Skip to main content

Today Wikileaks made headlines (WaPo headline here; WikiLeaks publishes leaked Stratfor emails, casting light on workings of private US intel firm). Now Wikileaks does not just leak anyone, they go for the big fish like the US Govt. and described by Wikipedia;

Since 2006, the document archive website Wikileaks, used by whistleblowers, has published anonymous submissions of documents that are generally unavailable to the general public. This article documents the leaks which have attracted media coverage.
Some highlights:

Apparent Somali assassination order
Guantanamo Bay procedures
Tibetan Dissent in China
Sarah Palin's Yahoo! email account contents


Congressional Research Service reports
Climategate emails
Barclays Bank tax avoidance
Internet censorship lists
Bilderberg Group meeting reports
Nuclear accident in Iran


U.S. Intelligence report on WikiLeaks
Love Parade documents
Iraq War logs
Diplomatic cables release


 Guantanamo Bay files
 The Spy Files


The Global Intelligence Files

Not small potatoes, even the many I have left out. As one friend so what "who the F#@% is Stratfor? (Link to their site, understated as self described as "Provides strategic intelligence on global business, economic, security and geopolitical affairs"). What they really are is one of those organizations akin to ALEC, Council of Foreign Affairs, AEI, Association for Corporate Growth or even the American Chamber of Commerce (plus many others yet to known or named). It is a part of the International Oligarchy, the nameless and orderless parallel international governing organization that has engineered a secret new order.

I mean just looking at the metaphor that Assange used and you get a taste as to the significance:

“What we have discovered is a company that is a private intelligence Enron,”
ENRON, now that is an interesting metaphor, you remember Enron. Enron essentially created something called mark to market accounting, a nice trick where they booked future profits from any deal were tabulated received immediately without any receivable's risk. Therefore,  recorded financial gains (as a publicly traded company) regardless if the deal resulted in a loss, manipulating its stock price on Wall Street during bubble. Could that be, but Stratfor is neither publicly traded or the 9th largest company on the board. So what is Assange alluding to?

Much below the squiggles

More background. First if Friedman's staff is reading this and I promise some analyst will, I am an email subscriber (free) by way of his friend, John Mauldin and his e-newsletter, Thoughts from the Frontline. Mauldin was referred to me back in 2006 when I was headhunting for a few clients in the Private Equity market, (yes the Vampire World) before the market started diving. One day Mauldin forwarded a Friedman contribution that was republished in his newsletter and I signed up for Friedman's. In both cases it is more about knowing the other side. And Friedman and Mauldin are no dummies but I think much of their basic presumptions are flawed as events continue to frustrate them, Friedman to a lessor degree, though both have audiences that is targeted at the elite of the elite.

Anyway what caught, were two writings by Friedman. One that stated in 2009 that the Wall Street meltdown was going to eventually cause a political crisis in this nation because those who caused the calamity, benefited from it, at the cost of the rest of society. That not holding those who caused the recklessness accountable will demonstrate that the political elites are beholden to the financial elites (which is upside down) and cause appropriate credibility to the entire political system.---Duh, the Occupy Movement of 2011.

Second was a writing discussing his most recent book, The Next Decade, (sequel to the Next 100 Years).

Friedman in the Next Decade outline his vision that the United States is an "Inevitable Empire" (where he admits at the cost of the republic he loves) and that America might as well just get on with it.

The U.S. Navy’s control of the seas guarantees the United States economic access to the world and gives it the potential power to deny access to other countries. […] But this does not mean that the United States is at ease with its power. […] We have already noted that the fall of the Soviet Union left the United States without a rival for global dominance. What needs to be faced squarely now is that whether we like it or not, and whether it was intentional or not, the United States emerged from the Cold War not only as the global hegemony, but as a global empire.

The reality is that the American people have no desire for an empire. […] Empires are rarely planned or premeditated, and those that have been, such as Napoleon’s and Hitler’s, tend not to last. Those that endure grown organically and their imperial status often goes unnoticed until it has become overwhelming. Thisvwas the case both for Rome and for Britain, yet they succeeded because once they achieved imperial status they not only owned up to it, they learned to manage it.

Unlike the Roman or British Empire, the American structure of dominance is informal, but that makes it no less real. […] The United States is a commercial republic, which means that it lives on trade. […] Until the empire is recognized for what it is, it is difficult to have coherent public discussion of its usefulness, its painfulness, and above all, its inevitability, [and later he added], at the cost of the Republic.

This excerpt should send shivers down any self-respecting Jeffersonian Constitutionalist or anyone who believes in individual sovereignty or self-determination. But all that is quaint and passe for those who seek a New World Order and the great global empire. Except it is really not the U.S. that is the empire, we are merely the vehicle, no different than Spain or England for the real empire of the Middle Ages through to the period of exploration (err was that exploitation). Rome, through the parallel empire of the Church (Holy ROMAN Catholic Church) ruled through a parallel system embedded, yet separate and above any civil monarchy in the Feudal System.

The same is true now for the great, (though unnamed and officially leaderless, sound familiar Occupy) international corporate Oligarchy. So now Assange is releasing the emails of Friedman's once obscure security strategic consulting group that even allows free e-newsletters weekly to no bodies like me. By the way here is his statement to me sent via email at 3:13 MST, roughly five hours after Washington Post published the Assange release.

I'm George Friedman, founder and CEO of Stratfor.

As most of you know, in December thieves hacked into Stratfor data systems and stole a large number of company emails, as well as private information of Stratfor subscribers and friends. Today Wikileaks is publishing the emails that were stolen in December. This is a deplorable, unfortunate -- and illegal -- breach of privacy.

Some of the emails may be forged or altered to include inaccuracies. Some may be authentic. We will not validate either, nor will we explain the thinking that went into them. Having had our property stolen, we will not be victimized twice by submitting to questions about them.

The disclosure of these emails does not mean that there has been another hack of Stratfor's computer and data systems. Those systems, which we have rebuilt with enhanced security measures, remain secure and protected.

The release of these emails is, however, a direct attack on Stratfor. This is another attempt to silence and intimidate the company, and one we reject. As you can see, emails sent to many people about my resignation were clearly forged.

We do not know what else has been manufactured. Stratfor will not be silenced, and we will continue to publish the geopolitical analysis our friends and subscribers have come to rely on.

As we have said before, Stratfor has worked to build good sources in many countries around the world, as any publisher of geopolitical analysis would do.

We are proud of the relationships we have built, which help our analysts better understand the issues in many of these countries through the eyes of people who live there.

We have developed these relationships with individuals and partnerships with local media in a straightforward manner, and we are committed to meeting the highest standards of professional and ethical conduct.

Stratfor is not a government organization, not is it affiliated with any government. The emails are private property. Like all private emails, they were written casually, with no expectation that anyone other than the sender and recipient would ever see them. And clearly, as with my supposed resignation letter, some of the emails may be fabricated or altered.

Stratfor understands that this hack and the fallout from it have created serious difficulties for our subscribers, friends and employees. We again apologize for this incident, and we deeply appreciate the loyalty that has been shown to Stratfor since last year's hack.

We want to assure everyone that Stratfor is recovering from the hack. We will continue to do what we do best: produce and publish independent analysis of international affairs. And we will be back in full operation in the coming weeks. We look forward to continuing to serve you.

Notice a few items;

Assange says:

Assange accused Stratfor of funneling money to informants through offshore tax havens, monitoring activist groups on behalf of big corporations and making investments based on its secret intelligence.
While curiously Friedman makes the point:
As we have said before, Stratfor has worked to build good sources in many countries around the world, as any publisher of geopolitical analysis would do.

We are proud of the relationships we have built, which help our analysts better understand the issues in many of these countries through the eyes of people who live there.

We have developed these relationships with individuals and partnerships with local media in a straightforward manner, and we are committed to meeting the highest standards of professional and ethical conduct.

Now good sources can be bought, which does develop a relationship with people who live there, (even for a day or two) and straightforward is you give me info and I will pay you in a secret account. The most interesting point Assange made was the greed of making investments off of secret information...sound familiar, as in (Congress). Remember he and financial analyst John Mauldin are close friends, connected to Wall Street.

This will be another peek into the world as is ALEC, it will be interesting.

Originally posted to RWN on Mon Feb 27, 2012 at 07:17 PM PST.

Also republished by Anonymous Dkos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site