Charlie Hebdo trial in Paris

biko

With the main perpetrators dead, the court will focus on those accused of aiding the assaults on the Charlie Hebdo offices and a kosher supermarket that killed 17.

Over at least the next two months, before the glare of the world’s media and under tight security, the court is expected to meticulously examine three harrowing days that traumatized France, starting with a daytime assault on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical magazine that Islamic extremists targeted after it published cartoons lampooning Islam.

The killings were followed by a string of deadly jihadist attacks, culminating with assaults in November that year in and around Paris that killed 130 people, vaulting France into a yearslong state of emergency.

Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, the two brothers who carried out the Charlie Hebdo attack, died in a shootout with the police north of Paris two days later.

https://charliehebdo.fr
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/02/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-trial-france.html
Charlie Hebdo frontpage

Chudwick Boseman

Imagine thinking you have the right to slaughter people because someone drew cartoons of Mohammad?

LessOutragePlz

Chudwick Boseman wrote: »

Imagine thinking you have the right to slaughter people because someone drew cartoons of Mohammad?

That's what religion can do to some people absolute insanity of it.

Chudwick Boseman

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

That's what religion can do to some people absolute insanity of it.

Seems mostly Islam though. Don't see too many Buddhists driving trucks down European streets killing people.

Gregor Samsa

Chudwick Boseman wrote: »

Seems mostly Islam though. Don't see too many Buddhists driving trucks down European streets killing people.

Not in Europe, but:

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22356306
https://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/17/world/asia/sri-lanka-bodu-bala-sena-profile/index.html
https://www.pulitzer.org/files/2014/international-reporting/reuters/04reuters2014.pdf

Anyway, that's besides the point. It's obviously ludicrous that people think that they have the right to kill others because of religious traditions or beliefs.

RWCNT

Why only now, 5 years later?

Have their accomplices only recently been identified or something like that?

Blacktie.

Chudwick Boseman wrote: »

Seems mostly Islam though. Don't see too many Buddhists driving trucks down European streets killing people.

Have you heard of Myanmar?

Chudwick Boseman

Thousands of these bastards all over Europe.

Gregor Samsa

RWCNT wrote: »

Why only now, 5 years later?

Have their accomplices only recently been identified or something like that?

It often takes time to build evidence before a trial. These guys are being charged with assisting the shooters - it's not like they were caught red handed or on CCTV at the attacks.

WrenBoy

All that for this !

suicide_circus

In before "they brought it on themselves".

RandomName2

Chudwick Boseman wrote: »

Imagine thinking you have the right to slaughter people because someone drew cartoons of Mohammad?

Interestingly, it is sacrilegious to draw cartoons of anyone in Islam.

Or more specifically, the depiction in art, of anything that has a soul. Destruction of art depicting humans, by Muslims, has been around as long as the religion. Getting outraged about depictions of Mohammad in isolation actually goes against Islamic teaching.

Gregor Samsa

RandomName2 wrote: »

Interestingly, it is sacrilegious to draw cartoons of anyone in Islam.

Or more specifically, the depiction in art, of anything that has a soul. Destruction of art depicting humans, by Muslims, has been around as long as the religion. Getting outraged about depictions of Mohammad in isolation actually goes against Islamic teaching.

It's not as cut and dry as that. The Koran doesn't prohibit figurative depictions at all. There are a few hadith that do so, but it's mainly a tradition rather than a core tenet.

Figurative depictions of Muhammad are fairly common in Iran, for instance. Some households would have posters depicting him. Here's a public mural depicting Muhammad that was erected in Tehran in 2008:



https://news.artnet.com/art-world/the-secret-islamic-devotional-art-that-depicts-muhammad-217729

With the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, it was more than just the depiction of a living being or Muhammad specifically. There was the perception of disrespect to him and Islam in the content of the cartoons - they certainly weren't devotional images. It goes without saying - but I feel the need to say it -, this doesn't justify the reprehensible criminal reaction in any way, shape or form. People from all religions get pretty worked up when their particular faith is disrespected - what no one should do is kill people for it.

As usual, though you can't take the narrow beliefs and actions of the lunatic fringe and paste them on the masses. Extremists gonna extreme.

nthclare

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

It's not as cut and dry as that. The Koran doesn't prohibit figurative depictions at all. There are a few hadith that do so, but it's mainly a tradition rather than a core tenet.

Figurative depictions of Muhammad are fairly common in Iran, for instance. Some households would have posters depicting him. Here's a public mural depicting Muhammad that was erected in Tehran in 2008:



https://news.artnet.com/art-world/the-secret-islamic-devotional-art-that-depicts-muhammad-217729

With the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, it was more than just the depiction of a living being or Muhammad specifically. There was the perception of disrespect to him and Islam in the content of the cartoons - they certainly weren't devotional images. It goes without saying - but I feel the need to say it -, this doesn't justify the reprehensible criminal reaction in any way, shape or form. People from all religions get pretty worked up when their particular faith is disrespected - what no one should do is kill people for it.

As usual, though you can't take the narrow beliefs and actions of the lunatic fringe and paste them on the masses. Extremists gonna extreme.

The Shia Muslims are note tolerent of art and philosophy than the hard line salafism bints who are monsters.

Research salafism.

Regular Sunni and Shia Muslims are ok, but it's these salafist bints who are interested in slaughter and destruction

Gregor Samsa

nthclare wrote: »

The Shia Muslims are note tolerent of art and philosophy than the hard line salafism bints who are monsters.

Research salafism.

Regular Sunni and Shia Muslims are ok, but it's these salafist bints who are interested in slaughter and destruction

You're 100% right of course. I'm well aware of Salafism, it's highly extremist bent, and the attempts it has made and is making to present itself as "true Islam" (specifically by Saudi Arabia), both inside the traditional Islamic world and outside it. They're part of the lunatic fringe I referred to. My response was to the poster who presented Islam as a monolith on this matter.

biko

Wahhabism was founded by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.
Today his teachings are the official, state-sponsored form of Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia.

As a rule, all Wahhabis are Salafis but not all Salafis are Wahhabis.
Saudi Sunnis are Wahhabis and thus Salafis.




I am old enough to remember when we didn't have to know these things in Europe...

Gregor Samsa

I have an elderly in-law who is a very, very conservative Catholic. After the Charlie Hebdo massacre, she went off on one, saying that it was the cartoonist's fault, and that people can't "disrespect religion" and think that there won't be repercussions.

I pointed out that she had beef for dinner that day, and that some Hindu extremists in India were killing people for eating beef or farming cattle. I asked if she thought that she deserved death for having consumed what others regard as a sacred animal worthy of killing for to defend religious sensibilities. Turns out she didn't regard Hinduism as a valid religion at all, so the comparison - and hypocrisy - went totally over her head.

WrenBoy

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I have an elderly in-law who is a very, very conservative Catholic. After the Charlie Hebdo massacre, she went off on one, saying that it was the cartoonist's fault, and that people can't "disrespect religion" and think that there won't be repercussions.

I've heard many christians express they would be envious of the "strength" or influence islam seems to wield in the West in the way it dissuades or at the least gives people/media pause before talking about or criticising islam publicly.

GT89

Chudwick Boseman wrote: »

Seems mostly Islam though. Don't see too many Buddhists driving trucks down European streets killing people.

Very true

biko

A tangent is the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons attack earlier in 2012.

Munir Awad, Omar Abdallah Aboelazm, Munir Ben Mohamed Dhahri and Sabhi Ben Mohamed Zalouti had planned to kill as many as they could,
but thankfully was arrested before they could kill anyone.
Three were citizens of Sweden, and one was Tunisian.

RWCNT

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I have an elderly in-law who is a very, very conservative Catholic. After the Charlie Hebdo massacre, she went off on one, saying that it was the cartoonist's fault, and that people can't "disrespect religion" and think that there won't be repercussions.

My mother said this to me the day after the attack. She also told me that she approached a woman in a hijab at the supermarket and told her "Well done!". She's good value my old one.

TheBlackPill

RWCNT wrote: »

My mother said this to me the day after the attack. She also told me that she approached a woman in a hijab at the supermarket and told her "Well done!". She's good value my old one.

seems par for the course from the generation that tolerated the likes of the laundries and an effective totalitarian clerical state

Feisar

TheBlackPill wrote: »

seems par for the course from the generation that tolerated the likes of the laundries and an effective totalitarian clerical state

Was thinking along these lines before I came to your and others posts above. The things we allowed the church to do to us as a society is nothing short of shameful.

TheBlackPill

Feisar wrote: »

Was thinking along these lines before I came to your and others posts above. The things we allowed the church to do to us as a society is nothing short of shameful.

For all its faults as a human institution its still better than Wahabism by a logarithmic scale. Compare and contrast the way Jesus dealt with sinners to Mohammed

Feisar

TheBlackPill wrote: »

For all its faults as a human institution its still better than Wahabism by a logarithmic scale. Compare and contrast the way Jesus dealt with sinners to Mohammed

Funny, a google search throws up a wiki page for the death toll of Christianity however so such page for Islam.

TheBlackPill

Feisar wrote: »

Funny, a google search throws up a wiki page for the death toll of Christianity however so such page for Islam.

The information is out there. have seen quotes of 200million dead during the Mughal conquests of India

James Brown

TheBlackPill wrote: »

For all its faults as a human institution its still better than Wahabism by a logarithmic scale. Compare and contrast the way Jesus dealt with sinners to Mohammed

And what atrocities have been and are carried out in his name?
Its like comparing horrible with obscene.

TheBlackPill

Bowie wrote: »

And what atrocities have been and are carried out in his name?
Its like comparing horrible with obscene.

Enthusiastic participant in all the bad stuff, inspiring followers to this day, versus guy who was the embodient of good, who paid the ultimate sacrifice

DelaneyIn

KARACHI, Pakistan (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of people protested across Pakistan on Friday against French magazine Charlie Hebdo’s reprinting of cartoons mocking the Prophet Mohammad, chanting “Death to France” and calling for boycotts of French products.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-protest-cartoons/thousands-protest-in-pakistan-over-reprinting-of-mohammad-cartoons-in-france-idUSKBN25V2KJ?utm_source=reddit.com

Keep letting these people move in they seem perfectly reasonable and stable.

biko

There hasn't really been much movement in the trial so far.

The trial has been delayed by almost four months because of the coronavirus pandemic.
In March, the presiding judge said France's lockdown measures had made it impossible to bring together "all the parties, witnesses and experts under the necessary sanitary conditions".

The alleged accomplices are accused of obtaining weapons and providing logistical support for the attack on Charlie Hebdo's office on 7 January 2015, as well as the subsequent attacks on a police officer and the Hyper Cacher supermarket.

Three of the suspects are believed to have disappeared in northern Syria and Iraq and will be tried in absentia. Some reports suggest at least two of them were killed in bombing campaigns against the Islamic State group (IS). All three remain the subject of international arrest warrants.

There are about 200 plaintiffs in the trial and survivors of the attacks are expected to testify.

igCorcaigh

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1309440048513912837?s=19