‘Charlie Hebdo, Before the Massacre’

[rug]

JAN. 9, 2015
By JÉRÔME LAMBERT and PHILIPPE PICARD

In February 2006 the editors of the French magazine Charlie Hebdo met to discuss a matter of what turned out to be deadly consequence: Would they publish a satirical image of Muhammad on their cover? We were making a documentary about Jean Cabut, known as Cabu, one of the most famous cartoonists in France. So we were there, filming his conversation with his colleagues as they chose the cover. The issue that came out of this meeting — with a Cabu cartoon on the cover and the images they discussed here — turned out to be one of the most popular in the magazine’s history. Almost nine years later, gunmen stormed this very meeting and killed 10 editors and cartoonists, including three of the people in this film: Cabu, Bernard Verlhac (known as Tignous) and Georges Wolinski.

Beyond his talent as an artist, our friend Cabu was a formidable character — his Joan of Arc haircut and John Lennon-style round glasses were inimitable. A former children’s television host, he was goofy, kind, sweet. We loved him. But what Cabu loved was provocation and bad taste: a very French — political and vulgar, yet sharp — type of irony. He was right at home at Charlie Hebdo, where he could take uncompromising stands on institutions and leaders of all stripes: politicians, bankers, cops … and men of God.

In this case, Cabu was supporting cartoonists in Denmark who had just grappled with the same issue in September 2005. The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten had published 12 cartoons considered blasphemous by many followers of Islam. Arab governments protested officially; there were clashes at protests and demonstrations around the world, leading to more than 200 deaths. Charlie Hebdo had decided to reproduce the complete set of cartoons for its Feb. 8 issue.

In filming Cabu’s now historic meeting with his editor in chief and fellow cartoonists and editorialists, we could not know that we were capturing on camera such an important moment. We were just amazed by the collaborative, creative, joyful process that led to the cover and caption, Cabu’s drawing of the Prophet Muhammad, cleverly hiding his face with his hands to avoid breaking outright prohibitions on showing the prophet’s likeness, but still provocative. Provocative enough to apparently serve as the root of this week’s attack.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/09/opinion/charlie-hebdo-before-the-massacre.html?_r=1

[NYC_SKP]

1. Excellent. After several days of thought, I've concluded all were innocent here.

*** Preface: This is the Religion Group, a place to discuss theology, and what follows is an honest expression of my faith and willingness to forgive, which is not a bad characteristic to practice. ***

After much thought I conclude that the bystanders and the cartoonists, all are victims.

Prompted by this exchange in the Buddhist group, "a sincere question", I've expanded my feelings about the matter to include the gunmen among the victims in this event.

They were pawns, they were used by unnamed powers, they clearly were operating outside of a normal human sense of being.

In a word, they were sick. They committed evil acts, make no mistake. They are murderers, without question.

But they were also used, and they were sick and suffering.

And, to be sure, the nameless people who sent them are sick, too.

More than one religion teaches us to pity the weak and to love our enemy.

We are all just organisms on this little marble in the universe, simple creatures, many or most of us suffering.

Hatred cures nothing, hating the hateful cures nothing and only brings more pain.

Love is the only answer.

[rug]

2. You're not alone in that sentiment.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1225114

[NYC_SKP]

3. Most excellent.

Thank you, rug.

[AtheistCrusader]

4. Mighty nice of you to suddenly come around and grant all the victims, victim status.

You can't take all that vile shit you posted about them back.

Have a 'nice day'.

[NYC_SKP]

5. I'll have to correct you. There's still the matter of responsibility and innocence...

My opinion on those matters hasn't changed.

For the record, I never said that they weren't all victims, I said that I felt particularly bad for the innocent victims who had no part in the cartoons.

It was predictable that some violence against the Hebdo group might occur, but they are still victims, I never said they weren't.

I haven't changed one bit in this opinion, but I have expanded it to include the gunmen as victims along with the targets of their sickness.

They were murderers, but my faith tells me that I must try to understand and pity them and I am able to do that.

I find great comfort in that point of view.

Hatred is an uncomfortable feeling to harbor.

[AtheistCrusader]

6. My apologies. Why in the hell did I give you the benefit of the doubt.

I oughta fucking know better by now.

In case you need a refresher:


re-spon-si-bil-i-ty
[ri-spon-suh-bil-i-tee]
noun, plural responsibilities.
1. the state or fact of being responsible, answerable, or accountable for something within one's power, control, or management.
2. an instance of being responsible :
"The responsibility for this mess is yours!"
3. a particular burden of obligation upon one who is responsible :
"the responsibilities of authority."
4. a person or thing for which one is responsible :
"A child is a responsibility to its parents."
5. reliability or dependability, especially in meeting debts or payments.

Synonyms:
authority burden duty guilt importance liability obligation power restraint trust albatross amenability answerability care charge constraint contract culpability encumbrance engagement fault incubus incumbency onus pledge rap subjection boundness holding the bag obligatoriness


And you wonder why people think you are victim-blaming.