Hello, I'm John Don Van, host and moderator of Intelligence Squared U.S. last week, armed

attackers brutally shot down 12 people in an attack at the offices of the Paris-Based

satirical magazine, Charlie Abdo, among the victims was the editor-in-chief, Stefan

Shabonnier, three other cartoonists, two police officers.

This was not the first time Charlie Abdo was targeted for its controversial depictions

of the Prophet Muhammad.

In this interview held in 2011, shortly after their offices were fire bombed, Shabonnier

defended the magazine's editorial viewpoint.

We can't caricature Muhammad in France, so yes, we can caricature Muhammad.

We can caricature everyone in France, in France, religions part of a philosophy like an

idea, and I can caricature Muhammad just like I can caricature Marx.

Well the world has come together to condemn these attacks, but last week's massacre has

reignited a debate about the importance and the risks of free speech.

New York Times reporter Jennifer Schossler summarized that discussion taking place especially

right now among cartoonists and journalists when she wrote this.

We're the victims of this attack.

Free speech martyrs full stop, or provocateurs whose aggressive mockery of Islam sometimes

amounted to xenophobia and racism.

Well, in order to shed light on these questions, we're going to take a look back now to one

of our first debates ever staged by intelligence squared US.

It took place back in 2006, not long after a Danish newspaper came under fire for its own

cartoons that depicted the Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb as a headdress, and these images

...