Charlie Hebdo Defends Religious Freedom, Says Editor
The chief editor of Charlie Hebdo has defended the satirical magazine's controversial depictions of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed, saying the cartoons safeguard freedom of religion.
His comments were broadcast as five people were killed and churches set on fire in Niger on Saturday in fresh protests against the French weekly's Mohammed cover -- Charlie Hebdo's defiant riposte after two Islamist gunmen shot dead 12 people at the magazine in Paris.
Anger has mounted in several Muslim countries over Charlie Hebdo's caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed, as jittery European countries step up security to thwart a repeat of the attacks in France last week that killed 17 in all.
Gerard Biard, Charlie Hebdo chief editor, told NBC's "Meet the Press" program: "Every time we draw a cartoon of Mohammed, every time we draw a cartoon of prophets, every time we draw a cartoon of God, we defend the freedom of religion."
In what NBC called his first interview with an American television network since the attack, Biard added: "We declare that God must not be a political or public figure. He must be a private figure. We defend the freedom of religion.
"Yes, it's also the freedom of speech, but it's the freedom of religion. Religion should not be a political argument."
Biard had been asked to respond to comments by Pope Francis, who condemned any killing in God's name, while also saying there are limits to freedom of speech and other people's religion could not be insulted or mocked.
The full interview with Biard will be aired Sunday.
over 10 years
No we prefer them to be married under church law with no divorse so that thwy go after cheat on their wives and party in maamalten...
Hypocrits....
over 10 years
Geha, you are totally right!
As for Charlie Hebdo and the caricature that I see on the image above, it is just racist.
Forget what religious people call "blasphemy", the image is just a crude and racist depiction of Arabs: big nose, beard, the head gear and the white robe.
France killed hundred of thousands of Arabs in Algeria and colonized it from 1832 until 1962 and ten percent of the French people are Muslim, (mostly from former colonies) and they are treated like second class citizens.
Making fun of how Arab look and who they pray to is pure racism as much as killing as revenge is pure terrorism.
over 10 years
Machia i usualy enjoy ur coments but a satiric journal (caricature man) should make fun of something.
I donnot approve a lot of charlie hebdo point of view and i find most of their caricatures not funny but i do approve freedome of expression.
Protestant donnot approve icons in churches should we remove them? Should all people stop eating during ramadan? Should unveiled women go out of the streets so that religious muslim wouldnot be offended? Should we check how people are having sex (a lot of positions are not approved by gods rule) should we distroy boudhist statues (taliban style) because it is heretic? Were do u think it must stop??
over 10 years
Imagine, I am for freedom of speech and I have no problem with "blasphemy". But depicting people of African and Arab origins, especially in France where they are looked down upon, in a racist way in this day and age is unacceptable.
Here are some references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censored_Eleven
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_St%C3%BCrmer
over 10 years
Depicting Arabs with crooked noses and head gears is racist profiling, same as:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackface
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_mascot_controversy
over 10 years
naharnet!
are you seriously posting the front cover of the newspaper depicting the prophet
what out rage!
you will be targeted by lebanese muslims now
if only our country was secular and separation of religion from the state could happen.
the immediate result would be that people will identify themselves as Lebanese and not as shia, muslim or Christians, depriving all the current so called leaders from any support.
it would be the day each MP would be representing the Lebanese people in its entirety.
it would be the day where civil marriage is the norm and religious marriage to be facultative.
it would be the day when we have a country.