Oh, get off it man! Grievances dating back 700 years have absolutely no probative value. So what if some Calvinists back then did some nasty deeds? It is irrelevant to the truth or falsity of their claims that God is sovereign and saves and reprobates whomever He will. It is a red herring, calculated only to prejudice readers.
The canons of Dort are not - and could not be - discredited by the actions of government. "Falsely charged with treason, he was beheaded." Treason was not a charge within the Church, nor did the Church authorities have the ability to bring treason prosecutions. That was a failing of Dutch government in the 1600's.
Scattered throughout this piece of pulp propaganda is the fallacious assumption that 1600's Holland can be judged according to the standards of 20th century American secularism. You find me a single country in the 1600's that tolerated religious dissent. (crickets).
From the participants or descendants of Dort. I've posted the history from at least 2 sources and it seems to be the same. We could go for other sources, but I suspect they'll also say the same. It's hardly pulp history.
In any case, it goes to the climate of the age, and it speaks to the nature of the meetings, synods, hearings, etc. that were held.
It sounds as if there was no ability to speak or be heard, so one can only wonder what really went on with Arminius, Grotius, Remonstrants, etc.
And the so-called "political safety" of Arminius is fiction. No wonder he was careful about speaking out.
Is that our cue to go back to discussing the Inquisition and the Crusades? ;-)