Small win in a long game.

I read today that the poster boy of the right wing in the Netherlands Geert Wilders has been acquitted of all charges of inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims. The case against Wilders was somewhat artificial to begin with since the trial was forced by the appeal court having previously been refused by various prosecutions since 2008 who were unwilling to take it on. However, its a small victory for free speech albeit involving a somewhat seedy character, the case was summed up nicely IMO in the following statement,

"His comments may have frequently caused anxiety and insult, they were not criminal as they criticised Islam as a religion and not Muslims as a people."

There is much in Islam to be critical of, the colonial aspirations of it, the treatment of women, the glorification of barbaric acts, racism, parochialism etc. and of course not all Muslims agree with all these things either; but they exist they are real, they affect the lives of millions and are codified in the holy texts of that religion. In many debates the elephant in the room which no one dare mention for fear of "offence" is Islam. If we believe in free speech we should not be afraid to call out these undesirable traits and counter them with rational and if needs be forceful argument where ever they are encountered. For me this is the main point, not whether we agree or not with the politics and tactics of the Geert Wilders but whether anyone living in a society that claims to uphold the principal of free speech should be able to criticise ANY idea, religious, cultural, political or otherwise and to have the weight of that criticism stand on its own merits through evidence and reason.