A French satirical weekly publication found itself a target Wednesday just hours after publishing anti-ISIS tweets, and on the heels of an issue that featured French Michel Houellebecq’s book, “Soumission” (“Submission”). The book features a dystopian picture of a not-too-distant future France ruled by an Islamic State.
The issue hit stands early Wednesday, and within hours, 12 were dead after gunmen opened fire at the Charlie Hebdo offices, armed with Kalashnikovs and a rocket-launcher. Two of the dead were police officers, who exchanged fire with the attackers. They marched out of the offices amid the chaos, triumphantly proclaiming that they had “avenged the prophet!”
This is by no means the first time this publication has been targeted. In 2006, they reprinted Danish cartoons that depicted the Prophet Mohammed. In 2011, they were firebombed for publishing another such cartoon. They received threats after another cartoon was published in 2012. The death threats have been extended to their editor, Stephanie Charbonnier, who currently resides under police protection.
British Prime Minister David Cameron spoke out to condemn the terrorist action, saying,
“The murders in Paris are sickening. We stand with the French people in the fight against terror and defending the freedom of the press.”
My response to that is twofold:
First, I think that this is exactly what we should be defending when it comes to freedom of the press. While publishing cartoons isn’t necessarily considered hard news, being willing to risk that kind of backlash is something that is sorely lacking from the public sphere in America. Remember the story from New England last year? A letter to the mayor resulted in an “offensive” sign featuring bacon being removed from public display. In Paris, multiple terrorist attacks aren’t keeping Charlie Hebdo from publishing what it pleases.
And second, it’s all well and good that PM Cameron “condemns” this attack. Everyone should condemn this attack, and others like it, because it is a heinous action carried out for heinous reasons. But when are they – and other nations such as the United States, who regularly “condemn” the actions of terrorists – going to take a step past passive “condemnation” and do something?
Does PM Cameron actually believe that those responsible for the attack will read his Twitter feed, realize that he is displeased, and think twice before committing another such act? No. Not likely. Rather, as has been the case up to this point, they will see that tearful public statements and carefully worded social media hits are going to be the only repercussions to their actions, and carry out business as usual.
