WhistleblowerSupporter

DSS and Boeing Continue Retribution Against DSS Security Specialist Despite DOD OIG Report

Thanks Old Navy Man for sending this.  It is a good follow up in one of the continuing stories I had been observing.  The Defense Security Service has truly reached the point of no salvation in this whistleblower supporter's opinion.  It just gets worse and worse.  I have a lot more I've been told or have been able to find out during my family emergency trips back east.  I'll be unrolling more stuff from this point forward.   Please do go to this link.  I see that POGO's Nick Schwellenbach included links to the DOD OIG's report concerning Mr. Conley's case from 2002-2008, where the DOD OIG validated and upheld Mr. Conley's concerns and that he has been fiercely retaliated against by DSS managers and it appears the director.  Mr. Conley has been on the receiving end of a vendetta for doing his job lawfully and trying to make sure a particular case was not covered up and would be prosecuted.  But because of the demonstrated actions of the defense contractor involved (Boeing) and the conflict of interest relationships certain managers in DSS have personally and professionally with Boeing,  and as it was discovered later, Boeing's relationships with other government managers and  defense agencies or activities, it has been a brutal uphill battle to assure integrity in the oversight process.  Start with reading all of this.  I will be publishing more later.    GFS

 

 

G Florence:
 
Please read this article    http://getinvolved.pogo.org/site/PageNavigator/dss_boeing_whistleblower.html

I just stumbled across this link to a very disturbing whistleblower article.  I did not see it posted at your site so I am forwarding it to you.  Please take the time read it.  I hope you will consider posting it with your comments.  This recent article is from the Project On Government Oversight.  As an old navy man I am incensed that the two government workers identified in this article have been persecuted by the Marine Corps, my Navy and the Defense Security Service for trying to do their jobs.  More people need to know what is going on in our government!
 
An Old Navy Man

Boeing/BISS Continue to Frustrate Justice for Former Employee Held Hostage in Saudi Arabia

This from Rob Petersen, who is still trying to get justice, concerning his unlawful treatment by BISS, (a wholly owned subsidiary of Boeing), and the Saudi Arabian government. 

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, Saudi Arabia, 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: [email protected]

To: [email protected]

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: [email protected]

To: [email protected]

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Oversight of Contracts Worth Billions and Billions is Broken

This is another article sent to me today.  Thank you reader!  GFS

 

G. Florence-

 

The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) is broken.  The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) is broken.  And the Defense Security Service (DSS) is broken.  It looks like the entire contracting and security oversight of defense contractors is broken.

 

 

An Old Navy Man

 

 

POGO

Pentagon Radically Reducing Oversight of Contracts Worth Tens of Billions

October 29, 2010  Nick Schwellenbach

The Pentagon has radically decreased the Defense Contract Audit Agency’s (DCAA) review of contracts, according to an October 18 DCAA memo obtained by POGO. DCAA’s job is to protect taxpayers from contractor overbilling.

“POGO has long feared contractors and their government allies would block DCAA from exposing contractor ripoffs,” said Nick Schwellenbach, POGO’s director of investigations.  “Why are billions of dollars being put at risk when Secretary Gates is demanding cost savings?”

According to the memo, contracting guidance “now limits contracting officer requests for audit services to Fixed-price proposals over $10 million and Cost-Type proposals over $100 million, unless there are exceptional circumstances.”

These audit services are reviews of cost data (referred to as “reviews”) and they entail an examination of a contractor’s cost proposal to the government.  In these proposals, contractors estimate how much it will cost them to accomplish work on a contract.

Previously, there was no dollar threshold for reviews on fixed-price contract proposals, but contracting officers would limit requests for DCAA reviews of proposals over a threshold tied to the submission of cost or pricing data, which is currently $700,000. The old threshold for reviews of cost-type proposals was $10 million, but could be lower if the contractor has systemic problems estimating costs.

In FY 2009, a total of at least $92 billion in Defense Department contracts fell between the old thresholds and the new ones, according to USAspending.gov.  The $92 billion figure is a conservative estimate – it reflects awarded and funded contracts, rather than contract proposals, which are often higher than the funded contract award amounts.

The guidance states that cost proposals below the new dollar thresholds for review may be sent instead to the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). DCMA is typically less thorough than DCAA, according to a 2009 Wartime Contracting Commission report.  The DCMA also does not specialize in examining and verifying cost and pricing data.

The reason for this new restriction is DCAA’s attempt to perfectly comply with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS). With this standard, which requires meticulous documentation of findings, DCAA is unable to cover as much ground as they used to, thus the need to restrict “audits” as defined by GAGAS.  The number of DCAA reports produced annually has plunged: 33,801 in FY 2007 to 30,352 in FY 2008 to 21,276 reports in FY 2009.

Rather than subjecting reviews of cost or pricing data to GAGAS, DCAA should consider these reviews as financial advisory services, which are not subject to all GAGAS requirements.  This would better protect taxpayers and warfighters by allowing DCAA to review cost data and deliver advice to contracting officers in a timely fashion.

Founded in 1981, the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is a nonpartisan independent watchdog that champions good government reforms. POGO's investigations into corruption, misconduct, and conflicts of interest achieve a more effective, accountable, open, and ethical federal government.

http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/alerts/contract-oversight/co-ca-20101029.html

 

Supreme Court to Look at Old Case Involving Boeing, Dick Cheney

I received this yesterday from Old Navy Man.  Thank you.  I observed that Cheney seemed to have ties to Boeing previously.  Wonder if he is/was a recipient of gratitudes through Hidden Treuhands or other secret off-shore accounts?  GFS

 

G. Florence-

 

When will the taxpaying citizens get a clue?  Defense contractor oversight is broken, and it is the taxpaying citizens being taken for an A-12 ride!

 

An Old Navy Man

 

DoD Buzz

Supreme Court Takes Up A-12 Case

By Colin Clark Tuesday, September 28th, 2010 5:37 pm

Posted in Air, Naval, Policy

Hard as it may be to believe, a court case that traces its roots back to the time when Dick Cheney was Defense Secretary will be considered by the Supreme Court. The case involves the A-12 fighter program, for which the government says Boeing and General Dynamics owe it almost $3 billion (including interest).The court combined cases filed by the two companies, according to the New York Times and Bloomberg. The A-12 began with a 1988 contract to build the Avenger aircraft. The Navy cancelled the contract three years later and said the companies owed it $1.35 billion.

The contractors refused to return the money and sued. The government, they said, had not shared classified technology and that led to program delays. The government used the state secrets privilege to explain why it could not present arguments in court refuting the companies claims. An appeals court ruled against the contractors.

The stakes are high for everyone in this case. Boeing has said the company could owe $1.7 billion. General Dynamics has said it may owe $805 million. And the government must defend its right to invoke the state secrets privilege, which has been an increasingly important legal principle to the government.

[ http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/09/28/supreme-court-takes-up-a-12-case/#idc-container ]

Robin Peterson v. Boeing/BISS Update: How do you serve a moving target?

I acquired an update from former BISS Employee, Robin Petersen about how the process is going in his suit against Boeing and their subsidiary, Boeing International Support Systems (BISS). 

It appears to be a case of Boeing playing a game of keep away with Mr. Petersen’s attorney and process server.  Boeing apparently is a bit out of sorts after they lost their hard push to get an Arizona judge to dismiss Mr. Petersen’s case recently.  They are back to pretending Boeing has nothing to do with BISS or any of its business practices. 

This would be very humorous except for the extreme hardship real people have gone through that the Boeing Company has caused, through the lack of responsible direction and management of their subsidiary, BISS.  I have posted a description of the legal document, the portion that is the Declaration of Process Server John Kizzire Regarding Efforts To Serve Defendant BISS.”   (The document would not copy for posting without many errors; my apologies for that.)

If anyone with knowledge of this area of concern with Boeing, or who has experience in successfully litigating against Boeing in similar cases, has any useful advice or information for Mr. Petersen, please comment or email to me at this site.  I will forward it to Mr. Petersen immediately.  Thank you.  GFS

 

Here is the overview as the proceedings appear to Boeing/BISS whistleblower, Rob Peterson:

 

‘Here is a copy of the "Affidavit" of our process server Mr. John Kizzire who attempted to serve BISS through the Boeing Plant in Mesa, Arizona.  One affidavit found in the BISS motion to dismiss ( Yvett B. Kumi, Boeing Company employee) states that "the only jurisdiction in which BISS is authorized to do business is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia."  Therefore inferring that BISS is not allowed to do business here in the United States.   However, BISS has been involved and is already providing aircraft maintenance and support to the RSAF (Royal Saudi Air Force) for a number of Apache Helicopters they have had in that country for the past several years.  The Boeing Company / BISS, Alsalam Aircraft Company and the U.S. State Department are now involved in a new business deal that involves $60 billion dollars worth of aircraft and military sales to Saudi Arabia.   This includes sales of more Apache Helicopters to Saudi Arabia.  So I believe that business records will be found upon discovery that will show a connection to BISS and in fact these records will show BISS is doing business with the Boeing Operation out of Arizona.  I have evidence that already proves BISS in fact doing business in Oklahoma City, and St. Louis, MO.  The evidence shows that the BISS VP, Torbjorn Sjogren is located in St. Louis; that the BISS legal counsel is located in St. Louis; that the BISS Chief Program Manager is located in St. Louis; and that the Boeing Company and BISS are jointly involved recruiting of American citizens from their operations in Oklahoma.

 

Here is a link to arms sale:

http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2010/08/20/20100820apache-helicopter-sale-boeing-mesa-arizona.html

 

Now the "Affidavit" I referred to in the beginning of the above paragraph and coming from our service processor, Mr. John Kizzire shows some interesting information.  It shows that "The Boeing Company" Attorney (Mr. Geoffrey Sturr) has purposely withheld information to cover up for BISS.  As anyone can plainly see that on page five (5) and page six (6) of John Kizzire's sworn affidavit that Mr. Sturr states that he can be of no assistant to the process server who is trying to do his job.  In fact the Boeing Attorney who is now representing BOTH THE BOEING COMPANY AND BISS states he knows of no one who can accept legal service for BISS.   

 

The question becomes how is it that the attorney who has been representing "The Boeing Company" in this legal matter for months and who has now taken over the duties as counsel for BISS does not know anyone or any corporate officers for BISS who could be served with the summons and complaint?   The answer to that question is that this Boeing attorney, at the time of Mr. Kizzire's contact on September 1, 2010, engaged in obstruction, unethical activity and maybe illegal activity by withholding this legal information from this service processor.   This is proven by the fact that THE BOEING COMPANY/BISS attorney stated only a few days later in his pleading to the court on September 17, 2010 that BISS was amenable to service in Saudi Arabia and then provided an address in which to serve BISS.  I suggest that this attorney Mr. Geoffery Sturr who represents both the Boeing Company and BISS also knew of BISS Corporate Officers located in St. Louis, Missouri who could have been served with the summons and complaint.’

 

Here is the description of process server, John Kizzire’s, experience while trying to lawfully serve papers to Boeing Subsidiary, BISS.  I have summarized the longer document. -GFS

 

 

Mr. Kizzire, an Arizona licensed process server tried to  serve copies of a summons and complaint in the lawsuit of Petersen  v. The Boeing Company and their subsidiary, Boeing International Support Systems Company, Saudi Arabia Limited.

 Since Boeing was not very forthcoming with their business information so it was reasonably easy to find out where to serve the correct people, Mr. Kizzire searched the records and databases of all of the following:Arizona Corporation Commission and Arizona Secretary of StateDelaware Division of CorporationsWashington State Secretary of StateIllinois Secretary of StateMinistry of Commerce and Industry – Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Records are not available online, and do not appear to be readily available to the general public, by any means.  PACER federal court records for previous cases, in which BISS is named, to discover an agent or officer for service of process.  No other cases were found to have been filed naming BISS.

 

Mr. Kizzire then attempted service on two local Boeing executives for service on BISS through Boeing.   He attempted to serve Boeing at 5000 E. McDowell Rd, Mesa, AZ.  The Security Supervisor, Larry Sindle, stated he would not permit Mr. Kizzire on the grounds even though the server had court and state issued identification.  He passed the buck and told Mr. Kizzire he needed to contact Chuck Pfeister at (480) 891-0639.

 

 Kizzire was told that Pfeister is in charge of all of security for Boeing, Mesa, AZ. Kizzire called Pfeister, 9-2-10, got voice mail and left a message. 

 

About an hour later, he received a call from Judy Keledjian, (480) 891-7205, who said she is with the legal department of Boeing, Mesa, AZ.  She said Pfeister had asked her to return Kizzire’s call and that she could not authorize Kizzire’s delivery of to this location.  She deferred to the need to meet with her attorney to determine where and to whom Kizzire could deliver the legal papers. 

 

Keledjian did not call back.

 

A little less than an hour later, Kizzire received a call from Attorney, Geoffrey Sturr, of Osborn Meledon, Phoenix, Arizona.  Sturr said he was informed by the legal dept of Boeing, Mesa, of the problem.  He said that service on Boeing could be accomplished through their statutory agent.  Kizzire corrected that the service was not being attempted on Boeing, but on Boeing’s subsidiary, Boeing International Support Systems Company, Saudi Arabia Limited.   

 

Sturr was described as maintaining an abrupt, rude, and condescending manner throughout all of the communications on this matter.

 

Kizzire clarified that he was attempting to serve someone locally for Boeing in an attempt to accomplish service on Boeing International Support Systems (BISS) and that he (Kizzire) understood that service on two local executives for Boeing would suffice for service on BISS.  (Exactly what Boeing/BISS was trying to prevent.)  Sturr replied, “If the statutory agent had advised Kizzire of that information, they were mistaken.  Kizzire replied that the statutory agent did not advise him of anything.  He further stated that exhaustive efforts had been made to locate any persons authorized to accept service for BISS in Arizona, Illinois, Washington, Delaware, and Saudi Arabia, and that those attempts proved fruitless. 

 

Kizzare asked Sturr that as an attorney for Boeing, if he, Sturr, knew the persons authorized to accept service for BISS or if he knew any persons affiliated with BISS who might be able to confirm this requested information.   Sturr replied in a “rudely, abrupt manner,” “No.”  Kizzire stated that he had been given the name (by a switchboard operator at Mesa, AZ), of a law firm in Seattle that represents Boeing that Kizzire could contact, who would be able to confirm persons authorized to accept service for BISS. Sturr replied that Kizzire was probably referring to Perkins Coie, and that they would not be able to help him, Kizzire.  Sturr then stated “there is basically nobody who may be served for BISS in Arizona.”  Kizzire then asked that if Sturr could not provide the names, who could provide names of persons who may be authorized to accept service for or affiliated in any way with BISS.  He asked Sturr to refer him to the correct person.

 

 Sturr refused to help or assist in any way. Kizzire asked then if Sturr would at least be willing to check with someone else who may have any information about who may be contacted for BISS either in the United States or in Saudi Arabia.   Sturr replied he “would see what he could do.” When Kizzire tried to put a time frame on it and asked to receive the return call that same day, Sturr repeated “he would see what he could do.”    That ended the conversation between Sturr and Kizzire.

 

About 30 minutes later, Kizzire called Judy Keledjian at Boeing’s legal department, Mesa, Arizona.  Keledjian asked Kizzire if he had spoken with Geoffrey Sturr.  Kizzire affirmed that he had.  Keledjian then divulged that after Kizzire’s first phone call with Keledjian that morning, she had checked with her attorney in Mesa, Arizona, and he said he has nothing to do with Boeing International.  She then contacted her attorney in Saint Louis, and he recommended, “Geoff handle it.”   

 

About two hours after that last phone call with Geoffrey Sturr, Sturr called Kizzire back and stated he could not help him with any information nor could he direct Kizzire in discovering information about how to serve BISS in Saudi Arabia or the United States.  He stated all he knows is that BISS is a Saudi company.  

 

GFS's Comments:

BISS is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Boeing Company (USA).  That is what Boeing has told and represented to the U.S. Government in their participation in the National Industrial Security Program. (NISP)  Anybody see a problem with the statements of Mr. Sturr?  Anyone see a problem with Boeing playing this game to try to prevent Petersen’s attorney and server from processing Petersen’s lawsuit as legally required? 

 

Boeing should be able to immediately identify the correct people so they may be served as provided for in U.S. law.  If they can’t, why can’t they?  This appears to me to be an attempt to either evade Justice and the U.S. legal system or to postpone it for purpose of evading Justice and possible penalties for the alleged criminal actions and activities of Boeing/BISS. 

 

I am wondering if Boeing is trying to prevent being served in order to manipulate the system, similarly to what is described in the another post, I found on POGO’s Website today,   “Secret Deals May Lead to Bailouts for Defense Contractor Misconduct.”  Put off being served until the DOD has put up the protection so no suit can be successfully filed or processed?  (Please read this post also posted today.)

 

Does anyone in the federal government, contracting oversight or management, have any helpful information for Robin Petersen regarding how his process server may overcome the keep away game that Boeing is playing to try to prevent his legal counsel from serving Boeing/BISS with suit paperwork?   Can any of you specifically help?  Please contact me if you can. 

GFS

The Utter Frustration of Washington State's Senate Race

 

Washington Senate Race Endorsements, MoveOn.Org and the Deaf Ears of Politicians to Whistleblowers

I got an email from MoveOn.Org last week. I am not sure how I got on their mailing list. In my blogs, I pretty much criticize everyone who I believe deserves it regardless of political party affiliation.

They were asking me who they should endorse in the Washington Senate Race (incumbent Senator Patty Murray (D) or challenger Dino Rossi (R)

They also left a space to write in a candidate. Then they left a space to write in explanatory comments. Against my better judgment, I wrote in a name in the write in slot and then explained why.

I explained that I had a problem with both the incumbent and the challenger. I clarified that the incumbent had a history of supporting her industrial campaign contributors and was willing to ignore her individual constituent's appeals to her for help when they were federal or industry employees being treated badly as whistleblowers, or threats to the corruption done by the employers. Her deafening silence has not endeared her to multiples people who've been standing up to the creeps pretty much on their own. She has been doing a lot of cheerleading for a particular very large defense contractor/aerospace corporation, despite their catalog of sins and continued mistreatment of their own employees and federal oversight employees. There is a very good reason she is known as the Senator from Boeing.

As far as her challenger, I explained that I considered him no better. He keeps whining and running for office, and his only lack is that he hasn't been in a position of power and authority so he can do exactly what Murray has been doing. So, there would be no difference; they are both disasters.

I explained that I had written in the name of my attorney, as I really found that despite commonly held views about attorneys and all the jokes, although I didn't always agree with my attorney politically, I found him to me much more ethical and honest than either of those candidates.

The next day, I got another email from Moveon.org, happily announcing they had endorsed Patty Murray who was going to help them stop all those corrupt corporations and contractors from continuing their campaign of fraud, waste, and abuse.  It went on and on beyond that.  After I got through shrieking and laughing myself out of my chair, I deleted it.  (It's still in the trash file, should I need to get it out and post it on the blogs with annotations.)

Presently more than disgusted with nearly everyone,

GFS

 *******

Response from The Last Inspector:    

LOL, G. Florence.

I know about intimately and agree with everything you wrote.

Murray did help me a tiny bit, albeit behind the scenes so as not to appear anti-Boeing.

The problem with most Democrats is they are too meek, albeit republicans are as meek in many ways (they have to be, as if they campaign honestly on what their agenda is, the vast majority of people will never vote for them).

If Murray and Democrats didn't always appear to be afraid of their own shadows on how they responded to every issue and just did what they wanted to do, they would be far more successful in the polls.

Being afraid to go up against the political power of an evil corporation like Boeing is illustrative of that.

Despite all of her bowing to Boeing, the evil management at the company stabbed her and all Boeing workers in the back by putting the second 787 line in SC.

That's what happens when you in essence make deals with devils like Boeing management.

However, despite their meekness in standing up to those forces more powerful than even a US senator, there still is no equivalency between Democrats and republicans, no matter how bad the Democrat is (except in the very few cases when the democrat actually acts like a republican when elected).

That is the falsehood that many spout out when their subconscious is desperately looking for reasons to justify voting for the other side.

Democrats are angels when compared to evil republicans, although there is never complete black and white, the following is as black and white as it gets:

Democrats are honest. Republicans are liars.

Democrats believe and legislate for what WJWD without wearing their Christianity on their sleeves. republicans believe and legislate for the opposite of what WJWD and then falsely proclaim themselves the "party of Christians and Jesus." They demonize Democrats, when it is actually themselves that are working for the head demon.

Democrats are the opposite of hypocrites; republicans are the worst hypocrites in existence. Just look at one issue--they impeached a president for lying about an affair, yet they now have several republicans in the Congress who have had affairs and even lied about them, yet their hypocritical supporters still support them, and few if any ask them to resign or ask for their impeachment (that would require not being a hypocrite).

Democrats work for the people, as the Constitution "wants," and only suck up to corporations because of our corrupt campaign finance system that gives corporations the key to politician's doors when citizens are shut out, and due to their meek natures (like Murray). Republicans work solely for corporations, and never for the people, only sucking up to the delusional and stupid people in the electorate around election time with lies and making up bogus wedge issues like the "Ground Zero Mosque," for they could never get elected if they campaigned honestly on their true beliefs. Like the devil, the only way they can convert souls is to deceive.

Democrats are the party of all sane true Christians. Republicans are the party of the American Taliban, who, like the Taliban, are doing the opposite of the "holy books" their faiths are based on. All those who fall victim to the false Christianity of the republicans will go to hell, if there is one. I am an agnostic, so I believe they can't go to a place that doesn't exist, but their sole legacy will be that they made the world hell while they were alive, whereas the democrats worked to make it a place more heaven-like and WWJD-like. If hell existed, and Jesus were alive, he would likely re-state that a republican's chance of getting into heaven is as likely as a 747 flying through the eye of a needle unscathed.   

 

So, albeit Murray has hurt this whistleblower through almost total inaction almost as deep as my wife when she betrayed me, even I may hold my nose and vote for her, especially if she pledges to break the "senator from corrupt Boeing management" mantra. A vote for anyone else is a vote for Rossi, who is the very definition of the evil that is today's republican party. In evilness, there is no comparison. As noted, Murray is an angel compared to Rossi. If he gets in, things will be 100 times worse for us whistleblowers.  

In all things perspective is needed. Anger can cloud our vision. In the long term, we need to fix the campaign finance system that republicans and the evil five on the Supreme Court back for selfish reasons, as giving more power to contribute to the powerful only enhances their goal of furthering our Plutocracy.

Once that is done, Democrats can be true Democrats, and stand up to the evils against the people like Boeing management. Rossi will always side with the evildoers.

Any republicans out there should get themselves exorcized. Anyone out there not under the influence like G Florence should regain their perspective before the election and get motivated. If you can't hold your nose and vote for Murray, work for any other Democrats out there like your country's and whistleblowers' fates depend on it, for it does.

Christian Republicans, and those "going toward the republican light (that leads to the opposite of heaven), repent now, while you can save yourselves from an earthly or unearthly hell that the republicans will attempt to bring back into existence if taking power again.

Gerry

BISS Whistleblower, Robin Petersen, on Boeing and CEO, Jim McNerney

I received this from Robin Petersen today describing his problems with Boeing taking responsibility for their subsidiary BISS.  GFS

*****

If you have the time I would suggest taking a moment to look at this C-Span link;

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/193687-1

  

I would also suggest that you start the C-Span video at 1:17 in which Mr. McNerney begins his testimony before the AFSC.

The Boeing Company CEO, Mr. James W. McNerney Jr. went on record before the Armed Forces Services Committee in August of 2006 following a Department of Justice investigation that proved that the Boeing Company had been involved in unethical and criminal wrongdoing.  Mr. McNerney, the new CEO of (14 months) stated in part that he would personally ensure that "The Boeing Company" would put the unethical past behind them, move forward, and operate under the highest standards of integrity and ethical business conduct.  Mr. McNerney stated that he would personally oversee the Boeing Ethics and Compliance Programs and hold those managers who failed to follow his leadership principles and ethics guidelines accountable. 

You should know that I contacted the Boeing Ethics Hotline in April of 2009 to express my concerns of unethical business practices, by people who represented themselves as "Boeing Managers."  I also contacted Mr. McNerney himself, via federal express letter from Saudi Arabia in June 2009 in which I identified a number of ethical violations; that I was injured; that his company had breached my contract for failure to pay me my salary; that I felt fraud was taking place; that there was a complete disregard for the safety and wellbeing of Boeing employees; and that my U.S. Passport had not been returned upon my request. 

Mr. McNerney never bothered to respond to this report of obvious ethics and criminal violations.  If leadership, ethics and integrity are to be achieved by example, I believe Mr. McNerney has failed in that responsibility.  

Thank you,

Robin P. Petersen (Rob)

BISS Whistleblower's Letter to Hillary Clinton

With Mr. Petersen's permission, I have posted the letter below that he wrote asking help from Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, while he experienced unlawful detainment by BIS/Boeing in Saudi Arabia and was not allowed to leave to seek medical treatment in the United States.  Apparently there are a number of people, both U.S citizens and citizens of other nations, who have been experiencing such treatment.  This is an outrage.  Defininitive action must be taken by the U.S. government, concerning this unlawful behavior by Boeing/BISS and what appears to be an involved Saudi government.  Accepting employment with Boeing/BISS and working in the Middle East should not be tantamount to signing away one's rights and becoming a slave or political prisoner.    GFS

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

To all;

I have sent the following email to the U.S. State Department as they allow only seven days in which to respond to their email.

 

Rob

From: [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: RE: Boeing Company Violating Human Rights [Incident: 100604-000108]

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:04:54 +0000

Dear Sir/Madam;

 

Thank you for your email.  I am responding because you stated that I have seven (7) days to reopen this matter should I not feel it has been resolved.  I do not feel it has been properly resolved.  My point in this matter is that the Boeing Company and its wholly owned subsidiary Boeing International Support Systems have engaged in U.S. Passport confiscation, false imprisonment, failure to provide for the safety and wellbeing of its employees and other fraudulent activities.  They have defrauded the Saudi Government through over billing (claiming to have more employees working for them than actual) and in providing substandard flight training and unsafe aircraft maintenance.  They are a U.S. Contactor and as such are required to meet certain ethical, professional and legal standards in accordance with the Technical Assistance Agreements established through our U.S. State Department.  They have not met those standards and should be held accountable for violating such agreements. 

 

I and others, including people from other nations were held against our will and were not allowed to return to our countries of origin when requests were made in writing to Boeing managers.  Many were forced to sign liability releases before being paid, having their passports returned, and being provided with an "Exit Visa" in which to leave the country of Saudi Arabia.  Although, this information was reported first to the U.S. State Department in June of 2009, via the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (please find attached letter dated June 3, 2009) and then to the FBI in December of 2009 to my knowledge, no investigation has ever been initiated by either agency. 

 

You should know that I recently sent a letter to President Obama dated June 16, 2010 asking that he please have someone contact the Phoenix, FBI on my behalf to inquire as to why they did not initiate an investigation of some sort for what I believe are criminal violations of U.S. Law.

 

Thank you for taking the time to review this information and please reopen this investigation [Incident: 100604-000108].

 

Sincerely,

 

 

s/ Robin Petersen

 

> From: [email protected]

> To: [email protected]

> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:40:20 -0400

> Subject: Boeing Company Violating Human Rights [Incident: 100604-000108]

>

>

> Recently you requested personal assistance from our on-line support

> center. Below is a summary of your request and our response.

>

> If this issue is not resolved to your satisfaction, you may reopen it

> within the next 7 days.

>

> Thank you for allowing us to be of service to you.

>

> Subject

> ---------------------------------------------------------------

> Boeing Company Violating Human Rights

>

>

> Discussion Thread

> ---------------------------------------------------------------

> Response (Support Agent) - 06/18/2010 10:40 AM

> Thank you for your message to Secretary Clinton sharing your thoughts and concerns. We value your opinion and will take it -- and the views of all Americans -- into consideration.

>

> Secretary Clinton is committed to strengthening America’s national security, advancing the interest of the United States, and restoring America’s leadership position in the world.

>

> Thank you for contacting the U.S. Department of State.

>

>

> Question Reference #100604-000108

> ---------------------------------------------------------------

> Category Level 1: Ask the State Department

> Date Created: 06/04/2010 12:06 PM

> Last Updated: 06/18/2010 10:40 AM

> Status: Solved

> [---001:001003:23410---]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robin P. Petersen

Apartment NC8-10D

Saudi City, Jeddah

Saudi Arabia

Email [email protected]  Phone # 966 (0) 56 650-7815

  June 3, 2009

US State Department

The Honorable Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State

Washington DC

USA 

Subj:  Withholding of US Passports 

Dear Mrs. Clinton; 

I am writing you this letter to request your assistance.  I am a US Citizen / Retired Veteran and have been injured in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.   I need to return to the United States for medical care.   

Although I have requested the return of my US Passport, the managers of the Boeing International Support Systems / Alsalam Aircraft Company will not return the passport to me nor will they provide me with an exit visa to leave this country. 

I have enclosed a copy of a letter that was written to the Boeing C.E.O. dated June 2, 2009 for your review.  Please help me. 

Thank you, 
 

Robin P. Petersen 
 

Encl:  letter dated June 2, 2009 to the Boeing Company CEO

BISS (Boeing International Support Systems) Employee Files Suit Against Boeing

This story was sent to me as a comment related to the McNerney stories about Jim McNerney being placed in charge of Obama’s Export Council.  It was sent to me by the plaintiff, Robin Petersen, who has filed suit against Boeing.   I find this very disturbing that what Mr. Peterson was subjected to could even conceivably happen. I wish Mr. Petersen well and good luck with his legal proceedings. GFS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7:10 p.m. June 2:  This is real.  I found the court filing here:  http://dockets.justia.com/search?q=Boeing+International+Support+Systems+Company%2C+Saudi+Arabia%2C+Limited

And Mr. Petersen’s attorney’s website here:  Kissandra Tysman

[email protected]

http://tysmanlawfirm.com/attorneys.htm

THE BOEING COMPANY AIDING AND ABETTING HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN SAUDI ARABIA


The Boeing Company, a U.S. company incorporated in the State of Delaware and with corporate offices in Chicago, Illinois and St. Louis, Missouri and its wholly owned subsidiary Boeing International Support Systems, Saudi Arabia (BISS) are reportedly engaged in the practice of passport confiscation, involuntary servitude, debt bondage, and fraudulent recruitment practices upon U.S. Citizens and Third Country National (TCN) workers. The Boeing Company may be held responsible for violations of U.S. Law and international law for "Aiding and Abetting" their subsidiary company, BISS which recruits employees out of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma and is alleged to have confiscated passports from US Citizens and Third Country National workers in Saudi Arabia.

As reference, the U.S. State Department's 2009 report on "Human Trafficking" details the unconscionable and disturbing ongoing human rights violations that are presently taking place in the country of Saudi Arabia. A report authored by former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, (2006) identifies Saudi Arabia as a "Tier 3" country whose government does not fully comply with the minimum standards and is not making significant efforts to eliminate human rights violations in their country. The report further states that the United States employs a "zero tolerance" policy against human trafficking both domestically and abroad. A third report by the Department of Defense, OIG dated January 15, 2010, provides information relating to "Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act," January 10, 2006 that gives the United States Government authorization to terminate grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements for "Trafficking in Persons" (TIP) related violations.

A lawsuit brought by Attorney Kissandra L. Tysman of the Tysman Law Firm, located in Mesa, Arizona was filed on May 7, 2010 in U.S. District Court, Phoenix, Arizona against "The Boeing Company" and it wholly owned subsidiary BISS. The lawsuit alleges that her client Mr. Robin Petersen, a pilot and former U.S. Navy Commander who became injured overseas while employed by Boeing/BISS was not allowed to return to the United States for medical treatment in that he had his U.S. passport confiscated; was held against his will; and was not provided with an "Exit Visa" in which to leave the country of Saudi Arabia. Mr. Petersen had made several written requests for the return of his passport to "The Boeing Company" Operations Manager, in Saudi Arabia, Mr. Shaun A. Ford, and also contacted Mr. W. James McNerney, Jr., "The Boeing Company" CEO by Federal Express letter, detailing the fraudulent activity, unethical business practices, and violations of human rights that he had observed and experienced while employed by Boeing/BISS. Mr. McNerney never responded to Mr. Petersen's concerns and request for help. The lawsuit also alleges that a number of other U.S. Veterans and Third Country National workers who were employed by Boeing/BISS in Saudi Arabia had their passports confiscated and were subject to inhumane treatment.

Mr. Petersen made several attempts to get help from the U.S. Consulate located in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. He was finally helped by a consulate security official in June 2009, who then ordered Boeing/BISS company officials to return Mr. Petersen's U.S. passport and provide him with the required "Exit Visa" in which to depart the country of Saudi Arabia. On June 8, 2009, and after six months without having the freedom to travel, Mr. Petersen was able to return to the United States to get the proper treatment he needed for his injury. The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Arizona, May 7, 2010 (case # 2:2010CV00999 Petersen v Boeing) and lists the following causes of action:

Count 1, Confiscation of U.S. Passports
Count 2, Violations of RICO statutes
Count 3, False imprisonment
Count 4, Breach of Contract
Count 5, Fraud
Count 6, Intentional Inflection of emotional distress
Count 7, Failure to pay wages

Although this lawsuit has been filed in the United States, it is important to know that there is an effort on the part of several worldwide organizations to hold executives of companies such as Mr. McNerney, CEO of "The Boeing Company" criminally responsible for willfully aiding and abetting their business partners who engage in human rights violations.

Boeing's Reorganization and Creation of Subsidiary Boeing International Support Systems

Link to Original: http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1024

 

 

Boeing Defense Unit Realigns for Growth, Expansion Into New Markets

|

ST. LOUIS, Jan. 7, 2010 -- The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] today announced organization and leadership changes within its Integrated Defense Systems unit that continue to reposition the company for growth in the current business environment. The realignment is effective immediately, and the unit will begin operating under a new name: Boeing Defense, Space & Security.

In announcing the changes, Boeing Defense, Space & Security President and CEO Dennis Muilenburg said the realignment is part of a continuing effort to successfully compete in a rapidly evolving global defense and security marketplace. Muilenburg said that reshaping the unit positions Boeing for further growth in new and adjacent markets while continuing to serve existing defense and space customers.

"Boeing anticipated flattening defense budgets and shifting customer priorities for the past few years and has been taking aggressive steps to position the company for profitable growth in a challenging economy," Muilenburg said. "In the past 18 months alone, we have acquired seven companies to enhance existing capabilities, expanded Boeing's services business, and created new divisions -- like Unmanned Airborne Systems -- to directly and rapidly respond to our customers' emerging priorities.

"With these latest strategic moves, we can extend our core programs even as we enhance Boeing-wide capabilities designed to capture business in promising markets in the United States and around the world, including cyber-security, energy, intelligence, C4ISR and logistics," Muilenburg said.

The scope of change in Boeing's business environment is further reflected in the decision to rename Integrated Defense Systems, a name the unit has carried since 2002, when the company consolidated its military aircraft and space businesses. Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a recognition that success in a highly competitive global arena will be determined by a company's ability to offer and deliver new capabilities, products and services to meet complex customer demands.

"As Boeing sustains and grows its core global defense business through solid execution, we are also playing a broader role in markets that go beyond Boeing's traditional strengths," Muilenburg said. "As we grow in these areas, it is important for us to send strong signals to our global customers that we are prepared to offer high-value Boeing solutions for all of their needs across defense, space and security domains."

While Boeing Defense, Space & Security will retain its current operating units -- Boeing Military Aircraft (BMA), Network and Space Systems (N&SS), and Global Services & Support (GS&S) -- the realignment consolidates some divisions and makes a number of leadership changes. Chief among the moves is consolidation of two divisions in N&SS: The Combat Systems division and the Command, Control & Communications (C3) Networks division will be unified as the new Network and Tactical Systems division.

Muilenburg also announced several key leadership assignments at the Boeing Defense, Space & Security level and throughout the business units that will help the company improve productivity, manage its cost structure and deliver on customer commitments:

• Rick Baily is named vice president, Engineering and Mission Assurance; prior to this, Baily was vice president/general manager of Combat Systems.
• Nan Bouchard is named vice president, Program Management; she previously served as vice president/general manager, C3 Networks.
• Dave Bowman is named BMA vice president/general manager, Global Mobility Systems and International Tankers; he previously served as vice president, Tanker Programs.
• Jean Chamberlin is named BMA vice president/general manager, U.S. Air Force Tanker Program; prior to this, she served as vice president, Global Mobility Systems.
• Steve Goo is named vice president, International Operations and Compliance; he adds international compliance to his responsibilities. He will oversee all BDS international legal entities in Australia, the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia.
• Bill Schnettgoecke is named vice president, Operations and Supplier Management; Schnettgoecke previously served in a deputy role to this position, and succeeds John Van Gels.
• Torbjorn Sjogren is named GS&S vice president of the Boeing International Support Systems and Alsalam Aircraft Co. subsidiaries in Saudi Arabia; previously, he served as GS&S vice president, International Support Systems.
• Charles Toups is named N&SS vice president/general manager of Network and Tactical Systems; he had served as vice president, Engineering and Mission Assurance.
• John Van Gels is named vice president, Strategic Planning for Operations and Supplier Management; he previously was vice president, Operations and Supplier Management.

A number of structural changes complement these leadership moves:

• In BMA, the Weapons business becomes a division with a direct reporting relationship to BMA; it had been a subdivision of the BMA Global Strike Systems division.
• In N&SS, the Heath, Ohio, and Ogden, Utah, facilities will now report to the Missile Defense Systems division; previously, they reported to the N&SS C3 Networks division.
• GS&S operations in Australia will report to Jim O'Neill, vice president/general manager, Integrated Logistics division. Aviation Training International Ltd., a joint venture for Apache helicopter training with AgustaWestland in the United Kingdom, will report to Mark McGraw, vice president, Training Systems and Services division. Both entities previously reported to International Support Systems.

A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is one of the world's largest defense, space and security businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions, and the world's largest and most versatile manufacturer of military aircraft. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a $32 billion business with 70,000 employees worldwide.

# # #

Contact:

Daniel Beck
External Communications
Office: 703-414-6447
Mobile: 562-243-7082
[email protected]