[Video] Martin Bosma and Thierry Baudet together DESTROY the AIVD and the WEF

A committee debate yesterday focused on the Dutch intelligence service AIVD's crackpot report warning against "anti-institutional" movements, politicians, websites and individuals. In that debate, Thierry Baudet (FVD) and Martin Bosma (PVV) teamed up to briefly fillet both the AIVD and the World Economic Forum together.

In his input, Baudet explained that the AIVD's "anti-institutional" argument makes no sense. Minority groups that want to associate with each other in a parallel society are extremist? So then the pillarisation was radical(-right). Criticizing Big Pharma is "anti-institutional" thinking? So then you are no longer allowed to control big business, this while that same big business has been caught many times after flouting the law. Big Pharma companies have thus received the highest fines in history for deliberately withholding vital information, etc.

Indeed, Baudet said, if you think about it, "anti-institutional" thinking is an important condition of a healthy democracy. Only totalitarian systems thrive on censorship and a lack of distrust of power. In a democracy, that very distrust must play an important role. It is centric. Hence, of course, the separation of powers and the like

WEF

When he had finished his contribution, Martin Bosma of the PVV came up with a question that the gentlemen had clearly played into. Because while the other parties first and foremost want to remain silent about the World Economic Forum, FVD and PVV do want to talk about it.

And so Bosma asked Baudet what he actually thinks of the WEF, and whether he also finds it so curious that the WEF is now protected by the AIVD. That criticism of the WEF is seen as extremism. What does Mr. Baudet think about that, Bosma asked the FVD leader.

"Yes, it is a very remarkable sentence in this report," Baudet replied. "The AIVD explicitly recognizes in this report that it is not up to it to take political positions. Yet you see that between the lines a certain position is very clearly taken."

For example, the AIVD report states that the WEF - a club of, for and by the rich and powerful of the earth - only wants to rebuild the world in a "fairer divided" way after years of crises. "In other words," Baudet explained, "the WEF wants a fairer world. It is clear where the AIVD stands on this. The AIVD endorses the vision of the World Economic Forum, of the controversial professor Klaus Schwab and his ideas."

"From this you can see exactly how politically colored this whole report is," Baudet continued. Because of course you can have a debate about that: about what the WEF wants, what the WEF's goals are, etc. But no. According to the AIVD, even instigating this is "anti-institutional" and "extremist." The WEF wants a fairer world; we ordinary people just have to resign ourselves to that.

"That doesn't suit a democracy and that doesn't suit an intelligence agency," Baudet rightly said.

AIVD vs. FVD

And Bosma wasn't done yet. He had another question and comment for Baudet. Because, the PVV'er said, when he reads that AIVD report, he wonders: what do these people really want? They could also write a report about the radical-left Extinction Rebellion (XR) that "opposes our democracy" and hates our freedom. But no, instead people who are critical of "institutions have to suffer."

"Why are they coming up with something like this at this time? And then I see a lot of things that Forum for Democracy argues and then I feel like it's a politicized report towards possibly banning Forum for Democracy. That we are dealing with a very political report here."

Help DDS get through these difficult times. Help us make a fist against the mainstream media as well as the party cartel. Fight side-by-side with us. Donate on BackMe and fight side-by-side with DDS against the globalist elites.

Baudet's response was that this is indeed "obvious," also given new legislation that is going to make it easier for the state to declare political parties that break with the mainstream illegal.

"The security service is employed to write a politically colored report," Baudet said, "in which all kinds of views are associated with extremism, and that extremism is then associated with a threat that, by the way, is also not made concrete..."

So in this way Bosma and Baudet, from two different parties, explained together in a calm but extremely clear way what the problems are with the AIVD report and also made clear why everyone should be particularly vigilant now that "anti-institutional thinking" is suddenly being dismissed as a "danger."