To the people of Europe, please purchase and read my book KNDU187, prior to placing US false NMD technologies in your home country. Many secrets for you to figure out. 
KNDU187 paper back book is available. Fiction, or is it? 

ORDER by clicking here on: KNDU187  or on Amazon.com 

NiraSchwartz.com
 National Missile Defense [NMD] Fraud;
Government Corruption; 
and
  Trials Exhibits
Whistle Blower [Qui-Tam] Cases: 

D.C. 96-3065 RSWL - Appeal 9th Circuit Case 03-55495
D.C. 01-4937 RSWL - Appeal 9th Circuit Case 03-55571 - Petition

US Federal Claims Cases: 03-37C - US Court of Appeal 05-5063 - US Supreme 
US Federal Claims Cases: 03-786C - US Court of Appeal 04-5113

CA State BAR Complaint: 05-2875; Appeal; First Response; US Supreme 05-11161
NAVY Complaint:  20050489 - Final Decline to accept
FOIA - Refused

D.C. 06-4010 DDP (JCx)Schwartz vs. Government, MIT, LLNL, AERO
Appeal to the 9th Circuit case 07-55091

Home
KNDU187 Book
KNDU2008 Patent
Criminal Reports
Jamieson Committee
Fragile NMD Technology
GAO Reports
US Attorney General
Case 96-3065 RSWL
Physics Laws
FBI Letter
Consulting US Government
Government Corruption
Please Help
Contact me
N. Korea Threat
Raytheon CV 01-4937 RSWL
Boeing & HOT BACK-UP
Raytheon Legal VA
MIT/LL False Reports
My Reply 05-5063
International
Current News
Northrop/G. HR Manual
'SSSS' Yellow
NAVY - Games
US Supreme Court
Links
Letter to US President
Wally Beitzel Deposition
Conflict Of Interest
ARMY Scope Of Work
NMD Contract DASG60-90-C-0165
Ray Maddalone Deposition
Roy Danchick Deposition
Henry J. Crowder Deposition
NMD-My-Copyrights
New Warhead Patent
Hon. Congressman H. Berman
FOIA - refused
State Bar Complaint
Case D.C. 06-4010 DDP (JCx)

 

Special Agent [SA] Sam Reed Investigation Reports On National Missile Defense [NMD] Corruption and False Technologies at Defense Criminal Investigation Service [DCIS] located in Orange County California during 1996 - 1999

Investigation milestones:

  • On April 29, 1996 Dr. Nira Schwartz filed a court case in D.C. Federal Court in Los Angeles California. Case # 96-3065 RSWL.

  • The Court case is named Schwartz vs. TRW [Currently known as Northrop/Grumman Inc]. It is a Whistle blower case. In this case Dr. Schwartz stated that US NMD as developed by TRW [Currently known as Northrop/Grumman Inc] does not work and will not work. The technology will not comply with Physics laws.

  • This Whistle Blower court case was filed by Dr. Nira Schwartz on behalf of the US Government.

  •  The Government by its Department of Justice [DOJ] can elect to intervene in the case and carry it to justice, or it can decline to intervene in the case, leaving it to the Relator [Dr. Nira Schwartz in this case] to carry the case load to Justice.

  • During 1996 till 1999 SA Reed at DCIS  was appointed by his boss the Inspector General, to investigate Dr. Nira Schwartz Complaint that NMD was a false technology that does not work and will not work.

  • Government Agencies such as the ARMY sabotaged SA Reed Investigation Refused to read his reports. See page  Here     here2

  • On August 31, 1999 SA Reed Reported that on 2-26-99: 

    • " 13.  On February 26, 1999, LtCol. John B. Hoffman, United States Army Legal Services, Arlington, VA, provided a letter to the DOJ, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, Washington, D.C. LtCol. Hoffman states in the letter that, "Based upon conversations with Mr. Dennis Egan, the investigators handling this case and our review of the facts, we recommend against intervening in this case. The relator's request that the government not intervene, while not determinative, was also considered as a factor in making this recommendation."

      Please see http://niraschwartz.com/Reed Redacted.pdf#page=6 .

    and on March 15, 1999 SA Reed was quick to response that:

    • "   On March 8, 1999, Department of Justice (DOJ) Attorney Dennis Egan faxed reporting agent a copy of a letter from the Department of the Army, United States Army Legal Services Agency, Arlington, VA. The litter is addressed to Mr. Michael F. Hertz, head of the Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, DOJ Washington, D.C. The letter is dated February 26, 1999, and recommends against, DOJ intervening in this case. One of the reasons for not intervening was based upon conversations with the investigators handling the case. This statement has no factual basis as reporting agent is the only investigator assigned to the case, and has not spoken with any Army representative regarding not intervening in the case "

      Please see  http://niraschwartz.com/Reed Redacted.pdf#page=14  

    In that letter SA Sam Reed refused to take part in the DOJ and the US Army corruption and was was forced to retire shortly after he was appointed a Group Manager in DCIS. A job position that SA Reed told me was the dream of his life. 

  • The Government prohibited SA REED from testifying in any of my court cases and/or talk to me. All my efforts to legally subpoena SA Reed as a witness were denied by the US Government. 

  • I never requested that the Government will not intervene in my cases. On the contrary I wrote many letters requesting that it will intervene in the case. Please see  http://niraschwartz.com/GAO_2ND REPORT.pdf#page=34  

  • http://niraschwartz.com/Reed_Bookmarks.pdf#BM_1  

  • http://niraschwartz.com/Reed_Bookmarks.pdf#BM_2

  • http://niraschwartz.com/Reed_Bookmarks.pdf#BM_3

  • http://niraschwartz.com/Reed_Bookmarks.pdf#BM_4