Charlie Hebdo: Gun attack on French magazine kills 12

Oh no. This is terrible. Jeebus... this is ridiculous.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30710883

 

Goes to add that Americans are not the only ones who kill by use of firearms

 

What an utterly asinine point to make about a serious issue.

 

What worries me is how this will fuel the NF in france even more.

In the past week france has had pro and atni-islamic rallies and a controversial book release about a french islamic state.

looks like le pen will be in the running for elections.

 

Here's a summary of the background on the issue:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/what-charlie-hebdo-terrorists-target-4934843

 

RiP to the fallen.

Been watching the footage on the news here.

 

It is a tragedy that so many died over a disagreement.

Condolences to the families of those involved.

LFD

 

Wow, that is horrendous. Condolences to the families and friends of those lost.

 

RIP to the victims and condolences to the families.

However, I think this could have been prevented had the publication in question either heeded their own government’s warnings to tone down their Islam related caricatures etc, and/or took serious measures to protect staff that had already been threatened and previously had their office burned down.

Freedom of Speech is all good and well, but it is common sense that if you publish information which large swathes of society might find offensive on religious/cultural grounds, particularly taking in to account France’s sizable Muslim population, France’s repressive colonial history towards Muslims and the current and protracted discord with French Muslim youth, you should expect that out of all the people you offend some might be violent, extremists, psychopaths, unhinged, etc, and may come looking for blood.

There is more detailed and general info here:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/924410e2-9664-11e4-a40b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3O9brDG1Y

and

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e3ccd058-9663-11e4-a40b-00144feabdc0.html#slide0

 

Or maybe we should consider them brave for not giving in to people who want to control our thoughts with violence?

 

There are those rare times when I wish they gave the option of multiple thanks. This is one.

 

Damn.

 

They could have been equally brave and alive had they taken the threats seriously and had adequate security, particularly taking in to account their past experiences and that of others involved in similar activities. It is common sense, no?

 

This sums up my thoughts exactly...Freedom of the press is an important part of our democratic society and the day that we allow censorship from intimidation and threats of violence..

I agree this was rather tasteless and not a great idea with the current political climate and this was mentioned on LBC this afternoon and it was mentioned that the current issue has a graphic image of the Virgin Mary giving birth on the cover and I don't see many Catholic's screaming for a holy war... If something offends me it doesn't not give me the right to resort to violence, I will either ignore it or go complain/protest in the correct way. Even if (and its not!!) justified tell that to the families of the innocent police officers guarding the building or others not involved in the cartoons of Mohammed.

The Muslim community need to act to stop this extremist fundamentalism in the midst and join the outcry, This is really becoming the most sensitive issue in European politics IMO partially after the racist anti Muslim protests in Germany this week which attract people in the thousands.

 

They had permanent police protection since the firebombing in 2011. The officers protecting them were amongst the dead. I don't know if they were gendarmes or not.

I don't know what else they could have done. According to reports, there were no recent threats. You can't hire armed PMC operatives to guard your office in France.

 

Yeah I'm watching this on tv now, horrific news.

 

Speaking to the issue of not bending over and giving into absurd expectations of these cowardly militant Islamic terrorists....


“I don’t feel as though I’m killing someone with a pen. I’m not putting lives at risk. When activists need a pretext to justify their violence, they always find it.”


http://www.theatlantic.com/internat.../charlie-hebdos-defiance-paris-attack/384286/

 

I did say "adequate protection".

If you go on liveleak you can see some footage, not very pleasant and if its still up, that you wont see on news sites etc. Including what looks like 'gendarmes' getting shot on the street across from the offices.

Perhaps it is my ignorance, but these are the questions that come to my mind:

- Were there security checks for people coming in and out of the offices?

- Were the entry and exit points secured?

- What sort of protection allows masked armed gunmen in to the building they are attempting to protect?

- Was this alleged protection even aware masked gunmen had entered until after the victims were murdered?

- How is it that the protection only encountered the gunmen after they murdered their victims and escaped on to the street and then got shot themselves?

I appreciate there may be much more info which we don't have that may shed light on the above questions, but it really looks like the protection they had was just for comfort/piece of mind and nowhere near adequate.

Also, I cant access it now, but I think the first FT link I posted earlier did mention recent threats.

 

2 officers as adequate protection when there is no threat made in a country with a public police force.

to be honest, this attack is like someone attacking the Onion, SNL or Mad for publishing some satire published 2 years ago. its ridiculous.

Its a bunch of radical nuts who don't like any criticism of their religion in a country that has growing distaste for their religion. they've put other peaceful followers in it by doing this and they, the shooters, will probably go with death by cop

 

Perhaps, not sure what doctrine you base this comment on, but threats were previously made and carried out. Todays events have proven, protection they had was not fit for purpose.