In a fierce debate about press freedom and press safety, Martin Bosma has proclaimed D66 the biggest threat to freedom of speech. The party would like to remove Ongehoord Nederland, a broadcaster that highlights outrageous news facts, from the broadcasting system. Bosma emphasized that D66 does not want issues such as the negative effects of the multicultural society to come to light. According to him, the party expects everyone to run like a herd after climate hysteria, the woke movement and mass immigration. Even the once liberal VVD now seems to be collaborating in the destruction of Unheard Holland.
During the debate, Bosma challenged State Secretary Uslu by calling her "stasis secretary." However, Bosma had to take this word back at the insistence of Chamber President Paul van Meenen. Tensions ran high and emotions were palpable. After all, the destruction of Ongehoord Nederland would be a heinous violation of our constitutional rights.
For this reason, Bosma introduced a motion stating that a two-thirds majority in the House is needed to remove Ongehoord Nederland from the public broadcasting system. This broadcaster deserves special treatment in the House because it protects our freedom of speech and offers alternative perspectives.
It is commendable that Bosma draws attention to this important issue. Preserving freedom of the press and protecting independent media are crucial pillars of a democratic society. It is disturbing that a party like D66 would want to intervene and limit the diversity of the news landscape.
It is vital that there is a wide range of voices and perspectives in our society. Unheard Holland provides a platform for news that is often overlooked or ignored by mainstream media. It is unacceptable that a party like D66 would try to silence this sound.
Help DDS through these difficult times. Help us make a fist against the mainstream media as well as the media cartel. Fight side by side with us. Donate on BackMe (or directly to the bank: Liberty Media, NL95RABO0159098327, please include 'donation DDS' plus email address).
Bosma's criticism of D66 is justified and deserves serious reflection from the parties involved. It is disappointing that Sjoerd Sjoerdsma, as a representative of D66, did not go beyond jij-bakken in his answer to Bosma. This shows a lack of openness to a constructive debate on press freedom and press safety.