Idealists

After the Second World War, antisemitism in the Netherlands was higher than before the war. During the occupation years, most of the Dutch only had access to information supplied by (supporters of) the Nazis.
People love to hate and there was a direct connection between the one-sided reporting and the antipathy towards Jews.

Fast-forward to the Netherlands today. Recently a grande dame of Dutch journalism published an op-ed. She wrote that in her forty years of journalism she had never witnessed such one-sided reporting as the current anti-Israel reporting.
"Coincidentally", Jew-hatred has exploded in the Netherlands. As a reaction, 13 political parties in parliament (that is 94% of parliament) made a joint statement against the rise of antisemitism.

I read about the recent al-Shifa battle on the largest Dutch news site, that has 8 million visits per month.
The emphasis of the report was on the X account of a "Palestinian journalist" who wrote about witnessing "hundreds of bodies outside the hospital, there wasn't one full body all the bodies were either pieces or heavily mutilated."
He also wrote that "many had their hands and legs tied behind their backs."
The "Palestinian journalist" is a Hamas operative who daily publishes blood-libels against Israelis. 

Yet this propaganda was presented as facts without any qualifications.

How do people react to such daily reports? 

I think, with righteous indignation. It is obvious that the blood-libels stimulate verbal and/or physical attacks on Jews, because Jews are identified with Israel.
The Jew-haters now consider themselves to be idealists, fighting the Israeli demon who randomly murders and tortures the innocent.

Where can all this lead?
Some years after the Second World War, a son in a family of Dutch Nazis wrote a book about his family. For the book he interviewed his mother.
He asked her, what went wrong, how could such atrocities be committed in your name?
She replied, "we were too idealistic"

Live Jews do not count any more

There was much criticism of the amount of violence used by police to disband demonstrations against corona policy in the Netherlands.
After two demonstations in the Hague and Amsterdam, Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, lashed out at the actions of Dutch police officers: ".... the most disgusting scenes of police brutality I have seen since George Floyd!”

Femke Halsema, the Green Left mayor of Amsterdam is responsible for the police there. She defended them.
According to her, they were "humane, disciplined and decisive."

During the corona period there was also an anti-racism demonstration in Amsterdam in support of Black Lives Matter. 
Halsema supported the demonstrators, who were from her political family. At the beginning of the demonstration she mingled and joked with them.

Too many people arrived and the demonstrators could not keep the required distance from each other. She should have disbanded the demonstration, but she did not.
Her argument was: emotions were running high and if the police had tried to disband the demonstration there would have been a riot.
Surprisingly enough, lots of emotions and danger of a riot were not a problem when the police violently disbanded the demonstrations against government corona policy.

And now the demonstrations surrounding the opening of the Holocaust Museum in Amsterdam on Sunday March 10, 2024. According to one Jewish dignitary: the darkest day for Dutch Jews since the Holocaust.

Once again the demonstrations were supported by her party and all left-wing and Muslim-affiliated parties in the Municipal Council.
Together a large majority in a Council that, up till now, has shown no particular empathy for the welfare of live Jews.

How did she justify letting the screeching demonstrators get so close to the Holocaust survivors and their descendants? 
This time she used the argument of the right to demonstrate. (A right that did not apply to the opponents of government corona policy).

She stated that, according to the law, they had the right to demonstrate within sight distance of president Herzog, who they were demonstrating against, and at a distance near enough for him to hear them.
This is vague terminology and she used it as an excuse to put the demonstrators, some who had megaphones, very near to the opening.
She added that this kind of demonstration was perfectly acceptable "even if it grates, hurts and offends people”.

She forgot to mention that she meant "offends certain people".
Commemorations of dead Jews like the Anne Frank House - the second most popular attraction in the city - are at least good for tourism.
Live Jews do not count in her Amsterdam.