I'm not entirely sure, but I write FF. Vilks doesn't seem from what I haver read (and I haven't researched him or anything) to be racist or islamophobe. He just seem to be a guy who have bought into the art world's propaganda about itself and have followed it to its logical conclusion.
What sort of propaganda?
The belief that true art should provoke. That's the narrative the art world run with. Lars Vilks also seem to have adopted this view, and but he decide that he would provoke the art world, rather than some strawman which symbolise the "establishment" in the mind of artists. He attacked the hypocrisy in the art world by making a artwork which should provoke them and showing them to be hypocrites. Sadly for him it provoked a slightly different group.
Of course any one with a brain know that the most important important fact when you provoke someone, it should be someone who's:
a) a acceptable target.
b) won't react violently
He made a mistake on that point.
BTW Rushy had a interesting interview with him a few weeks ago.
Poll
