We've been told any action reasonably expected to elicit a violent response

[tama]

46. Violence begets violence

and hate speech is form of violence. Our emotions are much less "private" than we often think and believe and much more collective than some believe. Anger is very catchy emotion and spreads very easily once ignited, ire like fire.

I'm not sure at all how reasonable it is to assume that those who riot interpret this as government protecting or subscribing to the film itself. Depends much on what and how people they trust as their community leaders (e.g. religious leaders) say - or agitate. So far I have no idea if religious leaders there want to use this particular action to agitate more violence. I don't know nor understand which threats of violence you are referring to, against protecting the filmmaker from potential violence.

What I see here is that many DUers are angry and agitated also against the film maker, which is also not difficult to understand, and in the "lynch mob mood" angry at also US government for using tax payer money to protect the person they are angry at. I thought the agitation you mentioned referred to that mood, which was quite confusing.