Muhammad.... again... but different

Early in the school year I wrote a blog that discussed some controversy at Yale University over whether or not to keep a cartoon shown in a Danish newspaper of Muhammad in a book that was soon to be published. The some called it "intellectual cowardice" to keep the cartoon out of the book. However, in the end the cartoon was never re-added. This same controversy came up in the most recent episodes of South Park. To be honest, if you didn't see them then you aren't missing anything, they were basically clip shows from the last 200 episodes. I last weeks episode a band of celebrities lead by Tom Cruise demanded the town of South Park bring them the Muslim Prophet Muhammad so they could harvest his immunity to ridicule. Muhammad is only present in the second episode but he is covered by a large black censor block the entire time. Even the word "Muhammad" was censored in the second episode (but not the first peculiarly). Both of the episodes the town was in a huge frenzy to keep Muhammad cloaked so they wouldn't got bombed by Muslim extremists. I think that the point being made is that before an image of Muhammad was shown in a Danish newspaper, people didn't show images of Muhammad out of respect for the Muslim people. However, because extremists responded to that incident with violence, people now refrain from showing images of Muhammad for fear of a violent retaliation. I think there is a temptation by some (i.e the people at Yale considering publishing a cartoon of Muhammad because it gave historical context) to think that it is cowardly to not publish and image of Muhammad. These people think they are making a statement against terrorism. In reality, whenever an image of Muhammad is shown it is a slap in the face to every Muslim. For that reason I think that it is never ok to publish an image of Muhammad. What do you think?
Is it ever ok to show an image of Muhammad? Is there any bravery in publishing an image of Muhammad (for historical context)?

POST!