Public Relations

Koch "Facts" flummoxed over undeniable tar sands business, Keystone XL interest

  • Posted on: 15 May 2012
  • By: Connor Gibson

Koch Industries: kingpin of climate denial and Keystone XL truth-dodging

For those who missed the deep investigative piece published by InsideClimate News last week documenting a half-century of Koch Industries involvement in the destructive tar sands of Alberta, Canada, it has finally closed the coffin on a vicious round of lies straight from Koch Industries.

Through its aggressive KochFacts PR website, Koch lawyers, lobbyists and communications advisors hammered InsideClimate for its initial reports on the Koch connection to tar sands and the Keystone XL pipeline, specifically attacking the outlet's publisher and calling the reporting "deceptive," "untrue" and "utterly false," among other claims that, ironically, are deceptive, untrue and utterly false.

A major indicator of InsideClimate's diligence is the response from KochFacts this time around, which mentions nothing of InsideClimate's damning new documentation of ongoing Koch operations in the tar sands, including the following points from the article:

• The company is one Canada's largest crude oil purchasers, shippers and exporters, with more than 130 crude oil customers.

• It is among the largest U.S. refiners of oil sands crude, responsible for about 25 percent of imports.

• It is one of the largest holders of mineral leases in Alberta, where most of Canada's tar sands deposits are located.

• It has its name attached to hundreds of well sites across Alberta tracked by Canadian regulators.

• It owns pipelines in Minnesota and Wisconsin that import western Canadian crude to U.S. refineries and also distribute finished products to customers.

• It owns and operates a 675,000 barrel oil terminal in Hardisty, Alberta, a major tar sands export hub.

• And this year it kicked off a 10,000 barrel-a-day mining project in Alberta that could be the seed of a much larger project.

Zing! And since KochFacts says InsideClimate is simply driving "agenda-driven, dishonest journalism," let's see where exactly the outlet sourced this new round of information:

InsideClimate News has pieced together a rough picture of the company's involvement in the industry, using published reports from the National Energy Board of Canada; documents and data extracted from the website of Canada's Energy Resource Conservation Board; securities disclosures and filings of Koch businesses in Canada; court documents from an inheritance battle that pitted Charles and David Koch against their two other brothers; Canadian and U.S. media reports; company newsletters and press releases; and two books, one written by Charles Koch and the other the autobiography of a long-time Koch company director.

What say you now, Koch? Answer: not very much. The response from the Kochaganda machine this time around was delayed and notably underwhelming, recycling their previous talking points (which are dishonest) and ignoring all of InsideClimate's newest revelations.

This is probably because of the rock-solid documentation of Koch's historic and ongoing operations in the tar sands of Alberta. That and the fact that Koch lawyers directly told Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) that they have "no financial interest in the project whatsoever," which I believe means they lied to a Congressman--expect them to split hairs over the definition of "financial interest" if Mr. Waxman follows up with Koch Industries, not that he hasn't tried. Both Energy & Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Energy & Power Subcommittee chairman Ed Whitfield (R-KY) denied Waxman's requests to bring Koch before Congress to speak about Keystone XL.

Wait, what's that? Representatives Upton and Whitfield each received $52,500 and $16,000 respectively from Koch Industries since 2007 began? Democracy fail.

Also noteworthy: the almost $60 million that the billionaire Koch brothers have funneled to groups that deny climate science, notably Koch support for the anti-environmental American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and their million-dollar attack on California's Global Warming Solutions Act and its provisions to cut back high-carbon fuels from--you guessed it--the tar sands.

Read the new InsideClimate report at InsideClimate News: Koch Brothers' Activism Protects Their 50-Year Stake in Canadian Heavy Oils, as well as previous reports:

Stacy Feldman, "Koch Subsidiary Told Regulators It Has 'Direct and Substantial Interest' in Keystone XL," October, 2011.

David Sassoon, "Koch Brothers Positioned To Be Big Winners If Keystone XL Pipeline Is Approved," February, 2011.

Known Associates: 
Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

The Cato Institute, a subsidiary of Koch Industries

  • Posted on: 20 March 2012
  • By: JesseColeman

Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries are currently using their shareholder ownership of the Cato Institute to take full control of the libertarian think tank. The Cato Institute leadership and staff who are not loyal to the Kochs have pushed back against growing Koch influence and are now engaged in a high-profile public relations battle with Koch Industries after Charles and David Koch filed a lawsuit against Cato. Both Charles Koch and David Koch have released statements on the controversy, as has Cato Institute chairman Bob Levy.

While the Cato Institute's current leadership apparently don't appreciate bowing to the Koch brothers, Cato has historically been an instrumental pawn in the Koch-funded Climate Denial Machine. With the threat of total Koch control over Cato, Cato will have no more intellectual authority than Americans for Prosperity, Koch's flagship front group.

cato institute koch industries kato

Employer: 
Industry: 

Heartland Institute Scandals Convince Columnist of Climate Change Reality

  • Posted on: 14 March 2012
  • By: Connor Gibson

Ken Midkiff, Columbia Daily Tribune Columnist

PolluterWatch: Greenpeace Investigates Heartland Institute Leaked Documents -- click to see investigation and ongoing updates.

Some journalists have issues with reality.

Here at PolluterWatch, it's obvious when agents of the climate denial machine succeed in taking advantage of widespread scientific ignorance in our country and place stories in the news that misinform the public on global warming. While many have come to expect unscientific coverage of global warming on agenda-driven partisan fronts like Fox News, poor reporting pervades plenty of more respected sources of news.

In contrast, it's refreshing when you see a person really get it. Thanks to the Heartland Institute's recently leaked documents laying out their 2012 efforts to create doubt over climate science, [Missouri's] Columbia Daily Tribune columnist Ken Midkiff has publicly reversed his skepticism over global warming now that he has examined Heartland's dubious public relations. Reacting to a Greenpeace letter questioning Heartland payments to the University of Missouri's Anthony Lupo for climate denial work, Mr. Midkiff explains his change of heart:

Some recent revelations about the Heartland Institute have led me to correct my earlier statement about global warming. It now seems that the jury is in and has rendered a verdict: The Earth is becoming warmer, caused by the amount of gases that humans are sending into the upper atmosphere.

While we wish this had been clearer to Mr. Midkiff years ago (NASA's James Hanson told Congress this was a pressing global issue with a formidable human impact way back in 1988), his revelation and willingness to publicly explain it is a small win for both science and journalism. Even earlier this year Mr. Midkiff had been questioning aspects of climate research that the scientific community can easily dismiss with their tedious work.

Well-organized and -financed public relations shops like the Heartland Institute and many others (check out ExxonSecrets and DeSmogBlog) play a critical role in the effort to fabricate public doubt, politicizing the science of climate change by demanding journalists cover their "side" of the story, even though it carries no scientific relevance. Worse yet, they are expert projectionists, taking their very tactics of lying, misrepresenting, cherry-picking, bullying and politicizing and blaming their opponents for those very things.

It's like arguing with a child: "I know you are, but what am I?!"

And horrifyingly, it works and has worked for decades now, which is why the booming public relations industry in this country dwarfs the presence of true journalists whose job it is, ideally, to dig up an accurate story and present it to the public for final judgement. The Heartland Institute is a hired PR gun in this case, taking money from a few rich ideolgues and vested interests and packaging doubt over global warming to sell to the media and American people.

Luckily, we can see that the lastest exposure of Heartland's climate denial campaigns through their leaked internal documents is shining a light on this shadowy effort to deceive us all. May that trend continue as Greenpeace continues to investigate the Heartland Institute.

Known Associates: 
Industry: 

Dr. Willie Soon: a Career Fueled by Koch, Big Oil and Coal

  • Posted on: 21 July 2011
  • By: Connor Gibson

Willie Soon has taken $1 million from dirty industry to push junk climate science. (Photo Credit)

Written by Cindy Baxter and Kert Davies, crossposted from Greenpeace USA.

When climate denier and astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon wrote a controversial paper in 2003 that attempted to challenge the historical temperature records, we all raised eyebrows at revelations that the American Petroleum Institute funded it. 

When he co-wrote a (non-peer reviewed) paper in 2007  arguing that Arctic warming wasn't happening and polar bears were not threatened by the effects of it, we found that ExxonMobil and the billionaire Koch brothers had paid for it.
   
So we went digging and came up with more – a whole lot more, released today in the new case study: Dr. Willie Soon, a Career Fueled by Big Oil and Coal. Not only did Big Oil punt hundreds of thousands of dollars to Soon, but Big Coal as well – specifically, the Southern Company, one of the largest coal burning electric utilities in the U.S. and in the world.
 
Could this be why Soon (an astrophysicist) has been recently writing op-eds on how mercury is harmless and the mercury emissions from coal are minimal, with a byline saying that he has a strong expertise in mercury and public health.

Southern Company says no in this morning's Reuters story.

Soon has been relying on the fossil fuel industry for most of his career.  Documents obtained from his employer, the Smithsonian Astrophysics Observatory (SAO), show that he has received no new funding from conventional, university sources since 2002.  

Since then, it’s been all about the Southern Company, a Koch brothers' foundation, ExxonMobil and the American Petroleum Institute – totalling over $1 million since 2001.  Together with his colleague at the SAO, Sallie Baliunas, they brought in $1,153,000 since 2001 and only $842,000 from conventional sources. 

Were these companies working together?   The API started funding Soon's work as far back as 1994 (he only graduated in 1991).  The API was later joined by the Mobil Foundation, then by the electricity industry’s research arm, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).  The U.S. electricity sector is dominated by coal. 

In 1998, the API, ExxonMobil and the Southern Company sat round a table with other oil companies and think tanks they plotted and funded a Global Climate Science  Communications Plan  to undermine the climate science and support for the Kyoto Protocol that had just been agreed.   "Victory will be achieved when... average citizens 'understand' (recognize) uncertainties in climate science"... read the plan. "Uncertainty" was also their objective for the media.  The detail funding sources from corporate purses going to think tanks and front groups who will coach scientists with messages counter to the rising consensus on the global warming crisis.  Even though this 'scandal' was front page news at the New York Times, our assumption is they did it anyway.

So when they saw that Willie Soon was writing papers to try to show that it was the sun, not the increase in carbon dioxide, that was causing warming in the Arctic, did they then get together to ensure he got the funding for his work?   Did they consider Soon (and Baliunas) a good investment for their corporations?

In around 2003, Soon saw that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was beginning work on its next summary of climate science, the Fourth Assessment (AR4).  Another document obtained by Greenpeace was a letter to colleagues  hatching a plan to undermine the outcomes of the report, focusing on Working Group 1 (the science).  "… I hope we can start discussing among ourselves to see what we can do to weaken the fourth assessment report..."  he wrote.   

The letter was addressed to a range of climate deniers, but also to two people we can't find in our database of denier "scientists".   The only names we can find that match two of the addressees – "Walt" and "Randy" – were the two Exxon staffers who had been at the centre of funding the denial campaign. Indeed, Randy Randol was the Exxon man sitting at the table plotting with the others in 1998. 

Willie Soon has been embraced by the denial industry.  This week will see him speak, again, at the Heartland Institute's annual "Denialpalooza".  The "sponsors" of that meeting and organizations the speakers work for have received millions in funding from ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, the Scaife Foundation and other corporate, 'free-market' and anti-government, anti-regulation funders.  (more on that soon)

Meanwhile, Exxon has cut funding to a large number of climate deniers.  Late yesterday, Exxon released its latest "Worldwide Giving Report", over a month overdue.  It reveals that more career climate deniers have been dismissed by their major funder, ExxonMobil Foundation.  What was a peak Exxon funding level of $3.5Million per year to these mouthpieces of climate denial, is now below $1M per year.  Exxon IS still funding deniers like Heritage Foundation and American Legislative Exchange Council,  but major deniers like the Annapolis Center, Atlas Foundation and others have now apparently been cut, as of 2010.  

Funding to Dr. Soon at Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory has also been cut according to responses from Exxon in news reports:

Mother Jones: "Did ExxonMobil Break Its Promise To Stop Funding Climate Change Deniers?"  by Kate Sheppard
Reuters: “US climate skeptic Soon funded by oil, coal firms”  by Tim Gardner 
ClimateWire (subscription): Power companies fund anti-climate research on 'solar variability' by Evan Lehmann

Industry: 

Swarthmore Students Punk Denier Pat Michaels [PHOTOS & VIDEO]

  • Posted on: 21 April 2011
  • By: Connor Gibson

UPDATE: SSSIP press release posted.

Speaking truth to climate lies, students at Swarthmore College resisted dirty industry scientist-for-hire Patrick Michaels during a presentation for a modest audience yesterday. As Michaels pecked away at credible scientific consensus over climate change, students held up signs highlighting Michael's true expertise: acting as a mouthpiece for the likes of ExxonMobil and other major polluters who have funded his anti-scientific public relations career. Recognizing his expertise, the satirical "Swarthmore Students for Scientific Industrial Progress" were photographed presenting Dr. Michaels with a Certificate of Corporate Climatology. Finally, a credential Michaels has earned!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michaels has been a particularly useful arm of the climate denial machine, as his credentials include an actual Ph.D in climatology, lending him unearned legitimacy as he has spent recent years peddling misinformation about global warming on behalf of the coal and oil industries. Michaels has long been an ally to front groups heavily finanaced by ExxonMobil and Koch Industries, including the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, CFACT, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and numerous others. He has published several books attacking the research of climate scientists who actually are publishing peer-reviewed climate studies, the conclusions of which are against the profitability of the polluter giants who fund Michaels' work. In the two weeks that followed the release of hacked emails between climate scientists at the Unversity of East Anglia, Michaels appeared in over twenty media interviews on major news networks to broadcast the false accusation that climate researchers were manipulating data.

Michaels has become increasingly recognized as a corporate polluter megaphone. In late January, 2011 California Representative Henry Waxman sent a letter to House Energy & Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) asking him to question Michaels over his failure to disclose sources of funding that present a clear conflict of interest in his role as a climate misinformer.

Ironically, Waxman's inquiry was sparked by Michaels' own admission on CNN that "forty percent" of his funding came from the oil industry:

Pat Michaels' entire presentation was filmed, his connection to the Cato Institute is challenged at minute 57:00, shortly followed by his refusal to answer a question about his sources of funding. Michaels instead cited how ExxonMobil has spent "hundreds of millions" developing renewable technology--pennies of ExxonMobil's hundreds of billions in annual revenue. After Michaels' 40% figure from CNN was cited by the student challenging him to disclose his sources of funding, Michaels replied, "I don't discuss personal matters in public." See for yourself:

Pat Michaels at Swarthmore from Swarthmore Media on Vimeo.

Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

Advice for Koch's PR team

  • Posted on: 22 March 2011
  • By: Cindy Baxter

Koch Industries' facebook page - was posting such a clear link to well-known deniers the wisest PR move?

Memo to:      the Koch PR team
From:           Polluterwatch
Re:               over-zealous PR unlikely to help your clients

Dear Koch PR team

It's good to know who you are now – thanks to a story over at Politico.  But perhaps we can offer you a little bit of advice? 

We note that you’ve been getting to work on your new Koch account, placing stories in the New York Times about funding cancer research and the like. (Good distraction tactics!).

We also note how active you’ve been on the Koch Industries, Inc Facebook page

We understand that the brief from the Kochs is to fight back against the terribly bad name they’ve been getting over the last year.

And while we know the Koch brothers fund the deniers (as documented in this Greenpeace report), we also know that they’ve made you go to great lengths to distance them from any involvement. Major fail for you then when Wikipedia found out that your web guys, New Media Strategies, had created sock puppets to edit out the links and banned them from the site. Ouch!

But did you take another step too far last week?  A new post appeared on Koch Industries’ facebook page on 19 March saying:

      “A Berkley scientist explains how activist scientists managed to "hide the decline" in recent global temperatures.
"You're not allowed to do this in science,"   Richard Muller explains.”

It links to a puff piece on Power Line by serial denier Steven F Haywood (more on him later),  promoting one Richard Muller’s denier views on climategate.  

ClimateProgress has unearthed what Muller is up to – he’s co-chairing the rather prestigious-sounding “Berkely Earth Surface Temperature Study” – another recipient of Koch Funding. 

Seems the whole project is a ruse to challenge Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick findings from the early 1990’s – a challenge raised by the so-called "climategate" scandal.  As Think Progress points out: 

     "why would Berkeley want to be associated with the Kochs?"

And why investigate the Hockey stick findings, which have been backed up by at least five other studies?   The deniers have focussed on the Hockey Stick argument (that shows global temperatures spiking upward, like a hockey stick) as their benchmark for whether global warming is happening and whether it’s caused by human activities. But this is despite strong signals from different areas of science that all point in the same direction

That’s the same Richard Muller who has, as Climate Progress points out:

      "has actually worked to undermine credibility in well-established science.”

(Latest:  Climate Progress has now discovered that the Berkley project is not turning out the way Muller and the Koch’s want it to go – turns out that their preliminary results show that the temperature records are dead right.  Oops!  Findings are summarised: 

     “We are seeing substantial global warming” and “None of the effects raised by the [skeptics] is going to have anything more than a marginal effect on the amount of global warming.”

The presence of Muller and climate-scientist-turned-denialist Judith Curry is bad enough.  

But Haywood? Do you not know who this guy is?  If ever there was a Koch-funded climate denial mouthpiece, it’s Steven F Haywood.  He’s a fellow at four of the Kochtopus-funded think tanks.  They’ve all had quite a bit of funding from your clients 1986-2009:
Reason Foundation ($2,536,521),
Heritage Foundation ($4,110,571),
Pacific Research Foundation ($1,515,800) and
American Enterprise Institute (only $150,000 from Koch but Exxon gave them $2.8 million).  

So the total Koch money to Hayward’s groups is $8,312,892.  Add Exxon’s $4,341,000 and that adds up to a massive $12.65 million of denial punch.  

No wonder you guys were excited about linking to his piece. But was it wise?  Does Koch really want to be openly associating itself with Hayward and Muller – and “climategate?”   This is the first time we’ve seen such an open association by Koch to undermining the climate science.   Very useful for us – but doesn’t this rather undermine the Koch’s ongoing denial that they are linked with these climate deniers?

And finally, while we’re discussing your Facebook page, another word of advice: if you’re going to promote stories that you’ve managed to place in blogs, perhaps drip them out slowly?  

During the Wisconsin protests, Koch’s Americans for Prosperity group led the tea party in support of Scott Walker and Koch became a lightning rod for protestors. (Bet that got you going).

Nice work lining up all the bloggers to support Koch - but posting them all in one day on Facebook?   Six posts in just a few hours? 4th March was a busy day for you.  But seriously, if you’re going to go on the offense, maybe make it a little less obvious?  

We know you must be paid an awful lot by this client – are they really getting their money’s worth?  Or did you leave your Facebook promotion up to New Media Strategies? 
 

Known Associates: 
Industry: 

Koch Brothers, Cuccinelli, Peabody and others Named "Climate Villains"

  • Posted on: 13 December 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

Similar to Rolling Stone's "The Climate Killers" article that was released at the beginning of the year, AlterNet has just profiled some of the most influential political, financial and popular enemies of the Earth's increasingly disrupted climate.

Snide comments aside, both reports nail some of the most influential staples: Koch Industries, an infamous engine of the climate denial machine; Warren Buffet, the filthy-rich investor who has placed his bets on coal; and Joe Barton, Big Fossil's purchased U.S. Representative (over 1.7 million dirty dollars over the last decade).

AlterNet's newer spotlight identifies Harold Lewis and Freeman Dyson, who are similar to the likes of S. Fred Singer and Patrick Michaels in their use of scientific credentials for corporate public relations rather than, say, active climate studies...or scientific study in general.  Also like Singer and Michaels, they have ties to prominent denier think tanks such as Cato, the Heartland Institute, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, all of which are currently or formerly funded by Koch Industries and ExxonMobil.  Similarly, AlterNet mentions Anthony Watts, whose skeptic blog is the go-to hub for climate-solutions obstructionism, and whose credentials as a TV weatherman (not certified by the American Meteorological Society) fool people into thinking he's a climate expert.  Like the other junk scientists mentioned in the article, Watts has ties to the Heartland Institute.

In a contrasting look at university integrity, AlterNet also profiles Ken Cuccinelli, Virginia's attorney general who has used the "climategate" nonscandal as grounds to continue harassing Michael Mann, the influential University of Virginia climatologist whose university research was a primary target of the hacked East Anglia emails.  While Mann was defended by his university and cleared of wrongdoing after investigations, the same can't be said for George Mason University's Edward Wegman.  AlterNet points out that Wegman is currently under formal investigation his George Mason for pushing bogus climate material for none other than Texas Rep. Joe Barton.

It is worth noting that George Mason University (GMU) is a known breeding ground for climate deniers and heavily supported by the Koch brothers; both the Mercatus Center and the Institute for Humane Studies (IHS) operate out of the University have received millions of dollars from the Kochs.  There's also Koch Industries executive Richard Fink, who taught and filled various other positions at GMU, co-founded and directs GMU's Mercatus Center, directs the Institute for Humane Studies, is the president of two Koch family foundations that fund these groups, founded the Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation (which became the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, of which Fink is a director)...Rich Fink pretty much lives up to his name.

Glenn Beck (who attended Charles Koch's secret election strategy meeting last June), Mitch McConnell, former BP CEO Tony Hayward, Peabody CEO Gregory Boyce, and others are also credited for their dirty work in the full article.

Check Greenpeace.org for more Koch Facts.

Industry: 

The State of the Nation [as Arranged by Polluters, Inc.]

  • Posted on: 9 December 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

The fossil fuel industry knows that its time is running out.  While their influence and profits are still enormous, we can see from increasing shifts to unconventional extraction methods--hydraulic fracturing, deepwater drilling, tar sands mining, and other examples--that easily accessible fossil fuels are dwindling.  That's a pretty clear indicator that they will not last indefinitely, before even considering how burning dirty fuel to the last particle will cook the Earth, not to mention the casualties along the way.  You know, like the Gulf of Mexico, or the people of the Athabasca watershed, or those whose wells are now full of poisoned [PDF] or flammable water.

Unfortunately, for people who care about the future of humanity and the vast variety of species were are dragging to extinction [PDF] through the climate crisis, profit is the key factor for fossil fuel barons and their influence peddlers.  With time running out and industry insiders well aware of it, Big Fossil is focusing on how to preserve itself for as long as possible.  Creating a public relations war over the seriousness of global climate disruption has been the keystone tactic in this process. 

Companies recognize the benefits of investing in public doubt, and unfathomable sums have been dumped into this effort across the board, whether through the grossly unapologetic Koch Industries or ExxonMobil, or more slyly by the likes of Chevron or Duke Energy.  Industry misinformation is then pushed to the public through astroturf front groups (like the Koch-funded and -founded Americans for Prosperity), through advertising campaigns (like those run by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity), and by hiring "scientists" or "experts" with that special lack of integrity and credibility that allows a person to earn money at the expense of a far, far broader population.  As this happens, Congress and federal offices are constantly being filled with polluter servants instead of public servants, taking massive campaign donations or cutting career deals in order to further enrich Polluters, Inc.


As if the battle wasn't uphill enough, we now have witnessed the first round of elections post-Citizens United, in which powerhouses like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce raised tens of millions of dollars from the corporate titans it serves and funneled the money into attack ads, sending a warning message to politicians who aren't bending over backwards for big business, if not delivering a crippling blow to their election campaigns. 

Now wouldn't be a bad time to look up the definition of "democracy."  Google it now, before net neutrality is a thing of the past.

Industry: 

Greenpeace Sues Dow, Sasol, Dezenhall for Corporate Spying, RICO

  • Posted on: 1 December 2010
  • By: Michelle

Greenpeace Spygate lawsuit breaks on CNBC

Spygate

On November 29, Greenpeace filed a lawsuit against Dow Chemical, Sasol North America (which owns CONDEA Vista), and PR firms Dezenhall Resources and Ketchum, for hiring private investigators to steal documents from Greenpeace, tap our phones and hack into our computers.

The purpose of this lawsuit is twofold.

First, we aim to put a dent in the arrogance of these corporate renegades who have for too long believed that ethics do not apply to their pursuit of ever-higher profits.

Second, we believe it is every citizen's right to stand up for the health of their children and community without fearing retribution, an invasion of privacy, conspiracy against them or theft of their belongings. We believe Dow and Sasol conspired to do this to Greenpeace; we aim to stop this before it happens to you.

Boxes of files from the security firm hired by Dezenhall Resources and Ketchum on behalf of Dow, Sasol North America, and other companies, reveal daily logs, emails, reports, phone records and other evidence that shows what these corporations were working to disrupt: the private lives of community members in Louisiana fighting to keep their communities free of toxic poisons and community meetings and efforts to educate the public about the public health threats posed by these companies. [see a sample of these files here]

The public relations firms involved - including Nichols Dezenhall (now known as Dezenhall Resources) and Ketchum - acted as intermediaries between the chemical companies and the private investigator spies.

While Greenpeace can only sue on our own behalf, we do so to send a message to any big corporation that plans to spy on, intimidate and interfere with communities fighting for a better world for their children. People among the communities in this case are residents of Mossville and Lake Charles, Louisiana, who suffer high rates of cancer and other health effects linked to the production processes of the companies we're suing.

This case concerns events that occurred between 1998 and 2001. Many of the affected people in Lake Charles and Mossville have since died, many by cancers they believe were caused by the toxic pollutants these companies pumped into their environment.

Greenpeace works to protect the environment we all depend on, rooted in the assumption that politicians and corporations care about two things - money and people (either voters or customers).

We know we won't match polluters dollar for dollar, but have matched their millions over the years with three million people behind us. When Goliath corporations go beyond buying elections to intimidating, infiltrating and invading the privacy of small citizen groups, they are attacking more than that group. When corporations hire private spies to undermine the rights of civic leaders, they are undermining democracy.

We'll see them in court.

Go to Greenpeace's Spygate website to see a sampling of the evidence used to support this lawsuit.

Industry: 

Pages