The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
2588
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
2012-09-06
2012-09-07
2012-09-09
2012-09-10
2012-09-11
2012-09-12

### 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: WikiLeaks & Julian Assange

Released on 2012-02-28 15:00 GMT

Email-ID | 1078864
Date | 2010-12-11 02:44:04
From | friedman@att.blackberry.net
To | rbaker@stratfor.com, analysts@stratfor.com, chapman@stratfor.com
List-Name | analysts@stratfor.com

Mostly its a revelation to the ignorant. If you pay little attention to
foreign affairs but suddenly focused on this because of media attention,
you might think some of this is significant. If your well versed, its the
unimportant scraps of conversations. This is the same as with the iraqi
and afghan reports. Nothing was of significance there either.
Woodward and bernstein were fed their story by lent and the fbi. They
weren't investigators. They were stenographers. This isn't investigation
either. Its more like dumpster diving and only getting the top layer of
the garbage and thinking it was gold.
J
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Rodger Baker" <rbaker@stratfor.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:34:54 -0600 (CST)
To: Colin Chapman<chapman@stratfor.com>; <rbaker@stratfor.com>
ReplyTo: rbaker@stratfor.com, Analyst List <analysts@stratfor.com>
Cc: Analysts<analysts@stratfor.com>
Subject: Re: WikiLeaks & Julian Assange
My point is that this isn't a taRgeted look at anything. It is a
completely random selection of material, not even released in a way to
tell a narrative. There is a signicant difference between this and
specific leaks of targeted information.
I'm not arguing tjhat rich people aren't helping spread this. And maybe
some journalists will eventually use some if this to point them into the
direection of some important investigation.
But I have a hard time seeing these releases as some sort of journalistic
tour du force. And reception is less changing politics than voyeuristic
pleasure.
--
Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Colin Chapman <chapman@stratfor.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:04:11 -0600 (CST)
To: <rbaker@stratfor.com>
Cc: Analyst List<analysts@stratfor.com>
Subject: Re: WikiLeaks & Julian Assange
I did make the point about context and also said it is precisely because
investigative journalism has died in much of the press that WL can
flourish. (Along with many other internet operations). And actually some
of the stuff I have seen on WL had already been leaked to the press.
WikiLeaks is raw, but I am not sure publication of a confidential
document in this form and passed over on a memory stick is any different
from a printed document handed over by a public official or whistleblower
to a journalist, or indeed to a private intelligence company. Breaches of
security are by the providers, not the messengers. As to spin, I disagree.
Spinning interferes with truth. Rio Tinto was spinning that it sought
leniency from the Chinese for Stern Hu. All the time it was providing
secret information on his finances to the Chinese government, thereby
condemning him to a more serious sentence. The US state department
pretended Rudd was a great friend of the US (as indeed he was) while at
the same time working with a leading conspirator to get rid of him. That
these things happen it is not surprising, but when we find out about them
they should be published not in 50 years time when a historian decides to
write a book, but now
On 11/12/2010, at 10:46 AM, Rodger Baker wrote:
Much of the discussion today wasn't about assange, but about these
wiki-supporting internet vigilantes, who sit around and mess with vidsa
and mastercard web services. These sorts are geeks in their nom's
basement.
But even if funded, they do nothing to offer understanding, context,
explanation of the material. It is a data dump. Well funded, perhaps,
but with little value added.
As for sick of spindoctors, I don't know. They are just spinning things
in anothjer direction. Politically motivated, yes. Cutting through spin?
No way. Just spinning another direction.
As for woodward, the wiki folks aren't investigative journalists, just
thieves. They didn't do any work, just downloaded a memory stick if
stolen documents.
--
Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marko Papic <marko.papic@stratfor.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:50:43 -0600 (CST)
To: Analyst List<analysts@stratfor.com>; chapman<chapman@stratfor.com>
ReplyTo: Analyst List <analysts@stratfor.com>
Subject: Re: WikiLeaks & Julian Assange
Nor, in my opinion, are they, as Marko suggests, young men destined for
greatness.
I did not say that. I said that they are young men DISILLUSIONED by
greatness and ego.
BIG difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Colin Chapman" <chapman@stratfor.com>
To: "Analyst List" <analysts@stratfor.com>
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 4:46:20 PM
Subject: WikiLeaks & Julian Assange
It is wrong to characterise the WikiLeaks leaders as geeks operating
from Mum's basement.
Nor, in my opinion, are they, as Marko suggests, young men destined for
greatness.
That may be the way it reads inside America, but outside the US they are
the Woodsteins of the internet age. They are well funded, and their
patrons are those, who - like the voters in recent elections in Britain,
US and Australia - who are sick of spin doctors and politicians telling
lies. (In that sense they are like Stratfor!). The weakness is that WL
stuff is raw and unprocessed, often not in context.
One of the participants in the WikiLeaks publishing operation has today
described a visit by their correspondent to the WikiLeaks HQ in rural
England. It's not Mum's basement, but a Georgian mansion, obviously
donated by a generous benefactor. Many of these benefactors are
broadcasters and rich lawyers, such as Geoffrey Robinson, who are strong
advocates of press freedom. By its description it sounds to me as if it
this place is in Norfolk, where my son lives, about 120 miles north east
of London. The correspondent makes it clear that the people around
Assange were not geeks.
It is worth reading this article, found at
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/how-i-met-julian-assange-and-secured-the-american-embassy-cables-20101210-18sxj.html
This isn't to say that much of their stuff is either important, or
relevant in the world of geopolitics. But some of the recent material
is. The duplicity of Rio Tinto in feeding the Chinese secretly data
about its staff, including Stern HU, while simultaneously pleading for
his release, and the many other commercial revelations are examples.
Finally, surely the approach here is to treat each 'leak' on its merits
as an event, either worthy of attention or not, rather than the product
of anarchists. If newspapers were doing their job properly,if they were
following the edict of the great London Times editor Thomas Delane that
'the duty of the press is disclosure' , there would be little space for
Wikileaks. Much of the media, particularly in metropolitan America, has
resigned from investigative journalism, preferring instead to feed off
the corporate and government spin doctors for serious news, and publish
tedious 'lifestyle' sections.
Colin
--
Marko Papic
STRATFOR Analyst
C: + 1-512-905-3091
marko.papic@stratfor.com