Breaking News - Allegedly 10 people killed at office of satirical magazine in Paris

And so are those who, like me, having witnessed it first hand time and time again- will say it is not surprising some French 3rd generation children of ex North Africa FRench colonies- are becoming radicalised. As they are still treated like 3rd class (non) citizens by the majority of the French- both the left (under the disguise of the secularity principle linked to the Revolution) and the extreme right. No access to decent housing, decent education, and later apprenticeships, jobs, housing, loans to become self-employed. These youngsters are not equal under the law, as they are in much more tolerant uk- and are constantly harrassed by French police in a very provocative way. Where the best of French students can be excluded from school just for wanting to wear a simple scarf (not talking aobut hijab or burka), etc.

As a French teacher who organised exchanges with several locations in France- i witnessed some appaling lack of tolerance and clear racism there towards some of my best students.

Agreed, Mishap

Those who have expressed concerns about the editorial decisions at Charlie Hebdo are no less appalled and condemnatory of the terrorists than anyone else.

Who's blaming the cartoonists, Iam? Nothing justifies murder, but we have to be very careful when we talk about freedom of speech. And...je ne suis pas Charlie.

Rowantree I see no reason to be respectful of other people's views if I consider those views to be absurd – courteous, possibly, and acknowledging their right to hold those views, perhaps. I, for example, have no respect for the views of people who believe that the earth is flat. (I also see no reason to be offensive about them and just ignore them.) However, if a group of people wishes to impose their views on the lives of others by force and through fear because they are convinced that theirs is what jingl described as the "true religion" – which is the case with Islamist extremists – then I believe it is not just right but essential to show the utmost disrespect for those views and the people who hold them.

loopylou Ridiculing Islam in any of its forms may be offensive but it can hardly be racist when the religion is so widely practised from Arab countries and Iran in the Middle East to the Indian sub-continent and South-east Asia. That said, I think the French authorities did, at one time, consider charging Charlie Hebdo with racism.

Many people have been targets of offence and racism. It doesn't turn them into mass murderers.

Considering the terrorist attacks that took place in France prior to the slaughter which took place at the offices at Charlie Hebdo, there is every possibility that the staff there decided to make their own brave stance against terrorism.

I would like to think that after the events of the last two days, peace loving Muslims could let their voices be heard against terrorists who abuse their Islamic religion but I fear that within their community, which terrorists which may well be part of, they are too afraid to speak out.

I'm finding some of the evangelical, simplistic and biased posts offensive. I don't intend to go out and shoot anybody

Thanks to Agus. Gill57 , Soutra, Elegran and co for their posts on this thread.

The legacy of colonialism hasn't been mentioned yet, so far as I've seen, apologies to anyone who has mentioned it. The analogy made above, with the IRA bombing campaign, is well made. I am opposed to terrorism in any form, but have to accept that the history of these isles is that eventually we have to sit down and talk with our enemies. I am not suggesting we're anywhere near that, I share the anger expressed by others about these murderous events. I share the sentiments previously expressed, I don't like those cartoons, but they do not justify murder. Blaming the cartoonists for their own deaths, and those of innocent police officers and by standers is simply wrong on every level. Blaming victims for their rape, murder etc is familiar ground, we ought to know better.

Just watched a moving interview with the widow of the editor of Charlie Hebdo when she concluded with "it's a war". A further news item included a piece about Abu Hamza and snippets of his hate filled sermons were aired. For years he just wasn't taken seriously and now one of the gunmen have been linked to him. I remember Channel 4 Dispatches under cover programme where the reporter went to various mosques in the UK where hate filled sermons were covertly filmed, the bile that was spewed out against Jews, Christians and homosexuals was staggering, I can't help thinking if this sort of rhetoric was expressed in a church or synagogue the priest or rabbi would have have been dealt with, it's quite clear there was a complacent we'll just cruise along keeping an eye on them attitude. The fact that someone like Abu Hamza and others like him were allowed to preach the sort of sermons they did for so long without being challenged casts a slur on all the decent Muslims, but also poses the question in the mind of the general public how many mosques allow that sort of sermon from their preachers?

For the sake of all the peaceful Muslims, like the young man I am just watching now signing a condolences book, there must be a more joined up approach to dealing with Imams who encourage their young men to wage war on the West.

I still find the content of the cartoons make me feel uncomfortable, I was brought up a Catholic at a time when blasphemy was taken quite seriously, I don't like the idea of deliberately insulting anyone's religion, it just seems to be fanning the flames. Although it goes without saying, however insulting, nothing justifies murdering people.

Isn't this why we have laws limiting racist publications, and those which are homophobic or which attack or mock disabled people? There cannot be unlimited 'freedom of speech' - one person's FOS is another's racism/disablism/homophobism (whatever the term is, but you know what I mean). I cannot see the team at Charlie Hebdo as freedom fighters as they are being portrayed.

Me too Rowntree, personally I found the cartoons offensive and racist. Very fine line to tread me thinks.......

One gunman (woman actually) still at large. I wish the gunmen had been taken alive and put on trial. They want nothing better than to be seen as martyrs.

I still feel uneasy though about the 'satire' depicted at Charlie Hebdo. When does satire become offensive and racist? That doesn't condone their murders - nothing does - but I don't think this is a question of simple freedom of expression. We all have to be respectful of the views and lives of others and it's a very fine line between satire and causing profound offence to others. I don't know the answer, honestly - I just feel uncomfortable.

Yes POGS - just heard that 4 of the hostages at the supermarket are dead. So sad. Apparently the hostages in there were intended as security for the 2 terrorists in the printworks - police were told that if the brothers were killed the hostages in the supermarket would be killed. A carefully planned piece of barbarism.

Oops, crossed response to POGS' post.
That's so sad. Wish the murdering b......s had Ben captured alive and faced life in prison, in solitary.

Although obviously relieved this is over I suspect will be seen as martyrs to the cause.. Do hope everyone else safe.

Sadly the other incident is being reported as at least 4 hostages are dead at the supermarket.

What an awful time.

The two brothers are dead so it certainly looks at this moment in time that at least one of the operations has been concluded to what can only be termed as the best possible conclusion.

Sorry repeated post

Its also reported that the hostages and the deli are free

It looks as though the hostage has been freed at printworks.

The two gunmen at the printworks are dead but there is no news yet of the hostage. They are saying some hostages at the supermarket have been freed.

It looks like they co-ordinated the rescue attempts which would make sense.

Explosions and gunfire at the supermarket too

Oh no - these poor people. I am listening to Karl Jenkins "The Armed Man" as I write - how appropriate.

Explosions and gunshots at the printworks and now there are men on the roof.

We watched Question Time last night and DH wondered if there might have been a last minute attempt to get Ian Hislop on the panel?

I wouldn't blame him if he's keeping his head down.

I do think that the content of these cartoons is relevant as this magazine office has clearly been targeted because of its provocative articles and cartoons - that has to be relevant.

To say that the publication of these was provocative in no way excuses the actions of the terrorists. Just because there are many other instances of people being targeted by terrorists where the provocation was non-existent does not alter the fact that these journalists knew they were playing with fire; and innocent people's lives have been put at risk as a result.

I defend their RIGHT to publish these cartoons - what I am questioning is the WISDOM of this. They are two different things. This is not limiting free speech, but expecting people to behave with wisdom, responsibility and discretion.

If they had been witty cartoons that lampooned terrorism and terrorists or poked moderates in the ribs to get them to act then that would be entirely different. But they are just offensive and puerile.

I am deeply saddened by the deaths of these journalists and their work colleagues, but just because they have died does not mean that they might not have acted unwisely in life.

As I have said before I would like to see the media using their right to free speech to publicise loud and clear messages from the moderate muslim community and from their leaders spreading the message that this is NOT acceptable.

I am not sure what the legal situation is in France, but I cannot help but think that some of these items might have qualified as inciting racial hatred over here.

There is no easy answer to the problem of terrorism that threatens us all and our dear children and grandchildren but I am very sure that deliberate provocation has no place.