Defendants had a common plan to engage in acts … that deceived the press and public … These infringing and fraudulent acts are antithetical to public debate on important issues, because they prevent the public and the press from knowing the true position … In short, such conduct is destructive of public discourse, and cannot be tolerated under the law.
– Chamber of Commerce lawsuit against the Yes Men and "John and Jane Does 1 through 20", November 2009
Just a couple of years ago, most people had no idea what the Chamber of Commerce did. Aren't they mom and pop's small-business lobby in Washington? Now, thanks in large part to the work of Chamber opponents, we've come to learn that the biggest business lobby in the world is also one of the biggest impediments to real democracy in the US, and that they're a huge force in opposing healthcare reform, employee free choice and other labour legislation, veterans' rights, banking regulations and, of course, transparency.
The US Chamber of Commerce is the public face of a corporatism that is hijacking our democracy – and so dramatically limits any chances of meaningful reform. Even local chambers, fed up, have been leaving the US Chamber en masse. But what might it take for the "Facebook generation" in the US to topple, Tunisia- or Egypt-style, this arrogant and destructive force in American politics?
Late last week, another, still-unfolding leak story revealed the anti-democratic activities of private security firms, apparently hoping to sell their services to the US Chamber of Commerce as a means to silence its critics. Despite reports on the Centre for American Progress blog suggesting that contacts took place between representatives of the Chamber of Commerce where such proposals were made, the Chamber has denied all knowledge of them and has described such reports as a "smear campaign".
In 2009, the Chamber sued members of the Yes Men, an activist group that satirises powerful corporate foes, for posing as Chamber reps and announcing, to a room of reporters, that the Chamber was doing an about-face on their dangerous opposition to climate-change legislation. The media had a good laugh at the Chamber's expense (thanks in large part to a real Chamber representative who barged into the press conference in a rage), but the Chamber found the whole thing distinctly unfunny, and promptly filed suit. (Incidentally, the same law firm involved in the "Chamberleaks" affair, Hunton and Williams, is retained by the Chamber as its attorney in this suit against the Yes Men.)
Nutty indeed. But last week's spectacular series of leaks, counter-leaks and counter-counter-leaks revealed (and continues revealing) a disdain for free speech that shocked even us. It turns out that a consortium of private "cyber-security" firms were developing a $2m proposal to use a variety of sophisticated disinformation techniques to destroy the reputations of Chamber opponents, including public-interest, consumer-advocate and worker-rights groups such as US Chamber Watch and Change to Win. (The same firm was reportedly also proposing, in a presentation for Bank of America, a plot to destroy WikiLeaks, and to "neutralise" constitutional scholar Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com.) Like the Chamber of Commerce, Bank of America has denied knowledge of these plans.
More specifically, the firm proposed to (according to a leaked document) "create a false document, perhaps highlighting periodical financial information, and monitor to see if US Chamber Watch acquires it". To help make this happen, they'd "create a fake insider persona and generate communications" with Change to Win, a labour group the firm theorised might be allied to Chamber Watch. Maybe they'd even "create two fake insider personas, using one as leverage to discredit the other while confirming the legitimacy of the second". But it didn't stop there: the security firms proposed passing off the faked documents they'd created as the fabrication of Change to Win.
We wish we could credit these jokesters with some originality – especially given the fees they were planning to charge – but there's actually nothing new here. These dirty tricks are straight out of the playbook of COINTELPRO, the FBI's notorious 1960s programme of psychological warfare that, among other things, planted false reports and forged letters to destroy reputations. Lately, COINTELPRO tactics have been making a comeback on the right, inspiring a whole new generation of "dirty tricks" operators, along with their patrons in the rightwing media and their sponsors in Congress. But it isn't just "gross and offensive" kids (Andrew Breitbart's words) who are taking up old rightwing techniques. It's actually a very big business.
According to a security expert quoted in a recent New York Times article, "the 'competitive intelligence' industry had 9,700 companies offering these services, with an annual market of more than $2bn." What that industry does is (in the own words of one firm) to "discredit, confuse, shame, combat, infiltrate, fracture" opponents, whether those opponents are rival businesses or, as in this case, groups standing up for democracy, free speech and government transparency.
Why now? Dirty tricks aren't new, so why have they only now hit the corporate mainstream? Why might firms that specialise in such tactics consider that the most cashed-up big-business lobby in the world, with a daily budget nearing $400,000, might be a potential customer? After all, it has the funds at its disposal to enable it just to buy much of the media, not to mention a good chunk of Congress.
What this affair highlights is the crass, anti-democratic and increasingly desperate quality of our current version of corporate influence on politics. With the department of justice showing no signs of investigating, perhaps the Facebook generation in the US can learn a thing or two from the brave citizens in the Middle East.
Maybe we, too, have just been waiting for the right leak.
Comments in chronological order (Total 57 comments)
16 February 2011 2:56PM
Hmm sounds like the same tactics that Chamber Watch engages in. Hypocricy to the max.
16 February 2011 2:57PM
Huge surprise------------------business is about profit not democracy.
Well I never!
16 February 2011 2:59PM
Well, what can I say - the foremost conspiracy theory is that the US and the West in general are democratic and transparent.
"It turns out that a consortium of private "cyber-security" firms were developing a $2m proposal to use a variety of sophisticated disinformation techniques to destroy the reputations of Chamber opponents, including public-interest, consumer-advocate and worker-rights groups such as US Chamber Watch and Change to Win." + COINTELPRO + ??? =
... a 24/7 ideological war on democracy and the possibility of all US citizens flourishing instead of financial giants and corporations monopolising.
16 February 2011 3:00PM
We dont have democracy, we have government by the rich for the rich, and it's all paid for. It really is time for change.
16 February 2011 3:02PM
So is crime, Gonk.
16 February 2011 3:04PM
I hate a world that lives like this.
16 February 2011 3:08PM
Big business "buys" all the major candidates in every US election.
Never, ever vote for a person who received money from corporations.
Its like mice voting for cats.
16 February 2011 3:10PM
gwillikers
Do search the Guardian website specifically to defend corporate abuses and belittle those that are outraged by it?
So glad to see this getting more coverage, this is actual, concrete, written evidence that big companies will step on anyone that would rather value society over profit. If there's any justice the executives of HBGary will be looking at some prison time for some of these things.
I won't hold my breath, mind.
16 February 2011 3:14PM
Conanthebarbarian;
Hang tough buddy. The world will get better when people wake up.
16 February 2011 3:15PM
gwillikers
"Hmm sounds like the same tactics that Chamber Watch engages in. Hypocricy to the max."
let me guess, due to your pathological need to attack liberals, or any organisation that you suspect may employ liberals, you've just assumed that Chamber Watch engages in dishonest tactics, just so you can call them hypocrites. is that about right?
16 February 2011 3:15PM
So that explains Sunny Hundal and his attempts to destroy the student movement.
16 February 2011 3:17PM
WHIZ __ this site is essentially no different than Fox News. People here are clueless about America. I keep hearing about Ciorporations controlling elections and yet the 3 biggest campaign contributors are all unions. As far as big companies stepping on people? No different than big Government stepping on people, so I'd rather choose the stepper who actually produces something. If there was any justice in America big Government would be dismantled andwithout the protection of big Government Corporations would follow. Why would I fear Corporations when the single largest employer in America is the despicable Federal Government? Corporations take nothing from my weekly paycheck. Btw the way people who commit abuses themselves and are outraged by the abuses of others are hypocrites so sorry to burst your bubble but these characters and the people they defend aren't a bit better. Every tyrant says the same thing
QUIXOTEMIC -- Many crimes are crimes of passion not robbery so your example was kind of silly. Drunk driving is for profit? Murder? Rape? All for profit lol.
16 February 2011 3:20PM
A lot of people are starting to wake up.
It may still come as a surprise to some people but global finance really is in charge and calling the shots. We are all pawns in their great game, to be used and sacrificed at will. Our domestic political charade is pure theatre.
More people are waking up and many of them are going to very upset. Very upset indeed
16 February 2011 3:22PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
16 February 2011 3:24PM
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Commerce.
16 February 2011 3:25PM
@gwillikers
You cannot deny massive contributions are made by the private sector with devastating effects on policy.
I don't doubt that unions are big donors but looking at the state of workers rights in the US, risible minimum wages, very little holiday entitlement, mandatory drug testing etc etc etc would suggest that the US unions have not been very effective in improving the lots of their members.
Could they all possibly be on the same side?
16 February 2011 3:26PM
We're all using computers here, so apparently we are not hostile to one company, or the hundreds who make that computer.
Corporations aren't human, but they're made up of humans, so are certainly imperfect. But they do provide, directly and indirectly, all the financial support for the great American way of life, still the most prosperous, and free, for a large country.
Without corporations, we'd be living much like the population of the Sudan. Most of us prefer the lot we have, so tend to ignore these types of folks.
And what do they offfer? More government control. Brilliant - government works so bloody well.
16 February 2011 3:26PM
Breaking news: businesses lobby for laws that reduce costs to business.
Lower costs mean lower priced products available to consumers, or more money to create new jobs. Legislation is only merited where there is a greater public interest (e.g. in ensuring that say public transport vehicles are properly maintained and are safe to travel in).
So where's the shock "revelation" here? The world appears to be working as it should, with people arguing their respective corners and legislators making up their own minds.
Unless your point is that businesses should never be allowed to lobby, make campaign contributions, or join organisations which represent them on matters of collective interest?
How democratic would that be?
16 February 2011 3:28PM
What this column highlights is the crass, anti-democratic and increasingly desperate quality of our current version of left-wing polemic.
For example, the "employee free choice" referred to by the authors is in fact the newspeak re-naming of the process by which workers are deprived of the secret ballot in union elections and must instead sign - or not sign - a union card under the direct supervision of a union official. Not so very democratic, but certainly desperate. And crass.
16 February 2011 3:29PM
When religious leaders got too strong, we had a separation of religion and state. We need now to have a separation of business and state. The new fascists today are not politicians. They are huge monopolies with large lobbies. We can't fight them though, because when we try to, we are called conspiracy theorists.
16 February 2011 3:29PM
No natural law saying that unions can't be corrupt too.
You only get to choose governments (theoretically at least) not corporations.
If there was any justice in America big Government would be dismantled andwithout the protection of big Government Corporations would follow.
The power vacuum would be filled by a naked (and armed) plutocracy. Choose your poison carefully.
Um . . . we don't fear corporations because they employ people, Willy.
Except for the tax money that goes on corporate welfare and bailouts, sure.
Btw the way people who commit abuses themselves and are outraged by the abuses of others are hypocrites so sorry to burst your bubble but these characters and the people they defend aren't a bit better. Every tyrant says the same thing
Incoherent Willy - could you elucidate?
An interesting rhetorical gambit, Willy. Do go on.
16 February 2011 3:31PM
Who brought up lobbying, soundmoney? The article didn't mention it.
16 February 2011 3:32PM
This is all so sad, because 25 years ago, Chamber of Commerce was a local Mom and Pop, organization. They were on the front line, with helping Vietnam Vet's, pursue education through the GI bill, and helping them back into society. That was then and this is now, From Wikileaks, we see where Shell run the Nigerian Government. Speaking of Shell, the security operatives they were using on the West Coast of Ireland, to bring Natural Gas on shore, ended up in Bolivia, trying to overthrow Morales, the democratically elected President.
16 February 2011 3:35PM
FreemanMoxy
16 February 2011 3:24PM
Or, Benjamin Sniddlegrass and The Chamber of Commerce, the sequel to Benajmin Sniddlegrass and The Cauldron of Penguins.
Can't wait.
16 February 2011 3:36PM
This is a follow-up to the resumes of the people involved in opposing the Chamber of Commerce. We have a Chamber of Commerce that includes the Southeastern part of Franklin County, Ohio. I belong to it, as council president pro-tem, as does our village itself and all the rest of its elected officials. Our neighboring villages to the east also are members.
The Chamber enables us to deal directly with what it takes to gat and keep businesses within this area, ensuring that we have places to work and shop and that our citizens remain and feel productive and useful.
There is not a damned thing in any of the little bios printed above that tells me that any of these people have the slightest training, education, or experience at anything other than activism and politics. Nothing they have ever done has prepared them to tell a single citizen or business person how to lead their lives or tun their businesses.
Maybe writers for the Guardian can see it, but I don't. What the hell are we celebrating when these self appointed assholes involve themselves in something for which they are so ill prepared? And who are they to complain when they meet opposition from an organization that, around here, represents far more than half of the employers?
If ever there was an organization that could represent why we Democrats lost so much in this last election, this little "liberal" circle jerk is it.
16 February 2011 3:41PM
QUIX -- Talk about an incoherent post. Simple fact is that local Chambers of Commerce have and always will do far more good for society than the people posting this article. Proud to belong to the Chamber as well as Rotary Club. Btw you claimed crime was for profit. I proved you wrong. Instead of admitting your error you got all childish on me.
The hypocricy in this article is astounding. What they mean by employee free choice is the destruction of the secrecy of the ballot in union elections. The same lefties who browbeat Mexico on the issue demanding secret ballots, now shill for the thuggish unions to deprive Americans of the right to a secret ballot. More disgraceful than the coirporations or just as bad?
CHIEFWILEY -- They seem to be professional gadflys who never actually worked.
16 February 2011 3:43PM
It has to be said that they are more likely to in the US than in Europe. The Americans aren't scared to jail business men gone to the bad, we are.
16 February 2011 3:44PM
But the article was not about the running of businesses was it, Wiley?
It was about deceit, espionage and double dealing. How much of that do you do in you in your provincial Ohio branch, far from the levers of power?
16 February 2011 3:45PM
"CHIEFWILEY -- They seem to be professional gadflys who never actually worked."
Amen to that. It looks a bit like Revenge of the Trust Fund Babies.
16 February 2011 3:45PM
gwillikers,
Caught moving the goalposts again I see.
This article is not about local Chambers of Commerce
16 February 2011 3:49PM
"It was about deceit, espionage and double dealing. How much of that do you do in you in your provincial Ohio branch, far from the levers of power?"
So when these dickless wonders play their little games to discredit real organizations and real people doing real work to real benefit of real people,
just who is engaged in deceit and double dealing? I'm not amused.
We're just a tiny corner of the world, but we've got several billion dollars worth of projects underway within five miles of those little local levers of power you seem to demean.
16 February 2011 3:50PM
Gwilikers;
I mean this in the nicest possible way. I'm not trying to get into a p***ing contest with you.
But you seem to be blissfully unaware of how the society you live in actually works. Many apparently separate organisations actually work for the same ultimate masters.
What their leaders all have in common with each other is that they have been seduced by the emotion of greed.
I don't want to sound too much like David Icke but his "pyramid" model of society has some truth to it.
PS Aliens do not run the White House.
16 February 2011 3:52PM
PS Aliens do not run the White House.
........................
just Bankers the Monied elite and Corporations
16 February 2011 3:55PM
"But you seem to be blissfully unaware of how the society you live in actually works. Many apparently separate organisations actually work for the same ultimate masters."
There's a door at the party headquarters that has stickers for a considerable number of organizations with high minded names. It leads down to the finance office. Is this what you are writing about, or is it just those people you don't like who engage in this type of thing?
16 February 2011 3:56PM
Trust Fund Babies that worry businesses to the point that they can no longer argue with them and must resort to underhand tactics to discredit them. Attacking the messenger, not the message.
You may buy it, but I don't. If I or anyone else wishes to write socialist articles or contribute to liberal causes then they have no right to discredit me or anyone else outside of the open scrutiny of public debate.
Maybe you don't fully understand what they are have been caught doing. There were named individuals that they wished to discredit.
16 February 2011 4:01PM
Sure G-Willy. But with due respect, you are 'little people'. You are not involved, i don't imagine, in the activities described in the article
Perhaps i could lend you a spade, Willy, since you are so keen on deepening your hole.
16 February 2011 4:05PM
"You may buy it, but I don't. If I or anyone else wishes to write socialist articles or contribute to liberal causes then they have no right to discredit me or anyone else outside of the open scrutiny of public debate. "
Sorry, but once you have established the rules of the game, anybody can play by them. The group used false names and dubious tactics, sarcasm and satire, and every other process at their disposal to bring ridicule to the organization they oppose. If that is how the game will be played, brace yourself. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
16 February 2011 4:14PM
gwillikers
wrote
" No different than big Government stepping on people, so I'd rather choose the stepper who actually produces something."
If only the American colonies were peopled with your attitude in 1775, America would be a dominian today likeCanada.
Dont rock the boat stay with the big guy keep the status quo.
16 February 2011 4:25PM
Expose their duplicity where it exists. Hiring security firms to look into the private lives of individuals that your group disagrees with is inexcusable, and is nothing like a proportionate response. As a demonstration of what they could do, HBGary managed to find pictures of the buyer's kids to demonstrate how 'exposed' he was. Doesn't that set alarm bells ringing at all?
16 February 2011 4:27PM
also, chiefwiley
if they are using satire to attack them, then there must be a kernel of truth there, otherwise it is just lies.
16 February 2011 4:32PM
That's the wrong word to use. It's not 'security' firms, it's 'sabotage'.
16 February 2011 4:32PM
"Expose their duplicity where it exists. Hiring security firms to look into the private lives of individuals that your group disagrees with is inexcusable, and is nothing like a proportionate response. As a demonstration of what they could do, HBGary managed to find pictures of the buyer's kids to demonstrate how 'exposed' he was. Doesn't that set alarm bells ringing at all?"
Alarm bells ring at anything measurably and specifically illegal. Some of the people in the Center for American Progress and its allies have made the children of opponents fair game in their attacks. Establish the rules of the game, and the whole world moves to the new minimum standards.
16 February 2011 4:42PM
Liberal minded people would lay off on corporations, if the corporations backed off their dunning of the treasury and statutes protecting lives and environment.
16 February 2011 5:04PM
...gwillikers...
"... I keep hearing about Ciorporations controlling elections and yet the 3 biggest campaign contributors are all unions."
In 2010, unions contributed $15,795,194. The Chamber of Commerce alone contributed $32+ million. I'm not even bothering to list other corporate contributions...the list is very long.
gwillikers....are you a fraud? Are you paid to post nonsense? Or just misinformed?
16 February 2011 5:14PM
SoundMoney
16 February 2011 3:26PM
More money for corporations does no create jobs in the US. Large corporations are sitting on trillions of dollars and yet the number of people without jobs is still rising.
16 February 2011 5:17PM
More jobs will only be created when there is more demand from consumers, which means we need more well paying jobs. It is a catch 22.
No one seems to have a viable solution.
16 February 2011 5:25PM
Fortunately nothing like the activities described in this article could possibly happen here on Cif.
16 February 2011 5:41PM
Industry State-level Total Federal Total ↓Combined Total↓
1 NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
Public Sector Unions $53,672,972 $2,676,297 $56,349,269
2 PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO MISSION INDIANS
Tribal Governments $43,360,697 $599,754 $43,960,451
3 PENN NATIONAL GAMING
Gambling & Casinos $40,457,347 $65,100 $40,522,447
4 MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
Tribal Governments $38,453,597 $600,312 $39,053,909
5 SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION
Public Sector Unions $32,778,494 $2,921,463 $35,699,957
6 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS
Real Estate $23,712,744 $4,878,390 $28,591,134
7 LAKES ENTERTAINMENT
Gambling & Casinos $25,692,898 $2,000 $25,694,898
8 TRIBES FOR FAIR PLAY NO ON 94 95 96 & 97
Tribal Governments $24,754,413 $0 $24,754,413
9 ActBlue
Liberal Policy Organization $0 $23,183,948 $23,183,948
10 AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
Tribal Governments $21,650,925 $428,276 $22,079,201
11 AFSCME
Public Sector Unions $18,083,364 $2,883,292 $20,966,656
12 COMMUNITY FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION
Payday/Title Loans $19,963,260 $198,760 $20,162,020
13 CLEAN ENERGY FUELS CORP
Oil & Gas $18,814,600 $37,200 $18,851,800
14 PG&E CORP
Electric Utilities $16,130,016 $419,484 $16,549,500
15 EDISON INTERNATIONAL
Electric Utilities $14,520,142 $613,419 $15,133,561
16 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS
General Trade Unions $10,135,208 $4,716,921 $14,852,129
17 ARIZONA COMMUNITY FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION
Payday/Title Loans $14,675,023 $0 $14,675,023
18 AT&T
Telecom Services & Equipment $9,087,070 $5,422,955 $14,510,025
19 LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA
General Trade Unions $11,348,826 $2,987,360 $14,336,186
20 PALA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
Tribal Governments $13,178,219 $2,300 $13,180,519
21 AUBURN RANCHERIA
Tribal Governments $13,123,085 $2,950 $13,126,035
22 UNITED FOOD & COMMERCIAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION
General Trade Unions $10,713,916 $2,348,144 $13,062,060
23 ALTRIA
Tobacco companies & tobacco product sales $11,322,517 $1,500,041 $12,822,558
24 CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Party Committees $12,355,252 $0 $12,355,252
25 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS
Public Sector Unions $8,977,675 $3,006,923 $11,984,598
16 February 2011 5:42PM
If you've ever been involved in any sort of political brawl, and my experience is limited to localized privatization of municipal services, you can find that they may bet pretty rough and tumble. Truth gets stretched, lies get told. Self appointed assholes (in the Chief's words) get involved.
However, we have freedom of speech in this country, though interestingly to me, I sense that many on the left believe that should be curtailed more than many on the right. Still, you get to say what you want. If someone perceives they've been slandered they can sue you for damages, but they have to make their case in court. And even if they prevail in their libel suit, you can still go ahead and say what you please if you are willing to risk the consequences. The laws won't force you to shut up. You probably won't go to jail, though failure to pay a judgment may have subsequent consequences.
This article, by the way, does not state that the Chamber engaged private security services, only that they heard proposals. They get to do that. They may even have a perfect right to engage security services. If the security companies break the law then people can be prosecuted.
At any rate, rough and tumble it is; rough and tumbled it should stay.
16 February 2011 5:45PM
http://www.followthemoney.org/?gclid=CL-FlaedjacCFcbsKgodH11Bew