Attention. You're listening to the Tod Huff Radio Show, America's home for conservative not bitter talk radio. Be advised. The content of this program has been documented to prevent and even cure liberalism, and listening may cause you to lean to the right. Here's your Conservative but Not Bitter host, Todd Huff. Well greeting's, my friends, and welcome to today's episode of The Todd Huff Show. It's a pleasure to be here. You know the routine, you
know the drill. Todd at todhoffshow dot com is the email. You can also send us text message three one seven two to one zero two eight three zero. Just make sure that you make it count and make sure that you include the appropriate amounts of adoration and praise, which again may be significantly more than what you expect. So have you seen or read much about heard much about this discussion? These I don't know if accusations. I guess in some
circles they're straight up accusations. But have you seen the questions, discussions, allegations, at least pertaining to what the media may have known in advance of Hamas launching its terror attack on the nation of Israel On October seventh. Have you followed this? Have you seen this? I've got something in the stack of stuff today at todtebshow dot com if you want to read more. But that's what I want to talk about today. I want to talk about this
because this, of course is a massive problem. Now I'm looking here at an article written at pjmedia dot com, written by Victoria Taft posted looks like Sunday afternoon. Now the headline of this one is media in panic and panic mode over questions about whether they knew in advance about Hamas attack on Israel. Now pause for a moment, because now these folks you know this. But this is a prime example of why context matters, because because we all can
look, I grew up in the nineteen eighties. In fact, I'm about to have a birthday here and a little bit later in the year. And I was born in the last well born at the end of seventy seven and raised during the eighties. That was really the prime years of my childhood. Was a teenager in the nineties basically, and the I remember the Gulf War, right, I remember I was in I'm trying to remember was that in nineteen ninety one I think so. I would have been a young teenager back
in those days. And I remember we had in the classrooms back in the day. This was high tech back in the day here in central Indiana. I'm sure these were all over the country. We had, wasn't it called channel one? Channel one? We had TVs mounted in the corner of the classrooms. One corner one television mounted in the corner of the classroom. Now this was back in the day when TVs had back These TVs weren't flat these TVs, you know, they had all the stuff that made the screen work
in the back of the television. So these things were in the corner, but they were you had to pull them out a little bit so they would fit up there. But they're not TVs like we had the day. But we had we had televisions. We had televisions back in the nineties. They were color, and they were in the corners at least of my classroom in nineteen ninety one, and we had a daily quote unquote news broadcast. I guess that also typically coincided with the video announcements that we would do at the
school. I was, by the way, boy, that may be something to discuss at some point in time, I did the video announcements back my senior year. I think it was, yeah, my senior year of high school, back in nineteen ninety five, nineteen ninety six, and I'm sorry, lots of fun with that. We had way more fun than we should have had. But same television, right, So we had school announcements and then we had news, news brought to you by Channel one. And I
remember watching as we prepared to invade Iraq back in those days. I remember watching the journalists cover that and so forth, and context matters. So some people think, well, wait a minute, why can you have media when the United States is about to launch an invasion? But you can't have it when Hamas the Palestinians are just trying to fight for their liberation, for their freedom, which of course is complete and utter nonsense. That is not what's
going on in Israel. In fact, we'll get into Israel a little bit more today, and as fate would have it, tomorrow, I'm releasing another column talking about the background of Israel. It's the second of a two part series, and you can get that for free Todd Huffshow dot Com slash column. You can sign up there and you'll get that tomorrow when that goes out anyway, So there is a difference. Context is king. Context matters.
The context is that Hamas is a terrorist organization. Hamas is not gauged in engaged in legitimate military activities. Hamas is a terrorist organization that is launching acts of terror against civilians, civilians in Israel. This is not the same thing. So that is important to note the first Well, for multiple reasons, Hamas is targeting women and children. Hamas is using what we clearly define as
terrorism. Now, the media often misses what terrorism is. But terrorism is when you use violence or intimidation or some combination thereof, usually against civilians, but really against anyone, so as to help you achieve a political ends. That's what terrorism is. Terrorism says, Okay, you won't do it our way through your normal political system. You won't. We can't win the argument politically, we can't. We can't convince you to do X, Y or
Z. We're going to force you. We're going to make you so scared to go outside, to go to a shopping center, to go to work, right that we are going to launch a terror attack to make you pay until you submit to what we want. You could argue that terrorism in that sense is the exact opposite of what these jokers and clowns in the media tell you they're helping to defend, which is our democracy. It's the polar opposite of that. It's not the will of the people, it's the coerced will
of the people. That's the that's the objective, that is the stated objective, and terrorism, and it is the stated objective of Hamas. Hamas wants the political eradication of the nation state of Israel from the river to to see Palestine will be free. Simply means that the eradication of anyone who is not well, anyone who is Jewish between the river, which is the Jordan River, along the eastern border the eastern part of Israel all the way to the
Mediterranean Sea, which forms the western border of that nation. So that is an important differentiation. The other thing is so not only is it terroristic to activities, it's not a true legitimate, active war, which of course that begs a whole nother series of questions and so forth. But they don't they're not. Hamas is not trying to Hamas tries to embed itself with its civilians. They want to launch attacks and then look like the civilians. They want
to hide amongst the civilians. In fact, I've got a story in the stack of stuff which, surprise, surprise, one of these terrorist thugs that Israel, the IDF has recently taken out, had been holding one thousand Palestinians as hostages, as hostages in order to make them as a human shield so that he could determine where they are, put them around a base of operations where they're launching missiles or whatever, and then dare Israel to try to take
out that base of operations, because of course he's wanting he desired, this terrorist was desiring the death of as many Palestinian hostages people they are supposed to be allegedly fighting for their freedom. He wanted them to die in as many of those folks to die as possible, or to at least serve as a deterrent to protect him and his location and his operation and his military equipment and so forth. Anyway, So that is what Hamas does. They don't get
into uniforms so that they identify themselves. They try to blend in as civilians. They use methods of terror. This is not a legitimate army. This is not a legitimate military operation. They target civilians, They target babies, they target women, they target the elderly, they target the sick, they target anybody other than people that can fight back, because you see what happens when they target people that can fight back. That's what's happening now. That's
why they're calling for a ceasefire and all of this. They can't fight back. There are a bunch of whimps and what's is over there and hummas pounding their chest until someone steps up who's got the MC to punch them squarely in the mouth. And that's what's happening anyway, So the military, excuse me.
The media. The media has been called out. There's a Twitter account called Honest Reporting at Honest Reporting is the Twitter handle, honest reporting dot com is the website, and in the article that they've tweeted and posted, it's basically it's calling out the journalist. It's saying, hey, how did you know? Is it coincidence? Is it coincidence that you were there? On October seventh headlined this thing, by the way is broken borders ap and Reuter's
pictures of Hamas atrocities raise ethical questions. On October seventh, Hamas Terris were not the only ones who documented the war crimes they had committed during their deadly rampage across southern Israel. Some of their atrocities were captured by Gaza based photo journalist working working for the Associated Press and Reuter's News agencies, whose early morning presence at the Breech border raises serious ethical questions. What were they doing there?
That's the question. What were they doing there? How did they know? Were they just hanging out there? Was it a perfect timing situation? I mean, this was from what what six was it like six am or something on a Saturday morning, early Saturday morning, just hanging out at this at this border in the right place of the border to where they can capture the images that were necessary. Also, you may remember if you were like me and saw some war correspondence in the you know, covering conflicts and so
forth. All the media has identification. The media has certain I think often don't they wear yellow vests? They were a vest that marks them as media. These photojournalists did not. And this is a lot of questions here. What is going on? How did they know about this? And all this website. All this group Honest Reporting dot Com did was raised the question this has caused the AP and the media to go into absolute meltdown mode. Absolute
meltdown moad, because of course you can't question the media. Questioning the media, if you follow the narrative of the day, means that you're trying to thwart and undermine our democracy. You're trying to overthrow a free press and everything else, which is an obsert accusation. That was not the meaning of the First Amendment to say to maintain a free press, you have to have an accountable press. You should be able to say whatever you want to say about
the press. The press is free to respond, The press is free to explain why these allegations and questions are unfounded. Go for it. Don't start crying and saying that there's some sort of an attack on the media now blaming someone here like this group Honest Reporting dot Com, when in reality, the reason that there are so many questions about what's being reported in the world today is because the world has seen way too many professional deceivers in your industry.
Timeouts in order, timeouts in order. When I come back, I want to say more about this and get into other things that I've got in the stack as well. My friends, sit tight back in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends. So do you trust the media? Now? Oz Oz has been and she's got a point here. It's something that we should at least be aware of. Oz has asked this since the early boy. I just want to mention this because I think, I think in fairness,
it's it's just something that we should we should just ask. And Israel again, Israel is the is not the aggressor here or anything like that. I just I just want to raise this question because it as we're talking about what journalists knew along the border between Gaza and Israel on the morning of October seventh, why were they there? It's also a fair question to say, how did Israel not know? Did they? No? I know, there's lots of questions about this. There's all sorts of rabbit holes as you can
get yourself down and everything else. And look, I'm not here, that's not I don't know. It's these are fair questions to ask, and that's really the point to me. There are fair questions to ask, no matter if you're asking them of the Israeli government. The United States government, the media. These are fair questions. No one, my friend, is above question. You can ask me questions why. That's why. That's why I give out the email address. That's why I give out the text number.
Now, obviously I can't respond to everything. I do my best, I really do, but you're free to ask. No one is above reproach. No one is. When you start having a mindset that says this, this group shouldn't even be questioned, that's really setting the stage for bad things to come in the future. You are creating an environment that says, hey, this is where corruption can really take root. I mean case in point, look at the Hunter Biden Joe Biden situation, with the alleged corruption and so
forth, with Ukraine, China, you name it. There's lots of lots of figures that are popping up on that radar. When people are allowed to operate in the dark without any accountability whatsoever, then bad things, bad things
can happen. It's the entire reason that we in this nation have. It's why the founders were so insistent upon a free press, because they wanted that free press to hold our government account, to be able to tell the people what is going on to be able to present or give a voice to people who are questioning things. It gives the government of a method, a means,
a form of media to communicate back with their answers. Doesn't mean that their answers are always true, doesn't mean that the allegations are always true. But it is necessary. It is a necessary component for a free people. We have to know what is going on. We have to at least have the ability to question what is happening. And the moment that we're not allowed to ask questions, bad, bad, bad things happen. This is not This is not a complicated sort of situation. It's just the way that it
is. Now. I'm going to go back here to this PJ Media article because the article that I referenced, the initial one which was posted again at Honest reporting dot com. I'll put all this stuff in our stack of stuff if you want to read it. The PJ Media piece basically starts by referencing that, but also then goes further right. It begins to look at the greater context. And Honest Reporting is doing this too, by the way, Honest Reporting is doing this too, And so the media has gotten itself really
worked up in a tizzy. This was on This would have been on Friday. They issued, well, Reuters issued the following statement, Reuters doesn't like being questioned about about this and response, excuse me to the honest reporting story which I referenced earlier. This is what Reuter's said on the tenth of November. We are deeply concerned. Oh yes, deeply concerned about the ear responsibility of honest reporting and publishing such damaging accusations. Why don't you just answer the
accusation? I just look, I'm not one to say that someone should just go out there and make all sorts of accusations, right, wild accusations can cause problems. I recognize that, But answer the allegations. Don't just basically cross your arms, you know, walk off in a in a tizzy, take your ball and go home. Answer the questions. You're just concerned. They say they're deeply concerned about the irresponsibility of honest reporting and publishing such damaging
accusation. It's executive director, Reuter's Rights has accepted that there is no evidence to support the incendiary insinuations in the report. The baseless speculation. I mean, listen to all these adjectives descriptors here and Honest Reporting's post pre in it as quote raising ethical questions end quote has posed grave risks to journalists in the region, including those working for Reuter's pause for a moment. How can raising
questions about whether journalists are how journalists were there? How can raising questions about what is really going on? Was that a coincidence? Was it discussed in advance? Were they invited? Were they invited by Hamas for some sort of a briefing early in the morning and then found themselves in the middle of watching an invasion unfold, a terrorist activity unfold? Give us something we know that they were there. This has been documented to be shown to be accurate,
that they were there. Why and notice this statement doesn't address any of that. It just says things are They're deeply concerned. Onto sporting is irresponsible. They published damage accusations, incendiary insinuations, baseless speculation poses a grave risk to journalists, including those working for Reuters. I mean, how if you're telling the truth and if there's nothing nefarious going on, just explain it. Take that paragraph I just read, replace it with answers. Don't act like you're
above responding to these questions. Because if you think about it, it's a fair question. It wasn't just Hamas that was documenting the death and destruction that was unleashed upon the Israeli people on the morning of October seventh. It was also journalists that work for Reuter's, AP, CNN, whatever else. Why just why instead of taking this this stupid paragraph, replace it with an ext explanation. They continue the Israeli government and others amplified honest reportings baseless speculation.
Honest reporting must take responsibility for the spread of misinformation. It is triggered. What's the misinformation? What is the misinformation here? Tell us we have no idea until you tell us. Of course, that's part of the the that's part of the objective. The part of the objective is to just to raise a protest so much just to start throwing counter accusations at the one who raised the questions. Tell us what we're supposed to be so worked up about here?
The spread of misinformation. Of course, that's a phrase that was made popular when Trump was president, and of course during the COVID years where you couldn't even ask a question. Asking a question was a kin in the minds of these well the debased minds of these radical leftist and journalists raising questions they believe is akin to spreading misinformation. Anyway, I'm going to continue reading this
stupid statement here. Honest reporting must take responsibility for the spread of misinformation it has triggered, triggered, and for the risk and reputational harm its inflammatory claims have caused to journalists reporting on this conflict. I just you know, if you don't believe a politician is being honest and you say politicians lie, it would be like politicians getting together and saying you've were deeply concerned. We are
deeply concerned that you've said such damaging things about politicians. These baseless speculations and incendiary insinuations that you've written about have no place free society. You've posed graver risks to politicians in Washington, d C. We can't do our job. Our lives are in jeopardy thanks to you folks who raise questions about our integrity. How dare you do such a thing. You've triggered so much misinformation.
We don't know what to do. We can't function. Our reputation is at risk because of your inflammatory claims that politicians are sometimes corrupt, how dare you? We're all at risk now January. So every morning we wake up, we're in fear of a January sixth, of a pearl harbor day of a nine to eleven, which, of course January sixth is just as bad as any of those days. We're supposed to believe, as they've told us. I mean, it's ridiculous, it's absolutely utterly Often it's the stupid statement here
and then I'll take a break. It is the job of journalists, this statement says, to document important news as it unfolds and to provide a first hand account of events on the ground. This is the essential role of a free press in war zones, and we've remained fully committed to providing this coverage both from Israel and Gaza as the conflict continues. Reuters publishes fact base news fairly, accurately and independently, in keeping with the Thompson Reuter's trust principles in
the Middle East and around the world. Did you hear one bit of a response, one bit of a response to the allegations. No, it's just broad based. Don't ask me about that. Don't try to question what we do doing so simply by raising the questions, raising your ethical questions. As you put it, they're not really ethical though, that's of course honors reporting. You guys aren't being honest or being unethical, causing our journalists to be at risk. Give me a break. Nothing in response to any of it,
just virtue signaling and posturing. This is to be expect that it's us as usual, my friends, timeouts in order back here in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends. You know, this whole discussion here, this whole discussion. It reminds me. It reminds me of what we refer to here at the Toddhu Show as the seven pillars of propaganda. You've heard me talk about this from time to time, the seven pillars of propaganda,
and the media is one of them. So the thinking goes, the thinking goes that there are you've heard me say, eighty percent of the people in this country would agree with eighty percent of the things I say on this program. I do believe that to be true. By the way, I also believe that it should be the case that one hundred percent of the people agree with one hundred percent of what I say on this program. But that's beside
the point. For just the moment. And so if that's the case, then how how in the world do we have all of the mess that we have? How right? How do we have it? How do we have the nonsense happening in our classrooms? How do we have an open border? How do we have American weakness projected abroad? How do we have I mean complete dysfunction in the United States Congress and our state houses in many instances. How do we have all this? How do we have this absolute mess?
Well, what's necessary is for a group or in this case, groups of influential and powerful people who control the levers of information, who control what you can see and consume, who try to influence your thinking, manipulate your thinking. If you have control, if the people who are in the minority have the control of these powerful levers of society what I refer to as the pillars, and they are used for propaganda, then that's precisely what can happen.
And look, I want to say this idea was I'm building upon the idea that was really created by Rush. Rush Limbald probably ten years ago heard Rush talking about the four corners of deceit, and I think there's a couple of more groups that need to be identified, and so we've changed the name to the Seven Pillars of Propaganda, because that's really what they're designed to push, is this propaganda message. A message of propaganda is when people are given information
that is misleading and designed to create in them a certain conclusion. See on this program, I come on here and I talk with you. I share with you my thoughts. I try to make the case right before your eyes. I don't do any subtle mystical smoke and mirrors stuff. I just say, this is what's going on, this is how I think about it, this is why, and I try to address it head on and I try to do, you know, to to answer the questions I think that people
might have. I try to answer some of the questions that I get from folks. All of that. That is not how the Seven Pillars are propaganda view this. The seven Pillars are propaganda. They view this as a they view their area, so to speak, their their pillar there. They're the seven pillars. Would be government would be academia would be entertainment would be the media would be science. Yes, science, I mean, look at what
happened during COVID. By the way, it would be woke business. I used to call it big business, but I really think it's woke business, and it would be big tech. And so when you look at those institutions, if you will, and you look at the fact that they are in lockstep with the leftist narrative of the day, and you look at the tools and techniques that they use to promote their propaganda, you can see why they do it and you can see how they do it if you understand who these
folks are and understand why they do what they do. Now, does that mean that every single person who is in academia? Does that mean every teacher is bad? Of course not, of course not. Does that mean that every person who's an athlete and in entertainment is a bad of course that's not the case. Does that mean that there's no truthful journalists? There are some, there aren't many, that's the problem. Does that mean every scientist is
engaged in deceiving the American public? No, that doesn't mean that. But are there enough? Are there enough of the folks in these fields, especially at the top, at the upper rational And I think about the FBI is a great example. The FBI is an absolute utter train wreck, right now it is being used to target political enemies of the Democrat Party of the left. And it's not because now you need agents at all levels to participate in
this nonsense in order to accomplish your goal. But it starts at the top. And yes, there probably are some at all levels who are corrupt, but the truth is there's a lot of good folks in there too, they're just not the ones who wield the power to control, have the authority,
and so forth. And so media is one of these and the idea that they are above reproach that they can't be questioned, especially fairly questioned about why journalists were there, ap journalists, Reuter's journalists, photo journalists, Why were you involved in reporting on the morning of October seventh in Israel, in southern Israel? How were you there? What caused these series of events to line up so that you were there? It seems like a very fair question to
me. Reuters won't answer it. Ruter's is appalled that you would ask. Ruters is appalled and offended, and their virtue signal and they talk about how dangerous the simple question is. Asking a question creates more danger for the journalists and the minds of routers than having scores of journalists who are engaged in professional deception each and every day. That, my friends, is utterly absurd and ridiculous. The real problem is the fact that they are deceptive journalists who are
running the show many times in newsrooms around this country. Questioning those folks is not the problem. The problem is that they exist. To begin with, quick time out my friends, back here in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends. If you look at your calendar, you're going to see that it is the middle almost smack dam in the middle of November. And you know what happens after this. You know next week is Thanksgiving, my
favorite holiday. Then we get into December, We've got Christmas, We've got New Year's These last few weeks of the year always go by quickly, and so if you are worried, concerned, just want to make sure that you are doing the right thing when it comes to your health insurance, whether it's your individual coverage, whether it is your group health coverage. Now is the
time to look at this, my friends. Now today. Go to icellhealth dot com, or you can call my friend Eric Wilson at i sell Health eight one, five, three, seven two thirteen sixty three eight one five three seven two one three sixty three, or visit icellhealth dot com and he's going to help you. He's going to answer questions. He is going to get you the information you need to see if making a change to your health insurance is a good idea. This is the time of year to do this.
It's you. You know, it's coming to an end, that window that a lot of people need to operate within. He's been serving clients throughout America since two thousand and four. He's a friend of this program. I know Eric. He's a great guy. He's a conservative guy. He understands the business and he can help youisolhealth dot com. Give give him a call today, email him today, whatever is easiest for you. Eight one five
three seven two thirteen sixty three. Eric Wilson at I SOOEL Health. So, my friends, we are in You've heard me say on this program many times before. We are in the midst of a cold civil war, and it's a war of information. It's a war of simple it's a war of truth. The war that's really being waged in this country is the war on truth. That's what we try to do. You know every day. You know our mission here, my mission at this program is to help people hear
and receive truth. That's my objective. That is my mission. Not that I've got it all figured out, although I can certainly understand why you might think that I've got to be getting very, very close. But the truth is, my friends. We see what happens when truth is abandoned. When truth is abandoned, we have disaster. Disaster follows. We have what we
have in our public schools today. We have confusion on an issue that there should be absolute moral clarity concerning, which is the issue of Israel versus Hamas. This is not complicated. These things become more complex and more complicated in the minds of people who have been who've had the truth withheld from them, or who have been lied to, and they're lied to repeatedly by the people operating the levers of power at these seven pillars of propaganda, which I went
through last segment. I went through that and these questions and concerns about what's happening or what happened on October seventh, concerning how journalists happen to be there whenever they were Hamas was launching terrorist attacks on Southern Israel. It's a question that they should answer. Why would they not answer it? You know, I mean it seems to me methinks they don't protest too much. I think that they're raising too much of a stink about this. Just tell us what's
going on. Answer the question. Don't act like it's beneath you to answer it. Don't act like you're offended that someone would question your integrity. Get over it. Come on, grow up. Put on your big boy or big girl pants. By the way, there's only two types of pants. You got to pick one, big boy or big girl. But you gotta pick it. You gotta put it on. You got to show up. You gotta be prepared to make the case for what you're doing. Quit acting
like questioning the media is the end of the free press. Give me a break. The end of the free press happens when it is erupted by people who want to shove propaganda down your throat. If they don't like the questions, that means they don't want to face the reality. They don't want you to know the reality of what they've really done to the so called free end. Quote press timeouts in order, my friends sit tight back in a minute,
I'll go back in, my friends. I don't know if any of you saw the UFC five you have seen two ninety five over the weekend, you would have If you did, you would have seen, you would have seen. Let's see Trump, Kid, Rock, Tucker Carlson, who's the fourth one, oh, and Dana Dana White come out together. Of course, fans go wild for them as well. They they should. By the way, that you might not have well, you may have seen, you
may not have seen at the moment, I don't know. There is a was a comedian there near the front the octagon, Bill Burr, who's got some language in his stuff, but he's a pretty funny guy. I think he's pretty honest in some things. Anyway, his wife is sitting beside him. She decides to give Trump. It appears Trump from the back the two fingers salute, and so many people are proud of this and happy about this. I just can't imagine something like that making my day. Someone flipping off
the president. But what do I know. I gotta go SDG. My friends,