The New World with Marlies Dekkers and Maarten Keulemans (Reaction)

by Anton Theunissen | 24 sep 2025, 14:09

...or pay via paypal

cards

Reactions

Comments that are not related to the topic of discussion will be deleted. Always keep comments respectful and substantive.

30 Comments
  1. Pyotr

    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.

    Reply
      1. Pyotr

        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.

        Reply
  2. Lars

    Keulemans? That qualified professional lougice of the Volkakkerijkrant? Can I have a bowl?

    Reply
      1. Lars

        Thank you.

        Reply
      2. Elisa Doolittle

        Larger teil a.u.b.

        Reply
  3. Godfather

    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)!

    Reply
    1. Pyotr

      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.

      Reply
  4. Willem

    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.

    3
    1
    Reply
    1. Anton Theunissen

      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 😉

      Reply
  5. Hans

    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.

    Reply
  6. Rien

    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.

    Reply
    1. c

      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.

      Reply
  7. Alison

    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.

    Reply
    1. H Visser

      Maarten did not graduate, only prop anthropology and then some lectures Anthropo and history.

      Reply
      1. Alison

        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?

        Reply
        1. Anton Theunissen

          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.

          Reply
          1. c

            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)!

            Reply
            1. Anton Theunissen

              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.

              Reply
              1. c

                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.

                Reply
          2. Alison

            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.

            Reply
            1. Pyotr

              I can't even respond to any MSM site, including MDH.

              Reply
              1. Alison

                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.

                Reply
            2. Anton Theunissen

              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 ...

              Reply
  8. leo

    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.

    Reply
    1. Lars

      Perhaps there is an extra tub available.

      Reply

Post a Comment

Je e-mailadres wordt niet gepubliceerd. Required fields are marked with *