From the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, which, thanks to intrepid reporter Andrea James, has made a special effort in tracking the numerous whistleblower lawsuits against Boeing (My comments are in parenthesis within the article text):

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/168657.asp

An attorney who worked in Boeing's ethics policing division says that he was demoted to being an administrative assistant and then fired after raising concerns about violation of government regulations.

Joseph Sicilia, who lives in Spokane, filed a lawsuit against The Boeing Co. with the King County Superior Court in April. (Sicilia is wise to ask for a jury trial—finding an honest judge in King County Superior Court would be a crap shoot, indeed. Sicilia's attorney will still have to be on guard for any adverse rulings on Boeing's behalf during trial, as there is still much a biased judge can do to derail justice in even a jury trial, as I witnessed happen during my trial) A Boeing spokesman said Wednesday that the case has no merit. (That statement from Boeing’s spokesman can be taken at face value, if you adjust for the many past other similarly false Boeing announcements and take the opposite of what they state here as the truth—in other words, the case does have merit. Of course, Boeing said that ICO Global’s lawsuit against them had no merit, and look how that turned out: http://www.thestreet.com/story/10456478 ... mages.html )

Sicilia worked for Boeing from 2001 until his firing in November 2007. For most of his time at Boeing, Sicilia worked in the Office of Internal Governance, which is the company's ethics department based at Chicago headquarters. He reported to supervisors in Seattle, the complaint says. (This is what is so damning about his complaint—it documents in detail wrongdoing at Boeing headquarters in the Office of Internal Governance—the last department of Boeing that should be corrupted. The suit documents just how Boeing's compliance with laws and regulations promises after being caught committing serious frauds against our government were just empty promises, and that explains in part why Boeing management continues to willfully engage in fraud to enhance the bottom line up until the present moment. Sicilia wanted Boeing's compliance promises to be born out in actual compliance, whereas his OIG management obviously did not. When complaints of unethical conduct and fraud are ignored within the very department that is tasked with investigating such complaints-Boeing's OIG-that indicts the entire ethics complaint system it oversees, rightly.)

One of Sicilia's responsibilities was to ensure that Boeing complied with promises it had made to the federal government to maintain its ability to bid on government contracts. In 2005, Sicilia perceived that certain policies enacted by his supervisor "would result in the misrepresentation of compliance, thus equating to fraud," the complaint says. (Fraud at Boeing? Does a bear shit in the woods? Sicilia was doomed from the start in that he obviously had integrity and worked in “compliance assurance” activities at Boeing. Integrity in such a position is the last thing you would want to have if your only goal was to stay employed at Boeing. In my experience (and obviously many other’s), the appearance of compliance is the only thing Boeing management wants—real compliance would be far too expensive and prevent the company from engaging in business practices that would give it an edge over its more honest competitor’s management. I know. My job was to ensure compliance of Boeing’s safety critical products to quality, safety, and reliability requirements. However, my management directed me to rollerstamp the inspections (stamp them off on the documentation rather than actually doing them) required to ensure such compliance—thereby only giving the appearance of compliance with those critical requirements for the safety of Boeing aircraft.)

Later on, other program changes made within Boeing further reduced corporate compliance with federal acquisition regulations, Sicilia believed. He reported his concerns up the management chain several times, but the lawsuit states that his complaints were never investigated. (The OIG and Boeing Ethics in my experience only superficially investigate such reports, if that. The chance of a real investigation are much worse the more serious the allegations are for Boeing management’s continuance of the particular scheme the report covers.)

Sicilia charges that Boeing managers began to retaliate against him in several ways, including denying travel requests necessary to perform his duties, verbal abuse, pointing him to other job openings and giving him poor work evaluations. (I was pointed to other job openings as well. When the company wants to fire you for being too ethical and/or for whistleblowing on their fraud, and you are an hourly person represented by a union, they will try to get you to transfer into a salaried unrepresented job where it is much easier for them to wrongly terminate you. My Boeing supervisor tried to do that to me in 2005.)
After returning from a three-month medical leave in April 2007, he'd lost his position in compliance and "was ultimately given a position (as) an administrative assistant in the Corporate Secretary's office." (Interesting, I had to take a three month leave as well, apparently for an eerily similar reason--the stress from harassment and retaliation by Boeing management for doing the right thing--in my case, the stress from the harassment and retaliation I was under for doing my job as an inspector and for reporting Boeing QA management fraud to the FAA.)

The lawsuit alleges wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, and charges that Boeing violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the Washington State Family Leave Act, the Illinois Whistleblower Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, and the anti-retaliation provisions of the False Claims Act. Sicilia asks for compensation for damages, back pay and future economic loss.
Boeing has not yet filed a response to the court. (The Boeing response would be interesting, if it actually contained the true facts and not just the Boeing Legal pro-forma “we deny each and every allegation” garbage.)

"Boeing's got a strong compliance monitoring system and effective mechanisms for reporting potential wrongdoing," Boeing spokesman Chaz Bickers said." (If God struck people dead instantly for lying, this spokesman would be a goner for making such a statement. The suit itself (and many facts outside of it that corroborate its allegations) prove the spokesman's statement to be false. In this regard, this won't be the first time a Boeing spokesman called white black and black white. Of course, maybe he was just ignorant of the real truth, but you would think that Boeing would put someone knowledgeable of the subject out to comment to the press. In fact, Boeing’s OIG is the organization tasked by Boeing with retaliating against whistleblowers. The antithetically named Boeing Ethics program is also intentionally ineffective, especially if your complaint is against management: http://eastmans.web.aplus.net/pblog/ind ... 202-151930 ) The suit is clearly without merit and Boeing will defend it accordingly."

Bickers confirmed that Sicilia worked in contracts and pricing and then worked in the OIG organization. He also said that Sicilia was not employed as a Boeing attorney. (That appears to be the truth, for once.)

Sicilia's lawyer, reached by phone on Wednesday, says she intends to seek a jury trial. (Smart move. Don’t ever put your fate in the hands of a King County Superior Court Judge—you may get one of the few good ones, but that is extremely unlikely odds.)

"Boeing takes a scorched Earth litigation philosophy," Spokane trial attorney Mary Schultz said. "Never admit. Never acknowledge. Never say you're sorry." (Wow. True, indeed. If Boeing had honest management of integrity, it wouldn’t have to resort to such tactics.)

Schultz' firm, Mary Schultz Law P.S., and William Gilbert of Dano, Gilbert & Ahrend PLLC are handling the case.

To emerge successful in a wrongful termination case such as this one, Sicilia's lawyers do not have to prove that Boeing did anything wrong. Rather, they must prove that Sicilia honestly believed that Boeing did something wrong, and that the company retaliated against him because he spoke out. (That’s good, for getting any responsive information in discovery that would negatively and truthfully reflect on Boeing wrongdoing would be difficult, indeed. Corrupted organizations like the King County Prosecutor’s Office also help in obstructing such discovery, as they did in my case.)

"This is one of these areas that the American public is very concerned about these days," Schultz said, referring to the government contracting process. "People like Joe Sicilia are very important for the integrity of the system." (Amen. A huge understatement, in fact. With many corrupted government agencies still, whistleblowers are the public’s almost only hope to expose and correct fraud by ethically and legally wayward companies.)

Read the full text of the compliant:

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/lib ... boeing.pdf

The lawsuit is filed in state court. Boeing faces at least two other wrongful termination suits in federal court:

http://www.seattlepi.com/business/38597 ... uit01.html

http://www.seattlepi.com/business/390401_boeing03.html

(Those are the two SOX IT whistleblowers who were wrongfully terminated by Boeing.)

And now my (and others) comments on this news:

Sicilia is right. His suit provides real insight into what I've known for years of Boeing management misconduct and fraud—and it indicts the Boeing OIG and Ethics departments, and rightfully so. As Sicilia's and many others' experiences show, Boeing is never serious about compliance with laws and regulations, even at the highest management levels, and even in the departments created to give the appearance that Boeing intends to comply.

What happened to Sicilia is SOP for corrupt Boeing management against anyone they see as a threat to Boeing management's numerous frauds. There must be a book for corrupt managers on how to do such retaliation and harassment, as Boeing management is too consistent at doing it for there not to be such an "anti-bible" they use for such cover up actions for their fraud.

I and many others have witnessed the deep, deep corruption of Boeing management from the lowest first line to the highest management levels at the company. And many of us have suffered retaliation and harrassment for doing the right thing at a company where the management insists on being able to do the wrong thing--no matter how many lives are lost in the process or how many dollars the government is defrauded out of, or how seriously our nation's security is damaged by their frauds.

RICO laws need to be enforced ASAP against Boeing management for the sake of all Boeing employees. I don't know of any companies' management more deserving of the application of those laws against organized crime. Suits such as these are too slow at reform. Bravo to Sicilia for naming Boeing employees in his suit. That may be a quicker way to reform--not going after the "Queen" of such corruption, but going after the individual corrupt "ants" in the "ant hill," thereby scaring each individual ant into compliance when the management (the "Queen" ant) obviously wants the opposite.

To have a company such as this in America with a management so corrupted and so unreformed and still apparently "untouchable" by law enforcement makes America itself look corrupted. There should be no free passes to violate laws and commit fraud in America--no matter what the size of the company.

BoeingStockHolder on the P-I website had some excellent points on this article:

"The world is finally starting to see the light escaping from the black hole of OIG and BLT (the Boeing Legal Team) and it's not just poor disgruntled OIG auditors as AJ initially reported...now that the tables have been turned on one of the inside men by OIG and BLT...How many of the same complaints of the "Ships on Fire" do we have to hear before the ship burns down to the waterline?"

BoeingStockHolder is exactly right. Perhaps a judgment large enough in this case will finally motivate the Boeing OIG and Boeing Legal Team to follow the laws and regulations rather than finding ways (including whistleblower harrassment and retaliation) to continue to skirt them undeterred. It's all about the money with these types--not right and wrong--so if it can easily be proven that Boeing loses more money engaging in fraud than it gains, then it will finally reform.

Another comment form an unregistered poster:

"BA doing something illegal ? Of course – what’s new? Fish rots from the top. I've dealt with the BOD as a shareholder, with Perkins Coie, and a few corporate sectys over the years. Its been downhill since Frank Shrontz and his entourage left, and over the cliff since BA melded with the Mickey D Klan"

Excellent point, unregistered! True, both about Boeing management and Boeing's outside counsel.

Another astute poster:

"Those of us who have been at boeing - and had to deal with some the jerks in corner offices probably have NO problems in following this guys story as shown in the filing. And more than a few can probably make his story seem mild."

Amen. Worked there. Seen the criminality up close. Too bad Boeing helped install their own King County Prosecutor that covers for Boeing crimes instead of prosecuting them.

Yet another enlightened poster on the forum:

"...ethics every day, not just once a year...I'm more concerned that, even perceived from inside the company, there is merit to these allegations of misconduct and unethical actions. BTW ... The Boeing OIG is not a compliance organization ..... its a damage control team."

Exactly. It is more than a damage control team--it actively retaliates against whistleblowers, as this suit and many other cases prove. The government cannot do business with Boeing rightfully until the OIG, BLT, and Boeing management are reformed.

Glad to see Boeing management corruption and lawbreaking are now common knowledge. As Marianne Jennings said, eventually a companies' frauds will come to light no matter how hard they try to hide it.

Boeing management is now beginning to reap the "rewards" for selecting the ethically bankrupt managers instead of the ethical or competent. When you force the ethical employees out of the company, it shouldn't be too surprising what is left. A whole book could be written about just how Boeing management and Boeing Legal got so corrupted. It would be best however, if ethical police and prosecutors did the work on that "book" themselves. If so, it would have a happy ending for both Boeing and the public, even if the public had to pay for the living expenses of many officials in and out of the company as a result.

Just how compromised "Boeing Ethics" and the Boeing OIG are is starting to become more widely known, finally. Let’s hope that the people outside Boeing with the power to reform Boeing also notice.

Read the documents at the links below to find out the “latest” violations by Boeing management of the laws meant to protect our national security.

The State Department Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) feels that Boeing has a “serious, systemic, and longstanding” problem with export violations. They are, of course, right on the mark about that.

Of course, the sanctions implemented for these violations will not deter further violations by Boeing management. Boeing management has demonstrated that even a 615 million dollar fine will not result in reform of itself and real, effective “compliance” processes, so the 3 million dollar fine for these violations will be orders of magnitude less effective at getting Boeing management to begin to fully comply with our most important laws to our national security.

The 3 million dollar fine is equivalent to a person making 60,000 dollars a year being fined one dollar in each of the next three years for serious violations of the laws meant to protect our national security. Would such a fine make such a hypothetical person do anything differently than they had done before? No? That certainly is the most obvious answer. That may explain why the equivalent $15 fine for the last egregious violations by Boeing of ITAR laws were not effective as well.

Sanctions for such serious lawbreaking imperiling the security of our nation would be much more effective if the "veil" the company places over violations is pierced by government officials and individual Boeing employees charged with crimes in addition to sanctions against the company itself. Of course, even such sanctions against complicit Boeing employees would have to be heavily policed to ensure Boeing did not pay any fines brought against individual employees. When I was in Flight Test QA I heard it bandied about that a Boeing pilot had been fined $30,000 for violating FAA regulations, but that Boeing had paid the fine for them. Of course, Boeing paying such a fine would have much less deterrent effect on the pilot than if Boeing hadn't paid it for them.

In one of stories I was the source of about the unauthorized transfer of B-2 technology by Boeing to their Commercial programs, one employee is documented as fearing indictment if they wrongly certified the 787 was free of ITAR data. Boeing also unfortunately stepped in in that case as well and said they would take the blame instead if their certification was proven wrong, thereby short circuiting what was a healthy fear (for compliance) by the employee of the personal consequences of their actions. Obviously, for compliance sake, what is needed is for the consequences of violations of these important laws to reach the individual employees and lawyers responsible for breaking them, not just for Boeing to make them simply another cost of doing business.

Reading the below documents is also a bit concerning for another reason. Like many such agreements with Boeing, one person holds all the cards as to whether Boeing is deemed to hold to the agreement or not.

Laws meant to protect national security are much too important to give one person such an important responsibility. It would be too easy for Boeing management to perform a “Druyun arrangement” with such a person, even if that person had not before succumbed to such an offer. Any such agreements should ensure that no such conceivable fraud (especially considering Boeing's documented history in this regard) by the company could endanger its viability at acheiving its goal--real compliance with the law.

The past agreements with Boeing as part of its management’s habitual lawbreaking (only a small part of which Boeing has been held accountable for in any way) all seem to have been victim to putting the judgment of compliance into many too few hands.

In the case of these violations, Boeing gets to hire their own auditor, as long as the choice is acceptable to that one official.

Boeing’s internal “compliance” processes implemented as C/A for the few past frauds they were caught at have proven ineffective, to say the least. A new suit by a whistleblower I will post about later shows just how badly compromised Boeing Ethics and the Boeing Office of Internal Governance tasked with these “compliance” processes are. Read this blog and www.thelastinspector.com for further evidence of these effectively fraudulent compliance measures instituted as a result of Boeing’s frauds.

Like the proverbial “horse and water” analogy, you can lead corrupt Boeing management toward compliance, however you cannot make them imbibe of it. For that to happen, you need to change out the corrupt management itself. Just a few sacrificial lambs’ heads rolling at the top as happened in the distant past will not suffice.

When it comes to lawbreaking, much of current Boeing management are just like junkies—no amount of fines will get them to quit “shooting up” on such lawbreaking that so easily maximizes the bottom line without the much harder work or real compliance and competence at doing their jobs. Their doing prison sentences would obviously be more effective, especially if managers of competence and integrity immediately were put in their vacated positions.

When will Boeing management stop taking shortcuts by violating laws and regulations in order to meet bottom line and personal stock option value goals?

Your guess is as good as mine.

But one thing is for sure—Boeing management will not undertake such minimally required reforms unless they are forced to do so by other means than mere fines that don't come out of their own pocketbooks.

http://www.pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/ ... mpany.html

BoeingDDTCChargingLetter06092008.pdf
BoeingDDTCConsentAgreement06092008.pdf
BoeingDDTCOrder06172008.pdf

As no reforms in Boeing management have taken place since this letter, please use it as a model for your letters to the next procurement team and your Congressional politicians. Just substitute your own experiences with Boeing management fraud for mine. The taxpayer as well as the warfighter need to be protected from such Boeing management continuing Druyun/Sears-esque fraud. Note that I advocate for a Boeing selection despite corrupt Boeing management. I feel the extra expenses to guard against Boeing management fraud are outweighed by the necessity of this program to Boeing employees and our wider industrial base. This letter was previously posted at www.thelastinspector.com

Here is an important story yesterday in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that explains in part the corruption detailed in the letter below--the first Boeing tanker procurement scandal was never adequately investigated--no adequate investigation, no adequate reforms.

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/168964.asp





February 25th, 2008

The Honorable Sue C. Payton
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition
1060 Air Force Pentagon, Room 4E964, AF/AQ
Washington, DC 20330-1060


Dear Assistant Secretary Payton:

This urgent letter is to inform you of matters that I have witnessed that I believe should strongly bear upon how you should go about structuring the KC-X contract and how you perform contract negotiations should The Boeing Company be selected over the Airbus/Northrop team as supplier of the KC-X Aerial Refueling Aircraft.

First, I want to make my motivations in giving you this crucial information clear: I am not trying in any way to influence you to select the Airbus/Northrop proposal for the KC-X instead of the Boeing offer. Instead, quite the opposite is true, although that is not related to this letter other than as background information. I do hope you ultimately select the Boeing RFP even considering the corruption I detail below that I witnessed that is still entrenched deeply within Boeing management following the former tanker contract debacle and other Boeing ethical and legal lapses that have been aired publicly for several years now.

My opinion as a loyal former Boeing employee and U.S. citizen that can trace my roots in this country to eighteen years after the Plymouth Colony was settled and some 138 years before our country was founded is that it is essential for the economy of our country, the preservation of aerospace manufacturing jobs in this country, and therefore the preservation of military aircraft production capacity within the United States, that Boeing is ultimately selected as the winner of the competition for the KC-X contract.

That said, I can now get to the essential crux of this letter, which is how best you and your KC-X procurement team can structure a contract should, as I hope, Boeing wins the competition, in order to protect the Air Force, Air Force personnel who will fly on and use these tanker aircraft, and the American taxpayer from the consequences of the fraud still ongoing within management at Boeing today several years after Boeing’s much self-publicized “ethics reforms.”

As a former Boeing Quality Assurance Inspector until just over a year and a half ago, when I was terminated per the direction of the highest management levels at the company for collecting information in order to bring this continuing fraud in Boeing management to light, I witnessed this management fraud in Boeing Commercial Airplanes Quality Assurance on a daily basis. Knowing not only the lives of the public were being intentionally placed at higher risk by corrupt Boeing management because of this fraud, but the lives of our brave military personnel were placed at much higher risk illegally, as well, to maximize Boeing’s bottom line, I knew I had to act to stop this brazen fraud before more lives of the public and our military that fly on Boeing Commercial Airplane platforms were inevitably lost, so I reported this rampant fraud in QA throughout BCA to the FAA in early 2002, well before the former tanker contract debacle.

By the way, this letter is in no way related to Boeing Corporate Headquarter’s retaliation against me as noted above. I knew the day I decided to try to bring Boeing’s illegal actions I witnessed to justice that I would be ultimately removed from my job by Boeing as retaliation for attempting to bring Boeing management’s fraudulent actions to an end as I knew Boeing management’s corrupt modus operandi almost better that they knew it themselves at that point, when Boeing’s “win at any cost” “ethic” was in full swing, as it had not been publicized yet.

The fraud that I witnessed and reported to the FAA in early 2002 is a fraud that sadly continues to this day, due to a relationship with the arm of the FAA that I reported it to that mirrors to some extent the bias that was unfortunately shown by a few former officials in the Air Force before those officials were removed from their posts following the reforms instituted after the 2003 tanker procurement scandal. While the Air Force, under your new leadership team’s hard work and integrity, is totally reformed now and is up to the task in performing your duties with the utmost integrity for the benefit of the taxpayer and our military you represent, the same cannot be said of the FAA and Boeing management involved in the continuing fraud I witnessed. And it is this continuing fraud that, if not noted and addressed by your team as it relates to the KC-X program, poses a grave threat to military personnel who fly on or use the services of the KC-X tanker, and an unreasonable danger to the wise use of American taxpayers’ dollars. Possible challenges to the hard won reputation of the procurement agency for the program also exist if this ongoing corruption at Boeing and the FAA is not properly addressed before a contract is signed, and is not properly mitigated during the life of the program.

The fraud I witnessed on a daily basis at Boeing is something you have likely heard of. While my coworkers and I referred to it as “rollerstamping,” this fraud does have other names in the industry, such as “hot stamping,” or perhaps its most apt description: Product Substitution.

As you well know, the safety, quality, and reliability of military as well as commercial airplane platforms that are produced must be ensured by strict adherence to inspection, testing, and other quality assurance processes. Without such processes, no matter how well intentioned the people are that do the actual construction of those aircraft and their many component parts, inevitably faulty and/or incomplete aircraft will be produced because all humans by nature make mistakes, especially on fast paced and complex tasks requiring high levels of skill, such as in aircraft manufacturing.

That basic fact is acknowledged in the modern regulations and implementing and necessarily mandatory quality assurance procedures that have been put in place over the years to ensure the safety, quality, and reliability of military and commercial aircraft is ensured, and is ensured to the high level required.

However, to Boeing and FAA management, those critical regulations and implementing procedures are only guidelines, if that.

At Boeing, inspectors are expected by management to “look the other way” rather than actually do their critical jobs of ensuring the safety and conformity of Boeing aircraft, and FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors are also similarly expected by their management to “look the other way” from their duties to enforce the FAA regulations at Boeing and to ensure Boeing is adhering to their FAA required quality system.

Is this corruption just speculation? Hardly. I, as well as many others, witnessed it, and I in fact proved it during my dealings with top Boeing and FAA management in my thusfar futile efforts to end this endemic and symbiotic Boeing/FAA fraud.

My reports of this fraud at Boeing to Boeing and FAA management did not have the desired result of reform so inspectors like me could begin to do their critical jobs without the inevitable harassment and retaliation for doing so. The FAA and Boeing chose to cover up and protect this fraud rather than investigate and end it. My refusal to ignore FAA foot dragging on investigating my report did result in corrupt FAA management having to document a few of my many reported Boeing noncompliances so as to be able to say they did an investigation, so they unwillingly corroborated several systemic noncompliances I reported. However, the major and most serious by far noncompliances the “investigation” of my report by Boeing and the FAA uncovered was in proving that the many noncompliances I reported were not just a result of low level Boeing management corruption—they were instead a result of corruption at the highest levels of FAA and Boeing management—a true “working together” corrupt relationship to ensure Boeing did not have to abide by what they saw as too expensive to comply with mandatory quality and safety ensuring regulations and procedures. What Boeing management got out of this corruption is clear as most of their compensation is tied to bottom line driven stock option prices. What the corrupt FAA management involved got out of ensuring Boeing could break regulations, in opposition to their mandated duties, other than “quid pro quo” well paying jobs at Boeing and organizations funded by Boeing is less clear, but time will tell.

Since you are busy, I will spare you the details in this letter as this letter is to only warn you of this fraud so you can take measures to protect the taxpayer and warfighter from it before it is too late to do so. The details of this fraud are on my website, www.thelastinspector.com . I strongly suggest you visit the site to find out the corroborating and disturbing details of this corrupt FAA/Boeing relationship.

As you are intimately aware of the inner workings of the aviation industry as I am, it should not surprise you then that the ethics reforms Boeing said it undertook after the first tanker contract and the Lockheed RFP data theft debacles did not “take,” and Boeing management still relies on unethical and illegal activities to enhance its bottom line. Even unethical and illegal activities that obviously place many citizen and military lives at risk.

Although Boeing has apparently been very careful to not use such unethical and illegal habits in the current tanker RFP until the contract is sewn up, that has not prevented it from engaging is such misconduct in other areas of its business—especially “safe” areas to do so, such as internally in making quality and safety assurance at Boeing one of the most corrupt organizations within Boeing, and in long fostered corrupt relationships with FAA management. The Boeing Legal department is another area where the illegal is tolerated, if not fostered. They were they department of Boeing tasked with covering up rather than ending the Boeing management corruption I reported to them on two occasions. It is no accident an internal Boeing system used by Boeing Legal is called the “elegal” system, and that one of Boeing Legal’s top attorney’s mantra was “you gotta do what you gotta do.” Rather than end the corruption I reported to them, the same Boeing Legal attorney assigned to “investigate” my report was also assigned to personally ensure I was arrested and charged with a crime for collecting data for my continuing efforts to end the noted Boeing/FAA corruption.

However this letter is not about what Boeing has done to me. It is solely to protect the taxpayer from being defrauded by Boeing as it defrauds its current customers via the ongoing product substitution abetted by corrupt management personnel in the FAA, as well as to ensure such fraud is not allowed unwittingly by your organization to place military personnel’s lives at extra risk by your organization not being informed of it.

I have read disturbing articles about the still unreformed FAA being allowed to certify 767 tankers for Japan and Italy. Such certifications are next to meaningless in the current era of FAA management corruption. This is a key area that will have to be changed should Boeing be awarded the contract.

If FAA personnel have to be used on the tanker program in any way, DCMA Quality Assurance personnel must closely supervise FAA personnel to ensure they are actually doing their critical jobs rather than mostly pretending to do them. They must perform independent audits of Boeing quality assurance as well as FAA inspections and certification work with ending and preventing the fraud reported in this letter and on my website in mind during the program. Such heightened oversight activities by the DCMA must be allowed in the contract.

Boeing will likely pursue language that FAA and FAA delegated Boeing personnel do as much of the inspection and certification work as possible in the contract. After this letter, the motivations of such language should be much more transparent. Language must be inserted in the contract to give the DCMA the authority, headcount, and budget with which to perform the much increased oversight functions that will prevent FAA/Boeing fraud on the program from being used to pump up Boeing’s profits from the program via the noted product substitution currently enabled by “quality assurance” at Boeing and the reduced certification costs lack of real FAA oversight provides.

Such real oversight by the DCMA would uncover problems in the production system hidden for years by the noted Boeing and FAA non-oversight of Boeing’s engineering and production processes. This would add additional costs to the program, but the conforming aircraft that would result would be worth those costs. Drawings and engineering specs that could never be complied with as they were in error and/or conflicting would be uncovered—never fixed because Boeing management thought it would cost too much to fix them and that such fixes were “non-value added” no matter how much the errant engineering confused those who had to try to build per those drawings/specs and how creative mechanics had to become to make what they thought the engineer might have intended. Such evidence of past Boeing and FAA carelessness will be simply more proof of the corruption I am disclosing to you now.

Although I have not been on the Boeing production line for over a year, there is no doubt the FAA/Boeing fraud proven by the handling of my reports continues to this day. I still communicate with Boeing personnel on occasion. Nothing has changed. If the noted fraud was ended by Boeing and/or the FAA, the severe bottlenecks on production programs resulting would have to be made public, and an announcement by the FAA making the public announcement of the ultimately ineffective FAA Special Technical Audit of 1999/2000 seem very insignificant by comparison would have to be done. Neither has happened to date.

As you can see on my website documenting the Boeing and FAA management corruption I and others have witnessed, “working together” fraud in Boeing and FAA management will not be the only Boeing mismanagement and fraud your team will have to be vigilant in preventing in order to protect the interests of the military and our country’s citizens during a Boeing tanker program. Boeing’s past intentional and “unintentional” mismanagement of ITAR controls is an area that will need special emphasis in preventing during a Boeing tanker program. The QRS-11 chip debacle is just one such instance of ignoring such controls that I helped ensure a fair end to for our country. Transfer of ITAR data between commercial and military programs is another area that will need to be of special concern during the program in terms of putting in place controls to prevent such actions by Boeing’s still ethically challenged management during the program, and/or to prevent Boeing management’s past demonstrated disdain for adhering to ITAR controls when more money can be made by ignoring them from affecting how such controls are used on the program.

And then there are the 787 delays and the Japan and Italy tanker delays to consider as far as how to best help Boeing management avoid a repeat of those delays during a tanker program for our government. It is my belief that it was Boeing’s focus on “leaning out” the production and certification processes and focusing on the financial planning aspects of the program rather than planning sufficiently for production of the 787 itself that has resulted in the 787 delays. Schedules planned too tightly in order to meet financial targets ultimately has resulted in the delays thusfar, I believe. Notably, one of the “bright spots” in the 787 program thusfar has been the “smoothness” of certification activities on the program and the FAA siding with Boeing over experts on some controversial certification tests performed and those chosen not to be performed as was required in past new programs. I need not, I trust, give my well informed opinion as to why the FAA has been so accommodating to Boeing’s every wish on the program, and has allowed unprecedented levels of delegation of Boeing personnel to do formerly and exclusively FAA performed certification activities on past programs on the 787 program.

I will let my website give you the rest of the details. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions for me not addressed in this letter or on my website.

Please do not penalize Boeing workers for the continuing “sins” of their management. I believe, if you heed the warnings in this letter, Boeing and FAA management’s arrogance in continuing to perform unethical and illegal activities if the personal rewards are seen to outweigh the risk can be mitigated completely so that the Air Force will avoid being defrauded and receive the product contracted for, with the required levels of quality, safety, and reliability assured. And our country and the vast majority of Boeing workers not complicit with the noted fraud will reap the benefits of such a key contract to protect our military aircraft industrial base.

I hope one day soon the noted FAA/Boeing fraud will be ended. However, until then, procurement officials like you and the DCMA will have to take actions to protect our country and military from it on programs such as the KC-X tanker program and the P-8A Poseidon program.

Please ensure these warnings are heeded and the contract language is structured to protect the Air Force and the taxpayer from the noted Boeing/FAA fraud. Please delay any contract signing until such contract language is drafted, if necessary.

And please distribute this letter to your Deputy, Lt. Gen. Donald Hoffman, John Young, and any other member of your team that you believe has a need to know this information.

Sincerely,



Gerald Eastman

cc: The Honorable Patty Murray
United States Senate
173 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-0238

cc: The Honorable Maria Cantwell
717 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-228-0514 fax

The following is from a comment (minus the political asides) that I entered on The Seattle Times website for the following article on the announcement of DOD proposed cuts in its defense contracting:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... uts06.html


This is an interesting story, in that Boeing seems to be more affected by the cuts. I may know a little more why that is in addition to the pros and cons of particular programs on the chopping block.

Boeing is a theoretically good company with an almost completely corrupted management. Truth is, Boeing has been stealing technology it does not own from the military side and using it on its commercial side, which the same corrupt executives that stole it then outsource to proscribed countries.

That is a simplistic view of the corruption. The reality is much more complex, however. The corruption is very, very deep, and any technology the government or a subcontractor or prime contractor places within Boeing's walls is not safe from such illegal theft and illegal disclosure.

And that may be why the DOD is "downsizing" Boeing's military side, because they are well aware of Boeing's continuing inability to keep their hands out of the export controlled cookie jar of technology it does not own and is prohibited from disclosing, which it then discloses to our potential enemies anyway.

At the 8/1/06 Boeing GSA (Global Settlement Agreement) hearings before the SASC (Senate Armed Services Committee), some senators seemed to express (carefully) that the 615 million dollar fine was perhaps too lenient for Boeing's crimes, and that perhaps debarrment from any further goverment contracting was really needed in response to Boeing's continual reoffending, but they couldn't do so because Boeing's defense business was so big that the country needed to do business with it, even in its dishonest state.

And these cuts may be the fallout from that meeting--the government making Boeing's defense side small enough (as republican's say) so it can then be "drowned in a bathtub," therefore solving Boeing's theft and illegal export of sensitive military technology wrongly entrusted to its corrupt executives forever.

I realize that these programs employ many people. Although some of them are the idiots like NoBS that post here and actually believe the misinformation they repeat constantly, many are good people who do great work and deserve their jobs. I used to work with many of them.

It would be sad if they have to suffer for the crimes of corrupt Boeing management, but corrupt Boeing management has long ago demonstrated that they care about their own parasitic and destructive jobs at the company far, far more than tens of thousands of the worker bees at Boeing that will lose their jobs because of the fallout of their own personal greed, corruption, and illegal export of military technology to proscribed countries.

The solution is obvious, but as everyone knows, often it is the corrupt management of a company that is hardest to remove before they succeed at bringing the whole company down via their numerous frauds. No one in Boeing management has been held accountable for these numerous ongoing frauds as of yet.

I was hired in on the military side of Boeing. Working on military programs can be hard work but very satisfying work because of the pride in helping your country protect itself. When your management steals that technology and illegally exports it, it doesn't make you feel that great about your companies' role in protecting the nation, however.

Of course, Boeing has been milking government contracts like cash cows for as long as I am aware of. 12 hour days 7 days a week even when there is nothing to do because Boeing supposedly got paid a set amount per the contract for every man hour worked. That abuse, also, should have been ended long ago, however the problems on the ABL and other programs Boeing has seem remarkably similar. Obviously, real oversight over these contracts must be restored.

Such abuse gives fodder to those who oppose military contracts as a matter of course.

I hope that Boeing soon hits the "eject" button on its management and saves its military side from drowning in the bathtub by irate government officials POed at their ongoing fraud, but the greed of those fraudsters never ceases to amaze me. They are parasites in the true sense of the word, not releasing hold of their host until it has died and they can no longer suck further blood from it.

The following is an interesting comment after mine from timmy3923:

Boeing use to be a company that had integrity and a quality product. But around the 1995-96 era and the inception of it's present senior leadership team, the company has turned to nothing more then a company that will do anything to keeps it's stockholders happy. To hell with quality or integrity, make money. That was when folks who helped build a good company and had been working there for 20+ years, bailed as they were disgusted with the direction the company was heading. My father was one of them and opted to take the early retirement that was offered at the time because he didn't want anything to do with where Sr. Management was taking the company and how they were going to do business. During that time frame, Boeing lost a huge amount of talent and has never recovered since.

It' a wonder how they keep the company going now, other then the legacy of work and engineering that was done for the 737, 767 and 747 airplanes. Since then it's been crap and not a wonder why Airbus is beating the pants off of them now.

The following is my response to his comment:

timmy3923--true, Boeing has set a whole new level of corruption in search of the almighty ever increasing bottom line than even Enron did. Your insight about when exactly this happened is valued. The 1997 production debacle and the McD merger helped exacerbate the corruption, as corrupt Boeing management solidified their belief then that the ends (profitability and stock price goals) justified the means (breaking every law).

Updated 3-4-09, 3:56 PM PST! Please note that this blog covers several important issues that all occurred in close proximity, so this blog will probably end up being my longest by far to date. Putting so many issues in one blog is not ideal, but all of these issues except item 1 are of extreme importance and I therefore do not want to bury them behind a later blog entry that infers that one issue is more important than the rest.

Please scroll down to item 4 if you want to see my remarks on the latest tragic 737NG crash that Boeing is at least partially (if not fully) responsible for, which killed three of its own employees.

1. The Small Good News:

The false, unfounded, and overblown charges against me were finally dismissed.

2. The Hugely Bad News:

Boeing and their King County Prosecutors, Dan Satterberg, Kathy Van Olst, and Scott Peterson continue to try to cover up any evidence of Boeing management crimes of the highest order--even to the point of overtly interfering with the gathering of critical evidence in that case. No company (and definitely not a prosecutor supposedly sworn to uphold the law) should have that kind of power to interfere with true justice.

In his support of Boeing outside the law, Dan Satterberg has proven once and for all that he protects the white collar crime of his campaign contributors, rather than does his statutory duty to oppose and charge all white collar criminal violations--Boeing's or anybody else's.

Corrupt Boeing management has just proven, well, that they are indeed corrupt Boeing management.

See the my comments at the link at the bottom of this blog entry for important additional information on this latest obstruction of justice by Boeing, Boeing "Legal," The Seattle Police Department (SPD) and Dan Satterberg, the Boeing (and Boeing outside counsel) owned King County Prosecutor.

3. Another startling issue is the fact that Boeing committed the same crime that they and their King County Prosecutors accused me of doing and prosecuted me for by Boeing's illegal possession of my personal computer drives well past the date the King County Superior Court order required their return.

You be the judge. Compare the court order language and dates to what the Boeing letter states. Also note that the court order required their return to the SPD, but, instead, Boeing illegally erased the evidence of their illegal access and copying of my personal files. I had wanted the drives returned to the SPD as required by the court order so that they could be checked for evidence that Boeing had illegally accessed my personal files. Note that I reported Boeing's illegal possession of these drives to the SPD and the FBI on February 4th, 2009, and asked them to retrieve them immediately so that Boeing would not be able to erase evidence of their illegal access of my files.

I was, and still am, concerned for anyone Boeing found that I had communicated with in the personal email that I had stored on my computer before the time it was seized (in all likelihood illegally, despite what an overly Boeing deferrent King County Superior Court judge approved at the request of a certain corrupt Boeing Corporate Investigations Manager, a certainly corrupt Boeing inside counsel, and Scott Peterson, the King County Prosecutor doing everything (legal or mostly not) per the direction of Boeing's bought and paid for King County Prosecutor, Dan Satterberg).

The reason? I have certain knowledge that Boeing's illegal pogrom against innocent whistleblowers and everyone close to them continues to this day. I will post more on that later:













Note that Boeing's attorney (the same one that embraced King County Prosecutor Scott Peterson during my trial after his closing remarks when she thought he had my conviction in the bag--before the jury's deliberations' outcome intruded upon her fantasy in that regard) does not state in the letter that the wiping of the copies of my computer drives illegally in their possession was not illegal in itself--but what would you expect from a "Boeing Legal" attorney? You might have expected some attempted explanation on her part in the letter on behalf of her employer, but, just as with any criminal under investigation, attorneys often believe the less said the better.

Yes, it is overly obvious that Boeing broke the law and the court order in this matter, then tried to cover up the extent of their crime by wiping the drives on Boeing premises rather than returning them to the SPD where they could be checked for any illegal access to my personal files that occurred in addition to the illegal holding of the copies of my drives past the court ordered 12/31/08 required date of their return to the SPD.

Note that this crime involved Boeing criminal attorneys in the Boeing Legal Department, and it was done By Boeing intentionally with its addled Legal Department's concurrence. It was not a simple oversight on their part by far. A vastly smaller company with no legal department that knows the law inside and out as Boeing's Legal Department does may plausibly make such a specious argument--Boeing can't. Note that the Boeing Legal Department knowing the law extremely well is a point I concede. From my intimate experience with them, they purposely know the law so well so they can circumvent around it, as they did in this matter and in the other case of obstruction of justice noted in item 2 above, among other instances. To Boeing Legal, there are in essence two sets of books--the laws of the land, and the completely different set of principals that they really operate by which contain such principals of theirs such as whistleblower retaliation, harassment against the "independent of Boeing" press, etc., etc. Yes, I am not the Boeing Legal Departments biggest fan by far because I have never witnessed them doing the right thing despite my intimate knowledge of their actions--they only seem to do the opposite.

In fact, Boeing never had any intention of ever returning the copies of my computer drives to the SPD as the court order and the law itself required. How do I know this? Boeing's actions of course. Instead of letting the SPD image the drives onto SPD owned drives that would have to be returned to the SPD as a matter of course because they would be SPD property in addition to the court order requirement for their return to the SPD, Boeing's outside counsel "pulled rank" on the SPD and told them to image the drives onto two hard drives that Boeing would provide them. Why did they have the drives imaged on Boeing owned drives rather than SPD owned drives? You got it--Boeing intended to keep the drives and my personal files on them forever, never intending to comply with the court ordered mandate to not access my personal files while they were in their possession or the requirement to return them to the SPD no later than 12/31/08. Only my report to the SPD and FBI changed their plans to keep those copies of my computer drives forever and forced them into cover up mode that led them to illegally erase them rather than return them as legally required. Where are the illegal copies they made of those copies? That's what now needs to be the main point of the investigation by authorities in this matter in additon to the obviously required criminal charges for their intentional lawbreaking as noted.

But here is an interesting conundrum--the court order still requires their return to the SPD--illegally erased as they did, or not. But there is another obvious problem I don't have the answer to at this point--did the SPD make note of the I.D. of the two Boeing drives before they imaged my drives onto them and provided them to Boeing? Why is this important? If they didn't do so before they were sent out to Boeing, there will be no way to verify that Boeing ever even illegally erased the same drives they illegally held--right, we would only have Boeing's word that they did so with no way to verify they did so.

Boeing wanted copies of my computer drives so that they could illegally access my personal files that were on them and in order to continue their illegal pogrom against anyone that dares to oppose Boeing lawbreaking or dares to associate with whistleblowers who oppose Boeing lawbreaking--in this case me.

New! The Boeing Illegal Department (as they would be more aptly named, I strongly believe) is not the only organization involved in this pogrom against whistleblowers like me, the sources of true Boeing stories (especially stories about Boeing lawbreaking, some of which I have been the source of) in the press, and the very idea of a free and unmolested press itself.

I found this out when I had to do two interviews with Boeing as part of the continuance for dismissal that I signed under duress due to the unethical if not illegal pressure on U.S. Attorney Carl Blackstone by Perkins Coie partner Marc Boman (Boman used his friendship with Blackstone to get Blackstone to go against all ethics and standards of his profession and threaten me with a federal prosecution he later admitted he had no basis for if I did not enter into the "Deal with the Devil" that I ultimately had to agree to).

One of the interviews (on 10/28/08) was required per the agreement and lasted about eight hours. The other interview (on 2/11/09) my attorney and I did under protest as it was outside the terms of the continuance for dismissal I was forced to sign, which expired in its entirety on 1/30/09. That interview only lasted about three hours.

But what is interesting about these interviews, absent the fact that I should never have had to do them at all absent Marc Boman’s unethical if not illegal conduct for his client, Boeing, is where the interviews occurred, who was present at the interviews, and the questions that were put to me at the interviews.

These interviews are one of the main reasons that I know as much as I do about Boeing’s and their outside counsel’s illegal (I strongly believe) and continuing pogrom against whistleblowers, the sources of true information in the press about Boeing lawbreaking, and Boeing’s and their outside counsel’s retaliation against those whistleblowers (which include the noted press sources), and Boeing and their outside counsel’s unethical if not illegal pogrom against the very idea of a free and independent press that this country was founded on as engendered in the Constitution of the United States.

These two interviews occurred at the offices of Boeing’s outside counsel, Gordon, Tilden, Thomas, & Cordell, LLP, in downtown Seattle, on the 40th floor of the 1001 Fourth Avenue Plaza building, a 50 story skyscraper that was Seattle’s tallest building from approximately 1969 to 1985 (only of interest if you are trying to guestimate what Boeing is paying this outside counsel per billable hour (I would guess about $10 a minute), and to imagine the fantastic view I saw of Seattle from that firm’s main conference room in which the interviews were done—which was stunning and truly worth at least a $10 a minute admission fee, I think. Luckily they let me and my attorney sit on the side of the huge conference table with the view).

Present at the interviews were my attorney, Ramona Brandes, me, Anthony “Tony” Maus of “Boeing is the most arrogant company on the face of the planet” quote and whistleblower retaliation against me fame, Jeffrey Tilden, founding partner of Gordon, Tilden, Thomas, & Cordell, LLP, and a freelance court reporter transcribing the interviews.

I couldn’t describe the contents of the first interview because the agreement I was coerced into signing prohibited that—that is, until the agreement expired on 1/30/09—now I can document publicly both interviews.

Mr. Tilden was a gentleman, at least while he wasn’t “slipping the knife” in during an inappropriate question or during prevarications in the interview(s) and related letters to my attorney that I wasn’t being forthcoming enough during the interviews. I’m sure those prevarications were just for legal manuevering on Mr. Tilden’s part for his “$10 a minute” client, Boeing, and had no relationship to my very honest and very forthcoming testimony during the interviews. Despite the long span of time between most of the events they questioned me about and the time of the interviews, I think I did remarkably well—much, much better, in fact, than I understand President Reagan himself did when he gave sworn testimony in the Iran Contra Affair investigation. In fact, when I remembered additional details relating to one of the questions I was asked during a break, I reported that info to them when the interview continued, even though I didn’t want to give that info to them, as it concerned what I knew of Dominic Gates other sources, which I wanted to protect from the same retaliation and termination that the SOX IT whistleblowers and I suffered by Boeing’s illegal (I strongly believe) actions against them. I gave that info to them as I was legally required to do as part of the agreement—they would have me sent to prison falsely if I had refused to do so. Thankfully, Dominic never told me his other source’s names, so I hope that the other whistleblowers they are still trying to route out and illegally persecute will be safe from such retaliation because they won’t ignore and keep silent about Boeing’s illegal conduct.

And that was what was so troubling about the interviews—Tilden and Maus were only seeking info from me that they could obviously use to identify and persecute such whistleblowers and persecute The Seattle Times itself with. Additionally, they sought personal info from me so that they could continue the persecution of me and ruining of my life for doing the right thing ad infinitum.

In that last instance, they had the gall to ask me for my current address and for my current work location.

Why would they need such information? I can only think of two reasons—they wanted my current address in order to have investigators illegally surveil me in hopes of furthering my persecution, and they wanted my current employer info so that they could continue to ensure that I was blackballed from the industry and/or so that they could call that employer and ask them to terminate me or tell me I was being laid off if that company was open to such improper and illegal Boeing pressure.

In fact, its very likely that they have done exactly that with both of the jobs that I was doing exceedingly well in, but ended under suspicious circumstances suddenly. However, I don’t have any hard proof of Boeing and their outside counsel doing that--yet.

Boeing and their outside counsel failed to call my current employer to ask them to fire me or tell me I was being laid off permanently as they likely did in my last two jobs, only because they couldn’t do so due to the fact that I am currently unemployed—thanks to their original actions against me and subsequent actions with my later employers.

My first job after Boeing terminated me for trying to end their lawbreaking imperiling lives and our national security was at a machine shop in Bothell, Washington. They are one of the main non-union suppliers to Boeing locally, but they did work for several other companies as well, including Boeing’s main competitors. I accepted the job offer extended to me during my interview with the QA manager there, and they were immediately impressed with my work ethic and expertise. For those of you that are prejudiced against overweight people like me, I lifted crates of heavy machined parts (weighing up to 70 LBS and more each) around for ten hour shifts during my inspection work on those parts. Lazy, I’m anything but. Actually, due in small part to the few times I had to ask for a few hours off of work so that I could go into Seattle for hearings to do with the progress of the false and unfounded charges against me, my QA Manager gave me a raise much, much earlier than we had negotiated in the interview, and actually raised my pay to significantly more than we had agreed to in the interview after my probation time there. Funny, but he actually believed that my taking a few hours off of work here and there (which I only did when absolutely necessary, as I didn’t want to jeopardize my job by taking any time off of work at all) was because I was interviewing with other companies because I wasn’t satisfied with the pay or the long commute from Kent to Bothell! Even though that raise was an unintended consequence of his fears that he would lose me to another company, it did show me how well he appreciated my hard work and expertise on the companies’ behalf.
When the trial came up, I asked my management there if I could work on second shift for a few weeks. I intentionally made cryptic the reason why, and thankfully they didn’t press me further for details. They granted me the temporary shift change, no doubt because they thought they had to do so in order to keep me on there.

I was going to the trial during the day, and going directly therefrom to work in Bothell.

During the first few days of the trial and my stint on second shift there, the HR manager of the company came up to me at work and took me upstairs to pick out a company jacket, as I was well past the six month mark with the company, I was then considered a permanent employee there. They didn’t have my size, so he special ordered one.

Then came the fateful day when someone saw the news of the trial on the false charges, they recognized me as being the falsely accused in the trial, and they brought the article in to work about it and passed it around.

I never got a chance to hear what my coworkers there thought about me facing such false charges, as when I reported to work that afternoon after the trial had ended that day, 3/26/08, the HR Manager and my QA Manager were there at my workstation to “greet” me. They immediately led me to the same conference room where I originally interviewed for the job. There, the HR manager told me about the article passed about that day, and told me that they were terminating me for “a conflict of interest with a main customer (Boeing).” What the “conflict of interest” was that they thought I had with Boeing they never explained, and I never have figured out. The HR manager told me he had visited my website and blog and he seemed to be unable to describe exactly how he felt about the truth I had posted there, other than a negative connotation. I guess they terminated me for telling the truth, just as Boeing did (and later prosecuted me for). I told the HR manager that, “I had always thought he was a great HR manager, up until this meeting,” and both him and my QA manager shook my hand and wished me luck as they showed me the door.

Later, I checked the company rule manual they had provided me when I was hired—no where in it was listed “a conflict of interest with a customer” as a prohibited thing. A conflict of interest with the company itself was prohibited, but not with a customer. Wrongful termination, indeed. Never mind the fact that I had no conceivable “conflict of interest” with Boeing—ever, unless you call me whistleblowing on their crimes and their illegal retaliation for such “a conflict of interest.”

But what the larger point was in writing all of this was too examine Boeing’s possible involvement with my wrongful termination from that company. I don’t remember if we covered the subject in the meeting, but any reasonable person would assume that my employer had contacted Boeing after they saw the article and realized I was the most dreaded of things to any corrupt company like Boeing—a whistleblower. What was discussed between them, if anything? I don’t yet know. But Boeing’s and Tilden’s inapproriate questions in my interview with them lead me to believe that Boeing would support their wrongful termination of me, if not direct itself that it occur if my employer of the time wanted further Boeing work.

I will be adding to the prior new section as I get time to do so. It is by no means complete, but I trust that it documents in further detail just why I believe that Boeing is still illegally going after me to ensure I am never employed again and my life is further destroyed because I dared to do the right thing against Boeing's frauds, as well as illegally going after other whistleblowers, press sources of Boeing lawbreaking to the press, and the press itself if they won't serve only as mouthpieces for the lies and cover-ups of corrupt Boeing management.

Want proof that they intentionally obstructed justice again in the case of the illegal erasure of the drives rather than returning them as required? Notice the date on which they started to illegally erase the disks rather than returning them to the SPD as the court order required--2/9/08. Why is that date significant? Because, on 2/4/09 I became aware of their illegal possession of these copies of my computer drives and I reported that fact to both the SPD and the FBI, who I asked to immediately go to Boeing and confiscate the illegally held drives and any evidence during that seizure of any illegal copying of my personal files on those disks.

Then what happened? Yep, exactly what is documented above in the Boeing letter--more obstruction of justice by Boeing and Boeing Legal. Apparently, Boeing denied the FBI access to Boeing property on which they illegally held the copies of my computer drives and any copies they illegally made of those copies of my drives. At least they denied them access long enough to erase the evidence of their illegal copying at Boeing.

Why is Boeing and Boeing Legal so law adverse and obstruction of justice friendly? That is a good question, and the answer to that I have blogged on frequently. In a nutshell, it is this--Boeing is so arrogant and powerful that it knows that it does not have to comply with any law or any court order. It has key personnel in most agencies corrupted to the point that they will never lift a finger to oppose Boeing no matter how egregious Boeing's lawbreaking is. And it was this that I was up against when I went up against corrupt Boeing QA management starting in early 2002. Is it no wonder what then happened to me as a result?

The two "Senators from Boeing" mostly just watched me "burned at the stake" illegally by Boeing and Boeing's outside counsel and their bought and paid for (by their campaign contributions, as well as perhaps other favors) King County Prosecutor, Dan Satterberg. I wrote to both senators years before Boeing had me falsely arrested. Washington's Junior Senator never did anything to my knowledge to help me oppose the serious fraud in Boeing and FAA management that I reported to her. To her credit, Washington's Senior Senator did respond with a letter back to me about the referral action she was going to take in response (which I never learned the outcome of despite letters asking for status), and she also helped me another time with the OIG "investigation" behind the scenes. Unfortunately, I knew exactly why she was so coy about appearing to support my efforts at stopping FAA and Boeing management fraud by putting her actions behind the scenes into writing to me. But I am thankful for what little she did do despite her obvious fear of looking like she opposed Boeing lawbreaking publicly.

Note that Del Valerio was the Boeing computer forensics guy that participated in the illegal whistleblower retaliation pogrom against me, and was the guy who prevaricated in sworn testimony in an interview with my attorney in order to shape his testimony away from the truth in order to do his management's bidding and ensure the unfounded charges against me resulted in a prison stay that would protect corrupt Boeing management from the truth of my whistleblowing of their crimes. He actually had the gall to infer that I was a hacker even though he knew I never was one (I only accessed files on the Boeing network that any Boeing employee with computer access could have accessed). His "uhs" while he was shaping his testimony in his head during the interview were numerous indeed, especially when he was lying that what I did in accessing publicly accessible files (to all Boeing employees) was included in the definition of "hacking." That he was involved in the cover up of Boeing's illegal possession, access, and copying of my personal files is not surprising in the least. Boeing has seemed to maintain the same small corrupt cadre of personnel throughout their retaliation efforts against me.

What is notable as well is that the letter states that a person from Boeing's OIG was there to witness the illegal wiping of the copies of my computer drives.

The Boeing OIG is just as corrupt as its subset organization, Boeing Ethics.

In fact, having the OIG rep witness this and attest to anything from that witnessing is just like someone in WWII Germany reporting to the Gestapo that they think Jews are being burned in the concentration camps, the Gestapo rep going inside the camp and actually witnessing the Jews' bodies being thrown in the ovens and burnt, then that Gestapo rep going to the person who asked them to investigate and telling them that they had seen no evidence of Jews or anything else being burned in the ovens, even as the smoke from the ovens billows up in the background.

That's exactly how much I trust the OIG to do anything at all ethical, or attest to anything truthfully, and my opinion of them in this regard is an informed one. After all, they are one of the Boeing organizations that persecutes whistleblowers as they did me.

Will the people involved in this crime and cover up be held accountable? Will the law be applied to them with the same vigor it was overly applied to me?

Not likely so in King County Superior Court, as Dan Satterberg would have to file charges against himself, Scott Peterson, and Boeing for that to happen.

There are other and much more fair courts than that one, however.

Here is a comment I just did in response to an anonymous commentator to this blog entry that contains much more detail about this Boeing theft (and almost assuredly illegal copying) of my personal data, as well as much more important info about the entirely separate Boeing crime of Boeing, SPD, and KCPO obstruction of justice in an active investigation of Boeing management crimes of the highest order:


Thanks for the post. You are exactly right, anonymous.

Sorry, but I am working on posting the rest of that story today, but I got interrupted after posting the bogus Boeing letter. I have yet to post the court order that gave out the very, very specific conditions for their release (which they intentionally violated) and the required date of their return to the SPD (which they also intentionally violated). I will try to post it momentarily, then I have to explain the documents on the blog.

You are remarkably astute! Yes, (as far as I know) my original computer drives are still sitting unmolested in the SPD Computer Forensics Lab.

Of course, corrupt Boeing management are trying to prevent themselves from facing charges which are likely to be (in my opinion, pending the investigation's conclusion, of course) much more extreme than I was falsely faced with by corrupt Boeing management and their King County Prosecutor as a result of the investigation I am cooperating with (by specifically allowing them to take all of my stuff in SPD custody for that investigation). This is obstruction of justice on their part, pure and simple.

True, the vast majority of crooks do not want to go to prison for their crimes. But do we let them obstruct justice like Boeing is doing in this case so they can destroy the evidence against them and therefore short circuit the possibility of such very rightful charges against them? The answer is no, unless Boeing is the one obstructing justice, according to corrupt personnel at the Seattle Police Department and the Boeing financed King County Prosecutor's Office.

This is a huge story that will one day come out in all its ugly detail nationally. Although Boeing, the SPD, and the corrupt KCPO know which authorities I am cooperating with in efforts to at long last bring culpable criminals in Boeing management to justice for their very high crimes, I cannot divulge that here, out of respect and deference to these authorities who have so bravely stepped up to do their duty in a climate that, although changing rapidly, is still unfriendly to honest authorities trying their best to protect us from criminal acter's frauds of the highest order, no matter how big, corrupt, or powerful the corporation they are investigating is.

This obstruction of justice by Boeing with corrupt SPD and KCPO help will not ultimately stand. Of course, corrupt Boeing management trying to literally save their own arses from culpability for their crimes are likely trying their best to have my drives erased that are in SPD custody. Those drives of mine have the data that I so meticulously collected of Boeing crimes of the highest order so I could give that data to the relevant investigative authorities (that is, before Boeing filed a false police report in 2006 and had them wrongly confiscated from me).

Corrupt Boeing management, Boeing's SPD, and Boeing's KCPO I believe wrongly think that I told these investigators of the high crimes they are investigating and suggested that they get the data I long ago had collected for them from the SPD for that investigation.

They may have been so led astray to think that I had the investigation started because I did call the SPD and FBI to investigate the illegal holding and copying of my personal computer by Boeing in violation of the law and the court order requiring that my personal data on those drives not be accessed or copied in any way and that those copies of my drives be returned to SPD custody on 12/31/08 at the latest. That was an entirely separate matter of much lesser importance than the investigation of Boeing that Boeing, the SPD, and the KCPO are obstructing.

Nothing could be further from the truth, and that is why I am so proud of these brave investigators for having acted on their own in this investigation of the most serious crime imaginable. It was they who requested my permission to get my drives from the SPD Computer Forensics Laboratory. I more than gladly gave it to these brave authorities. Of course, I will do whatever I can to assist these investigators during the investigation that they started on their own by just doing their critical jobs.

They launched the investigation when they came across one of my websites that documented serious crimes under their purview. I have long hoped that authorities would come across one of my web pages and launch the investigation required of the Boeing management crimes documented thereon. To my knowledge, this is the first investigation to be started that way--by brave investigators making proactive efforts to protect us from crimes of the most serious sort.

Needless to say, I am dumbfounded that a corporation even as large. powerful, arrogant, and law adverse as Boeing would dare to obstruct an investigation of the magnitude of this one. Hopefully, Boeing will not succeed in this obstruction of long past due justice, and will not therefore succeed in stuffing the "bloody skeletons" back into the closet and keeping it locked from authorities who already know exactly the nature of the high crimes and location of the "closet" in which the evidence of Boeing's crimes are stored--my computer in SPD custody.

Add to the crimes they have committed the crime of obstruction of justice. Hopefully all involved personnel will do much more time ultimately because of this affront to every law this country was founded on.

End of comment.

Is this just another cover up by Boeing and the King County Prosecutor's Office of Boeing's crimes?--Of course--that is certainly the case.

If they had nothing to hide and had did nothing wrong, they would have complied with the court order and returned the drives rather than instead erasing the evidence of their violations of the court order and the law in the matter.

This involves the computers (quite likely illegally, no matter what the judge approved) that were seized from me on 5/17/06 when Boeing had me arrested at work and simultaneously seized them from my home in what was the start of their most serious episode of whistleblower retaliation against me (after the harrassment and retaliation I suffered on the job at Boeing for years for reporting their fraud in QA management to the FAA, and for simply doing my job of inspecting airplanes).

Update! Please read the following email I just sent to the FBI to upate them on the developments noted above:

From: Gerald Eastman
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 1:18 PM
To: (FBI email address)

Subject: Urgent info for Eastman Case investigators--As Feared, Boeing Illegal Erasure of the Copies of My Computer Drive Occurs. Unfounded Charges Against Me are Finally Dismissed

Dear Eastman Case Investigators,

I wanted to inform you of important developments that you need to know about for your ongoing investigation of the illegal possession and illegal copying of my personal data concerning the copies of my computer drives that are/were in the possession of Boeing.

As feared and I tried to forestall by warning your team previously, Boeing illegally wiped those drives of any evidence of their illegal copying of my personal files in violation of the law and the court order I previously sent to you. Accordingly, please expand the investigation to include this obstruction of justice by Boeing during an active investigation. The only possible reason for their illegal (wiping) of those drives instead of compliance with the court ordered return of them intact to the SPD is an obvious effort on their part to cover up the illegal accessing and copying of my computer files before you could get them back and check for such illegal access as I requested you to do before their illegal erasure.

Please see my additional thoughts on this obstruction of justice by Boeing on my blog by looking at item 3 of my latest blog at:

http://eastmans.web.aplus.net/pblog/index.php

Also please note that the unfounded and false charges against me were dismissed last Wednesday. You may have caught that on KOMO TV 4 news. Now I am just like every other law abiding U.S. citizen without such false charges hanging over my head by that dismissal. With this news, I trust that you will treat me (as I hope you have done prior) just as you would any other citizen reporting serious crimes and related obstruction of justice, and that you will keep me informed of the investigation's progress. I hope that you also similarly pursue violations of the law, the court order, and the related obstruction of justice extremely vigorously and thoroughly, just as you would any report to your office from any other unaccused law abiding citizen that your office interfaces with in the investigation of serious criminal matters (like this one) that they report to you.

Thanks for your hard work to hold the criminals accountable in this important case. It is a testament to your professionalism that you are holding Boeing to the law in this investigation, just as you would do in the case of any unconnected person being investigated for criminal conduct.

Note that, due my informed belief that parts of the SPD are helping Boeing obstruct justice in an unrelated matter, I am ceasing efforts to get the SPD to uphold the law themselves in this matter, and I will be exclusively updating your team as related developments arise from this point forward.

Gerald Eastman


4. Strange--yet another 737 crashed today.

Update, 3/4/09!--It appears that my corrupt QA management at Boeing's PSD may be off the hook for the specific deaths and grievous injuries in the Turkish Airlines 737-800 crash. Both Boeing Legal and the Boeing Chief Counsel's Office are not off the hook for responsibility yet, however--they covered up Boeing QA management fraud across the enterprise--not just at PSD, and that larger fraud may still be a causal factor in the crash.

New news from the investigation points to a faulty altimeter as a main factor in the crash.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... crash.html

What is still unclear is if the "defect in the altimeter" was in the altimeter itself or in the wiring between the altimeter and other critical systems, like the autopilot. The altimeter is in all likelihood a Boeing purchased item, whereas the noted wiring itself was almost certainly done at Boeing.

I know that the wiring on Boeing planes is one of the chief areas in which defects are intentionally delivered to Boeing customers on aircraft because of the rollerstamping fraud common across the enterprise due to corrupt QA management and Boeing Legal and the Chief Counsel's Office's cover-up of said fraud rather than ending of it when I reported it to them in detail.

I worked in 777 Systems Installation (SI) in Everett as an inspector and I could not believe the numbers of defects in the wiring that I found during my inspections. Due to my not taking part sufficiently (to Boeing QA management) in the Boeing "reindeer games" of rollerstamping fraud, I documented those defects for rework rather than ignoring them and buying off the paperwork as the rollerstamping inspectors did. I remember a particularly bad job I had clocked in on inspecting on the 777 flight deck.

Of interest, perhaps, is that when I was loaned into that area, my recently promoted former boss when I was a PED (Passenger Entry Door) Door Rigger (who shall remain nameless as he later tragically died) and Liz Otis, V.P. of Quality at BCA, walked into the 777 section I was inspecting and struck up a conversation with me. They asked me how I found the quality of the work I inspected. I was polite about it, but I didn't mince words as well about the abysmal quality of the wiring I had been inspecting and documenting the defects of there. As I recall, I complained there were so many defects on each wiring job I clocked into that I had to spend much time per job documenting all of those defects as a result of my necessarily thorough inspections, which was making me less efficient than I would have liked to have been if not thusly slowed down dealing with the abysmal workmanship on those wiring jobs.

Note that the requirements for wiring outside the fuselage in "high vibration areas" are intentionally more strict per engineering than inside the fuselage, which the engineers assume to be mostly an area without significant vibration. Anyone who flies, however, will attest that that is not the case, of course. But if you were riding an engine ala Slim Pickens riding the nuke in "Doctor Strangelove," you may be able to feel the difference in vibration levels.

But what I was getting to was the much slacker standards for installation of wiring inside the fuselage, and the fact that even those minimal standards were not being met, in large part to the rollerstamping fraud of other inspectors under the direction of Boeing QA management that Boeing Legal and the Boeing Chief Counsel of the time covered up and ensured the continuance of rather than ended as I had urged the to do for the safety of the passengers and crews of Boeing commercial aircraft and their military derivatives.

So, the mystery is partly revealed, but that reveals new questions. Was it a wiring fault, an "inside the box" vendor altimeter fault, and/or a maintenance error? We should find out in due time, hopefully. The replacement of the caution light, the previous errors in the altimeter, and the exact sequence of such events and other causal factors will be interesting as more is learned.

Because the fraud at PSD on the 737NG EBU production line (among all others there) is so well documented here (and includes new data), is so well documented in my almost 400 page report to the FAA and Boeing's Chief Counsel on that issue and many others, and is so well documented in at least one "Boeing Ethics" "investigation," that I plan on posting here, I will leave this here for posterity, even though it appears an EBU problem may not be the cause. The rollerstamping fraud demonstrated by all of this is still a suspect in the crash, however, as I previously noted below would be the case if the 737NG EBU fraud was eliminated as a cause of the crash. Unfortunately for everyone, the results of the fraud of Boeing QA management cannot easily (or even with some difficulty, for that matter) be undone. The criminals in the matter will remain the criminals in the matter until they are brought to justice and they pay for their crimes:

Could it be because of the rollerstamping fraud noted on this blog and my website? It is interesting beyond the obvious tragedy involved that it seems to be a loss of power in one or both engines. I saw the fraud first hand on the 737NG EBU (Turbo-Fan (Jet) Engine Build-Up) production line at the Propulsion Systems Division at Boeing when I was an inspector there. That was where I was arrested and terminated. The 737NG EBUs (two of which powered the crashed Turkish Airlines 737NG airplane) were some of the most rollerstamped major components of any aircraft produced by Boeing. I exposed that corruption in my report to the FAA, and openly opposed it at work there when I was assigned to that line in crude efforts to fire me for not rollerstamping as fast as other inspectors on that line--the fastest paced one at PSD.

I filed an ethics complaint against my corrupt QA supervisor--Tom Nakamichi--because he told me not to look at the engines too closely in my inspections when they were received from General Electric. I'll have to post the details of that ethics investigation here. It may show you just how bad things were as far as QA management fraud on the 737NG EBU program (as well as any other production line at Boeing's PSD for that matter). Tom told me to stand at least four feet or so from the engines I was receiving and told me not to look at most of the engine even at that distance. Unbelievable? No. Not for those that witnessed it. Of course, as noted on a prior blog, the antithetically named Boeing Ethics Department "did not substantiate" my ethics complaint, even though there were multiple witnesses to Nakamichi's highly unethical conduct.

The problem with being told not to comply with the FAA approved quality manual requirements to inspect these critical airplane propulsion units upon receival?

In addition to the fact that it is illegal to ignore the FAA requirements to inspect those engines, I knew from my many inspections of those General Electric engines (which form the "core" of the 737NG EBUs) that those engines were very defect ridden upon receival. Later I would learn that General Electric had self-inspection in place at their factory--which, of course is no excuse for them delivering to Boeing with those engines the hundreds if not thousands of defects that I found on those engines during my many receival inspections of them as they came into the building at the start of the PSD production line that built them up to be ready to interface with rest of the airplane.

Let's just say that the resident rep from General Electric that had to ensure the many, many defects I found on those G.E. engines were corrected before the NCRs (Non-Conformance Records) I wrote were bought off (only in the case that I bought them off myself), wasn't my greatest fan. He, like my corrupt management, preferred that I never saw and documented the defects from the G.E. factory for repair in the first place. Of course, per procedure, all the defects I wrote up during my receival inspections had to be validated as rejectable defects before the NCR was sent on to Engineering for disposition. And out of the hundreds and likely thousands of defects I found on these G.E. 737NG engines, I believe I could count the times a defect I wrote up was cancelled as not a defect on a few fingers on one hand--an outstanding accuracy record. Of course, that does not mean that my corrupt Boeing QA management did not try to persecute me for those extremely few instances--they did so remarkably consistently, due to their widespread corruption and care only for Cost and Schedule concerns rather than the Quality and Safety problems that they were instead supposed to chiefly address rather than ignore.

Actually, most of those few cancelled NCR items were not my errors at all--they were just valid defects per the specs and engineering drawings that my management did not want to have reworked so that they would instead ultimately deliver to Boeing's airline and military platform customers rather than show up in their CORRS (Cost of Rework and Repair System) cost charts.

Of course, other inspectors on that 737NG EBU line did not buck their managements corrupt directions to violate FAA required inspection procedures as well as I did by far. Some of them were indeed the most prolific rollerstampers at PSD, or all of Boeing, for that matter.

That is not solely their responsibilty, however. Most were just trying to prevent retaliation against them by Boeing management that I had suffered for insisting on actually doing my critical job of inspecting the receival and buildup of those EBUs. Corrupt Boeing QA management (as well as anyone that protected them, like the Boeing Ethics Department, The Boeing Legal Department, and Boeing's Chief Counsel) were ultimately responsible for that fraud, as they purposefully engendered it and/or protected its continuance.

Updated! Of course, I mean in no way to infer that this rollerstamping fraud engendered by Boeing management at Boeing only resulted in G.E.'s/CFMI's defects ultimately being intentionally ignored and therefor delivering to Boeing's customers--myriad defects created at Boeing on the 737NG line during PSD's buildup of the core supplied engines into the "ready to hang from the airplane" propulsion units (EBUs) also were intentionally ignored and delivered to airline and military customers by this endemic Boeing QA management engendered QA rollerstamping fraud. In addition, likely millions of other defects have intentionally delivered because of this rollerstamping fraud on all Boeing built components of Boeing's commercial airplane programs and their military derivatives. This is fraud that is endemic throughout BCA as a result of Boeing executive management's, Boeing Legal's, and the Boeing Chief Counsel Office's steadfast pursuit and defense of that fraud, despite my continuing efforts to end it before yet another life is lost or someone is grievously injured because of it. How do I know that it is so widespread at BCA? I witnessed that myself, of course, at the Everett plant, at PSD, and at Flight Test at "Boeing Field" in Seattle (troublingly, the same organization that will be doing 787 flight testing if it ever flies). All places were remarkably similarly corrupt, and their QA management consciously engaged in that fraud to the point that no ethical inspector did not have to fear for their job because of their ethics and determination to do their critical jobs despite their corrupt management's insistence that they do otherwise. Also note that my corrupt QA supervisor (later promoted) at PSD, whose base corruption started my quest on 1/11/2002 to end this fraud costing and risking many lives, came to PSD from the Renton plant, from where he learned his corrupt QA management ways. Also note that Boeing's fraud in this regard intentionally allows the same fraud and defects to deliver from Boeing suppliers to Boeing's plants, as a recent DOT OIG report documented (except for documenting the fact that it was intentional Boeing management fraud behind the DOT OIG documented Boeing "global" oversight of performing its oversight responsibilities over the integrity of the quality systems of its suppliers. You only as far to look in that regard as what I documented above about Boeing QA management's intentional oversight of the defects on G.E./CFMI turbofan engine "cores" so that those defects could deliver to Boeing's military and airline customers so that reworking and repairing them would not interfere with Boeing QA management's Cost, Schedule, and CORRS cost reduction goals. I don't believe they intended that that fraud they engaged in would result in crashes of Boeing aircraft, but that specific fraud that I witnessed accross the Boeing enterprise appears to be a prime candidate for the cause of this particular crash, and the deaths and grievous injuries therefrom. As I've stated before, I don't think their fraud and crimes in this regard rise to the level of murder charges, however, 1st degree manslaughter charges I believe would be quite appropriate considering the level of fraud and lack of care for the passengers and crew's lives that I witnessed in these corrupt Boeing managers that I unforunately witnessed the corrupt antics of. There is an almost 400 page report I wrote and gave to the FAA and Boeing's Chief Counsel documenting this very same Boeing QA management fraud. That they covered it up and continued it rather than investigating and ending it as I had hoped makes them witting accomplices in those serious crimes that have cost lives and have grievously injured so many.

One thing I will never understand (despite the fact I know the reason behind it) is why Boeing protected Tom Nakamichi, my QA supervisor, and his boss (just as guilty, for she directed him to threaten me into rollerstamping line) from any sanctions for their corruption and law breaking as documented in my ethics report and report to the FAA, which I forwarded on to Doug Bain, Boeing's Chief Counsel at the time. Boeing, considering their ability to obstruct justice, could have easily thrown Nakamichi and his boss "under the bus" to law enforcement to further make it look to me that they had actually done something besides cover up after I submitted my report to the Chief Counsel for appropriate corrective actions following Boeing's FAA management's refusal to actually investigate the report and let the chips fall where they as a result of that purely hypothetical unbiased investigation. They didn't do so (give over Nakamichi and boss to law enforcement), much to the credit of their corruption noted so well here and on my website.

In fact, both Nakamichi and his boss were promoted, instead, shortly thereafter. To keep them in corrupt Boeing management line by rewarding them thusly? Quite possibly.

One good thing in my dismissal is knowing the certainty that Tom Nakamichi, his boss, and anyone else involved in Boeing management, Boeing outside law firms, or the management of public agencies like the FAA that are/were involved in the corruption detailed on my website and blog now have a vastly greater chance than I do of wearing orange jumpsuits and getting free lodging and meals. In that regard, the correct direction for justice has been restored to those truly deserving of it, even if Boeing still hasn't gotten that fact and is still trying to use its undue influence with gullible and corrupt government employees to overtly interfere with any rightful efforts by ethical authorities to ensure culpability and corrective actions for Boeing management's crimes.

Tom Nakamichi, by the way, was the corrupt Boeing manager that overtly told me per his boss's direction to engage in rollerstamping fraud and just buy the paperwork off rather than do my job of inspecting the airplane components first as documented near the bottom of the main page of my website. It was his attempt to coerce me into doing the highly illegal in that 1/11/02 meeting that prompted me to take action to stop that endemic fraud in Boeing QA management and the resulting dangerous and defect delivering Boeing Quality Management System by going to the FAA. And the rest is history. However, from this point on, the criminals will not dictate the direction of justice in the opposite direction it should take, as they did in the past. Now, justice will be applied to the real criminals, whether Boeing and the King County prosecutor's Office approve of that or not.

Of course, the crash may not be related to this fraud at Boeing that intentionally let defective engines deliver to Boeing's commercial and 737NG military airplane platform customers. But even if it isn't, this fraud is documented here anyway. This crash could also well be because of other defects in the airplane that Boeing managment also intentionally let deliver to such airlines due to the noted rollerstamping fraud.

Update, Friday 2-27-08:

I posted this comment on the articles on the Seattle Post Intelligencer and The Seattle Times websites. Links are provided:

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ction=DESC

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/soundoff/ ... eID=401555

Tragedy, indeed.

All the more tragic in that the crash may have something to do with the fraud in Boeing QA management that I witnessed and tried to stop on the 737NG Engine Build Up (EBU) production line that I reported to the FAA and Boeing's Chief Counsel at the time, Doug Bain.

Boeing and the FAA, through their well documented corrupt relationship, chose to cover up and let the fraud continue rather than end it, which resulted in defective G.E./CFMI engines (and other components) being delivered on Boeing 737NG commercial aircraft and their military derivatives. If this traces back to the fraud I tried to stop before more lives were lost, I could say "I told you so," but all I have now is a feeling of grief over the loss of life in common with the families of the dead and well wishes for those fighting to recover from their injuries.

That McNerney made such a statement is reprehensible, as his office's obstruction of reforms at Boeing may be quite possibly the very reason the crash happened in the first place.

You can check out more details on my thoughts about this crash and the quite possibly related fraud I witnessed at Boeing related to the Boeing management sanctioned rollerstamping of defective 737NG EBUs at my blog at:

http://eastmans.web.aplus.net/pblog/index.php

If this crash is related to that fraud, I can say that I did everything possible to prevent these deaths and injuries. That doesn't give me any personal peace, however, like maybe it should--it only begets anger at those in Boeing, the Boeing Legal Department, and FAA management that purposely ensured this fraud negating the quality, safety, and reliability of these EBUs (and other "Boeing" airplane components) that quite likely cost these very lives. I have no tolerance for people that put profit over the value of people's lives. Hopefully soon they will be brought to justice, and the fraud in Boeing QA management will be at long last ended, for the safety of everyone involved.

As far as I know, the dead Boeing employees were not involved in any way with the fraud I witnessed in Boeing QA. Even if they were, they didn't deserve death for such actions. These are the crimes of others at Boeing--they deserve only lengthily prison terms, not death, for their crimes are simply first degree manslaughter, as far as I know.

Maybe the politicians and authorities will finally act to stop that fraud now that people are quite likely dead and grievously injured because of it.

Regarding the dismissal of the charges against me, and the related frauds to those fraudulent charges:

No victory --Boeing management criminality, cover up, and interference into investigations into Boeing's numerous frauds continues.

Justice will prevail--but when?

Why doesn't Boeing management walk the annual ethics training talk they present to employees every year? The truth (as stated in those trainings) will come out eventually as Marriane Jennings stated in a Boeing funded ethics training video, no matter how hard or how illegally they try to cover it up.

Why do non-management Boeing employees have to comply with the Boeing Code of Conduct, when Boeing management refuses to do so? After all, it was typical (to this day) Boeing management fraud that resulted in the formation of that Code of Conduct in the first place.

In that regard, Boeing is well down the path of Enron, which Ms. Jennings outlined the downfall of in the noted training video. Boeing employees will only save their own jobs by ensuring their corrupt management is brought to justice and removed before their criminality destroys the company. Strangely perhaps--that is exactly what I have been pursuing since the noted 1/11/02 meeting with Nakamichi.

5. Boeing stated through a newscast on Seattle's KOMO TV 4 that my "allegations" are "outrageous," thereby stating that the truth itself is outrageous to Boeing--and that meaning of their statement is exactly true, unlike most Boeing P.R. department spin--nothing outrages corrupt Boeing management like the truth of their corruption ultimately becoming public. That is why they illegally retaliated against the SOX IT whistleblowers, and exactly why they retaliated so viciously against me and my family for doing the right thing, when they couldn't handle the danger of the real truth coming out concerning their numerous and complex frauds.

When will Boeing get a management that will no longer rely on lawbreaking in order to pad the bottom line and cover up for past lawbreaking?

I don't know, but let's just hope it is soon, for the welfare of all Boeing workers, the lives of passengers and crew on Boeing commercial and military aircraft, and for our national security.

Marriane Jennings was right. Boeing will go into "Enron history" itself unless it bucks its corrupt management like a deathly ill host removing the deadly parasite that is killing it.

By the way--anyone got a link to the KOMO TV 4 afternoon newcast of my story? I can't find it to post it and view it.