On x @BumblebeeJoe Aka Jan B. Hommel aka Jan Bonte us to watch the DNW interview of Marlies Dekkers with Maarten Keulemans, just because of the pure, driven, authentic Marlies that I can imagine, that it was precisely in front of the Vale Dwaallicht Maarten Keulemans. So for that suggestion I have thanked for health reasons (not that something is going on with me).
@ LEON1969 Aka Leon Kuunders, however, picked up the glove fearlessly. Brave. I have to admit: he came a long way. Fortunately, he reported on X, so that those who cannot bring it up to look, or just find it a waste of their time, or any excuse - that they too can still take something of the conversation with them.
Below Leon’s “My Reaction to the New World with Marlies Dekkers and Maarten Keulemans”. The link to the conversation itself is no longer necessary.). Leon speaking:
Ok, well, the watched it anyway: First I want to admit to be one of the men who knows that @marliesdekkers In addition to the women's line also had a men's line (super nice business in The Hague, sex in the fitting rooms is still me). Thousands of euros I transferred to that beautiful lady with a big smile on the face. So. Do not expect a balanced response from me.
Second impression. Maarten is sitting on the apologetic chair. Mf. So I undertook it (... a few moments later) Oh no, he blocked me.
Oh well.
Third impression. Download that transcript.*
Over:
- The atmosphere on the Volkskrant editors: "Occasionally then I have a strong opinion about things and then I am sometimes called up"
- Winning a prize for writing news items during the most intense propaganda period in the history of the Dutch people: "All those people who had just come to the [shit] by the coronacrisis, people who had died, people who ... we know really terrible stories about it"
- The feeling (without calling the lower abdomen): “This gives you natural feeling, a good network too and a good feeling for what is going on in [and] how [de] science works”and about taking responsibility: "Of course I don't have the truth in lease, isn't it. I'm just a journalist."
Overflowing self -confidence, being called on the mat at your employer about your publicly proclaimed opinion and get told what the conditions are, including that strong opinion in the newspaper ventilation. Check. 
Fourth impression. @marliesdekkers Can listen for hours. Of which deed.
Fifth impression. IK Paraphrase: "You do the same as me, many the same people are addressed? We are no different, is we?" Well heard dear readers? Maarten runs empty there about all the reactions and what that does with his life. Terrible. Check. I will quote the editorial status of the Volkskrant, valid as of August 2021, the applicable article 3.1: "De Volkskrant is a journalistic organization that takes the task to inform readers independently, carefully and as versatile as possible." In the interview with Marlies, Keulemans acknowledges that he knowingly and knowingly the editorial status of de Volkskrant. Check.
Sixth impression. "You are irritated, why?" "It's already gone." "Well I don't think so. You are pretty irritated just because I ask questions. ... you are doing super well, Marliesje. But often you have people with a story that is different from how the scientists are seeing it. And then I see you in that story and then I think ... why don't you let a scientist go to the word." Hautaine Frikadel. Check.
Seventh impression. "You have called me stupid. Why?" Reads reactions to his propaganda in which people extended about the upcoming Tribe-Un-Analen And what that does [those reactions, not that tribunal, lk] with his life. "The narrative, the media, that run on the basis of the government." Terrible. "It is unpleasant. People can be angry, have every right to see me the bringer of the bad news, but questioning my integrity that [X]” Sorry, I'm going to make coffee. Hmm, nice. Good, Keulemans who are the wrong light: 1/ https://x.com/mkeulemans/status/1417445823592472593, 2/ https://x.com/mkeulemans/status/1405076841115926532, 3/https://x.com/mkeulemans/status/1414975186500263945 [In 2022 a 70+ excess of young people, LK], etc., etc., etc. The amount of propaganda is shocking. Fafo. Check.
Eighth impression. About narrative monitoring. "We didn't go along with the prevailing narrative." "That other sound was a cloth for bleeding. You went along with the narrative." "I notice that you get intimidated by my questions." "I want to connect." “What I did is from the start ... [confused story follows, then something with tables] ""If I don't get it I go to an epidemiologist. Just as I go to the garage when my car is broken. A BOVAG garage. ” Ok, let me pick up this analogy. First that BOVAG: that is a guarantee stamp, with which a party can show that they deliver a certain guarantee at their work. That means that if they nourish the case terribly, you can held them responsible for the damage. Good analogy Maarten, we keep it in. Then the next question is: your car is not broken, because otherwise you would not have gotten it in the garage anymore and it might be Total-Loss, no, your car that makes a strange sound, the engine is a bit, so what is the first step? Right, check the oil level yourself, Maarten. "And then I don't go to my neighbor who sometimes works on his car." No Maarten. Most Dutch people do that, they are talking about such things and then determine what they will do. Let me put down an analogy: in a hospital they call such a moment, after all, you cannot flicker all patients on the IC. Little unworldly. Check.
Ninth impression. “Broadly speaking, what happened then. Perhaps masters is right and all those other scientists are not. But you know, you should never trust politicians. Hugo de Jonge scam that nonsense. That group immunity story of Rutte of which so many scientists said, don't say that. " Master draws the only correct conclusion that can be drawn to the camp on the basis of the data made.
Tenth impression. "That someone decides what to write or something." See 55:40. Listen. Hear that pinched voice at the end. Maarten is said what he should write down. That is what he shows here. Old AIVD. Check.
Eleventh impression. “We could have said well: we are not locked, we let the virus take its course. Then it would have caused much more damage, the virus, if we had let it go immediately. " This is of course a fantasm that he punches again in that conversation and it shows that, as he has already acknowledged, it serves a limited group of opinions. Check.
Twelfth impression. “What does that mean, you follow it narrative. Call it concrete, What did I write ...“ No Maarten, it always works the same and let me use an analogy to help you a little: power is not perpetuated by people giving money, but because you have the money can take or stop. There is the control option for behavior [Charlie knew that too, lk]. For a newspaper this means that their power is not so much in what they write down, but what they do not write down, what they are concealing. Informed consent of millions of Dutch people is deliberately broken into the largest medical scandal in history. Maarten do not write about that and that is where he chooses to exercise that power. Machiavellist. Check.
Thirteenth impression. Maarten repeats the talking points again: because @marliesdekkers proclaims a one -sided narrative by letting people speak who say that 1. Vaccines you die of that [That is actually correct, the only question is how fast and how much hurt it hurts, lk], 2. The corona measures were for nothing [Sweden has already proven that by not locking and having better results, lk], 3. The virus comes from a laboratory [There is really nobody who doesn't think so, achieve people who have an interest in the "Pangolin Fucks Bat-Milf" story, LK]. And then the authority argument “Determine the majority of the ...” etc., paid talking points that he will continue to repeat.
Fourteenth impression. "The moment your evening after evening, day after day, Keulemans says nothing, he proclaims propaganda, why do you let you get a lot of things on your sleeve." "Science is not an opinion." 1:04:00. Sorry dear people, but I don't get the end. It just doesn't work, this enormous attack on the speech and logic of someone who says repeatedly "The majority of scientists who" bla bla bla And then comes with "Science is not an opinion". Maarten Keulemans is and remains a propaganda cannon that is told what to write. That is and remains the conclusion and that means that he must be just as much faced with a stationary clock at any time of the day.
And further agree, @BumblebeeJoe, she is a party to listen to, even if there is a bleak wind. Chapeau @marliesdekkers.
Thanks from the ground of my heart Leon, that you saved me this viewing session. I hadn't lasted as long as you. Check.
* I downloaded the transcript but it is really too bad to make something readable out of it. To properly display the text, I would still have to listen to just about the entire video. That didn't work. The first piece You can read about it here.
Keulemans also wrongly said: "After people were/ were vaccinated in 2021, there was no more excess."
The facts: after the first wave was over in March, April 2020, the excess reported in June, July, August, etc. Without vaccinations. In September/October 2021 when (in the end) almost the entire population was completely vaccinated, the excess was started to increase.
Serious!? He really said that ...!?
Consistent. About three quarters of the broadcast. I was surprised that Marlies Dekkers did not respond to this at all.
Maybe (still) an article about writing.
Keulemans? That qualified professional lougice of the Volkakkerijkrant? Can I have a bowl?
Go ahead!
Thank you.
Larger teil a.u.b.
Forward then
MK also had a nice statement that Maurice had been on TV very often. But nothing about how he was put on TV and his newspaper (with an extremely racist caricature)!
That was also fake news from MK.
Maurice de Hond has only been a few times in those four "Corona" years (NPO-RTL) television to talk about the corona policy. All in all, he may have spoken for an hour. I expect Maurice to write an article about this.
The question of how "we" (vague described) can trust each other again was what Dekkers and Keulemans Kibbelden.
Unfortunately, the elephant in the room was not discussed, perhaps Keulemans/Dekkers did not see him standing, what happens if you focus too much on other things (such as radiologists sometimes want to miss cancer on an X -ray because too much focus on other diseases).
There.
Both DNW and de Volkskrant, the new media, the old media, all media must focus on the conventional truth: that is, the media focuses on what the majority of the following/watching the public keeps for true. In the regular media that is often what the minister says (he or she who was chosen by majority). The journalist can do little differently than follow this conventional truth, and that is what they did at de Volkskrant. That is their job.
At DNW they have a different audience who also follows a conventional truth, namely the truth of what colorful, master*, etc says what is true and that fits more with a more critical voter. That cannot be otherwise: at DNW they simply serve that audience.
Science should be outside the conventional truth and not have to wonder what is being kept for where, but what is true. That is what science left during Covid, that is the elephant in the room that is not mentioned in the interview.
What Covid really was (a media spectacle in which political decisions were made under the guise of "science says") had nothing but nothing to do with science. This is again kept outside the media. A missed opportunity.
Seeing Dekkers and Keulemans who, ultimately, bicker about themselves, under the use of The Royal We, The Editorial We, which I can apparently get under something, was annoying to watch. I have not looked like it.
*Eg Ronald Meester rightly says that he is due to data that he is not allowed to see/ data that is not there, he cannot do science, but forget to say that everything he can say about Covid is in fact nothing. Yet he says a whole lot at DNW, from overdiction through the puncture (no matter how much I think that this is true, there are no evidence), biowapen until Covid exists and is a thrombogenic disease. Perhaps I don't make friends now, but I remain critical of all the media and their spokespersons, as it should be.
If you can't say anything about it, you can say if you think it's true or not? And if you like it, why not Ronald Meester?
Yes I also remain critical 😉
Being able to sit out the conversation with some difficulty and then decided that I don't have to read an opinion of this scribent.
Handing himself on the shield (nine and tens), to be hoisted (by the KNAW bills) and then think others can be able to get rid of well -founded statements more or less as "meninks".
And if in the end it is not possible to move Marlies to give him the credits that are, in his opinion, then, from the goodness to ask how she can return to his camp. This without having expressed any clear doubt with regard to his "covid oeuvre".
It all tends a lot to narcissism.
Marlies is a hunk in the best bringing the content of her guest.
As far as I am concerned, she has succeeded perfectly because Maarten does not represent much.
He is honored by the wrong people and as a result we see a false light.
Not too much attention to giving is actually the best and Marlies has certainly succeeded in confirming that. I find that Maarten does not even realize that.
I served it with attention. For Marlies because she deserves that in my eyes and I learn from it. Of course I understand that people could not afford to listen to MK, his contempt for Jan Bonte and others and Marlies treating like a stupid girl were difficult to sustain. Freedom of expression can sand but this was with a very gross grain.
Maarten was not a nerd at all. Not when he was a student. Be honest Maarten! Nerd is super unprovable, but you certainly did not deal with the nerds during your student days. You were an average student. A bit like Willem.
Maarten did not graduate, only prop anthropology and then some lectures Anthropo and history.
Oh, really? I knew him from my student association Periferie. Another dispute, more or less the same batch.
A nice, jolly kid (certainly not a nerd, I was myself. I even wonder if he knows what a D20 is).
I think it is a shame that I disagree with him so drastically at this point, because that is sometimes obscured here: I thought and I think he had a good character (now I don't know him anymore).
How can a person lend himself to such misled propaganda? Bizarre and bitter harmful. But without him, another talking head ...
I could swear that he was studying history - he introduced himself in the introduction time. I automatically assumed that he would also have graduated as a nerd.
He was not an intellectual large light. Sorry Maarten, you just wasn't. So de Volkskrant fits well. Maybe he's smart there?
No, but of course he can write a lot of fun. A pure craftsman. I have spoken to him, two years ago or so, a conversation of about an hour and a half I think. We both would not write about our conversation (I had stipulated that because they are of course bastards at de Volkskrant) and I actually break that appointment now. But almost nobody reads my blog, let alone the comments, so I'm not so worried about it. And then it is a long time ago and if he goes to take revenge with lies through that propagandavod of them, then he goes his way.
Everyone in my bubble wanted to stop me from accepting his invitation. Nevertheless, I still wanted to make contact to see if we could provide each other with interesting insights.
It was an entertaining conversation in itself. In any case, I got the impression of someone who is completely stuck among people he looks up to in admiration. I wouldn't be surprised if he has never thought of anything or even judged anything himself. A very friendly, not to say amiable, man, willing to engage in conversation, with a friendly smile. And of course he writes smoothly, nice style! But I already said that.
He just kept asking about my motives because he did not understand that such a sensible person as I collapsed there so much. Well that is actually a wipe sign: then you don't really take the subject as such seriously. And that he did not understand it, I also started to understand: you have to be able to take a distance, step out of your own frame of mind. He just doesn't have that thinking power.
Towards the end of the conversation, he overbluged me with his knowledge about abroad (New Zealand and Such), which would all prove that it was nonsense I wrote about vaccinations and overdolution. They were three arguments, I don't even know which one (then I have to check my emails, it's not worth it). At home I started finding that and I wrote down my findings of all three of the topics. Nothing remained.
Now we had agreed to stay in contact despite our contradictions to feed each other with insights from the other side. So I wrote him, a few weeks after the conversation, an email, including references to those articles that invalidated his counter -arguments. He replied that he didn't have time to read those pieces. With that the stocking was finished for him.
He just isn't worth our attention.
Anton, you are worth the attention! I continue to find it strange that your articles are not (seem to be) read. In the meantime, you have had an invitation from Maarten K. and also had to deal with "why someone can be as clever as you can be as stupid" that, among others, Maarten K. likes. De Volkskrant flew out very quickly with us after the many tendencing articles in Coronatijd. Throwing the remains of the evidence (still here in a drawer) of the overboard of medical ethics and oath, throwing the science for which I have been standing and what I had been critical of for years by the interference of companies and having to publish, otherwise you will not belong to culture that we have now seen the serious consequences. For later we will say. Always in love and patience. The man who uses these words from the beginning of 2020 is often convicted of his hairstyle ... Fortunately I read the facts here (usually)!
Thanks C! My articles are often about abstractions and figures (necessary substantiation), that makes them less accessible, I think.
But if I make factual mistakes, I would also like to hear from you.
Anton, by facts I do indeed mean the numbers and the like. The word "usually" hits opinions and words around it that I am also guilty of, but that makes us (emotional) person. And it is so pleasant that you are usually the first to ask and/or corrects factual misses (even though that does not happen often). No complaints, so fear that you will throw the ax.
I sometimes find the Netherlands more like China than they want to realize. I find it amazing how real everyone I know with a "responsible job" has exactly the same positions (and that of the MSM), including MK.
I had to break with several friends myself, because they could not let me change my mind. First I was carefully and lovingly back to the herd as a wandering sheep. Eventually my stiff persisted in unreal screaming from the other side. Then the straw breaks.
I have thought about it for a long time about how it is possible that almost everyone with a good income in a contextually dependent position is porridge. My answer is that there is indeed a social credit score here that determines whether you are eligible for jobs with a good income. Only, for their own protection - they do not realize that.
I have also known several people who (pre-covid) broke with the social credit status quo, because they thought. They have all worked out of their luxury positions and cut back.
The Netherlands has a social credit score.
I can't even respond to any MSM site, including MDH.
I also have quite a few Shadowbans. The bizarre thing is that I seem to have it on both left and right side. Also "alt-right"-what an ugly, non-covering stunning name, by the way-does not like certain views.
Intolerant narrowness is, in my opinion, not in a uniform, but in a person and those people are, everywhere, spread everywhere.
The problem arises when those people group themselves into a dominant class that rejects dissenters.
To say it tasty, vague and spiritually floating 😛: "The light needs the dark to be light." M.a.w. In particular, they need us to kick down and thus perpetuate their own weakly reasoned position.
Oh well, I was executed under Pol Pot. Among the young I only get a Shadowban. Count your winnings. Their power days were counted in the "Longue Dekee". Although the lie is still so fast, ...
That is why I can also state with arrogant certainty that MK will go down history as the spokesperson for a democide.
You have From campfire to talk show read? It is not "the Netherlands", it's how we are, what group dynamics do. Institutionalization formalizes and strengthens that process. We should pay better attention to that downside. I think ...
I only get nauseous when I hear sound from such a psychopath as Keulemans. No shred of humanity to be found in such a nausea. It only imitates a person. Blowing high from the tower with an opinion based on the lies obtained of the mainstream media that are driven by the actual criminals swelling in their billions, then received a prize for it and now also get a stage in a program that strives for the truth. This kind of aliens does sail on all the attention it gets, there is nothing positive or negative. This being stands for the prototype for the wrong fellow countrymen with whom everything is wrong. They are a mrna vaccine in the form of news. The RNA notifier who instructs your body to poison itself. Nowhere should this disease get a stage. We should immediately forget him and not recognize or recognize it as whatever. It is a shit fly on a car window and nothing more.
Perhaps there is an extra tub available.
Leo, take the big but
Poor Keulemans:
https://x.com/BumblebeeJoe/status/1975169374282498070/photo/1