These are excerpts from editorials in newspapers about the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed and the ensuing worldwide protests:

Egyptian Gazette, Cairo, on freedom of speech:<$>

In a desperate bid to assuage anger, which has erupted across the Muslim world over published cartoons lampooning the Prophet Muhammad, Western media and officials cite freedom of speech as an excuse. The argument is downright faulty. It adds insult to injury. Who said that free speech should be offensive to others?

The drawings, which first appeared in a Danish newspaper and later reprinted in European papers, mock a symbol that means a lot for Muslims. For sure, freedom of the press is not without limits or responsibility. The European media, which provoked Muslims’ fury, have not shown enough consideration by running those images, deemed offensive by ordinary Muslims inside the West and far beyond.

The cartoons could not have been more ill-timed. They were published with the West and Muslims seen on a collision course. No one could be happier than propagators of racial hatred and advocates of the “clash of civilisations” theory.

In a multicultural world, the media everywhere should demonstrate a sense of responsibility and play a role in bringing people of different faiths closer. By no means does this lofty role contradict freedom of expression.

Asahi Shimbun, Tokyo, on prophet drawings:<$>

Freedom of expression is a basic right that shores up democracy. But how far are people allowed to assert that right when it comes into conflict with the dignity of religion? This vexing question is raised afresh by the row between European countries and the Islamic world over caricatures satirising the Islamic prophet Mohammed.

While we are concerned about the violence, we also fear that, as things stand, the ruckus could isolate Islamic countries and Muslims scattered in many parts of the world. Calm must be restored early so that the conflict will not become a “clash of civilisations”.

In the Islamic world, only a handful of countries allow their people to freely express their views. And partly because they are left behind by Western countries in economic terms, many people in those countries have twisted sentiments.

Under such circumstances, what would happen if some in the West press Muslims with “the prophet’s cartoons” by wielding the principle of freedom of expression? It is obvious that such action would be seized by agitators and used as an outlet for venting the pent-up frustration of the discontented masses.

Freedom of expression is something very precious. But consideration must also be given to the religion that is the very basis of people’s thoughts.

Moderation must be exercised to securely protect such freedoms.

Bergens Tidende, Bergen, Norway, on violent Islamic protests of cartoons:

At the moment, it can seem that caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad printed in Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten and then Norway’s magazines have ignited a fire that can be hard to put out.

Many are surprised by the violent reactions in some Muslim countries over what some see as relatively harmless cartoons. But the rage in Muslim countries must be seen as an expression of a deep and lasting frustration over humiliation by the West, life in poverty, and a future that seldom looks bright.

In that situation, the cartoons were seized by extremists and turned into a fighting cause. If these extremist groups were waiting for a symbolic cause, they got it from Jyllands-Posten and magazines. It started as a case about free expression. The right to speak out, even provocatively, stands.

We cannot and will not accept religious extremists answering the printed word, no matter how offensive, by burning embassies.

But even we defenders of free speech must understand that political authorities, in this case (Norwegian) Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere, also have other considerations when trying to control a situation that can seem out of control.

In that case, dialogue can be more beneficial than protests based on strong and inflexible principles.