39:17 And so there's a lot of eccentricity about leaders at that level. So that's how I see Trump. He's eccentric. Well, and I bring this. this up for a series of clips that I think are important. And I hope that this will go far and wide as you always pray before we start the show. Because what, in my opinion, what President Trump has done with this and is doing is he is breaking apart a very, very old system that has been in place really since the 70s. And it has been, you know, you can call them neoconservatives. There's a lot of Jewish names, but that's all by design. And I just wanted to play these clips so people can understand, particularly our Gen Z
39:59 listeners, because you need to understand where this came from and what President Trump has actually been just blasting apart. And they're stunned. They cannot believe what is happening. By the way, it was so funny. So he went down this whole list of people, and Kier Starmer, the prime minister of the UK, he's standing, who, by the way, only hurt the process by calling for a two-state solution. And that gave Hamas all kinds of extra. Oh, well, you might as well wait then for that. And he went down this. He was thanking everybody. He's getting everybody the props. And it's alphabetical. And you see Starmer, for some reason, Starmer's on the stage behind him.
40:42 We just walked up there and stood with Georgia Maloney, who actually does belong there from Italy. And he gets to the United Kingdom. And Starmer comes forward like he's going to speak. And Trump just body checks him and jumps in front. And he says, okay, thanks, Kir. Wow. He just body checked him right out. Like, whoops. No, you're not saying that. Like a Wayne Gretzky move right there. He let the listen from Egypt talk and from India and Pakistan. No, Kier Starmer. So art of the deal, brother. Those people, they are true enemies, in my opinion. He knows. Not the UK or the UK people, but that system is no good.
41:22 And just think about who really started this whole thing, drawing lines in the desert and saying, here you go. That was England. And I don't think that they had good intentions at the time. Anyway, this is Michael Hudson. Michael Hudson is an economist. And he's getting up there in the years now. He's in his 80s. And he has been interviewed. This is actually from maybe even a year ago. It was so good. I wanted to share it with you. He's talking about the system that was set up in the 70s with the State Department and why the aircraft carrier in the desert was created, which is what our military industrial complex still calls it, the aircraft carrier.
42:05 So hopefully this will dispel any idea that people have that Israel controls Trump, Israel controls our entire Congress, Israel controls America, Israel just wants to draw us into war. It was not Bibi Netanyahu who came in the 90s and said it. It was these people that did it. And this is what's being broken apart. Everything that's happened today was planned out just 50 years ago, back in 1974, 1973 and 4. I sat in on meetings with the Arad, who became Netanyahu, who's chief military advisor after heading Mossad.
42:44 And the whole strategy was worked out essentially by the Defense Department, by neoliberals, and almost in a series of stages that I'll explain. Skoop Jackson is the main name to remember. Skoop Jackson was the ultra-right-wing neocon who sponsored them all. He was the head of the Democratic National Committee in 1960 and then worked with military advisors. I was with Herman Kahn, the model for Dr. Strangelove at the Hudson Institute during these years.
43:19 And I sat in on meetings and I'll describe them. But I want to describe how the whole strategy that led to the United States today not wanting peace, wanting to take over the whole Noris, took shape gradually. Okay, so you've got the setting here. It's military industrial complex, which are the direct funders through the American Israeli Education Foundation of AIPAC, which is what everyone thinks Israel is controlling it. Yeah, I'm sure there's some big Jewish donors there, and I'm sure that we all write resolutions, and it probably should be registered under FARA.
43:58 But it's military-industrial complex who has run this from the beginning, and that's what they're always doing. Before you go forward, a couple of terms that we need to, I'm going to pretend I don't know everything that's been said. Please, good. Neocons. Well, that's actually a good question. It stands for neoconservatives. Okay. And it was a group of. fly. This fly is so mine. I would just call them the warmongers. Okay. They literally, so it was the Neo as a new, the new conservatives, and they were really more involved in military money and oil.
44:39 Okay. The Middle East has always been about resources. Same with Africa, by the way, but that's kind of France. France and England, BP, Total Oil. They all have Africa. We've kind of stayed out of that. And how's that worked out, by the way? That's really good in Africa. So the Middle East has always been about oil, gas, resources, etc. That's what it's pipelines. This is what it's always been about. And if you look at right into the Bush family, I know a lot of people love Papa Bush, but they were oil guys. They were big, big oil guys. And, you know, people like Cheney, you know, these are just, I'm sorry, these were not good people.
45:21 Not good people at all. One other thing, neoliberals. What's a neoliberal as opposed to a liberal? Well, I don't really have an answer for that. Did he say that? Did he say neoliberals? He did. Probably I don't have an answer for that. I'm trying for me and any of our listeners who are not versed in this, I'm trying to be on this line. Well, I would say they're two sides of the same coin, basically. Neoliberal, like, you know, Barack Obama is a liberal, but, you know, he had a kill list. You know, he droned people to death every Tuesday. I mean, so it's, it's two sides of the same coin. Neo knew anything. Okay.
46:01 So why did they set this strategy in place? And it's actually quite logical when you think about it. The starting point for all the U.S. strategy here was that democracies no longer can field a domestic army with a military draft. America is not in a position able to really field enough of an army to invade a country. And without invading a country, you can't really take it over. You can bomb it, but that just is going to incite resistance. So this was recognized 50 years ago. And it seemed at that time that the U.S.-backed wars were going to have to be scaled down.
46:42 But that hasn't happened. And the reason is the United States had a fallback position. It was going to rely on foreign troops to do the fighting as proxies instead of itself. That was a solution to get a force. Well, the first example was to create the Wahhabi jihad fighters in Afghanistan as al-Qaeda. And Jimmy Carter mobilized them against the secular Afghan interests. And Carter justified this by saying, well, yes, they're Muslims, but after all, we all believe in God. So the answer to the secular state of Afghan was Wahhabi fanaticism and jiads.
47:26 And the United States realized that in order to have an army that's willing to fight to the last member of its country, the last Afghan, the last Israeli, the last Ukrainian, you really need a country whose spirit is one of hatred towards the other, a spirit very different from the American and European spirit. Well, Brzezinski was the grand planner who did all that. So this is critical to understand. After Vietnam, you couldn't get a draft together. You couldn't, I mean, 2000, you know, 9-11 was different because it was like, hey, man, we got attacked. We got to go literally got to get the towel heads. I mean, that's how crazy we were at the time. And
48:11 that's for a whole nother show some other day. But this was the intent. Let's get people who already hate the people that we want to take out. And Ukraine is really, really salient in this point because that's exactly what it was. Who sparked this revolution? We did. The same people. Victoria Newland. I mean, the Wolfwitz guys, then weren't there anymore. But this is our State Department. Our State Department was there handing out donuts and cookies because they so desperately hated Russia. Why Russia? Most oil in the entire world, bigger than the whole Middle East. I know it's weird to think about it, but it's really the truth.
48:54 It's always been about those resources. So this is why Israel became like our foreign legion, our aircraft carrier in the desert. And I would say the Brits were a big part of this with their oil companies as well. And they always wanted to, they never want, they don't want peace. They don't want. want peace. They want it to be strife continuously, destabilize all of these nations around them. When all of this strategy was being put together, Herman Khan's great achievement was to convince the U.S. empire builders that the key to achieving their control of the Middle East was to rely on Israel as its foreign legion.
49:34 And that arm's length arrangement enabled the United States to play the role, as I said, of the good cop, designating Israel to play its role. And Israel has organized and supplied El Nusra, Al-Qaeda, while the United States pretends to denounce them. And it's all part of a plan that's been backed by the military, the State Department, and the National Security Operation. And that's why the State Department has turned over management of U.S. diplomacy to Zionists, seemingly distinguishing Israeli behavior from U.S.
50:13 empire building. But in a nutshell, the Israelis have joined Al-Qaeda and ISIS's troops as America's foreign legion. So this is the point. They got real zealots in there. They got real Zionist haters who are like, whatever we do, it's got to kill all Muslims, kill all Arabs. And that was running our State Department for decades. So while it is true that this is, you know, that Israel has literally been abused for oil interests, it's us controlling them, not the other way around. Total sense. Yeah. I see it. Completely. You know, and we don't have to play anymore because it just goes into more depth and more detail.