James Delingpole
Politics • Culture • Writing
Valencia: Man Made Climate Change is REAL
Or: Why I No Longer Talk to Climate Sceptics
November 05, 2024

I’m about to bring out a revised edition of Watermelons, a book I wrote over a decade ago exposing the man-made global warming industry as a gigantic lie machine advancing the agenda of super-rich Malthusian psychopaths who want to turn the world into a giant slave economy.

But there was one key detail I got wrong which I now intend to correct. In the original version, I claimed that man-made climate change wasn’t real. Of course it is, though. Look at Valencia…

Or, indeed, look at North Carolina after Hurricane Helene. Or Florida after Hurricane Milton. Or, come to that, look out of your window right now, if it’s daylight, and admire all those white lines criss-crossing your skies and marvel at the gobsmacking fact that even now, even after all this evidence so blatant they might have got one of those skywriting aeroplanes to scrawl in rainbow smoke “This is what chemtrails look like, you morons!”, most people in the world still think this is normal.

My own view is that none of us, anywhere, save possibly at outposts like Rothschild Island in Antarctica, has seen what normal weather looks like for a very, very long time - possibly not even since we were born.

Perhaps I’m exaggerating a bit: for example, I definitely don’t remember in my childhood seeing airliners that produced vapour trails which didn’t quickly disappear but which rather lingered in the skies, slowly spreading, before forming a blanket of impenetrable and dispiriting gray cloud.

On the other hand, they’ve had this weather altering technology for a very long time, probably since at least the Second World War, so I think it’s unlikely that they wouldn’t have been experimenting on us with it ever since.

One of the earliest reported examples of this weather manipulation is the Lynmouth Flood disaster of 1952 which claimed the lives of 32 people in Devon, England. This, it was later admitted, was the result of a cloud-seeding experiment by the Royal Air Force.

I think after Lynmouth The Powers That Be learned their lesson: if you’re going to carry on spraying the clouds, flooding towns and killing members of the public - and you are - don’t let on that you’re doing it; instead, let the message slowly seep out that anyone who believes their government would do crazy stuff like cloud-seeding, geoengineering, weather manipulation and so on is a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

This strategy has worked, clearly. Even though universities now offer courses in geo-engineering, and even though expert witnesses have testified in Congress about the reality - and ongoing menace - of weather manipulation, and even though whistleblowers have confirmed that chemtrails are definitely a thing, most people still labour under the cognitive dissonance of thinking that none of this stuff is true.

What I find particularly interesting, as a veteran combatant of the climate wars, is the reluctance of my old, climate sceptical comrades to acknowledge the role of chemtrails, the use of Directed Energy Weapons and such like in generating extreme weather events.

These are not the kind of people who normally back down from a fight. We’re talking about scientists and journalists who’ve been vilified, marginalised, defunded, even had their careers destroyed because they dared stand up to the Climate Industrial Complex and refused to accept the fake science of Man Made Global Warming.

Unfortunately, one of the greatest weapons in their armoury is being used against them.

Let me explain. It is an article of faith among climate sceptics that dramatic fluctuations in climate are nothing new - and that they certainly pre-date so-called ‘man-made’ global warming. They are, of course, perfectly correct on this point and I have made it many times myself, including in Watermelons. Whenever climate alarmists shriek “B-b-but catastrophically rising temperatures in the post industrial era”, we climate sceptics like to remind them of the balmy era when the Romans were growing grapes as far north as Hadrian’s Wall; and of the Medieval Warming Period (which alarmists have tried hard to claim never existed), whose fruitful benignity coincided with an explosion in scholarship and artistic expression (because when people aren’t starving or freezing to death culture flourishes).

The same goes for floods, hurricanes, wildfires and all the other extreme weather events that alarmists - and the compliant MSM - like to tell us are the result of climate change, climate chaos or, as they once tried desperately to brand it, ‘global weirding.’ What climate sceptics usually point out in response is that extreme weather events will always be happening somewhere in the world and have done since time immemorial.

So it has been with the Valencia floods, which have now claimed hundreds of lives. The alarmists - of course - have been busy trying to pin the floods on man-made ‘climate change’. And various sceptics on social media, as you’d expect, have been fighting back by pointing out that in 1957 Valencia suffered floods at least as bad caused by a day of even heavier precipitation. Indeed, Valencia has reportedly experienced as many as 75 such floods since 1257.

This, then, is the nub of the climate sceptic argument: climate has always been changing; extreme weather events have always happened; therefore the notion that there is anything unusual or worrying or man-made about climate change or extreme weather events since the industrial age is dishonest and misleading.

It’s a good argument. A strong argument. In fact it’s so well supported - by history, geography, the temperature record, the rainfall record, the archives, eye-witness testimony and, for what it’s worth, ‘the science’ - you might say it was a position as impregnable as the Maginot Line.

But we all know what happened to the Maginot Line, don’t we? This is the problem when your position becomes too entrenched: you become complacent; even cocky; and you render yourself vulnerable to outflanking movements.

That’s probably why I no longer talk to climate sceptics. They are brave, decent, principled people but they are doomed by a fatal flaw: their dogged integrity. They believe that this is a debate which will ultimately won on facts - which it won’t be because the game is rigged and always has been by an enemy far, far more evil, cunning and manipulative than they realise.

Nowhere is this naivety more pronounced than on the issue of man-made weather. Deep state whistleblowers tell us that the technology at the disposal of the world’s elites is at least 70 years more advanced than anything they will admit to in public. I suspect that this is the case with almost all the weather atrocity porn you see in the newspapers, in TV documentaries and so on. The wildfires, the floods, the hurricanes, the ice storms are sold to us as further evidence of the chaos caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions. But the truth is that this stuff is man-made, only in a completely different way: generated by the secretive, usually military-linked institutions behind HAARP, NEXRAD, the worldwide Chemtrailing programme and - a speciality of Trump’s Space Force, this one - Directed Energy Weapons.

This artificial weather serves a number of nefarious purposes. It keeps the ‘climate change’ issue in the public eye; it escalates the Cabal’s war on farmers and the food supply; it contributes to the population cull; it enables the Cabal to carry out semi-legitimised land grabs on territory - eg Lahaina, Hawaii - that would otherwise be protected by private property rights; it can be used as a weapon of war (the torrential rain in Vietnam’s Central Highlands during the war, gruellingly chronicled in the excellent novel Matterhorn, was likely geo-engineered); it enforces geopolitical blackmail: countries that won’t play ball with the desired agenda can find themselves suffering unexpected earthquakes or tsunamis or, as in Valencia, floods.

That last detail, especially, is exactly the kind of thing that gives mainstream climate sceptics conniptions and has them muttering: “Get me away from this madman!” Climate sceptics, remember, are already outsiders who have been punished greatly for standing up against the official narrative. The last thing they want is to have what remains of their credibility shredded by association with the kind of bat-shit-crazy loons who actually believe that there are people in the world so evil and powerful that they can actually create earthquakes and use them as a weapon of terror.

But what if such people and such technologies exist? (Spoiler alert: they do!) What you then have is the rather unfortunate situation we’re in today. You have climate sceptics who pride themselves on their honesty and integrity yet choosing convenience and social acceptability over the truth. In other words, they’ve started to act like their much less scrupulous opponents have always done.

This is sad but also kind of inevitable. The tiny, tiny minority of people who run the world - just the scions and associates of a few super evil families, basically - do so on the basis of divide and rule. So long as they can keep the masses distracted with pointless squabbles which ultimately go nowhere, the Cabal are never going to have deal with any serious opposition.

The debate between climate sceptics and climate alarmists is just another example of this.They’re so busy arguing over almost immeasurably trivial issues like whether or not human CO2 emissions are changing the climate (answer: NO) that they’ve no time to look up at all those white lines criss-crossing the sky, or the truly bizarre behaviour of the weather fronts gathering around those HAARP and NEXRAD facilities, and go: “Wait! This is what REAL man-made climate change looks like. And it’s absolutely bloody terrifying!”

community logo
Join the James Delingpole Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
3
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
Big Birthday Bash

James Delingpole’s Big Birthday Bash August 1st. Starring Bob Moran, Dick Delingpole and Friends. Tickets £40. VIP Tickets (limited to 20) £120

Venue: tbc Central England/East Midlands - off M40 and M1 in middle of beautiful countryside with lots of b n bs etc.

Buy Tickets / More Info:
https://jamesdelingpole.co.uk/Live/bob-moran.html

If you have any questions regarding the event - please contact us via our website:
https://jamesdelingpole.co.uk/#Contact

00:04:15
Nick Kraljevic

If you had to escape to another country which would it be? James runs through some of the options with Aussie cybersecurity guy and entrepreneur Nick Kraljevic. Nick - a Delingpod addict since Australia’s crazy lockdowns - talks about how to claim dual citizenship (handy if your family originates from somewhere like Croatia, as Nick’s does) and which countries are currently the most welcoming. His two top choices may come as a surprise. Nick is the founder of Societates Civis - www.soc-civ.com - which can help you make the move.

↓ ↓

How environmentalists are killing the planet, destroying the economy and stealing your children's future.

In Watermelons, an updated edition of his ground-breaking 2011 book, JD tells the shocking true story of how a handful of political activists, green campaigners, voodoo scientists and psychopathic billionaires teamed up to invent a fake crisis called ‘global warming’.

This updated edition includes two new chapters which, like a geo-engineered flood, pour ...

01:24:01
Good Food Project

James talks to Jane from the excellent ‘Good Food Project’.

↓ ↓ ↓

The Good Food Project would like to offer Delingpod listeners a 10% discount off their first order with them (including free delivery for orders over £50).  This will be applied by adding DELINGPOLE10 at checkout.

http://www.goodfoodproject.co.uk/

They would also like to offer your subscribers a special discount off the virtual tickets for the event we are hosting with Barbara O Neill in Crieff next week. The promo code is: delingpole10

https://goodfoodproject.zohobackstage.eu/BarbaraONeillHealthSummit#/buyTickets?promoCode=delingpole10

This virtual ticket allows you to watch any session live – there are 4 x 1hour sessions on each of the four days and the full agenda is here

https://goodfoodproject.zohobackstage.eu/BarbaraONeillHealthSummit#/agenda?day=1&lang=en

After the event you will be sent a link with access to all 16 of Barbara’s sessions and the other speakers to download and keep.

The discount ...

01:36:43

Posted by Tom Woods this morning. I concur! Breakfast is for farmers.

post photo preview
James's Big Birthday Bash - August 1st. Be There!

Because I love you all and want you to be happy, I’d like few things more than if you were ALL able to join me at my James Delingpole Birthday Bash on August 1st.

Unfortunately, numbers are strictly limited. So please don’t be one of those people - I’m the procrastinating type myself, so I know whereof I speak - who sends me a pleading message a few days before the event saying: “Can you squeeze me in?” Because tragically I might not be able to help.

Here’s why I think you’ll enjoy it. The main event is me doing a live Delingpod with Bob Moran and the conversation is going to be great. You know it is. Apart from my brother Dick - who’ll also be appearing, obvs. - there’s probably no one with whom I have a greater rapport than Bob. And, gosh, do we have a lot to talk about: chemtrails, death jabs, dinosaurs, Satanists, the New World Order etc. All the stuff, basically, that you can’t discuss with your Normie friends, but which here we’ll cover freely and frankly because, hey, you’ll be ...

post photo preview
Christianity 1 New Age 0

If you haven’t already - I’m a bit behind the curve here - I urge you to watch this car crash encounter between Christian apologist and scholar Wes Huff and ‘ancient civilisation’ researcher Billy Carson.

It’s an excruciating experience - probably best to watch it on double speed - for a couple of reasons. First, the hapless podcast host/debate moderator Mark Minard is somewhat out of his depth and is also clearly embarrassed at having one of his guests (Carson, sitting right next to him) eviscerated in front of him by his other guest. This causes him to interrupt the debate at intervals and expound well-meaningly but not very interestingly on his own half-baked views on the mysteries of the universe. You feel a bit sorry for him but you do rather wish he’d shut up.

Second, and mainly, it’s painful to watch Carson being outclassed and outgunned by someone who knows and understands his purported field of expertise so much better than he does. Carson was reportedly so upset by the encounter that he ...

post photo preview
Emmanuel Macron's Wife Is Totally Not A Bloke

I was originally going to give this piece a different title. Something along the lines of: “What do Brigitte Macron, Michelle Obama and Dame Edna Everage Have In Common?” or “Which World Leader’s ‘Wife’ Has The Biggest Hairiest Bollocks?” or “If Mrs Macron Is A Woman Then I’m The Secret Love Child of Serge Gainsbourg.” But then I heard the shock news that the French president and his fragrant and definitely-not-a-bloke wife are suing Candace Owens for defamation.

When the story broke in the mainstream media, I happened to have been sitting next to an old friend of mine who is a total Normie. “I’m no fan of the Macrons but I hope they take her for every penny. Who is this Candace Owens person anyway?” he said.

This, I suspect, will be typical of the reactions across Normieland. And designedly so. When I read the story my immediate thought was: “This is another Alex Jones and Sandy Hook psyop.” The law suit by the Macrons appears to have been calculated to have the same effect on ‘conspiracy theorists’ talking about Elite Gender Inversion (EGI) as the Alex Jones case did on ‘conspiracy theorists’ talking about faked high school shootings: ridicule them; marginalise them; frighten them; shut ‘em down.

Whether or not I’m right will only become clear as the law suit progresses. Is Mrs Macron really going to subject herself to the indignity of a full examination to ascertain whether she is the sex she claims to be? Well yes, possibly, if she really was born a woman. But if she wasn’t, then aren’t the Macrons taking an almighty risk here?

My guess is that the intimate personal examination is never going to happen. And that the law suit will be settled out of court, with Candace Owens being forced to pay some kind of salutary settlement - a bit like the person pretending to be ‘Alex Jones’ very publicly had to do over Sandy Hook.

I could be wrong. But if I’m right it will justify the suspicions I’ve had for some time about Candace Owens. Yes she is attractive and articulate but she has risen, almost without trace, to enjoy a platform far larger than people pushing ‘conspiracy theory’ material about subjects ranging from the Jews to Elite Gender Inversion are generally permitted.

Was the purpose of Owens’s success, all along, to gain a huge profile in Awake circles before being ‘exposed’ in the mainstream as a dangerous charlatan not a single one of whose wacky ideas should be taken seriously by any rational human being? If so it wouldn’t be the first time They have played this trick.

Alex Jones and Sandy Hook provides the template. Though the case never went to court - thus ensuring that none of the questions about the authenticity of a mass shooting in a school which had been closed for many months were ever subject to legal niceties like disclosure and cross-examination - the general public is now convinced that the official Sandy Hook narrative has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

In the UK, currently, we have a cut price version of this propaganda technique being deployed in the case of one Lucy Connolly. Connolly, if you believe the official narrative, is an otherwise blameless mother currently serving a 31 month jail term for something supposedly inflammatory she said on Twitter in the wake of the Southport ‘killings’ in which three little girls were allegedly stabbed to death at a ‘Taylor Swift’ ballet class by a scary-looking black immigrant.

You may guess from my inverted commas deployment that I don’t believe the official narrative. Nor - and I do recommend reading their takes, below - do Miri AF or Francis O’Neill.

https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F23bbeb49-73a6-4b91-9a26-e38e29a91102_960x960.pngFrancis’s Substack
A Letter to Lucy Connolly
On 31st October 2024, Lucy Connolly was sentenced to 31 months in prison, “the particulars of the offence being that “on 29 July 2024 she published and distributed written material on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) which was threatening, abusive or insulting with the intent thereby to stir up racial hatred or whereby, having regard to al…
Read more
7 days ago · 75 likes · 8 comments · Francis O'Neill
Miri’s Massive Missives
The Whole of the Moon
Tomorrow, 29th July 2025, marks the one year anniversary of the notorious "Southport stabbings", where - the media tells us - three little girls were stabbed to death "at a Taylor Swift themed dance class" (this detail is always included in any media coverage on the subject, make of that what you will…
Read more
3 days ago · 78 likes · 16 comments · Miri AF

Whenever you write pieces like this you will - as night follows day - attract comments, purportedly from fellow ‘Awake’ people, accusing you of paranoia, purity spiralling and needless divisiveness. This is just what has happened to Miri AF and O’Neill on social media.

On Twitter, for example, Miri has been attacked for her catchphrase “If you know their name they’re in the game.”

Here is a tweet from Fiona Rose Diamond, ‘Truth Be Told Founder, Activist, Law Student, Human Rights Advocate, Campaigning for Truth, Justice & Freedom’.

"If you know their name, they're in the game."

What an absolutely ridiculous, self-defeating mindset. That phrase gets tossed around in the freedom/truth movement like gospel, but it's pure poison.

Think about it: You're saying that every single person who's publicly standing up, risking their life, reputation, career, family - for truth, freedom, and justice - is automatically a plant or controlled opposition... just because you’ve heard of them?

Seriously? That’s not critical thinking. That’s indoctrination wearing a tinfoil hat.

This kind of thinking does exactly what 'they' want; it ensures there's zero unity, zero leadership, zero momentum. It breeds suspicion, paralysis, and nihilism.

So you trust no one, follow no one, build nothing, and fight nothing. You sit in a corner, pointing fingers at everyone who’s actually moving.

Newsflash: If they’ve got a name, it usually means they’ve DONE something. Said something. Moved something.

Here is a tweet from an accountant called Graham Kemp.

"If you know their name, they are in the game" might sound edgy, but in practice, it undermines unity, discredits effort, and isolates people who are doing real work.

When I read responses like this I often find myself thinking: “Tu Quoque.”

This is not, sadly, because I am so incredibly clever that I spend all my time thinking in Latin. Rather it’s that Tu Quoque is the name often given to the rhetorical fallacy in which you accuse someone - it means ‘you too’ or ‘you also’ - of doing the very thing of which you yourself are guilty.

So, in this example, both Fiona Rose Diamond and Graham Kemp are accusing Miri AF of fomenting division in the Awake community when they themselves, by tweeting in this way, are fomenting division in the Awake community.

They could have just shrugged their shoulders and gone: “Ah. That’ll be Miri being Miri.” Or they could have gone: “Damn it! I’m sick of this woman with her furry hats and her pesky arguments which make no sense to me, so I shan’t read her stuff any more.”

Instead, though, they’ve decided to turn Miri’s contention that lots of prominent people in the Awake movement might secretly be enemy agents or collaborators into The Hill They’re Prepared To Die On.

Which seems to me a pretty weird Hill To Choose To Die On for anyone who purports to be Awake.

If you fancy my long read take on this, I can highly recommend a scorching essay I wrote a couple of years ago. [You can tell this has been a pet peeve of mine for some time…]

'Discrediting Our Cause'

·
29 AUGUST 2023

“I was all ready to believe that 9/11 was an inside job but then someone mentioned Flat Earth”, said no one ever.

Read full story

For those without the time, here is the key paragraph.

If you accept - as all the red-pilled must because it is the foundation of Awake awareness - that the world as it has been sold to us is a tissue of lies, half-truths and deceptions, then it naturally follows that everything we think we know about the world is potentially fallacious.

That is, it is not an intellectually tenable position for anyone who is truly Awake to pour scorn on anything they deem to be a ‘conspiracy theory too far’ - be it Flat Earth or Paul is Dead or Lucy Connolly is a Psyop - because this would require them to have perfect knowledge that they cannot possibly possess.

Sure they might be right that ‘Lucy Connolly’ is a blameless freedom fighter genuinely serving a draconian prison sentence - rendered even more cruel and horrible by having to endure prison visits from Reform MP Richard Tice - for the crime of getting momentarily upset on Twitter about all the evil immigrants murdering our babies at Taylor Swift dance classes and such like.

But they might - especially given the prevalence of such psyops - be wrong. And unless they can prove their case beyond all reasonable doubt, what they are engaging in is mere, idle speculation. Mere idle speculation does not put you in a position of such authority that you can reasonably traduce those arguing a different point of view.

Nor does it give you the moral high ground. Quite the opposite in fact because what you are doing is standing in the way of perhaps the purest and most noble mission of the Awake community - the pursuit of the truth.

Pursuing the truth in a world of lies requires courage. Attacking truth seekers for asking difficult questions, on the other hand, requires no courage whatsoever because all you are doing - whether unwittingly or otherwise - is announcing that you agree with the Current Thing.

A good example of this was immediate aftermath of October 7 when we were told, inter alia, that no fewer than 40 babies had been beheaded by the evil, bloodthirsty terrorists of Hamas.

It took a brave soul indeed to declare in those early days of orchestrated hysteria and mendacity: “Not buying this. It makes no sense”.

It required all the courage of the bastard offspring of Brave Sir Robin and the Cowardly Lion, on the other hand, to declare how disgusted you were by all those hateful, antisemitic conspiracy theorists peddling outrageous nonsense about those 40 murdered innocents not being real.

[See also: all the innocent children killed by an evil terrorist at the Ariana Grande concert]

Or, to put it another way, the price of claiming that 40 babies weren’t beheaded - and it later being proved that they really were - is embarrassment, opprobrium and reputational damage.

The price of claiming that 40 babies were beheaded - and then it subsequently emerging that they weren’t - is zero.

But - as so often - I digress. To return to my main point, I think it highly likely that many influencers within the Awake movement have been positioned there for disruptive purposes. And that the bigger their reach, the more likely it is that they are compromised.

This ought to be so obvious to anyone even half-awake as scarcely to need explaining. But let me do so anyway, perhaps with special reference to the Brigitte Macron story which first inspired this article.

OK. So the world is run by a tiny cabal of Satanic paedophiles who hate us and want to kill us. But they can’t kill us all - not immediately, there are too many of us - so instead they have to settle for keeping us like mind-controlled slaves (‘cattle’ as they fondly refer to us).

Mind control is very important to them, a) because it appeals to their sick sense of humour and makes them feel like they are outwitting us (which indeed they mostly are) and b) because if ever we woke up, en masse, to what’s really going on the game would be over and they wouldn’t be able to treat us like cattle any longer.

Hence the high premium They place on deception, on the agencies of deception (the media, the movie and TV industry, pop music, social media, etc), and on the individual agents of deception (which is why pop stars, movie stars, chat show hosts, newscasters, etc get paid so much). They rely on these institutions to keep everyone fooled.

But some people aren’t fooled. A small percentage of the population knows that the world is run by a cabal of Satanic paedophiles. As long that percentage remains small then these people don’t pose too much of a problem. So the important thing with this lot is to keep them contained and stop their ideas spreading and infecting the broader culture with their dangerous truth virus. (Not that we believe in viruses, obviously, but that’s another story.)

How do The Powers That Be contain the Awake threat? Lots of ways, obviously, from shadow banning all the way to killing. But one of their favourite methods - because it involves doing what they do best - is mind games.

So, they take various plausible characters and insert them into Awake circles, like sleeper agents who can be activated at any moment - now or a long time in the future - according to requirement.

“Release Agent Connolly,” They might decide. And suddenly Agent Connolly will find herself deployed in a psychological operation designed to work up segments of the UK populace into so furious a state that they begin rioting and looting. Which has, of course, been the plan for some time because then the state can respond by crushing the populace with draconian new regulation, introduced Für ihre sicherheit.

Then, a few weeks later, They might decide: “The cattle are getting too wise to this crazy, perverted thing we Dark Overlords do where most of our US presidents’ wives are actually blokes, and where we have to bring up our male children as females and vice versa…” [See my podcast with Mr E for further details]

“Unleash Agent Candace,” some Illuminati player might suggest.

“No. Not Agent Candace. She is too valuable to squander on an issue so trivial,” another Evil Overlord - one of the Du Ponts, maybe, or Elon Musk, or the Grey Pope - might chip in.

“Trivial? To us it might be trivial. We Illuminati take it for granted that all our beautiful wives secretly have huge hairy bollocks and swinging lunchpacks like ‘Big Mike’ Obama. We don’t bat an eyelid when we hear that Ellen De Generes is one of the Rockefellers’ grandsons or that Barbara Bush was sired by Aleister Crowley. But if the Normie cattle ever got to find this stuff out it wouldn’t go down well. They’d think it was proof that we were all paedophiles from ancient bloodlines with more reptilian DNA than human DNA, all of us sworn to the service of our master Lucifer.”

“Well tbf that IS exactly who we are,” might respond David Bowie, not unreasonably.

“Yeah. But the Normie cattle don’t know that. They think it’s all just crazy conspiracy theory stuff. And we need to keep it that way.”

Grey Pope: “All right. Sigh. Pains me to do this but I guess it’s gotta be done. Unleash Agent Candace.”

Read full Article
post photo preview
Was Ozzy Osbourne a Satanist?

Did you know that Ozzy Osbourne was a closet Christian?

No, I didn’t either but here is a post someone kindly sent me from the Telegram channel of Paul Fleuret (Absolute 1776). (If I knew how to do links to people’s Telegram posts I would link to it.)

Contrary to popular belief - Ozzy was actually a Christian. And had been for at least the past 30 years.

His lead guitarist Zakk Wylde is also a Christian.

Ozzy never had any demons, pentagrams or Satanic imagery onstage. Quite the opposite - His stages were almost always adorned with angels and crosses (and not upside down ones).

And even Black Sabbath, whilst touching upon Occult themes, was not Satanic. Tony Iommi is a Christian as well.

Ozzy has openly stated his belief in Jesus Christ.

Ozzy also never beat his kids or cheated on his wife. Sharon did, however, cheat on him and he forgave her.

Sometimes to fight the darkness, you have to work within it and learn about it. You cannot defeat an enemy without knowledge of said enemy.

Working in the dark to serve the light is a thing.

Even the bat incident was overblown - he thought it was a plastic bat, and was too hammered drunk to know the difference.

Was Ozzy perfect? Hell no. Not at all. Was he a role model? Probably not. But he also owned his imperfections.

And FWIW: He is NOWHERE near any of the Pedo lists.

Ozzy is NOT who many believe he was.

Water-muddying posts like Fleuret’s are why I now somewhat regret having set out to write a piece inquiring about Ozzy Osbourne’s Satanic affiliations. My excuses are as follows: I was raised in the Birmingham area, which is where most of the early heavy metal bands came from (My uncle, for example, was Robert Plant’s lunch table monitor at Stourbridge grammar); when I was at school, a lot of the older boys in my house were into heavy metal and definitely the first time I heard the word ‘paranoid’ was in the context of that rather catchy Black Sabbath track; the more I understand about the world, the more excruciatingly aware I become of the key role played by popular music in shaping and subverting mass consciousness.

As Leon Trotsky probably would have said if he’d lived long enough: “You may not be interested in heavy metal but heavy metal is interested in you.”

The other thing that piqued my interest in the topic was reading tosh like this from Osbourne’s obituary in the Daily Telegraph.

Osbourne always ridiculed accusations of the band’s connections with Satanism, remarking that ‘the nearest we ever came to Black Magic was a box of chocolates.’

It’s quite a good line - even if it probably only makes sense if you’re English. (Black Magic were a brand of faux-up-market chocolates, heavily marketed in the 1970s and 1980s with a series of inescapable TV ads).

But like a lot of the stories and quotes in the obituary it feels a bit too pat. It’s not that I don’t believe Osbourne could conceivably have come up with such a quip - by all accounts he was an amiable, amusing, down-to-earth, and unscary character - but rather that I have learned to take with a huge pinch of salt anything we are ever told about any pop or rock band of any significance. Almost certainly it will have been dreamed up not by the ‘stars’ themselves (who are merely puppets) but by the publicists and image-makers acting on behalf of the sinister interests who really call the shots.

The rumours and counter-rumours now circulating about the ‘real’ Ozzy Osbourne are part of this misinformation and disinformation process. Take the ‘famous’ story about the bat. (Which is only famous because They made it famous).

Was it a live bat or a dead one or a fake one? Was Ozzy aware of what he was doing or so pissed out of his brain that he hadn’t a clue? Oh, and did or did he not have to a rabies injection afterwards?

If you are seriously pondering any of these questions then you have been taken for a ride. They are all designed to distract you, like a conjuror’s prestidigitation, from what is really going on here. The truth is that there is nothing particularly shocking, or even mildly interesting, about a schlocky, druggy, boozy vaudeville act biting a head off a tiny airborne mammal. Even if he did it on stage in the middle of a concert - in January 1982 at Des Moines Veterans Memorial Auditorium, apparently - hardly anyone will have realised what was going on (not least because in those days they didn’t have huge screens showing rock stars in close up). The Ozzy Osbourne bat story is and always was a nothingburger. And the only reason any of us think otherwise is because we have been told so often that it is outrageous that we have been persuaded to believe in the PR spin rather than trust our own instincts.

This is why I’m disinclined to believe the stories about Ozzy Osbourne being a secret Christian. Sure, he may well have thought that Jesus was, like, an amazing guy from whom we can learn an awful lot. Yes, he might have worn a cross - many crosses, actually - an awful lot, both on stage and off stage. Yes, he may well have believed in God. But so do lots of non-Christians, including Goths, New Agers and, let’s be brutally frank here, closet Satanists and Luciferians who profess Christianity as part of their cover. As ‘Shakespeare’ said “The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.”

Sure there are lots of stories that one can dredge up from the internet to ‘prove’ that Black Sabbath were just innocent Brummie lads having fun and in no way serving the Dark Lord of Evil. I was planning on citing a few more of them myself, just to show I’d done my homework and I knew the guitarist was called Tony Iommi and that it was the bass player Geezer Butler who wrote the lyrics to Paranoid and so on, when I suddenly remembered: “Hang on. You’re just playing the enemy’s game here…”

To understand what I mean you need to take a step back, not get distracted by the largely fabricated detail and faked-up tittle tattle about what the band did or didn’t do, and remind yourselves of the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is this: the music industry is a gigantic brainwashing instrument, run by and for gangsters and Satanic paedophiles for the purposes of destroying the family, waging war on Christianity, promoting drug and alcohol use and sexual excess, engendering cultural division and celebrating occult ritual magic in the guise of concerts. Everyone working in the industry knows this because that is part of the pact they signed - whether literally or metaphorically - when they sold their souls in return for their place in the rock and roll hall of fame.

I think it highly unlikely that there are any exceptions to this rule. But of course, we’d all like to think that there were, as I argued in Why You Can No Longer Listen To The Dark Side Of The Moon.

https://delingpole.substack.com/p/why-you-can-no-longer-listen-to-the

It’s what I call ‘But Not Kate Bush’ Syndrome. This is the delusion whereby you know everyone on the industry is evil, everyone except your personal favourite artistes who are magically exempt because their music is so great and because you saw them on stage once and they were obviously lovely people who had a real rapport with you.

I suppose in the case of Ozzy Osbourne, lots of people want to believe that he was all right because of his lovably bumbling, out-of-it persona, lank hair and silly round sunglasses. He came across like everyone’s favourite useless Dad, much put-upon and mocked by his grumpy kids Kelly and Jack [he has three older ones too, but we don’t know about them because they weren’t on the MTV series The Osbournes] and his incredibly pushy, ruthless wife (and handler) Sharon [daughter of industry thug Don Arden - born Harry Levy].

Yeah, right. If Ozzy Osbourne was so sweet and innocent, what possessed him, do you think, to write lyrics like the ones in this little charmer called Mr Tinker Train?

Would you like some sweeties little girl?
Come a little closer
I’m gonna show you a brand new world tonight

I’ve got a palace full of fantasy
Ready made just for you and me
Once you’re there I’m gonna take you for a ride

I got a one way ticket
To take you to the other side
I got a one way ticket
So come along and don’t be shy

They call me Mr. Tinker Train
That’s how I got to get my name
They call me Mr. Tinker Train
So come along and play my game

You’ll never be the same

Close the curtains and turn out the lights
Beneath my wing it’s gonna be alright
A little secret just for you and me

I’ve got the kind of toys you’ve never seen
Manmade and a bit obscene
Little angel come and sit upon my knee

Presumably he was being ‘ironic’, right? Or maybe he was satirising the unhealthy attitudes displayed by so many of his confreres within the heavy metal industry, but, as per the claims made by Paul Fleuret and quoted at the beginning, he was ‘working in the dark to serve the light.’

lol.

Anyone who buys into this kind of risible apologism needs to hand in their Awake card right away because it reveals such sublime ignorance of how the world really works.

Always but always - whether it’s the back story of four preternaturally talented Liverpool lads who decided to form a band or that tall tale told by ‘economists’ about how we need more immigrants ‘to do the jobs English people won’t do’ - there is the Approved Narrative lovingly curated to fool the well-intentioned but gullible masses.

And then there is the unpleasant Underlying Truth.

The Approved Narrative on Ozzy Osbourne and Black Sabbath is the one you’ll have read - or more likely not read - in papers like the Daily Telegraph.

Here we ‘learn’ that young John Michael Osbourne - ‘Ozzy’ to his mates - had a chequered early career as a ‘plumber’s mate before moving on to work as a mortuary attendant and car factory horn-tuner, finally settling at an abattoir where he slaughtered cows for two years’ before a ‘brief life of crime in which he spent three months in prison for trying to steal a television set.’ Then ‘when he was 18 he renamed himself Zig and placed a card in the window of his local music shop announcing Ozzy Zig Needs Gig - Has Own PA.’ His subsequent band called themselves Black Sabbath after a 1935 Boris Karloff film because their original name Earth was already taken. Their name - and their record company’s decision to put an inverted crucifix on the gatefold sleeve of their first album - attracted the attention of Satanists who asked Sabbath to play their Night of Satan at Stonehenge. When Sabbath chastely refused, the Satanists put a hex on them, prompting Ozzy to ask his dad, a toolmaker, to kit out the band with some aluminium crosses… etc.

Some of this might even be true. But the only bit that really matters is what they don’t tell you. Just as gangster rap was invented by the elites to put more black people in prison, so heavy metal was devised to turn white boys to suicidal despair and dark occultism. In order to conceal this truth - see the Approved Narrative, above - it was deemed necessary to create a cover story in which heavy metal acts were basically just amiable LARPers, wearing scary make up, sporting inverted crosses, flashing the devil’s horns signs and suchlike not because they remotely believed in any of the Satanic imagery with which they were flirting, but because a) they were a bit thick and didn’t really understand what they were doing and b) it just helped sell the records.

This Big Lie attained its apotheosis in This Is Spinal Tap - which used to be one of my favourite movies. I still find it funny - as how could you not? But director Rob Reiner is definitely in the Big Club, as of course, are players like Christopher “Nigel Tufnel” Guest. Here is Hollywood doing what it does best: deploying its full battery of skills from genius-one-liner-writing to brilliant, pastiche song-writing to lull you into an utterly false sense of security about the nature of the entertainment and music industry: to reassure that it’s all just harmless fun.

But it isn’t harmless fun. Ozzy Osbourne wasn’t harmless fun. None of it is harmless fun.

Only an industry run by and for the devil could fool you into believing otherwise.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Who Are REALLY God's Chosen People?

My podcast guest this week could scarcely be more contentious. William Finck believes that Jesus was not actually a ‘Jew’ and that the true descendants of the Children of Israel are to be found not primarily in the Middle East but in the white European nations which used to be known collectively as Christendom.

If you happen to be a Christian of European descent it’s certainly a pleasing notion. When, for example, you recite these lines from Psalm 33 - “Blessed are the people, whose God is the Lord Jehovah: and blessed are the folk that he hath chosen to him to be his inheritance’ - you may, if Finck’s thesis is correct, experience the warm glow which comes from knowing that the Psalmist is talking about YOU.

But we’re in tricksy territory here. (And by the way, I’m going to park the even more contentious “was Jesus Jewish?” question to one side for a later article, once I’ve done a second podcast with Finck asking him to elaborate). It’s not just the Jews who think they have sole claim to the ‘God’s chosen people’ mantle. Many, if not most, of the world’s Christians are emphatically of the same opinion.

I used to be one of them. In my days as an edgy, outspoken, right-wing columnist I was a massive fan of the state of Israel, relishing its (supposedly) against-the-odds victories in the Six Day War and Yom Kippur, crowing that its economic success was a vindication of free-market capitalism, writing articles to the effect that it was a bastion of civilisation - and fundamental decency: look at the way their medics treated enemy combatants and civilians just as kindly as their own people! - surrounded by barbarous, chippy Islamist aggressor-states which had yet to emerge from the Dark Ages.

When you wake up, though, as I did during ‘Covid’, you start questioning all your prior assumptions. Almost everything I had been taught to think about the world - dinosaurs; Evolution; the Beatles; the Titanic; outer space; you name it - was, I realised, potentially a monstrous deception. And if I had got it so badly wrong about all those other subjects, how could I be sure that I hadn’t been similarly bedazzled, befuddled and misled on the subject of Jews, Jewishness and Israel?

Sure enough, I discovered that I had. It didn’t make me love my Jewish friends any less but it did cure of me of a longstanding hang-up I’d had in which I’d half-wished I’d been born Jewish myself. Why had I wanted to be Jewish? All the obvious reasons, such as that the Jews I knew seemed to punch above their weight in terms of intelligence, wit, humour, vocabulary and general Menschishness. Not to mention their affluence. And their clan loyalty. Also, the clever way they’ve managed to have their cake and eat it: eternal victims of history’s worst crime on the one hand; fabulously brilliant overachievers on the other; marginalised outsiders, yet, simultaneously, innermost members of the in-crowd. Oh - that and the fact that they were literally God’s chosen people, of course.

Are the Jews really God’s chosen people, though? Possibly. Some of them. But to answer that question you first have to decide what is meant by the word ‘Jew’, which is more complicated than you might think. For example, in the Second Century BC, under the governance of Maccabean leader and high priest John Hyrcanus, the populace of Judaea was forcibly converted to the religion of Judaea (first called ‘Judaism’ by the Greeks). While this may have made them ‘Jews’ by religious affiliation, it didn’t make them inheritors of the Abrahamic covenant by birthright. That’s because Judaea, by that stage, was a multiracial, polyglot nation containing large numbers of Canaanites and Edomites. These, you will recall from your Old Testament reading, are among the tribes that God enjoined the Children of Israel to destroy - and so, you might not unreasonably argue, the very opposite of His ‘chosen people.’

But are the claims to that title by white Europeans any stronger? Well Finck certainly thinks so. If you go to his website Christogenea.org you’ll find reams of information on the subject, including a 14-hour (!) video series titled 100 Proofs the Israelites were White.I’ve only managed to watch the first few episodes. These cover the great migration of the Israelite tribes after their periods in captivity and exile. Finck’s argument is that they headed northward, crossing the mountains of the Caucasus (which may be why white people are referred to as ‘Caucasians’) and spreading out from there. The Germanic tribes (Franks, Saxons, Angles, Goths, Vandals, Lombards, Belgae, Cymbri, etc) which swarmed across Europe in the first half of the first Millennium AD were descendants of the Israelite tribes.

His conjecture is supported both by archaeological records and contemporaneous accounts, from the Assyrian and Babylonian court records to historians such as Herodotus, Tacitus and Livy. The Israelites were recognised as a very distinctive people and were given different names over the centuries. In Assyria they were known as Cymri/Khumri (after the king, Omri, from whom they were thought to descend), and by the Babylonians Gimiri, which later mutated into the term Cimmerians. The Persians called them Sakea or Saca Suni which, at least one historian has argued, is the origin of the word ‘Saxon’. They were also known as Scythians (tent dwellers) and, by the Greeks, Galatea, a term derived from their fondness for milk.

This isn’t the first time I’ve come across these theories. But you generally only find such information in hard-to-track-down, often out-of-print books like George F Jowett’s The Drama Of The Lost Disciples or the works of Baram Blackett and Alan Wilson, who traced the westward migration of the lost tribes by noting the remarkable similarities between Welsh, Etruscan and ancient Hebrew. You’d think by now that someone would have turned this story into a bestselling popular history book. Imagine the potential audience!

It’s never going to happen, though, is it? In my Normie days, I would probably have assumed that the reason for this is that these theories are cranky and have been debunked by all the ‘experts.’ Now I think it more likely that they’re bang on the money but that they have been variously ridiculed or suppressed by vested interests.

I can imagine all sorts of reasons why The Powers That Be would wish to suppress the truth. One is the devastating effect it would have on White Identity politics, which at the moment is mainly about skin colour and culture and tradition, but which would explode into a new level of intensity were it also to be about Biblical prophecy and divine approval. Another, obviously, is the potential repercussions for the state of Israel, a good part of whose perceived legitimacy derives from the widely promoted notion that it wasn’t stolen by interlopers but was merely reclaimed in 1948 by the people to whom it has always rightfully belonged.

But I suspect that the most widespread resistance to the idea will come not from Jews, oddly enough, but from Christians. Especially those - like the estimated 30 million in America - of a Zionist persuasion. This is the audience Israel’s leader Benjamin Netanyahu is addressing when he quotes Old Testament scripture, which he tends only to do in English because it’s a message he’s directing to a very specific constituency. When, for example, in an October 2023 press conference he invoked ‘Amalek’ he was sending out a clear signal to his Christian supporters in America: that any atrocities he committed against the Palestinians while fighting Hamas had Biblical legitimacy, because annihilation was what God wanted the Children of Israel to do to the Amalekites.

Zionist Christians, who outnumber Jewish Zionists by about 30 to 1, tend to be very sure of what constitutes the correct - and incorrect - Christian position on such matters as “Israel”. But then, in my experience, so do Christians of most other persuasions too. Whether they are Catholics, Orthodox, Calvinists, Baptists, Evangelicals or whatever else, they tend to believe what they’ve been brought up to believe by their preferred trusted authority.

This is why the Christians whose opinions I value most tend to be of the Awake variety. Once you realise that They (I mean the Baddies who run the world, not Christians) have lied to you about everything else, it’s no longer such a stretch to accept the possibility that those lies might extend even unto the Bible, its various translations, its potential meanings and the very nature of Christian doctrine. Christians who blithely accept whatever they’ve been brought up to believe by their pastor, priest, minister or whoever - are too often also the kind of Christians who asked why you weren’t wearing a mask and whether you’d had your clot shot yet during ‘Covid’.

In other words most Christians, regrettably, are Normies. And this mental shortcoming, a form of blindness, becomes a major obstacle when you’re trying to introduce them to any idea which contradicts their embedded preconceptions, most especially where Christianity is concerned. Often they’ll take refuge in the idea that scripture is inspired, the literal word of God. And they really don’t know how to respond when you say: “OK. Which version: Septuagint or Masoretic texts? And which translation? And whose exegesis?”

Details matter. Take, for example, the word ‘Gentiles’, which most Christians take as read to mean ‘non-Jew’. But does it really? Not in the Greek of the Septuagint it doesn’t, where the word “ethnos” - from which we derive ‘ethnic’ - is probably better translated as “nations” or “peoples”. It was Jerome who introduced the G word in his 2nd century ‘Vulgate’ version, where he used the Latin word ‘gentilis’. This in term was translated into the clumsy English neologism ‘gentiles.’

I’m certainly in no position to declare, ex cathedra, that white Europeans are the true inheritors of the mantle ‘Children of Israel.’ But there do seem to be plenty of historical clues to support it, such as the suggestion that the river Danube was so named because that region was colonised by the tribe of Dan. I’m puzzled by the sniffy tone of articles like this historical factoid salad published by Larouche, which seeks to dismiss what it calls Christian Identity and the ‘British Israel’ movement as some kind of psyop promoted by Venice’s top psychological warfare officer Paolo Sarpi. Well hang on. Making an argument on the basis that various political interests felt they could benefit from promoting a theory for nefarious reasons is a classic case of the ‘Motive Fallacy’. It tells us nothing as to whether the theory might or might not be well grounded.

Of course Christian belief has been manipulated by vested interests from generation to generation. That is why I call Christianity the greatest of all the rabbit holes. Once you start looking into Christian doctrine and realising how widely it differs from denomination to denomination - the Church can’t even agree on how many books to include in the Bible or on whether or not Mary is the ‘Queen of Heaven’ - you cannot help come to the conclusion: “Well they can’t all be right.” Which then means that, if you are remotely intellectually curious, you have to start asking the kind of questions that none of the churches want you to ask, foremost of which are: “OK. So where did they get these ideas? Which ones are scripturally and historically viable? And which are the accretions of political factionalism?”

I don’t buy into some of what Zionist Christians believe, for example, because they are too obviously under the influence of some heavy duty 19th century campaigning by dubious characters like John Nelson Darby, not to mention the even more suspect Cyrus I Scofield and his worryingly influential Scofield Study Bible. Also, sorry, but anyone who looks at what Benjamin Netanyahu is doing in Gaza and says: “Ah but it’s OK. He’s a man of God, doing the Lord’s work” seriously needs to refamiliarise themselves with the four Gospels, look at the teachings of the main character and ask themselves what He might thought of it all.

Of course, I might be completely wrong to get all excited about William Finck and his Christian Identity theories. Clearly, I have a dog in this fight because as a white European and a Christian I really rather fancy the idea that I might be descended from one of those entertaining brothers in Joseph And His Amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat. But if there’s one thing I’ve learned during the five or so years I’ve spent properly down the rabbit hole, it’s that just because a theory is ridiculed by ‘authority’ doesn’t mean that it’s not actually true. In fact, the more ridiculed it is by ‘authority’, the more my antennae start to twitch…

 
 
 
 
 
 
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals