Anti-Muslim activist and conspiracy theorist Pamela Geller believes herself to be in great company.
For the past decade she has been a leading voice railing against the “Islamization of America,” blogging about supposed Muslim infiltration of the government and how President Barack Obama was possibly the secret love child of Malcolm X. Even prominent supporters of the War on Terror consider her to be a fringe figure.
But Geller wants to be taken seriously.
This week, she was on the defensive after putting on a contest to mock the Prophet Muhammad in Garland, Texas, which resulted in two gunmen showing up and being shot dead on Sunday.
In the face of critcism from conservatives and liberals alike, she has taken to comparing herself to others considered to be clear-cut heroes and victims — dead soldiers, civil rights activists, and trailblazers for free speech.
Rosa Parks
Even a Fox News host had to call time-out for this one.
After hearing the critiques about her from the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue and real estate mogul Donald Trump, Geller compared herself on Tuesday to the most famous black Civil Rights icon outside of Martin Luther King Jr.
Trump had called Geller out for simply “taunting” Muslims rather than offering any real philosophical or social criticism.
“What would he have said about Rosa Parks?” Geller said. “‘Rosa Parks should never have gone to the front of the bus. She’s taunting people.'”
“No, no, no, where are you getting the Rosa Parks comparison?” Fox’s Martha MacCallum interrupted. Geller did not return to the analogy.
Malala
In fairness to Geller, her top advocate at Fox News, Sean Hannity, set her up here.
In a debate with the channel’s “liberal” contributor Juan Williams on Thursday night, Hannity pushed back against criticisms that Geller knew she was inciting violence. He brought up the story of Pakistani teenager Malala Yousafzai, who won the Nobel Peace Prize last year for her activism after being shot in the head by the Taliban in 2009.
“She knew there could be consequences! And she went anyway,” Hannity said of Malala.
“Sean, she was getting an education!” Williams pleaded.
“I’m giving an education,” Geller interjected.
Williams rolled his eyes and looked away. Geller went on to say Williams was enforcing “Sharia law.”
Moaz al-Kasasbeh, The Jordanian Pilot Killed By ISIL
In the same Fox segment on Thursday, Williams tried to draw some contrast between Geller’s antics and actual people who come up against Islamic violence in their home country, particularly the adherents of the faith Geller spends her days attacking.
He picked up on Geller’s mention of Moaz al-Kasasbeh, the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive by the Islamic State terror group in 2014.
“Pam Geller just said a minute ago they burned a pilot,” Williams said. “The pilot was fighting a war.”
“But I’m fighting a war,” Geller interrupted. Williams attempted to continue his point about the difference between the two, but Hannity and Geller cut him off.
Charlie Hebdo Staffers
Geller championed the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo when members of its staff were killed by Islamic militants earlier this year, but apparently the feeling was not mutual.
“To be honest, I can’t imagine the kind of comparison you can make between the Charlie Hebdo attack January 7 and this event,” staffer Jean-Baptiste Thoret said of Geller’s stunt. He called the event part of a “very harsh movement against Islamization of the U.S.”
On a Fox appearance on Tuesday with MacCallum, Geller didn’t allow the magazine’s explicit disavowal of her ideology to interfere with her case.
“You see a Charlie Hebdo comparison with what you did?” MacCallum asked.
Geller was forced to acknowledge that she may have “a disagreement” with the staff of Charlie Hebdo, but reiterated that she shared their fight.
“This is political Islam seeking to impose restrictions on free speech, and you’re asking me to abridge my speech so as not to offend savages,” she said.
Molly Norris
The closest example Geller may have going for her is Seattle political cartoonist Molly Norris, who in 2010 drew a cartoon that proposed an “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day.” (She didn’t actually draw a human figure, but labeled several objects like a tea cup, a cherry, and a domino, “Muhammad.”)
Death threats came pouring in, and on the advice of the FBI, Norris was whisked away into hiding, where she remains to this day.
During the Hannity segment on Thursday, Juan Williams evoked Norris as an example of someone whose criticism of Islamic orthodoxy had a purpose. Geller saw it differently.
“Molly Norris had a draw Muhammad contest. What’s the difference?” Geller said.
“She was doing political cartoons,” Williams interjected.
Norris elaborated on her cartoon at the time.
“I didn’t mean for my satirical poster to be taken seriously. It became kind of an excuse for people to hate or be mean-spirited. I’m not mean-spirited,” she told City Arts Magazine.
For Geller to compare herself to Malala or Rosa Parks to me is…well it’s offensive. Geller hasn’t got near the courage of Malala and besides this beautiful young lady (Malala) is MUSLIM!! And supposedly Geller is anti-Muslim so on several levels Geller’s off base.
And as for Rosa? Jeebers…Here’s another person of great courage. Geller isn’t worthy to tie Rosa’s shoes.
Geller is a pretty disgusting individual. And it’s probably true that she was looking to incite violence, which makes her both stupid and dangerous. But none of that really matters to me. I’m not going to say, “I support free speech, but…” Freedom of speech has value precisely because speech has the power to offend or anger. She wanted to make people angry. So what? People of all religions need to have their faith mocked.
Has anyone noticed that everyone that Geller has compared herself to has either been arrested, had to go into hiding or has been wounded or killed?
She is a racist hater…no wonder Hannity likes her.
She is exactly like them…except for the whole thing about agitating a group of people or pushing for their exclusion from the US society. The others fought or are fighting for inclusion. Expanded rights, so the only right she is fighting for is the right to exclude. Thus putting two “rights” at direct conflict.