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,