US Foreign Policy Exposed: Iran, NATO, Covert Ops & the Petrodollar

Moore To Consider: Welcome to another edition of Moore to consider Jack and Charles Charles. How are you brother?

Charles Hundley Jnr: I'm doing okay. I'm doing alright man. Enjoy this nice weather.

Moore To Consider: All right. You've traveled the world. You've served in the United States military. You're probably my go-to guy of knowing really what the hell goes on around the world more than anybody I know. I'm more of an American history guy and I'm ignorant a lot of times to what the hell's going on around the world. These things pop up. You know, I mentioned this to a friend the other day. I tend to have a lag time of... I can do a deep dive after historians have had at it for 10 years and kind of figure out, cause in the, in the moment, I don't know what the hell's happening. And what I mean by that is, and this has been especially, ⁓ more elevated in the last 10 years, I could listen to CNN and I can listen to Fox. And if you were to listen to the two of them, those are in two entirely different worlds. Right? So I mean, I don't make the news in the sense I'm not on the ground. I'm not embedded with a bunch of troops somewhere. I can only know what I know sort of about what's going on in the world through reports. It is interesting now though, that we have so many people doing the very thing we're doing on the internet podcasting. I get most of my news from that, right? I'm kind of. Podcaster to podcast to really trying to figure out what's going on. So in the news, and I'm going to let you have at it. This is from yesterday.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Bye.

Moore To Consider: This is from an article from yesterday. U.S. and Iran clash in Hormuz as the war escalates. What happens and why does it matter? So the U.S. and Iran have exchanged fire in the Strait of Hormuz, prompting fears that the already fragile ceasefire between the warring nations could collapse. So think it's April 8th was the day of the ceasefire. The flare up and fighting on Thursday came as Washington awaits a response from Iran. and, ⁓ and its latest proposals for an agreement to run and its latest proposals for an agreement to end the war, which began with joint us Israeli airstrikes on February 28th. So there it is. That's kind of the latest news and that would not bode well for those that are saying that there might be any time soon and into all of this. So what's your take on all of this and where do you think things stand?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, I got to go back in time a little bit to the 1940s in the early 1950s. know, British Petroleum pretty much ruled. that part of the world when it comes to oil production. They essentially make these deals with these countries and they're like, well, you you have this, this black gold is just percolating out of your, out of your soil. We'll be happy to go ahead and take care of that for you. And we'll give you a little cut. And a lot of countries like, okay, well Iran had signed a deal where they were going to give BP 40 % of their oil. Just give it to them. And the people in Iran were like, you know, we don't really like that. That's a lot of money that we're just giving away that we could probably use here.

Moore To Consider: Let me ask you a quick question, because again, I'm the ignorant one. I'm trying to learn all this. that, will give you 40 % of the oil for you to come in and refine it and do all kinds of things to get, bring it to market that we don't want to have to deal with. It's going to, it's going to benefit us too. Or what's, what's the take on that? What, was the upside for Iran to do that?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Okay. Well, that was upside as in that they but still it's given away 40 % of the oil. So

Moore To Consider: No, I understand, but it was an exchange to make this profitable for both, even if it's a really skewed percentage. In other words, I'm sitting on a gold mine. I don't maybe have the technology to deal with. Is that what was going on? And they're like, you guys, you're BP, you know what to do. So come on in and take the oil, give us a cut. Fair. Okay.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. Yes. Yes. Right, yes. So Iran, obviously, it's their country. Imagine if, imagine if somebody's doing some work in your house and you're literally standing over them while they're doing all the work. You start to pick up, ⁓ I could do that myself. And that's pretty much where Iran came, kind of, sort of. But then in 1952, when they had that election in Iran and the guy who was running who ended up winning in a democratically conducted election said, that's our oil. And as a matter of fact, we're gonna nationalize all of the oil companies in Iran because we can do that. We don't need BP to do that. And we don't need to give them 40 % of it either. Well, 1953, that's when BP, I'm sorry. That's when the British with MI6 and the CIA said, well, we can't have that. And they overthrew their democratically elected government and put in a shawl. Now, for some strange reason, people give the shawl this giant pass that he was just the greatest thing since sliced bread. He was not. He was a dictator. had a secret police that was putting people in jail and so on and so forth. It was a normal stuff that goes on in a country where you have a dictator.

Moore To Consider: Mm-hmm.

Charles Hundley Jnr: people were disappearing, people were being tortured and so on and so forth. Well, 1979, the people, pretty much it was a, it was a, we call it a youth movement that really overthrew the shaw. And it was, I think it was college students that actually took over the United States, the US embassy that was there. Right.

Moore To Consider: took over the embassy and took hostages. It was like 44. It was like 50.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, actually it was more than that initially, but those are the ones that were left over because, you know, my guy, Ross Perot, when he got his people out and now Carter has egg on his hand on his face and he has to do something about it. And that's what led to Eagle Claw and so on and so forth. know, the creation of joint special operations command. I can go on and on about this, but.

Moore To Consider: Okay, they started to release some That's right. That's right. Tries to rescue fails.

Charles Hundley Jnr: So they overthrow the Shah and they put in a religious cleric. And it's awfully interesting as to what happened after that. Well, the Israelis didn't really like, by the way, we all hear the Israelis say that we don't like Iran, their threat to us and so on and so forth, but you didn't have an issue with supporting Iran when it came to the Iran-Iraq War. As a matter of fact, ⁓ the United States went to Israel to get help to funnel the weapons into Iran to fight Saddam Hussein because Saddam Hussein was at the top of the pyramid when it came to people we didn't like in the Middle East. And one of those people that they used was this guy who's in his early, I'm sorry, his late 20s to do this. It was him and his not father-in-law but pretty much was his father-in-law, guy named Robert Maxwell ⁓ who is Galang Maxwell's father. He was the guy that they used as the intermediary ⁓ when it comes to, what's the guy's name, Oliver North. You know, this is where all this comes together. The Americans went to the Israelis. They rarely used Maxwell to get the weapons to give to Iran to fight Iraq. Now, think of it this way. If you are Iranian and you're in a war with Iraq, your next door neighbor, ⁓ one Shia, the other Sunni, ⁓ and you're people being gassed by Iraq. and then come to find out you got the gas or it got the gas from us. So not only did we sell them you know regular conventional weapons we sold them chemical weapons to the United States.

Moore To Consider: You say we. No, I'm sorry. Okay. ⁓ yeah, you said we, but, ⁓ I wasn't sure which country. So you're saying we supplied Iraq with chemical weapons that were used against Iran. Now the Iran Contra was basically sale of arms to Iran or Iran to then fund the Contras. Okay. So that.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. Correct. Correct. Which was against the law.

Moore To Consider: Right. And it was, yeah, right, right, right. And then there was the whole question of did Reagan know, you know, was Bush 41 running at all and all that stuff. What was Oliver, you know, North's role, et cetera. So yeah, I know a little bit about that. So was that arms sales to Iran more of a, again, money to fund the other more so than an actual support of?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Right. I think it was a little bit of both because two people, two entities actually got something out of it. Israelis got something out of it for the fact that Iran was fighting against Iraq because they didn't like Saddam Hussein. We got something out of it because we got the money to send to the Sandinistas.

Moore To Consider: which they wanted, they benefited from. Get the money. Right. what I'm saying is though, it could be looked upon though, is not so much of a US military support or even a administration support of Iran in the war. It was more providing weapons to them because we had an alternative motive for doing so. Okay.

Charles Hundley Jnr: I mean, that's fine. Regardless of what our alternative. That's where I'm going with this. That's exactly what I'm going with this. Imagine being an Iranian and you find out that these bastards are literally ⁓ supplying weapons to both sides. That's a good thing, honestly. It really isn't. Either you're to pick a side or your side is solely war.

Moore To Consider: But we were finding both sides of the war in a sense. Yeah.

Charles Hundley Jnr: We don't care who wins. We don't have any...

Moore To Consider: I don't, I don't know. mean, it's a bad analogy, but if you're in a really, really, really hot contested softball league, you're playing with your boys and you know, you guys work together or something and you're playing another team and I'm a sporting good store and somebody had a really nice bat and hit a home run against you. And you came in the store and went, Hey, you sold a bat to the other team that hit a home run off of us and you sell us equipment too. Yeah. I sell equipment to both sides. Cause you guys are going to play a game. Bad analogy, but I'm like, I can't think that Iran at some level didn't think like, it doesn't make a U S popular, but I don't know that Iran ever expected just because we were selling them arms, say we, United States was selling them arms, that they were any way supporting their cause and that they wouldn't just as much fund the other side as well.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah. I don't think that Iran thought that we would have the audacity to sell weapons to both sides. I don't. And the reason being is that really makes you look bad when you do something like that. Because this is about killing people. This isn't about a game. You lose a game, you go home. No.

Moore To Consider: Really? No, I understand. That's why I was bad. But what I'm saying is if I'm a sporting goods store, I do sell equipment to both sides. And if one uses that side really, really well against you in the game, you don't come into sporting goods store. Like I can't believe you sold us at other team of baseball bat or a softball bat. I'd be like, that's what I do. So I'm just saying, I don't know that these countries wouldn't look at it like, the U S it might make you a whore in their eyes. It might make you an awful figure. It could be contemptible, but I'm just saying it doesn't sound like from the background.

Charles Hundley Jnr: On the stair.

Moore To Consider: that Iran at any point ever really thought we were an ally because we sold them arms. We sold them arms to get money to do other nefarious things. So I don't know why they would be surprised that we're supplying military hardware of some type to both sides. Because we're not a sworn ally.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Again, I- I do. I understand what you're saying, but legally, but this is probably, this is probably the main reason they do hate us because we sold them chemical, we sold Iraq chemical weapons, the worst kind. So, and they were, we were selling to Iraq, Iraq was using them on Iran. It didn't go both ways.

Moore To Consider: Yeah. It doesn't make it mean it doesn't mean they hate us any less for it, but I don't think they'd be surprised by it. Sure. Yeah. Right. Right.

Charles Hundley Jnr: We were selling conventional weapons to Iran and selling chemical weapons, probably conventional weapons also to Iraq. regardless, if you're Iranian, it doesn't matter who asked for it. You're looking at the United States as you are a piece of shit for doing that.

Moore To Consider: Maybe only because Iraq asked for it. Okay, I'm just narrowly defining why you're a piece of shit, or the United States is a piece of shit.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Why? Because you're selling weapons to kill people to both sides. All you're doing is

Moore To Consider: I agree. I agree. But again, all I was just trying to clarify, it wasn't because of backstabbing. Hey, I thought you were our ally. You were selling us weapons. No, we sell everybody weapons. You know what saying? You made it seem that, no, you didn't make it seem at first, but I just wanted to clarify for the listener. You were at never any point saying that when the US was supplying arms to Iran, that it was because we were some kind of ally. We were doing that so we could get cash to do other things we weren't supposed to do ⁓ constitutionally or. without congressional authorization. And then, ⁓ Iraq wants some weapons too? No problem. We'll give you some weapons too. You're going to use that against Iran and hurt people? Yeah, sure, shit, who cares? That's kind of the...

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, remember Iran didn't know that those that we were the ones selling their weapons because we had to go through Israel to do it.

Moore To Consider: But again, they're not disappointed though that because the allies supplied it, they're just saying you're a real piece of shit to give stuff to both sides. Right. Right. I mean, I can understand you hating the people that supplied your enemy with something that hurt you, but I don't think it's a disappointment. And then, I thought the U S was on our side. Cause I don't think they ever thought that. Or did they?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, and that's all that really matters. Honestly, that's all that matters. Again, they didn't even know that was a, they didn't know that the weapons were being sold. But that is my point though,

Moore To Consider: Not my point, not my point. When they found that out, did they think that the United States had been an ally and betrayed them? Or did they just think, what a whore, you sell it to both sides and you sold them, you sold, you sold them things that hurt us. We don't really care whose side you're on. That was a shit move.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. they did not know, allegedly, did not know where the weapons were coming from. Because imagine if they knew at the time that it were coming from the United States. They didn't even know that. They were just getting weapons from the Israelis. Because remember, Israelis are the people that hate them, or they hate the Israelis. Come to find out it's not exactly the case. We were kind of being duped about that.

Moore To Consider: Mm-hmm. Right. But would you also say that summer saying that since 48, maybe that the Israelis have had a pecking order of who to get rid of next kind of thing. And maybe Iraq was up and Iran wasn't yet. wasn't yet. So sure. If we can supply arms to Iran to take out Iraq right now, done. When we're done with that, we'll move on. Fair. Yeah.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, yeah, that's true. Yeah.

Moore To Consider: So Iran never thought at any point just because the Israelis were helping them that they were in any way allied either. Or did they think of them as his allies?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well. This is okay. Let's go back to prior to 1948. This is called 1947. Muslims and Jews didn't hate each other. They weren't fighting each other like this. They weren't. This didn't start until a group of people came into Palestine and started taking people's land. That's when it started. That's when all the animosity between the two started. Prior to that, they lived for hundreds of years in pretty much harmony. ⁓ It wasn't what's going on. The people who really hated the Israelis, or say really hated the Jews, were the Eastern Europeans. They were the ones that were having their programs and killing the Jews and kicking them out and so on and so forth. That wasn't happening in Palestine.

Moore To Consider: Okay. Mm-hmm.

Charles Hundley Jnr: until they started stealing the people's land. But that's another story. Yeah, that's a completely different subject. This is about why Iran doesn't like us. And they don't like us for the fact that we have meddled inside their country for a long time. And Americans just keep pulling up. They, oh, 1979, 1970. You got to go back further than that.

Moore To Consider: Okay. But there's a reason 79 happened.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, the reason that 79 happened because of 53 happened. Right, but Americans don't understand this because they're, we call it, they're grasping on history only as far as their fingertips. That's about it. Well, look at what's happening today.

Moore To Consider: was 53. Well, let me say this about that though. Do you think that 30 years ago, your garden variety M1A1 American ever really knew what happened in Iran in 53? The what the CIA was doing behind the scenes? You think the average American knew that? Right. Okay.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No, no, they still don't. But that doesn't mean that what we did was right just because we don't know about it. Okay.

Moore To Consider: No, no, no. I'm not saying it's right. What I'm saying is you're talking about the dumb ass American that everything is what happened, you know, from the day they were born or less. I'm just saying that the way things were spun in 79, it's a big part of the reason Reagan won. I remember this. I was around to see it. Carter looked weak. Carter tried, it 31 US military were killed in that attempt or how many was it? I think it was like 30 plus were killed where they were trying to do, or was it eight?

Charles Hundley Jnr: It was an eagle claw.

Moore To Consider: Yeah, it was, anyway, was, I think it was eight. And anyway, they tried to like get the helicopter in to do the rescue mission and it, it, uh, it, it either blows up, gets shot down, whatever. Uh, I think it was blown up on the. They crashed. Okay. So anyway, all this is bad. Um, he gives the Malay speech too, you know, the general Malay speech. Um, he would do the cardigan sweater. He did the fireside track, uh, chats Carter, Jimmy Carter.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Right. They actually crash into each other. Yes.

Moore To Consider: He was becoming super unpopular, but the way the media was spinning it and certainly contemporary history, something crazy happened in Iran. They took a bunch of hostages and they got released today. Reagan was inaugurated. Now that being said, I remember it being spun as a bunch of religious zealots overthrew a halfway decent guy and took over the country and took our people hostage. I don't think most people were thumbing through their history books and going,

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, which was

Moore To Consider: Why would that be? hell, ⁓ hell what? Yeah, back in 53, after a election was held, which was a duly noted election, the CIA and BP decided to go in there and overthrow the guy and put in their own plan. That wasn't really talked about a whole lot.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. All right. Well, there's a reason it wasn't talked about a whole lot because that doesn't make us look any that doesn't make us look good. That's what it was talked about over there. It was talking about the other parts of the world. It just wasn't talked about here.

Moore To Consider: or BP or the CIA or, yeah. Let me ask you this too though, because with, you know, my background in the Kennedy assassination stuff, with the church committee and the Rockefeller commission in the mid seventies, a lot of the dark history of the CIA began to come out, including they were trying to take out Castro, which might've been blowback on Kennedy and all that kind of stuff. Was that one of the things that came out in the mid seventies? Cause this is four years prior to, you know, 75, 76 is when these Senate committee hearings are. Basically coming out with the dirty laundry on the CIA. Do you remember that? Did that come out? I don't know. I don't know either. I don't even know if that was addressed. I thought to some degree it was addressed to CIA had been playing hanky panky in other countries, but go ahead.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Nah, dad I don't remember. Yeah. So, ⁓ well, I was trying to get to a point of today. ⁓ They put in Ayatollah to the Supreme Leader of Iran. In 79, yes. Now this is, with them killing, you know what a fatwa is, right?

Moore To Consider: Sorry. Okay. In 79. Right. Yeah, give a definition that I can work with you. Declaration of, hmm?

Charles Hundley Jnr: It's pretty much an edict that a religious leader puts out that everybody within that country or under his tutelage, you want to call it that, they abide by. They abide by. So with us killing the guy who was the ayatollah prior to the one who's in charge now, I think it was his father that we killed.

Moore To Consider: Okay.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Do you know what FATWAI, he had ⁓ issued about nuclear weapons?

Moore To Consider: No idea.

Charles Hundley Jnr: He had forbid Iran to develop. Right. Right. So we go and kill the guy who puts out a religious far. Why? To say no, no, no nuclear weapons. How stupid can you be? I mean, really, that's one of the dumbest things to do.

Moore To Consider: Oh, that's right. He did not want the development within. That's right. Right. I do remember hearing that. Yes. was to not do it. Yeah, have heard that point, mate. Yeah, that is interesting. Yes, it's quite interesting that...

Charles Hundley Jnr: So we get rid of the guy who does this. Now there is no, if you want to call it a ⁓ rule or law, because pretty much what they say is essentially law. It's kind of like an executive order. We get rid of that guy. So now there isn't one. How is this helping? How is this helping our relationship when it comes to Iran? It doesn't help at all. Why are we doing this? So I'm going to go back to our previous podcast that you asked a question as to what's going to happen in these midterms. Are the Republicans going to rolled over? ⁓ Unless this gas comes down, unless the price of food or insurance, I could go on and on and on. If this inflation doesn't get ⁓ dealt with, the Republicans might want to start looking for another job and they've done it to themselves. Why? Why was this necessary? There was zero zero indication that Iran was going to develop a nuclear weapon. ⁓ but they keep saying a death to America. So what we say, what was it? ⁓ Dumb as John McCain, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. What's the difference? There's no difference. But he was some hero. know, look what he did in the Hanoi Hilton hats off to him. But everything after he did with did after that was garbage. Just my personal opinion. There is, there's, but there are a lot of Republicans who are still in Congress right now who believe the same thing. Unfortunately, there are more people who are saying we have enough issues here in United States that we need to deal with and we don't need to spend a billion dollars over there. And this is the big question here and I ask anyone in the audience.

Moore To Consider: That's not an unpopular opinion.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Can you please give me in great detail how this has made the United States any better? It hasn't. It is hurting people. It's hurting industries. I know a lot of truck drivers who have gone out of business because of this. When they're looking at six dollars a gallon when it comes to diesel, they're like, I'm out of here. I can't do this any longer. For what?

Moore To Consider: Yeah, yeah.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Why did this have to happen? again, I don't, these people would just keep bringing up 79, 79, 79. Bruh, it's not working any longer. That 79 thing is not working.

Moore To Consider: Okay, then why do you think it happened?

Charles Hundley Jnr: because Israelis wanted it to happen.

Moore To Consider: Okay, so what you're saying is Trump's being led around by his nose by Netanyahu, basically. Okay. I mean, that's kind of an argument. I mean, it is an argument. Okay, so you think it's that simple?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I can't come up with it. When you when you completely go against what every one of your own intelligence agency says, you come, you go completely against the leader of Iran, what he says, and you go and do what the Israelis say. You have lost your mind, but also you've lost support from your own people because

Moore To Consider: Mm-hmm. Have you? But all right. Okay. But there has to be sometimes when people do things and we're Monday morning quarterback that decision, quarterbacking that decision and go, well, clearly he knew this clearly. He still did it. So you'd have to ask yourself, is the weight of not doing what Israel is asking you to do going to be so extreme that you do the thing that you're saying now everyone can clearly criticize as just being a dumb move.

Charles Hundley Jnr: So what is that weight? You said the weight of not doing what Israel wants him to do.

Moore To Consider: You still have to wait. What's that? Alright, here's the thing, Here's the thing, Charles. You are absolutely sure, as many people are, that everybody said, Trump, leave the guy in power, don't kill the Ayatollah, leave it the hell alone already, Iran is not a threat, they're not gonna declare nuclear weapons, and Israel's tugging at his sleeve saying, this, right? So you're saying clearly Trump's an absolute dumbass to do this, fair? He did it. So if he does it,

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. Fair. Yes?

Moore To Consider: I'm saying he's weighing every decision against the alternative. And it would make one think that the alternative of not doing what Israel is asking to do, if that's what's behind it, if that's what's behind it, then the weight of not doing it, the circumstances are much more grave that he not do it.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Mm-hmm. So look, I hear what you're saying, but that leads to, well, that's where I'm going with this. And this is why it makes it look so much worse. If there's no upside at all when it comes to the United States doing this, only downsides, you have to say, what is it personally that they're holding over your head?

Moore To Consider: So what is that, I'm just saying, what's that grave circumstance? Tell me. That's kinda where I'm going. That's what I'm saying. There has to be something.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Okay, and yeah, there has to be something. A lot of people are saying, well, a lot of people are saying that that something is, ⁓ no, it's an Epstein hoax. No, it's not. It's not a hoax.

Moore To Consider: Do you care to speculate what the something is? So you think this is all tied to Epstein?

Charles Hundley Jnr: I can't think of anything else because there's no upside for us. There's no upside for the United States at all. At all. It's only downside. And the people who's actually an upside for, they're in Israel, not here.

Moore To Consider: I guess a lot of people would think that. Let me ask you this, do you think the president or the prior administration serving from 21 to 25, did they have the goods with all the same information regarding whoever the hell Epstein is, was, why didn't they roll that out in the 2024 election?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. Watch your thing.

Moore To Consider: Keep Trump out of office.

Charles Hundley Jnr: But the problem with that is that would just implicate a lot of their own people.

Moore To Consider: So that's the reason. Okay. That's fair. That's fair. I'm just saying if all these people have been sitting on it and they've all had the files and they've all known, it would have been a nice, you know, October surprise to come in and say, Donald Trump related to Epstein in this way, here's the goods. Now, if you're saying, and then that would trigger like, yeah, and whole lot of Democrats were also tight. Okay. That's fair. Or could it be that maybe certain forces says, no, no, don't, don't do that. We need to play that card later.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, that's it. That could be the case also. But this is why this Epstein thing is so important. Because remember, these people are making decisions. They're making decisions. These people who are potentially in the files are still making decisions. And they're liable to blackmail. I do. That's just my personal opinion.

Moore To Consider: Sure, seems like it could be, right? Who are these people? ⁓ yeah, yeah, yeah. Sure. Okay. Okay. I hear you.

Charles Hundley Jnr: This is the biggest honeypot operation of all time. It just is. And the Israelis have the goods on a lot of people. And they're going to do whatever the hell they want them to do. Because again, if you can't not come up with a reason, a positive reason why we go and attack Iran. can't come up with one. Oh, they were supplying the Houthis and I remember hearing some guys say, yeah, but they were supplying Hezbollah and so on and Hamas. Israel, the Likud party was pretty much created Hamas and they were supplying them. They were funding them. So what the hell does that mean? I don't really care. I really don't care. I'm way more concerned about what's happening here in the United States. And I think a lot more people are way more concerned about what's happening in United States. And people keep supporting this stuff when they're looking at four or $5 a gallon for gas and stuff like that. They're going to say, we probably need to get the people out that caused this.

Moore To Consider: Yeah, I just took a look, ⁓ what I could find sort of regarding where does it look like it's going for midterms? And it says good chance Republicans lose 28 seats. That's kind of the forecast right now. So the house will be taken over by the Democrats. And then this doesn't, ⁓ seem to be a huge stretch. How did the Republicans maintain control of the house? What would it take? And it would take an end to this conflict for sure. And then it would take, because it's not an heroic war. I mean, it's not, it's not a war in the sense that bring the troops home and everybody's happy and there's ticker tape parades. And I listened to an economist the other day on one of the alphabet news agencies and it all made sense. He's like, look, I don't care what you're talking about with economic trends. It's like moving.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No. No.

Moore To Consider: the largest vessel in the ocean. If you're trying to turn this thing around, you're talking about a massive amount of time that it takes to spend something. There's waves and cycles. with these oil prices, because if everything went to perfect tomorrow, it might be late July or August that you even start to see a better tick down. I mean, it's going to take a time. You're giving me the look again.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. I think it's going to take longer than that for the fact that how many refineries have been destroyed.

Moore To Consider: Okay. All right. All right. All right. You gave me the look. I'm telling you what this guy said. He may be a dumb ass. I don't know. He's just some guy that's on it when you're wearing a suit. He's like two to three month lag is at least expected. He goes, that's if everything gets perfect tomorrow. So my point is the elections November. And if people are still hurting and they're going to start voting in August or whatever, get to vote. They're not going to be voting on what might happen naturally in October and December. I mean, December, maybe gas prices are down to $215 again, but they're not going to be in time. And the economy is not going to rebound probably in time because everything that we buy is tied to transportation costs. I mean, everything that moves is tied to transportation costs. So there's going to be an on, there's going to be an on running lag before there's any real recovery. And I don't think given the fact we're in May, there's gonna be enough time for the turnaround. That's all I'm saying.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No, I agree. It's going to take a long time for this to turn around because of, all of the refineries that have been destroyed. So even if everything was back hunky-dory between Iran and United States, they lift all the sanctions and so on and so forth, don't have, technically, don't have the capacity to get it back to where it was prior to this. They have to rebuild the refineries. Well, now,

Moore To Consider: Right. And I'm just talking about a sense of our midterm elections that our midterm elections is set. It's set in November. It is what it is. So all the rosy pictures and all I'm saying again, maybe, you know, maybe I miss smoke. Maybe he said more like, just remember him saying like late summer was the best turnaround possible. And again, he prefaced it with that's if everything turns around tomorrow, there's a complete, you know, ending of everything. And then a rebuilding of refineries, whatever else was involved.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, yeah, it is what it is.

Moore To Consider: He goes, the best you're going to do to turn the prices around to any degree that's measurable would be late summer. And maybe he's wrong. Maybe it's January 1st, whatever. the bottom line is if the economy's bad, because another thing that they said you're going to measure is Trump's approval rating. It's through the floor. And I don't know that he ends hostilities with Iran. It's going to get any better fast. I don't think it changes anything.

Charles Hundley Jnr: This is something that I said to our friend over in Norfolk back in 2022 when Russia invaded. ⁓

Moore To Consider: Mm-hmm. Right? that place it invaded.

Charles Hundley Jnr: ⁓ Ukraine. Yeah. Now say to him, this is what we need to be concerned about. We need to be concerned about the petrodollar. That should be a number one priority of maintaining our dominance when it comes to ⁓ the dollar being the reserve currency. That's what we really, really need to be concerned about. He's like, well, you know, but you know, there's other things we need to be strong and, you know, okay, that's fine and dandy, but remember BRICS. BRICS used to be, ⁓ what is that? ⁓ my gosh. Brazil, Russia, India, China and Saudi Arabia. No, South Africa. I'm sorry. Well, now it's Egypt. It's Ethiopia. It's in Iran, it's UAE, it's Indonesia, and it's Saudi Arabia. So what they're doing is they're going to, it's pretty much it's already been happening, they're selling oil to each other, not using the dollar. What does that do to our dollar? It makes it less, worth less and less. You think inflation is bad now? If this continues, it's going to be horrible. Why? Let's go back to us kicking Russia out of Swift. Russia had enough oil to say, well, we're not some pan-yanny country out here. We have enough to sell to people if they want it. ⁓ Natural gas also. European Union is like, yeah, but what you're doing is bad and we're going to impose sanctions on you Russia. And Russia is like, yeah, but we have some something that you need. And they were like, yeah, I guess you're right. Can we buy some natural gas from you? So they didn't even do they made it even worse. ⁓ The EU made it even worse. But back to us, this thing with Iran is not helping. when it comes to what's going to happen to our dollar. It's not, it's, bruh, I had just had this conversation with a couple of other people. It's going to be bad and it's coming. And I hope people are prepared for it. I don't know how much you can prepare for what's about to happen because we haven't been in or will not have been in this situation for several decades prior to the 70s when the petrodollar pretty much was calling it. The whole concept was invented. ⁓ It's about to get really, really bad when nobody wants to use our dollar. Well, we don't manufacture too much here in the United States either. What are we going to do? all because we want to be strong. That's the dumbest. Look at what China is doing. They're like, yeah, you can run around and flex your muscle all day long and then you don't have anything to sell it to anybody. Yeah. Good luck with that. Good luck with that. We can only build with so many bombs and missiles and tanks and airplanes to sell to people. But when they stop actually wanting to use them against each other, now what do we have?

Moore To Consider: All right, let's close on this. President Charles, you're president. You didn't create this situation, but you're in the seat right now. You didn't create it. What do you do?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. ⁓ I would ⁓ spool up every C5 and every C17 and pull all of our damn troops out of there.

Moore To Consider: You say out of there, out of where.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Wherever they are right now, you're coming home. Yep. that would be the top priority list. By the way, I was just down.

Moore To Consider: wherever they're sitting stage for Iran. Okay. Well, no, no, I was just clarifying because I don't, I don't think, are they in country at all? Is anybody in country to your knowledge? They're just in staging areas, just outside. Okay.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No. No, not that I know of. Right, but they would they would come home, but I'm not just talking about their coming home from Germany, coming home from Japan. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. For what reason do we need them? Who are we containing?

Moore To Consider: Okay, you're going to bring, yeah, the 700 military installations in 130 countries, you're going to end that. Okay. All right, but how do you resolve the conflict that has been started, not your fault?

Charles Hundley Jnr: ⁓ I'm bringing them home. That's how I the conflict.

Moore To Consider: You just bring them home and act like nothing ever happened.

Charles Hundley Jnr: is not even act like nothing has ever happened, realizing that we shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Moore To Consider: All right. I get all that. Do you lift sanctions against them at all? just go to, okay. Just open up everything. Okay.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yep, sure would. and this is the whole sanctions thing. For what reason did we need to have sanctions against them?

Moore To Consider: You're going down. I was asking you, how do we get out of this in five minutes? And you've said one thing, just bring the troops home. And now I'm just kind of cleaning up the rest of the aisle six mess. We got to spill on aisle six. What else are we going to do? So we tell Israel what? Do we tell Israel, Hey, you're a sovereign nation. You want to go screw around with them and law bombs on them, knock yourself out. Is that something we'd say?

Charles Hundley Jnr: It... What? It... I'm going to use your analogy of there's a spill in aisle six. You're in a Walmart and there's a spill in aisle six. But Walmart is expecting Target to come in and clean it up. No. No. Target's saying, that's not my problem. That's your problem. You deal with it. As a matter of fact, my janitors are off work right now and I'm sending them home. We're not coming to clean up your mess. You clean up the mess that you created.

Moore To Consider: Yes. I like that. Okay. Alright, who created the mess though? I thought the US created the mess. In league with somebody else.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, the US created a mess. Yeah, and it pretty much led by the nose of somebody else. Yeah. Yeah.

Moore To Consider: Fine. Okay. So my, so my thing is if president Charles is going to bring home all the troops and you're talking about Korea, Germany, you're bringing them for everywhere. Okay. You're going to, you're going to, you're going to get out of the whole business of policemen of the world. So you're going to do that. My question is, you're going to get a phone call. And when you get that phone call, you're going to say, we would highly recommend you end hostilities or you're a sovereign nation, knock yourself out, fire, whatever you want to do.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah. Yep. Yes. Who am I getting the phone call from? No, seriously, I don't know. Okay, as a matter of fact, it's going to voicemail. Yeah, I'm serious. I'm not even taking the call.

Moore To Consider: Who do you think? Israel calls and says, asked, just did. Okay. All right. Do to your knowledge are gosh. all these tangling alliances that GW said, be careful of what if they get attacked? What if Israel's attacked immediately by Iran? What if they just start lobbing bombs in or something? Do we have any, um, recognizable duty to get involved in?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah. They're not part of how about, this, and I'm glad you brought that. I know this is going on a little longer than we wanted it to, but I'm glad that you brought this up. This issue with Turkey is an absolute slap in the face to Turkey because Israel and Turkey have this, this issue right now. The United States,

Moore To Consider: Right? Any other recognizable? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Charles Hundley Jnr: is choosing a side of Israel and not Turkey. Turkey is part of NATO. Say for instance, Israel decides to attack Turkey. By treaty, what are we bound to do? Okay, we're bound to support Turkey, not Israel. But Trump is saying we need to get out of NATO.

Moore To Consider: Mm-hmm. Yeah, I understand. I get it.

Charles Hundley Jnr: But when it comes to allies, first of all...

Moore To Consider: Well, let let me, let me clarify that real quick. I'm just asking. I remember when in, I guess it was 2016, it might've even been 2015, it was in the vying for his first presidential term that, you know, and Tucker Carlson's talked about this a lot. It kind of got him to go, whoa, wait a minute, what did that guy just say? He's in some type of a speaking situation. He's speaking. And I think he's like, yeah, what the hell's this thing with NATO? Like, yeah, Cold War ended. Why are we still in that? And everybody.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah.

Moore To Consider: And everybody went crazy, but I don't ever remember him saying we need to be out of NATO. It was more of a, are we still in? Did he ever make a declaratory statement of like, we need to be out to your knowledge?

Charles Hundley Jnr: I mean they're kind of sort of the same. Well, they're not.

Moore To Consider: No they're not. No they're not. They're not the same. They're not the same. No.

Charles Hundley Jnr: I would say that they were the same. the question of their existence is not the same as we should get out.

Moore To Consider: No, it's not like a justification to get out. No, I don't think it's the same.

Charles Hundley Jnr: I think it is. It's no different,

Moore To Consider: I don't, I'm just saying I'm splitting hair. Well, I'm just looking at if, ⁓ gosh, I'm trying to think of, ⁓ I've tried to think of an example like it. keep thinking of like, you know, homeowners, ⁓ you know, associations or something like that. ⁓ like, I mean, that might be one, you know, how about that? I mean, you know, I'm trying to think of a good one. If we were homeowners in the same, like establishment and we've been paying dues forever and nobody does trash pickup or whatever. And I looked at you and I'm like, why are we still in the HOA? And you were like, We have to be in an HOA where we're in a particular, like, well, nothing gets done or we're paying dues or, but it's not a good analogy because NATO was based upon a threat. NATO was based upon a whole post-World War II structure. So when Trump asked the question, why are we still in it? audience, please apologize for trying to go down the HOA thing, but I'm trying to think of a similar type of situation where you just keep doing something. I mean, some of that might be, you know, having ⁓ a ⁓ Netflix ⁓ subscription. You you're like, you keep paying for Netflix, but you never watch it. But it doesn't mean when, I'm just saying, when you're precise with the language, Trump's saying, why are we still in it? The Cold War ended. That does sound like I'm asking this question because if I were president, I'd get out of it. Sounds like it, but he didn't say, why are we in it? We don't need to be in it.

Charles Hundley Jnr: How about... No, no, no. What he said was why they're still around because there is no, yeah. Why is it? But, but again, if you can't, you really can't see why they are the same. If you're asking why this even exists, why? Because there is no cold war. But again, the, there's a legitimate reason to leave it too. And we can leave it anytime we want. But

Moore To Consider: He questioned his existence. He questioned his, yeah. If I ask you why something exists, you might give me legitimate reason why. That's another lane. That's another lane. Like I could say, why does something exist? And you go, ⁓ it has to, there's kind of an underlying. And I go, ⁓ I never really thought about that. Or I could say the cold war ended and why does it still exist? And you go, no reason for it to exist. Then I might then follow with the why the hell don't we just disband it? Or we get out of

Charles Hundley Jnr: No. If you're contractually obligated to stay in it, yes. But if you're contractually Yeah, I mean, that's kind of sort of what he's saying.

Moore To Consider: I don't think that's what he said specifically. I think he said, why does it still exist?

Charles Hundley Jnr: I'm being honest with you, I don't even understand your point. I really don't. Because if you're questioning the existence of something, then pretty much by extension, you're asking why we even there.

Moore To Consider: My point is he questioned NATO. How about this? Do you not think there's a distinction in this statement? Hey, I've been doing a little history. I've been doing a little historical research. Cold war ended and NATO was designed or was basically founded as a cold war measure to protect the free countries from the communist creep, basically. And now I have decided, I have decided in running for president, my first move will be to take the U S out of NATO and do everything I can actively to destroy it. because it no longer has any purpose. That's a different statement than, hey, Cold War ended. Why is there still NATO?

Charles Hundley Jnr: But he didn't say anything about destroying it. asked what was it? Why do they even exist? Okay, but yes, but that.

Moore To Consider: Why does it still exist is what he said. Yes, that's different than the first thing I would do is try to destroy it or at least pull the US out.

Charles Hundley Jnr: But that's not what he said. He didn't say he was going to try to destroy it. I'm sorry. He didn't say he was going to try to destroy it. He's just asking what is it? What is their purpose? But that's not trying to destroy it.

Moore To Consider: What's not what he said? What's not what he said? I know he didn't say that. He said, why is there still NATO? I didn't say it was Charles, but you were saying that the question of why does it still exist was him saying I want out is what you said earlier.

Charles Hundley Jnr: But that's actually that's what you just said. Yeah, that's exactly. Yeah. Okay. I mean, that's fine.

Moore To Consider: I don't believe, I don't agree with that. All I'm saying is when some, when someone says this existed for this purpose, purpose no longer seems to exist. Why is there still there? Doesn't mean you're saying get out. You're just saying, I don't understand why we're even doing this anymore, which would be a lane opening for getting out. It's certainly throwing something out there where they make one think that I don't think Trump wants to say NATO anymore. I think that's fair, but he didn't say that.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah. That's all.

Moore To Consider: He didn't say destroy it ended or pull the U S out. just said openly, this is my memory. It was kind of like, Hey, yeah. Why does it exist anymore? There's no cold war. That was it. That's what he said.

Charles Hundley Jnr: ⁓ okay. That's fine. Well, right. And when it comes to who's really our ally, you know, I hear people say, well, you know, Israel's our greatest ally. I kind of think that England would have a problem with that statement. I really would. They're without a doubt. This is not even close. They're our greatest ally. Yeah, it's not even close. And really, I would say

Moore To Consider: But you're saying Israel's not in it, Turkey is, so what's the deal?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Turkey is probably in the top three or four. Mainly because of where they were geographically. They were right beside the Soviet Union. They had to deal with, when it came to the Soviet Union, what was it, the Cuban Missile Crisis, that was solved because of what happened in Turkey. They are very, very important to our quote unquote, if you want to call it, throughout the Cold War, our security. Very, very important.

Moore To Consider: Well, yeah. Well, we had missiles there that were obsolete. The Kennedys knew it and Khrushchev basically back-channeled. You're giving me a look again. You're giving me the look. What part do you not agree with? They were. To my knowledge, what the Kennedy administration said, John Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy in a room said, we got to save face with the American people. And I know Khrushchev wants to save face too. He wants to peacock and act like he's a bad ass and we damn sure don't want to agree to let the American people know that we're pulling missiles out of Turkey. And so they said, Khrushchev, we don't want World War III.

Charles Hundley Jnr: I'm listening to you. I'm listening. That they were obsolete.

Moore To Consider: So we're going to act kind of bad ass and say the blockade worked and you turned the Soviet ships around and we're going to secretly pull the missiles out. Now what I've read, I may be wrong. People can rip my ass apart in the comments, but what I've said was they kind of like, they needed replacement anyway, or they needed retooling. And they were like, what the hell? We're not really losing anything. We're going to take the missiles out of Turkey and we're going to give them what they need. And they said to Khrushchev, just do us one solid. What's that? Don't say anything on the world stage about it. Got it. So America didn't know for decades that that was, so the way they spun it in the American press, that calm, cool JFK, that young guy that's being tested, he almost got the world blown up is basically what happened. But instead they spun it that he's, you know, he was staring down Khrushchev and said, get your ass out of here with those missiles and all the rest. And Khrushchev ate a little bit of that to like not have World War III. But he said, I got to have some concessions too. So the whole pulling, basically the pulling the missiles out of Turkey was done on the sly as a throw. Okay. That's all I'm saying. they were obsolete, maybe I'm wrong on that. I just remembered that in a room, Bobby and Jack were like, who gives a shit? Or we were going to pull them out soon anyway. It was like, okay, if that's what we have to do to silence this and make it end, then we'll give Khrushchev what he wants, pulled the missiles out.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, yeah, I agree. Yeah, it was

Moore To Consider: But you mean that in the Cold War, Turkey was clearly an ally because they let us have missiles there, pointed at the Soviet Union.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, not just that, because where they were geographically, they were very, very important to us. ⁓ We could send spies into the Soviet Union. It was easier to send spies from through Turkey because they're right next door. I mean, we go on and on on about this. No, we didn't need to have missiles, but also Turkey controlled the Bosphorus.

Moore To Consider: But we didn't need to have missiles there to do that.

Charles Hundley Jnr: And that was really, really important to the Cold War also, know, with ⁓ Russia having Sevastopol in the Black Sea, which again, kind of brings us back to present day. That's why they're at war with Ukraine right now because of that Sevastopol Navy base. That's why they're at war. But ⁓ anyway, there are a lot of people... We started this talking about Iran. Iran hates us for various reasons. The Americans don't have a clue as to, they can't imagine that somebody would dislike us, the vast majority of Americans, because we do everything great. Let them tell it. Unfortunately, when you travel to other parts of the world, and I've had people say this to me, ⁓ we love Americans and we can't stand your damn government. That's what they said. Because all you do is meddle in other people's business. How about you stay over there, deal with your issues, we stay over here. What is that Monroe Doctrine? What is it? The new thing, the Don Roe Doctrine ⁓ with Trump saying, hey, China, you stay over there and the United States would deal with things over here in our hemisphere. We're going to get Maduro, so on and so forth. Well, last time I checked, I don't think Iran was in our hemisphere. What are we doing over there? You're literally going, going against what you use as justification to go and get Maduro to go and attack Iran. You're literally contradicting yourself. This isn't difficult.

Moore To Consider: Okay, real quick, because you know how I am. I'm an asshole, so I got to say this, but I just looked up, I just did a general, somebody could probably find something, but this is what it stuck in my mind. The Jupiter missiles in Turkey were considered outdated, not effective for their intended purposes at the time of their removal. The decision was part of a secret deal for the Cuban missile crisis to end. The Jupiter missiles were intermediate range ballistic missiles deployed by the United States in Turkey and Italy during the Cold War. They were intended to serve as a counter to Sylvia missile capabilities. the time of their removal in 1963, the Jupiter missiles were considered outdated. Their effectiveness for their intended purpose was questioned as they were not seen as viable in a modern military context. So that's all I'm saying because I've done so much Kennedy assassination and just Kennedy stuff. I just remember there was a meeting in the room and it was kind of a JFK and Bobby wink like. ⁓ pull them out of Turkey? Sure. We'll pull them out of Turkey. And they laugh kind of like, what the hell? We don't care. Just don't let the world know it. So that was the secret deal. That's all I was saying when I said outdated missiles. I've got some historical context for that. I don't know what that means exactly, but I understand that Turkey was certainly an ally to allow the missiles to be there in the first place.

Charles Hundley Jnr: So, so. The United States would not have pulled those missiles out unless they were forced to pull them out. How were they forced to pull them out? Hold on, let me finish, Rand. Hold on, let me finish.

Moore To Consider: Okay. Okay. Charles. Okay. All I'm saying is, all I'm saying is I've got historical context to say they were somewhat outdated, whatever. And the Kennedys were like, crew chefs like, I got to say face too. Okay. Tell you what, we'll let, we'll take the missiles out of, out of Turkey. Okay. So that, or what do you want? I take those missiles pointed out of Turkey. So they did it. All I'm saying is, and I've shown some historical backing for this. The Kennedys were like, dang.

Charles Hundley Jnr: too.

Moore To Consider: Yeah, that's kind of tough. Okay. Okay. I think we can do that because there might've been plans to retool with different missiles is what I'm saying. And instead they took them down, but when they took them down, there was kind of, I know this from the stuff I've studied. There was kind of a wink and a nod like son of a gun. They're making us take down the missiles. Well, shit, we were going to do that anyway, or we don't really care. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying they didn't create any strategic advantage at all. They, was just the throw in to Khrushchev for him to save face. and the US got out of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Go.

Charles Hundley Jnr: I think that the United States saying that those missiles were obsolete is a sham. And the reason I say that is this. They would not have pulled them out had Russians tried to put missiles into Cuba. They would have just left those missiles there.

Moore To Consider: You may be right. Well, I'm not even sure when would the missiles first go in because I'm not even sure that the whole going down the Cuban didn't in large part have, it may have been some response to the Bay of pigs, but I think it also had something to do with the U S putting missiles other places. Yeah. It was a tit for tat. It's a tit for tat. Sure.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes, that's exactly right. That's why they wanted to put them in Cuba. But remember, it was a tit for tat. Yes. And the United States made a big deal about it. And then Russia is like, all right, well, you want to make a big deal about us putting missiles in Cuba, know, 90 miles from the United States. And what about those missiles you have in Turkey? Oops. ⁓ you caught us. ⁓ you caught us.

Moore To Consider: Not saying, not saying that's not true. The only statement I made and I found support for was that they weren't so keen on him anyway, that they were outdated or obsolete. That's what I'm saying. I found support for that. You may be right. That's all bullshit further sold. I just know the Kennedy administration and the U S government and all of its media types kept that out of the news for decades before it was even known. It wasn't known.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No, I get it. I get it. Yeah. No, I agree with you.

Moore To Consider: All right, you keep talking and I'm going to find out because I know it was some time. That was not something on the front page of the New York Times the next day. By the way, we've solved the Cuban missile crisis. I just can't remember what the timeframe was or how long it was before the U S public actually knew about it. It was a while.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No, of course not. Well, yeah, of course, of course they're not going to broadcast it because it makes us look bad. Yeah, they're not going to broadcast it.

Moore To Consider: That, that, that again, that was all part of the play of the Kennedy administration is like, we want this to end. Khrushchev's like, I got to have some concessions too. Okay. Tell you what, we'll take the missiles out. Don't let the world know. So I can save face. So I can look heroic and Khrushchev's like, whatever. I'm not even sure that Khrushchev didn't put the missiles in Cuba to get that end in the first place. I think that was part of, yeah. So he got what he wanted.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Mm-hmm. Yes. No, I agree with you. Yeah, I agree. Yes, yes, that's pretty much what the story is. Yes, he did. He got what he wanted. You know, Crew Chef really did. I'm not gonna say he liked Kennedy, but he had a choice.

Moore To Consider: Sure. I think in the end he did.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, let's just say in 1960.

Moore To Consider: He's out in 64, Kennedy's killed in 63, Khrushchev's out the next year and I think a lot of it was the hardliners thought he was too soft on the US.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, I've heard that too. But I do know that he, you know, he had a choice between Nixon and Kennedy. And he chose Kennedy. I'm sorry.

Moore To Consider: And he'd had the kitchen debates with Nixon. He'd had the kitchen debates with Nixon in 59. When Nixon was vice president, they had the famous, they're sitting there with what a kitchen looked like in the USSR and what it looked like in the U S and Nixon was supposed to gained a lot of fame by telling Khrushchev what's what about the two styles of the country, know, capitalism versus communism, whatever. And that was the famous kitchen debates.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Okay. Mm-hmm. Bye. And Nixon, I'm sorry, Khrushchev thought Nixon to be much more of a difficult person to deal with than than. Yes.

Moore To Consider: Yeah, he thought Kennedy was a pushover when they met in Vienna the first time he thought he was, he was a kid. He was like, who's the kid with all the hair? Like he doesn't know what the hell is going on. But a lot of people that on the Kennedy conspiracy side said his speech he gave to American university, June 10th, 1963, where he said, you know, we all breathe the same air. We're all mortal. We feel very much like the Sylvians that had a lot of people really. And, and, uh, and panic that he was given into the Sylvia union. I know that.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Right.

Moore To Consider: Khrushchev's daughter also said they had a back channel phone. I think this has been pretty well established. They were doing negotiations between each other or some kind of back channel communications to try to tamp down the bad energy. And I think Khrushchev in the end might not have been a bad guy even according to some, but he got run out. I want to look at the reasons again. Kennedy's killed in 63, he's out in 64.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No. Yeah, he got run out. Yeah, he got run out. For sure. There's no doubt about that.

Moore To Consider: And I'm not so sure some of it was he wasn't a hard enough guy on the U S he was considered to be getting to be too much of a softie. think that was at least some of the take on that.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, strangely enough, the Soviet Union had something. Well, it was used as an excuse as to why this this coup in Iran in 53 had to occur because people were saying that that that president who they had had elected in in Iran in 52 was closing up to the Soviets. Well, OK. Yeah, he was. Yeah, but did that justify overthrowing their democratically elected government and essentially creating a whole bunch of people that hate you? No, it didn't.

Moore To Consider: Okay. Some clean, some more cleanup. Let's change the aisle. Maybe it's aisle seven. The United States publicly announced the removal of Jupiter missiles from Turkey in April, 1963. They came right out and said it. The decision was part of a broader agreement reached with the Soviet Union during the Cuban missile crisis. So where'd I got to find is when the truth came out about the removal. So I think what Kennedy said is we're, the world's going to know that we're removing the missiles.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah.

Moore To Consider: So why don't you sit on it and I'll sit on it. I'll remove it. We'll announce it. We'll just say like, and you're right. This feeds the, it's bullshit that they were obsolete. This might be where that whole report came from. It might've been Kennedy telling cruise ship, like I tell you what we're going to do. We're going to come out and say, the missiles were obsolete. We're bringing them out. You and I know why we're doing it, but just don't ever tell the world. Then the truth of why it was a connection.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah.

Moore To Consider: between concessions during the Cuban missile crisis, I don't think comes out until like the nineties or the eighties. I believe, I think it took a while for historians to really start to say what was really, ⁓ what was really behind the secret agreement. That's what I'm saying. It was a secret agreement and I think Kennedy just came out and made it, ⁓ here we go. ⁓ no ego. ⁓

Charles Hundley Jnr: Wow.

Moore To Consider: Yeah, I'm just getting the same thing over and over. They told the truth and said that the missiles were coming out in 63 when it happened, but the truth of why didn't come out for some time, but I'm not finding a specific date. Okay. That's why I say you don't know anything until it becomes history. Cause you and I could have been arguing in May of 1963 and I'm like, Charles, think those, no, no, no. Kennedy said the other day they're obsolete missiles. Nah, I think it has something to do with the Cuban missile crisis last fall.

Charles Hundley Jnr: That's fine. That's fine. Right.

Moore To Consider: And I would have been right and you would have not flip it. You're right. I'm wrong, whatever, but we don't even know. We know what the new New York times just told us, but we don't know what's behind it.

Charles Hundley Jnr: It's kind of like if ⁓ someone ⁓ said, we're going to pull our ⁓ carrier, what's the task force? I that's what they're called. I'm an army guy. Carrier task force or whatever out of the Mediterranean. Yeah, well, the reason we're pulling them out is because they're obsolete. ⁓ really?

Moore To Consider: Mm-hmm.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Well, I have this thing called the UltraNet right now, and I can just go in here and see that, ⁓ well, you have two more of those carriers that are over that are being built over in Newport News. So no, that's BS. They're not obsolete. You're pulling them out for a different reason. They didn't exactly have that ability to do on 63. Unless you were in the know. unless you were one of the people that really knew about nuclear missiles, you probably couldn't go and tell somebody, I'm sorry, you probably couldn't say that, no, that's BS, they're not obsolete, because you had no way to find out at all yourself. So it is a different time. The flow of information. I should say access to information today is much greater than it was back then. You can pretty much tell anybody anything back then. they were like, if Walter Cronkite said it, then most people believed it. We know better now. We know better. Anyway, we've gone long for this one.

Moore To Consider: Alright, anything you want to say on the way out here.

Charles Hundley Jnr: ⁓ no, just well, actually is one thing and pretty much I just said it. It's it's awfully difficult for some of us to take what the government is saying, specifically the government is saying as to what the reasons for whatever they're doing is valid or truthful because they've lied to us so many other times. Yeah, I in.

Moore To Consider: I think that's all they do is lie. And sometimes it might be for national security, they call it, whatever.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, or for some other reasons. mean, just think. Yeah.

Moore To Consider: It could be for any reason, but I think the likelihood that half of what we hear is true is very unlikely.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, yeah, but it's even using national security as a reason. I'm starting to call BS on that too. And we don't have to go back, but so far to know that ⁓ anyone who really truly believes that we're sending troops over to a country because they actually need it, or we're going to free people. Just read the writings of Smedley Butler.

Moore To Consider: Yeah, fair enough.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yeah, and what happened in the early 1900s and late 1800s. They were doing it back then. Of course, they're doing it now.

Moore To Consider: Yeah, I do. I do think for example, again, because of my, you know, just extensive amount of study in it. I remember an article that came out probably in the nineties after Oliver Stone had released JFK the movie. was like dooms week somebody, which of course conspiracy theorists are always saying that all the major establishment publications media were in league with. the very people that killed Kennedy. Like they're just putting out the state lie. And I get it. I mean, that's kind of the thing, but they were saying that, and I do believe I was well acted alone. This article came out and said, they probably got it right for not all the right reasons, but the motivating factor above all was they didn't want World War three. So in other words, when the Warren commission gets started, there were clearly political pressures. practical pressures of, we don't want to go down every road because if we find Sylvia Union or Castro, our country is going to be calling for World War III. Fair?

Charles Hundley Jnr: Are you are you saying that if we found out that it was some other entity? because I'm starting to understand why even the Soviet Union and Castro thing that there was somebody else that had ⁓ an alter, I should say, they would have gained or did gain by Kennedy disappearing. And it wasn't Castro or the Soviet Union.

Moore To Consider: Okay. You don't think it was Castro, Soviet Union and a lot of historians. Okay. I'm, I'm not trying to solve the Kennedy assassination. What I'm saying is I could see where Lyndon Johnson would have been like, Hey, Earl, Warren, you're putting together this commission. You start kicking some cans around and you come out with the fact that CIA was trying to kill Castro and that shit gets to John Q public. They're going to be like that son of a bitch did it. And.

Charles Hundley Jnr: We can... No, I understand. I get it.

Moore To Consider: Alan Dulles sat on the Warren Commission and knew they had tried to kill Castro because he was a part of it and they had enlisted the mob to try to kill Castro. And how many times do think he brought that up during the hearings? Never. Yes, go. Yes.

Charles Hundley Jnr: No, time out. Let's end this podcast. Yes, let's end this podcast and go into it. ⁓

Moore To Consider: Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah. All right. I'm just simply saying that I can understand sometimes this final shot that sometimes they're going to lie and sometimes they're going to lie. think because they think it's in the best interest of people to not have world war three. Okay. All right. This is more to consider. Please like subscribe and share and Charles will listen to the comments or read the comments. I will not. Okay, brother. All right, man. Talk to you on the next show. Bye.

Charles Hundley Jnr: Yes. Yeah, I agree. I agree. Yes. you Yes, I will. Yeah. All right, brother. All right. Bye.