[BOBTHENAILER]

Sorry to disagree. "And sorry you had to dignify my idiotic statements with your reply".

We don't disagree. What I posted to you was my response to someone who said Al Qaeda WAS NOT responsible and that Musharraf was the only one who had something to gain, ergo, he did it.

Sorry for the confusion, but we agree.

[fight_truth_decay]

..seems upon further reports, we both PRE-NAILED that course of events correctly! ;)

Thanks BOBTHENAILER

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

>>Sorry for the confusion, but we agree.<<

You are both right.

Bhutto called for opposition to AQ and other extremists, so AQ or similar vermin would have a reason to get rid of her.

Even more important, we see how this seems to be playing out now: Musharraf is getting blamed for it, and may be weakened by the whole affair. If Musharraf is overthrown or the country goes into permanent chaos, that would work out very well for AQ and friends.

Did you notice that Bill Richardson called for an aid cutoff to Pakistan? “Not one penny more ... until Musharraf is gone and the rule of law is restored,” he said.

Did Richardson forget what happened when Carter decided to get rid of the Shah of Iran?