowledge" of all the whys of all the plans and machinations. I know I don't, so I can't call you "wrong" on that, but I can question making a blanket statement of anti-trust.

I don't think we always create positive results in regions where we use "secret influence," and we the people don't even get to know the motives behind the actions, sometimes ever, or perhaps it's dribbled out on The History Channel when so much time has passed it no longer matters. Sometimes we may fail in our secret efforts, or cause something we did not anticipate, or other's secret plans mess ours up. We may even exacerbate a situation. Sometimes we do bad things.

But we cannot simply say it's all simply BAD. Neither you nor I nor, most likely, anyone here, is sitting at the center of the web with all the intelligence in their hands and the knowledges of the players on the field. This is a fact.

We cannot judge what we do not know. And sometimes, unless we are "in the know" completely, the pieces we see of the web (on the web) do not give us the full interpretation of the patterns, the whys and wherefores. I'm guessing there are many many things we really don't WANT to know. (or maybe you do, but I imagine it gets kind of dark.)

This is why in the military there is information given only on "need to know basis." During operations, does this not make sense? Should the military be transparent in their operations and tell everyone from top to bottom the entire plan, give out the big picture and minor details? Would that be effective? Why should I be considered as someone who has a "need to know" and should be "read in?"


So, the question is, how can we ensure there is any real accountability in our government, with its octopus of covert actions, massive military, State Department secrets and Homeland Security pogroms?

The answer is, well, we can't.

And no President can "break the system" to get us those answers and accountability. No whistleblower is ever going to have the complete picture, only a part of it. The best we can hope for is to elect people who, in the layers of government that directly effect our lives on a daily basis, are going to be working on behalf of the best interests of the country, who are not going to ruin "our country." (And that is why we have this conflagration of opposition, because people think "the other guy/gal" is the one that is going to ruin it.)

While we fight and wrangle, the covert actions go on, the military and State Department and CIA and FBI and all the letters do their work and, we hope, balance our safety against our individual freedoms. When it goes too much the wrong way for a group, a whistle blower reveals it, the masses stir, and seek to correct it through protest.

Anyway. This isn't all directed at you. It's kind of a general rant, like me saying in general "well, what did you expect they do? Sit in the Embassies crocheting doilies and having tea parties?"

Another point is that originally Trump’s strong point was his foreign policy versus Clinton's.

It’s clear now though that Trump has and would as president buy into all the sinister black operations that evil Hillary and spineless Obama went along with.


A good thing about this OP and the link is that it is very instructive on the reality that the real power behind the scenes in America transcends the left/right GOP/DEM superficial political fight and directs both sides to do their bidding or else.