I thought I was the only one. It IS offensive for Muslims, and that part of it, I feel badly for them. It would be as if a newspaper ran a cartoon portraying Christ as a homosexual sex slave to the apostles. Alot of Americans would be quite upset by that, and threaten to boycott as well. Of course, they wouldn't be threatening to burn the place down, but that is besides the point. While the press and media have a right to offend, they have to realize that when you do, you piss people off.
No, that's precisely the point. Muslims can avoid any honest examination or appraisal of their "prophet" because the Koran tells them they must. Well, isn't that just so convenient for Islam.
I'd expect this from the UN, not the US State Dept. Bad form from State, who's silence is deafening when God or Christ are villified publically.
Additionally, the Counterterrorism Blog is reporting that some Muslims have Fabricated cartoons to worsened Danish controversy. Throwing fuel on the fire to justify their "anger" at the West. As if they ever needed any reason before.
Frankly, I could give a flying pig fart what the jihadis felt about anything.
What most of us do care about, however, is how the jihadis (and virtually all of Islam based upon its noteworthy silence) respond.
Depiction of Christ in urine: we get ticked off and threaten boycotts.
Drawing of the Pedophile (spit be upon him) in any form or manner: beheadings, mass violence, calls for new 9/11's, declarations of war, etc.
The contrast between the West and the great cult is priceless.