Are the Kouachi brothers really Muslims? If they truly love the Prophet, they will not disobey an authentic hadith (i.e. no harming or reciprocating harm). According to reports, these murderers’ preoccupations are football, chasing girls, listening to hip hop, addiction to alcohol, smoking weed, etc., while they are indoctrinated by an ex-janitor-turned-self-proclaimed-imam which I don’t know what “Islam” he was proselytizing on. In addition, we still don't have factual bases why they killed those journalists, police officers, and bystanders. And yet most people immediately and simplistically conclude that it was perpetrated by religious motivations. What if they're wrong?
I condemned all acts of terrorism; however, Muslims are increasingly being pressured to condemn or worst apologize for atrocities committed by pseudo-Muslims hiding under the cloak of their pseudo interpretation of Islam or by thugs and terrorists as if the entire 1.4 billion Muslims including the Islamic faith are to be blamed. And yet when thousands or millions of Muslim organizations speak out against these atrocities, the Western media is absolutely deaf. It is quite disturbing of the extent of gargantuan media coverage by the US and European news corporations about the murder in Paris where Islam is 24/7 vilified with no confusion at all with race, culture, politics, extremism or fundamentalism; while thousands of deaths in other parts of the world perpetrated by a factual 'state-sponsored terrorism' is being committed on a daily basis.
There's really a double standard of press freedom and what Noam Chomsky calls 'manufacturing consent'. This is a very dangerous period for Muslim minorities living in those countries where Islam is 24/7 reviled and repugnantly maligned in the public space. And manifestations of ignorance, cruelty, and evil are now gradually lurking in every communities of Muslim minorities where people and places of worship are vehemently attacked. I hope that those countries lived up to their values, rule of law, constitutional rights, and protect their citizens regardless of religious affinities, ancestry, race, culture, physical appearance, color of the skin, etc.
I am not Charlie (je ne suis pas Charlie) that has the audacity to publicly disseminate drawings/images of hate, insults, and slurs in the name of freedom of expression. Is this really a principle of free speech? It's really far from what they want to be called a legitimate satirical newspaper. Aside from their crude insults of cartoons depicting the Prophet, they even have images of the Pope getting fucked in the ass. Do you think pejorative/insulting images of the Pope can get published in the USA, Italy, Poland or the Philippines? I commiserate and extremely lament for the humans/souls who were tragically killed, but "I am not Charlie (je ne suis pas Charlie)" in the sense that double standard of freedom of expression is strikingly manifested.
And for those who are offended with the depiction of the Prophet and resort to violence to avenge him. Contemplate first of the hadith I mentioned above, what the Prophet did when someone insults him face to face or publicly, and do some research if there were banned depictions of the Prophet from the classical age to pre-European colonial times in the Islamicate civilization.
Think before it's too late.