Presentation van Kees van der Pijl on Ukraine and MH17

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Kees van der Pijl is a Dutch political scientist who is emeritus professor of international relations at the University of Sussex. At September 19, 2017 he delivered a presentation in Dutch language at Pletterij Debatcafe.


Van der Pijl ‘s ideas about what happened to MH17 are similar to those of MH17 truther Joost Niemoller and a guy called @HectorReban (not his real name). Both are extreme conspiracy thinkers who all only look at one side of the story. They all forget to mention the many Russian lies. And are to say the least not very good at telling facts.

Kees van der Pijl is one of the people who signed a letter addressed to Donald Trump requesting a new independant investigation. The letter was published at the website of Joost Niemoller.

Others who signed the letter are Karel van Wolferen. I wrote about the nonsense he talked about here. Also former pilot Peter Haisenko signed the letter. My comments on the nonsense by Haisenko here.

A Dutch politician named Thierry Baudet, who also signed the letter, was criticised early September 2017 by Dutch Minister for Foreign affairs Bert Koenders.

Graham Phillips (former RT)  and Patrick Lancaster, both pro Russian freelance journalists signed the letter as well.

Van der Pijl was active in a Dutch communistic political party.

Van der Pijl talked about the history of Ukraine, NATO, BRIC countries and MH17.

Van der Pijl states in the beginning of his presentation “I have no idea who downed MH7  in contrary to authorities who state the do”

However during the presentation he mentions he believes Ukraine shot down MH17 with a military jet.

Van Der Pijl then states a crime also needs a motive. Well, in the first minute of his presentation Van der Pijl makes his first mistake. MH17 was likely a mistake. Mistakes happen. The motive is according Van der Pijl “an important factor”

Van der  Pijl then relates the shotdown of MH17 to the BRIC countries. He talks about Ukraine which wanted to be closer to the West. And he talks about the extension  of NATO. He explains the eastern and southern areas of former Russia were added to Ukraine in around 1922.

Then at 29:00 minutes in the video Van der Pijl states that Ukraine must be seen as main suspect of the downing of MH17 altough he does not know if they indeed did it. They had the means he adds.

Van der Pijl then states Ukraine got a veto right in two investigations. That is nonsense. The Dutch Safety Board did not have any veto. And in the criminal investigation all JIT countries signed a none disclosure agreement. That is different than a veto right.

At 31:34 Van der Pijl states Ukraine immediately had an statement about the shotdown. “only these were three different explanations”.

“Poroshenko stated it was an accident. Later he stated it was a terror attack”. “A minister for foreign affairs stated it was a missile from Russia handed over to the separatists and the leader of military in Ukraine Andriy Parubiy stated it was a missile launched from Russia”.

I have not found anything on internet confirming these statements by Van der Pijl.  In fact, Poroshenko at July 17, 2014 stated 

“We are not calling it an accident, or a disaster, but an act of terrorism,” Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko said. The Ukraine Foreign Ministry says the plane was shot down by a Russian Buk missile.

Around 33:00 questions by the audience are answered.

At 36:00 Van der Pijl says money of foreign companies which flow through the Netherlands for tax avoiding reasons is criminal. “Dutch Minister for Finance should be prosecuted”


At 39:00 he starts to talk about his appearance for the Tweede Kamer commissie for Foreign Affairs. Van der Pijl states himself that was not a very impressive presentation. At that time he missed facts and was intimidated by the members of Parliament. Afterwards he was approached by bloggers active on MH17 (likely Hector Reban). They gave him information and warned him for Russian propaganda.

He then talks about ‘tanks with surface to air missile’ on it. Even the words  ‘BUK TELAR’ is not a single time used by Van der Pijl in his presentation. Indicating he does not know what he is talking about.

Van der Pijl then states a child aged 11 is able to make a fake video of a telephone call. Van der Pijl then talks about the presence of lithium batteries in the aircraft. Far more than mentioned in the DSB final report. He doubts this is the cause of the accident.

Van der Pijl then calls Joustra, head of DSB, a big mouth.

At 43:36 a conversation starts about Ukraine aircraft using civil aircraft as human shield. Radar recordings of both sides are missing.

Van der Pijl then states civil aircraft were used as a shield. Civil aircraft were flying at 10 km, military are flying much lower. But when they fly at the same speed as civil aircraft and under it, the military jets cannot be detected by radar. Elsevier described this.

This is another complete nonsense. Elsevier never published an article confirming aircraft can hide from radar. Radar is able to detect two different objects.

Van der Pijl states all states failed by not handing over radar data.

He then states that Russia always offered to hand over information but only if Russia would be involved in the investigation.This was refused.

Ofcourse this was refused as Russia is the suspect in the criminal investigation by JIT. And Russia did not offer to hand over all radar data. Why at all should there be an offer? Russia should have handed over all radar data. Just like Ukraine had to do.

Russia was involved in DSB investigation for expertise on radar and BUK systems. Russia did not hand over the requested raw radar data of all radar stations to DSB.

At 47:45 Van der Pijl states that according his feeling MH17 was not downed by a BUK. A BUK would cause the aircraft to explode in the air. He mentions “benzine”(petrol) lines. (not knowing an aircraft has kerosene as fuel). He thinks MH17 was shot down by an aircraft.

Dear Kees. You talk nonsense. Even Russian MOD stated there were no other aircraft near MH17.

He then at around 50:00 states that in his book all shot downs of aircraft  by a BUK missile are described. However there are no civil aircraft shot down by a BUK missile except MH17.  Only a few cases of shot down of civil aircraft with surface to air missile are known. A Siberia Airlines Tu154 was shot down by a S-200. This post has an overview of damage observered by various weapons.

He states when an aircraft is shot down by an air to air missile aircraft can still be flying. That happened to MH17 as well as it made a wierd curve.

He states the book by Joost Niemoller “de doofpot (real name de doofpot deal) is still standing as a house. The book is full of tunnelvision. Dutch review of the book here.

At 54:00 he states the animations by JIT in the september 2016 presentation are cartoons.

At 57:00 someone asks how it is possible media does not report the same findings as Van der Pijl.

Van der Pijl then responds that the official narrative is copied by media. Media cannot backtrack the story. A letter written by Van der Pijl was not published in NRC.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

4 Comments on Presentation van Kees van der Pijl on Ukraine and MH17

  1. He states when an aircraft is shot down by an air to air missile aircraft can still be flying.
    – This one is true actually.

  2. Indeed Roman an aircraft can keep flying after being attacked and struck by an Air-to-Air missile. But that fact itself also demonstrates that MH17 was absolutely not attacked by another aircraft. An Air-to-Air missile would’ve been fired by an aircraft –that aircraft would show up on radar. The missile would have struck an engine. Engines on commercial airliners are actually designed to break off and fall away in the event of an impact or detonation some way smaller than an Air-to-Air missiles 3kg warhead. If an engine had landed in Petropavlivka, the western edge of the debris field, it would be a little harder to rule out an air to air attack. But both engines are present at the Hrabove site. I’ve seen some suggest an Air-to-Air missile might’ve missed the engine and exploded or some combination of Air-to-Air missile and machine gun/canon fire which, besides being silly, remains exceptionally unlikely that such ordinance would detonate or impact at exactly the spot one would expect a large Surface-to-Air radar guided missile to strike –AND produce the kind of damage you could expect to see from a 75Kg warhead such as the simultaneous, instantaneous end of both CVR and FDR. That the Russian MoD, being military people who’d know all this, would still raise and promote this hypothesis as feasible is what has had me convinced since Monday July 21st 2014 that they knew more about how that plane ended up a smouldering wreck in Ukraine than they were letting on.

  3. Apologies Marcel – I actually called in to compliment you on a succinct deconstruction of Mr Van der Pijls nonsense. It is mindboggling that someone with such an illogical, unscientific and unacademic tendency to speculate rather than engage in evidence based enquiry could rise to a position of Professor.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.