On Nov. 24, activist Adam Ortberg, 29, sat across from two dark-suited lawyers representing banking giant Goldman Sachs. Just two days before, the two attorneys had carted towers of paper into the civil branch of D.C. Superior Court. In the most extensive filing some there had ever seen, the piles of paper presented Ortberg as a victimizer.
The grim lawyers wanted a temporary restraining order against him, his co-defendant Michael Weber, 24, and the organization they’re part of. Though Ortberg is a pretty big guy, neither he nor Weber exactly fit the bill of a dangerous stalker. Shaggy and soft-spoken, both give off the vibe of being the kind of process-loving progressives who, whenever they get a chance, suggest everyone “circle up.” But there they were, in the chambers of Judge Curtis E. von Kann, learning why one of the most powerful financial entities in the world, along with one of its lobbyists, Michael Paese, was now terrified of them.
A former top aide to Rep. Barney Frank, Paese was helping the Massachusetts Democrat crack down on Wall Street—via the House Financial Services Com mittee—for causing the country’s financial meltdown, before he defected to the other side in 2009. The abandonment pissed Frank off; Paese was barred from lobbying the committee for two years instead of the standard one-year “cooling-off period.” After taking his new, more lucrative position at Goldman, Paese ran into trouble from Ortberg, Weber, and their group. “They scare him,” lawyer William D. Nussbaum, flanked by lawyer Douglas Crosno, told the judge. “We know what th ey’ve done in other places. Exploding things, harming people...”
Goldman Sachs, of course, is at the center of a lot of controversies these days. It paid billions in bonuses last year, after racking up record profits, and the firm’s come under fire since the financial collapse wrecked the economy in 2008. But what raised Ortberg and Weber’s ire had nothing to do with collateralized mortgages or Wall Street titans. The group they belong to is called the Defenders of Animal Rights Today and Tomorrow. And they’re angry at Goldman, and at Paese, because of puppies.
On Halloween, at about 8 p.m., DARTT was hard at work outside of Paese’s home in the 1600 block of 19th Street NW. A dozen or so members showed up dressed in masks and lab coats. They chanted, and held up signs, and told everyone within earshot that Paese was psychotic. “Michael Pease, your neighbor, is a puppy-killing scumbag!” a protester yelled through a megaphone.
Which isn’t to say that DARTT actually thought Paese was inside torturing dogs. (“Mr. Paese has a dog, it’s a beautiful dog,” Nussbaum, would later tell von Kann. “He loves the dog. I’ve met the dog. And the dog would be appalled to know what’s being said about Mr. Paese.”) Goldman Sachs got mixed up in an animal rights protest through a complicated chain that starts with Huntingdon Life Sciences.
In the 1990s, the British company came under fire for videos of its employees abusing animals, beyond even the typical horror movie set-up that’s required to conduct animal research. HLS promised reforms. But the allegations persisted. When a list of the company’s stockholders was published in the UK, stock prices tanked. HLS eventually fled to the New York Stock Exchange. Still, stock prices remained dismally low, and HLS might have gone under except for a few strong-stomached investors and lenders.
According to DARTT, one of the lenders that helped HLS hold on is Fortress Investment Group, a ballsy New York investment firm that’s made and lost billions since it was founded in 1998. Ortberg says in an e-mail that his organization has discovered Fortress lends money to HLS “through a series of shell companies.” For instance, there’s a front company in Luxembourg called Anchor Sub Funding, he says. Fortress uses it to route money “presumably to stop HLS’ horrific record of cruelty, violence and law breaking from tarnishing Fortress’ reputation,” Ortberg writes.
DARTT says Goldman owns shares in Fortress, but Goldman denies it, and spokesman David Wells says there’s “no direct connection” between the bank and HLS. A search of a Securities and Exchange Commission database doesn’t turn up any sign that Goldman has an ownership stake in Fortress, either. Still, to DARTT, Paese is public enemy No. 1—at least for an animal rights group that operates locally. Neither Fortress nor HLS has any employees in D.C., so when DARTT wanted to protest HLS, it went after Goldman.
According to Paese’s lawyers, DARTT’s attempt to pressure Goldman has been a nightmare. DARTT has descended on Paese’s home five times to accuse him of animal abuse. “Those demonstrations—which defendants euphemistically call ‘home visits’—are extremely loud, disorderly and intimidating,” Paese’s lawyers wrote in court papers. There were threats: “We know where you sleep,” demonstrators chanted.
The protests wound up causing a scene on Paese’s block, just north of Dupont Circle. A neighbor, who spoke on condition of anonymity (he says Paese isn’t the most friendly person in the world, and he doesn’t want to make trouble), recalls seeing a Metropolitan Police Department patrol car parked outside after the Halloween incident. He says he approached the cops and asked what the deal was. They told him Goldman was footing the bill for round-the-clock MPD security. Another neighbor resorted to donning a pair of headphones typically used on firing ranges during the demonstrations, lawyers told the court. Yet another was forced to lock himself in his home with his two frightened beagles. (“No small irony there,” the lawyers quipped.)
If that wasn’t gnarly enough, the noise also disturbed a nearby cancer sufferer. DARTT protesters were told about the ill resident, but Paese’s lawyers say they didn’t care. When one neighbor confronted the activists about disturbing the healing quiet of the neighborhood, the complainer just got an ear full of megaphone, the lawyers say. From Ortberg’s perspective, though, at those demonstrations, Paese’s neighbors were causing the real ruckus: One Paese supporter bumped a demonstrator with his car, Ortberg recalls. Video taken by DARTT at the Halloween protest shows the rowdiness goes both ways. At one point, a tall, broad-shouldered resident was inches from the face of a protester, cupped his hands, and let loose with, “Shut the fuck up!” A while later, he got in the face of some female protesters and called them “cunts.”
Ultimately, the saga’s ending may not surprise anyone who’s watched Goldman Sachs play hardball to get its way over the past few years. Though DARTT lawyer Jeffrey Light argued that the lawsuit wa s “a free speech case,” von Kann sided with Paese.
In a temporary restraining order handed down the day of the hearing, the judge barred DARTT from coming any closer than 100 feet away from Paese’s house—or any other house where Goldman Sachs employees live. “Defendants have repeatedly subjected plaintiffs and their neighbors to extremely loud, unruly, threatening, harassing, obstructive, and in some instances frightening protests and demonstrations that have unreasonably and substantially interfered with plaintiff’s ability to use and enjoy their property,” von Kann wrote. Between 6 p.m. and 9 a.m., the buffer zone expands to 150 feet. Demonstrators also have to stay 50 feet away from any Goldman offices. At a hearing set for December 10, von Kann will begin hearing arguments on whether to keep the order in place. DARTT says they’ll fight it.
That won’t be the only fallout from the episode. Legislation by Ward 3 D.C. Councilmember Mary Cheh would curtail DARTT’s home visits even more, by forbidding nighttime demonstrations in front of private homes, banning protesters from wearing masks while demonstrating in front of homes, and requiring protesters who plan to target houses to notify MPD two hours in advance. Cops could make a warrantless arrest if protesters seem to be violating any of those rules.
The bill already passed a first reading; a committee report on the legislation makes clear it was aimed at DARTT, mentioning “a small group of animal rights activists.” Ortberg says there’s an easier way to end all the protests: Negotiation, and, ultimately, divestment from companies involved in animal research. DARTT has tried to set up a meeting with Paese, but Ortberg says the lobbyist hasn’t responded to phone calls or letters. Until he does, there’s no chance of DARTT letting up, except if the authorities step in. “DARTT is committed to exposing those who participate in animal torture,” says Ortberg.
Our Readers Say
If Goldman Sachs lie about their shareholding in Fortress Investment Group, what else are they lying about?
Goldman Sachs has 1,032,244 shares in Fortress as of 09/30/2010:
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/holdings.asp?symbol=FIG&selected=FIG&FormType=Institutional (second page, 6 lines down.
They used to have many more shares than that until they sold 2/3 of their shares in Fortress...
Why should Goldman Sachs or any other group agree to talks with DARTT? The majority in the US supports animal research, and with very good reason since it has played a vital role in most of the medical advances in the past few decades, and is still playing a vital role in new fields such as stem cell and regenerative medicine, gene therapy and nanotech drug delivery.
Should all activist groups who use stalking and harassment to further their cause be rewarded with discussions? Would the Washington City Paper suggest that abortion providers negotiate with anti-abortion extremists who picket clinics and harass doctors in their homes?
I applaud von Kann's ruling, and wish Mary Cheh every success in her efforts to restore some civility to public discourse.
It takes a lot to make me to support the likes of Goldman Sachs, but this article obliges me to do so.
Who are these activists educating about their cause at night, at someone's private home, wearing masks, and screaming obscenities? There is no public to address. This is no free speech issue here. It is all about intimidation, harassment and threats. "We know where you sleep at night"?! Is that an explanation for these people's position on animal research?
Good move by the judge and the city council. Must be replicated everywhere across the country.
Regardless though what is going on at HLS is wrong in any situation. Workers coming in on hard drugs punching beagle puppies in the face and dissecting animals while they are still alive and conscious not even with any anesthetic is wrong by any standards. If you have a company that tolerates hard drug use and abuse of animals that violates even the stringent animal "welfare" laws that barely protect animals at all then there is something wrong with you. Not too mention the fact they are in debt and cannot get on the stock exchange or get a bank account and have had to change their name or come up with new names so they could sneak around and do business. The company is very shady, looking more like a Mafia type operation than a legitimate business. Also looking at the companies they do business with you can see they are not worth sticking up for. Bayer has a long history of doing horrible things from their creation of heroine back before WW1 (which they held a patent on up until the war) to their direct funding and creation of the Auschwitz death camps in Nazi Germany under IG Farben which was also part of the creation team behind Zyklon B.
Otto Armbrust (IG Farben board member behind Auschwitz) had this too say:
"our new friendship with the SS is a blessing. We have determined all measures integrating the concentration camps to benefit our company."
A long term Bayer employee and Nazi doctor had this too say to his employer Bayer before he was executed for war crimes:
"I have thrown myself into my work wholeheartedly. Especially as I have the opportunity to test our new preparations. I feel like I am in paradise."
Fritz Ter Meer worked for Bayer and then IG Farben with Dr. Joseph Mengele and was convicted of war crimes and sentenced to 7 years in prison, at an interview during the trial about the test he committed he had this too say:
"They were prisoners thus no particular harm was inflicted, as they would have been killed anyway."
After he got out he became the chairman of Bayer and too this day Bayer has a fund in his name.
Bayer has also been involved with human deaths more recently with Baycol in which at least 52 people have died and thousands more hospitalized. As well as with HIV infect blood products and a powdered milk substitute they contaminated with insecticide methyl parathion and gave to a remote village thinking nobody would notice the aftermath. Not too mention other drugs that have failed and their global pestacide market and release of GMO rice into regular rice crops.
Sanofi-Aventis is another customer of HLS and through Aventis/Hoescht AG history was one of the founding members of IG Farben which was mentioned earlier with Bayer.
Bristol-Meyers Squibb another customer of HLS has had accounting scandals and has been raided by the FBI and been too court several times.
these are three companies involved with HLS however there are others doing much of the same. Plus Goldman Sachs is tanking as is Fortress Investments (who has scandals of it's own).
So the question is: Why is HLS still in existence and why are we allowing them to be in existence and why would be support them and their customers against free speech and compassion?
Just as an interesting note about DARTT:
DARTT is an independent group, not affiliated with SHAC, SHAC USA or any other organization and does not conduct illegal activity. (from a press release about their demos found online)
I applaud DARTT for standing up against the horrific abuses shown in HLS time and time again and standing up for free speech. As well as going against Goldman Sachs, a company that probably most of the world hates right now. It seems like just about every week there is a story somewhere about GS doing something bad or being in trouble again and the comments associated with those articles always seem to be negative towards GS. Also I am glad you are annoying Mary Cheh she is really nasty and spiteful woman who clearly hates the first amendment.
I might see your point about animal testing if it worked, but science has proven that wrong over and over, many scientists have come out against it as well as average citizens and celebrities.
"I abhor vivisection. It should at least be curbed. Better, it should be abolished. I know of no achievement through vivisection, no scientific discovery, that could not have been obtained without such barbarism and cruelty. The whole thing is evil." - Dr. Charles Mayo, Founder of the Mayo Clinic
"Giving cancer to laboratory animals has not and will not help us to understand the disease or to treat those persons suffering from it."
- Dr. A. Sabin, 1986, developer of the oral polio vaccine
"There are no alternatives to animal experimentation, for one can only talk of alternatives if these replace something of the same worth; and there is nothing quite as useless, misleading and harmful as animal experimentation."
-Prof. Pietro Croce, M.D.
"Indeed, while conflicting animal tests have often delayed and hampered advances on the war on cancer, they have never produced a single substantial advance either in the prevention or treatment of human cancer."
-Dr. Irwin Bros, director of Roswell Park Memorial
"At present it is a rare person that emerges from medical training with his or her humanity intact." - Journal of the Amerian Medical Association 1989 Vol 261, p. 2011
"Science that fails to embrace all living beings is far more dangerous than any virus!" -
Steven Simmons, AIDS victim and activist
If you want civility Paul you won't find it in Huntingdon Life Sciences nor in Goldman Sachs nor in Mary Cheh. Civility is something that Goldman Sachs has refused time and time again. According to the article DARTT tried to meet with GS and GS refused. I mean if I were running a corporation and somebody asked to meet with me over involvement in horrific animal abuse, I would meet with them, even if I wasn't going to care about what they had to say I would at least meet with them in hopes they wouldn't bother me. GS didn't even have the decency for that. It seems like they ran scared too the courts and the police because they couldn't be bothered for a short meeting to discuss things like rational beings. Basically they did what a very young child might do they tattled and made stuff up so that free speech could be quashed and freedom and the animals at HLS could suffer more abuse.
He reminds me of the Hooligan bit by comedian Bill Hicks (R.I.P.):
'Yesterday, some hooligans knocked over a dustbin in Shaftesbury.' ...Wooooo. 'The hooligans are loose! The hooligans are loose! ...What if they become ruffians? I'd hate to be a dustbin in Shaftesbury tonight. (to the tune of "Behind Blue Eyes" by The Who) No one knows what it's like... to be a dustbin... in Shaftesbury... with hooligans...'
Better watch out Weber might come too your house and knock over your dustbin...LOL. Methinks this Paese guy is a fraidy-cat!
Any moron can see, on any stock site, that this is a total lie.
As of today they own over one million shares. See for yourself.
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/holdings.asp?symbol=FIG&selected=FIG
My question is: Does Goldman Sachs really believe they're so rich and powerful that they'll lie to a judge's face this blatantly? They're not above the law and perjury is perjury.
Simply amazing!
Oh but that's right - DARTT echoes the philosophies of the rest of the animal rights movement in their belief in nonviolence and does not harm people or explode things. In other words, DARTT may be loud and speak their mind but they're certainly not hurting people or setting things on fire.
Shame on Goldman Sachs for their lies and their financial support of real and brutal violence at Huntingdon Life Sciences.
Kudos to DARTT for standing up to these bullies.
I would suggest that they take their fight to the streets of downtown and the Goldman Sachs offices. They would reach more people, be out during the DAY as well as maybe deter would be Goldman Sachs clients. Come on- hit them where it hurts, their wallets!!!
I'd like to also make a point, that if the judge were truly concerned about the nature of the home protests, then why would he let them continue at all? Why allow them to continue, but 50, 100 or 150 feet away? Wouldn't this rule then place these protesters in front of either a different office building, or someone else's home, unrelated to GS? What kind of sense does that make? It's not ok to disturb GS employees, but anyone else, regardless of their lack of connection to HLS doesn't matter? If the protests were indeed so horrific, why on earth would the judge allow them to continue in front of someone else's home or office? This is clearly not about the "disturbance" of the protests at all...
My tax money wasn't taken from me too bailout GS, it was a donation too their fine church of good deeds and saintly activities. Plus I bet those dogs the company they are funding kills were probably vicious attack dogs that would have murdered 80 billion people if let loose.
I mean if people will go after the good name of Goldman Sachs, who next: Blackwater/Xe, Wal Mart, or maybe they might go after the saints at BP oil. This must be stopped
On a related note, I wonder if living near someone who profits from animal exploitation brings down your property value? Maybe that'll give some people incentive to keep these corporate criminals out of our neighborhoods.
As some of the posters on this thread who are equipped with a brain pointed out, animal experiments are useless to serious research anyway, the scientific community has acknowledged that a long time ago.
These kinds of tactics get people riled up and get media attention, but they turn the public away from the real issue, the dogs, and make it seem like all people that care about animals are crazy. That doesn't seem to be DARTT's intentions, but it's their results.
In reality, this does very little to help animals. I'd like to ask DARTT, what good comes out of this? It'd be more effective to fund groups that can do investigations into testing labs (or factory farms) or do educational outreach, which will actually create change in this world.
Leave a Comment