I certainly took offence at the Danish depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) the same way I take offence at Hollywood representations of the Virgin Mary (pbuh) and the Prohet Jesus (pbuh). However, I disagree with the agressive manner in which a minority of Muslims reacted to the cartoons. By perpetuating violence as a reaction is merely fuelling the cartoonists and must have convinced the masses that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was really how the non-Muslims generally paint him to be.
Prohpet Muhammad (pbuh) was certainly told by Allah (swt) to accept the Prophets (pbut) of the People of the Book. However, Allah (swt) did not say that Jesus (pbuh) will reign for a 1000 years. By putting forward that the Muslims have been told that Jesus (pbuh) will reign for a 1000 years is misleading. I strongly believe that before anyone makes claims about beliefs, they need to accurately attribute information to the relevant sources.
What I find completely outrageous is the beheading of people as some sort of revenge against the depictions. If the Muslims did this to honour the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), I believe that this was not achieved. Rather, I believe that those violent acts dishonoured him. I am not opposed to protests as long as they are civil and not violent or agressive in nature. I think that the Muslims would have been more successful in honouring the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) if instead of the a day of protest, they had a dedicated day to talk about the truth about him, especially in light of the example of the prophet who forgave many who attacked him personally rather than the nation.
The truth about the Prophet, contrary to what some Christians have posted is that he was not a rapist and he did not steal his stepson's wife. There are hadiths that say that he married a very young girl, however, by highlighting this as some sort of derogatory act carried out only by Muhammad (pbuh) is unfair. I have read that Moses (pbuh) and even earlier Prophets (pbut) too married young girls as Ayesha (pbuh) in their older years.
In terms of having a civil, intellectual debate between believers of the two faiths, I believe that the website leaves a lot to be desired. It seems that both parties are merely concerened about who can collect the most dirt to throw at the other. Neither party is slightly interested in actually understanding why each other believe in their faith.