I realized there were a few links plus some actual “news” that I have yet to link to in regards to Canadian responses to the Charlie Hebdo murders and subsequent events. Here they are:

Item! Here is the video of cartoonist Luz being interviewed recently. Luz was the Charlie Hebdo member who arrived late to the scene on that day. He is responsible for the most recent cover of the magazine and several of the more famous covers from the past. The video is very sad to watch. I think he is very brave. I would still be curled up in a ball sobbing if my friends were all murdered.
Item! Most recently Charlie Hebdo religion editor Zineb El-Rhazoui (aka Zineb) actually appeared in Montreal at an event sponsored by the atheist Association Humaniste du Quebec. Zineb wrote the series (later a book) La Vie de Mahomet (The Life of Muhammad) that was illustrated by Charb, the murdered editor of Charlie. Zineb is a Moroccan muslim by birth, but her political and anti-religious writing made her an exile until she landed in Paris. You might know her from her response to accusations of racism levelled at the paper by an ex-staffer. In Montreal, Zineb said it is the violent acts of the shooters that represent “the most ugly caricature, that this is the most ugly picture of their religion […] not the pictures made by Charlie Hebdo.” There is video at CTV’s coverage. There was also a fundraiser for Charlie on the same day. Toronto Star coverage here.
Item! More than anything, the murders have sparked a debate about freedom of speech and freedom of the press, with the discussion usually focusing on whether or not to reprint the Charlie Hebdo cartoons that depict Muhammad, especially the cover of the first post-massacre issue. The Toronto Star didn’t reprint the cartoons, sparking an angry retort from Star columnist Rosie Demanno: “For many Muslims, perhaps most, any depiction of the Prophet is blasphemous. So be it — for them. But not so be it for us, in the mainstream media. We are a secular profession. We do not make a habit of cowering before any other faith. We do not allow potential ramifications to pre-censor. We do not defer to the hurt.I care far less about Muslim sensitivities than I do the articles of faith inherent to freedom of expression. It isn’t absolute, of course not, but it should fall far beyond the fault line of any religion’s sacraments. The Charlie Hebdo cover is self-evidently news. But we’re afraid to show it.Too many “buts” have been attached to the commentary arising from last week’s two-pronged terrorist attacks in France. Oh yes, freedom of expression but. Civil rights yes but. Defiance but.Convolute and dilute the essence of the argument and you come back around to the beginning: the starting point for the assailants who attacked the magazine, the justification for the horrors they unleashed.”
Item! The Globe and Mail also didn’t republish the cartoons, claiming solidarity with The New York Times and CBC, in an editorial titled “We honour Charlie Hebdo, but we don’t want to be it”: “What doesn’t require courage or intelligence is demanding proof of one’s solidarity with the victims of the Paris massacre by reprinting their most offensive material. The right of Charlie Hebdo, and all the Charlie Hebdos of the world, to publish provocative, offensive, satirical cartoons must be backed without reservation. But so too must the right of other publications to make different choices – namely to defend Charlie Hebdo without embracing and endorsing everything the satirical newspaper ever did, or holding its work up as canon.” Ironically, the Globe posted an editorial this week claiming that the lesson of Charlie Hebdo should be “more free speech.”
Item! Former Globe columnist-turned-rabble.ca-columnist Rick Salutin wrote for The Star about the role of political cartoonists and satire: “Contributors to Charlie Hebdo held clear, passionate political views, many were “children of May 68,” explicitly left-wing or anarchist. For that reason they loathed the official “socialist” parties and often refused to vote in hollow elections. You can practically hear them weep in their 2013 response to charges of racism (reprinted in the Star).They didn’t just hate fanatics and “despots” but also the respectable mindbenders of the church, “democratically” elected governments and the press itself. Charlie Hebdo extended its sympathy not just to Arabs and Muslims but even to Muhammad — he was a guest editor — for having to put up with the adoration of “idiots” (cons) like Islamic State and Al Qaeda.In a way they and their cognates elsewhere carry the ethical burden of journalism (afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted) that mainstream media so often shuck. In the U.S. today the most insightful sources by far are Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and John Oliver. I know a teen addicted to them who resents the charge (which Stewart at least accepts) that they aren’t doing news, they’re doing comedy about the news. If there is a mix, it’s tending more toward the former, especially with Oliver’s brilliant Last Week Tonight.If I’ve implied purity and uniformity on their part, je m’excuse. They grew up in the same society we all did and are susceptible to taboos and blind spots.”
10846141_10152587208257124_3024755654446295718_nItem! The prolific dean of Canadian mini-comics Colin Upton has packaged his thoughts on the Charlie Hebdo murders in convenient comics form.
Item! Cartoonist Ethan Heitner says yes to love, no to the reprinting of racist cartoons, in a one page strip.
Item! The actual distribution of the first post-massacre issue was spotty in Canada, despite the large print run. Many people had reserved copies at the few places scheduled to receive the issue, only to be disappointed by the paltry numbers actually shipped. Speculators were buying and selling on ebay. Actual physical copies eventually filtered through or found there way through friends in Europe.
Item! I don’t think I linked to this Bun Toons cartoon by Ty Templeton that came out the week of the attacks. Templeton comments on the bias in our society that labels certain types if violence as the work of religious terrorists and other types as random acts of crazy people. Food for thought.
Item! The public profile given to cartoonists in France since the killings has also led to a discussion of the paucity of paid political cartoonists in North America. This article asks the question, “where are the women cartoonists?” Lots of quotes from comics critic Mira Felardeau. As the article points out, Susan Dewar is the only woman cartoonist working the editorial beat for a major Canadian newspaper.
Item! Stephanie Shonekan writes for In These Times on the difference in coverage between the Charlie Hebdo killings and the Nigerian massacre by Boko Haram by quoting Fela Kuti: “Finally, it is important to address what Baga and Charlie do share. Both tragedies were perpetrated by radical Islamic fundamentalists motivated by violations of their faith. As commentators shuffle and tiptoe around difficult discussions about religion, Fela’s song “Shuffering and Shmiling” (1977) allows for a balanced critique of both Islam and Christianity. He challenges Africans who populate churches and mosques for following blindly. While radical Islam is in the limelight right now, let us not forget that Christianity has a history of religious violence, and that slavery and colonialism were justified by Christianity. I value my own Christian faith, but I listen closely as Fela questions the rabid devotion that causes the fervent to enslave, kill and dehumanize.”
Item! There’s a Guy Delisle quote at the bottom of this article about the presence of Charlie Hebdo at Angouleme: “S’ils avaient tué des journalistes de l’écrit, il y aurait eu une moins grande mobilisation. Mais le dessin fait partie de notre enfance.” Delisle is also among thé international group of artists who contributed pieces to a tribute book to be published by Glenat this week. As well, he is interviewed here about the differences between his experience with his North Korea book and Hollywood vs the threats against cartoonists in Paris.