Hi Pete. No such insinuation. The point I was making is that when what Peter Dale Scott called "deep events" happen in US history, and the role of UBL is certainly part of a very deep event, then key witnesses have a habit of dying soon afterward. The JFK is one of the better known examples, hence my allusion to that event. In the present case we have the special ops soldiers in the best position to give an alternative account (and one of them has) meeting an untimely demise. I would tell you that they were all together (contrary to ops procedure) in an old and poorly defended helicopter vulnerable to ground fire (which is what happened) but SPQR and his ilk would accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist or anti-American or some such other substitute for thought.

The Bin Ladens were good friends of the Bush family. Most of the so called hi jackers came from Saudi Arabia. Now they trying to blame the whole false flag fiasco of 911 entirely on the Saudis.

So will Bush and the Saudis be the sole scape goats and all the controlled demolition be explained thus? Perhaps this will even justify and invasion of Saudi Arabia for their oil.

George Bush should watch out since they may re-incarnate Jack Ruby.

That whole kill-UBL scenario was such an improbable PR farce that this imprisonment conspiracy theory only adds another layer of absurdity.

Hi James O'Neill

No worries mate. There is indeed much more to the UBL matter including:

- the influence and perhaps support of wealthy Saudi's particularly some in the bin Laden clan and other sympathetic Arabs via Pakistani intelligence,

- the related angle of who paid for the Abbottabad compound's construction and upkeep?

- the type of imprisonment or perhaps better described as "house arrest" UBL was under. In that regard there were some significant parallels with the house arrest of another famous Pakistani, A. Q. Khan http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-brink-of-war-unstable-pakistan-has-us-on-edge-a-732110.html . Khan's house arrest occurred under sustained US pressure.

UBL's ill health, to which you refer, might form an additional reason that UBD accepted his semi-enforced stay at Abbottabad. At this fixed and urban address he could receive constant medical support - something difficult to achieve when he was being shuttled amongst temporary safe houses.

If UBL's illness looked to be terminal he would have been more likely wanted to live out his final days in religious observance and with his large immediate family.

I agree that there are so many commentators regarding major US concerns that theories or mythologies are spawned. The ease of duplicating ideas using the internet is a help and a hindrance.

Regards

Pete

Sorry Peter, your posts are usually highly credible but this, alas, is pure speculation in a near-vacuum. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence in support... I see little of that here. Only a fool wd have allowed UBL to live in Pakistan like that, given that the Pak. military cannot be trusted to be either competent or loyal. The risk of bin Laden escaping wd be unconscionable.

That said, I hope you continue to put up your posts, provocative and controversial tho they occasionally are. You write far more sense than the other thing. But nobody's perfect.

No problem Godless

By approaching the issue with curiosity "why did the US decide to rely on the Pakistani Army to form the blocking force at Tora Bora?" one can get on the track.

With such a high value target as bin Laden (just after 9/11) why didn't US military forces provide the blocking force? Basically there was US intent rather than inexplicable absence of mind.

This intent established the pattern for the ten years that bin Laden was inexplicably off the US radar.

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tora_Bora#Fury.27s_account

Cheers

Pete