Complicity of Supreme Court Justices and sampling of tragedies enabled to occur.

<body> Evidence of How Supreme Court Justices Are Heavily Implicated in a Pattern of Corruption and National Tragedies Judicial and other records show the following: High-level corrupt activities were discovered by former federal agent Rodney Stich and a coalition of other government agents and insiders, that sought to expose the crimes. The initial discovery was corrupt activities within the government's aviation safety office (FAA), and then criminal activities in other areas of government. The serious consequences of the misconduct caused Stich to file the first of several lawsuits against the FAA and NTSB. Encountering the standard cover-ups in the executive and legislative branches of government, they decided to make a record of the criminal activities by reporting them to a federal judges under the specific mandatory requirements of the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, and the citizens' right to seek a court order to halt the unlawful conduct provided by Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Every attempt to report the federal crimes to a federal judge was blocked by federal judges. These obstruction of justice tactics were criminal acts. When Stich persisted in attempting to report the criminal activities to a federal judge, federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors retaliated by charging him with criminal contempt of court, denying him a jury trial, and sentencing him to federal prison. These retaliatory acts by federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors were additional crimes. Parallel efforts were made to block the reporting of high-level corruption by using a CIA-front law firm (Friedman, Sloan and Ross, San Francisco), which filed a sham and bizarre lawsuit that was barred by law. Lawyers for the CIA-front law firm and over a dozen California judges repeatedly, from 1982 to 1988, violated blocks of state and federal laws and constitutional protections. They knew, and surely planned, that their actions were blocking Stich from reporting and exposing the corruption that was continuing to adversely affect national interests and even result in periodic deaths in airline crashes associated with the corruption Stich sought to report. When Stich exercised federal defenses in the federal courts seeking to halt the great harm he was experiencing from the violations occurring in the California courts, federal judges blocked the defenses, as they had repeatedly prevented Stich and his group from reporting the criminal activities. From 1978 to 2005, the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court were repeatedly made aware of the underlying criminal activities gravely affecting national interests, and the obstruction of justice and retaliatory tactics by federal judges over whom they had supervisory responsibilities. The Justices repeatedly refused to act, aiding and abetting the underlying corruption and the corruption of the federal judges that were converting the federal courts into a criminal enterprise. Letters and petitions were repeatedly submitted to the Justices, without any effect. The Justices became criminally complicit in the corrupt activities. To make a record of the misconduct by the Supreme Court Justices, Stich filed a lawsuit against the Justices on the basis of their corrupt conduct. Unprecedented Lawsuit Naming Justices Of U.S. Supreme Court as Defendants Before deciding that this was a freak lawsuit, look at the facts. A federal lawsuit was filed against the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court on the basis of their cover-ups and complicity with other federal judges. October 20, 1989. (Adobe PDF) That lawsuit was assigned to former CIA legal counsel Stanley Sporkin, who was then a federal judge. The statements in that lawsuit, and their response, reveal that they were fully aware of the charges of criminal activities, the consequences, for which they claimed judicial immunity. This may sound bizarre, but the seriousness of the charges, the gravity of the consequences to the United States from the criminal activities and the cover-ups, dictated unusual attempts to circumvent the blocks. Key statements made in that lawsuit included the following: This lawsuit addresses (a) graft, corruption, and conspiracies related to a series of ongoing air tragedies; (b) government and judicial misconduct misusing facilities of the United States government to silence plaintiff's reporting, exposure, and correction of the air disaster, government, and judicial corruption; (c) subversion of our form of government, and of the laws and constitution of the United States of America by those paid and entrusted to uphold them; (d) the deaths of several thousand persons in air tragedies caused and made possible by the wrongful acts stated in this complaint. This cause of action specifically addresses the actions taken by the defendants [Supreme Court Justices] within the last 120 days. These include aiding and abetting of criminal actions, by denial of relief, from (a) unlawful, unconstitutional acts by indicted former bankruptcy trustee, Charles Duck, whose unlawful, unconstitutional and RICO acts, committed with the aid of federal judges in the Ninth Circuit, caused seizure and looting of plaintiff's assets; (b) the conspiratorial, unlawful, unconstitutional, acts of California state judge William Bunting. Both of these parties and groups acted in a judicially originated and engineered conspiracy to silence plaintiff's exposure of the multi-faceted corruption related to an ongoing series of air tragedies. The defendants are Justices of the United States Supreme Court who are paid, entrusted, and required, to uphold the laws and Constitution of the United States, and have supervisory responsibilities. The defendants include Justices William Rehnquist; Antonio Scalia; Sandra O'Connor; Anthony Kennedy; Thurgood Marshall; William Brennan; John Stevens; Byron White; Harry Blackmun. The defendants, by denying plaintiff relief from massive and repeated civil, constitutional, and racketeering activities which they are paid and entrusted to provide, have aided and abetted the following unlawful and unconstitutional acts that are part of the conspiracy to silence plaintiff's reporting o the underlying air disaster corruption: (a) protected the unlawfully unconstitutional, and conspiratorial actions of convicted trustee Charles Duck, who is part of a widespread Ninth Circuit bankruptcy racketeering enterprise comprising federal judges; (b) protected these federal judges whose wrongful acts financially destroyed thousands of people who sought the congressionally provided relief in Chapter 1, only to be looted by the judicial racketeering enterprise; (c) obstructed plaintiff's exposure and correction of deeply ingrained air safety corruption that has, is, and will continue to play a causative and contributory role in air tragedies; (d) protected the judicial conspiracy inflicting outrageous harms upon plaintiff, as described within this complaint; (e) undermining our form of government, and making meaningless the laws and constitution of the United States. U.S. district court judge Stanley Sporkin, former legal counsel for the CIA, dismissed the lawsuit against the Justices on January 17, 1990. (Adobe PDF) Stich then filed an appeal The Supreme Court Justices sought to have the appeal dismissed without filing appeal briefs through a motion for summary affirmance, raising various statements that admitted the charges but claiming they were immune from the consequences of their actions. (Adobe PDF) As could be expected with such serious corruption in high government places, the system protected itself and the appellate judges dismissed the lawsuit. But Stich made a record. However, protective media people made no reference to the lawsuit with its serious implications. Only One Favorable Response in 30 Years Letter from U.S. Supreme Court justice Byron R. White (October 28, 1991) in response to report of corrupt activities in government and in the federal courts, implying the seriousness of Stich's allegations but stating that as a single justice--without the cooperation of other justices--"I can be of no help to you." Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court do not send personal letters to any of the thousands of letters or briefs filed in the court. It appeared that he would have liked to help buts court not do so, by himself. As a matter of law, this is not correct, but real-world conditions are often quite different from what the law says. Legal Submissions to Supreme Court Justices in 2003 Letter to Rehnquist October 21, 2003. This letter was an extensive description of the criminal activities, the felony cover-ups by federal judges, and the sham legal actions that violated large numbers of federally protected rights for which federal remedies existed, which were denied to me by federal judges. The significance of the sham lawsuits was dual efforts to halt Stich's exposure activities by stripping him of the $10 million in assets that funded his exposure activities. Note: Every letter sent to Chief Justice William Rehnquist had copies sent to each of the other Justices. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, October 21, 2003, describing the criminal activities, including those areas constituting the primary and the secondary areas of blame for the conditions that enabled terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11, and the judges blocking the reports of such federal offenses, and the judges misusing federal courts to retaliate (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Rehnquist February 6, 2003. (Word) (Adobe) Letter to Rehnquist January 26, 2003. (Word) (Adobe) Submissions to Supreme Court justices in 2002 Letter to Rehnquist December 16, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter dated December 12, 2002, to clerk of U.S. Supreme Court addressing his lying in a previous letter as the clerk sought to support his refusal to file a petition with the court. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Rehnquist October 14, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to all Supreme Court justices dated May 1, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Justice Thomas May 3, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dated May 1, 2002. The primary issues in the petition were the massive civil and constitutional violations being inflicted upon Stich by a CIA-front law firm and the aiding and abetting by federal judges. The petition included details of how federal judges were blocking the reporting of criminal activities, and listed some of the criminal activities for which Stich and his group of other former government agents had discovered and sought to report. Justice Thomas refused to provide any relief, thereby aiding and abetting the criminal activities, some of which played key roles enabling the events of September 11, 2001, thereby insuring a continuation of the years of deja vu tragedies. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Rehnquist January 2, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Submissions to Supreme Court justices in 2001 Letters sent to Chief Justice Rehnquist and each of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States (April 11, 2001). (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition for emergency relief to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dated March 3, 2001. The purpose of this petition was to obtain relief from the civil and constitutional violations being inflicted upon Stich in efforts to block his exposure of criminal activities, paralleling the judicial block to such reports. The petition also reported the criminal activities that Stich sought to report under the federal crime reporting statute (Title 18 U.S.C. § 4). Some of the criminal activities that Stich sought to report were primarily responsible for the success of the September 11, 2001, terrorist hijackings. If Thomas--or any of the others who knew of these crimes--had responded to these charges, it is probable that the hijackers could not have succeeded in their plans that had such massive immediate and subsequent catastrophic consequences. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition for emergency relief February 8, 2001 to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, February 15, 2001. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (January 15, 2001), describing the corruption in the lower federal courts, their obstruction of justice tactics, their felony retaliation against the former federal agent seeking to report criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute. This letter was a follow-up to an emergency petition submitted to Justice Thomas. No response. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition for emergency writ to Supreme Court Justice Sandra O'Connor, submitted on January 5, 2001, under the authority of Supreme Court Rule 12 and Rule 22 providing for application to an individual Justice, and Title 28 U.S.C. § 1651. Even if relief was denied, a response is required under Supreme Court Rule 22.6, which says: "The Clerk will advise all parties concerned, by appropriately speedy means, of the disposition made of an application." Following their standard practice, the submission was never acknowledged. To have done so would have made a record of the fact that the Justices were made aware of the very serious charges and did nothing about them. No response, despite the legal responsibility to at least answer, such as denying the petition. But to do so would make an official record of their cover-ups and obstruction of justice. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, January 2, 2001. The letter described documented misconduct by federal judges, including their blocking of reports of criminal activities, retaliating against the former federal agent for seeking to report the criminal activities, and the civil rights violations that were part of the scheme initiated by a CIA related law firm in San Francisco (Friedman, Sloan and Ross) to block Stich's reporting of the criminal activities Stich discovered within the FAA and other government offices. Copies sent to each of the other Justices. No response. (Word) (Adobe PDF) Letters to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy (and the other Supreme Court Justices), January 2, 2001, sent to each of the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court referring to documented pattern of corruption by federal judges in the West Coast's Ninth Circuit, which included a 20 year pattern of repeatedly blocking the reporting of criminal activities, judicial retaliation for attempting to make such reports that were required to be made under the federal crime reporting statute, and the involvement of numerous federal judges in a scheme to take Stich's $10 million in assets that funded his public-spirited exposure of criminal activities. That scheme required 20 years of uninterrupted violations of dozens of state and federal laws compounded by violations of every legal and constitutional due process defense guaranteed to all citizens. No response to these letters stating documented facts revealing major crimes against the United States, including those perpetrated by federal judges over whom they have supervisory responsibilities and vicarious liabilities. This non-response, the cover-up, the obstruction of justice, reflects the seriousness of the corruption against the people by those in control of the system. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Submissions to Supreme Court justices in 2000 Petition for writ of certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court submitted on November 10, 2000, under Supreme Court rule 12, Title 28 U.S.C. § 1651, and Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. No response. The court never responded to this petition and never filed it, despite the legal requirement to do so. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Justice Rehnquist April 11, 2000. (Word) (Adobe) Letter to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, March 16, 2000, with similar information. No response. (Word) (Adobe) Submissions to Supreme Court justices in 1998 Notice of appeal of the contempt of court charge, in retaliation for a former federal agent seeking to report federal crimes in the government's aviation safety offices that enabled to occur numerous specific airline crashes--and which would continue for years thereafter--making possible the conditions enabling four groups of terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11. Petition submitted to U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit Judge Anthony Kennedy seeking stay of the prison sentence pending appeal of the judgment and sentence. Kennedy received this emergency appeal after he was named to be a Supreme Court Justice but before he left for the position. In that petition, Kennedy was notified of the criminal activities that former federal agent Rodney Stich had discovered, and that of other former government agents; the deaths associated with some of the corrupt activities, and the harmful effect upon other national issues, including national security due to the involvement of the FAA, FBI, and CIA. The wording on this petition to Judge Kennedy was similar to the wording filed on October 5, 1988, with the Ninth Circuit court of appeals. (After Kennedy denied the stay, Stich was sent to federal prison, where he filed another request, which was granted. Stich was released, only to be returned t federal prison when his appeal was denied, including denial en banc by the entire 9th Circuit list of judges. The great numbers of federal judges implicated in the criminal cover-ups and criminal retaliation reveals the awesome extent of judicial corruption and judges complicit in the resulting consequences of the criminal activities. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Submissions to Supreme Court justices in 1997 Letter to the clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, clerk, William K. Sutter, (August 24, 1997) making reference to his role in fraudulently refusing to file a petition for writ of certiorari which would have made a judicial record of certain major segments of the judicial and other corruption which Stich and his group of government agents had discovered, including the pattern of CIA drug trafficking into the United States, the Justice Department retaliation against Stich and his coalition for seeking to report these criminal acts, and the role of federal judges in these actions. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition for Writ of Certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court, which would have exposed a broad pattern of criminal and subversive activities as defined in Stich's books, the third editions of Unfriendly Skies and Defrauding America, and Drugging America. This filing would have made a Supreme Court record of these matters, and required the Justices to engage in a documented cover-ups of the grave charges. August 15, 1997. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) This petitioner was unlawfully refused to be filed, apparently to avoid making a record of the corrupt activities by federal judges over whom the Justices of the Supreme Court have supervisory responsibilities. This tactic repeated the prior pattern, which would be duplicated in the future, of Supreme Court judges blocking the reports of criminal activities and misusing the federal courts as a racketeering tool through judicially perpetrated civil rights violations while concurrently voiding legal and constitutional defenses. Submission to Supreme Court in 1991 March 4, 1991, Petition for emergency relief to Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking relief from the criminal contempt of court charges for attempting to report criminal activities to a federal court under the federal crime reporting statute (and for exercising federal due process remedies against record-setting violations of state and federal laws initiated by a CIA-front law firm). From 1986 to 1995, a succession of criminal contempt of court charges confined Stich to his home pending trial for attempting to report criminal activities under the federal crime reporting statute. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) And others. Submissions to Supreme Court 1976-1982 The first four petitions were sent to the U.S. Supreme Court as a result of the cover-ups by Ninth Circuit district and appellate judges blocking the reporting of criminal activities implicated in a series of aviation disasters, implicating people in the two government aviation safety agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board. Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, violations of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and misconduct). Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.)(table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible repeated crashes from the same sequestered problems). Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.) (addressing the long standing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct). Supreme Court Justices Are Complicit In Events on September 11, 2001 Among events enabled by Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court were the 9/11 hijackings that involved the corruption, cover-ups, and retaliatory actions that continued the conditions making it a "cake walk" for 19 terrorists to hijack four airliners. The Justices covered up for the criminal activities that Stich and his group of former government agents sought to report that had been involved in numerous prior catastrophic events, and which were involved in causing the conditions to continue making 9/11 possible. Repeated documented complicity by the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court resulted in a horrendous price. Sampling of Documentary Books Showing Government Conduct As It Really Exists 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. All of the books are available at amazon.com, in print and on the Kindle, and at many other Internet sites. 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. ; Email address for the author and activist against corruption in government: stich@rodneystich.com. For more information relating to the author and his activities put "Rodney Stich" into a search engine such as Google or yahoo.com. The links run into many tens of thousands. There Were— To Be Expected—Consequences! 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. Advance Notice of Bombings of U.S. Embassies in Africa FBI-DOJ personnel were given advance notice of the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa by a mole inside the al Qaeda cell headed by Ramzi Yousef. One was in Kenya and another in Tanzania. Areas of corruption involving key people in government, including years of drug smuggling by CIA assets and involving aiding and abetting by people in other government entities. Series of preventable aviation disasters enabled by corruption being covered up, those occurring from 1978. Fraud related to downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie. Downing of TWA Flight 800 departing New York. Bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa. Hijacking of four U.S. airliners on September 11, 2001. Sampling of Early Consequences Progression of Consequences 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 Victims of Less Catastrophic Events 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. These offenses are described in the books written by insiders. Harm to People Overseas From High-Level Corruption 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. Harm to the indifferent American public. 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. 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. Return to: www.defraudingamerica.com www.druggingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.defraudingamericablog.com </body>