@Huma: This most certainly involves freedom of speech, because it asks the question of whether you're allowed to say something that offends a bunch of people. That newspaper had something to say, they said it under the knowledge that they're entitled to say it, and then the rug was pulled out from under them. Whether they should have done it isn't an issue for freedom of speech, but whether they should be allowed to say something that offends quite a few people is. The KKK offends quite a few people, but they have every right to say what they have to say if they say it in a peaceful medium. Likewise, the people who hate the KKK have something to say, and they have the right to say it as long as they do so in a peaceful manner. This newspaper wanted to tell the world that it thought Islam was a religion of violence (not that I agree with that), and I don't think they should be silenced because people get angry. Lea has nothing to do with the US or EU, or their political system therein; I think a person has every right to insult my religion, and I have every right to argue against what they say when they do. But, with freedom comes responsibility; I think the newspaper made a very bad choice in publishing those images, I think it was wrong to insult the good muslim people of the world, and also I think they cannot have their right to publish such things taken away.
And I do think this has to do with taking offense, at least to an extent. I would be offended, I wouldn't boycott Denmark, but yeah, i think there's definately some offense taken.