So we're all absolutely certain that the murderers were Islamic terrorists, hmm?

Well, I wasn't there.

But according to the many witnesses cited in different newspapers, the lunatics screamed Allah Akbar and something about vengeance for Mohamed.

NOTHING is certain, as anybody nowadays can cry Allah-u-Akbar but it really looks thelike

Are you implying they might have been chemtrail spraying Freemasons?

no no no, just agents of the CANARD ENCHAINE

Oh, well that's cut and dry, then.

"Hey! We avenged the Prophet Muhammad! We killed Charlie Hebdo," one of the men shouted in French, according to a video shot from a nearby building and broadcast on French TV. Other video showed two gunmen in black at a crossroads who appeared to fire down one of the streets. A cry of "Allahu akbar!" — Arabic for "God is great"— could be heard among the gunshots.

from:
http://news.yahoo.com/police-11-dead...113741279.html

Pending them being caught, draw your own PC conclusions

Link to a video of the "gunmen" with fairly clear audio

I conclude that several people have been murdered by as-yet unapprehended murderers.

Why would someone cries it out? Just for the fun of it? A witness was told by one of the murderer to tell the newspapers that this was from Al Qaida.

No, we can't prove it. But frankly, why one would pretend to be a fanatic and kill 12 people? To make the fanatics look bad? I think they already covered that part.

Well, that's all the evidence we need, isn't it?

Well, if for any reason they are merely pretending to be islamic Extremists (as you seem to be suggesting), why shouldn't they continue to pretend once arrested?

So what would their arrest reveal that we don't know or not know already?

I'm not suggesting anything, other than we have no idea - none at all - who these murderers are.

No, it isn't. You know that, I know that.

One, There is no absolute reason for killers to pretend to act for an other cause than their own. Second, we have to trust the witnesses.

Believe me, I would prefer (not really, prefer it wouldn't happen at all) to be some other kind of lunatics than the Islamist one but so far, the cumulated proofs are showing this direction.

Your earlier two statements would, however, suggest that the mere act of catching them would clear that question up.

While I find your staunch rejection of logic in favour of political correctness vaguely admirable, there is next to no chance, considering the target is a long-time "enemy" of radicalism, that the people who perpetrated this were not religious extremists. They did it knowing full well they were going to be caught, and will likely finish in some kind of glorious shoot-out when the police finally catch up with them.

In fact, if the people who did are not found to be religious extremists from the Islamic religion I will personally send you a wedge of Godminster.

No information on the identity of the terrorists. What is known is that they speak clear french (i.e without accent), that they were very well prepared and everything was planned ahead (wednesday morning is when the whole editorial board of Charlie Hebdo meets). There was no sign of panic, they were determined. Analysts of police said that they have probably received a military training or were on field in armed conflicts given the modus of operation.

Edit: Holland announced that Thursday 8 january 2015 is national mourning day in France.

I just heard on the radio that the police have raided an appartment in Paris but made no arrests.

So it would at least seem that they are not entirely clueless, even if they haven't yet caught the individuals.

Should magazines respect Islamist fanatics more than other fanatics? Or what kind of respect they lacked in, precisely?

Olygirl simply pointed out the fact that it is only the minority of Muslims who are radical and will easily resort to violence to defend their beliefs. Her statement in no way supports a theory that it would only be the small minority of Muslims that would take offense if every newspaper were to publish that cartoon on their front page.

Being offended by something and reacting violently to that offense are two very different things. If every newspaper were to put those cartoons on their front page, I'm quite certain that it would offend more than just the minority of Muslims that constitute the jihadists. I'm sure there would be plenty of non-violent Muslims (the majority of them) who would also be offended but would not be willing to resort to violence because of it.

But I think that the freedom of speech should come with some degree of responsibility, particularly since it is often used solely as a means to offend or "get a laugh" -- as was perhaps (or most likely) the case with the cartoons published by this newspaper. What else could their intentions have been?

Well, of course no one deserved to lose their lives because of these cartoons, but at the same time, I do think it's time that all sides start taking more moral responsibility for their actions, because if we really do want peace, then perhaps we should consider acting accordingly. I don't want my little boy to grow up in a world in which the tensions between the Muslim world and the non-Muslim world have escalated into a full-blown third world war, particularly if it was in part due to our own inability to understand the fact that, regardless of it being right or wrong, there are some people out there who are willing to kill on behalf of their religion and to defend what they hold as sacred. Despite how much we might disagree with that kind of belief system, if we don't respect the fact that it does (and probably always did and always will) exist, then it's just a vicious circle, and there will never be peace between the Muslim world and the non-Muslim world.

Simply because we are allowed the freedom of speech doesn't mean that we should always take the opportunity to abuse it.

Absolutely nothing can justifiy this violence and murder. The journalists at Charlie Hebdo knew the risks they were taking and Charb the director clearly said "I prefer to die standing, than live kneeling". They were the defenders of the right to speak and publish. They are paying today a high price....so that WE all here can still exercise our rights for freedom. Charlie Hebdo mocked equally christians, jews, muslims and right-extremists.