Paris attack: Who is responsible?

Paris attack: Who is responsible?

Introduction:

January 7, 2015, Paris witnessed barbarity and ruthless killing in the name of vengeance. Gunmen or more specifically, terrorists claiming to be followers of Islam, stormed into the the office of Charlie Hebdo's satirical magazine and killed 12 people brutally. This is not the first time when Charlie's weekly was attacked. Back in November 2011 there was firebomb attacks on the headquarters of his office. Threats were given by mad extremists to yet another bunch of mad cartoonists who abuse and offend people through their cartoons. Who is actually responsible for this barbarism and loss of 12 lives?

Terrorists are responsible:

1. Media has the freedom of expression and though they misuse the freedom to offend religion and beliefs of people, nothing justifies killing of people. It is terrorism and fanaticism and everyone should condemn the act for the sake of humanity. These terrorists are no friends of any religion. They are the biggest enemies of peace and humanity, have crossed every limits of barbarism, and should be punished.

2. There is no vengeance in Islam and those hypocrites who shouted out after the killing that they avenged Prophet Muhammed are actually nowhere near to the teachings of the Prophet. The greatest of prophets of Islam does not need mere humans to take revenge for him. Islam teaches tolerance and these extremists know nothing of the same yet call themselves follower of Prophet.

3. Protesting against the media and condemning the obscene caricatures of Hebdo could be done in a peaceful way too. There is no denying that his cartoons are indescribably offending to our Prophet and raised anger everywhere not only amongst the Muslims but other religions as well (it's not only Islam that Cynic Charlie offends) but such acts of terrorism are not justified in any way.

4. Freedom of press and democracy cannot be stabbed to silence by these means of inhuman acts. Intimidation by religious extremists and politicians is at its height and these terrorists are born out of it. They might take a stand that their act is justified given that they were offended by the press' publication and they did not agree to it. But you do not need to agree to everything they write and publish and power doesn't give you the authority to punish them for what they wrote or drew.

5. Islamic minorities in France are living under unpleasant situation with Islamophobia getting them discriminated. To add to their despair, their economic crisis makes them easy target to intimidation by the so called jihadists. But instead of resorting to violence these people can protest in other peaceful ways where there would be more space for sensible discussions and that would yield effective results too.

Charlie Hebdo shares the partnership in crime:

1. The role of the media is to bring forth the truth, free from intimidation and fear. Lampooning shariah laws and offending a religion is what media do when they have nothing else left to cover their pages. Without thinking of the consequences or the kind of response such offensive cartoons could draw, Hebdo continued the business of hurting sentiments of people worldwide. This is not meant to defend the terrorists or their act of terrorism but there is no denying that such content is like oil on fire for those already ready to kill and die intimidated by the leaders of the terror groups.

2. According to Florence Noiville, a French novelist, there is a keyword in France - laicite - which means public life should be separated from religion. Does this rule not apply to the French media? Terrorists hurt physically in the name of religion. We can them hypocrites. Media cartoonists like Hebdo hurts the sentiments of millions intentionally in the name of democracy and freedom of press. We now call this strategy. How are people like Hebdo any different from those like ISIS? Both are ruthless in different ways.

3. Other than the followers of these terror groups, every Muslim condemns the atrocities and fundamentalism of these extremists. The terror act was condemned by Muslims across the globe. Did Charlie's media think of the sentiments of these people when they drew the obscene cartoons of one of the greatest prophets of a religion? Common people like us could get angry over it and condemn the cartoons with words but what else had Charlie expected from these terrorists? Opponents would call this a strategy to gain sympathy and outspread messages of Islamophobia - we expect Charlie to be expecting this too.

4. Meaningless and obscene cartoons of Charlie Hebdo are just meant to anger people of a religion and they have nothing in it that calls for freedom of press of democracy. They are drawn just to offend people. Is that so difficult to stop? If we cannot expect sensible media people to understand that their content is hurting people's sentiments, there is no expecting these fanatics to feel the pain of people.

Conclusion:

For Hebdo, it's just a cartoon he created one fine day when he was retarder and had no news to play around with. His cartoons were failing to get attention so he decided to play safe with the matter that would get him into the limelight for no good reason. Muslims across the globe were offended (mission accomplished) but then came the unexpected blow from another bunch of retards. Both of these groups insulted the Prophet. More than the cartoonist, these terrorists offended his teachings. Our heart goes out to the families of the victims of this massacre.