|| -----Original Message-----
|| From:michael pugliese
||
|| Like Thomas, I'm wondering why Iran was included in the State
|| of the Union speech as composing one of the three axes. Can only
|| surmise the influence of AIPAC (like this website with numerous
|| articles, mostly mainstream contesting the Martin Indyk originated,
|| "Dual containment, " of Iran and Iraq policy.
|| http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3163
|| )
Eh? This is what I found there: ------------------------------------------------ Welcome to Teenage Freedom Foundation (...) Florida Drivers license Law (07/01/96 passed) This law has RESTRICTED teenage driving privileges. If you live in Florida, you need to be aware of this and what you can do. (...)We are CapitolHill 3163. This should be everything you need. ------------------------------------------------ One guy constantly pushing for confrontation with rogue states is Michael Rubin, whose articles are posted at www.washingtoninstitute.org and www.aipac.org. He mentions Iraq, Sudan, Iran and N. Korea and "explains" why not fighting them is appeasment. You gotta fight Iran because Iranians love the US and WANT the US to fight the mollas.
But more fundamentally, the "axis" doctrine entered the SotU speech through Wolfowitz (http://www.economist.com/people/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=976036), who is on the board of advisors to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy ( www.washingtoninstitute.org ) an AIPAC think tank, as you well know. Perle is on the board too. Indyk wrote that his goal was to emulate - i.e. defeat - the "liberal" Brookings fellows Brzezinski & Quandt's takeover of the Carter admin, resulting in Camp David and secret negotiations with the PLO - disasters for the ultrazionist gameplan.
Hakki