The treachery of images
The creation of images of Muhammad (pbuh) is against a subset of Islamic teachings from the Hadith, but is not a general prohibition. Sunnis, particularly fundamentalist Sunnis, believe that it is improper to create a physical representation of the prophet. You might compare this to fundamentalist evangelicals in the American South, who believe that Catholics are misguided because they use the crucifix (not just a cross) and statues of the Blessed Virgin and the saints. Maybe you even remember that in the summer of 2001, the Taliban were destroying statues of Buddha in a broad interpretation of this belief (called "aniconism"). So it's no surprise that the Danish cartoons pissed off a lot of Muslims just by being images of Muhammad. Never mind that the cartoon used Muhammad as a symbol for Islam in general, and that symbol was being used to make some offensive points about Islam. Freedom of the press, which holds that anything lawful may (some would say "must") be printed, is obviously at odds with any group that holds taboos about ideas or images.

The U.S. State Department's position was that "Jyllands-Posten has the right to publish these cartoons and people who are offended by them have the right to express their anger. But no one has a right to threaten violence."

So now an Iranian newspaper has announced a Holocaust Cartoon contest. Given that the reaction, until now, has been a petulant and violent tantrum (only with firebombs, 'cause that's more fun), I'd say they're on the right track. I want to see Europe squirm on this one, and I want to see every newspaper that printed the Muhammad cartoons print the Holocaust Cartoons, or an editorial explaining why they won't...

...just as soon as Denmark has received formal diplomatic apologies for the destruction of their embassies in Syria and Lebanon, the vandalism of their embassy in Indonesia, the armed assaults on the EU offices in Gaza, the bomb threats against the Jyllands-Posten, and any other acts or credible threats of violence.