From the BBC:

Thousands of people in Afghanistan have been protesting against the reprinting of cartoons in Danish newspapers they say are insults to Islam.

At the scene of the biggest protest, in the western city of Herat, police say more then 10,000 people took to the streets to denounce Denmark.

They also condemned the planned release of a Dutch film critical of the Koran.

They burned Dutch and Danish flags, and called for their troops to be removed from the Nato force in Afghanistan.

Saturday's protests have been the largest in the last two weeks in Afghanistan.

The crowd size estimate from an AP reporter was 5,000 in Herat. But still, that's five times bigger than the group of religious clerics and students who protested a week ago in Mazar-i-sharif.

Denmark and Netherlands have troops in Afghanistan, supposedly tasked with winning hearts and minds.

Both those countries are liberal democracies with free speech traditions. Some on the conservative side of the spectrum are using that freedom of speech in a way that alienates the very people that their troops are supposedly trying to help, thus making that task much more difficult to achieve -- and easing the burden for the Taliban.

Vast swaths of the Afghan population are socially and religiously conservative Muslims. Nothing ISAF does there will change that fact. During the Christian apostate controversy of a few years ago, journalists seemingly had no trouble finding people who felt the guy should be put to death for switching to Christianity from Islam.

While the "I may disagree with what you say, but I would defend to the death your right to say it" sentiment may play well in the secular West, I suspect it doesn't play at all in honour-based, post-medieval Afghanistan. It's more like, "I disagree with what you say, and I'll kill you for saying it."

My guess is that expecting the average Afghan to hear anything more than "Denmark," "Netherlands" and "blasphemy" in this particular conversation -- or to differentiate the actions of individuals from the state -- would be insanely optimistic.

As promised, Dubya said he will veto bill that would stop U.S. intelligence agencies from using techniques that have feathers like torture, webbed feet like torture and quack like torture -- although Dubya referred to them in his radio address as "specialized interrogation procedures."