Search

Alice van Drie called it unjust that the cabinet had excluded FDF and Agractie from the nitrogen discussions after the farmers' protest in Amersfoort. She wrote that the organizations had not organized the protest and suspected that the cabinet was looking for a pretext to keep them off the table. According to Van Drie, all farmers would suffer as a result of this government. #fail66 #boerenprotest https://t.co/a97OIFIqKp #boerenprotest #stikstof #politiek (translated)

A group of men in Amsterdam is organizing the first Men's March to promote the safety of women, but feminist organizations criticize the use of the word "protect" and the division of roles in which women do not participate. #Mannenmars #VeiligheidVanVrouwen #Feminisme (translated)

"I want to apologize to everyone inside and outside the UWV who has experienced discrimination or racism. That is not acceptable; I find it inconceivable. It is the norm and the boundary we must have in society and certainly in this organization." "It touches me. I find it inconceivable. You don't want it to be true," says Abdeluheb Choho, chairman of the Executive Board of UWV since September 1. #discriminatie #racisme #UWV (translated)

Wouter Duyck called a tweet the most scandalous of the week. He wrote that organizations that have traditionally worked to protect the vulnerable have come to think that oppression is always determined by skin color, even when a 15-year-old was carrying a flamethrower. According to Duyck, those organizations were abandoning the truly vulnerable. #onderdrukking #socialerechtvaardigheid #kwetsbaren (translated)

Afshin Ellian asked what would happen if Islamic rules became visible in the police and the judiciary. He argued that guidelines could change under pressure from leftist and Islamic politicians, and that the VVD could permanently prevent this with strict legislation. Ellian wrote that neutrality and a neutral appearance of government bodies and their officials could be enshrined in an overarching law or in separate laws, such as the Police Act and the Judiciary Organization Act. He suggested that leftist and Islamist politicians would, in principle, never obtain a majority in both Houses to amend such a law. He also noted it was remarkable that the VVD had not proposed such legislation in recent decades. According to him, a robust law should guarantee the neutrality of the police, judiciary, and public prosecution, unlike a guideline. #neutraliteit #wetgeving #politiek (translated)

Jonathan Krispijn wrote that he announced his departure from Ongehoord Nederland a year earlier and started Krispijnpunt for himself. He said that a fellow fighter and Robert Jensen encouraged him to take that step. According to Krispijn, his own channel gave him more space to delve into subjects. He mentioned documentaries about the events of October 7, Geert Wilders' relationship with the VVD, and his ties to Israel. He also said he investigated why Wilders voted against independent research into sadistic ritual abuse. Krispijn wrote that GeenStijl and Nieuwrechts openly criticized him after publications from Krispijnpunt. In November 2025, according to Krispijn, the weekly National Agenda show started, in which he discussed the media, particularly De Telegraaf. He said he confronted editor-in-chief Kamran Ullah about a Nazi cartoon concerning Lidewij de Vos and explained who the newspaper's shareholders were. He also mentioned a documentary about the influence of politics on the media, and reports on demonstrations in the Netherlands, a trip to Ceuta, and an interview with Jared Taylor about the white race. Krispijn wrote that Krispijnpunt now had almost 30,000 subscribers, about 1,300 regular donors, and a total of 3,000,000 YouTube views. He thanked his supporters and asked readers to contribute either once or monthly. According to him, the channel aimed to grow to 60,000 subscribers and 3,000 regular donors in the coming year. He also reported that the website was expanded with articles from editor Fabio Bellarmino. #journalistiek #onafhankelijkheid #Krispijnpunt (translated)

Forum for Democracy wrote that Prime Minister and D66 leader Jetten had held well-organized and financed organizations responsible for alleged attacks on minorities, according to the party. Jetten would have stated that he wanted to hit hard the people behind those organizations. Forum for Democracy added that D66 responded evasively when asked which organizations were involved, and let readers judge for themselves. #politiek #minderheden #D66 (translated)

Rob, I'm just jumping in. Team Netherlands, red-white-blue, the same freedom. Beautiful imagery, you surely have a premium ChatGPT account? But may I remind you that just four days ago you were at the D66 congress proclaiming that you were going to ‘hit certain people hard.’ And now suddenly it’s one big warm nest? Pressing question, if we all count, what about the members of parliament who just walked out during @biemyati's maiden speech instead of listening to her argument? Or don't @fvdemocratie members of parliament belong to Team Netherlands? Or am I misunderstanding, and does ‘we are all different’ only apply if the other has a different skin color or sexual preference, but is a member of @D66? You are the prime minister of the whole country, @RobJetten, not just of the people who applaud when you use aggressive language about ‘well-organized organizations’ that undermine our democracy. Show us that you are truly the prime minister of everyone, including the Dutch people you want to ‘hit hard,’ because indeed all Dutch people are different, but all deserve the same freedom, dignity, and the right to be heard, even if their political beliefs don’t agree with yours. Right? #TeamNederland #vrijheid #democratie (translated)

Typerend. This is the director of Avansa VZW. His organization, linked to the Catholic union, receives 13.6 million euros in subsidies each year. What do they do with it? Organize forest walks. With a left-activist approach. And as he aptly explains here: "doing things for people". Like "writing a book about the elderly" and then "touring schools with it and making a theater presentation". The man risks losing a maximum of 5% of subsidies with this government agreement. That means: instead of 13.6 million euros, he will now receive "only" 13 million euros per year (it is likely to be around 13.4 million in reality). According to the public broadcaster, this is "cold, bleak" almost inhumane. Those not invited to discuss this: working dual-income earners who struggle to save a little money. They will continue to pay the 13.4 million euros to Avansa. In this country, you are already seen as cold and bleak when you question that. Abolish the entire subsidy pot of 80 million euros. If there are a few organizations that could use some support, that can perfectly be done through a regular subsidy. #subsidies #maatschappij #vakbond (translated)

Typerend. This is the director of Avansa VZW. His organization, connected to the Catholic trade union, receives 13.6 million euros in subsidies annually. What do they do with it? Organize forest walks. With a leftist-activist angle. And as he aptly explains here: "doing things for people". Like "writing a book about the elderly" and then "going around schools with it and turning it into a theater performance". The man risks losing a maximum of 5% of subsidies with this government agreement. So that's: instead of 13.6 million euros, he will now receive "only" 13.4 million euros per year. According to the public broadcaster, this is "cold, chilly" almost inhumane. Not invited to discuss this: working dual-income earners who struggle to save a bit of money. They continue to pay the 13.4 million euros to Avansa. In this country, you are already cold and chilly when you question that. Abolish that entire subsidy pot of 80 million euros. If there are a few organizations that you would like to support, that can easily be done through a regular subsidy. #subsidies #politiek #samenleving (translated)

Letschert in a tight spot! The Jewish and Israeli students in Maastricht are stating it clearly. They are no longer carried away by the dialogue merry-go-round of the D66 Minister of Education, after spending years in her merry-go-round when she led the university. Result: an antisemitic climate and the import of hate rallies. Letschert's reward: the plush of The Hague. Read the letter below. Support these brave students who let their voice, and only their voice, be heard. Who do not bow to the established order and do not allow themselves to be exploited and misled by them. Bravo! To the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, IJAR Maastricht has learned that Minister of Education Rianne Letschert intends to organize a meeting about Jewish students, following the recent developments at Maastricht University. As the representative organization of Jewish and Israeli students at Maastricht University, we have received no formal invitation from the minister or her ministry. Nor have we been informed about the purpose, the mandate, the intended participants, or the measures that may be considered. If the subject concerns the position and experiences of Jewish and Israeli students at Maastricht University, consultations should begin with the organization that represents these students and within the university environment where the relevant events take place. During Ms. Letschert's previous term at Maastricht University, Jewish and Israeli students and their representatives spoke with her and other members of the university administration on numerous occasions. They repeatedly expressed concerns about safety, intimidation, the campus climate, institutional decisions, and the implications of those decisions for Jewish and Israeli students. From those discussions, it appeared that consultations were taking place, but in our experience, they did not lead to measures that corresponded to the issues raised. Clear lines of accountability were also not established for what followed. This history means that the mere fact that there is again a meeting cannot be considered an achievement in itself. Other Jewish organizations and individuals elsewhere in the Netherlands may have legitimate perspectives on broader issues concerning Jewish life, antisemitism, or national policy. However, they do not represent the Jewish and Israeli students at Maastricht University and cannot replace the representative organization of the students whose campus, lecture halls, and daily living environment are directly at stake. A meeting held elsewhere, with discussion partners who do not represent these students, can be viewed as discussions with Jewish organizations, but cannot reasonably be presented as a consultation with the representative organization of Jewish and Israeli students studying at Maastricht University. For that reason, we believe that if the minister wishes to address what is happening at Maastricht University, she should come to Maastricht and engage directly in conversation with the representative organization of Jewish and Israeli students here. The location is important, as responsibility must be aligned with where the issue occurs and not be disconnected from it: the issues being discussed involve this university, the decisions being made here, and the students who experience the consequences of those decisions. Thus, consultations regarding Maastricht should take place in Maastricht and begin with those who are institutionally responsible for representing the involved students. Before such a meeting takes place, we also demand clarity about what the minister aims to achieve with it. We expect to know what questions are being investigated, what decisions or measures remain open, what responsibility the ministry will take on itself, what responsibility it expects from Maastricht University, what concrete follow-up steps are foreseen, and how the outcomes of the meeting will be recorded and communicated. Without that information, participation threatens to serve mainly as proof that consultations have taken place, rather than as a means by which those consultations can actually have an impact. Our concern, therefore, is not about whether there will be a meeting, but about the relationship between consultation and responsibility. We have previously participated in discussions, we have laid out the problems before, and our presence has previously shown that a dialogue existed. What too often has remained unclear, however, is who was responsible for acting on what was raised during those discussions and what actually changed as a result of those discussions. A representative consultation should not end once the participants leave the room, but should record who is responsible for the issues raised, what actions follow from that, and how those actions will be assessed. We remain willing to engage seriously with the minister in Maastricht. However, that consultation must take place with the representative organization of the Jewish and Israeli students whose situation is at stake, with a clear purpose, with well-defined responsibilities, and with an explicit connection between listening and acting. Anything less than that threatens only to reproduce the form of consultation, while the substance — and the responsibility for it — remains unresolved. Signed, The Board of IJAR Maastricht *link to the original letter in the tweet below #antisemitisme #onderwijs #studentenrechten (translated)

Hundreds, possibly thousands of Dutch women and minors have been secretly filmed in recent months with a smart camera glasses, leading to the cessation of their sale by various organizations and companies and the advice from NOC*NSF to ban such glasses due to the seriousness of the violation of privacy and the increased risk of sexual abuse. #PrivacySchending #SeksueelMisbruik #AIbrillen (translated)

The prime minister wants not to 'hit well-organized and funded organizations hard' anymore. That's nice. But who are those people…? And what exactly do they do? Therefore: Parliamentary questions! With bonus question #17. @baspaternotte saw that it was good. #politiek #organisatie #Kamervragen (translated)