Wilders "provisionally" acquitted

Submitted by Edward Cline (United States), Oct 16, 2010 at 15:43

I will do a full jig of jubilation when Geert Wilders is completely exonerated. At the moment, just half a jig. Perhaps I'm reading more into this statement by public prosecutor Birgit van Roessed than is legitimate that, "Criticism [of religion] is allowed. Wilders makes his utterances as a politician. We believe the fact that he made his statements within the context of public debate removes any punishable element."

I'm not at all intimate with the political rules of engagement in Dutch politics, but doesn't this statement imply that only Dutch politicians may "blaspheme" or denigrate Islam? Are ordinary citizens "allowed" (and by whom?) to declaim and debate and make utterances about Islam around a café table? Publish images of Mohammad over the Internet, or through the public mails? Stage a Monty Pythonesque musical about the life of Mohammad? As I read Roessed's statement, it's only during political debates that critical utterances about Islam, Mohammad and even Muslims are permitted. Are there any readers of Mr. Pipes' article here who could clarify the meaning of that statement?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".