When you consider that the Occupy efforts appear to be a collaboration of committed individuals who have various concerns and complaints, many of which are caused by corporations, politicians, bureaucracy, greedy examples of those with more than most, etc.  The problems are social, economic, and political.  I can see my reader’s point

These are the same people who are helping to enable corporations and various hands and arms of government that are causing the very situations that are creating whistleblowers.  Greed, power mongering, cronyism, influence pedaling, unethical and criminal contracting activities, fraud, waste, abuse, and a host of other ills are examples.  Honorable people when confronted by this try to change it, report it, fix it and usually get the stuffing kicked out of them for their efforts in the climate we are dealing with in this country today. 

I agree that I should help promote the support of those who have the courage, determination and commitment to go be an active part of peaceful protest in events being staged across the nation.  Even if you cannot take part in the sign holding and waving, stop by and talk, find out why these people are down there and what they need to stay well and comfortable.  This is especially true in parts of the country that are now turning cold, wet and inhospitable.  My reader suggested donating supplies that are so critically needed like, warm coats, gloves, hats, food, especially things that can be cooked or heated under outdoor camping conditions.  Waterproof plastic storage boxes, tents, sleeping bags, cooking utensils, first aid supplies, those hand warmer sticks you can buy at sporting goods stores, and anything else that will keep up the volunteer’s spirits and energy.  

My reader reported that the Occupy Tacoma (in Washington State, south of Seattle, in a park on Pacific Avenue, downtown, at the cross street with the new bridge across the Puyallup River) is a neat and orderly effort showing a positively motivated cooperative of young and old that demonstrates a stellar example of the best of human effort.  They, who are giving the best they can to make a difference and to help the majority of us break out of our complacency and paralyzed condition, deserve our support and help. 

When those with wealth and political control, who continue to take and take, and manipulate things to the detriment of the majority (working class and poor)  in this country are taken to task, and our society balances and rights itself again, we will also be reducing the number of whistleblowers, because there will be less crap and corruption to report,  and to fight against in our work places. 

Please take time this week or weekend and do what you can for your local “Occupy ____________” effort.  If you can report on your local Occupy activities, please comment here on this site; you are welcome to voice your observations and opinions. 

As for me, I am going to the coat closet, storage room and pantry right now! 

GFS

GFS

—————————

From: Douglas Kinan [mailto:dougkinan@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 7:46 PM

Subject: Re: Today’s press release: Judicial Corruption must be stopped!

All: I’m rooting for all of you, but after 13 years of trying, I’m convinced you will not succeed. The court process for whistleblowers is rigged. According to the published April 2008 boast by the Department of Defense, none have gone to trial yet Lawbreaking for cash is standard operating procedure in the courts. Based on my firsthand knowledge, corruption and crime in the courts is the norm and all of you have evidence to prove it. For more evidence, see the attached pleadings. Questions, comments and criticisms are welcome.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

DOUGLAS K. KINAN

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 08-10477-WGY

ROBERT M. GATES

Judge William G. Young

Defendant

MOTION FOR THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUDGE MARK L. WOLF TO INTERVENE

AND FOR JUDICIAL/ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW CONCERNING JUDGE WILLIAM

G. YOUNG’S DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS BASED ON SPECIAL AND

EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES PURSUANT TO THE RULE OF LAW, THE

EQUAL JUSTICE STANDARD, DUE PROCESS, THE “CLEAN HANDS” DOCTRINE,

ATTORNEY INTIMIDATION, FRAUD ON THE COURT AND THE CODE OF

CONDUCT FOR UNITED STATES JUDGES ADOPTED BY THE JUDICIAL

CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES’

NOW COMES the Plaintiff, pro se, in

CA No. 08-10477-WGY

cross

referenced with

CA No. 99-11855-WGY and CA No. 99-11465-WGY

and

moves the Honorable Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf to intervene and

conduct a judicial/administrative review of Judge William G.

Young’s discretionary decisions on the grounds that Judge Young

gave every benefit of the doubt to the Defense Contract

Management Agency’s (“DCMA”)extensive pattern and practice of

verified criminal activity and deliberate acts of continuing

retaliation.

“The Code of Conduct provides guidance for judges on issues ofjudicial integrity and independence, judicial

diligence and impartiality, and the avoidance of impropriety or even its appearance. Judges may not hear cases in

which they have either personal knowledge of the disputed facts, a personal bias concerning a party to the case… :’

I

On September

28, 2009,

Judge Young denied Plaintiff’s Verified

Motion and Memorandum dated September

24, 2009,

without explanation.

Judge Young’s decisions preempts the DCMA and the Department of

Justice from responding to Plaintiff’s “First Amended Complaint”

and “Combined Verified Motion and Memorandum” filed with the

Court on or about June

14, 2008 and September

24, 2009

respectively2.

Judge Young’s denial of Plaintiff’s pleadings bends the law to

protect crime, including the Department of Justice’s

participation in the willful and deliberate frame ups of many

innocent citizens (even one is too many) .

Judge Young’s decision ignores relevant and material facts,

defends the case for the Defendant, allows the DOJ to remain

silent concerning their participation in criminal activity and,

for a second time, demonstrates a bias toward Plaintiff’s pro se

status, which deprives Plaintiff of equal justice, due process

and an evidentiary hearing on the merits. Judge Young has

absolute and unequivocal evidence

􀁾􀁴􀁴􀁾􀁾􀁾􀂷􀁤􀀽􀀭􀁁􀀹􀀮􀁇

to prove a fraud on

the court, which is contained in court records.

2 Neither AUSA Christine

1. Wichers or the DOl

offered counterarguments or a defense to the verified criminal

activity outlined in Plaintiff’s pleadings except to characterize Plaintiff’s lawful reporting and pleadings as being

“irrelevant, repetitive, conclusory, inflammatory, prolix, disjointed, unintelligible, impenetrable, swollen with irrelevant

rhetorical flourishes, muddled, personal and vindictive.”

Judge Young never bothered to ask AUSA Wichers to explain in open court why Plaintiffs reporting of the DCMA’s

continuing violations to include, heinous and violent acts against women (and their children), sexual harassment, well

planned discrimination, intentional exclusion of black candidates from working in the Equal Employment Office, quid

pro quo promotions in exchange for false and/or tainted testimony or silence, suborning

􀁰􀁥􀁾􀁪􀁵􀁲􀁹􀀬

fabricating documents

and reports to pretend complaints were investigated when they were not, frame ups, and widespread public corruption

and criminal activity subsidized by millions of tax dollars is “irrelevant, repetitive, conclusory. inflammatory, prolix.

disjointed, unintelligible, impenetrable, swollen with irrelevant rhetorical flourishes, muddled, personal and

vindictive. “

2

Judge Young’s treatment toward overwhelming evidence of a rigged

promotion and a verified fraud on the court coupled with the

direct threat and intimidation of US Marshal Frank Dawson

3

during

a court proceeding should not be cavalierly overlooked by denying

Plaintiff’s motion. (See Attachment #1, Affidavit prepared for

Judge Young, which was withheld and/or concealed and Attachment

#2, Dawson’s email dated March 27, 2009

4

.)

Judge Young’s decision embraces the Defendants’ verified criminal

activity, subsidized by millions of taxpayer dollars and ensures

the pattern and practices as outlined in my 30-page affidavitS and

verified complaints shall continue.

The truth, facts and evidence in the pleadings and the official

government record are undisputed and self-evident. Judge Young

ignored the weight of the evidence, which is violative of

Plaintiff’s vested legal right. (See Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S.

6

)

Respectfully submitted,

􀁌􀀾􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁾􀁾

Douglas K.

􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁾

34 Glenburnie Road

Boston, MA 02132

617-323-6171

October 10, 2009

3

Dawson told Plaintiff that the [violations in

Judge Wolfs court] was “none of Judge Wolfs business.” PlaintifT

disagreed with Dawson.

4

Dawson’s told Plaintiff that ifhe reported public corruption to the Public Corruption Officer, Brian Kelly,

that he would prosecute Plaintiff as a “stalker.” Dawson stated that Kelly thinks that Plaintiffs reporting is

“bothersome.”

5

Plaintiffs required government participation in the Gerard Francis investigation. See also Plaintiffs

affidavit in the Harrison complaint and the contemporaneous emails in the VireJla frame up.

6

“Marbury v. Madison is a landmark case in United States law. This landmark decision helped define the

‘checks and balances’ ofthe American form of government.” “One ofthe key legal principles on which

Marbury relies is the notion that for every violation of a vested legal right, there must be a legal remedy.”

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Douglas K. Kinan, hereby certify I

request, by First Class Mail, prepaid

served the

to:

within

Honorable Chief Judge Mark

John J. Moakley Courthouse

1 Courthouse Way

Boston, MA 02210

L. Wolf

Christine J. Wichers

Assistant United States Attorney

John J. Moakley Courthouse

1 Courthouse Way, Suite 9200

Boston, MA 02210

Cornelius J.P. Sullivan

51 Ellison Street

Mattapan, MA 02126

L>-.

{L-.

􀁲􀁊􀁾􀁾

Douglas K.

􀁾􀁮􀁡􀁮

34 Glenburnie Road

Boston, MA 02132

617-323-6171

October 10, 2009

4

ATTACHMENT

#1

AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF MASSACHUSETIS

COUN1Y OF SUFFOLI<

I, Douglas K. Kinan, of Suffolk County provide this affidavit to the Honorable Judge William G.

Young, as a result of a March 25, 2009 effort to retaliate, harass, intimidate, humiliate and

embarrass me, place my job

in

jeopardy and silence me concerning my reporting of public

corruption, verified felony conduct and fraud on the court, condoned by United States Attorney

Michael

J. Sullivan’s office, knowing that this sworn statement is

not confidential.

In the interest of substantial and equal justice and

in

accordance with the United States Marshals

Service, Judicial Security Division

aSD),

which “is committed to the protection of the judicial

process – by ensuring the safe and secure conduct of judicial proceedings and protecting federal

judges, jurors and other members of the federal judiciary,” I askJudge Young to inqUire as to

who sent US Marshal Francis P. Dawson, Jr. (“Dawson”) and why and whether or not Dawson’s

visit was meant to interfere with the judicial process

in

my federal civil complaint before Judge

Young’s court (08-1047? – WGY.)

There is no doubt in my mind that Dawson’s visit was intended to scare, embarrass and silence

me and interfere with my civil complaint. Dawson’s visit was a disturbing and menacing act.

Dawson had no

􀁾􀁵􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁲􀁩􀁴􀁹

coming to my job at the court and he had no business acting contrary

to JSD responsibilities and his job. No judge or no judge’s clerk in his or her right mind would

have sent Dawson to see me. Dawson’s visit demonstrates that someone in the US Attorney’s

office, once again, has no difficulty

in

destroying my livelihood and my reputation in the court.

I hereby solemnly swear and affirm:

DAWSON’S VISIT TO SUFFOLK PROBATE COURT -10:30 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.

Upon my arrival to work on March 25, 2009, I was informed by employee, Tina Cole that at

approximately

8:15

a.m. a US Marshall called, “looking for you.” The call was forwarded to

Peter Solomon who operates the switchboard.

Mr.

Solomon informed me that he asked this US Marshall if he would like to be connected to my

voicemail and leave a message. Dawson said, no, that he would come to my job and visit me.

At approximately

10:40

a.m., an individual walked into my office, which is open and public. In

public view and earshot and approximately four feet from the line of attorneys who fue court

pleadings with me, Dawson showed a badge and credentials, introduced himself as US Marshal

Frank Dawson. (Dawson’s business card is: “U.S. Department ofJustice, United States Marshals

Service, Francis P. Dawson,]r., “Frank,” Deputy U.S. Marshal.”)

2

Dawson told me that his visit to my job was prompted by a letter that I had faxed to Judge

Gertner on February 26,2009

(Attachment

#1) dated February 24,2009, and that he “should

have been here on the 27

th

.”

The timing of Dawson’s visit, coupled with his comments corresponds more to my letter of

March 24, 2009

(Attachment

#2).

I asked Dawson who sent

him

to see me. His first version (Dawson gave three versions) was

that Judge Gertner sent

him

and, “The judge don’t want anymore letters.” I informed Dawson

that I admiredJudge Gertner, I would not do anything to offend her or any judge in any way, I

was complying with the federal statute and I had sent Judge Gertner and other members of the

federal bench letters in the past, without consequence. Dawson then changed his story and said

Judge Gertner’s clerk sent him. In the afternoon during Dawson’s follow up phone conversation

he emphatically stated, “I’m doing this on my own.”

I informed Dawson that I would not and did not send any threatening letters to anyone, I am not

a violent person and essentially I have always had my daughters’ reputation to anchor my conduct

to

all

ethical, moral, legal and civic standards. Dawson said, “Neither was I(acynski” (referring to

Una-Bomber, Ted Kaczynski.

Dawson told me that I was

in

violation of a federal law and that I am not supposed to send

letters to judges. I informed Dawson that I work for the court, that his information was a

surprise to me and that judges get letters here everyday. Dawson said that a “2007 federal law

(“1521

or something”) supported his claim but that he did not remember the cite. Dawson later

changed his story and said he was recendy in trairiing and learned of

this

new law.

I informed Dawson that I was lawfully required to report felony conduct to a “judge” and asked

him

if he wanted to see the statute confirming such reporting. He said he did. I left my

operations office to get the cite and returned with the letter to AUSA and Public Corruption

Chief Brian Kelly dated December 24,2007 (Attachment #3) showing the cite

(18 USC 4

&

2(il), which was also footnoted

in

my February 24, 2009; letter, which Dawson claimed had

prompted his visit. .

Upon my return I closed the door because there was a line of attorneys approximately four feet

away listening to our discussion, which was embarrassing. I asked Dawson to read the Kelly

letter and that I(elly had never notified me that my letters offended

him

or anyone else. Dawson

said he did not want to read the letter, folded it and placed it in his book. We both agreed that he

should check with I(elly to see

if

I was “bothersome” and get back to me.

After Dawson read the footnote requiring reporting to a “judge” he said, it was not the “whole

law,” that the law has changed and proceeded to tell me that he was recendy in training

in

which

he learned of a new law, which prohibits letters being sent to judges. I informed Dawson that I

had no knowledge of the new law, informed

him

that I would respect any law and asked him if

he would send me that cite. He said he would.

We continued our discussion and I informed Dawson that I was reporting the frame ups of

innocent individuals, other crime and public corruption, to include the current retaliatory frame

3

up of whisdeblower Ken Pedeleose and that Kelly of the DOJ and Foley of the FBI refuse to

investigate.

I also informed Dawson that Foley thinks the frame-ups are amusing. I

informed

Dawson that unless there is a law that supercedes

18 USC 4,

my lawfully required reporting

needed to be recognized to prevent more harm to innocent individuals. Dawson again repeated

that

I

should not be sending letters to judges.

Dawson then inquired as to how

I got Judge Gertner’s fax number. I

informed Dawson that it

was public information, contained

in the Massachusetts Lawyers Diary (“Redbook”) and/or

I

may have called Judge Gertner’s office, using the “Redbook” to obtain her fax number. I asked

Dawson if he wanted to see the Directory. He said he did.

I gave him

a copy of the “Redbook”

pointing out the Federal District Court Directory on Page

19. He said it was a “2006″

book. I

offered

him the 2008

version of the Redbook to my right and asked if he wanted to see that

version. He said

Cl

no.” .

The

timing

and comments surrounding Dawson’s visit corresponds, not to my letter of February

24, 2009

but to my letter of March 24, 2009;

because during our discussion Dawson brought up

the ”Jeffrey Auerhahn” matter, which was previously before Honorable Judge Mark Wolf and

told me that Auerhahn’s conduct was “none ofJudge Wolf’s business.”

I

disagreed with Dawson

and informed

him

that Auerhahn’s conduct was Judge Wolfs business and that Judge Wolf acted

appropriately.

Dawson then informed. me that his job requires

him

to check on people who are “bothersome”

to the judiciary and to the United States attomey’s office. I informed Dawsonif that were the

case then why haven’t I received notice during the approximately

10

years that I have been

notifying I<elly and others at the US Attorney’s office. I asked Dawson if he would be sure to

check with I<elly and with Foley to find out ifmy lawfully requited reporting was “bothersome

7

‘

and to let me know.

During the course of our discussion Dawson asked if

I had a complaint in court. I told him

I

did. He also asked for my date of birth, twice, but not in succession.

I

informed Dawson there

was no reason for

him

to have that information.

Dawson told me that I was “consumed” by this and to “get on with my life.” Dawson said,

”You have a good thing going here (meaning my job at the court), don’t

ruin

it.”

Dawson restated many times that I should not be sending letters to judges and that if there was

no remedy from the US Attorney’s office or the FBI that I should

talk

to the press. Dawson

suggested that I

talk

with Shelly Murphy or Dave Abel at the Boston Globe.

AF!ERNOON PHONE DISCUSSION WITH DAWSON -12:50 -1:08 p.m.

Walking into my administrative office for lunch, my phone indicated that

I

had a message

waiting. It was from Dawson.

I

returned the call and left Dawson a voice message. He returned

my call.

Dawson’s tone was menacing and tough. He began by telling me that he was “extending my

message to include no more letters to anyone at the US attorney’s office.” Dawson said that if I

sent any more letters that he would, “come and talk to you again and open up a case against you,

4

then you’ll

go

into a [national] database as an “inappropriate communicator.” Dawson told me

that [Kelly] said I was an “annoyance.” “They don’t want to hear from you. Don’t even send

them a Christmas card. They are not your friends.”

I informed Dawson that

all of my reporting to the Chief of Public Corruption, Kelly, was in

the

context of reporting crime, public corruption and verified felony conduct-and reminded Dawson

of the frame-ups, including the current frame up of whistleblower, Ken Pedeleose.

Dawson told me that lam “fmding out too much” that I have the “propensity to stalk them.”

Dawson said, “I’m doing you a favor. I’m trying to nip it

in

the bud.” I informed Dawson that I

wouldn’t threaten or stalk anyone.

Dawson told me that my reporting is nothing but “rumor, speculation, conjecture and hearsay.”

I informed Dawson that if the firsthand information

in

my thirty-page affidavit were false that I

would not be talking to

him

from a courthouse. I informed Dawson that my affidavit was paid

off to conceal the DCMAE’s verified criminal activity, as were other cases; .

I informed Dawson that my letters did not threaten anyone, there was no name-calling and no

defamatory statements in my lawfully requited reporting. Dawson told me, “It’s how they

perceive it.” Each time I provided a fact to Dawson, he rebutted my facts with a comment about

no more letters. Dawson repeated his belief that

I

was “consumed” by this.

I informed Dawson that his visit to my job was improper. He said he was just “doing his job.” I

informed Dawson that I would

think

about everything he said. Dawson said I could file a

complaint, that he did not care.

Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury

this 26th

day of March, 2009.

􀁦􀀮􀀾􀀮􀁻􀁌􀀮􀀮􀁾

March 26, 2009

Douglas 1<. I<i.nan

———————————-

ATTACHMENT

#2

.”.b..x!iOO._

MAIL …….tI: .. It,:!,

Cbsslt

: Inappropriate Communication(s)

Friday, March 27, 20099:51 AM

j

hom:

“Dawson, Frank (USMS)” <Frank.Dawson2@usdoj.gov>

To: dougkinan@yahoo.com, douglas.kinan@jud.state.ma.us

Mr. Kinan,

I would like to reiterate what we discussed the other day, in person and on the phone. The U.S. Marshals

attention was drawn towards you because you

had originally sent an Inappropriate Communication (a fax) to JUdge Gertner. But during our meeting you

admitted sending letters to other Federal Judges, and

also to several Assistant U.S. Attorney’s.

As an agency that is responsible for the safety and security of the Federal JUdiciary, as well as the U.S.

Attorney’s, the U.S. Marshal Service (USMS) is

advising you that you should immediately cease from any further attempts to communicate with any Federal

Judges or Federal Prosecutors.

If you do communicate with them in any fashion it will be construed as an Inappropriate Communication, and

will be investigated by the USMS..

No Judge or Prosecutor seeks to have any communication with you at all.

Therefore the U. S. Marshals Service is politely advising you to not contact anyone mentioned above by

any form ‘of writing, e-mail, phone call or in any

other manner. If you partake in any Inappropriate Communication(s) the U.S. Marshals Service will be calling

on you to conduct an in-depth

interview, so please comply with this advisory.

Remember I know we specifically discussed Judge Gertner and Assistant U.S. Atto’rney Brian Ke’l1y, but

you are prohibited from trying to communicate

with

any.

Judge or Prosecutor, with the exception of through a motion filed with the Court, and only in regards

to a specific case you may have at the D/Mass U.S.

District Court.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Frank Dawson

United States Marshals Service

Protective Intelligence Investigator

(617)-748-2575

office

(617)-594-7008 Cell

(617)-748-2579 FAX

Is this how it will work?  Defense Security Service Director, Legal Department and Management will ignore investigative reports and pretend the investigation from DoD OIG simply does not exist and continue on their unethical and illegal path with impunity?  There are some very angry federal employees and civilian citizens regarding this cavalier attitude toward justice.  Not to mention questions about what appears to be DSS malfeasance in managing a federal agency and expenditure of taxpayer funds. 

If Defense Security Service oversight cannot be ethical in its own in-house matters, how can they be trusted to be ethical in doing their oversight job of policing government defense contracting and contractor corporations?

Anybody have more information or perspective? 

GFS

We continue our daily press releases. Please send them everywhere! We now have more than 500 web publications of the IAW caucus. We won’t rest until we reach everyone.

 I want to thank coalition member William Perry (Georgia Common Cause) for his quote supporting Judicial justice (a novel concept!) that was published by the AP.

We urge all members to attach responses to the OpEd articles. This makes the more visible. Also, we urge everyone to write articles supporting the meeting. We are on the countdown. Let’s get this out!

Thank God the FBI is finally involved.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Citizens-United-Demand-Jud-by-Mark-Galen-110913-607.html

Citizens United Demand Judicial Reform Now!

By Mark Galen (about the author)

Judges have gone wild against Whistleblowers

“Corruptio optimi pessima.”  “Corruption of the best becomes the worst.” 

Washington-Whistleblower advocacy groups have joined in an unprecedented cooperation to protect Judicial Integrity. These groups, including the International Association of Whistleblowers (IAW), the Atlanta Whistleblower Coalition and Georgians for Justice have joined to hold judges accountable a top priority.

In the end, judges are the gatekeepers who frequently deny whistleblowers access to courts. Regardless of laws passed, if courts are hostile to whistleblower rights, society suffers. Whistleblowers may be looking out for society, but who is looking out for whistleblowers?

Leaders of the movement agreed that this is the most difficult challenge that persons of conscience face. Court misconduct can be deadly. When judges permit hospitals or defense firms to cover up, then taxpayers and citizens are left unsafe, and people die.

In the Godfather, Vito Corleone carried judges in his pockets “like so many nickels.” What chance do average whistleblowers have when powerful corporations are pulling judicial puppet strings?

In the most extreme example, Georgia judicial misconduct has led both the Wall Street Journal and Forbes to declare, “Georgia judges have gone wild.” Prime examples include judicial misconduct and criminal conduct in the Georgia / Fulton County Superior Courts. As it stands, more than 24 Georgia Judges have had to resign for violations of ethics, and for even wrongful execution orders.

Just last week, the FBI agreed to intervene. Brian Lambkin, who heads the FBI office in Georgia, has announced this week that it was opening a large investigation into judicial corruption. Larkin elaborated:

“It impacts the everyday system. It’s not just a dirty law enforcement officer that might be shaking you down,” he said. “You’re talking about people that you elect to an office to represent you who try to line their pockets.”

The Associated Press GREG BLUESTEIN writes that the situation is serious:

Lamkin will personally sign off on the investigations.

“The reason is a corruption investigation can ruin reputations,” he said. “These are not quick hits. We will use sophisticated techniques and undercover operations to really go after these. That’s why the individuals that work these have to be patient.”

Lamkin wouldn’t say how large the team is, but he said he’s assigned about 40 percent of the staff in the bureau’s white-collar crimes unit to the mission.

The move was welcomed by government officials, who believed state and local funding cuts over the last few years have eroded other investigations.

“I just appreciate it. One of the frustrations you hear is that with the state budget cuts, you don’t have the resources to hire more investigators,” said state Rep. Joe Wilkinson , who chairs the House Ethics Committee . “This brings another much-needed level of scrutiny to the system.”

Fulton County Sheriff Ted Jackson , who has asked the FBI to investigate deputies at the Fulton County Jail for wrongdoing, applauded the new oversight.

The Judicial Qualifications Commission nearly ran out of money in December to investigate judicial misconduct, but state lawmakers gave it a financial boost this year.

And the Georgia Ethics Commission , which investigates finance complaints and registers lobbyists, has been rocked by deep funding cuts even as it takes on more duties. The commission’s director resigned after a dispute over the agency’s budget and the status of several cases involving Gov. Nathan Deal . And it went from fielding three investigators in 2008 to none now, said William Perry , the director of Common Cause Georgia.

“Our state is cutting back on monitoring elected officials and their ethical behavior, so we welcome the fact that the federal government is stepping up,” he said.

“We don’t take this lightly,” he said. “These are truly the types of investigations that are being done in the back room. And the circle of friends is very small. In order to penetrate that inner circle, you’ve got to have a strong and tenacious group to develop the intelligence.”

By cutting fraudsters off from special favors from judges, we can and must protect the United States. People’s lives are at stake. No more profit before patients. We urge newspapers everywhere to reprint this article, and for all citizens to join this campaign. We need everyone! No federal dollars without real accountability. Good faith is the essential prerequisite for public support.

Do we want Vito Corleone to control US justice? Are citizens finally going to unite for justice for all?

The IAW urge all citizens to reprint this article everywhere, and to join the fight for better hospital safety.

Calling all citizens who can describe judicial misconduct. Come to our meeting. Tell us your story. Judicial misconduct cannot be allowed to stand!

Now, do not allow more misconduct. Stand up!

Please contact the following immediately:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

http://internationalwhistleblower.org/

–

America needs H.R. 2472

Washington-   Patient advocacy groups and Doctors groups have joined in an unprecedented cooperation to protect medical quality, safety, cost and efficiency. These groups, including the International Association of Whistleblowers (IAW), Medical Whistleblower Association, Georgians for Justice, Mothers against Medical error, have joined to make passage peer review reform a top priority. H.R. 2472 represents a small, but definite, step forward in providing due process to physicians in peer review.

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS 4-PAGE BILL.

Physician and Congressman Joe Heck, D.O. (NV-3)  introduced H.R. 2472 and it is co-sponsored by many of the other doctors in Congress, including Tom Price, MD; Ron Paul, MD; Charles Boustany, MD; Michael Burgess, MD; Scott DesJarlais, MD; Phil Gingrey, MD; Andy Harris, MD; Dan Benishek, MD; and Larry Buscon, MD.

The bill is a response to the growing problem of good physicians losing their careers as a result of the disastrous effects of reports to the National Practitioner’s Data Bank (NPDB). 

Medical whistleblowers have a great deal in common with defense whistleblowers. Defense workers can be stripped of their security clearance without warning and without due process. Doctors can be stripped of hospital privileges and lose their careers without warning.

In addition, the two areas of vast fraud are medicine and the military. Errors and safety in medicine and defense can be deadly. That is why the IAW has started a special “Patient Quality Care Project.” All doctors and patients and citizens are urged to join.

.

“Possibly 100,000 people die from medical error every year, “stated Dr. Helen Salisbury, chair of the panel on medical whistleblowing to be held Sunday Sept. 18 “This is simply unacceptable. Worse, these deaths are the direct result of stonewalling and silence inside of hospital culture. It is high time that doctors and patients band together to make sure our loved ones are as safe as possible in hospitals, and that patients get the care they deserve. We want every possible group to sign on to this campaign- patients, doctors, citizens. We need every local group, every national group. This is the big one.”

“If we don’t protect the truth tellers, people die,” states James Murtagh, MD. “We must pass H.R. 2472. Patient safety and doctors careers are at stake.”IAW is recruiting all doctor and patient groups in every community of America to join into this effort. No group is too big, and none is too small. We are all patients, and every American has a stake in the safest and best good faith medical care possible.”

.

Organizers note that medical truth-tellers must be protected so that the public can be confident in the integrity of hospitals. “Without truth tellers like Dr. Patrick Campbell of Redding California, no one would have ever known that Tenet HMO was performing thousands of unnecessary heart surgeries. Tenet put profit before patients.” Dr. Salisbury continued. “Healthcare fraud costs this nation billions, and leads to loss of life. As a physician, I find this intolerable. We are committed to protecting medical truth tellers who work in both the federal and private sectors.”

.

Other leaders of the group noted that the federal government is by far the biggest player in healthcare, and federal protections would go far to help doctors even at private hospitals. Virtually every hospital receives important federal funding. No hospital should continue to receive a dime of federal money until they comply with all federal regulations. By cutting fraudsters off from federal money, we can and must protect patient care. People’s lives are at stake. No more profit before patients. We urge newspapers everywhere to reprint this article, and for all citizens to join this campaign. We need everyone! No federal dollars without real accountability. Good faith is the essential prerequisite for public support.

The IAW urge all citizens to reprint this article everywhere, and to join the fight for better hospital safety. Please contact the following immediately:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

http://internationalwhistleblower.org/

We plan to release further press releases very frequently this week

http://www.opednews.com/articles/5th-Annual-Whistleblower-C-by-James-Murtagh-110831-261.html

–

Dr. James John Murtagh, FCCP

Co-chair, IAW

404 626 4520

Attachments may be unavailable. Learn more

PQCPIAW.doc

203K   View   Download

America needs H.R. 2472

Washington-   Patient advocacy groups and Doctors groups have joined in an unprecedented cooperation to protect medical quality, safety, cost and efficiency. These groups, including the International Association of Whistleblowers (IAW), Medical Whistleblower Association, Georgians for Justice, Mothers against Medical error, have joined to make passage peer review reform a top priority. H.R. 2472 represents a small, but definite, step forward in providing due process to physicians in peer review.

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS 4-PAGE BILL.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h2472:

Physician and Congressman Joe Heck, D.O. (NV-3)  introduced H.R. 2472 and it is co-sponsored by many of the other doctors in Congress, including Tom Price, MD; Ron Paul, MD; Charles Boustany, MD; Michael Burgess, MD; Scott DesJarlais, MD; Phil Gingrey, MD; Andy Harris, MD; Dan Benishek, MD; and Larry Buscon, MD.

The bill is a response to the growing problem of good physicians losing their careers as a result of the disastrous effects of reports to the National Practitioner’s Data Bank (NPDB). 

Medical whistleblowers have a great deal in common with defense whistleblowers. Defense workers can be stripped of their security clearance without warning and without due process. Doctors can be stripped of hospital privileges and lose their careers without warning.

In addition, the two areas of vast fraud are medicine and the military. Errors and safety in medicine and defense can be deadly. That is why the IAW has started a special “Patient Quality Care Project.” All doctors and patients and citizens are urged to join.

.

“Possibly 100,000 people die from medical error every year, “stated Dr. Helen Salisbury, chair of the panel on medical whistleblowing to be held Sunday Sept. 18 “This is simply unacceptable. Worse, these deaths are the direct result of stonewalling and silence inside of hospital culture. It is high time that doctors and patients band together to make sure our loved ones are as safe as possible in hospitals, and that patients get the care they deserve. We want every possible group to sign on to this campaign- patients, doctors, citizens. We need every local group, every national group. This is the big one.”

“If we don’t protect the truth tellers, people die,” states James Murtagh, MD. “We must pass H.R. 2472. Patient safety and doctors careers are at stake.”IAW is recruiting all doctor and patient groups in every community of America to join into this effort. No group is too big, and none is too small. We are all patients, and every American has a stake in the safest and best good faith medical care possible.”

.

Organizers note that medical truth-tellers must be protected so that the public can be confident in the integrity of hospitals. “Without truth tellers like Dr. Patrick Campbell of Redding California, no one would have ever known that Tenet HMO was performing thousands of unnecessary heart surgeries. Tenet put profit before patients.” Dr. Salisbury continued. “Healthcare fraud costs this nation billions, and leads to loss of life. As a physician, I find this intolerable. We are committed to protecting medical truth tellers who work in both the federal and private sectors.”

.

Other leaders of the group noted that the federal government is by far the biggest player in healthcare, and federal protections would go far to help doctors even at private hospitals. Virtually every hospital receives important federal funding. No hospital should continue to receive a dime of federal money until they comply with all federal regulations. By cutting fraudsters off from federal money, we can and must protect patient care. People’s lives are at stake. No more profit before patients. We urge newspapers everywhere to reprint this article, and for all citizens to join this campaign. We need everyone! No federal dollars without real accountability. Good faith is the essential prerequisite for public support.

The IAW’s Patient Quality Care Project urges all citizens to reprint this article everywhere, and to join the fight for better hospital safety. Please contact the following immediately:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

http://internationalwhistleblower.org/

We plan to release further press releases very frequently this week

http://www.opednews.com/articles/5th-Annual-Whistleblower-C-by-James-Murtagh-110831-261.html

–

Our website explains what we, the IAW, are about:

http://internationalwhistleblower.org/

Opening day of the conference is Sunday, September 18, 2011.

  The IAW Caucus will be conducting activities at the DC Public

 Library – Martin Luther King Jr. Branch, Room A-5, 901 G

 Street, NW, Washington DC 20001

Some of the activities will include a welcome by co-chairs Mike McCray Esq. And James Murtaugh, MD.

This will be followed by:

-         The Atlanta Whistleblower plenary panel, “Have Georgia Judges Gone Wild?”

-         Tapping the Power of the Media:  “How can we use the power of story, and new internet media, to promote social justice?”

-         Whistleblower support fund – plenary panel, “How can we save priceless documents from the legendary cases of whistleblowers like Ernie Fitzgerald?”

-         “Empty Chair” ceremony honoring whistleblowers who cannot be present due to retaliatory imprisonment  or untimely death.  Statements will be read on behalf of:

o       Martin Salazar, former Dept. of energy employee

o       Bradley Birkenfeld, former UBS banker

o       Mordechai Vanunu, former Israeli nuclear technician

o       Karen Silkwood, Kerr-McGee technician, deceased

-         Waste of Funding within Federal Government Procurement Panel

-         Medical Whistleblower plenary panel, “Can the Patient Quality Care Project Bring Integrity Back to Medicine?” This will include VA whistleblower panelists as well as medical doctors.

For those of you interested in joining the IAW, work sessions will take up the rest of the afternoon on matters concerning planning, charting IAW’s organizational directions, viewing of whistleblower authored books, and continued videotaping of whistleblower story videos for publication on U-Tube.  You will meet a lot of dynamic, creative, and determined people.  It will be well worth your time and effort to get here.

All of this will be concluded with an informal participant dinner at the Dubliner at the Phoenix Park Hotel. 

The rest of the week will continue with events and presentations by various whistleblowers, whistleblower organizations and others.  This will be an exciting and informative week where you will learn a lot and make all kinds of good contacts and build up your supportive networks.

GFS

Should Boeing’s CEO Be Fired?

http://defense.aol.com/2011/08/08/should-boeings-ceo-be-fired/

Please send this everywhere and ask everyone to join the IAW caucus.
We are of the whistleblower, by and for the whistleblower. We want the
largest diversity of whistleblowers possible. We want everyone regardless of
affiliation.

Please circulate the following news item:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/5th-Annual-Whistleblower-C-by-James-Murtagh
-110831-261.html

Our website explains what we are about:

http://internationalwhistleblower.org/

We are expanding our membership, and we are international in scope.
Our articles are appearing today in Scoop magazine NZ and around the world.
We want all whistleblowers to join, and the greater the diversity, the
better. Our signature issues are judicial accountability and medical
whistleblowing, but we are joining with defense and financial
whistleblowers, veterans, environmental. Our focus is to network and mentor.

We also ask all members to register for the entire conference at:

http://makeitsafecampaign.org/news/?page_id=2146

Please ask all members to write articles for OEN. We are running a series of
articles about the conference. I urge every panel to write an article about
their issue. Everyday I would like to run an additional article about each
individual event for the meeting. We are going to U-tube as much of the
conference as possible, and post on OEN and on the IAW website.

We work hard for this conference every year. This year, we can get even more
out of the conference with planning. I challenge every person to get an
article out about their issue. We will work with them, help them with
editing, and get their issue into the press.

We want participation from every single member. By delegating, we can get
everyone involved, and everyone can be heard.

Please send this out, and we will have another article tomorrow.
Ginger, if you have an article about the overall conference, please send it
and we will post it. OpEdNews has a tremendous circulation, and we will get
more attendees if we post articles now. Members still can reserve discounted
airfares.

So, to all MISC members and fans, now is the time. Write and post your
articles! None of us can do this alone, but together we can!

http://www.opednews.com/articles/5th-Annual-Whistleblower-C-by-James-Murtagh
-110831-261.html

Read and be advised what kinds of things happen to Americans and what little support they have from our government, if they decide to work overseas for a company doing work outside of the U.S. even if the company is American or is a wholly owned subsidiary of an American company.  Or does Boeing now consider itself to no longer be an American corporation?  If that is the case, a whole lot of things need to be reinvestigated and redetermined regarding defense contracts and other contracts which have to do with U.S. national security. 

KB Richter has not answered Mr. Petersen’s question.  Her/his answer is no answer.  If a person accepted work with a Saudi company, and it was not represented as an American corporation,  or a division of a well-known American corporation, that is one thing.  But if an American corporation like Boeing, and/or its wholly owned subsidiary represents itself as doing business in both the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, that is another thing altogether.  It sounds like Mr. Peterson and others have a valid false claims complaint. 

From what I understand of Mr. Petersen’s unfortunate experience, he was injured and needed medical care in the U.S. and was not allowed access to his passport to return to the U.S. for that necessary medical care.  That ventures into the human rights arena in my mind.  This is not merely a “labor dispute” over some small matter.  This was a matter of life and health. 

It would appear people should be very careful about accepting employment with any American company that does business overseas, either the parent company, or any subsidiaries, wholly owned or not.  If our government cannot and will not protect it’s citizens in these situations, and that country is such a violator of human rights, I again ask, why Saudi Arabia holds such a high degree of trust with regard to trade and arms sales?  Why are we selling them weapons, planes with secret technology, and so on? 

I ask this to push the issue.  I am aware of previous personal relationships between our heads of state and Saudi royal family.  I am aware of manipulation of trade agreements to accomplish sale of certain airplanes produced by Boeing.  I am aware of other business and banking relationships between certain entities here and Saudi entities.  None of this should make it acceptable to hold an American hostage like Robin Petersen was when injured and needing medical treatment back home in the U.S.  Outrageous.  Particularly the Boeing Company’s efforts to now distance themselves from their wholly owned subsidiary, now that they’ve been caught with their hands in this matter.  

 If any of you can add your voice to the call for justice, regarding all of this, please do! 

GFS

Rob says….

To all:

After over eight months I finally received an email from the U.S. State Department stating they are unable to help Americans in the country of Saudi Arabia.

If you should care about America and our rights, as I do, please send a letter to your Senators or House Representatives asking just two questions:  (Consider enclosing the email found below with your letters)

1.  How is possible that our young men and women can be fighting for “Freedom” in Afghanistan or Iraq, but that our own U.S. Consulate in Saudi Arabia will throw an injured American Veteran out on the street when he asks for help to have his illegally confiscated U.S. Passport returned? 

2.  Ask how is it that no action will be taken against American Companies that participate, support and condone the illegal activity of passport confiscation? 

Thank you for your help.

My Best,

Rob

From: asu55rp@hotmail.com

To: richterkb@state.gov

Subject: RE: OIG complaint regarding your experience in Saudi Arabia

Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 15:47:08 +0000

Dear Ms. Richter;

Would you please identify your position; which office within the U.S. Department of State you work; your supervisors position; and the date of the letter (my letter) of which you are now responding.

For your information, I was told that my complaint had been sent to the Bureau of Consulate Affairs, Washington DC for action over eight (8) months ago.  I am still waiting for a response from that office.

Thank for providing the information concerning Saudi Arabia.  My complaint however, concerns the fraud that was perpetrated upon me by “The Boeing Company” and its “American Run” and wholly own subsidiary Boeing International Support Systems (first) here in the United States and then again in Saudi Arabia.  Boeing International Support Systems operates from Oklahoma City and St. Louis Missouri.  The evidence package I provided the DOJ and Bureau of Consulate Affairs supports this claim.  My U.S. passport was taken from me by an American Citizen working for Boeing/BISS and was not returned upon my reasonable (written) request.

As your information (found below) confirms the fact that it is illegal to confiscate passports in the country of Saudi Arabia.  Any American business that engages or condones the confiscation of U.S. passports and who supports human trafficking in any way has violated U.S. law.  The Presidential Interagency Task Force created in February 3, 2010 pledges;  “To uphold a system that provides for all victims, whether they lost their freedom through sex trafficking or labor trafficking and regardless of age, gender or immigration status.”   I believe the U.S. State Department is part of this “Interagency Task Force” and has a duty to protect my rights as an American Citizen.

As such, I am again stating for the record, that my country follow the law, utilize the “Presidential Interagency Task Force” and bring those to justice who bring disgrace and discredit upon our Nation’s Constitution and the Laws of this Country.  Thank you for your email and I look forward to hearing that this matter will be thoroughly investigated.

Sincerely,

//Signed//

Robin P. Petersen 

(480) 993-5344

Subject: OIG complaint regarding your experience in Saudi Arabia

Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 09:47:52 -0400

From: RichterKB@state.gov

To: asu55rp@hotmail.com

Mr. Petersen,

I just received your OIG complaint regarding your experience with Boeing in Saudi Arabia.   I understand you have concerns regarding your time in Saudi and how you feel you were held against your will and your passport was confiscated and the Consulate in Jeddah did nothing to assist you.  Working in Saudi Arabia is completely different than working in the U.S.  Your sponsor – the company that hired you – has control over you while in Saudi and can stop you from departing if there are contractual or other disputes.  The U.S. Embassy/Consulate is unable to assist you those situations. 

In our Consular Information Products which are available at http://travel.state.gov we try to give you as much information as we can regarding travel and work in Saudi Arabia.

http://www.travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1012.html#special_circumstance

Business Contracts: The written Arabic text of a contract governs employment and business arrangements under Saudi law. Before signing a contract, U.S. companies should obtain an independent translation to ensure a full understanding of the contract’s terms, limits, and agreements. No U.S. citizen should come to work in Saudi Arabia or make a business arrangement without having read and understood the full written contract. Verbal assurances or side letters are not binding under Saudi law. In the event of any contract dispute, the Saudi authorities refer to the contract. Since the Saudi sponsor holds the employee’s passport and controls the issuance of exit permits, U.S. citizens cannot simply leave Saudi Arabia in the event of a labor or business dispute. A U.S. citizen who breaks an employment or business contract may have to pay substantial penalties before being allowed to leave Saudi Arabia. To change employers in Saudi Arabia requires the written permission of the original sponsoring employer, which is discretionary. Saudi courts take seriously their responsibility to adjudicate disputes. This process, which is performed in accordance with Saudi law and customs, may require hiring legal counsel, should not be entered into without an Arabic translator, and generally takes several months. Persons involved in legal cases are not permitted to leave the Kingdom until the case has been resolved or abandoned. The U.S. Embassy and U.S. Consulates General cannot adjudicate labor or business disputes or provide translation services. U.S. consular officers can provide lists of local attorneys to help U.S. citizens settle business disputes, but ultimate responsibility for the resolution of disputes through the Saudi legal system lies with the parties involved. For additional information on Saudi labor law, please refer to the Ministry of Labor’s information on related regulations.

The Human Rights Report from 2010 discusses the lack of workers’ rights in Saudi Arabia. 

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/nea/154472.htm – The lack of workers’ rights, including the employment sponsorship system, remained a severe problem.

Noncitizens may reside or work in the country only under the sponsorship of a citizen or business. The law does not permit noncitizens to change their workplace without their sponsor’s permission, thus forcing the worker to remain with the sponsor until the satisfaction of the contractual terms or to seek the assistance of the embassy to return home. Foreign workers were under the complete control of their sponsoring employers, who held their passports and were responsible for processing residence permits on their behalf, although the country has a law prohibiting the withholding of passports. Sponsors involved in a commercial or labor dispute with foreign employees could ask authorities to prohibit the employees from departing the country until the dispute is resolved. Workers can hire a lawyer or represent themselves in the arbitration or court proceedings to settle the contractual dispute.

This email is UNCLASSIFIED.