How were we to know?

On the University of Saskatchewan cartoon controversy, Robert McClelland responds: "This paper can’t be expected to now what will offend a pack of religious zealots in advance."

Oh, of course Robert... how on earth was the paper to ever suspect that a crudely drawn strip of Jesus Christ of Gallillee the Lord performing fellatio on a Jewish carciture pig would ever be considered offensive?

(He also hits the "hypocrisy" angle, which I've covered before and am tired of enduring...look, its not hypocrisy when the paper continues its political slant and merely lies about its motives. To be hypocritical, you actually have to believe in the two things you're saying.)