French weekly publishes Mohammad cartoons
French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad today, a move criticised by the French authorities, who sent riot police to protect the magazine's offices.
Issues of the magazine hit news stands with a front cover showing an Orthodox Jew pushing a turbaned figure in a wheelchair with several caricatures of the Prophet on its inside pages, including some of him naked.
The front page cartoon had the wheelchair-bound figure saying "You mustn't mock" under the headline "Untouchable 2", a reference to a hugely popular French movie about a paralysed rich white man and his black assistant.
The publication came amid widespread outrage over a short film, made with private funds in the United States, that mocks the Prophet and has ignited days of sometimes deadly protests in the Arab world, Africa, Asia and some Western countries.
French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius criticised the move as a provocation and said he had ordered security beefed up at French diplomatic offices in the Muslim world.
Charlie Hebdo's Paris offices were fire bombed last November after it published a mocking caricature of Mohammad. In 2005, Danish cartoons of the Prophet sparked a wave of violent protests across the Muslim world that killed at least 50 people.
Many Muslims consider any representation of Allah or the Prophet Mohammad offensive.
"Is it relevant and intelligent in this environment to add fuel to the fire? The answer is no," Fabius told France Info radio. "I'm very worried... and when I saw this I immediately issued instructions for special security precautions to be taken in all the countries where it could be a problem."
The government has called for restraint over the cartoons, restating the principles of free speech in France and urging those shocked by the images to take action through the courts.
Muslim leaders in France, which has Europe's largest Muslim population, have appealed for calm.
As outrage over the anti-Muslim film continues to fuel violence and protests across the Islamic world, French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said the authorities had rejected a request to hold a march against the film in Paris.
"There is no reason for us to allow conflicts that do not concern France to enter our country," Ayrault told RTL radio.
Social media had circulated calls for a protest on Saturday against the film, after police arrested about 150 people who tried to take part in an unauthorised protest near the U.S. Embassy in Paris last week.
Popular Stories
Money has to serve, not to rule - Pope
Update 7 - Bombs kill 3 people, wound...
Updated - Boston bomb suspect 'identified'
Margaret Thatcher dies after stroke
Update 2 - Three missing women found...
Update 2: Gunman held in Rome police...
Investigators scour video, photos for...
Updated: Boston lockdown as bomber hunted
Many dead, injured in huge Texas...
In Discussion
Margaret Thatcher dies after stroke
Almost 500 migrants rescued in 24 hours...
Clashes as France approves gay marriages
More migrants arrive in Lampedusa
Boy, 8, killed in Boston blasts...
EU approves Cyprus bailout plan
England to ban wild animals at circuses
Pope washes feet of young inmates -...
Update 7 - Bombs kill 3 people, wound...
27 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Jay Oatmon
Sep 20th 2012, 09:52
In my view the problem is that a large section of Muslims are simply intolerant of anything modern, and forward thinking is overshadowed by the violent resistance to change (Talibanisation?).
I am sure the mainstream will not adopt anti freedom ideas from those that live by them.
Eventually these arch traditionalist fanatics will simply have to change - there is no other outcome, because the majority of the world favours freedom over restrictions and censorship. Those that don't change will have to shut themselves away from the mainstream world.
Bill Khan
Sep 20th 2012, 13:48
@ Jay Oatmon
Mr. Oatman in fact it is us in the west who will need to change. We live in an isslusionary world believing we have freedom. We are all in debt sir, in Europe young people under the age of 24 have unemployment rates of more than 25%. They want to work but have no freedom to work. Freedom is not only restricted to hurl abuse at the muslims and insult their prophet. freedom is also not restricted to killing innocent babies in the safest place the womb (abortion). And not restricted to inventing lies to go attack another peolpe in an other land and then argue if a million peolpe were killed or half a million and three million displaced.
The world sir is changing and we in the west can no longer hide behind the fig leaf of civilised' inscription.
In fact in the eyes of many across the world that fig leaf is no more. BTW try having a freedom of speech in and around wall street New York and you will know what peeper spray can do to your eyes. And the police baton chatrge will enhance and enlighten you considerably.
We have laws in place against those who deny holocaust. We need to draw up laws that prohibit and criminalise any who insult any religion. Laws against abortion could wait till we become less civilised!
Meanwhile lets be part of this silly game designed deliberately to divert our attention away from the dire economic situation across Europe where a young generation is not free to have any work.
Carmel Ellul
Sep 19th 2012, 21:03
Freedom of expression comes along with the respect of the other party's beliefs and opinion.
Insulting and ridiculing results in the loss of freedom.
Police should not protect such entities that insult and ridicule other's religious beliefs.
They should instead arrest them and close up the source of the media being used.
Robert Callus
Sep 19th 2012, 22:48
Public figures are joked about on a regular basis. Why should religious figures be exempt?
I do not mock religious figures myself because I don't like hurting other people's feelings. However if one has to stop the media from "insulting", where would one draw the line? What if Balotelli or Justin Bieber don't like to be insulted? Should we ban the media joking about them? What if politicians don't like it? Should we ban criticism because they might take it as an insult?
One can criticize the criticism of course. I do think that this film (I saw the trailer) is a completely talentless piece of **** aimed only to insult and provoke. But I also believe the media has every right to show it. And if they need to be protected, protect them.
Robert Callus
Sep 19th 2012, 22:48
Public figures are joked about on a regular basis. Why should religious figures be exempt?
I do not mock religious figures myself because I don't like hurting other people's feelings. However if one has to stop the media from "insulting", where would one draw the line? What if Balotelli or Justin Bieber don't like to be insulted? Should we ban the media joking about them? What if politicians don't like it? Should we ban criticism because they might take it as an insult?
One can criticize the criticism of course. I do think that this film (I saw the trailer) is a completely talentless piece of **** aimed only to insult and provoke. But I also believe the media has every right to show it. And if they need to be protected, protect them.
A. Mifsud
Sep 19th 2012, 19:27
It's all fine unless we don't cross the imaginary line... and the line has been crossed. I'm all out for freedom of expression and speech but this doesn't mean anyone has the right to offend and insult anyone else
George Camilleri
Sep 19th 2012, 17:29
Intentionally offending the core beliefs of others gives freedom of expression a bad name.
S. Vella
Sep 19th 2012, 19:05
No it doesn't. Taking offence on such trivial things is what gives a bad name to religion.
victor caruana
Sep 19th 2012, 15:31
I cannot understand how you can publish cartoons insulting 40% of the world population but you cannot publish the topless picture of a princess nobody cares about, except maybe her husband.....
Pierre John Agius
Sep 19th 2012, 17:48
There is only one big difference. The princess sued and won. The people opposing the caricatures take the law into their hands. They have every right to be offended and I personally think that it is irresponsible for a newspaper to provoke like this. But nonetheless we have law courts and laws and that is where things should be sorted out.
George Batta
Sep 19th 2012, 18:25
I assume you are referring to the 40% who call themselves muslims? Have you ever read the koran? Read it, then maybe you will understand why they need to be insulted.
Charles Grixti
Sep 19th 2012, 19:15
Why should Islam be the only religion that is not lampooned? Christians are all the time and so are Jews (you just need to watch South Park). Is it because Islam will threaten violence and carries it out? Then this begs the question, what kind of religion is this and what exactly does it teach? If the non-Muslims took this seriously enough and took the time to learn what Islam is all about, especially its political aspiration, they might have second thoughts about tolerating the intolerant.
Martin Cassar
Sep 19th 2012, 20:01
@Pierre John Agius.....
Countries takes the law by hands, why blaming a number of offended individuals and getting 1.8 billions on the dock? ! I know of a big country that captured unarmed man and killed him? Perhaps this was to hide the truth about who was actually behind the terrorist attack of 9/11 and use this terror attack as an excuse to steal wealthy Muslim nations?
Martin Cassar
Sep 19th 2012, 14:35
French authority’s condemnation is not a fix. What's actually lacking is a political will that criminalize, bring to justice and punish any body that abuse the freedom of expression to insult others by any way. Similar laws already exist that punish any body questions or point a finger at the Holocausts or the Jews.
Before such political will exists more blood will be shed and the USA or the West in general will be looked at as bunch of hypocrites that use the freedom of expression as a political tool only to justify aggression against Muslim countries. To have no respect to own religion is absolutely ones right, however one has no right to extend this to others. To get offended is human, in doubt? Ask Dr. Gonzi!
I am European to the core and could never be counted as a Holocaust’s denial-my question: would MEPA give me a permission to establish a Kebab outlet with business trade mark [Shoah]? Such exercises are prohibited across Europe not to hurt Jews sentiments and are very much welcomed in Iran. Shall I take it then Iran is a step forward as far as freedom of expressions is concerned?
Can I establish a business that print and sells stickers reading ‘I LOVE HITLER’ or ‘I AM A FASCIST’? Or a sticker reading Can I have any of such stickers on my private car windscreen please? Can I qualifies such stickers as a work of art?
Can anyone please mention just ONE SINGLE COUNTRY where absolute democracy and freedom of expression exists???
Charles Grixti
Sep 19th 2012, 15:30
The BIG difference is Martin that the Holocaust is well documented and took the lives of millions of people. This is a historical fact. Moreover, it was racially motivated - the Germans against the Jews.
One cannot compare this to satirising an ideology or belief or any abstract thought that come from the mind of men. And religion falls into this category. People should not be punished or die because of this. You are mixing apples and oranges here.
As for being offended, people are offended everyday over one thing or another. In Western culture, you reciprocate with an equally offensive retort or you hold your head high and walk away. The next day the sun also rises. It is only with Muslims that 'offending' is such a big deal and an excuse to act reprehensibly. And what is so sad is that because they are courting Muslim voters, our leaders are ready to capitulate and replace our laws and traditions with Sharia laws and customs, which fall very short from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which by the way all the Islamic countries in the UN totally reject).
Robert Callus
Sep 19th 2012, 17:41
As much as I find them repulsive, I believe they should be allowed to deny the Holocaust if they want to.
What the far right are doing is using it as an excuse that THEIR rights are being breached. And, funnily enough denying it anyway. For instance the leader of the NPD party in Germany answers the question on whether the Holocaust happened with "you know that I can't answer you honestly in this country". There, he didn't say it, but he said it!
In my opinion: Let them deny it. Let them enjoy their conspiracy theories. And let the rest us laugh at them.
Pierre John Agius
Sep 19th 2012, 17:55
I do not agree at all with the publication of these caricatures. As a human being I do not agree whatsoever with insults and provocation, be it the Pl , the PN, the Muslims, the Christians.
I also think that there are double standards. There is freedom of expression of the press in publishing whatever but there is no freedom or expression of press when one talks about the Holocoust - a historical truth which scares the hell out of me to know what man is capable of. Still ... why one is good and the other is wrong?
Bottom line, however, is our society build on laws and not on anarchy. The law courts is, therefore, the place to find justice. Otherwise it is anarchy and in anarchy there are only losers.
George Batta
Sep 19th 2012, 18:30
That's right Martin. Everything will be just fine if we can just pass "ONE MORE LAW!!!!" Or maybe 2 or 3, or maybe a million laws.
Bill Khan
Sep 20th 2012, 14:05
@ Charles Grixti
Mr. Grixiti, do the seven women in Afghanistan killed by the NATIO planes whilst gathering firewood have any universal human rights? Or the 83 children killed in a similar bombing on a school in the north of Pakistan have any rights? Do babies being legally murdered (abrotion) have any rights?
The holocaust is well documented yes. But there are scholars who question those documents. They present their own documents but are prevented from doing so under the threat of being arrested.Is that freedom? Christians are forbidden to wear the cross in certain places in Europe or to pray in certain palces. Is this freedom? The onslught against religion has been going on for quite sometime. the christian church has become impotent under this onlsught. Now the attack is on the Muslims. Christianity has bowed down and has exited. The target now is Islam and muslims. The bigger objective is to sow to widen the gulf between the muslims and the christians. Because together they can affect change. Divide these forces and be free to rule.
Charles Grixti
Sep 19th 2012, 14:31
A free society should protect is freedoms and that is freedom to satirise and mock any ideology, belief and public figures. It is part of our Judeo-Christian heritage and our government should champion this above all else instead of making apologies and be ready to silenct and punish its citizens for exercising their rights. If others get offended, be offended and move on. If one is offended and starts riots, violence and killings, then they should call out the army and pull them off the streets and off to prison. Anything less that that is a betrayal of the people and capitualation to religious-political creeds that are incompatible with Human Rights and Democracy.
isabella vella
Sep 19th 2012, 14:30
i would send no protection to the magazine offices at all... anzi charge them for cost of anything the french government incurrs... and put the publisher in a square for all the muslims to see...... this is blatant provocation!!!! had someone published such insensitive photos of Jesus.... i would have felt offended too.... ... if The Times published such photos of Jesus... surely all the church authorities and true catholics would react!!!!
Mary Pace
Sep 19th 2012, 15:40
Agree they are provoking. How would anyone feel if one of his family is insulted. Jesus and Mohammed are sacred to their followers and should not be mocked in anyway moreover as they are superior to any member of our family and such insults are a huge pain to those who believe in Them. These people are asking for great trouble and are risking world peace.
S. Vella
Sep 19th 2012, 19:10
I have every right to offend you. You have every right to choose (key word is choose) whether to get offended or not.
You do not have the right to take action outside of the law.
Everyone and everything is open to mockery (not slander - that is different). Civilised persons do not get offended on such trivial matters.
isabella vella
Sep 19th 2012, 14:25
i would send no protection to the magazine offices at all... anzi charge them for cost of anything the french government incurrs... and put the publisher in a square for all the muslims to see...... this is blatant provocation!!!! had someone published such insensitive photos of Jesus.... i would have felt offended too.... ... if The Times published such photos of Jesus... surely all the church authorities and true catholics would react!!!!
Ms.D. Galea
Sep 19th 2012, 21:12
Madam , have you ever heard of ''Life of Brian'' or ''The Last Temptation of Christ '', or the deliberate destruction of the Banyan Buddhas in Afghanistan?
Ever heard of Buddhists or Christians reacting in the way these Islamic Fundamentalists have done?
George Calleja
Sep 19th 2012, 12:37
Some maniacs find satisfaction in fomenting dissent amongst religions!!! What a disgrace!!!!!
B Ellul
Sep 19th 2012, 12:21
Now on Friday AFTER the Prayers (yes it's important to first pray), they will burn the building down....
Please choose the reason of your report below: