This isn’t an explanation for why Amsterdam wasn’t a pogrom. It’s a political polemic that argues that since Jews belong in the powerful-oppressor category, they shouldn’t ever be seen as victims, no matter what is done to them. And it gets there by ignoring what we actually know about the motives of the assailants, including the planning. If, for example, the deeper driver of this brand of Muslim rage isn’t Palestinian rights or suffering - the same rage isn’t ignited for other suffering Muslim peoples, a useful juxtaposition for discerning motive - but rather a function of various iterations of Muslim supremacist ideologies that pervade present-day political-Islamist thought and culture, then these are precisely pogroms for precisely the reasons the good professor names here - they are rage at the fact that Jews are no longer systemically oppressed, that they have emerged from beneath Islamic and Christian systems of marginalization and violence, and that this represents an intolerable retreat of Muslim power that reaches the level of a theological crisis. Or in other words, a pogrom.
See Tweet