As documented from 2005 to 2017 in ISGP's FAQ and from there for a month or 10 in an appendix to ISGP's article on Google censorship, early on in particular, this author was regularly targeted by the security services, starting immediately after the first articles on groups as Le Cercle and the JASON Group were written in mid 2005. The site still was extremely basic, super-obscure and terribly designed at the time, giving one an indication just how tightly monitored the internet was - and is - for "dissenting" behavior.
Can I prove any of this really happened? Maybe a few aspects - if I felt inclined to do so. But this article basically comes down to how credible ISGP is. Readers will have to judge that for themselves. In addition, there is little interest in going back and trying to find any type of proof, because the majority of censorship work has been taken over by Silicon Valley, most notably Google. Control access to the internet and you control the internet. It's that simple.
I'm not sure who did the intimidating back in the day. It could have been the CIA, NSA, MI6, GCHQ, AIVD (Dutch intelligence) on their own, a mix of these, or it could have been authorized by the Dutch prime minister and his cabinet. In fact, at least in the Netherlands the Home Office has to approve wiretaps on Dutch citizens, whether the AIVD carries them out or it is done by some kind of local police service. Recent developments certainly reveal an uncomfortably close tie between my family and the Dutch Bilderberg and Trilateral Commission-visiting prime minister, so who knows who authorized what over the years.
This is just my story. And that of ISGP. If you become a serious alternative researcher, expect things like this to happen.
In May 2005, I wrote an article on the JASON Group. Soon after, I apparently ended up on the mailing list of one of the JASON members. Together with dozens of JASONs I received an email with all kinds of details on nuclear power plants and how they could be protected from terrorist attacks. These blueprints - or whatever they were - were extremely complex with so many scientific terms in them that I couldn't understand even one aspect of it. It might well have been the most hard-to-understand material I've ever come across. In fact, the material was so incomprehensible I doubt it was authentic based on that alone.
In any case, I closed the email within two or three minutes, letting it sit there in my inbox. I thought about notifying the JASON who had put me on his mailing list, but at the time I considered the possibility that the JASONs were involved in other, shall we say, more "exotic" engineering projects - so I kept quiet. I never had the slightest intention of distributing or uploading the information in the email. All I did was wait and see if they would send me something else.
A week or ten days went by and something interesting did indeed come my way. One day I opened my email program and found that my inbox was completely empty! Immediately suspecting this had something to do with the JASON mail, I checked my deleted items and other folders. Everything still was exactly the same in these other folders, so the missing emails in my inbox, including the JASON email, had mysteriously skipped the deleted items folder. I've never seen these mails again, including the one sent to me by the JASON Group.
Now, of course, I cannot be 100 percent certain that I didn't do anything wrong. But I knew this had never happened before and basically made a bet with myself that this would never occur again. And, of course, it hasn't, even after sending and receiving tens of thousands of emails over the years. And then there's the additional X-factor that the handful of missing emails involved one from the JASON Group.
One is tempted to think that a JASON Group member made a mistake and called the NSA the correct it. However, I don't believe that was the case at all. For starters, there's absolutely no reason for me to be on the mailing list of any JASON. Secondly, I doubt they send super-sensitive emails without specialized encryption - which I don't posses and have never used. Also important, I didn't recognize any of the names on the mailing list, even though I compiled the names of just about every past and present member of the group.
My personal guess is that this mistake of a JASON Group member was just a scenario created by someone in the security services in order to A) test me; B) intimidate me; and C) turn me into a national security threat, making it legal to tap all my communications.
Sometime in the first half of 2006 all of a sudden it had become impossible for me to order any books from Great Britain. Actually, to be more precise, I could order them, but they would never arrive. In the span of about a month I ordered three different books from three different book stores: none of them ever arrived. The book stores in question all assured me they had shipped the book I ordered and in one case they sent me a scan of their post office receipt. This book store also returned my money.
Now, I've ordered more than 500 books before and since that time, both from the U.S. and Great Britain, and I've never had any problems with delivery. Never! I ordered hundreds of other items online. Never-ever a problem, at least not involving anything just simply disappearing. So what's the chance that three books from three different book stores all get lost at about the same time from the same country? Actually, I don't know, but I bet the odds are not very high.
I reordered the books from the U.S. and, as usual, there weren't any problems. After a while, and after writing about my delivery problems online, I began ordering books again from Great Britain. Luckily the problems were gone, because the vanishing books were starting to get expensive. I still wonder where the three books are that I ordered that went missing. Maybe they're at the bottom of the North Sea. Or on the desk of the MI5 or MI6 director.
In about the same period--give or take a few months--that I had these shipping problems from England, something else happened that was very interesting. One day I picked up the phone to call my grandmother. I dialed the number, but instead of hearing the voice I was expecting, I instantly, without hearing the dial tone, ended up talking to a room with humming noises in the background, like a bunch of servers were running there. "Hello, somebody there? Hello? Hello?" No answer. After maybe 10 seconds either I hung up or the connection was broken--can't remember anymore--and I redialed the number of my grandmother. This time it was successful. My grandmother hadn't heard anything the first time.
In the book Enemies of the State (one of the books that went missing, but later luckily did arrive), written in 1993 by the British author Gary Murray, we find stories of anti-nuclear energy activists being intimidated by British intelligence. On page 220 we can read about experiences of a person whose phone was tapped. One experience was very similar to my own, except for the fact that I did not hear anyone on the other side:
"She [a victim of serious harassment] also had the fairly common, and unnerving, experience of dialing a number and hearing not a ringing tone but people moving about in a room."
Has my phone been tapped? I don't know for sure, but I've never had a bizarre anomaly like that before or since. As a Dutch documentary showed at one point, the number of (official, acknowledged) phone taps per person in the Netherlands is higher than anywhere in the world. But even if my phone was tapped, I don't have the slightest clue as to who exactly ordered it or carried it out. Could be the NSA or GCHQ directly, or they may have put down a request with Dutch intelligence, the AIVD.
Whatever the case, it appears that once again a message was being sent, because if the security services followed protocol I would have never had a clue that my phone was being tapped.
ISGP's rise to fame within the conspiracy community started out somewhat "meteoric". The first article this author ever published, a January 2005 one countering 9/11 no-plane-at-Pentagon theories, was linked to, of all outlets, by Rense.com, a site larger at the time than even Alex Jones' Prisonplanet.com (bigger and better-looking than Infowars.com at the time). At that time Rense had only recently begun to shift - as it turns out - to the Nazi side of conspiracy. Unfortunately, over the next couple of months I only noticed that no-plane theories were increasingly aggressively pushed onto all of 9/11 "Truth". It's an incredible miracle my article was even published at the time. Looking back, I am virtually certain it slipped through because my site still was extremely badly designed, located on an url belonging to my personal Dutch ISP, and even accidentally included a little disinformation in the heading picture.
This initial support from Rense most certainly did encourage me to write more - and better. Over 2005 and early 2006 several articles were linked to by a variety of conspiracy sites, sometimes including Alex Jones. At the time I still was kind of pretending that whenever I wasn't linked to, this most likely had to do with the fact that I needed to improve the quality of the articles and the website. As time went by though, it became undeniable that as the quality of articles increased - more sources, content indexes, spelling checks, better English, better-looking site - and this author's work became more well-known within the conspiracy community, that the number of "peers" linking to it actually started to decline. I came into the conspiracy community thinking we would all be working together in solving the major mysteries of our time and safeguarding democracy. It turned out though it wasn't quite that easy.
Censorship by emerging conspiracy guru Alex Jones became very clear over 2006. First my January 2006 article The People With The Endless Bios was only linked to at Infowars.com, considerably less well-designed than Prisonplanet.com at the time. It wasn't the best article, certainly not with what ISGP produced in later years, but it was much better than a lot of the content Alex Jones was linking to. It also was better than small ISGP articles Jones's site linked to on other occasions. Being ignored surprised me, so I asked about it. As it was explained to me by someone at Infowars, Prisonplanet.com had other editors - more directly involved with Alex Jones. Thus, lower-level staffers were responsible for the publishing of ISGP; not Alex Jones or his right-hand Paul Joseph Watson.
Still hopeful I would be able to get future publications, I continued the work. In November 2006 I finished an article on Cercle Pinay, sent it around, and exactly got zero links. This included Infowars and Prisonplanet. To be honest, during the production of this article I noticed all kinds of ties between right-wing CIA and Pentagon-linked NGOs and the people Alex Jones was taking his information from, so I already was worried about not receiving any attention.
Ignoring the increasing censorship, I pushed on and by July 2007 finished ISGP's rather seminal Beyond the Dutroux Affair, to this day the site's most popular article, despite being banned from Google. The article had me worried that it would be forced off the internet under legal threat without it being able to spread. One would think the alternative media is there to publish unique exposés, but quickly I noticed that - once again - my article was being ignored. Thus I immediately offered Infowars to pay $500 for publication. Alex Jones' right-hand, Paul Joseph Watson, accepted and for about two days, Beyond the Dutroux Affair featured prominently at the top of Prisonplanet.com, as said, at the time much better designed than Infowars.com.
This publication resulted in something interesting: all of a sudden Rense.com linked to the article as well. Unfortunately it included the term "Illuminati" in its own title, but the article - for free this time - received about double the visitors I was getting from Infowars: roughly 7,000 versus 4,000 over two days, as far as memory goes. Next thing you know, DavidIcke.com also picked up the article. And so did a number of other, less well-known conspiracy (disinformation) sites. Clearly no one realized I had paid $500 for publication. About 12,000 people came to the article in two days, greatly boosting the visibility of ISGP, both through attention and increased Google Domain Rank. Daily visitors at least doubled overnight.
That was the last time ISGP received any prominent coverage, however. When a year later an extensive article on the Pilgrims Society was finished - which theoretically would be of extreme interest to the site - Prisonplanet.com only allowed the article to be published as an ad. I paid $200, but as an obvious ad, it received no more than 250 links over the next two days. That was the last time ISGP was linked to by Infowars.
Funny enough, ISGP actually was included in Jones' November 1, 2007-released film Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement. At one point an oversight of the "New World Order" is given, which is (the original 2006 version) of a Three Establishment Model oversight created by ISGP only shortly before. Clearly Mr. Jones was paying attention to ISGP at the time. But linking or giving credit? No, of course not. It's still pretty cool though, especially because - good or bad - the film inspired the likes of Megadeth. It's such a small world.
Over the years, the trend of ever higher quality work being rewarded by less and less links from both the conspiracy community and the mainstream news, has continued. Certainly from 2008, I've frequently made the claim, in private, that ISGP produces articles not for the conspiracy community, but for Google. Of course, Google started putting an end to that also by 2015.
As a test, specifically before putting out this article, this author had someone sent the newly-produced "Liberal CIA": Hollywood article to Infowars, Rense, Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research, Sign of the Times, four major conspiracy (disinformation) sites that in part make a living by providing the latest news in conspiracy land, including all the latest articles. So, how many acknowledged or linked to the article? Absolutely zero.
Next I created a new Reddit account and submitted the fresh Hollywood article, including a very concise, well-written intro plus picture, to one of the site's biggest conspiracy forums. New accounts have zero karma and require approval of forum moderators to be published. Guess what? The moderators of the forums blocked the article from appearing on their forum. I have actually been briefly but very intensely active in the past on Reddit in entirely different (non-conspiracy) forums with two different accounts. I never had any trouble getting articles through moderators. Never... ever. In fact, I wrote some of the most well-read and well-linked posts of that sub-forum, drawing in more than 10,000 viewers in my very first post. But in order to post, I needed the approval of moderators. And that's just not happening in Reddit's conspiracy forums.
As I've been writing over the years, the entire conspiracy community has been set up by deep cover agents of the CIA, with forums being penetrated the second any type of independent conspiracy discussion starts taking place. Even comment sections of conspiracy websites are completely taken over by government trolls. With Infowars, for example, you can easily spot this, because, despite hundreds of replies to many articles, no one is really liking each other's posts, or responding to what somebody else wrote. It's just random spam comments: "the Jews", the "New World Order", etc. Normal people are pushed out before they even think of contributing anything.
Even more worrying maybe, if you are a genuine whistleblower with the government chasing your tail, you're totally screwed because there is no place to go to. Alternative media outlets as Infowars will censor your information and almost certainly turn you in to the people you're running from. As discussed elsewhere, NSA "whistleblower" Edward Snowden and Wikileaks founder Julian Assange are solidly supported by superclass elements. Dissent? Except for ISGP and in the movies, I have hardly encountered it yet, certainly not anything overly productive.
As mentioned in the previous section, in July 2007 this author published Beyond the Dutroux Affair and subsequently was forced to bribe Prisonplanet/Infowars with $500 in order to get published here. It was a successful coup, but strangeness surrounding the article ensued about a year later.
One of the most prominent names appearing in the X-Dossiers is the Bilderberg and 1001 Club-linked Lippens family. The most prestigious member of this family - mentioned half a dozen times in the X-Dossiers alongside his brother - is Count Maurice Lippens, at the time still head of the leading Dutch-Belgian Fortis Bank. The Fortis Bank collapsed in a rather large scandal in 2008. One of the things that surprised me the most is that the Dutch and Belgian media remained completely silent about the countless X-Dossier ties, despite Maurice Lippens being on the evening news just about every day.
The exception became the Dutch conspiracy-inclined "activist" Micha Kat. ISGP has described him over the years as Holland's most prominent disinformation peddler who ran the website Klokkenluiders.nl in cooperation with Republican Society member Pamela Hemelrijk. Joris Demmink, about whom ISGP has also written in-depth, was Kat's main target, but with the collapse of Fortis, Kat ran into ISGP's article Beyond the Dutroux Affair and started a ruckus about this as well, the Lippens family in particular.
Starting on July 9, 2008 with an article entitled Fortis-bestuurders 62 nevenfuncties, Micha Kat wrote a number of "subtle" articles about the accusations against the Lippens brothers in the X-Dossiers. These articles of Kat included two on Libertarian site HetVrijeVolk.com, repectively on July 21 and July 22, that were entitled X-Files: Fortis-Head Sadistic and Perverse (X-files: Fortis-topman sadistisch en pervers); and Fortis: Website for Questions About Pedophile Boss (Fortis: website voor vragen over pedofiele baas).
"Turns out that the chairman of Fortis, just like Joris Demmink, is involved in child porn up to his ears, together with his brother Leopold, who turns out to run the gambling circuit of Knokke-Heist - as mayor - like a true Al Capone! [While Fortis is collapsing] top man Lippens is raping and terrorising little children." 
Within days Count Maurice Lippens and Fortis came after Kat with a cease-and-desist order through the Amsterdam court, forcing down his articles at Klokkenluiders.nl and HetVrijeVolk.com with a "non-compliance penalty of 250,000 euros 'to be increased with 15,000 euros for every day or part of the day that these transgressions continue'". A lawsuit followed.  Kat described the situation as follows on July 25:
"Next monday, July 28, at 13:30, in the Amsterdam court a lawsuit takes place that Count Maurice Lippens and Fortis (Netherlands and Belgium) have filed against the webmaster of this site [Micha Kat] and against HetVrijeVolk for publishing accusations against the count involving pedophile actions of a sadist character. ...
His attorney J. van Maanen writes that 'he demands that the defendants be sentenced to the payment of an advance on the damage compensation of 20,000 euros, to be transferred to a foundation that is involved in fighting child abuse [which is] to be picked by the plaintiff. ... In not a single way can the publication of these damaging articles be justified. ... The publications of Kat are even more unlawful because Kat has also published works that are to be taken serious. In professional circles he is known to many as a serious journalist.' ...
"What Joris van Maanen is keeping silent here is that the webmaster [Micha Kat] knows him well and has frequently worked with him. Amongst others, he invited Van Maanden as speaker at the largest congress for law students in the Netherlands in the RAI in Amsterdam." 
HetVrijeVolk.com retracted Kat's story a bit more convincingly, without any sarcasm or combativeness. The entire post reads:
"In various publications of Micha Kat that have been published on this website it was suggested that Mr. M. Lippens would have been guilty of pedophile behavior, among them of the performing of sexual acts with children.
"In the mean time we understand that these accusations are entirely unfounded, that not a single credible piece of evidence exists on that, because of this, we have acted unlawfully towards Mr. M. Lippens. We have removed these articles from the website. These will not return." 
There are all kinds of peculiarities to be spotted here. For starterss, why wasn't ISGP served with a 250,000 euros cease-and-desist order by Lippens and Fortis, as Klokkenluiders.nl and HetVrijeVolk.com were? Kat regularly linked to ISGP as the source for his accusations and others continued to do so whenever the case came up. Is it because ISGP is not considered "serious"? Is it because ISGP was unbiased in its writing, not accusing anyone in the X-Dossiers of anything?
Or... is it because corrupt elites, in high-level conspiracy affairs, tend to go almost exclusively after controlled opposition assets to engage in a little roleplay? Apart from Kat's outfit, HetVrijeVolk.com had prominent "populist" contributors that should fall in the controlled opposition category. It's also very strange that Kat, a major conspiracy disinformer who never approached this author despite seemingly having so common interests, already knew Lippens' lawyer. ISGP has described this roleplay phenomenon time and time again at this point. Even with assassinations that can be tied to governments, the victims basically always seem to involve individuals who already were on the take. Starving genuinely independent sources from attention might be the smart thing to do, but it's still a bizarre phenomenon to behold.
Along similar lines, in August 2010 Belgian judicial elites on French-language Belgian channel RTBF criticized the "illegal" release of the Belgian X-Dossiers, citing all kinds of manipulative reasons why it should have remained secret. Top Dutch (Bilderberg-owned) news aggregate website Nu.nl was among the few media ouitlets to give attention to the story. But what do we read in it? "The international whistleblowers website would already have put the dossier online in 2009." Wikileaks? Seriously? They most certainly did release it in 2009 - 1.5 years after ISGP did so, complete with a massive analysis, a large number of translations, and being featured all over the alternative media (after a $500 bribe to Infowars). So again you see the phenomenon of only granting attention to sources that are controlled. Wikileaks receives massive backing from "liberal CIA" sources.
ISGP has received a handful of threats over the years, but cases never went anywhere. A lawyer of billionaire arms trafficker, Cercle visitor, and reported MI6 asset Nadhmi Auchi once threatened the site over some copied mainstream article that the original newspaper already had retracted. I summarized the article, including the accusations, kept in a reference, and that was that. If anything, it was an improvement. I doubt the lawyer was happy, but I never heard from him again.
In 2016 or so a Belgian lawyer sent a cease-and-desist order around on behalf of a family member who wasn't happy that his relative was mentioned in the X-Dossiers. Some went into debate with the lawyer. I ignored him (or her). And that was that.
One legal threat, maybe around 2010, was particularly odd, if not hilarious. It involved ISGP listing Belgian castle owner Pierre Ferbus in its X-Dossiers "the accused" list. This person's lawyer complained that I had "outed" him as a homosexual. I had to read my translation pretty carefully to pick up on this "accusation", most likely due to the more relevant "sectarian or satanic activities at [Ferbus] Valmont castle in Merbes-Le-Chateau" being described - the source of which apparently were three different police reports. I wrote back a few lines, saying everything stays put, and that there's zero shame in being a homosexual in this time and age. As usual, the lawyer never got back to me. But it's twilight zone every day with ISGP.
One of the more important websites anno 2018 to retrace what exactly transpired in 2008 with the lawsuit of Maurice Lippens against Micha Kat over material made available by ISGP the year before, is the site Leugens.nl - a name that translates as Lies.com, or Lies.nl. It is one of a tiny handful of sites to have reported on the X-Dossiers and Micha Kat, all the others involving a group of misfits Libertarian sites and conspiracy disinformation blogs, as well as members of the Nazi site Stormfront. Leugens.nl mentioned plenty of these blogs in its reporting on the case, but apparently never referenced ISGP - which only was mentioned in the comment sections. Hence, chances of Leugens.nl being an independent site aren't too great.
Here's an interesting story I never told about Leugens.nl: Around the time of the Kat-Lippens controversy in mid 2008, I was working at a very large computer store. Most of the time I would spent in the business department, selling pretty much anything - from laptops to network equipment - to anything from one-person start-ups to government departments and multinationals.
So, one day, this new customer calls in and I'm one of three guys in this department, apart from the overall sales chief, picking up the phone. And this customer goes, "I need to buy some stuff for my new website." So I go, "Fine", don't ask any personal questions, and help him with what he needs. Him mentioning his website stuck in my mind, because I've never had any other client in the 1.5 or 2 years that I did that job specifically mention that it's for a website. Unless it's something really big or becomes relevant over the course of the conversation, you generally don't mention that, as it can sound a bit out-of-touch. You also don't need any special equipment to "run a website". What you need is a computer or laptop with web design and photo-editing software, an FTP program, and an internet connection. That's about it. The website is all taken care of by the Internet Service Provider (ISP).
Anyway, I sell him the equipment he needs (I believe a computer) and ask him his company name to put on the invoice. He goes: "Leugens.nl." I finish up the invoice, go "Have a great day", and hang up. But in my mind, the second he mentioned the site's name, I went, "Wew, that's a militant name. Relax, dude." And also: "Let me check that site out. It can't be better than mine." So I did. And I see the website, and I see he has one of the handful of websites talking about the Kat-Lippens lawsuit and the X-Dossiers. My X-Dossiers and my Lippens family.
I just scratched my head and shook it off as a strange coincidence. But the question here, of course, is: was this a coincidence? Yes, among heavy-duty gaming enthusiasts (which I ceased to be many years before), and certainly in the region, the company I was working at was considered the most prestigious and knowledgable. Even back then though, competition in the price department was absolutely murderous and this person could have called anyone. It's also quite amazing he managed to get a hold of me, making you wonder if he called in more than once until he got me. In any case, the person's name (me) he's deliberately avoiding to write about, is actually on the invoice for his website. 16 million people in the Netherlands at the time.
It could have been a coincidence, but I honestly doubt it. My work information also wasn't public the slightest, so it couldn't have been a case of looking me up. Thus, I suspect it was an attempt to "spontaneously" put me in touch with "an ally". These things have happened on numerous other occasions; mainly through email, but not exclusively. Even at that company I have a few suspicions about individuals being employed there as time went by. In the end though, it all remains speculation.
From mid 2008 to late 2010 the ISGP website was hosted by colleagues of mine. These were two students who had just begun their own internet hosting company. They offered me extremely cheap hosting services and were known to be very reliable with something like the usual 99 percent uptime. At least, that was the case until I became their client. In late 2010 they went out of business, at least for a while, because their server, and with that their client's websites, was crashing all the time. The crashes happened so often that I became worried for my Google rankings, with regular visitors becoming used to my site not being available for days on end.
The thing is, due to our work all of us knew everything about computers and networks. We had access to almost infinite spare parts, on top of an army of other students and full time employees who did nothing but sell, troubleshoot and repair anything related to PCs. And all of a sudden, these people can't keep a server properly running anymore, to the point they have to cease their business.
If that were all that would be one thing, but in early 2010, before the majority of crashes, there was an early anomaly. All of a sudden Eurid in Brussels suddenly decided to take down my isgp.eu domain. From one moment to the next my site is gone and there's not a thing my internet providers can do at that point. Turns out that Eurid had figured out that my living address wasn't correct anymore and I needed to provide documentation as to my current address. The strange things about this episode were:
That in Brussels they couldn't have known (as far as I know) that I was living at a different address, because the city council where I live hadn't changed the address in their own database at that point. I regularly called municipal services on this issue, because I needed a parking permit. Each time they asked for more information and additional steps had to be taken before they could process the information in their database. As far as they could see in their own systems (and there supposedly are no others), I had never moved. But somehow Eurid in Brussels knew...
The colleagues of mine who hosted my site and the company who in turn provided their hosting space and bandwidth, all thought it was unheard of what Eurid was doing. In their experience it (almost?) never happened that a domain was taken down over minor issues like this. Apparently they had gotten some kind of notice from Eurid about two weeks before, which they hadn't paid a lot of attention to. And let's face it, such a quick notice from a foreign country is just stunning. I mean, websites would be taken down left and right until local and national administrations update their own databases.
It also took quite a bit effort to get the domain back up again. Multiple scanned documents had to be sent to Brussels that proved where I was living. It took days for them to respond and they didn't answer the question how they could see I had moved when local administrations in the Netherlands couldn't. It's not a company, that's for sure. With those customer service standards they'd be out of business in no time.
More recently, I asked a support desk employee of my present provider about my past Eurid issues and if I should worry about them if I decide to move again. In all the months he was working there, he never experienced a domain suddenly being pulled after a change of address. He appeared to be genuinely confused about my experience.
If this happened today, I'd definitely be digging a lot harder for answers, because what happened with Eurid was really unacceptable. Was this another, more subtle message being sent? Keep in mind that my controversial Beyond the Dutroux Affair article caused a lot of upset in elite British circles. Strangely, everybody in the Netherlands and Belgium who copied the article either was asked to explain themselves at a local police station or forced to take the article down under threat of huge fines. Despite the fact that the most elite law firms, such as the Brauw Blackstone, were circling around my site for some time, I walked away unscathed. Don't know exactly why, but I like to attribute it to the fact that I'm completely honest and completely independent - and some underworld recruit for liberal or conservative spook networks.
In the end, if my hosting company indeed was repeatedly hacked in mid to late 2010, the group who did this was successful in its efforts. When my colleagues shut down their business, I let the site go, because hosting costs would have doubled and this was just too much at that point.
Probably the most common experience for anyone operating an activist or conspiracy-oriented website is the endless stream of curious characters you run into. Not so much in daily life (although it does happen), but more people contacting you through email, trying to convince you of the craziest theories. It is never-ending. There's an enormous amount of consistency in the theories these disinformers are trying to push on you: chemtrails, Pizzagate and 9/11 no-plane theories have been some of the most common.
2011: Death of Danny Jowenko
This experience I never mentioned until in later years more 9/11-tied peculiarities related to ISGP started popping up. It's probably among the less important entries here, but still very interesting in light of ISGP's overall history.
Dutch demolition expert Danny Jowenko, the owner of Jowenko Explosive Demolition, is famous in the 9/11 "truth" movement for his appearance on the September 10, 2006 VARA Zembla 9/11 documentary Het complot van 11 september (The conspiracy of 9/11), which also featured 9/11 disinformer Coen Vermeeren - later equally ensnared in the events surrounding ISGP. In the documentary Jowenko was approached by Zembla to analyze the collapse of WTC 7 in particular. Jowenko made no bones about it that he was "absolutely sure" that WTC 7 was demolished with explosives and points to Larry Silverstein's "pull it" comment as a clear admission that such a demolition indeed took place. Jowenko's down-to-earth reasoning was, and still is, extremely refreshing to hear. Next, going over the floor plan and seemingly starting to realize what he had just admitted, Jowenko explained that it would be quite easy to carry out on the same day, and also that it may have been the preferred choice by building owner Larry Silverstein (which should also automatically include the elite Blackstone Group, from whom he leased the building), because the costs of replacing the steel beams would be enormous. This replacement would be mandatory if the steel has been exposed to any kind of fire.
The thing is, I actually conversed with Jowenko back in February 2005, way before anyone had heard of him. This was about Silverstein's "pull it" comment. I was really uncomfortable asking questions about 9/11 and took a very careful approach, assuming he and his team would have heard about the WTC 7 controversy. Well, apparently they had not made the link, because in 2007 Jowenko acted mightily surprised when shown the WTC 7 collapse footage and hearing this collapse took place about 6-7 hours after the Twin Towers came down.
Strangely, during the 2007 segment, Jowenko was certain that WTC 1 and 2 had collapsed in natural fashion. So, reluctantly, I got back to him in early 2011 to provide him with additional video and questions about the investigation. No response this time, possibly because of the circus that grew around him.
At the time I was working in depth on ISGP's articles about the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 and planned to visit him in person after they were done. After all, he only lived about 25 miles away or so. I wasn't done with the article in question until December 2012. By that time I had already learned that Danny Jowenko had died in a single-car, no-witness traffic accident in July 2011, about 6 months after me trying to contact him again for a much more in-depth discussion. Certainly by 2015, when I developed support for my WTC 7 article from Lockheed and BAE engineer Tony Szamboti, a person with a very similar demeanor, it might have been perfectly possible to converse with Jowenko. Unfortunately, nothing ever came of that.
Obviously, I can't be sure if his death was an assassination. However, what I can say is that it is an awfully freaky coincidence. What I can also say is that if I were a demolition expert or witness to the events at WTC 7 (or the Twin Towers), I would have become much more careful about speaking out in public. Well, not really - but I'm an idiot. However, it would definitely be less comfortable than before Jowenko's death. The fact that this one lone demolition expert who dared to speak out about WTC 7 died in the way he did, is pretty crazy.
On the other hand, ISGP gathered about 400 suspicious deaths that might be linked to various governments. It is very, very rare to find anyone truly independent who got whacked. Over 90% certainly involves people already tied to shady government activity. Then again, it's entirely possible that Jowenko fell into this category too, because of his pretty basic reasoning ("They go from the top") meant to confirm the official version surrounding the Twin Tower collapses. As we shall see in the Frank Stadermann chapter, it appears anyone, certainly surrounding this author, can be turned by the intelligence services and the globalist superclass.
As for the equally bizarre coincidence of this author being the only 9/11 researcher having contacted Jowenko two years before he appeared on national television to become the first and only (latter day) demolition expert to speak out on the WTC 7 collapses, it may have just been that. It's just all so crazy.
In 2013 I experienced the disappearance of an article in L'Hebdo, a Swiss magazine. The article in question dates to September 27, 2001 and was featured in L'Hebdo No. 39 under the title Islamic Financial Networks: Three Swiss Leads (Réseaux financiers islamistes: Les trois pistes suisses). It read:
|"Moreover, "Le Monde" on September 26 has revealed that Yeslam [bin Laden] funded flight training of a Cannes policeman. Disturbing coincidence: at the same school in Florida some of the September 11 suicide bombers were also trained."|
The following text I left as I wrote it down in 2013: Immediately after finding the article and translating the relevant sections in January 2013, the article disappeared from the L'Hebdo website. I can't find it anymore via Google.com or via Google.ch: "site:hebdo.ch". I can't find it by searching on the L'Hebdo site. I also can't find it by going to the front page of the no. 39 edition. Every single article is listed, completely accessible, but there's no trace what-so-ever of this specific article anymore. And it was there just a few weeks before, when I was the first to grab the article and actually translate it word for word. I found it here after Daniel Hopsicker outlined the article in his Welcome to Terrorland book of 2004.
Eventually, I began to wonder a bit if maybe I'm just confused. But, ironically, L'Hebdo no. 40 still makes a reference to the missing article! "Anne-Catherine Menétrey-Savary, Saint-Saphorin Aller plus loin «Réseaux financiers islamistes, les trois pistes suisses» - L'Hebdo N° 39." So I guess I'm not crazy after all. On top of that, the article I found and translated literally doesn't exist anywhere anymore on the internet, because no one else copied it from the L'Hebdo website. Today only the translated version is available through ISGP. The original is gone.
I asked L'Hebdo in English where the article had gone, but never received a reply. To this day I think this is a very bizarre episode. Why would this article get deleted and literally wiped from existence days after I grab it? It contained very unique and important information. In fact, if I hadn't backed up the translation it would have been gone completely.
Now, I wouldn't be surprised if in time the article all of a sudden finds its way back to the internet, especially after me describing this experience. The disappearance of this article also is also quite useless, because a Le Monde article containing the exact same information and on which the L'Hebdo article is based still is available. So, once again, I ask, was this partly a message to make it clear that my internet is monitored? Similar to the events of 2005? Who knows, but the hints have definitely become increasingly subtle. From email, to disappearing books, to phone, to website crashes and domain pulls, to, now, a disappearing internet article.
In early 2015, soon after restarting ISGP at ISGP.nl, there was a wave of people subtlely offering to make donations or additional donations if only I would consider checking out disinformation Y or Z. I never bothered. One of these individuals actually went through the trouble of contacting L'Hebdo and handing me a copy of the original. However, despite me explaining the situation (again), she never asked L'Hebdo why this article - and this article alone - was removed from the website in that particular time-frame. It appeared she had no interest in that. Considering how extremely rare it is that any reader tries to do anything in support of ISGP, I consider this episode another curious one, even more so looking at the questionable information she was trying to push on me.
2015: Google censorship of ISGP starts - before ANY public controversy
Between 2010 and 2014 I allowed a copy of ISGP to remain at Wikispooks.com, which downloaded the ISGP.eu site before I took it down in October 2010. Over time, I began to update this copy more and more to the point that I decided to restart ISGP, at ISGP.nl, in December 2014. The new site featured a greatly updated design and SEO practices.
Compared to the early days of 2005-2007, I found it exponentially hard to get any conspiracy site to link to ISGP. Clearly it was very obvious to see at this point that outsiders were aware that ISGP was a totally independent entity. Things became even harder after moving to ISGP-studies.com in August 2016.
The thing is, in mid October 2015, two weeks before renewing the ISGP.nl domain, I started to notice sudden, overnight drops in traffic coming in to the site. This phenomena kept coming back. Every time I uploaded new material, within days or weeks there would be a sudden, permanent drop in traffic, undoing all previous work. I began to analyze this phenomenon more and more over the years and the only conclusion that fits is that Google is hitting the site with regular ranking penalties.
For instance, Google should have a dominance among search engines of at least 90%, although more realistically, based on past observations, it is more like 96-100% per 12 or 24 hours or so. Guess what? In 2018, Google dominance has generally been hovering between 65 and 75%, and has dropped as deep as 57.4%. In addition, it appears Bing and maybe Yahoo have also censored the site to some extent, that is by looking at the fact that the very small DuckDuckGo.com search engine very often is able to deliver more visits than these two alternatives. And that is with all kinds of duplicate content blocked on Google, Yahoo, and Bing that is not blocked on DuckDuckGo. Often it even appears that someone at Google is toying with the site. Google hits to an individual article - from all different international sites of Google - sometimes shoot up by 10-12x for 24 hours, only to decline again. In other cases, 20-25% general penalty hits are implemented hours after publishing a new article. Google also banned Beyond the Dutroux Affair in early April 2017, a week or two after this author had finally gotten rid of about 50 duplicate copies on disinformation sites that had never been touched. On it goes.
Realistically, ISGP should be getting anywhere from 7 to 35 times the Google traffic it is receiving today. And that is without taking the quarantine from the conspiracy community and mainstream news into account, which greatly helps to keep down Domain Rank and overall visibility.
Controlled opposition criticism on Google censorship by the likes of Alex Jones - whose name has been dropped by just about every mainstream news publication, including links to pump up Domain Authority - didn't really emerge until 2017, after the election of Donald Trump and elites apparently getting more desperate and aggressive with their censorship. ISGP had been commenting on this issue for at least two years at that point, but never received any support from the conspiracy "community". It still hasn't. It has also never received any support for its comments on instant security state harassment going back to 2005.
More information can be found in ISGP's article The War on Google.
2016: Old family lawyer turns to the dark side
In mid 2016 two things happened. First I have David Cole, a leading researcher of Richard Gage's Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, contact me. He wants to Skype and compare notes on the WTC 7 collapse in particular. He primarily tries to make the case that WTC 7 "survivor" Barry Jennings' account was truthful - which I had only recently debunked in great detail in ISGP's article on WTC 7. To me Cole seemed a clear case of a highly knowledgeable disinformer being assigned to try and get me in line with the rest of 9/11 "truth". That obviously doesn't work with me - because who has done more work on 9/11 and conspiracy in general? - so I ignored the email. Cole also came across as a little passive aggressive - "[Are you] only ... writing about the work that others have done?" - and linked to a site pushing the account of Philip Marshall, which I had also already debunked, so his intentions seemed more than clear. (Later, on October 20, 2016, Tony Szamboti of A & E introduced Cole again. After going deeper over Cole's arguments, all suspicions were fully confirmed.).
The second thing that happened in exactly the same period is that a regular supporter of ISGP - who continues to have trouble accepting that the Disclosure Project and the like involves nothing but disinformation - sent me a presentation at TU Delft of former RABO Bank chairman and Bilderberg visitor Herman Wijffels. He thought it was odd that Wijffels would bring up aliens in his otherwise rather corporate speech on global warming. A person with the name Coen Vermeeren did the introduction.
I hadn't heard of Wijffels or Vermeeren at the time, but as it turns out, Vermeeren is among Holland's most prominent disinformers, not just on 9/11, but also chemtrails, UFOs, 2012, crop circles - you name it. Like Wijffels, he's got amazing credentials. Vermeeren is an aerospace and space-engineering professor at the Technical University Delft, Holland's most prestigious engineering university, since the 1990s and head of its "Studium Generale" lecture hall since 2002. Vermeeren is a very obvious disinformer though. This was already clear in 2007 when he gained national prominence with his bogus claim that Flight 77 couldn't have hit the Pentagon, because the plane's fiberglass skin supposedly would be too thin for that. If that isn't enough to convince readers that Vermeeren is a disinformer, the chemtrails, 2012 and Disclosure Project-type UFO claims should. Another giveaway is that his 2012, crop circle and UFO work have been publicly supported by the afore-mentioned former RABO Bank chairman and Bilderberg visitor Herman Wijffels.
While I didn't know the full extent of Vermeeren's work and connections, a few minutes of research into his claims was enough to put him on the "ignore" list. And with him, Herman Wijffels. One of the things I didn't pick up on yet was that Richard Gage, head of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, gave a lecture on 9/11 "Truth" in the Netherlands on April 16, 2015. Guess where he went? The same "Studium Generale" lecture hall of TU-Delft, the introduction, as usual, being taken care of by Coen Vermeeren. Turns out, Gage's visit was quite prominently featured in the news, but I always ignore it, as nothing genuine with regard to conspiracy ever makes it to the mainstream or even alternative news. It's all disinformation. I also hadn't yet done a full analysis of Richard Gage's claims, but was fully aware that he supported a no-plane-at-Pentagon variation and that he'd gone on to the BBC in 2008 making the suggestion that the explosives that took down WTC 7 probably were pre-planted into the building when... it was built... back in the 1980s... Obviously that claim was immediately debunked on air by explaining that explosives as RDX only have a shelf life of about three years or so. In other words, he has just been doing the exact same job as Coen Vermeeren: disinform the public and ridicule the movement he pretends to represent.
Now, on to more important things. So what happens within a two-week span of me being contacted by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and being made aware of Coen Vermeeren? My mother forwards me an email... It involves one from a certain Frank Stadermann, an old colleague/acquaintance of hers who is a well-connected lawyer who in 2008 co-founded his own decent-size law firm, Stadermann Luiten Advocaten. Looking at the law firm's employees, it's what one would expect from it: a lot of expensive-sounding names and university-level educations, as well as several individuals with a history at the law firm Houthoff Buruma (I count three out of 19 employees per November 1, 2018), in which Count Rutger Jan Schimmelpenninck, tied by ISGP to both the Dutroux X-Dossier and Demmink affairs, became a partner in 1999.
To give a bit of additional detail here: the Schimmelpenninck family owns the Westerflier estate that appeared in the Dutroux X-Dossiers, with Count Rutger having been a law partner of Dutch royal family advisor Fritz Salomonson and the equally-Dutch royal family-tied Oscar Hammerstein, both accused of pedophilia. It might all be a coincidence, but facts are still facts.
In the mail from Stadermann to my mother he thanks her for a recent get-together, explains he is into 9/11 "Truth", provides a YouTube link to the April 16, 2015 presentation of Richard Gage at TU Delft, with Coen Vermeeren providing the introduction; and offers my mother - wait for it - to bring her along for a meeting with this very same Coen Vermeeren...
Odd coincidence, right? I'm contacted by a leading Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth disinformer trying to manipulate and recruit me as a A & E volunteer. At the same time another person is making me aware of Herman Wijffels and Coen Vermeeren, respectively indirect and direct allies of A & E leader Richard Gage. Meanwhile - without me knowing - a leading Dutch lawyer has a meeting with my mother, explaining all his crop circle and paranormal "research" work to her (which she can't care less about), while attempting to bring her into the Richard Gage - Coen Vermeeren fold. Odd. Very odd. Very suspicious. Of course, at some point the discussion turned to me, with my mother explaining all the stresses of me doing this (unpaid, neverending) work. So now he's there to support her: "Oh, how good that your son is doing that at such a young age. That is so rare." For like three seconds my mother is all happy and proud (anything not dictated by the evening news is 100% off-limits for discussion), so she - luckily - decides to share this with me.
To make matters even more suspicious, Frank Stadermann is the lawyer my mother turned to for help when I and others were arrested as minors for manufacturing and eventually selling (to an increasing army of fellow-interested teenagers) illegal "fireworks". The Justice Department went mild on us, classified it as "fireworks", and we got off with 240 hours of community service. Nobody died, but not everyone got out unscathed. The thing is, I feel stupid even for talking about it. It's not a good case though and it is definitely one that might spell the end for a politician's career if it gets leaked and the media decides to hammer on it. Then again, Politicians are awkward, spineless little creatures. Try to attack me; it's not gonna work.
The point is, isn't it very, very strange that this lawyer is among the very few in the Netherlands who "turned to the dark side" in terms of conspiracy and contacted my mother - also at the time that he did - to try and drag her into Richard Gage and Coen Vermeeren's Bilderberg-tied joint 9/11, chemtrails, crop circles and UFO disinformation cult? And that this happens to be the only lawyer in the Netherlands who has any "dirt" on me? It kinda makes you go, "Oh, so indeed the CIA works like this: they try to find something on you and then pressure you." Well, go right ahead.
Adding even more to the strangeness is that Frank Stadermann is a close friend and ally of leading Dutch crop circle researcher Janet Ossebaard. According to Ossebaard, they first met in 2013 at crop circle sites in South-England. Later, in March 2016, they gave a joint presentation on the crop circle-related orb phenomenon. 
Ossebaard is described in detail in ISGP's article Behind the Crop Circle Mystery: Researchers, Skeptics and Hoaxers Secretly Cooperating? The Ultimate in CIA, MI5 and AIVD Psyops. She is the primary mentor of Robbert van den Broeke, Holland's most famous and notorious (bogus) psychic. She continued to support and work with Van den Broeke even after his ties to serial killer Joran van der Sloot came out and he himself was arrested for sending extreme death threats to various Dutch VIPs - both in collaboration with his partner-in-crime Stan Pluijmen. Because Stadermann is close to Ossebaard and apparently also to Coen Vermeeren, both of whom know Robbert van den Broeke personally, one assumes Stadermann knowns Van den Broeke too. And let's face it, how are you going to do crop circle "research" in the Netherlands without Van den Broeke? When you already know Ossebaard? That's a tough thing to do. It involves a very small network of disinformers that are running in this scene.
Obviously I tried to advise my mother to stay away from Stadermann. Not knowing much yet about Robbert van den Broeke and Janet Ossebaard (I was still writing the crop circles article at this point), I tried to point out a few problems with Richard Gage's presentation. That led to the usual eye rolls and mental breakdowns: "Shut up! I don't wanna hear it! I should have never said anything!" So this issue kept festering over the years. So why not just write it down here? Be done with it.
2018: ISGP spied on by Dutch prime minister?
About two years after the Frank Stadermann issue (which I'm still left completely in the dark about), in August 2018, I'm coming over to my parents, sit at the dinner table, when my father goes: "Yeah, blahblahblahblah, knows the prime minister," with my mother going in her usually politically correct way, "Yeah, I met him, right? He's the Moroccan. He's nice... kinda." So I go, "What?" Turns out, a guy in my father's senior football team (he's 67) in the middle of a lower middle-class, increasingly Third World immigration-dominated neighborhood of Rotterdam, is a bodyguard of Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte, who, of course, also has visited Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission. This bodyguard never told anybody in his team until at some point a Facebook picture with him and Mark Rutte got out to team members.
I primarily remember my father being very excited with the fact that this person works for, or runs, some kind security company, isn't allowed to say he's Rutte's bodyguard and certainly isn't allowed to divulge where the prime minister is going to be next. I'm not sure how often he is in Rutte's presence, but if this person would be doing his work, he'd automatically be an informant to either the AIVD (Dutch intelligence) or directly to the office of the prime minister. So it certainly is quite convenient that a person like this ended up in the fifth-class elderly football team with the father of the person who is running the world's most threatening site to the superclass. And also somebody who considers Rutte and all his predecessor prime ministers major traitors to western civilization. If I were Rutte, I'd definitely be keeping an eye on me too. Luckily I believe in raising conscious more than starting a violent guerrilla war.
Thus we have the Frank Stadermann tie to my mother and now this new prime minister tie to my father. Things are going well. I never asked many questions though, knowing it will only lead to full-on mental break-downs with my mother. In that sense, the globalist movement has done a perfect job of not merely dividing the country with their anti-conspiracy, anti-"populist", anti-"homophobia", anti-"sexism" and anti-"racism" assaults, but also in breaking up individual families. The atmosphere back home is worse than North Korea in terms of having discussions that stray from the evening news. Thus, you just stop going there.
Thinking here about how close circle ties always develop in establishment networks: Coen Vermeeren, whom Frank Stadermann tried to introduce my mother to, has a major ally in famous Dutch pro-immigration, pro-conspiracy disinformation rapper Lange Frans In January 2017, Lange Frans was allowed to have a bogus immigration-related debate on air with prime minister Mark Rutte. And now one of Mark Rutte's bodyguards may or may not be acting as an informant on me through my father in their senior football team. The latter might not be fully the case, but it's a realistic way to look at the situation and ask questions about.
It must also be kept in mind that previous Dutch prime ministers also all were absorbed by the globalist network, Ruud Lubbers (1982-1994) in particular, followed by Wim Kok (1994-2002) and, to a considerably lesser extent for now, Jan-Peter Balkenende (2002-2010). Lubbers had an incredible amount of ties to globalist NGOs. After Wim Kok left office, he straight went to work for George Soros and his International Crisis Group, among various other positions. And on these things go. These politicians are not loyal to their country or even their culture. They do the bidding of the liberal globalist superclass, both when in office and thereafter.
As already explained in the intro, some experiences more clearly point to government and superclass harassment of ISGP than others, but the writing is on the wall: ISGP is considered a major threat to the powers that be. And because it is perceived as such, experiences as described in this article are only to be expected.
It's entirely possible that my phone and email traffic continues to be monitored. I have no way of knowing, unless somebody wants me to know it, as was the case early on, in 2005. Good thing is that I don't really care. Let them find something on me. Let them try to discredit me. Unless you're a murderer or a pedophile I guess, all attention is good attention. And these elites know that all too well, looking at how they have been trying to isolate and keep ISGP down in every possible way with as little mentioning as possible.
Much more insulting, of course, is when the security state is trying to infiltrate your personal life, from your work, sports club and other recreational areas you often visit, to your network of friends and family. Especially when you have not given any indication over the years of being an aspiring terrorist. If anything, this type of security state activity will only serve to radicalize people - right because they realize they are living in a emerging police state. For now, all I can do about it is write about my experiences.