1) BRIEFLY – according to Hussain why should we not value freedom of speech vis-à-vis (in relation to) the Danish cartoons?
Hussain states that we should not value freedom of speech in relation to the Danish cartoons because they are obviously discriminatory and have not place in media.
2) In one or two paragraphs, compare one of the cartoons to the image of the falling WTC victim. In your succinct comparison take into account that these are controversial images.
The first thing that catches my eye about the difference between these two photographs is the presence of text in each. The wtc victim one has no text, forcing the audience to focus on the man falling to his death. It makes the picture that much more painful to look at. The Danish cartoon, on the other hand, uses text to label the man in the picture and to identify the author. I do not know what the text in the upper right corner means. Another point of comparison is on the basis of medium. The wtc victim picture is a candid photo and the cartoon is well—a cartoon, complete with grainy colors and degrading stereotypes of what the prophet Muhammad must have looked like. This difference in nature, the candid versus the cartoon, serves each photo with a different purpose. The wtc photo captured a horrific event that will never be forgotten. The cartoon ridicules and offends a religious prophet.
photo links:
Jomack's Art History Blog 
Good start here but you did need to be a bit more precise on H – noting the historical roots of stereotyping Muslims. For your comparison – it’s great that you pay close attention to the images and note differences of medium etc., but note how in your response you simply bounce back and forth between the two without drawing conclusions: 2.