Je ne suis pas Charlie

Firstly I want to pay my respects to the people who have lost their lives in Paris and the families that have lost those dear to them - May you R.I.P

However, Charlie Hebdo is being portrayed as heroic political journalists who are somehow pioneers of free speech. Let's just get this straight, CH didn't publish just one cartoon containing the prophet Mohamed, there were countless cartoons released over a significant period of time that were not only unfunny but vile, tasteless, provocative and pretty hateful to Islam and all religions as a whole. One of them in particular contains The prophet Mohamed drawn naked, bent over spreading his cheeks in front of the viewer with a star barely covering his anús and the caption "Mahomet une étoile est née" "Mohamed, a star is born".

How on earth is this free speech? What is this saying? This magazine is not a martyr of freedom, it's picking on a persecuted group of people in society in order to shock, cause controversy, and inevitably MAKE MONEY.

I am all for freedom of speech, but just because we have freedom of speech doesn't mean we should always use it. If they decided to mock 'ethnic minorities', Jews or 9/11 victims on next month's cover would we all be saying Je Suis Charlie? This kind of irresponsible behavior is actually THE BIGGEST THREAT TO FREE SPEECH AS WE KNOW IT.

Charlie H are arrogant and irresponsible and although I pay my respects to the innocent people that lost their lives, I do not and will not support that magazine.

And to add a point, I think it's disgraceful that key public figures keep calling on Muslims people to condemn the violence. Why is it that the media only want to hear from the Muslim community when they want them to condemn other Muslims or their own religion? Have they not already condemned extremists several times before? Of course genuine Muslim people do not condone this violence, it's actually insulting to them to insist that they come out and condemn it.

**Edit**

CAN PEOPLE STOP TAKING MY POST AS JUSTIFICATION FOR VIOLENCE.

This article is not about whether the extremists are justified - THEY ARE NOT

It's about:

A. A magazine being portrayed as freedom of political speech.

B. it's actually not, but because of it's irresponsibility with free speech it jeopardizes the efforts of those that have something valid to say.

C. They were being hateful in order for profit, not political freedom.

D. People should view the content before forming an opinion on the nobility of the magazine's content.

E. Muslim people being put in the same box as violent extremists