James Delingpole explains why he interviews Illuminati assassins

On Wednesday, James Delingpole interviewed Nathan Reynolds, whose life is a product of one of the dark bloodlines that rule the world.

The interview requires a subscription to watch.  However, the article Delingpole published yesterday as an answer to naysayers reveals some of the dark underbelly of this world that many are not aware of and others refuse to believe exists.

Why I Talk To Illuminati Assassins

By James Delingpole

My podcast guest I’m characteristically excited about this week is Nathan Reynolds. For some of you, Nathan will need no introduction. He is a scion of one of the dark, bloodline families that rule the world, his personality was fractured MK-Ultra-style by years of sexual abuse from early childhood, and he subsequently trained as one of the Cabal’s assassins. Or so he claims in our two-hour chat. (See: Nathan Reynolds, James Delingpole, behind a paywall)

The bit that particularly gave me shivers was when I asked – as you do, if you have no filter – what was his preferred method of killing someone silently. Without a beat, he replied: “Stabbing someone in the kidney is a very effective way of paralysing the body. It locks the body up, makes it motionless. Then you drain them as quickly as possible.”

That nonchalant use of the word “drain.” To me, it’s a verb you’d only use if you’d done this sort of thing an awful lot, to the point where you’d become utterly inured to it.

Indeed, this was part of Reynolds’s training, what he calls the “systematic desensitisation to death,” “the searing off of connectedness” and “cauterised normal human reactions so that killing becomes as natural as breathing.”

These phrases are what I call “tells.” When you are assessing someone as to whether they are genuine you look for clues that confirm the authenticity of what they are saying and how they present themselves. The fact that Reynolds can articulate his mental state, in the course of conversation, in three different, equally arresting and vivid ways suggests that he has thought about this a lot, and also that he is of well-above-average literacy and intelligence.

Now, Reynolds could have read this stuff in a book, I suppose. But to me, he sounded genuine. You’re welcome to disagree with my analysis but the onus is on you to give reasons. It’s not enough, as someone tried the other day – before deleting their comment – to suggest that there’s something prurient and clickbaity about talking to such characters, or claiming that James Delingpole used to be a discerning journalist but has lost the plot.

No, I talk to people like Nathan Reynolds because I’m on a mission to understand the true nature of our world. Most of those who set out to do this seriously and unflinchingly come eventually to realise that this world, by God’s permission, according to the Scriptures, is the realm of satan. Once you understand this, the revelations of Cabal insiders like Reynolds become easier to comprehend if not necessarily to stomach.

By Reynolds’s account, children are the Elite’s drug of choice. They are used for Satanic sex rituals, they are used for Kompromat, they are used for the rejuvenating qualities of their blood. Often, as Reynolds witnessed many times, they are murdered in the process.

You could accuse Reynolds of being a fantasist. But if you did, you’d have to explain away the dozens of other insider whistle-blowers all saying the same thing. Some are former Illuminati bagmen, some are ex-child-traffickers, some are Satanic Ritual Abuse survivors, some are satanic high priestesses. They can’t all be lying, can they?

Some people would like to think so – and for understandable reasons. Even among Awake people, there is a clear division between those who take the spiritual realm seriously and those who prefer to think of it as a superstitious metaphor, between those who are comfortable (if that’s the word) broaching subjects like child trafficking, adrenochrome, satanic ritual abuse, fake suicides, false flags, flat earth, chemtrails, Elite Gender Inversion, cloning and Tartaria and those who want to stick to more obviously verifiable conspiracies like the true nature of the pharmaceutical industry.

Then there are Christians who don’t want to dwell on the seriously dark stuff, citing Paul:

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

There are those, usually non-Christians, who see the notion of a spiritual battle between good and evil as a distraction from the solutions they believe can be found in the material realm – self-sufficiency, non-compliance, and so on.

And there are those – I call them the purple-pilled – who pride themselves on their “discrimination” and who brandish their scepticism towards more outlandish conspiracy theories as a kind of badge of intellectual integrity. Sure, the world is not quite as it has been sold to us, they concede. But that doesn’t mean they’re going to fall into the trap of believing everything is a lie or waste time entertaining any “conspiracy theory” they deem outlandish.

My own view is that all three of the above responses are a cop-out. If dozens, perhaps hundreds, of children are being ritually murdered every day to satisfy the perverse cravings of a satanic elite – and I believe that they are – then we need to address this issue unflinchingly rather than turn our heads away because thinking about those poor victims makes us feel uncomfy or because it puts us somewhat out on a limb in conventional discourse.

If I’m sounding a little tetchy here it’s because, yes, I do get quite irritated when I’ve gone to the trouble of finding a really interesting podcast guest only to be told that I’ve been had, that the guy’s obviously a fake. It’s not the accusation I mind so much as the lack of supporting evidence or argumentation. To declare, Ex Cathedra, that you don’t feel a guest is genuine is not to make your case. It is merely to offer an opinion. And you know what they say about “opinions” …

Yes, of course it’s possible that some of the people who appear on podcasts claiming to be Illuminati insiders, ex-satanic high priestesses or Cabal assassins are imposters. But what would the motivation be? I can hardly imagine it’s the money. Does Nathan Reynolds look to you like a guy that is minted? Does he appear on all the TV chat shows? Last time you went into a bookshop, did you see his autobiography ‘Snatched From The Flames’ piled high in the bestseller section? How much do you think he makes from his YouTube videos like his reading from the Book of Genesis (8.9K views so far) or the one about grinding grain like the ancient Millenites did (over 9K views)?

Are they there, then, to provide disinformation and misinformation on behalf of the dark rulers of this world? Again, possibly. But what strikes me about a lot of the characters I’ve spoken to in this shadowy realm is how obscure they are. Their websites have no prominence; their interviews never get much traction; they totally fail the Miri AF “If you know their name they’re in the game” test because it weren’t for dogged obsessives like me bringing them to the world’s attention, not even many Awake people would have heard of them, let alone any Normies. So, if they are a psyop, they’re a very niche psyop, serving a purpose that is not immediately obvious given that a lot of what they are saying is corroborated elsewhere.

“Ah, but they would have been killed by now. Such people would never be allowed to cross the Illuminati and live!” Yes, I encounter variations on this theme quite a bit. But is it actually true, any more?

I refer you to this wise comment by my friend Mike Yeadon, which appeared on Substack below my podcast with Nathan Reynolds.

As an unusually well-qualified person whose testimony is as kryptonite to the perpetrators’ narratives, I have experienced horrible smearing and implied threats but the main weapon used against me is extraordinarily intense censorship. I’m limited to backwaters of the web. There, I can do too little damage for them to be concerned. Also, they have very good surveillance such that if I ever should find a really threatening avenue, they’ll know long before I convert that potential.

I’m alive and free because of their power to limit my reach.

This witness is in a similar position.

Yeadon, I think, is right. Of course They could come and take us all out, perhaps assassinating us in some of the imaginative ways Reynolds describes on the podcast – faking our suicides, say, with special devices designed to give the impression of self-inflicted gunshot wounds. But is it worth Their while when there are so many less messy ways of silencing us, ones which avoid the risk of turning us into martyrs?

If someone like Reynolds were to die mysteriously – especially when he’s so obviously fit and healthy with an excellent diet – it would only draw attention to him and lend credence to his claims that he really is who he says he is. (Or rather, was)

Instead, no matter how earth-shattering his revelations might be, no matter how potentially damaging his testimony to the Rulers of the Darkness of this World, Nathan Reynolds – along with the rest of his ilk – has been rendered toothless by technology.

Imagine if the newspapers and the news channels were to get their hands on the real story as to why London Bridge was shipped over to Arizona in the 1960s. Not the sanitised official version about rich, dumb Americans buying the wrong bridge, or the “London Bridge is falling down” one about it having become a crumbling liability – but the much darker explanation given by Reynolds involving immured sacrificial bodies and a new desert resort granted special legal status akin to that of the City of London so that Illuminati paedophiles could enjoy their vices in impunity.

Well of course you can’t imagine such a thing because it is inconceivable. The news media would never run such story because their raison d’être is to conceal truth from the public and to protect their owners.

Most people still don’t understand this. They find it difficult enough grasping the notion that 9/11 might not have been planned by a man in a cave. So when presented with someone claiming that the world is run by psychopathic bloodline families who gain their power by sacrificing children to satan, they’re hardly going to go: “Oh right. Now I get it!” Everything in their upbringing, their education, their work, their leisure pursuits, their daily viewing and reading has trained them to dismiss such things as utterly preposterous.

That’s how the game works. It’s not that the information isn’t out there. (If you want details try THIS from Cathy Fox.) Rather it’s that the people giving out this information have been so discredited, so heavily censored, so marginalised that they will never reach an audience sizeable enough for them to make the slightest difference to anything.

About the Author

James Delingpole describes himself as an author, blogger, podcaster, irritant and hero.  Officially, he is an English writer, journalist, and columnist who has written for a number of publications, including the Daily Mail, the Daily Express, The Times, The Daily Telegraph, and The Spectator. He is a former executive editor for Breitbart London and has published several novels and four political books.

You can subscribe and follow Delingpole on his Substack page HERE, his webpage HERE and his podcast on Podbean HERE or Odysee HERE.