The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
2537
The Global Intelligence Files

### Index pages

List of Releases

### by Date of Document

unspecified
2001
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011

### by Date of Release

2001-03-13
2010-03-10
2011-03-05
2011-03-15
2012-01-29
2012-02-27
2012-02-28
2012-02-29
2012-03-01
2012-03-02
2012-03-03
2012-03-04
2012-03-05
2012-03-06
2012-03-07
2012-03-08
2012-03-09
2012-03-10
2012-03-11
2012-03-12
2012-03-13
2012-03-14
2012-03-15
2012-03-16
2012-03-17
2012-03-19
2012-03-20
2012-03-23
2012-03-25
2012-03-26
2012-03-27
2012-04-01
2012-04-02
2012-04-24
2012-04-26
2012-04-30
2012-05-10
2012-06-18
2012-06-20
2012-07-01
2012-07-24
2012-07-28
2012-07-29
2012-07-30
2012-07-31
2012-08-01
2012-08-02
2012-08-05
2012-08-06
2012-08-07
2012-08-08
2012-08-09
2012-08-10
2012-08-11
2012-08-12
2012-08-13
2012-08-14
2012-08-15
2012-08-16
2012-08-17
2012-08-18
2012-08-19
2012-08-20
2012-08-21
2012-08-22
2012-08-23
2012-08-24
2012-08-25
2012-08-26
2012-08-27
2012-08-29
2012-08-30
2012-08-31
2012-09-01
2012-09-02
2012-09-03
2012-09-04
2012-09-05

### Our Partners

ABC Color - Paraguay
Al Akhbar - Lebanon
Al Masry Al Youm - Egypt
Asia Sentinel - Hong Kong
Bivol - Bulgaria
Carta Capital - Brazil
CIPER - Chile
Dawn Media - Pakistan
L'Espresso - Italy
La Repubblica - Italy
La Jornada - Mexico
La Nacion - Costa Rica
Malaysia Today - Malaysia
McClatchy - United States
Nawaat - Tunisia
NDR/ARD - Germany
Owni - France
Pagina 12 - Argentina
Philip Dorling - Fairfax media contributor - Australia
Plaza Publica - Guatemala
Publica - Brazil
Publico.es - Spain
Rolling Stone - United States
Russian Reporter - Russia
Ta Nea - Greece
Taraf - Turkey
The Hindu - India
The Yes Men - Bhopal Activists
Sunday Star-Times - New Zealand

### Community resources

Supporters Support Wikileaks Follow us on Twitter Twitter this Follow us on Facebook

courage is contagious

# The Global Intelligence Files

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

## Re: [CT] thoughts on anonymous kidnap announcement

Released on 2012-08-31 05:00 GMT

Email-ID | 1591734
Date | 2011-11-04 02:44:27
From | sean.noonan@stratfor.com
To | ct@stratfor.com

word.=A0 I only meant the IRC discussion as an example.=A0 "Claiming to be
Anonymous on twatter" works for me too.=A0 And more importantly, that
these fuckers aren't even part of the "op" is enlightening=A0 (though who
is part of and not part of the "op" is unclear enough)
On 11/3/11 8:13 PM, Tristan Reed wrote:
Yep.
I agree with Sean's point on "active in their IRC or 4chan discussions",
but in this case we are reading Twitter messages discussing the opcartel
topic. The concept of Anonymous gets murkier since a lot of
announcements have been coming from individuals who do not even claim to
be a part of Anonymous or opcartel. We've addressed the potential threat
OpCartel poses and the possibilities of its significance but information
is stemming from Twitter messages only now of individuals we can not
always place in the umbrella term Anonymous. I haven't seen much
discussions on #opcartel from many English twitter / facebook outlets,
has anyone else? Before Monday, I only saw OpCartel messages / facebook
announcements that were in Spanish.
Unless information comes from outside twitter messages relevant to
OpCartel or revealing information begins to flow, I don't think we have
anything additional to work off in regards to potential consequences of
OpCartel. The video and the Twitter discussions do add something to
cartel and the public dynamic. The media attention certainly has been a
contributing factor to the significance of that. There has been
anti-cartel blogs for a while, Zetas accused individuals of being
bloggers and killed them. The blogs however are never organized on a
specific cartel topics. Usually belligerent rants. OpCartel is a broad
discussion which focuses on the Zetas, and how online activists could
harm the Zetas. Massive discussions of Los Zetas brutality and an
attempts to channel discontent into a more cohesive threat against the
Zetas are ongoing now. OpCartel thrown in the media spotlight and the
Zetas are now the topic of an international discussion of a citizens
uprising. The threat could be hollow and nothing materializes, but Los
Zetas which has demonstrated a strong desire to minimize focus on their
operations is showing up on CNN, Fox News, and BBC's frontpages
simultaneously about how citizens want to harm them for their history of
brutality. This could play into inter-cartel dynamics as well. We've
discussed cartels blaming each other as a tactic to bolster their PR.
Narco Mantas from groups like LFM / KT and CJNG denounce the same
activities the Anonymous video cited. Could rival cartels in Mexico
capitalize on this attention? What is the potential of the focus
spurring more public backlash? Victoria has mentioned to me the
possibility of posing as Zetas as a potential tactic for cartels. I
haven't looked out for this tactic so far, is this tactic something that
has been demonstrated? If so, could this bolster the tactic or begin a
trend if not done yet?
On 11/3/11 7:13 PM, Sean Noonan wrote:
Agree with victoria.
Also, there is no such thing as a spokesman for "anonymous", since it
is not even an organization. This should read "someone CLAIMING to be
a spokesman for anonymous". And anyone else should be a "claimed
member" or someone "active in their IRC or 4chan discussions" etc
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Victoria Allen <Victoria.Allen@= stratfor.com>
Sender: ct-bounces@stratfor.com=
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:14:48 -0500 (CDT)
To: CT AOR<ct@stratfor.com>
ReplyTo: CT AOR <ct@stratfor.com>
Subject: Re: [CT] thoughts on anonymous kidnap announcement
=A0A few sticking points: undefined/unclassified "kidnapping" should
not be equated with "revenue stream," and while kidnapping is not the
sole purview of Los Zetas, we need to stop using the vague, generic,
"cartels" if the primary player in this situation is a singular
cartel. The BIG reason why we need to be careful here, regarding the
equating of "kidnapping" with "revenue" in this situation --
regardless of whether the "kidnapped Anonymous member" has actually
been released or not -- is because there has been no confirmation that
there was any demand for a ransom payment. =A0Because of that, the
person this is revolving around may have been kidnapped for three or
four other= =A0reasons.=A0
On 3 Nov 2011, at 17:33 , Ben West wrote:
Hey guys, Kyle wanted me to put some thoughts together on the
Anonymous tweet that announced the "kidnapped girl" had been freed.
Here's my go at it. Let me know if there's anything we can add or
should take out.
On October 6th, a spokesman for the online activist collective,
Anonymous, appeared in a video demanding that Los Zetas release a
girl that they allegedly kidnapped and threatened to publicize
information about individuals cooperating with the cartels.
This claim was never corroborated with other sources. Kidnappings
are a daily occurrence in Mexico and are typically done for ransom.
Kidnappings have become one of the primary streams of revenue for
cartels=A0Not one of the primary streams, by a long shot, BUT
definitely a significant though minority percentage. The point is
that it is not possible to quantify the monetary benefit stemming
specifically from ransom kidnapping - and we cannot lump all
kidnappings as being for ransom, either. We know that the cartels
are feeling the pinch in their narcotics revenues, and we know that
kidnapping has gone up. But we cannot make the leap from that
corollary to calling kidnapping one of the cartels' "primary streams
of revenue."=A0. Many kidnappings go unreported.
The structure of Anonymous is very murky. It is certainly not a
monolithic group and certainly does not have a hierarchical command
chain. It is made up of individuals, some of whom act as
spokespersons for the entity on websites such as youtube or twitter.
However, looking over the forums of anonymous=A0should that be
capitalized?=A0discussions, it is clear that there has been
disagreement over whether or not to pursue and publicize information
on the cartels. Many Anonymous members seem to be aware of the
threat that the Mexican cartels pose and seem disinclined to risk
the consequences of incurring the cartels' wrath. So there isn't a
consensus within Anonymous over whether or not to pursue the
cartels. Certainly some within the group are eager to pursue the
cartels, as evidenced by the Oct. 31 announcement that Anonymous was
going to seek out and publicize sensitive information on the
cartels, but those individuals are doing so on a voluntary basis.
The veracity of tweets from the group is, then, somewhat a moot
point. There are various individuals with varying agendas working
under the banner of Anonymous. One member may claim one thing that
is denied by another member. There is no single, authoritative
"voice" of Anonymous that speaks for the entire group. That fact,
combined with the fact that we have no way of proving that the girl
Anonymous is talking about was ever kidnapped and being held by Los
Zetas in the first place. It is an extremely murky situation and one
tweet isn't going to determine the future of anonymous.
Tactical Analyst
STRATFOR
512-744-4300
ext. 4340
--
Sean Noonan
Tactical Analyst
STRATFOR
T: +1 512-279-9479 =A6 M: +1 512-758-5967
www.STRATFOR.com