Cognitivefun also has a multimodal n-back, where you can customize most aspects of the test (sounds, images, speed run, double or triple n-back, number of trials):
Nobody protests against the right of individual muslims to feel offended. People protest against the tendency for (some) muslims to try to impose their religious rules on nonbelievers by actual violence and the threat of violence. In the wider perspective this is a protest against the tendency to silence criticism of religions (or anything else)
by using violence against the critics.
I understand the reason that this strategy works and why moderates don't actively distance themselves from it. By keeping silent and vague they will benefit from the power that the threat of violence gives. In Denmark there are quite a few places where the police can't operate on normal terms due to the mentality exhibited in the video above.
What I mean by double standard and excuses is the tendency to always add 'reasons' when it comes to islam.
Why do this behavior need to be taken on other terms than personal responsibility and the norms of civil conduct? It's not like the attackers - due to their religious affiliation and reasons derived from this - lack choice.
This took place in a swedish university during a lecture about religion and freedom of speech. The video that Lars Vilks showed during this clip was made by an iranian artist. Before this he had showed examples of offensive material directed at christianity etc.
And there is a funny kind of double standard involved, because practically nobody objects when artists offend religions where the response to the alleged offence isn't violent.
EDIT: A few days after this attack, "somebody" tried to firebomb Vilk's house. All because of a series of rather tame drawings like this one:
