If intellectual bankruptcy is a required qualification for conservative historians then Meirsheimer passes with flying colours.

Aside from from the willed blindness on the part of such writers to the role played by Papal-loyal Sabbateans in the history of Zionism as well as the current membership of both the Knesset and the CFR the number of omissions in such accounts is glaring.

Meirsheimer’s role as a fully paid-up subscriber to Straussian myths like the risible 9/11 Commission establishment narrative re-the NY attacks should give the game away.

Just like there was supposed to be a liberal version of the Israeli Lobby so now Meirsheimer,once touted as an a iconaclastic voice among the US foreign policy elite,turns up right on cue as a liberal remould of the neo-con variety!

The smell of singed rat is oppressive.

Such myths as the 9/11 one and their potential for mobilizing the masses are greatly enhanced by the willingness of gatekeeper academics like Meirsheimer to disseminate them as part of their own speciously oppositional analyses.

In Meirsheimer’s previous incarnation he was a neo-realist international relations historian working on inter-state rivalry among Great Powers.The realist optic viewed any state’s external policy as being driven solely by the then current structure of the international system.The internal social and political profiles of individual states were almost wholly discounted in such accounts.

In his re-incarnation the new focus on the relationship between the Israeli Lobby and US foreign policy is therefore something of a departure even a paradigm shift in Meirsheimer’s work.

Meirsheimer’s misunderstanding of where Netanyahu is coming from on the issue of the two-state solution
seems symptomatic of a general failure to get to grips with the real nature of the forces that will decide the fate of Israel,Palestine and Iran.

Netanyahu’s “conversion” to the two-state solution will not simply be a means to appease Washington.It will be portrayed in the media as a recognition on Israel’s part of the need to reach a settlement finally with their neighbours both in Palestine and across the wider Sunni states of the Middle East.

These latter states will be nicely on side for the coming conflict.

As papal-loyal Sabbateans whose first loyalty is not to Israel at all neither Netanyahu,nor indeed Perez, will have had any Damascene conversion at all.

On the contrary,they will have laid the ground for the next great conflict long-planned by their sponsors in the Vatican and CFR.

That’s the one Meirsheimer omitted to mention-against Iran.

Coming on the back of some false-flag dirty bomb terror attack imputed to Iran a US/Israeli attack on nuclear plants there will likely,by its instigation of a wider conflagration,compromise Israel permanently.

Maybe those Israelis Meirsheimer has noticed who want to leave their banana republic should get out now while they still can.

Which simply shows that no president has had the desire to stop Israel. Any president could do so quite simply, for example;

Stopping the $3 Billion US tax-payers money gifted in aid every year.

Stopping the export of advanced weapons, which are used against civilians.

Trade sanctions for continual contempt of international law and the norms of decency.

Enforce IAEA inspections at Dimona to establish Israel’s nuclear capability and safety.

Is that too much to ask for pity’s sake?