Erik Wemple June 4

On May 3, Pamela Geller, the controversial leader of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), organized a “Draw Muhammad” cartoon contest in Garland, Tex., that drew an attack from two gunmen. The Islamic State claimed responsibility for the incident, in which the two gunmen were killed by a police officer.

CNN’s Alisyn Camerota summed up the reaction in many media precincts when she told Geller this: “What people are saying is that there’s always this fine line, you know, between freedom of speech and being intentionally incendiary and provocative.” Fox News’s Juan Williams said this: “She intentionally was provocative in her actions.” Others said much the same thing, only in different words. Fox News’s Martha MacCallum: I’m not sure you went about it the right way.”

Yesterday brought another development in the story. CNN reported that Usaamah Rahim, the man who was shot to death Tuesday by law enforcement officers in Boston after he brandished a knife, was “originally plotting” to behead Geller.

The news introduces a juxtaposition: Organizing a cartoon contest vs. scheming to behead an individual. Which is needlessly provocative?

CNN’s Erin Burnett last evening got Geller on the phone and asked her, among other things, “Do you on some level relish being the target of these attacks?”

Geller responded, “Relish being the target? Who self-promotes to get killed?” She said she has recruited an “an army of security” for protection and criticized the media for siding with “those that would target me.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik...rovocative-now/