Mona Keijzer and Youp van ‘t Hek collided at the talk show table of Pauw & De Wit. The comedian thinks it’s lame that she didn’t want to answer a question from Tim de Wit.
Deputy Prime Minister Mona Keijzer was at the table last night Pauw & De Wit for some topic about Ukrainians, but host Tim de Wit also wanted to know something about the media riot that arose about her snub to the NOS. The BBB politician has more or less written that the news broadcaster would literally copy propaganda from Hamas.
‘Are we doing this?!’
When Tim mentions this riot and announces a video about it, Mona immediately becomes annoyed. “Seriously, are we really going to do this?” she says, annoyed. He then says: “Yes.” She again: “Okay.”
It bothers Mona that the media continues to milk this. “We are now a week further and apparently we are still devoting airtime to this. I think that is quite special, because it is something that I think is allowed.”
Tongue in cheek
Mona believes that criticism of the NOS should be allowed. “We have independent journalism in this country, which is a great asset and guaranteed in the constitution, I think so, but that does not mean that you are exempt from criticism. That is what is happening here tongue-in-cheek state and that is permitted and there is really nothing more to say about it.”
When Tim states that it is more than criticism, but more of a suspicion, Mona closes the gates: “I am here to talk about the long-term policy for Ukrainian displaced persons…”
Yup critical
Youp van ‘t Hek, who is sitting at the table, then starts to laugh. Mona: “The NOS thinks something of this. Maybe they should call me instead of me sitting here at a talk show table with you. I just don’t have much to say about this anymore.”
The comedian then: “Why not?”
Mona: “Because I said what I said about that and there is nothing more to add.”
Propaganda
Tim wants to know from Mona what exactly she meant. “Do you think NOS is copying Hamas propaganda?”
Mona: “But that is not what it says here and I am not saying that here either. So that is very special.”
Youp: “What do you say then?”
Mona: “There is a sentence here and I am answering it as I did. I am here now for another topic. That is why I said yes to your invitation.”
Dates
Tim thinks Mona is distorting the matter. “We also informed your spokesperson that we wanted to ask some questions about this.”
Mona: “That’s good and it was then agreed that it would be fine to bring this up. I answered it and I don’t have much more to add.”
Youp: “Do you mean what it says?”
Mona: “But I’m not going to do that here, sir.”
“That’s why not!”
Youp bites into it. “Why not?”
Mona: “Because I’m not going to do that.”
Youp: “But why not?”
Mona: “Because I’m not going to do that.”
Youp: “No, but you write that. It is nice when the question is asked: ‘Do you mean that?’ You’re here now anyway.”
Mona: “That is at your service, but I have been invited here for another topic.”
Youp: “Yes, I understand that, but still: the question is very simple, isn’t it?”
‘I’m silent!’
Mona remains silent. “No, I am not accountable to you either.”
Youp: “No, but the question is clear: do you think so?”
Mona: “Yes, Mr. Van ‘t Hek, I don’t have to answer you. Can we now talk about what I was invited here for? That is the agreement we made with each other.”
Youp: “Nice.”
Table guest Carrie Knoops concludes: “If you write it, you mean it, right?”
Mona: “Yes.”