Three terrorists murder 12 people at the offices of French magazine

A huge manhunt is under way in Paris for three masked and hooded men armed with a Kalashnikov and a shotgun who stormed the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, killing 12 people – including two policemen – before escaping in a car.

Visiting the scene of the country's worst atrocity in decades, the French president, François Hollande, described it as "a terrorist attack, without a doubt". Hollande said the assault, which happened at about 11.30am on Wednesday after the magazine's staff had gathered for their weekly editorial meeting, was "an act of exceptional barbarism".

Warning that several other attacks had been foiled in recent weeks, the president called for national unity and convened an emergency cabinet meeting. The French government raised the terror alert level in the greater Paris region to the highest level possible.

Five of the victims have been named, including four Charlie Hebdo journalists: editor Stéphane Charbonnier and cartoonists Jean Cabut, Georges Wolinski and Bernard Verlhac. AFP reported that Bernard Maris, an economist and writer who contributed to the magazine, was also killed.

... A spokeswoman for the Paris prosecutor's office, Agnes Thibault-Lecuivre, confirmed that 12 people had been killed in the attack. Police said three attackers were involved, two who entered the building and a third who drove a car to the scene, in rue Nicolas Appert in the 11th arrondissement in eastern Paris. The gunmen escaped in the car before abandoning it in the 19th arrondissement, where they hijacked another car, ordering the motorist out.

Cries of "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great") were heard during the attack, witnesses said.

Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/07/paris-terror-attack-huge-manhunt-under-way

There is no reason to end a human life. Not agreeing with their ideas or beliefs doesn't count either. Freedom of speech is one of mankind's basic rights. As a journalist, I am deeply disgusted and shocked. My condolences to the families and coworkers of the victims.

Wait, they attacked a satirical magazine? That's like attacking the Onion because you got your panties in a twist.

Like, seriously, if you don't agree with a magazine, especially one that is a satirical magazine, just don't fucking read it. There's absolutely no reason to attack people who write for something we don't agree with.

I'll be frank though, even though a lot are idle threats, I have noticed a lot of people these days get so aggressive about their opinion that they threaten death to those who don't agree with them. That's pretty fucked up in my opinion.

I hate to say that in the near term, we might be seeing more and more of this. In the immediate future, violence may be neccesary to stop violence. I don't like it, but there may not be a better option.

We certainly can't allow barbarism like this to go unchecked, yet the warrior perspective from which it arises is as neccesary to human rights as third grade is to fourth and fifth grade. The passion and the drive and commitment to a cause is healthy and must be kept, while the murder and rape and slavery is unhealthy and must be discarded.



Another thing is, freedom of speech isn't inherent to humanity. Nor is the equal value upon all human life, which I think most of us share here. Such things literally don't exist in the world of the fundamentalist, not like they exist for us.

These things come from a rational, worldcentric perspective. Which is why free speech has only been around for a few hundred years; rationality has not been the dominant force in human endeavors for very long. There's only one way I can think of to permenantly end these violent conflicts, and it is to move people upward through the stages of cognitive growth. Warriors must become conformists, then sometime after that they'll be able to live from the standpoint of reason.

daigonite said:

Wait, they attacked a satirical magazine? That's like attacking the Onion because you got your panties in a twist.

Like, seriously, if you don't agree with a magazine, especially one that is a satirical magazine, just don't fucking read it. There's absolutely no reason to attack people who write for something we don't agree with.

I'll be frank though, even though a lot are idle threats, I have noticed a lot of people these days get so aggressive about their opinion that they threaten death to those who don't agree with them. That's pretty fucked up in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I'd be willing to bet that for them, it's more like slandering the King, or God. A lot of people have died for this over the centuries. The problem we have now is that modern society lives by different rules than barbarians, and the two are next-door neighbors.

Tbh It was only a matter of time before some nut job attacked Charlie Hebdo, sadly it will give other copy cats ideas.

Hats of to the French people for how they are reacting, having a protest and saying screw you terrorists.

Sigh... I'm worried about the aftermath of this. France, particularly Paris, has been increasingly Islamophobic in recent years and I can only imagine what the people will be like now. I'm dreading the statement by that hag Brigitte Bardot calling for Muslims to be expelled from France.

Rest in peace to those who were killed, but my thoughts are with those who are currently scared for the backlash of millions of angry Islamophobic French citizens.

Absolutely sad :(, I wish peace upon them!

Tek said:

I hate to say that in the near term, we might be seeing more and more of this. In the immediate future, violence may be neccesary to stop violence. I don't like it, but there may not be a better option.

We certainly can't allow barbarism like this to go unchecked, yet the warrior perspective from which it arises is as neccesary to human rights as third grade is to fourth and fifth grade. The passion and the drive and commitment to a cause is healthy and must be kept, while the murder and rape and slavery is unhealthy and must be discarded.



Another thing is, freedom of speech isn't inherent to humanity. Nor is the equal value upon all human life, which I think most of us share here. Such things literally don't exist in the world of the fundamentalist, not like they exist for us.

These things come from a rational, worldcentric perspective. Which is why free speech has only been around for a few hundred years; rationality has not been the dominant force in human endeavors for very long. There's only one way I can think of to permenantly end these violent conflicts, and it is to move people upward through the stages of cognitive growth. Warriors must become conformists, then sometime after that they'll be able to live from the standpoint of reason.




I'd be willing to bet that for them, it's more like slandering the King, or God. A lot of people have died for this over the centuries. The problem we have now is that modern society lives by different rules than barbarians, and the two are next-door neighbors.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on everything except we all value all human life. But seriously. But all kidding aside I don't value all life important. A human beings life loses value if you do horrible things. And society has taught me that Women and children are worth more than Men. After all, it's ALWAYS women and children first right? And don't be a hypocrite, none of us truly value all life the same. If two men, both the same age, same financial class, and similar lives, were going die and you could only save one of them who would you choose? The only catch is that the 2nd man Murdered 47 people and showed no remorse. Who would you save?

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Reports-of-Grenade-Attack-on-French-Mosque-20150108-0005.html

The anti-Muslim backlash is happening almost immediately :/

When will people ever realize that KILLING can never ever be a solution to anything!
So they got mad at people making a comic about their religion and they kill them? Incredible example set.

I wish there happens an alien invasion, so humanity unites...

If at any point in your life you think that (a) censorship is good, (b) killing is good, and (c) the intersection of the two is just fantastic, then congratulations, as you've just descended into the lowest depths of low the human race has to offer. Collect your complimentary Hitler mustache and armband and proceed directly to hell, do not pass GO, do not collect $200.

The individuals involved with this are beyond scum. They're like the scum's scum. What's that even called? Double-scum? Scumception?

I don't think you have to be Muslim specifically to be a psychopath, so it is my opinion that the thread title may be a tad harsh; but don't be confused with my saying it's a tad harsh and my caring. Regardless, people are seldom reminded that weapons can be made in a garage by hand or bought illegally for no regard for the laws laid down. I'm actually thankful that this wasn't as bad as it could have been. Don't get the wrong idea, but I much prefer criminals to using firearms over fertilizer.

Voltaire is shaking his head in his grave right about now.

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

Gardevoir the Dragon Slayer said:

Tbh It was only a matter of time before some nut job attacked Charlie Hebdo, sadly it will give other copy cats ideas.

Hats of to the French people for how they are reacting, having a protest and saying screw you terrorists.

Click to expand...

And that's just it, actually. Only a matter of time. It just shows the type of world that live in where such a thing could be considered inevitable. I'd like to point out, actually that this wouldn't even be the first time that they have faced danger due to their arguably offensive portrayals of Muslim culture--their office was fire-bombed back in 2011 over their portrayal Islamic prophet Mohammed. I'd like to stress that this does signal that I think we should condone the actions of these men or the implication that our freedom of speech should be hindered out of fear of violence.

Aphrodite said:

Rest in peace to those who were killed, but my thoughts are with those who are currently scared for the backlash of millions of angry Islamophobic French citizens.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is going to be a huge problem, and with the slaying of the unarmed police officer, I can see officials being slow to aid followers of Islam who have proven themselves to be in real danger. Only time can tell if that prediction will come true, but considering the entire world is so eager to use what these men did as a means to judge all Muslim/Islamic
peoples.

MCMXCIX said:

I agree with you on everything except we all value all human life. But seriously. But all kidding aside I don't value all life important. A human beings life loses value if you do horrible things. And society has taught me that Women and children are worth more than Men. After all, it's ALWAYS women and children first right? And don't be a hypocrite, none of us truly value all life the same. If two men, both the same age, same financial class, and similar lives, were going die and you could only save one of them who would you choose? The only catch is that the 2nd man Murdered 47 people and showed no remorse. Who would you save?

Click to expand...

I don't think it is so black and gray as you are making it out to be. If both of those men were strangers, I couldn't choose either of them to save. Sure, the one who murdered 47 people with no remorse seems like the obvious choice to let die here, but can you really say that he is? What if that man is a soldier? Sure, murder is specified as unlawful, but what if he was conscripted into the army and they then begun an illegal offensive and he was merely killing before he got killed? I could explain the example in more depth, but I think it should suffice.

Or what if that person that murdered 47 people is a relative, or a friend of mine? If I was particularly close with them I'd be inclined to let the other person die simply because of my fondness with the murderer. Let's say they were strangers though. There might be a number of things that make me more inclined to choose one person over the other; what if the murderer was more attractive? Or what if he promised to give me a bunch of cash or some other reward for saving him as opposed to the other guy? What if the other guy looked at me funny? Hell, maybe I'm just curious and want to sit down with the murderer and find out every last detail about his slayings?

Warsmith said:

I don't think you have to be Muslim specifically to be a psychopath, so it is my opinion that the thread title may be a tad harsh; but don't be confused with my saying it's a tad harsh and my caring. Regardless, people are seldom reminded that weapons can be made in a garage by hand or bought illegally for no regard for the laws laid down. I'm actually thankful that this wasn't as bad as it could have been. Don't get the wrong idea, but I much prefer criminals to using firearms over fertilizer.

Click to expand...

I agree about the thread title it seems a bit harsh for my tastes. Sure they were Muslim and sure they were psychopaths, but there are plenty of the former that would never do such a thing and plenty of the latter that would easily do such a thing without being Muslim.

That aside, while it wasn't as bad as it could have been, could it not have been better? As I mentioned above Charlie Hebdo was no stranger to being attacked due to the offensive nature of the satire that they produce. They had increased security, but clearly it was not enough to protect its employees. They were supposed to be under some sort of police watch, but the first police officers on scene were unarmed and as a result died like sheep. I'm not saying it would have gone any different had the officers been armed, but its always a possibility that if stronger precautions were taken this could have ended with much less blood shed. I'm also not saying this would be the best solution, but from what I understand gun control is relatively tight over there. What if, the employees were licensed to carry a firearm and trained in the use of it?

A criminal who is intent on murdering someone is not going to care one bit if they obtained a gun legally or not--in fact, they're likely to obtain it illegally so that it doesn't have any traces back to them should they need to abandon it. A citizen who is trying to protect themselves, on the other hand, will most definitely care if the gun they have is obtained legally--they are not a criminal, and they do not want to be charged with illegal possession of a firearm where even if they use it to save their life, still could get them in trouble. Just something to think about.

Archer99 said:

It's just awfull. Like, We can't say something about Mahoma because we're going to get killed???, What kind of world is this???.
If we can joke about somethings... We're going to end pretty bad. Something like that happened down here a couple of months ago, With the Top Gear issue on Argentina. People doesn't have sense of humor, That's sad. I understand those jokes but... When people uses jokes to make bullying and those things, It's alright... Isn't it?? < That's sarcasm.

Click to expand...

In some primarily Islamic countries, freedom speech is strictly forbidden - even drawing Muhammad gets you thrown in prison. The drastic change of culture in other areas like France where freedom of speech is allowed and bashing their holy prophet is considered fine, to these extremist Muslims, this reaction is the only appropriate one to 'avenge' Muhammad from being dishonored. I'm not by any means justifying this cruel, horrible occurrence and these people deserve to die for the terror they caused. Unfortunately this puts even more of a bad aura around Muslims, who actually regard murder as one of the worst sins. I'm not religious myself, but my parents are Islamic, and things have been rough for them, especially when events like this occur. During 9/11, their closest friends sent them emails and messages making sure they were okay, as some communities lashed out towards Muslims in their area. Similar responses probably will emerge due to this.



Rest in peace to those that were unfortunately killed. I hope they are able to find whoever did this and punish them accordingly.

The 'Je suis Charlie' movement bugs me because although they're rallying for press freedom and what not, they're also actively identifying with a magazine that has a proud history of defiling Islam, which is something they need to consider regardless of their views on freedom of speech. I can't help but wonder if this is yet another way to rally for one thing while simultaneously expressing a disregard for Muslims.

I really liked what Jon had to say on the issue. I disagree with him and his writing staff occasionally, but I think he nailed it here.

Aphrodite said:

The 'Je suis Charlie' movement bugs me because although they're rallying for press freedom and what not, they're also actively identifying with a magazine that has a proud history of defiling Islam, which is something they need to consider regardless of their views on freedom of speech. I can't help but wonder if this is yet another way to rally for one thing while simultaneously expressing a disregard for Muslims.

Click to expand...

I don't think any religious group is or should be free from ridicule. They made fun of Islam, and Christianity, and Judaism, and a lot of other things. That's the nature of being a satirist.

I'll retract my comment until there's a more measurable impact of this incident. But there's a fine line between ridicule and, say, inviting the prophet to edit the magazine.

This incident was wrong on so many levels, and the perps are not doing Islam or muslims any favor. Am gutted to hear Islamophobia in France has gotten so extreme just because some idiots decided to ditch their brain and go on a so-called jihad.

I live in the largest muslim country in the world and am a muslim myself, but the surge of Je Suis Charlie sentiments here are surprisingly large considering the circumstances. "The core tenets of Islam are of peace and tolerance" seems to be the general consensus; I personally think that retaliating with gunfire is a really butthurt thing to do, especially against satire.

In closing, a friend's thought, which I found incredibly moving:

What's troubling, in addition to the attacks themselves, is that France has had some issues with Islamophobia and Islamic religious expression in the past, such as the burqa ban fiasco a few years ago, and this will only make it worse and enflame cultural relations.

Terrible tragedy, no one should have to suffer to any extent for simply thinking. Humour, in any form, should be celebrated.

It's truly unfortunate for the Islamic people that their religion is so deeply stained in the minds of ignorant Westerners such as myself and many of you on the forums. I don't know the first thing about Islam and the Islamic way of life, but I do know that radicalists of its religion have and will continue to reach to the absolute worst extremes to prove a point - either to themselves, their people, or their outside world.