9-11 Widow, Ellen Mariani, Files RICO Act Lawsuit Against Bush!

Federal Court Complaint against President Bush & Cabinet Members

ATTORNEY FILES SUIT AGAINST BUSH FOR $7 BILLION

San Francisco attorney, Stanley Hilton, has filed suit against Bush and other Federal executives including Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Norman Anetta, representing the families of fourteen victims and 400 other plaintiffs who are involved in the 9-11 disaster.

He held a press conference in September with a coalition of attorneys, victims' families and members of Congress to condemn the government's lack of action in preventing the September 11th attacks. He alleges that Bush conspired to create the 9-11 attacks for his own political gain and has been using Osama Bin Ladin as a scape goat. He says the Bush administration ignored intelligence officials and information available and refused to round up the suspected terrorists beforehand and during the event refused to disable pilot controls and switch to ground-based remote control systems. Therefore, the lawsuits are piling up against Bush and other officials and this is why many of the above targets of the lawsuit in the government have already given notice of their intent to resign.

For more details: www.criminalpolitics.com...

Interesting that they are filing suit. But even more interesting, they are filing suit undo the RICO act (Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organizations Act). This act is normally set aside for mobsters, members of mafia, etc and anyone else involved in organized crime. In a sense, most administrations since Kennedy could be considered organized crime syndicates!! God Bless America....or what's left of it...


[edit on 2-2-2005 by Zabilgy]

The unfortunate truth here is that the plaintiffs will lose while their attorney, Stanly Hilton, will gain in notoriety. Just another example of an abuse of our legal system.

Wow. This story is really old. It went to court about a month ago.

The judge dismissed the lawsuit under the “doctrine of sovereign immunity”. Stanley Hilton has already filed an appeal.

You can read all about it at www.suetheterrorists.net It was just updated yesterday.

The story is still news worthy and still ongoing if the case is being appealed. I just enjoyed seeing our government being sued for what it has become, organized crime.

Soverign Immunity wouldn't protect the government from a suite that alleges a conspiracy to allow/not stop a terrorist attack on the US tho.

Did he actuall claim in the suit that it was conspiracy, or merely a matter of ineffectual foreign policy?

It alleges Bush created the 9/11 event for his own political gain. And, using Bin Laden as a scape goat....

The improtant thing to remember is that the judge did not dismiss the suit due to lack of evidence. By declaring the defendants have sovern immunity, she has basically said they are above the law.

If the evidence tells the truth, that is the only thing the judge could have done to stop it.

Hopefully, the appeal will turn out better.

it is unfortunate that this case will be stopped from going forward. could you imagine some of the publicity and evidence that alot more sheeple would see and hear?? it needs to get out..no i'm not talking about the m. moore stuff either......

so much for a govt for the people, by the people.....

I will be shocked if this suit actually does any good against Bush but I'm pretty certain nothing will ever happen. So far Bush and Co. have played it like:

"What lawsuit? I don't know anything about a lawsuit. As far as I'm concerned not one 9/11 family member hates me. They all love me for what I did on that tradgic day."

Basically the U.S. government has become untochable which really pisses me off. No matter what you do to prove they are responsible, nothing will happen. They will continue to operate as if they were purely doing good in this world.

Originally posted by thirddensity
The improtant thing to remember is that the judge did not dismiss the suit due to lack of evidence. By declaring the defendants have sovern immunity, she has basically said they are above the law.

No, that is not what sovereign imunity is about. It means that the US government can't be sued for foreign policy decisions. Hence, Clinton can't be sued for not being more aggresive against bin ladin, or regan can't be sued for supporting rebels in south america. It does not say that they are above the law. Nixon attempted that vis a vis watergate, and failed. It would, you must admit, be a disaster to hold any part of government responsible in civil litigation for these kinds of things.

One could sue, say, Kucinich, for voting to reduce defense funding, or anyone really.

If the evidence tells the truth, that is the only thing the judge could have done to stop it.

Regardless of what the evidence said that is the decision that the judge had to make.

INFACT, since the juedge ruled on sovreign immunity, it means that no actual CRIMINAL actions were made by the government.

I for one want us Americans to keep the government in check, and hold them accountable.

The government needs to abide by the law. No way should they be above the law.

And notice how much coverage this has received. Next to none.