I am not trying to defend this act but I think a point regarding cartoons and free speech in France needs to be raised.
There has been a lot of discussion regarding the images of Muhummad and the right to free speech in France, the fact is there is no universal right to free speech in France, Hervé Lalin was sent to jail for insulting the Jewish people and denying the holocaust. Now one can argue that being sent to prison is an appropriate penalty for insulting Jewish people, but one can't argue that free speech exists universally and equally in France where you are sent to jail for insulting one group, but you can insult and denigrate another, such as Muslims, including insulting the founder of their religion via immoral images.
Now I am not a Muslim, but I can understand why a Muslim in France would feel aggrieved that there is a double standard, insult one group and you go to jail, insult another and it is protected under free speech, and there are people in France willing to defend this hypocritical approach, send people to jail for insulting one group but insulting another is free speech.
Sorry but there is a difference between insulting people and mocking a belief.
I don't see the similarities between Lalin who said "Jews are incestuous" and the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, which don't attack people but mock a belief, a religious figure.
And do you believe that Muslims are not protected against defamation or insults? A women has been sentenced to 4 months in jail for calling for the extermination of Muslims, Zemmour has been sentenced to a 3,000€ fine for calling Muslims "invaders", ...
