Judge Michael Mukasey

<body> The Mukasey "Albatross" for the United States On November 9, 2007, the senate approved the nomination of retired U.S. district judge Michael Mukasey to be attorney general of the United States, replacing the pathetic Alberto Gonzales. For an evaluation of how Mukasey will respect human rights, due process, civil rights, for upholding the laws and constitution of the United States, as well of enforcing criminal statutes, consider the following: In testimony before Congress in October 2007, Mukasey stated: Waterboarding, known throughout the world as torture, was not prohibited by the laws of the United States. He wavered on this, seeking to protect President Bush's approval of torture. The president of the United States did not have to abide by, and could violate, the laws and constitution of the United States if he held that it was in the interest of protecting the country. This position had not been described in just-prior-to-confirmation media reports, although it is far more important than the torture position, and is one of the reasons why the United States is in the mess in Iraq. In effect, Mukasey supports what Alberto Gonzales supported, though done in a less crude manner. Ah, but there is more garbage in Mukasey's history: Prior problems with Mukasey while he was a U.S. district judge in New York City. One of the most serious series of problems can be found in an lawsuit filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan; and specifically in an appeal brief (June 3, 2004), addressing the actions by U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Highlights of Mukasey's Conduct in That Legal Action Acted to prevent former federal agents from reporting criminal acts, federal crimes, to be reported to a federal judge as required to be reported under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. These acts were clearly obstruction of justice, violated several obstruction of justice statutes. Under federal criminal statutes, a judge to whom a federal crime is being reported must received that information as part of his mandatory administrative duties. By blocking the reports, he obstructed justice, a criminal act. Mukasey did this by blocking the reports, by dismissing the legal action within minutes of being filed in court. To block the reporting of criminal activities, Judge Mukasey violated numerous due process and legal and constitutional protections (as described in the appeal brief). Details of his actions are found in the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan, Mukasey’s 12-month blocking of the lawsuit’s filing (until every member of the U.S. Supreme Court was notified in writing of the latest obstruction of justice action by a federal judge over whom they had supervisory responsibilities). The action was then filed, and immediately a five-page dismissal order was filed by Judge Mukasey. That dismissal order violated numerous due process requirements, including notice of intent to dismiss; a hearing; the absence of any justification for dismissal; violating the requirement to receive the information. In turn, Mukasey aided and abetted the wrongful acts of prior federal judges that had repeatedly blocked the reports and became involved in a series of covert activities to halt the reporting of these crimes (thereby making possible some of the nation's worst human tragedies and catastrophic events). Adding another dimension to the dismissal, among the federal offenses that were being reported were those in the government’s aviation safety offices, the FBI, and the CIA, that were responsible for the conditions that enabled four groups of terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11; and the conditions that prevented the FBI and CIA from acting on the hijacking scheme. In this way, Mukasey kept in place the people, and the culture, that caused or enabled to occur decades of major tragedies and these will enable other tragedies to occur. Tragedy Enabling Complicity by Members of Congress Letters sent sent to each member of the Senate Judiciary committee considering the nomination of Mukasey to be attorney general, making them aware of not only Mukasey's unsuitable conduct for the attorney general, but also the corrupt and criminal activities that have been covered up for decades, with tragic effects upon countless numbers of people. : September 18, 2007, letter. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) October 18, 2007 letter. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) All of the above are matters of fact. The cover-ups by members of Congress has gone on for decades. Some of the letters from insiders informing members of Congress of the crimes against the people and the country can be found by clicking here. Unfortunately, there will be no reaction from the "who-me-care" in-denial American public. More Details on Mukasey's Contempt for Prior And Future Deaths Enabled by Corrupt in in Key Government Positions On September 17, 2007, President George W. Bush selected retired U.S. district Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next U.S. attorney general, replacing Alberto Gonzales. Mukasey was presented as a law and order judge. But judicial records show that he will not hesitate to cover up for corruption in government, and will not hesitate to violate civil and constitutional due process protections and even violate criminal obstruction of justice statutes. In the books, Blowback, 9/11 and Cover-Ups , and History of Aviation Disasters: 1950 to 9/11, Mukasey is seen as obstructing justice, prostituting due process, and protecting criminal activities in government offices, including the government's aviation safety offices, that made possible the hijackings of four airliners on 9/11. Very briefly, here is part of the bizarre conduct involving Judge Mukasey: Former federal agent Rodney Stich, representing himself and a group of other former government agents, submitted a lawsuit for filing to the U.S. District Court in New York City. That lawsuit sought to report criminal activities that they had discovered as part of their official duties, and that were responsible for the conditions that enabled four groups of terrorists to hijack four airliners on September 11, 2001. These matters have been kept from the people by government hearings. That lawsuit was filed under the federal crime reporting statute that required anyone knowing of a federal crime to report it to a federal judge or other federal officer. And under federal statute, Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361, that provides the right to any citizen to file a lawsuit in federal court seeking a court order requiring a federal official to perform a required duty and to halt unlawful conduct. Purpose of Federal Filing by Former Federal Agent and Whistleblower The lawsuit sought to report corruption and federal offenses of certain people in: The government's aviation safety offices, where the responsibility existed to have ordered, before 9/11, the known measures to prevent airline hijackings. There is a history of misconduct that made possible a long series of air disasters. It was in those offices that the responsibility existed to order measures to prevent hijackings; not in the FBI or CIA. The FBI and other Department of Justice offices, where misconduct played a role in blocking agents from acting on evidence that could have prevented the hijacking scheme from being carried out. The CIA, where similar misconduct as in the FBI prevented agents from acting on the evidence of the planned airline hijacking scheme. The lawsuit also revealed the actions of other people, prior to the 9/11 hijackings, who acted to prevent this highly explosive information from being made public and from being corrected. Implicated in these acts were federal judges, a U.S. attorney, over 50 lawyers and law firms, among others. Judge Mukasey's misconduct included: Illegally and corruptly blocking the filing of the lawsuit for over 12 months. That blockage constituted: Obstruction of justice, by blocking the reports of criminal activities, insuring the continuation of the criminal activities responsible for prior national tragedies. Violation of civil and constitutional due process rights. Conversion of the courts and the judicial position into a criminal enterprise. Civil and constitutional due process required that the lawsuit, that was in proper form, be filed when received. It was not filed until 12 months after being received, after complaints were made to each of the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, advising them of the latest obstruction of justice action by a federal judge over whom they had supervisory responsibilities. It was then filed. Within minutes of being filed, Judge Mukasey signed an order dismissing the lawsuit. That dismissal violated: The due process requirements of a hearing, notice of hearing, and application of due process. The federal crime reporting statute, that required any federal judge to receive information of a federal crime that is presented to them, as part of the judge's administrative duties. Federal criminal statutes, including obstruction of justice, by blocking the report of federal crimes discovered by former federal agents. Federal judges, as part of their administrative duties (not judicial duties) are required under the federal crime reporting statute to receive information of a federal crime. They do not have the right to block such reports. And if they do block such reports, they are guilty of various criminal acts associated with obstruction of justice. Legal statutes, decisional laws, and rules of court, and constitutional due process, by blocking the filing of a lawsuit that would expose serious corruption with far-reaching consequences. Judge Mukasey blocked a former federal agent from reporting corrupt and criminal activities in certain government offices that were responsible for conditions enabling four groups of terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11, which, of course, killed almost 3,000 people, and led to a series of catastrophic events seeking the 9/11 hijackings as justification. He blocked the filing of a highly sensitive lawsuit that had far-reaching political ramifications. Federal law required that the court promptly files a lawsuit that is submitted when the filing fee is paid and the papers are in proper order. He protected criminal acts and their perpetrators, that played an unpublicized role in the conditions that enabled terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11, and continued the conduct that made that and prior air disasters possible, and would continue these matters with a continuation of the prior consequences. The lawsuit stated facts with reference to documented official documents. It did not state any ridiculous conspiracy theory. The consequences for what was stated in that lawsuit were catastrophic for many people, and for the United States. Powerful people do not want the public to know about these matters and to understand the significance. Besides revealing a dark side to the 9/11 tragedies, by appointing retired U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey to the attorney general's position, President Bush has assurance that there will be no meaningful investigation of any of the many corrupt activities that occurred during his presidency. A "Sophisticated" and Corrupt Version Of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Following two days of Senate hearing on retired U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey for U.S. Attorney General, a New York Times article (October 19, 2007), titled, “Presidents Can Trump Laws, Mukasey Says,” and stated: President Bush’s nominee for attorney general, Michael B. Mukasey, declined Thursday to say if he considered harsh interrogation techniques like waterboarding, which simulates drowning, to constitute torture or to be illegal if used on terrorist suspects. On the second day of confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Mukasey went further than he had the day before in arguing that the White House had constitutional authori6ty to act beyond the limits of laws enacted by Congress, especially when it came to national defense. He suggested that both the administration’s program of eavesdropping without warrants and its use of “enhanced” interrogation techniques for terrorist suspects, including waterboarding, might be acceptable under the Constitution even if they went beyond what the law technically allowed. Mr. Mukasey said the president’s authority as commander in chief might allow him to supersede laws written by Congress. In the case of the eavesdropping program, Mr. Mukasey suggested that the president might have acted appropriately under his constitutional powers in ordering the surveillance without court approval even if federal law would appear to require a warrant. “The president is not putting somebody above the law; the president is putting somebody within the law,” said Mr. Mukasey, who seemed uncomfortable with the aggressive tone, occasionally stumbling in his responses. “The president doesn’t stand about the law, but the law emphatically includes the Constitution” [What Mukasey was stating during his evasive testimony was that President Bush had the right to make law, and therefore, violations of other laws and the Constitution did not constitute actions above the law!] The remarks about the eavesdropping program drew criticism from the committee’s chairman, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, who told Mr. Mukasey that he was trouble by his answer, adding, “I see a loophole big enough to drive a truck through.” The questioning by the Democrats was tougher still regarding Mr. Mukasey’s views on presidential authority to order harsh interrogation techniques on terrorist suspects, including waterboarding which was used by the C.I.A. on some of those who were captured and held in the agency’s secr4et prisons after the Sept. 11 terror attacks. “Is waterboarding constitutional?” Mr. Mukasey was asked by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, in one of the sharpest exchanged. “I don’t know what is involved in the technique,” Mr. Mukasey replied. “If waterboarding it torture, torture is not constitutional.” [Feigning knowledge of what is widely known as waterboarding and torture, and evading an answer to torture.] Mr. Whitehouse described Mr. Mr. Mukasey’s response as a “massive hedge” since the nominee refused to be drawn into a conversation about whether waterboarding amounted to torture; many lawmakers from both parties, as well as civil liberties and human rights groups, have said it is clearly a form of torture. “I mean either it is or it isn’t,” Mr. Whitehouse continued. [Explaining to Mukasey what everyone else knows] Waterboarding, he said, “Is the practice of putting somebody in a reclining positi8on, strapping them down, putting cloth over their faces and pouring water over the cloth to simulate the feeling of drowning. Is that constitutional?” Mr. Mukasey again demurred, saying, “If it amounts to torture, it is not constitutional.” Among the Democrats, Mr. Leahy was especially critical of Mr. Mukasey, wondering aloud whether he had been pressured overnight by the White House to defend the administration’s view of its expanded powers in dealing with terrorist threats. “In your answers yesterday, there was a very bright line on questions of torture and the ability of an executive, or inability of an executive to ignore the law,” Mr. Leahy said. “That seems nowhere near as bright a line today.” I don’t know whether you received some criticism from anybody in the administration law night after your testimony,” he said, “but I sensed a different and a number of people here, Republican and Democratic alike, have sensed a difference.” In another article the following day, the New York Times (October 20, 2007) gave their column the heading, “Plainly, a Pick of Like Mind,” as it referred to Mukasey’s vague and circumspect answers that showed he was supportive of President George Bush’s policies on surveillance of the American people and on torture. The article stated: Bush Nominee Backs President on Powers. The senators questioning Michael B. Mukasey, President Bush’s nominee for attorney general … in his two days of testimony, it became clear that Mr. Mukasey believes presidential power to be robust, expansive and sometimes beyond the power of Congress to control. Mr. Mukasey said that Congress might be powerless to bar the president from conducting some surveillance without warrants.. Mr. Mukasey said, “It’s been obvious from events of the last several years that everybody is better off—the president is better off, the Congress is better off, the country is better off—when everybody’s rolling in the same direction.” [In other words, the congressional approval under Republican control, that enabled Bush to start a war, to engage in torture, to spy on American citizens, met Mukasey’s definition of “everybody is better off.”] Senator Russ Feingold stated in response: “So you are telling the committee, Judge, that anytime the president is acting to safeguard the national security against a terrorist threat, he des not hav4e to comply with statute?” Instead of responding to the question, Mukasey said: “You’ve suggested that I’ve gone overnight from being an agnostic to being a heretic.” Jack Goldsmith, a law professor at Harvard, said: “He did a masterful and appropriate job of repudiating the excesses of what the administration had done. But, at the same time, he appropriately defended executive power.” Referring to Bush’s alleged right to make law that violates the law and the Constitution, and therefore gives Bush the right to violate law and constitutional protections, the article stated: Asked, for instance, if the president was free to violate a law enacted by Congress, Mr. Mukasey said, “That would have to depend on whether hat goes outside the statute nonetheless lies wit5hin the authority of the president to defend the country.” Gabor Rona, international legal director of Human Rights First, said the commen6t was troubling and suggestive. “I simply don’t know where in the decision he could be reading in order to get the impression the Common Article 3 [Constitution] doesn’t apply to interrogation methodologies,” Mr. Rona said. “He seems to be leaving room for the argument made in the torture memos that the executive does have room to violate the Geneva Conventions.” Mr. Mukasey also said that Congress might be powerless to bar the president from conducting surveillance without warrants. The day after Mukasey’s testimony, I faxed a letter to the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee showing them where they could find judicial filings showing how Judge Mukasey criminally blocked the reporting of criminal activities related to the 9/11 hijackings and his violations of due process and constitutional protections to carry out the criminal acts. I also had sent an earlier letter (September 18, 2007) to the members of the Senate judiciary committee concerning Mukasey. The October 19, 2007, letter follows: Far More involved Than Simply Another Corrupt and Political U.S. Attorney General Much more is involved than simply another U.S. Attorney General. The following shows him unfit to be attorney general of the United States: Mukasey covered up for widespread corruption in high government places. Some of the misconduct was the deep-seated culture that made the 9/11 hijackings and other aviation tragedies possible, and the corruption that affected other areas associated with many human tragedies. Not only did he commit criminal acts by his obstruction of justice, he joined a conspiracy of other criminal acts that are defined at this web site and in the related books. To carry out the criminal obstruction of justice, Mukasey had to violate blocks of due process and civil rights protections (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) under the laws and constitution of the United States, as stated in the legal briefs filed. Mukasey has made possible the continuation of the same areas of corruption that will be responsible for future tragedies. These areas of corruptions that was responsible for years of preventable airline disasters, responsible for numerous human tragedies arising from the misconduct in other areas, check the federal court filings in which former federal agents sought to report corruption in high government covert and overt operations. And then there is the problem with cover-ups by members of Congress, a practice that has been documented for decades, making possible many of the tragedies felt by the American people and people of other countries. Sampling of Related Letters Letter sent to Senator Patrick Leahy, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, October 18, 2007. September 18, 2007, relating to former judge Michael Mukasey. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF), with copies to Senators Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, and the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sampling of earlier letters sent to Senator Patrick Leahy relating to Judge Mukasey, and also reporting the misconduct in the government's aviation safety offices and FBI and CIA, the ripple effects of which made the 9/11 hijackings possible. September 18, 2007. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) January 29, 2001. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) September 5, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) October 7, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) None responded to that letter, or a later one dated October 18, 2007. During the Senate hearings, Mukasey refused to hold that waterboarding was torture, or that it was illegal, thereby protecting President Bush and his aides that authorized what was considered worldwide to be torture. Mukasey also stated that he considered it legal for President Bush to violate laws or constitutional provisions by issuing orders authorizing the acts. Mukasey As U.S. Attorney General After Mukasey became Attorney General, he continued his prior tactics. A New York Times article (December 16, 2007), titled, "Court Inquiry on Tape Case Is Opposed," and stated: The Justice Department has urged a federal judge not to hold a hearing on the Central Intelligence Agency’s destruction of videotaped interrogations of two suspected Al Qaeda operatives, saying a judicial inquiry "is both unnecessary and potentially disruptive." The Justice Department on Friday angered members of Congress of both parties by saying the administration would not cooperate with planned inquiries into the tapes’ destruction until the department and the C.I.A. completed their preliminary investigation to determine whether laws were broken The hundreds of hours of tapes, destroyed in November 2005, showed the interrogations of two men identified as members of Al Qaeda: Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. Only Abu Zubaydah is cited in the government’s filing, which says the judge’s preservation order of June 2005 does not apply to him. A New York Times article (December 20, 2007) referring to U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, titled, "Mukasey Signs He’ll Be a Strong Bush Advocate," stated: Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey has signaled in his first weeks on the job that he intends to be a forceful advocate for some of President Bush’s most controversial anti-terrorism policies, even if that means angering Congressional leaders who hoped that he would instead focus on repairing the strained relationship between the Justice Department and Capitol Hill. He stepped up the call for telephone utilities to have legal immunity for their past cooperation with the eavesdropping without warrants by the National Security Agency. In recent days, Mr. Mukasey has also upset Congressional Democrats by saying he would refuse to share information about the Justice Department’s investigation of the Central Intelligence Agency/’s destruction of tapes of the interrogations of tops figures of Al Qaeda. Mr. Mukasey wrote in a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week that he was only following tradition in declining to reveal "nonpublic" information to Congress about a potential criminal investigation. He also rebuffed early calls from Congress for the appointment of a special prosecutor in the inquiry. Senator Patrick J. Leahy, who is chairman of the panel, said that the letter "evidences none of the commitment to work with this committee that we heard during the attorney general’s recent confirmation hearings" and that it showed "no appreciation for the oversight rule of Congress." Mr. Leahy said he feared that the attorney general, who took office on Nov. 9, as already part of "an effort to prevent accountability and to undermine checks and balances. [I had sent Leahy two letters during Mukasey’s confirmation process showing Mukasey’s obstruction of justice while Mukasey was Chief Judge of the Second Circuit in New York City.] Further details are found at www.defraudingamerica.com and especially the following previously posted links: ,www.defraudingamerica.com/lawsuit_nyc_911_index.html. A letter sent to Judge Mukasey on November 1, 2002, letter. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Index to 9/11 matters. 9/11 secrets. Another New York City Federal Judge Acting in Concert with Mukasey Among the other New York federal district judges involved in the 9/11 cover-ups is U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein. Former federal safety agent Rodney Stich sent two letters to Hellerstein, requesting that he notifies the lawyers representing next-of-kin of the information that Stich and his group of other government agents had discovered that would be material to revealing people and groups that had primary blame for the conditions enabling terrorists to hijack four airliners on that day. May 4, 2003, letter to U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) September 11, 2003, letter to Hellerstein. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Also formerly considered for Attorney General was former Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson. Look at an April 13, 2004, letter sent to Olson that explains another problem area associated with 9/11. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) There Were, Are, and Will Continue To Be Consequences From the Culture of Corruption in Key Government Positions Harm to the American public in non-violent areas. Harm to people of other countries. Harm to the few people in the United States fighting the high-level corruption in a meaningful manner. Harm in general. Harm inflicted on former federal agent and whistleblower during multiple schemes to silence him. Sampling of Early Consequences TWA Flight 800 U.S. Embassy Bombings 9/11 Easily-Preventable Multiple Hijackings These few examples of the horrors associated with airline disasters enabled to occur by documented corruption withheld from the American people. The standard culture of cover-ups in the United States enabled the corruption, cover-ups, to mutate into different areas. In the aviation area, although the continuing series of airline disasters eventually came to a halt for other reasons, the culture continued, and enabled to occur a number of easily preventable airline disasters. The inbred culture created the conditions that enabled four groups of terrorists to easily hijack four airliners within a few hours of each other and kill nearly 3,000 people. One of Over 200 Victims Choosing This Way to Die— Made Possible by Many Enablers in United States Consequences of Corruption, Cover-Ups, And Retaliation Felonies Not Limited to Aviation There were many other forms of victims from the systemic high-level corruption. These included for instance victims of the: Department of Justice prosecutorial misconduct, people being falsely charges with crimes in order to improve the prosecutors' career. The explosion of violent crime related to drug smuggling into the United States, in which CIA assets were major players. Series of financial frauds appearing every few years, with the latest housing and financial implosions surfacing in 2008. Seizure of assets from innocent people. And many other forms. These offenses are described in the books written by insiders. Corruption of the Type Described at this site does not occur in a vacuum. High-level corruption in one area is simply one tentacle of a widespread culture of corruption. And the consequences of that corruption−and the endemic cover-ups−have consequences in other areas. The culture of corruption affects the people and the nation in many other ways, That includes the latest series of financial frauds that has occurred in the housing and financial sectors. Also, the effect of the endemic corruption and endemic cover-ups−major parts of the culture in the United States−that enablers successful terrorist attacks upon U.S. interests. Harm to People Overseas From Culture Of High-Level Corruption and Lies in the United States In addition to the decades of harm resulting from the systemic corruption of key people and groups in the U.S. government, affecting aviation safety, financial, human rights, in the United States, there is the harm from outside sources brought about by the actions of U.S. politicians affecting people in other countries—such as the history of invading and killing foreigners—there are the successful "terrorist" attacks made possible by high-level corruption, and then there are the foreigners who are also victims from the same high-level corruption that adversely affects the American, but in a different form. Remains of a girl—about the age of the 9-year-old Killed in Tucson in January 2011. In criminal law, people are accomplices, and guilty, if they know of a criminal act and fail to report it to proper authorities and also to take efforts within their capability to halt their continuation. And there are endless numbers of accomplices that are complicit in these crimes and enablers of the consequences. Suggestion to people outside the United States. Become familiar with the documented systemic corruption in the United States and show the outrage lacking of people in the United States, and: Help expose the endemic corruption that seem to be acceptable to the American people, and maybe wake them up. Help to protect yourselves against the decades of ham inflicted upon people of other countries by the actions of U.S. politicians—supported by much of the American public. Examples: Serial lying by U.S. politicians to use as a pretense to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, killing tens of thousands of innocent people. U.S. politicians shifting enabling blame from their own corrupt actions that encouraged and enabled four groups of terrorists to simultaneously hijack four airliners, and shift the blame to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan—with the help of a dumbed-down American public that is mostly too lazy to learn the truth. Books by Unprecedented Number of Professional Insiders on Multiple Areas of Corruption And Catastrophic Consequences All of the books are available at amazon.com, in print and on the Kindle, and at many other Internet sites. They bring together the various pieces of the puzzle to better understand the overall picture, and why the same conditions continue year after year. Information on the books by former government agent Rodney Stich Sampling of early books reviews Sampling of complimentary letters/faxes to author/activist Rodney Stich. More information about these books by clicking here. Thanks to the Very Few Who Care Enough Thanks are given to those very very few who have contributed funds to the non-profit organization that helps to fund these exposure activities. Amazon.com Ordering Links Make Your Own Blog or Internet Site: Easy and Inexpensive Get your own blog site, domain name, or hosting site at the popular godaddy.com hosting service. A low-cost provider with excellent support service. Click on the following graphic for information and quick start. Return to: www.defraudingamerica.com www.druggingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.defraudingamericablog.com </body>