I'm really torn about this issue.

I'm for freedom of the press and free expression. Plus, I find people are often too easily offended and if they could look at things a little more broadly we'd probably have a little more harmony.

On the other hand, the press screwed up because they kept poking at the wounds. It's one thing if you publish something once and go "oops, we didn't know it would be found offensive", but it's a different thing to publish multiple images, multiple times, and do it in the face of rising anger.

I'm just saying there needs to be a balance between a free press and respect for customs, morals and the public good. We already have enough trouble with that part of the world without finding ways to egg them on.

On the other hand, the press screwed up because they kept poking at the wounds. It's one thing if you publish something once and go "oops, we didn't know it would be found offensive", but it's a different thing to publish multiple images, multiple times, and do it in the face of rising anger.

You are missing the point of why the Danish newspaper did what it did. They did not publish the cartoons by mistake, not realizing they would be offensive. In Europe, where there are many more Muslims and the threat of terrorism has been apparent for much longer, the general public feels afraid to criticize anything about Islam because they might be killed -- like Theo Van Gogh was, for instance. Jyllands Posten published the cartoons (that they knew would be offensive to some) to stand up to the bullying of terrorism. And the later papers reprinted the cartoons to show solidarity with Jyllands Posten, once Jyllands Posten did start to get threats. You don't stand up to bullies by giving in when they turn up the heat.