>The phrase "Liever Turks dan Paaps" was coined

>>76310584

It was them justifying splitting Christianity and not uniting against the Turks.

we were somewhat religiously tolerant

First of all, the Dutch, are arabs at heart. Second of all, Christianity is a semite religion.

Dutch way of betraying the European race for turkish cock. They still do it and will always do it. That's why Meds need to eliminate the dutch race once and for all.

>>76310584
post this gay shit in /his/ faggot.

but to answer your question. it means that dutch women want BTC

>>76310584
The same thing the Jews of Andalusia meant by fleeing to the Ottoman Empire.

If you payed the Jizya (infidel tax), and you were a "person of the book" (Christian, Jew, or the ambiguous "Sabians"), you could practice your religion freely as a 2nd class citizen of the Empire (Sunni Muslims had far more rights than the lesser faiths).

This is in contrast to pre-enlightenment Christian realms, where if you weren't Christian, you had absolutely no rights or protections.

So a Jew or a Christian is better off beneath the sandals of the Sultan than the iron heel of less conciliatory despots.

What we meant was

>to express that life under the Muslim Ottoman Sultan would have been more desirable than life under the Catholic King of Spain. The Flemish noble D'Esquerdes wrote to this effect that he "would rather become a tributary to the Turks than live against his conscience and be treated according to those [anti-heresy] edicts."

File: 1372109718979.jpg (76KB, 231x238px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 231x238px

>>76310584
>What did the Dutch mean by this?

>>76310584
The Dutch and the Ottomans were bros. Turco-Calvinism is based.

>>76310584
It's pretty obviously tongue in cheek

>>76310584
>Just another germanic tribe loving muslim cock
O wow, what a shocker.

>>76311860
This. It would be as if a Saudi would say "I'd rather be Jewish than Shia" or something.