Metro News in France is reporting that police have identified the attackers on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo office

Visit for more information

Le Monde tweets that it has confirmed with police sources that the three suspects have been identified; however,The French reports do not include names.
The attack at Charlie Hebdo Magazine‘s office began around noon, when the suspects killed a receptionist to gain entrance to the offices in central Paris. They then opened fire on a second-floor editorial meeting, killing 10 people, including eight journalists, prosecutor Francois Molins told reporters. A police officer was killed during the suspects’ getaway. Eight others were injured, including four who reportedly were in serious condition.

We are shocked. We know that there should be a place for satirical press in Europe. We’re also sure though that this was not about Muslim people – it was about some really really extreme people. I am very worried about what might happen next – that the Front National will try to use this to their advantage. It doesn’t represent France at all.
French expat, Marie Proffit

Warning: Extremely Graphic Footage


President Obama’s reaction

Footage courtesy of The Guardian

Chérif and Said Kouachi, ages 32 and 34, are suspected of being the masked gunmen who entered the offices of the Charlie Hebdo newspaper at 10 Rue Nicolas-Appert in the 11th Arrondissement on Wednesday morning and slaughtered members of the paper’s staff and two police officers with Kalashnikov automatic weapons. The third suspect, Hamyd Mourad age 18, has surrendered, while the two brothers have yet to be in custody.

paris attacks
Cherif Kouachi, left, 32, and his brother, Said Kouachi, 34, who are suspected in a deadly attack on a satirical newspaper in Paris

President François Hollande has declared Thursday a day of national mourning, with flags at half-mast for three days. The President stated the country has been “struck at its very heart”.

Freedom will always be stronger than barbarism.

******************************FULL UPDATE**************************

Here is a timeline, as reported by The Guardian, of the events that transpired prior to the ultimate demise of all suspects involved in the initial attack on Charlie Hebdo

Friday 9 January, 11:30am

Police close in on the Création Tendance Découverte printing complex where there are reports that one hostage is inside. According to French TV, he is a 26-year-old male. French special forces take up positions on the roof of surrounding buildings. Charles de Gaulle airport, 8 kms away, is partly closed.


There were reports that an armed man took a hostage in a Jewish grocery store at Porte de Vincennes in Paris.


The man suspected of killing a policewoman in Paris on Thursday is the hostage taker at the supermarket, according to reports, and had around five people hostage. Police say no hostages were injured.


Police name the two people wanted in connection with the case as, Amedy Coulibaly and Hayat Boumeddiene. Coulibaly was reported as the supermarket hostage taker.


Shots and explosions were heard at the siege at Dammartin-en-Goële, and heavily-armed counter-terror officers moved in. The Charlie Hebdo gunmen are reported to have been killed and the hostage there freed.


Loud bangs were heard at the site of the supermarket siege, with some hostages being led out by police. Shortly afterwards, reports say the hostage takers at Dammartin-en-Goële, Chérif and Saïd Kouachi, were killed in the assault, as was Amedy Coulibaly.


French President François Hollande confirmed that four hostages were killed, and four were wounded in the Paris supermarket.

-Infinite Wiz (@infinitewiz)

1 Comment

  • scallywag says:

    Yes the deaths were barbaric, yes this is an assault on freedom of press, thought and liberty but are we not being naive to assume because most of us treasure freedom of free thought that such expression doesn’t risk inciting vitriol and reprisal by others? Are we not ourselves being equally insular in assuming that when reprisal finally happens in finding fault in those who declined to adhere to our sense of fair play? Aren’t we equally culpable by failing to open to the idea that we are indeed engaged in a clash of ideologues where the idea of gentleman’s rules of conduct go out the window?