Search

Joost Jansen wrote that he had Chat prepare a speech for Rob Jetten in response to serious riots in Amsterdam. The proposed text stated that violence against society was unacceptable, while demonstrating and expressing criticism were part of democracy. The speech proposed three measures: maintaining the rule of law, supporting victims and affected entrepreneurs, and investigating the causes of social tensions. The text also stated that researching those causes was no excuse for violence. The recovery of trust, according to the speech, would depend on consistent action and rules that applied to everyone. #Amsterdam #democratie #veiligheid (translated)

Martin Bosma wrote that people who claimed to strive for dialogue and connection about slavery, meanwhile had a Hamas flag and a sticker calling PVV members fascists brought to the table by Jeffrey Affreye. He asked what the Prime Minister was doing about that. https://t.co/1hF1ppnjGC #slavernij #dialoog #verbinding (translated)

Mia Doornaert wrote that in her opinion there were enough other occasions for dialogue, without including chants from the Quran or other religions in a Catholic service. She suggested that Muslims would find such a thing unthinkable in reverse and would consider it a sign of weakness. She also asked why, according to her, Catholic institutions were continually hurting Catholics. #dialoog #religie #respect (translated)

The goal is to reduce costs and have enough supplies, including for defense. Chairperson Von der Leyen announced this week a "strategic dialogue" on refineries in Europe: "The goal is to reduce costs and have enough supplies, including for defense." #olieprijzen #raffinage #duurzaam (translated)

The recent student protests in the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, marked by a sense of discontent over education cuts and societal concerns, have been overshadowed by violent actions from a small number of rioters, causing legitimate demands to go unheard and the level of dialogue with the authorities to further decline. #ManifesteEtudiant #ColèreCollective #RéformesEducatives (translated)

Mona Keijzer wrote that according to her a toxic atmosphere was spreading through the streets of Dutch cities. She asked where the time had gone when people used to engage in civilized and respectful conversations with each other, and stated that boundaries needed to be set. https://t.co/R7YGqGRVQU #respect #dialoog #grenzen (translated)

Sander Sassen reflected on the legacy of October 7. He wrote that three years earlier he had watched livestreams filled with rage and disgust in which, according to him, Palestinians were killing Jewish civilians while the Palestinian population celebrated the murders. Sassen stated that he commemorated the victims and argued that Israel was still being attacked from all sides and that Jews worldwide had to fear for their lives. According to him, October 7 had shown that civilization was an illusion for many and that antisemitism had returned in 2026. He said that his support for Israel and the Jewish people remained unwavering and called for speaking out against antisemitism, which, according to him, had also reached institutions, governments, politicians, and policymakers. Sassen referred to antisemitism as a "canary in the coal mine" and a measure of the tolerance and freedom of a society. In the Netherlands, he claimed that things had been declining over the past three years: propaganda was dominant, antisemitism had once again become socially acceptable, dialogue was often made impossible, and ideology drove many Dutch people. He wrote that the Netherlands had completely ignored the warning of the "deceased" canary. #antisemitisme #Israël #solidariteit (translated)

Strijder124 wrote that Minister Yesilgöz did not want to talk to Russia about peace. According to him, she said that the war could stop immediately if Vladimir Putin withdrew his troops, and that Ukraine and Europe should be at the table in discussions about lasting peace. According to the author, Yesilgöz also warned against what she perceived as naivety regarding the Russian threat. Strijder124 suggested that Yesilgöz's inflexible stance was exacerbating the problem. He advocated for concessions to Russia in exchange for peace and wrote that no one wanted a prolonged conflict with Russia. He also argued that the threat from Russia was being exaggerated and that Russia did not have the military capabilities to attack Europe. #Rusland #Oekraïne #Vrede (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)

,,Er moet een cultuur van dialoog zijn, van naar elkaar luisteren en elkaar respecteren. Het gaat er niet om positieve krantenkoppen te genereren, het gaat erom te doen wat goed is voor de sport"FIFA-voorzitter Gianni Infantino zegt open te staan voor open discussies over mogelijke hervormingen bij de wereldvoetbalbond. #FIFA #Infantino #UEFA