follow-up message on preceding Stanley Hilton interview

Hi,

The interview with Stanley Hilton I just emailed you contained the first plausible account I have heard that the Bush administration was not merely negligent, and has not only committed ordinary crimes plus "high crimes and misdemeanors," but committed outright treason.  

 

Then Harold Burbank sent me this:

Richard:

Re Stanley Hilton 9-11 suit, please forward the following to your listserve as well. I think I emailed it to you right after I sent you email #1 today.

HB

Attorney Harold H. Burbank, II
84 N. Mountain Rd.
Canton, CT  06019
860.693.2687
email haroldburbank@comcast.net
-----

Re the Stanely Hilton class action suit v Bushco for organizing 9-11, the case was filed in 2002 and dismissed in 2004:

Hilton gained notoriety and condemnation as a conspiracy theorist for filing a $7 billion class action lawsuit, in 2002, against United States President George W. Bush, members of his administration (including Condoleezza Rice, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld) and others. The lawsuit supposedly had 400 plaintiffs including 14 families of 9/11 victims [1], with only two named plaintiffs. [2] [3] The lawsuit alleged Bush administration complicity in allowing the September 11, 2001 attacks. The case was dismissed on Dec. 30, 2004, the judge ruling that US citizens do not have any right to sue a sitting President, based on the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity; that the lawsuit "presents a non-justiciable political question;" that the plaintiffs "lack standing to sue on behalf of all taxpayers;" that the plaintiffs "failed to establish the required causal connection between [their] alleged injuries and these defendants' conduct;" and that "deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by amendment."

This is why we have not heard more about it.  I would like to see Hilton's evidence, however, for future work.

I had thought this was a new suit reported by the Pakistan press 5-20-08 but in fact this is very old and now moot news.

HB

So we now need to find out what Stanley Hilton is doing now, what he currently believes about the case and why, and what evidence he has. We'll let you know.

Richard