It;s really unfair to say that religion causes conflict...no real religion would advocate warfare and destruction; tha's just people making up excuses not to believe in something bigger than them!

People don't HAVE to "believe in something bigger than them." They need to understand that religions have been used to bludgeon The Other when it grew large enough to encroach on the neighbors. Religions as a way to teach cooperation, a way to pass on traditions, a way to teach sustainable living in a given area is one thing--ritual is a good way to remember. A religion that is a template for existence in one region that is plopped down upon others who are then forced to accept it is another. Everyone is entitled to their own Origin Story without reference to the dominant religion, but the dominant religion (in many given areas) won't leave them alone. Those who must justify the existence of their religion by converting others are the problem. What is it in religions that creates this zeal in some groups, but not in others? The colonial enterprise is a really flawed system that rose from a combined politcal and religious partnership (i.e., the Conquistadors and the Catholic church).

Bhutto was, as was mentioned above, the person who embodied "east meets west." Musharraf has made great concessions that one doesn't necessarily expect from "dictators," and he appeared willing to work with Bhutto--don't write him off. Now my greatest fear is that the dick-head in the White House is going to stick his nose in or put his hands on the situation. The Pakistani's MUST work this out for themselves without Dubya's interference. If Pakistan goes up, you will be looking at WW III. Dubya is just the fool to walk into that firework stand with a lighted match.

SRS