The whistleblowing organization WikiLeaks has partnered with more than twenty-five media outlets to release millions of emails from the global private intelligence company known as Stratfor. The release of the emails, which they are calling the “Global Intelligence Files,” shows the full scope of the company’s operations—how they provide intelligence services to major corporations like Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Company. They show how the company has informants and engages in payment-laundering. And, most striking, it shows most of the money Stratfor uses comes from public sources like government offices, agencies, militaries, etc, because members subscribe to their services.
From the moment the release began, media has been ambivalent toward the news that the contents of the emails are now being published. Both how WikiLeaks may have obtained the emails and the fact that Stratfor’s reputation is allegedly poor among foreign policy writers, analysts and practitioners, etc.
Stratfor’s service may be shoddy, but the reality is the company does have a network of operatives that engage in activities around the world. The members take themselves seriously. George Friedman, CEO, writes in one email, after a deputy director of intelligence at the CIA was fired, that Stratfor would show the CIA how to properly run an intelligence organization.
Revealed so far is the following:
—Former Goldman Sachs managing director Shea Morenz to start a hedge fund called StratCap. The idea, which Morenz came up with, was that the company would “trade in a range of geopolitical instruments, particularly government bonds, currencies and the like.” Morenz invested more than $4 million and joined Stratfor’s board of directors. They put together an offshore share structure that went “as far as South Africa” Friedman said the fund will be useful and they would be “working on mock portfolios and trades.” And, the fund was to launch in 2012.
—Bhopal activists and The Yes Men were being spied on by the company. In response to activism against Dow Chemical for their role in the 1984 gas disaster in Bhopal, India (which victims have not been properly compensated for yet), the activists were tracked. The company kept track of the Yes Men’s speaking engagements along with mentions of Bhopal activism in the media.
—Coca Cola contracted Stratfor to spy on PETA. The organization, which engages in animal rights activism, was monitored. The soda company feared protests from PETA during the Vancouver Olympics. And so, they sent a list of questions to Stratfor and sought answers. Fred Burton, a former State Department official, responded in one email, “The FBI has a classified investigation on PETA operatives. I’ll see what I can uncover.”
—Vice President Fred Burton, former State Department official, has clear ties to Israel. As Al-Akhbar English’s Yazan al-Saadi details Burton was ”a special agent with the US Diplomatic Security Service and was appointed by Washington to investigate the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, the assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane, and a number of bomb plots by al-Qaeda prior to 9/11.” In the emails, his “pro-Israeli sentiments and links to Israeli military and intelligence sectors” are apparent as he argues the Gaza Freedom Flotilla was “funded by questionable sources.” There’s a level of racism in the company toward Palestinians or, in general, Arabs, not to mention the fact that the organization appears to be privy to information on the Mossad’s covert program to assassinate Iranian physicists.
Those are just some of the highlights of what has been gleaned from the emails. Only 200 of the five million emails have been released.
As was noted when news of the hack broke in December, Stratfor apparently had little concern for the “sources” it was working with. In fact, a glossary of terms they use when conducting business shows just how much disregard the business has for the safety of sources.
According to the glossary, “businessmen” are people you have to make “scared shitless of you.” The “most rare and prized variety” of a source is one that is a “coerced source” because “you have him by the balls.” A “green-carder” is “a source working for you because he believes that you will take him to America where he will own a Seven-Eleven. Try not to disabuse him until after you’ve squeezed his sorry ass.” Finally, rattling a source’s cage means “scaring the living shit out of a source in order to get a read on whether he is jerking you around.”
This is an organization with over 300,000 subscribers. This is how it obtains information. And, as one can tell from reading the content, the veracity of the intelligence collected is highly questionable. The company, as it admits, is largely “disconnected” from domestic politics in the countries of which it is producing analysis. If anything, the value of the intelligence is limited to its ability to reinforce already held biases in agencies and institutions toward certain policies, programs or leaders in specific countries.
Finally, the company has tried to publicly operate as a kind of hybrid between a think tank and a media organization. Stratfor was condemned during the Frontline Club press conference on the release because it does offer surveillance of citizens of the world as a service to corporations. The company also has likely engaged in bribery, which is why Friedman said the organization would be getting a law firm to help them establish guidelines so they would be prepared for any charges of violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
Bloomberg, Associated Press, Reuters, The New York Times, and the BBC have all, at some point, in the past decade used “intelligence” or analysis provided by Stratfor in its newsletters to supplement reporting. At least, individuals in these media organizations have consumed the material and tucked nuggets in the back of their head for referencing when necessary.
The release of the Global Intelligence Files has only just begun. This is not all that we are going to find out. Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder, claims 4,000 emails show how Stratfor was doing work that pertains to the operations of WikiLeaks.
Here is Firedoglake‘s live blog on the release covering what has been revealed thus far along with media coverage of the release. Firedoglake will continue to cover the release as WikiLeaks and its media partners publish new stories on revelations in the millions of emails yet to be released.
*
I appeared on RT’s “The Alyona Show” yesterday and discussed the “Global Intelligence Files” release. Here’s the video:



42 Comments

Where has Stratfor salted away its alums, Kevin?
I’m thinking Indian ministry that overseas Bhopal kind of thing.
Does this include waterboarding or pulling fingernails?
Perhaps they give classes at Tuol Sleng High School?
Kinda of on topic and related in my opinion:
IRS is also going after Tea Party groups. Don’t see how either relates to Stratfor tho…
Look Out Dick Armey and Koch Bros.
I wish the FBI would really tear into the real criminals.
If they did that at least half the gov’t would be in jail including the Supremes. No doubt things would work much better after that.
The PTB is a bipartisan coalition. Both sides are owned by the MIC / Wall Street / etc. The whitewashing of the robosigning made that absolutely clear, in case anyone had missed the fact.
Even Obama knows we know it. Notice how he steers clear of OWS now? At one point, he was trying to cozy up.
Yes and in response to both 8 and 9:
Our Government is defunct and huge criminal enterprise.
Getting rid of half of them won’t improve anything.
Here’s a fact largely unknown to most I’m sure.
What do Tom Clancy* and Ron Paul have in common?
They share the opinion that if all 537 elected officials died on the same day and all were replaced, nothing in Washington would change.
Why?
Look no further than Stratfor. The MIC, Wall Street et al own the place.
(* Well, Clancy wrote that in one of his books. But I’m guessing he shares the opinion. He is knowledgeable on Washington.)
I know there are lawyers here. I’m wondering… in relation to Coke investigating PETA, does a statement such as this:
Warrant empaneling a grand jury?
Kevin’s got a new live-blog thread upstairs…!
PP,just a sincere merci for your yeoman’s/woman’s work on these docs.
I would be very curious if the Chamber of Commerce is mentioned in any of these missives.
You are very welcome. I haven’t seen any yet, but there is still more to come. Certain entities have posted that all 5 mill are able to be linked to but I haven’t done that.
I have to rest some more so that I can think clearly and not get sent off on a link that I really don’t want to go to.
BTW ,the BP Deepwater Horizon trial has been delayed by one week…fyi. Wonder if forthcoming docs will relate in any fashion to the Gulf Oil Spill??? (Halliburton was implicated in that disaster,for the record.)
BP oil spill trial delayed for settlement talks | Reuters
3 hours ago … LONDON/NEW ORLEANS (Reuters) – The trial to decide who should pay for the
2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill has been delayed by a week, …
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/27/us-bp-idUSTRE81P0Q320120227 …
Delayed: Court Ruling “Biggest Risk” to BP Stock Says …
8 hours ago … Read ‘BP Trial Delayed: Court Ruling “Biggest Risk” to BP Stock Says Analyst’
from our blog Daily Ticker on Yahoo! Finance. Follow Yahoo!
finance.yahoo.com/…/bp-trial-delayed-court-ruling-biggest-risk-bp-165800591.html – Similar
Good question. Businessmen in oil companies subscribe to Stratfor. So, possibly. I wouldn’t rule it out.
I’m seeking some commentary from Moon of Alabama and Col Lang’s readers…!
Kevin, I don’t know if you are familiar with the investment firm Allen and Company.
It would be well to review their Wiki as regards to their affiliations with George Tenet, the Coca Cola Company,Google and the Hollywood film industry. (Word is, no deal is done in Tinseltown without Allen and Company’s okay.)
Interesting the data dump was the day of the Oscars,jus’ sayin.
I have posted on this in the past here at FDL and Emptywheel.( If you’re interested, the search engine will bring up the comments.)
Thank you for your amazing efforts, Kevin.
With regards to the second link in this article, to the Atlantic’s “Stratfor Is a Joke and So Is Wikileaks for Taking It Seriously” by Mr. Fisher, he makes his ignorance of the intelligence industry quite apparent.
I have no vested interest in defending Stratfor, and perhaps they do have a low reputation in the industry, but Fisher’s points against them are laughably stupid. It seems that Fisher is upset that Stratfor doesn’t live up to his James Bond / Tom Clancy conception of how the intelligence process works, and the article reads like a whine about that.
The released material DOES show how a private intelligence agency works, and unfortunately no comparable release exists for a government intelligence agency, therefore there is no real basis for comparison.
In actual fact, a widely-accepted rule of thumb in the industry is that private sector intelligence can do 3 times as good a job as government intelligence for the same cost. Stratfor doesn’t seem to be an exception to the rule based on what I see, and what may seem like hubris to an outsider (they like to poke fun at the CIA in internal documents) is actually just a very low bar of performance being surpassed. The modern CIA is as poorly-performing as it has ever been, so doing the job better than them is not exactly a noteworthy accomplishment.
GOOD NEWS!
Jane tweets:
Good news
Censored News (NA.indigenous rights) has some coverage:
http://bsnorrell.blogspot.com/2012/02/now-wikileaks-releasing-stratfor-global.html
And thanks, Kevin.
Thank you for posting this. Great news!
Is this really a big deal? Seems to me that you are making too much of this. I read through some of the emails which don’t appear to be much more than some routine aggregation. Some of what you say appears to be misleading – e.g. when you say that Bhopal activists were being “spied on” in fact all that what going on what some monitoring of press about Bhopal/Dow – now you can criticise that and Dow for being underhand about it but really it’s not spying. Similarly your link to the glossary of terms provides no context for that document. Reading through it it is clear, however, that it is a bit of a joke; a parody if you will. Very selective quoting of the definitions in particular you should use the entire quote about “businessmen” and “coerced source” which is obviously a joke.
Stratfor seems like a bit of a mickey mouse company which has managed to pass itself off as having some great particular insights but in reality just has a lot of people with access to the internet.
“a widely-accepted rule of thumb in the industry is that private sector intelligence can do 3 times as good a job as government intelligence for the same cost” ????? – granted the private folks said that in various gatherings when I was in DC – but no one took them seriously except GW Bush and the GOP. They are much cheaper than the US intel folks to be sure – and I suspect we could get the same amount/quality intel from the US gov intel for half the cost if we tried – but Statfor is not taken too seriously by those I once socialized with (example one – during the invasion of Iraq the Bush folks had the media telling us that we were marching to Baghdad when we had screwed up our supply lines and had ordered the Army to take a 3 – 5 day holiday – a fact known to the public via cell phone messages from the front – but Statfor still sold “marching to Baghdad” even after the Army stand down was known; example two – before the war Stratfor was what was sent to the GOP Congress to justify the 30 day war paid for by taking a bit of oil Cheney claim).
Your annual $139 subscription to Stratfor gets you an ID and password to sign on to a news aggregation site that added poor analysis with a heavy GOP/Corporate bias.
What is interesting to me is the methods they tried to use to gather info – and their client list – and the jobs they took on.
I should note that Kissinger Assoc’s reports were said to be no better – but he at least did have real contacts in other governments, and that Blackrock (name has changed a few times since then) took a lot of money from private companies and I was told never delivered.
When I was living in DC it meant you had someone working for the CIA on your block – who could not tell you they worked for the CIA but sure could complain about the crap the private intel companies were putting out (although 99% of the time and 99% of the people did not, and the ones that did needed a few drinks before making a comment). My boss – Reagan’s friend – was talkative – but still the above is “hearsay” – but I suspect it is true.
The way I figure it, Wikileaks and Julian Assange have even more, ahem, “leverage” regarding these Stratfor e-mails (5 million) than the previous “leverage” involving the leaked cables.
Assange has only released information concerning just over 4,000 of these 5 million e-mails, juicy tidbits revealing the secretive inner workings of the global multi-national corporation community that often operates outside the law and across all borders, a criminal cartel intent upon colonizing and monopolizing the entire world for their profit and only their profit.
Therefore, Assange has no doubt safeguarded these leaked Stratfor e-mails as he did the leaked cables, and if proceedings continue against him (and Wikileaks) then there is a high likelihood that there will be a major 5 million e-mail document dump someday, and “taking out” Julian Assange in one way or another will not stop this.
It’s amazing to me that these goons haven’t figured out how to use encryption. If I were a spook, I’d go back to exclusively using pay phones w/ voice distortion and “deep throat” direct encounters.
Kevin, it seems as if the minimization strategy for those establishment-media types not partnered with WL is to downplay the significance of Stratfor. First the Atlantic, and now Gawker are setting the Received Media Wisdom for this.
You think the FBI isn’t part of the problem? Really.
PW, it strikes me that the big influence of wikileaks has been overseas. There was nothing I heard of in the State Dept cables that I didn’t already know or was surprised about if I hadn’t thought of it before hand.
Very few domestically would have teh courage to make a big deal out of them.
BUT, they did get U.S. to comport with SOFA in Iraq bc having the documentation made it politically impossible for Maliki to allow U.S. troops to stay without protection from local laws, and is causing contractors & U.S. embassy personnel to leave in droves.
I’d say that is the kind of influence that will be important about making these documents public. Not a big change domestically where the whole system is so corrupt that the average American will never know what’s in them, but abroad where the U.S. is already hated and despised by 99ers.
There’s a lot in what you say. I’ve long found that I have to go to overseas sources to find out what’s happening in my own country.
For instance, WikiLeaks has long said that the USG has a secret indictment against Assange that they’re just waiting to spring once he gets extradited to Sweden. This has largely been pooh-poohed by WikiLeaks’ detractors as tinfoil-hat paranoiacs. So, when it was revealed by the Stratfor e-mails that the USG really does have a secret indictment waiting for Assange, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the first two news sources to report it, AFAIK, were Rolling Stone and the Sydney Morning Herald — and only the Herald says unequivocally that the e-mails show the existence of the indictment; Hastings, or his RS editors, covered their hineys with a question mark.
There’s a lot in what you say here.
I notice that of the two news outlets, Rolling Stone and the Sydney Morning Herald, that first (AFAIK) published the Stratfor revelations that Assange wasn’t woofing when he said the the USG had a secret indictment all drawn up and ready to spring on him once the Swedes got him extradited, only one dared publish the news without any qualifications or question marks — and that was the SMH, the news outlet located in Australia. (I don’t blame Hastings for this; I suspect his editors are doing what in the US is standard CYA where taboo subjects are concerned.)
(Actually replying to eCAHN @ 31, but the comments mechanism is wonky — testing it here…)
There’s a lot in what you say here, eCAHN.
I notice that of the two news outlets, Rolling Stone and the Sydney Morning Herald, that first (AFAIK) published the Stratfor revelations that Assange wasn’t woofing when he said the the USG had a secret indictment all drawn up and ready to spring on him once the Swedes got him extradited, only one dared publish the news without any qualifications or question marks — and that was the SMH, the news outlet located in Australia. (I don’t blame Hastings for this; I suspect his editors are doing what in the US is standard CYA where taboo subjects are concerned.)
test
(Thanks — now it’s back up again. Go figure.)
You can’t repeat your compliments to me too often. *g*
Folks, don’t be surprised if your comments reach the server with the c- word inserted by a bot in Palo Alto so it won’t post. *g?*
It took us only a couple of days to figure out Stratfor. I consider my self-sacrifice to mswinkle’s attacks a couple of nights ago to be well worth the price.
@Twain I am staggered at the thought Motown could somehow be involved.
I feel I have been invited to a five-course dinner and all I have seen so far is consommé. Where´s the meat apart from the hedge fund setup? Assange is keeping us all in suspense. I can’t help thinking that if there was material about Kroll, its parent company, its relationship to Thomson Reuter and other media & companies throughout the US and in every developed country and its ‘clients’ we might find something a little more substantial to discuss here.
In response to ECAHN at 31:
“I’d say that is the kind of influence that will be important about making these documents public. Not a big change domestically where the whole system is so corrupt that the average American will never know what’s in them, but abroad where the U.S. is already hated and despised by 99ers.”
Not a big change domestically when the whole country is too indifferent in a very 1930′s-Germany-way to the plight of other people.
The Apache helicopter video had the power to wake people up to the murder being committed overseas in their names by the troops they fund. But you can’t arouse a conscience in a people who don’t have any. That’s hardly the fault of Wikileaks.