Does “A. P.” Stand For “Allah’s Propaganda” ?

After reading this asinine article, I think so. These moronic media myrmidons STILL don’t get it, do they ? Critics of Islam are BRAZEN ?

What about the Islamic jihadists who behead JOURNALISTS, asshat? Are THEY not BRAZEN as well?

Good grief. The idiots who come out of J-school. Article by Jordan Schachtel at

AP: Islam Fundamentally a Religion of Peace, ‘Brazen’ Critics Probably Racist.

 by  Jordan Schachtel   12 Jan 2015  Washington, D.C.


Say, Lee Keath, is that YOU in the photo ? You might just want to REALLY study what the Islamonazis would REALLY like to do with you, and your ilk.

So, Lee old bean, does THIS look and sound like the “religion of peace” ? Islamic terror. Nothing to “lose your head over”, right, Lee ?


AP writer Lee Keath published an article on Monday dealing with the “debate among Muslims over interpreting faith” — without mentioning that thousands of deaths are meted out every year in the name of Islam across the globe. Keath instead describes those who question the link between Islam and jihadist violence as “increasingly brazen.” Rather than focusing on the “brazenness” of the murderers in Islam’s name, the author instead points towards those who dare critique the Religion of Peace.

Keath writes:

“Western critics are increasingly brazen about suggesting there is something inherent in Islam that is sparking violence by some of its adherents. Most Muslims reject this, arguing that the tumult of the post-colonial Middle East has created fertile ground for radicalism among people whose faith is fundamentally one of peace.”

By suggesting that Westerners have become “brazen” about Islam in their critiques of its followers’ promulgation of worldwide violence, the AP has dismissed the tens-of-thousands of Islam-related killings as mere coincidence.

Keath accused Saudi Arabia of sending conflicting condemnatory signals following the actions of AQAP and ISIS-linked terrorists and their attacks against Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish supermarket last week.

He adds:

“After gunmen in Paris killed 12 people, Saudi Arabia’s top body of Muslim clerics quickly condemned the attack and said it could have no acceptable justification. It was a signal from some of the Islamic world’s strictest voices that cartoons lampooning the Prophet Muhammad in the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo were not a reason to kill the artists”.

Only days later, Saudi Arabia sent an opposing message: On Friday, a young Saudi was whipped 50 times in a public square in the city of Jiddah, the first of what will be 20 such weekly rounds of lashes. That, along with 10 years in prison, is his sentence from the kingdom’s religious-based courts for insulting Islam, based on posts on his blog criticizing prominent clerics close to the monarchy.

The contradiction points to the difficulties at a time of a growing debate within Islam about whether and how to reject a radical minority that some fear is dragging them into conflict and wrecking the faith.

Saudi authorities, however, never said that Charlie Hebdo’s artists should not have been punished for their cartoon depictions of Islam’s Muhammad. A correct interpretation of Saudi authorities’ remarks would reveal that they believed the artist’s punishment was simply too severe. Nowhere in the statement did the Saudi government reveal a contradiction in the way the Wahhabi kingdom conducts itself.

Saudi Arabia views the Quran’s Shariah as the law of the land, where punishment for criticizing Muhammad varies from dozens of public lashes, to death by beheading.

The real contradiction occurs when attempting to bring Shariah, where criticism of Islam and Muhammad is forbidden, to a societies that protect freedom of speech, not when the Saudis decide to whip instead of kill one of Islam’s “offenders.” The Shariah-compliant view clashes with some of our highest Western values, which include the freedom of speech and freedom of religion. While one is free to practice their religion, the First Amendment of our Constitution does not guarantee freedom from religious criticism. Most Western nations have some analog to this provision. Under Sharia law, however, punishment is mandatory for the critics of Muhammad and Islam.

Worse, the AP news story passively accuses Charlie Hebdo’s writers of being racists.

Muslims who denounced the killings were often clearly discomfited by the content and defended their right to be upset over cartoons even some Western critics said crossed into racism.

The writer makes a blanket accusation that Charlie Hebdo writers not only disagree with the religion of Islam, but are also somehow racist, without providing any evidence to confirm the accusatory comment.


YYYAAAWWWNNN.  Another day, another liberal, politically correct, IGNORANT “journalist” calling these butchering 7th century barbarians members of “the religion of peace”.

Lee, you are a SPECIAL kind of stupid, aren’t you ? The RACIST card ? Really ? Is that all you’ve got, ignoramus? Tell you what. How about YOU get yourself “kidnapped” by these “peaceful” fellows, and let’s just see if you think the same way while your head is watching itself roll away from the rest of your body.

It is “journalists” such as THIS one that obviously keep the jihadi train rolling along. The jihadists KNOW they have the liberal loon media on THEIR side, so as long as the famel cuckers can keep these intrepid “journalists” fooled, which, as appears by this article to be TOO easy to do, they WILL continue with their “mission” mostly unabated.

Until they’ve run out of journalists to behead, that is.


CLYDE. Wondering if a low IQ is required to be a “journalist” ?




Tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Does “A. P.” Stand For “Allah’s Propaganda” ?

  1. Kathy says:

    This is right out of O’s playbook to blame the victims and the media who talk about it. Then he took a play from Sharpton’s book and played the racist card. Sheesh, go back to journalism school.

    There was a time when AP was the go-to news people when they were the first with the facts and everybody re-broadcast their posts, but these days they’re just as biased and the rest of the lefty media. It gets hard & harder to find anyone, right or left, who doesn’t have their own slant on a story.

    The Saudis already had their double standard and now it seems the AP does too.

  2. Grouchy says:

    Religious Rights in Saudi Arabia is a classic oxymoron.
    Ranking right with that is “Journalistic Integrity”.

    What ever happened to the motto of Scripps Howard: “Give Light, and the people will find their own way.”,,, All the mainstream media feed us now is darkness.

    Thank God for the Alternative Media~!

  3. Garnet92 says:

    Right on Grouchy! Journalistic Integrity indeed. What used to be the “fourth estate” has become a junk-filled vacant lot in the inner city. They have voluntarily relinquished their rights by NOT objectively reporting the news, but by massaging the news to fit their leftist agenda. It is somewhat reassuring that more and more people are turning away from the newspapers and networks and they are losing their monopoly on the news.

    There are lots of small-time blogs that are more dependable than the AP when it comes to the truth of the news.

    • Clyde says:

      I LOVE your description of the “Fourth Estate”, Garnet. A junk-filled inner city lot indeed. HOWEVER, a junk-filled lot has MORE integrity than most limpstream “journalists”. Thanks for that, my friend.

  4. Rich B says:

    Actually the AP stands for “animal packers” and it refers to muslim men. The “animals” I mentioned are female goats, sheep, and camels. The “packers” refers to muslim men and their nasty habit of _____________ those poor livestock I spoke of. Use your imagination ladies and gentlemen and fill in the blank line.

    I don’t want Knox to ban me for saying what I really mean. I’m vulgar enough on my own blog.

    • Clyde says:

      You can say most anything but the “F” word. The censors ban ME quite often !!! You have given us a damn good description of them, for sure Rich B. Thanks.

  5. Hardnox says:

    Good commentary Clyde. As we all know too well, damned near all of the Western media are nothing more than turd shiners. It matters not which country either.

    As I have stated many times, the left’s embrace of all things islam is because islam is anti-West. Any rational thinker would conclude that ANY religion that requires such brutality for a confirmed or perceived slight is NOT a peaceful religion. The same is true for Christianity back when blasphemy laws were enforced up until the late 1600’s.

    I am not suggesting that blasphemy is a good thing however “free speech” allows us to examine, question, and even ridicule most anything and is codified into law in all Western countries. The troglodyte countries have no such free speech guarantees. Saudi Arabia doesn’t even have a Constitution. Their law is the koran and is interpreted by clerics.

    What the so called journalists shamefully and willingly ignore is that Free Speech guarantees the media’s existence in the first place. The fact that most of the media miss that point is beyond stupid. Further, their support for all things muslim while using racism as a catalyst for their meme is intellectually bankrupt.