Originally posted by Caer
The two important things from this are that the cartoons did not spark immediate protests. The protests began happening -four- months later. What makes you decide four months after something that, dammit you really are angry and you need to show everyone!
I have seen this claim on various websites, so I took the time to dig up a source that gives some of the progress about this situation eversince the publishing of the caricatures. This article can be found here . It didn't take Muslims 4 months to react, but 4 months for Abu Laban to internationalize the matter.

Originally posted by Caer
Secondly, the last sentence in there underscores the issue we're seeing even in this thread. All we, the West, see of Muslims is hate-mongerers, terrorists, chaos, and corrupt governments. Blame that on the media if you will - it's partially true - but they're not completely to blame. Muslims, whether extremist or not, have played a large role in creating this image. One Reuters journalist noted that (though I was unable to find the article again) it is kind of hard to report on something good when there was yet another bombing.

In a way, I can see how these cartoons were created. It is a reflection upon the image the West sees of Muslims. What has struck me as curious the entire time is that Muslims aren't more angry that they've created a bad image of themselves, one that would generate such negative cartoons, rather than the fact that these were published.
I agree with most of what you said above. Regarding your last paragraph, however... once again, Muslims value God and the Prophet more than their friends, relatives, families and lives. Mock Muslims as much as you want, it's been going on for quite a few years now, but when you directly mock the Prophet and consequently God (no, the Prophet isn't God, but His messenger, so an insult to Him is an insult to God), shit hits the fan. Or at least, it's easier to rally up Muslims against you.

I hope this clarifies some of what you were pondering.