I posted this story for one reason.
You just can't make this stuff up. I mean, the best part,
Hilton claims the Bush administration ignored intelligence information, refused to round up suspected terrorists beforehand, and during the hijackings refused to disable pilot controls and switch to a ground-based remote system.
is that paragraph. I mean, all that is missing is reference to the Illuminati, the Bilderbergers, and Mind Control Rays from Russian Satellites.
This was just too delicious and goody-good not to post. Best thing I've seen out there since the wacky Egyptian who compared Condoleezza Rice to a nightclub trollop and jungle anaconda.
Or did they say that she deserves to make her bed in the jungle?
Anyhoo, this attorney's claim wins my Monthly Amish Blak Helikopterz Mystery Commandos Award for sheer tinfoilery.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
1 posted on
06/13/2002 6:08:59 AM PDT by
section9
To: section9
I like it. These people are separating themsleves out so fast and tying their own ropes! I expect his business just took a dive!
To: section9; all
3 posted on
06/13/2002 6:17:07 AM PDT by
dighton
To: section9
Tinfoil beanie bump!
4 posted on
06/13/2002 6:18:24 AM PDT by
6ppc
To: section9
What can one say after reading that? I'm so glad I'm sane.
5 posted on
06/13/2002 6:18:37 AM PDT by
callisto
To: section9
Chris, my hunch is Stanley Hilton's jockeying for a high-level position at the DNC...;^)
To: section9
Thanks for the laugh! That article should be enshrined.
To: section9
He claims the government benefited from installing a puppet Afghan government friendly to U.S. oil interests. How could something that happened after 9/11 be a cuase of action for events pre 9/11?
To: section9
$7 billion ?
To: section9
Saw this guy on Hannity and Colmes last night. Sean ripped him a new one. Basically treated him like a little kid that had crapped in his diaper. Said he should be ashamed of himself. LOL! They guy was an idiot.
10 posted on
06/13/2002 7:07:23 AM PDT by
ladtx
To: section9
Hilton claims the Bush administration ignored intelligence information, refused to round up suspected terrorists beforehand, and during the hijackings refused to disable pilot controls and switch to a ground-based remote system. I thought you needed a Interocitor to do that?
11 posted on
06/13/2002 7:11:51 AM PDT by
TC Rider
To: section9
Bob Dole says that Bob Dole is not amused that Bob Dole's former aide is being mentioned as a former aide to Bob Dole while suing on behalf of conspiracy theorists everywhere.Bob Dole says this is not right, and where is the outrage??;-)
To: section9
Chris, you're a hoot man!
Who would have thought Rep.Cynthia McKinney's (D.Ga.) attorney would do something like this?
I particularly liked the remote control stuff,
I always knew there wasn't anyone up in the cockpits of those things.
Nothing but a coke machine and a microwave where the Stews warm up meals.
15 posted on
06/13/2002 7:43:49 AM PDT by
tet68
To: section9
These people cannot go after a Federal jurisdiction lightly like that. It is seditious since they have no proof nor even probable cause. It's inflamatory stuff aimed to undermine the restoration of America.
To: section9
Pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proceedure, the Court can fine a party or attorney who files or continues to prosecute a civil action which they know or should know to be frivolous. I certainly hope the Court socks it to this guy. However, given that it was filed in San Francisco, I'm not optomistic.
I heard Hannity interview this guy on his radio and on his television show yesterday. The guy was wrong on virtually every point of law he tried to bring up. A real bottom feeder. Not only is he a scourge on society but he gives good, ethical, hard working attorneys a bad name. He also ties up an already overloaded Court system with meritless work. A plague on him.
19 posted on
06/13/2002 8:52:39 AM PDT by
joebuck
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson