2020年3月16日星期一

Manifest of Injustice Going From Bad To Worse

The judges of Administrative Review Board(ARB) of U.S. labor tossed a complaint on a massive counterfeiting Boeing safety parts for lack of jurisdiction before a fair development of trial can be developed. Below is a letter requesting the judges to answer or explain.


U.S. And China Must Strengthen Cooperation To Combat Counterfeiting


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ADMINSTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD
____________________________________________________
In the Matter of
CHARLES SHI,
Complainant
v. Case No.: 2017-0072(AIR)
Filing Date:2020-03-9
MOOG INC., AIRCRAFT GROUP,
Respondent Party.
____________________________________________________

Letter to ARB Judges requesting answers or an explanation

Your Hon. Mr. T.Burrell, acting chief administrative appeals judge;
Your Hon. Mr./Ms. J.Haynes and H. Leslie, administrative appeals judges;
We all know that U.S. and China laws does not shut up whistleblowers, but you, acting as judges of the Labor Tribunal, did it arbitrarily and did it twice. You might be extremely resentful that

Despite exit-ban; Noted aerospace whistleblower tells-all from Shanghai 

Since I believe ARB as an adjudication body will still carry justice, the name of ARB should not be tarnished because of a decision that contains nothing but manifest of injustice going from bad to worse, I write this letter in response to the ARB denial dated 2020-2-27 to you as persons hoping any of you can reply my below questions.




Order of denial 2020-2-27

1. Firstly, I must thank you for acknowledging finally that I was the employee of a Chinese subsidiary of Respondent Moog Inc. rebuking your past narrative that my employer was “a Chinese corporation” having nothing to do with U.S. Moog.
2. Does it mean you are actually aware that I should and must be protected by Air21 as an U.S. aviation whistleblower? Must you choose to protect the Chinese counterfeiter and U.S. defrauder because my lawful and justified appeal offended you as it made you personally feel bad due to being accused of abusing the law, mustn’t you?






3. Can you tell me and public why you insisted to knowingly apply an irrelevant foreign bank fraud case law to rehash your denial for the U.S. aviation whistleblower protection complaint while the firmly established Air21 precedence Sohbani v. Bombardier was hunting you every 2 minutes? You knew your denial is a complete absurdity and you could not challenge the precedence but you just could not find a better excuse to fool others and yourselves, could you?
4. Do you believe the chief Judge Purcell as well as The ALJ Morris knowingly made an unforgivable mistake interpreting U.S. lawmakers’ intent when they abused the law and disgraced their profession by setting up the precedence for the purpose of promoting air safety in allowing a foreign national, Mr Sohbani be protected under Air21? Must you as the ARB acting judges revoke or scrap the decision made by chief Judge Purcell because Mr. Sohbani, the non-citizen would require impermissible extraterritorial reach, or simply because you hate the other whistleblower, who is a noted U.S. aviation employee?
5. What are you going to tell lawmakers? Will you demand U.S. law be modified that any U.S. aviation whistleblowers based in China must be sanctioned, punished or silenced for speaking out on U.S. aviation safety threat because counterfeit safety parts made in China must be legally allowed to be put on Boeing planes?
6. Are you going to demand U.S. congress to make an exemption for NHJ counterfeit safety parts to remain on board Boeing planes because two Max crashes, 346 perished lives are not enough to justify safety concerns from the flying public?
7. Chinese counterfeiters such as NHJ for US aviation is so formidable that U.S. laws or U.S. China Trade Agreement 1.19 does not have a force over them, does it?
The Parties shall endeavor, as appropriate, to strengthen cooperation to combat counterfeit goods that pose ...safety risks.
8. Are you representing Chinese counterfeiters? If not, why are you so nice to them and why are you so hostile to the whistleblower?
You acknowledged that you ”have reviewed all of Complainant’s submissions’ That is Great!






9. So you know beyond any doubt that NHJ was a verified counterfeiter for US aviation, don’t you? Will you as the acting judges of U.S. labor tribunal tell NHJ that they are encouraged to make, deliver and get paid for bogus safety parts for Boeing planes? Will you also tell NHJ that their massive and organized counterfeiting is protected as long as you stay as acting ARB judges and you will help Moog and NHJ shup up the whistleblower which you are obligated?
10. You acknowledged “Respondent’s has engaged in deceit (just one example), “Neither Moog....is ...under the (Air 21)Act. Nor does Moog...perform safety-sensitive functions by contract for air carriers” However you readily embraced Moog’s deceit entirely because by doing so, you could feel good being on the wrong side of history, couldn’t you?
11. So you know beyond any doubt that Moog Aircraft Quality Refused To Investigate, don’t you? Will you tell Moog that Moog could be above the law and they did a great job colluding, mishandling as well as covering up NHJ counterfeiting?
12. So you know beyond any doubt that Moog Knowingly Sourced From China Counterfeit Safety Parts of Boeing Planes, don’t you? Will you tell Moog not to worry about it because you had the law in your hands and would use it to legalize their felony by all means?
13. So you know beyond any doubt that the massive NHJ made fake SPOF might have played a direct role in the fatal 737 Max crashes, don’t you? Will you tell Moog and Boeing that it is not a big deal because Boeing planes are still not all plagued with counterfeit safety parts made by NHJ?
14. So you know beyond any doubt that Moog top executive willfully leaked FAA whistle blowing information to the very suspect endorsing collusion, don’t you? Will you tell Moog that they did a great job because you could not wait to join Moog in getting the whistleblower silenced?
15. So you know beyond any doubt that Boeing was Blamed for Massive Counterfeit Parts Knowingly Installed and Kept on Its B737 Flight Control Systems, don’t you? However, for the sake helping Moog evade cost to remove the massive dangerous SUPs, Moog should get away with your legal blessings, shouldn’t they?
16. So you know beyond any doubt that it is not only correct that Chairman DeFazio: Boeing 'lacked a safety culture' , but in fact Boeing's 'culture of concealment' led to fatal 737 Max crashes, however you would exceptionally and desperately defend the bad safety culture of Boeing at the cost of flying public safety, wouldn’t you?
17. So you know beyond any doubt that The FAA Committed a Felony Covering up the Chinese Counterfeiting, don’t you? But for the purpose of endorsing the FAA wrongdoing, you must issue an order declaring wrongdoing is not a wrongdoing,mustn’t you?
18. So you know beyond any doubt that that the Chinese law enforcement was knowingly mishandling the criminal investigation on NHJ counterfeiting even after they verified the criminal facts, don’t you? But because you loved so much of the Chinese LEA knowing mishandling, you must endorse them continue doing so, don’t you?
19. So you know beyond any doubt that by denying to compel critical information disclosure, it will hamper the real and joint criminal investigation by U.S. and Chinese law enforcement even if it could lead to the complete uncovering of the crime and removal of the massive Boeing safety threat, don’t you?
20. For holding the evils in the Pandora’s Box, you must use the legal power in your hands to have the lid tightly closed, mustn’t you?
21. The flying public safety is the last thing in your mind, isn’t it? You don’t have a heart for flying public safety, do you?
22. So regardless what, you would rather sit on unsafe Boeing planes plagued with counterfeit safety parts made in China than allow a fair trial to a complaint that would help to save lives. wouldn’t you?
I, the lawful and justified whistleblower, of course, will not accept your arbitrary and harmful denial and will continue cry out for a fair trial probably at the court of public opinion. In the meantime, I look forward to your answers or an explanation to questions above.
Sincerely
Charles Shi, the pro se petitioner
blog
twitter
linkedin
youtube
tumblr
facebook


没有评论:

发表评论