2015, just seven where about the prophet. Rose we conclude this exwith the conductor of the boston pops orchestra Keith Lockhart. Ive always been amazed by the emotive connective power of music. It can bring people to tears without the benefit or perhaps without the limitation of language. This strong direct emotional messaging that music provides. And to be able to share that with people. Thats really what performers do. Theres two reasons to be a performer. One is what it gives to you and the other one is the chance to share this amazing thing. You just want to say this is a huge part of my life, here, check this out. Rose Charlie Hebdo and the boston pops when we continue. Rose funding for charlie rose has been provided by rose additional funding provided by and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and Information Services worldwide. Captioning sponsored by Rose Communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. Rose we begin with this story from todays news. Two againman open fired at the site of the mohammed cartoon drawing contest. It was organned by the Freedom Defense initiative that uses the name the asaleients wounded an unarmed Security Guard for being killed by a traffic officer. Incident has stirred comparison to the deadly Charlie Hebdo attack in paris early this year. Two armed brothers forced their way into the Magazines Office and opened fire in response to public mohammed cartoons. 12 people were killed including the magazines editor. The pen Americas Center will honor Charlie Hebdo with freedom of expression courage of award and a celebration of the office from around the world. This has ignited a controversial and some have withdrawn from the event in protest. Two join us they are editor in chief gerard biard and writer jeanbaptiste thoret. Welcome. Tell me about your reaction to what happened in texas. To be honest, i cant imagine the kind of comparison you can make between the Charlie Hebdo attack of january 7th. It has nothing to do. Absolutely nothing. You have as you said sort of antiislamic muslim, very harsh muslims against the islamization of the u. S. Its just a question of the kind of lesion its nothing to do with that. We dont we dont recognize conflict here, we just do our work. We comment the news when something jump out of the news we do amount if you didnt, we didnt we dont. So the this, the main of this wasnt shameless right left politician. Its a wellknown method. We are historically, we are antiracist newspaper. From the 60s to now its one of our main issue. We fight and we have nothing to do with these people. Rose well talk about many thing here this evening. But first where is and how is Charlie Hebdo the publication today . How is it . Rose yes. Its in a strangely way very goodbecause you know, we saw a lot of eight million. People called the survival issue a generation i think its sort of regarding the french, you know, eight million because its huge. But today we have to rebuild because and the writers too. You have to find another way to find new writer, its a very special moment. Rose what has been the consequences of the event beyond the terrible human toll for france and for paris . It was, we felt that at the very moment, that people understood what we were doing each week in Charlie Hebdo. What values we stand for. Rose define those values. Yes. Rose what are those values . First of all freedom of expression. Freedom of conscious. And what we call in france lazy maybe it can be translated secularism. Rose yes secularism. Sorry for my accent. Rose thank you for coming. So we became sort of a symbol. Not only in france. Even all over the world. I think its the reason why we are here. Rose well talk about that. But also the reaction to see those people in the streets of paris on that day with political leaders up fronted. It was a remarkable show. Yes. You have to, i think you have to wait. It was on january 11th, sort of huge, you know millions, millions of people in the streets. So. Of course its this kind of communion, the way that people understood and react because they felt in a very unconscious way sometimes thats sometimes very important for them as being attacked two days before, you know. But its important to say that all the french people were the day in the streets. To see this huge rose they were in the streets or they were not. They were not. You at that moment, you had two friends. The friends who walk in the street on sunday and another friends who was not in the streets. And i think its important rose whats the importance of the french not in the streets . Because that means that for some of the people, we have this debate january 7 for some of the people, maybe we shouldnt have you know draw the maybe we go a little too far, you know. Thats interesting because thats also the reality and people say that its rose is any of this because of the values youre expressing, because theres more vigorous debate of this kind in france than most places. The bigger of back and forth, the bigger of pushing the envelope, if you know the expression of freedom of expression. Its very hard to say because we have this, in france, i know some of the documents some of the color of Charlie Hebdo could have offend people in the u. S. You know but we are tradition because we are criticizing, we are sometimes attacking you know, just the ideas thats very important. Literal particular person you know what i mean, its very important. An institution left wing, right wing, sports and we have to say on 500 colors between 2005 and 2015, just seven on 500 were about the prophet, just seven. Seven colors, you know. Rose where were you on the morning. I was on vacation. I was in london. And a neighbor of the staff was not in the offices called me and i was just doing my shopping you know. I was with my wife and a phone to me and he told me you know, i know youre not at work, but i must i must tell you that it has been an attack a deadly attack in Charlie Hebdo. And then it all began, you know. I didnt, my phone ring all the time, rang all the time. I didnt i had to know who was injured, who has been shot who was dead. I didnt manage to do it because my phone explode. So finally i got to the French Embassy and they come, they bring back in paris and only the evening when we came back finally in paris, i knew who was injured, who was still alive and who was dead. Rose where were you. I was in paris. I was about to take the subway for the office. I was maybe 10 or 15 minutes you know. And just before i went into the subway station i received a lot of texts and messages and my phone ring. I debating, i thought it was something bad is happening to you, you dont think right away to your job you think something happened to your wife to your children. Anyway, and then i understood very quickly that something happened to Charlie Hebdo and people asking me if i was there what happened and so. Rose there had been threats before and there had been an attack before. In some cases there was police protection. Yes. But first of all, the former attacks, it was just about material, you know and so on. Never people have been attacked. Just material and maybe its very hard to understand because you know, all the people in Charlie Hebdo and especially the cartoonists, they are the main targets, the cartoonists the people who draw cartoon because i dont think they read the article, theyre obsessed with the sketches. You dont have to speak. The french way to understand or to interpret the cartoon. And where all conscious about this question. But when were drawing just enough of this cartoon with a cartoon of little guys. You are not in fact really prepared to that. A lot of people say you know these some issue, it could be done. But you know, in the other side of your brain you dont i think you dont really believe that could happen in this brutal way you know. You say okay, we know some people all over the world excited by the cartoons they are burning some flags. Of course. But the cartoonists seem to use its so a little thing you know. Rose but was there much internal discussion about, quote, crossing the line . When you go too far . Theres always discretion when we choose. We never choose the color just like that. We always have debate and its generally a collective decision. I do not decide okay, this cartoon will be a color. Rose its a collective decision. Yes, its a collective. Rose when you look back, would you have done anything different . Of course not. Of course not. This question of crossing the line or not, if they are interpreting because i think the line is inside you, you know. Did i write the right article did i make good judgment. Because you can make very bad judgment, it happens all the time, you know. But its the reason to kill people . No. Rose no one makes that argument. Of course. But the question of the line is very important. It depends on you. Thats very important. The lining is, you know its very hard to say i am crossing the line, im not crossing the line. If you show off what you are intending for, no doubt about that, it would be okay, you know. Rose you know garry trudeau. There have been criticisms of the award to you and also at same time confirmations and in support of it. Garry trudeau has said that quote by attacking a powerless disenfran championshipped minority with crude drawings closer to graffiti than cartoons, charlie wandered into the are realm of sheet speech. This is gary trudeau. Who thinks about those issues. We are not a weak thinking people. We attack powerful people. Were not attacking muslims were attacking islamics were attacking a political id. And this political id is mainly by rose by the prophet. Of making fun of power. The prophet internal power it represents, the power, we attack prophet. Just like we attack our president. Or an institution. Were not attacking rose political party. Were not attacking citizens. Were not attacking people. Were attacking ideas. Rose has defended the choice stating from our perspective the courage is central. The diminution of the terrain of free speech cannot happen through the barrel of a gun. Maybe there is a lot of confusion. This is given okay for the freedom of speech. But this is january 7. This is not for Charlie Hebdo, i mean you can disagree of course with some articles. We are sometimes among the there is a lot of debate a lot of debate. All of the content of Charlie Hebdo, all of the 16 pages of this magazine from the beginning to today we are supporting that. Rose some people make this distinction. I was horrified by the tragic murders at the Charlie Hebdo office, i have nothing about sympathy for the victims and survivor. I despise the use of violence as a means of enforcing silence. I believe Charlie Hebdo has every right to publish whatever they wish but that is not the same that Charlie Hebdo deserves an award as a friend wrote me First Amendment is the right of neo naziism to march but were not giving them award. Theres certain respect and admiration for the work that has been done and for the value of the work. Although i admire the courage which Charlie Hebdo insists on its right to provoke and challenge the doctrinaire i dont believe they deserve such an honor. This is about the award and giving the award. Its not about you. And talking about going too far. What was the how would you define any limits with respect to islam and mohammed. Was there a place where you discussed the cartoon or an idea and said thats not who we are thats not what we want to do ever . Yes, of course. There was a huge discussion when we published for the first time. The cartoons, the danish cartoons 2006. We published one newspaper, one french newspaper called francois and the day after the cartoon were published, the editorin chief of this newspaper was fired. So we decide to publish this cartoon with an explanation. We didnt publish this like that and okay, anyone say what he want to say. No, we explain we decided also some cartoons. But we are to do that. And we made a color. It took hours to draw this very cartoon. Rose hours to draw it. Yes. Not to draw, to draw the cartoon rose the idea of the cartoon. The idea of the cartoon, yes. And so, we want this cartoon to make a difference between islam and between islamism and between people, between believers and between politicals of belief. Rose do you believe, therefore, that believers not islamists or jihaddists were offended . I mean, all kind of critics produce people who are. Do you know a safe critique of politics, of sports of religion, i dont know that. A real critique absolutely. You will always find someone where we say i have a friend named what you say what you draw, what you wrote. If you are starting to think about the people which feel offended, you stopped writing you stopped cartooning, you know. Its important, i mean when they draw the cartoon now there was a caption in french. Its very hard to thats the exact sensation that means we are not attacking muslims, we are not attackerring islam we are using the rose for you, attracting, as you were saying, islamists, your words is no different than attacking le pen which you attack frequently. It is the same. Its politics stuff politics thats all. Thats it. Not about religion. We dont care about religion to tell the truth. We care about the political use because we think that its dangerous to use religion with political things. Rose thats an opinion not unique to you. A friend of mine with adam im sure both of you know, wrote in the new yorker the work ive written is not for those who like subtlety in their satire but it was not entirely to my own taste. But they were still radically democratic and egalitarian in this views with one passion being to have hypocrisy of organized religions. Few groups in french history has been more passionately more marginalized or on the outs with the political establishment. More vict trollic, they were always punching up at idols and authorities. No one in france has for example been more relengthlessly, courages lace contell scious of the extreme right wing le pen. The problem youre attacking the institution, youre attacking people with power and maybe we are attacking people that are making discrimination and what about the discrimination are and we have a conversation about religion and sports and were attacking soccer. Were not very fond of soccer. Rose you mean violence at the soccer stadium. No. The principle of this sport we dont like in Charlie Hebdo. Thats one of the comments, the thing that we share. Rose what dont you like about it . The fact that, sorry the fact that in france, its more than popular. Its rose its a religion. Yes. Rose theres a great difference between soccer. Even the pope has spoken out against you. You think his roll is to consider that rose one religion is an attack on another religion. Its always the same philosophy. Rose its an attack on people who want to hijack a religion. In a way. In a way. About the point rose what does that have to do with mohammed . Couldnt you attack them without attacking mohammed, im asking. Would that have weakened its a symbol. It was its a symbol, thats all. We also attack jesus. We make many cartoons, we make more cartoons about jesus than we did about mohammed. Rose what do you say about jesus. You dont want to know. Rose hollande is easy. Because political figures, political figures. If you are attacking, politicians in one way or another have an element of hypocrisy, an element of yes but you have to consider that for the magazine there is nothing secret. That means it affects everybody but nothing is secret. Rose nothing. Has this in any way made you bolder . Because you are already bold. No. Its what i wanted to say like its my own opinion. I dont think that its normal to be afraid. Of violence. Of threatening. Its natural. But i dont think that in this case, its the because its if you say okay im afraid, i stop. Or i go lower and you a wrong to people who did that. You say to them youre right youre right. Violence it works. You see . Rose yes. And so, theyll use more violence. Rose because violence has been used theres no time to pull back and its time to say that we will not be silenced by violence. No. Rose but i mean again heres what the pope said. Its my opinion. Again the pope. Rose because you responded to the pope, thats why. Pope said one cannot provoke or insult other peoples faith. One cannot make fun of faith. There is a limit. Every religion has its dignity and freedom of expression there are limits. You responded to that by saying every time we draw a cartoon of mohammed or the prophet or a cartoon of god we defend the freedom of religion. We declare god must not be a political or public figure he should be a private figure. If political argument steps into the arena all believers to life in peace. Yes. If you see where religion and religious people are discriminated, are in jail, are killed, its faith. The only way to prevent this is secularism because secularism is the frame of conscious. Anyone can believe or not. Rose are you surprised you are getting the pen award, a prestige association of writings. The writers of the Pan America Center wright this letter objecting not to ill read it. It clearly arguable the murder at the Charlie Hebdo is sickening and tragic. What is neither clear or inarguable is a decision to receive an award for creative freedom of expression. What criteria was used to make that decision. By honoring Charlie Hebdo does not convey and support freedom of expression but selecting offensive material thats antiislammic already prevalent in the western world. That is in the letter. My point is, do you have anything to say about this controversy about giving the award to you other than thank you . Because we are always turning around the same kind of issues and subjects, you know. First of all who is this going to decide the kind of limits you put the freedom of speech. Thats a very important question. Rose very important question. And i think maybe theres just one so its a question of for me the real issue of all that is are you enough intelligence, are you enough decent to know exactly what y