Submissions to U.S. Supreme Court, cover-ups, and enablers of 9/11.

<body> 25 Years of High-Level Corruption Notifications To Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court Since 1978, former federal agent Rodney Stich, seeking to circumvent the standard cover-ups in government, sought to report to Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court the criminal activities that he initially discovered as a key federal aviation safety inspector-investigator, but also criminal activities in other areas of government operations that he later learned from his coalition of other government agents and insiders who provided him with detailed information and evidence. Their cover-ups enabled the corruption, deaths, and national tragedies to continue. In addition, Stich reported, and sought relief, from the series of unlawful and unconstitutional retaliatory actions taken against him that were parallel efforts to halt his exposure of criminal activities that were inflicting great harm upon major national matters, including national security, and in the aviation environment, resulting in numerous preventable deaths. These constituted additional crimes. Lawsuit seeking to report criminal activities of key people in the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that caused or enabled to occur several specific airline disasters, most of which was in Stich's immediate area of safety responsibilities as an FAA airline safety inspector. And one against the political board members of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), addressing their cover-ups of FAA misconduct in several specific airline disasters. These lawsuits were taken to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the Justices were made aware of the federal crimes and the resulting consequences. Under the federal crime reporting statute, they had an extra responsibility to receive information on the major federal crimes that were continuing to result in a continuing series of preventable aviation disasters. Combination of Attempting to Report Criminal Activities With Judicial Retaliation for Making Such attempts, Known to U.S. Supreme Court Justices Starting in 1986, a new phrase of complicity by the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. 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. As the former federal agent attempted to report additional criminal activities, some of which were learned from information provided by other former government agents and insiders, a series of schemes were taken to halt his exposure activities. These schemes involved federal judges, Department of Justice prosecutors, and a hoard of lawyers and law firms. These tactics included, for instance: Issuing a series of unlawful and unconstitutional orders permanently barring Stich from filing any papers in any federal district or appellate court. Those orders knowingly blocked him and his coalition from reporting the ongoing corruption of key government personnel, and blocked him from seeking federal defenses against a series of sham lawsuits that violated blocks of state and federal laws and constituted federal causes of actions for which federal judges had mandatory jurisdiction. Federal judges and Justice Department prosecutors charging Stich within criminal contempt of court for exercising a citizen's right, and a responsibility under the federal crime reporting statute, for seeking to report additional high-level criminal activities, and for seeking to halt the great harm from the sham lawsuits. Federal judges and Department of Justice trustees unlawfully and unconstitutionally seizing and liquidating the $10 million in assets that funded the exposure activities. Federal judges charging Stich with criminal contempt of court for exercising the legal and constitutional right to file objections to the unlawful and unconstitutional seizure and liquidation of his life assets. All of these wrongful judicial and Department of Justice acts, meeting the definition of a conspiracy, were taken to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Justices of the Supreme Court continued their prior conduct of aiding and abetting the conduct by refusing to provide any relief, even though they had the legal responsibility to do so. Legal submissions to Supreme Court justices to halt imprisonment of a former federal agent on a criminal contempt of court charge for attempting to report to a federal court−as required by the federal crime reporting statute−high-level ongoing corruption relating to an ongoing series of tragic, deadly, and catastrophic events. The issues included major violations of basic constitutional rights. Sampling of 1991 Legal Filings Relating to Corruption: Submission for relief from the third criminal contempt of court involving San Francisco federal judges Marilyn Petal and Vaughn Walker. March 4, 1991. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) March 4, 1991, Petition for emergency relief to Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking relief from the continuation of 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). (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) (html) Repeated criminal contempt of court charges by federal district court judges Marilyn Petal and Vaughn Walker, resulting in his arrest and then house arrest for five years, again for attempting to report criminal activities and exercising federal defenses against the violations of federally protected rights that were parallel efforts to halt his exposure activities. Stich filed a petition for emergency relief with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. January 22, 1992. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition to Supreme Court for emergency relief, return of civil rights permanently terminated by series of unlawful and unconstitutional injunctive orders barring Stich from filing any papers in any federal court. (August 15, 1994) The effect−and surely the intent−was to block Stich from filing papers under the federal crime reporting statute to report criminal activities in government offices to a federal judge. The other probably intent was to block Stich from exercising the multiple federal defenses against the massive numbers of repeated violations of state and federal laws and constitutional protections. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Sampling of Supreme Court filing in 1994: Petition to Supreme Court for emergency relief, return of civil rights permanently terminated by series of unlawful and unconstitutional injunctive orders barring Stich from filing any papers in any federal court. (August 15, 1994) The effect--and surely the intent--was to block Stich from filing papers under the federal crime reporting statute to report criminal activities in government offices to a federal judge. The other probably intent was to block Stich from exercising the multiple federal defenses against the massive numbers of repeated violations of state and federal laws and constitutional protections. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Sampling of Supreme Court filings in 1995: Letter to Ginsberg, January 16, 1995. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Sampling of Supreme Court filings in 1997: 1997 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. This petition was submitted on August 15, 1997. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) It was improperly refused filing, 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. Letter to the clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, clerk, William K. Sutter, (August 23, 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. August 1997 petition to the United States Supreme Court reported the corruption relating to a series of prior airline crashes and the judicial and Justice Department actions to block these reports, was submitted to the Court in August 1997. (Word) (html) Sampling of Supreme Court filings in 1998: Letter to U.S. District Judge Milton Schwartz, June 19, 1998, making reference to his role in blocking the reports of criminal activities and his role in the scheme initiated by the CIA-front law firm. (MS Word) Prior to seeking relief from the Justices of the Supreme Court from the contempt of court sentence, Stich filed a petition for emergency relief with the 9th Cir. for contempt of court sentence. (October 5, 1998) (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Sampling of filings in 1999: [To be uploaded] Sampling of Supreme Court filings in 2000: Letter to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, March 16, 2000, with similar information. No response. (Word) (Adobe) (html) Letter to Justice Rehnquist April 11, 2000. (Word) (Adobe) (HTML) 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. This petition described the pattern by federal judges of blocking the reports of criminal activities that amounted to obstruction of justice, the civil rights violations that were part of the scheme to block these reports, and other violations. No response. The court never responded to this petition and never filed it, despite the legal requirement to do so. November 10, 2000. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Several criminal acts were committed, including obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting, and others. Letter dated December 12, 2000, 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. (Word) (Adobe) 2001 Supreme Court Submissions, Shortly Before September 11, 2001 During 2001, shortly before the corruption that was being reported to the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court enabled 19 terrorists to hijack four airliners, kill nearly 3,000 people, and led to the start of war against Afghanistan and Iraq, federal court filings and submissions to the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court occurred. Some are show here: Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, January 2, 2001, and each of the other Justices. 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. No response. (MS Word) And letter: (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Similar January 2, 2001, letter to Justice Ginsberg. (Adobe PDF) Letters to all of the 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. Letter to Justice Souter, January 2, 2001. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) January 5, 2001, Petition for emergency writ to Supreme Court Justice Sandra O'Connor, submitted 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. January 5, 2001. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition for emergency relief February 8, 2001 to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. (MS Word) Letter to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (February 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) Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Petition for emergency relief, 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. 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) Known to the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court was the filing of legal papers in the federal courts at Reno, Nevada, seeking to report: The ongoing corruption of certain employees in the government's aviation safety offices that would primarily responsible for the conditions that make it easy to hijack four airliners on 9/11. The ongoing corruption of certain employees in the FBI and other Department of Justice offices. The ongoing corruption of federal judges that prevented reporting of the corruption in the government's aviation safety offices and within the various offices of the U.S. Department of Justice. The pattern of corrupt, unlawful, and unconstitutional actions of a hoard of lawyers and law firms that were filing sham lawsuits against the former federal agent that were parallel to the obstruction of justice tactics by federal judges, both groups seeking to halt his continuing attempts to publicize the deadly corruption. The prior pattern of cover-ups by the Supreme Court Justices, that enabled to occur a continuation of preventable airline disasters but other consequences of the corruption in the various government entities, including the FBI-DOJ, CIA, and the government's aviation safety offices. The consequences would, before the end of the year, be even more dramatic than the previous consequences of the reported corruption. A permanent cover-up would then be needed to prevent the public from learning about the enablers in the Supreme court of the United States. Among the many people who suffered from the documented cover-ups and who became enablers to the fate suffered by many others: September 11, 2001: Supreme Court Justices' Role In the Nation's Worst Terrorist Attack The prior cover-ups by the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court had their most publicized consequences on September 11, 2001. But the public was never informed of their role in the 3,000 deaths on that day. However, earlier terrorist attacks had already occurred, made possible by the corruption of people in the Department of Justice. Index of 9/11 events. 9/11 Enablers. Role of al Qaeda mole in providing information that would have prevented 9/11. Greatest Documented Corruption Involving Supreme Court Justices The Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court were now involved in covering up for criminal activities that enabled to occur a list of prior preventable airline disaster, and were now involved with covering up misconduct in key government positions that made possible a continuing series of aviation and other terrorist-caused disasters. The felony involvement by the Supreme Court Justices, even without the many other key people and grounds involved, necessitate total cover-up by every check and balance. Necessity of Continued Cover-Ups by The Justices−As If Nothing Happened As if the greatest terrorist attacks in the nation's history has not occurred−and probably to cover up for their complicity as key enablers−the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court continued to cover up for the ongoing criminal activities that made these catastrophic events to occur. They again disregarded the future consequences that would be enabled to occur by their continuing cover-ups, that by then were far more series than simply obstruction of justice crimes: Supreme Court Justices' Cover-Ups in 2002: Former federal agent Rodney Stich again sought to report the documented corruption that was responsible for the conditions enabling and probably encouraging the four groups of terrorists to so easily hijack four airliners. Lawsuit filed in in New York after 9/11, seeking to report the corruption in the FAA and DOJ responsible for the conditions that enabled 9/11 airline hijackings to occur. Lawsuit filed in the federal courts in District of Columbia. Same as the lawsuit filed in the federal courts in New York City. By that time, so many federal judges and Justices were implicated in the 9/11 events that it was more important than before to block them. They were promptly dismissed, violating the crime reporting statute and numerous procedural due process requirements. No one feared the consequences, as a powerful force in the federal government was protecting the guilty. Letter to Chief Justice Rehnquist, January 2, 2002, advising him of the latest judicial obstruction of justice. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dated May 3, 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 Justice Thomas May 3, 2002. (Word) (Adobe) Letter to Rehnquist October 14, 2002. (Word) (Adobe) Letter to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, December 16, 2002. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Supreme Court Justices' Cover-Ups in 2003: Letter to Chief Justice Rehnquist, February 6, 2003. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF). Letter to Rehnquist October 21, 2003. (The same letter was sent to Justice Thomas and Souter.) 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. (Word) (Adobe) Supreme Court Justices' Cover-Ups in 2004 Letter to Justice Rehnquist, January 30, 2004 (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to U.S. Supreme Court, January 30, 2004. (MS Word) (Adobe pdf) Appeal brief, New York Court of Appeals, June 3, 2004. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Appeal en banc New York Court of Appeals, September 7, 2004. (MSWord) (Adobe PDF.) Oral argument given by Rodney Stich to court of appeal judges in New York City. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Supreme Court Justices' Cover-Ups in 2005 Petition for writ of certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court ("appeal") of dismissal by Judge Michael Mukasey, New York, January 5, 2005. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition to U.S. Supreme Court, Jan 5, 2005. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition following dismissal in New York by Judge Michael Mukasey, Jan 20, 2005. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Petition, January 20, 2005. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Justice Rehnquist, January 21, 2005 (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) Letter to Rehnquist, January 24, 2005. (MS Word) (Adobe PDF) At this stage, with all the other crises affecting the American people, people have stated to Stich that the information about the systemic corruption that he documented could never be made known to the American public. This is probably correct, and the people must suffer the future consequences from continuing cover-ups. The information stated here is documented, and constitutes prima facie evidence of these matters, and not simply opinions. Miscellaneous other filings: Supreme Court index. Supreme Court Justices' involvement. Communications with U.S. Supreme Court. Justices Approving Sentencing to Prison A Former Federal Agent For Reporting Ongoing High-Level Corruption The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court approved federal judges−over whom they had supervisory responsibilities−sentencing an American citizen to prison for attempting to report, under the mandatory crime reporting statute, to federal prison for seeking to report ongoing criminal activities resulting in great and irreparable harm to millions of people, and the public as a group, and to national security. One segment of the nation's worst scandal. Will it ever be recognized by the people? List of books on systemic corruption Start a stampede to clean up systemic corruption in the United States that has subverted the nation and thee people Start with exposing these documented instances of high-level corruption. Return to: www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com www.defraudingamericablog.com www.transoceanairlines.com More information about these books by clicking here. Return to: www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com www.defraudingamericablog.com www.transoceanairlines.com </body>