The murder earlier this week in Paris of 12 people people at the offices of satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo was revenge for the publication’s depiction of the prophet Muhammad. It wasn’t the first attack on the paper’s headquarters radical Islamic terrorists shouting “Allahu Akbar!”
They stormed the building previously in 2012. What was different then is that no one associated with the publication was killed. Another difference was the reaction back then by the leader of the free world and his administration, which refused to support the newspaper, instead criticizing it for publishing the cartoons.
A White House transcript shows that then-Press Secretary Jay Carney questioned the newspapers “judgment behind the decision to publish’ the Muhammad cartoons.
Here is a partial official transcript:
Q: The French government has decided to temporarily close their embassies and schools in several Muslim countries after a satirical weekly, Charlie Hebdo, that published cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad. Is the White House concerned that those cartoons might further fan the flames in the region?
MR. CARNEY: Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory. But we’ve spoken repeatedly about the importance of upholding the freedom of expression that is enshrined in our Constitution.
In other words, we don’t question the right of something like this to be published; we just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it. And I think that that’s our view about the video that was produced in this country and has caused so much offense in the Muslim world.
Six days later, the president was standing before the United Nations speaking about the Benghazi attacks, saying, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
The terrorists involved in the Charlie Hebdo attack agree, with multiple witnesses saying they could be heard saying “the prophet has been avenged.”
Has the administration’s position on the topic evolved, or is it just be typically two-faced in its reaction then and now?
Cross-posted at the Mental Recession