Powerful Ammunition to
Former federal investigator and crusader against corrupt government personnel
Rodney Stich has filed various lawsuits in federal courts over the years that
sought to report criminal activities in government offices to a federal court
under the mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute, Title
18 U.S.C. § 4. These federal filings can be of
unprecedented help to anyone or any group seeking to correct the arrogance and
corruption in courts that not only inflict great personal and financial harm
upon countless people but also subvert government institutions and national
Examining these lawsuits will
- Detailed description of a literal Trojan
horse type corruption in government offices including people perpetrating
the crimes and people feloniously covering up for them. The
criminal activities described in these pages and in
books written by former government agents include:
- Corruption related to a series of
aviation disasters discovered and
revealed by federal air safety inspector
Rodney Stich and other federal inspectors.
- Corruption in government related to the corrupt war on
- Pattern of other criminal and subversive activities, as detailed in
Terrorism Against America.
- Criminal cover-ups of these crimes by key people in the three branches of
the federal government.
Obstruction of Justice by
Federal judges repeatedly blocked former federal agents from
reporting corrupt and criminal activities that were being reported through
lawsuits filed under the
federal crime reporting statute (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4) that
makes it a crime for anyone who knows of a federal crime not to promptly
report it to a federal court (or other federal officer).
Implied in that
statute, federal judges must receive any reports and offered evidence
under the judge's administrative responsibilities. He or she has no
discretion whether the reports and evidence are to be received or not; it
must be received. However, this requirement was repeatedly violated by
federal judges. They knew the allegations were true, and refused to allow
the information and evidence to be presented formally to the court. If the
information was not true, and the judges were not interested in a
cover-up, they could have simply allowed the information to be presented
and have it disproved. These judicial acts, refusing to comply with a
judge's administrative duties, constituted obstruction of justice, and
Federal lawsuits seeking to report corrupt and criminal activities in key
government offices were repeatedly blocked by
federal judges, some of whom even inflicted great harm upon a former federal
agent seeking to make such reports.
In the first two lawsuits, district
court and court of appeal judges sympathized with the matters Stich brought
to their attention, but claimed these matters were the responsibility of
Congress. By refusing to act, the pattern of air safety and criminal
violations continued, and the expected crashes continued to occur, more brutal
than in the past.
Effects of Judicial
Corruption on 9/11
The most recent harms inflicted upon the United States that were made possible by
the judicial misconduct occurred on September 11, 2001. The existing
conditions that enabled hijackers to seize four airliners existed because of
the corruption in the government's aviation safety offices, and to a lesser
extent the corruption in the intelligence gathering offices. Federal judges
repeatedly blocked federal agents from reporting this corruption that was
being attempted via the
federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C.
of Justice with Record-Setting Civil Rights Violations
Federal judges repeatedly issued orders, inflicting great personal and
financial harm, upon former federal agent Rodney Stich, seeking to halt
his exposure of criminal activities in key government offices. These judicial
acts violated dozens of state and
laws and then blocked every procedural due process defense. The
effects? Deadly consequences in numerous areas, including the one-day's
consequences in the aviation area--3,000 deaths on September 11, 2001.
One of several tactics used by a string of federal judges to block that
former government agent from reporting the criminal activities under the federal
crime reporting statute was to issue unlawful and unconstitutional
orders barring him for the remainder of his life from filing any
papers in the district and appellate courts.
Using that tactic, the agent was unable to report the criminal
activities and unable to defend against the parallel legal efforts to
silence him through sham lawsuits filed by CIA-front law firms, and
other cooperating lawyers, all knowing they were blocking the reports
that were inflicting great harm upon America's national interests,
including national security.
that Funded Exposure of Criminal
Included in the judicial tactics to permanently silence former federal
agent Rodney Stich were the following:
Dismiss every legal filing in which the former government agent sought
to report the criminal activities to a federal court under the federal
crime reporting statute.
Render orders taking and liquidating his life's assets
consisting of $10 million in real estate that funded his exposure of
corrupt and criminal acts in judicial and other government offices.
Charging him with criminal contempt of court when he filed papers in
federal court to report the criminal activities that he and his group
of other former government agents had discovered.
Charging him with criminal contempt of court when he filed objections
to the seizure and liquidation of his life's assets.
Sentencing him to federal prison, nearing 70 years of age, shortly
after receiving multiple-bypass open heart surgery, for
attempting to report the criminal activities--including those that
would later result in 3,000 deaths on a single morning.
Using a CIA-front law firm (Friedman, Sloan and Ross--San Francisco)
to file a sham lawsuit against him to destroy the assets that funded
his exposure activities, which was barred by
large numbers of state and federal laws.
Obtaining the cooperation of California judges to violate those state
and federal laws barring the sham lawsuit, and to block every
state procedural defense against the record-setting violations.
When Stich exercised federal defenses for the violations of federally
protected rights, federal judges:
Dismissed every filing, often immediately upon being filed, reversing
the legal and common-sense definition of frivolous and placing a
frivolous label on the exercise of federal defense remedies.
Rendering orders barring Stich access to federal courts, violating due
process and equal protection rights.
Ordering Stich to pay huge financial sanctions for exercising federal
defenses against the massive violations of federally protected rights.
Attempting to Report Criminal Activities That
Played Key Roles in the Catastrophic Events
of September 11, 2001
The success of four groups of hijackers to seize four
airliners on September 11, 2001, was obviously due to "problems"
within the government's aviation safety offices that had the
responsibility to order preventative measures for the 50 years of
easily preventable airliner hijackings. These "problems," which
federal aviation safety agent Rodney Stich called deep-seated
corruption in the government's aviation safety offices, were
documented while Stich was a government aviation safety agent, while
he acted as an independent counsel, and from the reports of other
government aviation safety agents.
report this corruption to federal judges in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
The reports were made under the
federal crime reporting statute and the
statute that permits any citizen to seek a court order requiring a federal
official to perform a mandatory duty and to halt unlawful conduct.
These early attempts to report the criminal acts were blocked by federal
district and appellate judges, despite their acknowledgement that the charges
were very serious. The refusal to receive the reports was followed by even worst
aviation disasters that were caused or enabled by the corruption that Stich and
other federal safety agents sought to report.
The former federal
agent, concerned by the enormous loss of life resulting from the arrogance and
corruption in government offices, then used his
considerable assets to publish books, appearing on radio and television
shows throughout the United States, giving lectures, and continuing his
This publicity caused
other government agents to contact Stich and provide him with
information and evidence on other areas of
corrupt and criminal activities that were inflicting great harm
upon the people and upon major national interests, including national
Commencing in 1986, Stich attempted to report
these additional criminal activities to a federal judge, under the mandatory
requirements of the federal crime reporting statute and the right of any citizen
to seek a court order halting such misconduct. Federal judges continued their
prior blocks, and then compounded this obstruction of justice with financial
sanctions and orders permanently barring Stich from filing any papers in the
federal courts. The harmful consequences knowingly continued to be inflicted
upon American interests.
Lawsuit--Prior to 9/11--Seeking to Report Corruption Enabling Hijackings
of Four Airliners, and Suing Federal Judges Who Previously Blocked the
In 1999, former federal agent Rodney Stich filed a
in the U.S. district court at Reno, Nevada, that stated several major
federal causes of actions. These included:
- Attempt to report criminal activities to a federal court under the two
statutes that require and that permits such reports to be made.
- Lawsuits against federal judges and others who had blocked prior
reports and who engaged in misconduct to retaliate against Stich, seeking
to halt his exposure activities and to retaliate against him for his
attempts to expose the crimes. These actions violated numerous federal
laws which provided Stich federal defenses for which federal judges
had a mandatory duty to provide a court forum and allow the lawsuits to
proceed. The federal remedies permitting the lawsuits included the
Civil Rights Act;
Tort Claims Act; and various other statutes and Supreme Court case law
- That lawsuit was unlawfully and unconstitutionally dismissed, Stich
was ordered to pay sanctions for attempting to report the criminal
activities and for exercising federal defenses against the massive
onslaught of legal actions seeking to silence him.
- Ninth Circuit appellate judges refused to allow the appeal to be
heard, stating that an order filed ten years earlier by U.S. district
judge Marilyn Patel forever barred Stich access to federal court.
Post 9/11 Judicial Blocks, Despite the Catastrophic Consequences of Coverups
In June 2002, Stich filed another lawsuit in the U.S. district court at
Washington, D.C. (MS
pdf) That lawsuit attempting to report the criminal activities that
made possible the crashing of a hijacked aircraft into the Pentagon on 9-11,
was dismissed by Judge Henry
Kennedy without notice within two weeks of being filed.
He dismissed and blocked the reporting of criminal activities that played
a role in the crashing of a jetliner into the Pentagon on the basis of an
unlawful and unconstitutional injunctive order issued in 1991 by U.S.
district judge Stanley Sporkin that permanently barred Stich from access to
the federal courts. That order blocked Stich from reporting the criminal
activities under the federal crime reporting statute, and permanently
terminated Stich's legal and constitutional defenses against the numerous
violations of federally protected rights that were part of the judicial
schemes to halt Stich's exposure activities.
Stich filed a
notice of appeal, which the District of Columbia appellate judges
promptly dismissed, denying Stich appellate remedies. This violation of due
process by the court considered the most important below the U.S. Supreme
Court, covered up for the criminal acts, covered up for the felony
obstruction of justice by federal judges and others, and approved the
massive violations of civil and constitutional rights that were part of the
criminal scheme to block the exposure of vast criminal activities in
Cover-ups Where 9/11 Lawsuits Were Filed
In August 2002, Stich submitted a lawsuit for filing in the U.S. district court for the
Southern District of New York at New York City, for the primary purpose of
reporting and providing evidence of the criminal activities that caused the
conditions that encouraged and insured the success of hijackers on
September 11, 2001. That lawsuit was received on August 13, 2002, but the
requirement to promptly file it was violated. Instead, the lawsuit was filed
over a year later, on September 22, 2003. On that same date,
Judge Mukasey issued a five-page order dismissing the lawsuit. The
complexity of that order required many days of preparation, providing still
more evidence of the judicial determination that the evidence of criminal
activities and the judicial complicity in coverup crimes never be exposed.
due process law prevents dismissal of a lawsuit under various
Reason for Using Federal Courts to Report Criminal Activities
Members of Congress and Justice Department personnel had previously
refused to receive the evidence that Stich and his group of other government
agents had sought to report, leaving the federal crime reporting statute and
the requirement to report the crimes to a federal court as the only
remaining means to make such reports. By blocking Stich's access to federal
court, all avenues for reporting these crimes were blocked.
Since 1986, Stich and a group of other government agents
sought to report other criminal activities to federal judges, including
evidence of CIA drug smuggling, massive corruption in the bankruptcy courts,
and other criminal activities as described in the third editions of
Defrauding America and Unfriendly Skies and in Drugging America. Judges
repeated refused to receive the reports even though they had an
administrative duty mandated by legislation to receive the reports and the
evidence. The reports of criminal activities in key government offices and
in the courts were submitted under the mandatory requirements of Title 18
U.S.C. Section 4. This statute does not give any federal judge the option of
blocking the reports.
Title 18 U.S.C.
4 (misprision of felony). "Whoever,
having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a
court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make
known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military
authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or
imprisoned not more than three years, or both."
Title 28 U.S.C. §
1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his
duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action
in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United
States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.
The people who offered to provide evidence
of criminal activities, through Stich, included agents of the FBI, DEA,
Customs, Secret Service, CIA, including former heads of secret CIA
airlines and secret CIA financial proprietaries. Stich had extensive
office provided by them, plus evidence related to the fraud behind certain
airline crashes which he acquired while an air safety inspector
responsible for air safety at the most senior program at United Airlines.
By refusing to receive this evidence, federal judges were
aiding and abetting these criminal acts that had a deadly impact upon
the lives of many people and which continued to inflict great harm upon the
internal security of the United States. (Members of Congress and Justice
Department personnel have also repeatedly refused to receive the evidence,
helping to expose why the people in control of the system will never also
these crimes to be exposed.)
Refusing to receive information and evidence of criminal
activities, constitute obstruction of justice and are crimes under
U.S.C. Section 2, 3, and 4.
Federal judges compounded these acts by rendering
unlawful injunctive orders barring Stich (and his group of government
whistleblowers) from access to the federal courts for the remainder of his
life, which also voided the rights and protections guaranteed to him under
the laws and Constitution of the United States.
In addition to misusing the federal courts to block the
reporting of criminal activities, and in addition to rendering an
injunction that unlawfully and unconstitutionally voided the most basic and
all-important rights and protections under the form of government in the
After Stich and his group of government agents discovered
additional criminal activities in key government positions, Stich again
sought to report these matters under the mandatory requirement of the
federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 4, to a federal
Justice Department prosecutors and federal judges then
Stich with criminal contempt of court for filing his First, Fifth, and
Fourteenth Amendment rights, and rights under specific federal statutes,
rules of court, and case law. It is a felony to retaliate against a former
federal agent or witness for attempting to report federal crimes, under
Title 18 U.S.C. Sections 111, 372, 1505, 1510, 1512, and 1513, among others.
Simultaneous with the injunctive orders, federal judges were
rendering unlawful and unconstitutional orders that seized Stich’s $10
million in assets that Stich had used to fund his exposure of corruption
and criminal activities (which federal judges repeatedly blocked from being
reported). By rendering orders that barred Stich from federal court and
constitutional and other legal remedies, Stich could not defend.
Stich’s assets were seized after he was forced to seek
relief from hard-core civil right violations in Chapter 11 courts,
seeking to force a federal judge to address the matters under the
Declaratory Judgment Act and the Civil Rights Act. (These matters are
detailed in the third editions of Defrauding America and Unfriendly
Skies and the recent Drugging America.
Additional orders were rendered after seizing Stich’s assets
that barred him from filing any objections to the seizure and liquidation of
his assets, which constituted further violations of major constitutional
rights and protections.
When Stich did file objections, the objections were unfilled,
and he was charged with criminal contempt of court for exercising
constitutional due process. It is a felony for two or more people to
retaliate against a person for having exercised constitutional due process.
The original attack upon Stich commenced with a
filed in the California courts by a San Francisco law firm identified by
two reliable sources as a front for the CIA and FBI. That lawsuit was filed
shortly after Stich’s second edition of Unfriendly Skies was
released which named specific federal judges and Supreme Court justices as
engaging in cover ups relating to the criminal matters related to a series
of airline crashes. That lawsuit required California judges to act without
personal and without subject matter jurisdiction, to
many state and federal laws that barred that action, and violated
landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions, federal statutes, and constitutional
protections under Article IV, Section 1 and 2, and every protection under
the Fourteenth Amendment.
After Stich unexpectedly exercised the protections in federal
courts under the Civil Rights Act (for the civil rights violations
perpetrated under color of state law) and under the Declaratory Judgment Act to declare valid the personal and property rights already adjudicated 20
years earlier and established in seven judgments located in various states,
federal judges then had to enlarge on the violations to protect the scheme
and the parties who participated in the scheme. That scheme initiated
by the CIA-front law firm required that California judges violate dozens of
state and federal laws, which were then repeated and enlarged upon by a
succession of federal judges.
Eventually justices of the U.S. Supreme Court became
implicated as they were officially notified of the civil rights
violations and obstruction of justice by judges over whom they had
The evidence strongly indicates that a powerful force
somewhere high in government was responsible for the original scheme, which
power to control the corrupt acts of large numbers of California and federal
Related Web Sites
and Information on Revealing Books
- Chronology of decades of corrupt activities by the CIA, U.S.
politicians, and other members of the system, as described in the book,
- Chronology of the arrogant and corrupt war on drugs--against the
American people--as described in the book,
- Chronology of arrogant and corrupt activities in the deadly politics of
aviation safety, as described in the book,
- Chronology of covert and corrupt activities in which the American
people suffered the consequences of blowback, as described in the e-book,
Blowback, 9-11, Iraq, Lies,
- Story of a CIA operation based in Honolulu and its titular head, who
was made a scapegoat by CIA and Justice Department personnel and a federal
judge, after its cover was blown, and as described in the e-book,
- Site focusing on terrorism against America from Trojan-horse insiders
and from outsiders, as described in the e-book,
and e-books books describing these matters.
Note: The books and other activities are non-profit, relying on funds
obtained elsewhere, and arise out of the determination by Rodney Stich to
provide this information to the public concerning unprecedented threats and
sources of great harm to the United States, national security, and its
Help fund our exposure activities by placing orders for
any amazon.com products through our links.