Following the atrocities committed in Paris in early January when 17 people were murdered in cold blood at the office of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and Jewish deli Hyper Cacher, people were once again shocked by the attacks in Copenhagen which resulted in the death of one person at a freedom of speech debate, followed by the death of a Jewish man on guard outside the city’s main synagogue. The perpetrators of the Paris and Copenhagen shootings were not linked, though in both instances they had two obvious goals: punishing those who, in their view, had insulted the prophet Muhammad, and targeting Jews. The number of Jewish casualties in both attacks have sparked debates about anti-Semitism which, sadly, appears to be on the rise again across Europe. This debate has been further fuelled by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who called for mass immigration to Israel.
“Of course, Jews deserve protection in every country,” he said. “But we say to Jews, to our brothers and sisters: Israel is your home. We are preparing and calling for the absorption of mass immigration from Europe. I would like to tell all European Jews and all Jews wherever they are: Israel is the home of every Jew”. 
This past week was shocking and horrifying for many people. The atrocious attacks on the satirical comic-based magazine Charlie Hebdo, followed by the siege on Hyper Cacher (a Jewish deli), left many shocked and saddened. This article seeks to summarise the plethora of views articulated primarily on social media dealing with these awful events. As people came to terms with the events, and the consequences that followed, they sought to articulate their positions on the attacks. Thus, this piece seeks to provide a general overview of the trends in the arguments presented. This article will not be an exhaustive overview, nor will it seek to outline all existing opinions surrounding the events; it will outline the thoughts, ideas, and general views posted in the days following the events.
Several points need to be noted prior to the main piece itself. The first is an acknowledgement that the piece has an inherent selection bias: the Facebook and Twitter comments gathered are a function of the network available to me. That being said, the statements echoed here and taken from social media are not my own and therefore do not necessarily echo my opinions nor the opinions of Al Miraah. Further. Putting the opinions here is not an endorsement of the views displayed.
Finally, I would like to express my deepest condolences for those harmed and affected by the events described. I send out my thoughts to the families of the victims and to the people of France.
The brutal terrorist attacks in Paris which targeted the headquarters of the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, as well as a kosher grocery store, left 17 people dead. An outpouring of international support for the French government and people has been heard in the days since.
Laura Danielle and Kevin Moore break down how some governments and political leaders in the Middle East and North Africa responded to the events.
It is okay to criticise the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine. To do so does not mean we cannot — and must not — at the same time condemn the act of murder and terrorism conducted by brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi.
It also does not mean that we agree with or believe in the terrorists’ way of thinking. Clearly the proper response to a slight or offense — about one’s religion or otherwise — is not and never will be murder. That is beyond debate. To explain the motivations of terrorists is not to condone or justify their actions. It is a necessary measure that will allow us to manage the threat posed by terrorism inspired by the ideologies of groups like al-Qaeda.