UK’s David Cameron tricked by Russian pranksters into admitting he pressures Trump, GOP on Ukraine – LifeSite

Tell Congress to stop the Biden administration from funding wars in Ukraine and Israel

(LifeSiteNews) –– Across the West, populists like Donald Trump are responding to a demand for stability, sanity, decency and prosperity. They are rising in the polls, and winning elections in Europe. 

In Britain, Nigel Farage has returned to politics to lead a populist party against the liberal consensus of permanent war, open borders, LGBT tyranny, climate change nonsense and national suicide. 

This is proving popular everywhere it appears. It is called extremism by the liberal-global establishment, who say its rise is fueled by foreign propaganda and misinformation.  

Yet the people who support populists have not been radicalized by online conspiracy theories. 

They have been radicalized by reality. 

Liberal democracy is itself a conspiracy theory. It is a paranoid fantasy unsupported by the facts. This is the reason the U.S. and U.K., together with the European Union, work so hard to keep reality-based comments out of politics and the public sphere. 

This is made obvious when the entry of popular politicians with popular policies is described as a threat to the system. What is this system doing to make us all safe from democracy? 

Targeting Russian nuclear defenses 

At the present moment, the liberal democracies are supplying and targeting missiles being used to destroy Russian early warning radars. They are used to detect the launch of ballistic nuclear weapons against Russia.  

This is extremely dangerous. This is exactly what you would do first if your next move was to launch a first-strike nuclear war on Russia.

Watch the interview below with Dr. Theodore Postol of MIT presenting the reasons for his dire warning on the risk of nuclear war as a result of this unprecedented and reckless Ukraine/US escalation of the conflict.

 To deprive the Russians of this capability is to give NATO an initial advantage in a nuclear exchange.   

A strike using U.S.-supplied and NATO-targeted ATACMS struck Russian families on a beach in Crimea on Sunday.  

What kind of person would press for Ukraine to take such measures? David Cameron for one. He is the former U.K. prime minister and now serves as the U.K. foreign secretary.  

Nigel Farage, however, has warned against NATO and the EU “poking the Russian bear” for ten years. Cameron and the British establishment have rounded on Farage for pointing out last week that this is exactly what they have done, in “provoking” both the Russian invasion – and perhaps World War Three.  

On June 15 Cameron launched a personal attack on Farage, whose Reform UK party threatens to realize the ambition of many former Conservative voters to see the Tories get “zero seats” in the July 4 general election. 

Accusing Farage of “trying to destroy the Conservative Party by standing for election with Reform,” Cameron said Farage’s populist rhetoric about the mass migration Cameron and Blair have unleashed with their wars was “inflammatory.”

He also said Farage’s politics of peace with Russia would make Britain “less safe.”

I think with these populists what you get is inflammatory language and hopeless policy,” Cameron told the Times. He also warned that a vote for Reform or any other party would make “Britain less safe.” 

Cameron – Making Britain unsafe for years

How has Cameron made Britain safer? His war in 2011 on Libya fueled mass migration, adding to the waves unleashed by the Iraq war of his counterpart and role model, Tony Blair.  

Cameron launched a joint operation on March 19, 2011 with the U.S. Obama’s administration’s then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when he was prime minister to topple Colonel Gadaffi, who was murdered in October 2011.  

As Gadaffi had warned himself, a migrant wave then flooded Europe through the state that Cameron had collapsed by force. 

In February 2011, the month before the joint operation, Cameron had said that “state multiculturalism had failed in Europe” and that a “more muscular liberalism” must replace it to integrate radicalized Muslims.   

This was intended to make good of the evil he would do in destroying Libya and fueling a wave of mass migration into Britain – including many Muslims. Perhaps the bombing of their countries helps to radicalize them, but this suggestion is unpopular with muscular liberals like Cameron. 

After years of mounting mass migration, Farage spoke out in 2015 in defense of Christianity against “a policy of multiculturalism” which permitted terrorism and the rape of children by Muslim gangs to flourish in Britain.  

Cameron criticized Farage for making “political arguments” out of the terrorist attack in the Bataclan in Paris in which 12 people were gunned down by radical Islamists in January 2015.  

Politicians versus reality  

Why is David Cameron opposed to making political arguments based on reality? He has done more than most in the last decade-and-a-half to create the dangerous reality making the political argument for change in Britain today.  

Breitbart, 2015: 

Rather like the NATO proxy war in Ukraine itself, Cameron’s latest attack did not produce the desired effect to destroy its opponent. 

U.K. Independent, June 24, 2024: 

Why did Cameron attack Farage again? It was not only for Farage’s wish – shared by many in the U.K. – to ‘destroy the conservative party’ as Cameron said. It was because Farage mentioned the obvious reality that Russia was provoked by the EU and NATO into its invasion of Ukraine.  

In fact, Farage had warned of this, too – ten years ago. 

Boris Johnson, who personally sabotaged the April 1, 2022 peace deal agreed between Ukraine and Russia weeks after the invasion in 2022, denounced Farage on June 24 for “parroting Putin’s lies.” 

“Nobody provoked Putin,” he wrote on social media late Sunday. “Nobody ‘poked the bear with a stick.’”

However, his fellow Conservative David Cameron revealed in a prank call today that it is his personal strategy, and the “fixed policy” of the British government, to poke the Russian bear with sticks.  

Cameron ‘pranked’ into telling the truth about war

In a video released today, June 26, Cameron tells us this himself. 

The UK foreign secretary and former prime minister had a private video call with a man he thought was former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.  

In reality, he was speaking to one of two Russian pranksters. Lexus and Vovan have repeatedly “pranked” political figures in the past, resulting in revealing conversations which give us a glimpse behind the carefully crafted narratives of liberal democracy. Klaus Schwab got the call, as did trans-sane person of Ukrainian propaganda “Sarah” Ashton-Cirillo.  

You can watch the full video with David Cameron below.

In it, Cameron says the British policy of being “one of the most enthusiastic supporters of Ukraine” will not change  even if a new Labour government is elected in July.  

Cameron is asked whether shadow foreign secretary David Lammy’s lack of experience is an issue. 

“That is true,” he affirmed to the pranksters. 

“Will this affect the future foreign secretary’s Ukraine policy?”

“Not at all,” Cameron explains, “I think the British policy is fixed.” 

Lammy’s lack of knowledge on foreign affairs is not going to affect his role as foreign secretary because he is not going to be deciding any significant policies – such as one leading Britain into all-out war with Russia.  

Britain’s policies on this war are not decided by its elected ministers. 

Cameron is asked by the pranksters, “Will anything change with U.K. elections?  

“I think the opposition party is as enthusiastic about defending Ukraine as is the Conservative Party,” Cameron replies. “I don’t think you will see a change.”

Continuing, Cameron tells who he thinks is Poroshenko, that the Labour Party has “supported everything we have done” and that “the Labour Party if they win will continue that approach.”  

Cameron goes on to say the British role is to continue to press the Americans to keep sending their money to Ukraine, and also to urge them “to make all the changes that they could – in terms of permissioning, training, and engagement.” 

“They are not as engaged as they could be,” laments the foreign secretary. 

In effect, Cameron is saying the fixed British policy is to compel the Americans to escalate the war between Ukraine and Russia. He says the Germans should too. He is impressed by French President Macron’s efforts to get World War III underway, in campaigning to send NATO troops to Ukraine and urging missile strikes on Russian territory.  

Russia has warned of “nuclear escalation” should France carry out this move. Cameron is keen to see the continuation of their enthusiasm, but has doubts over sending troops.  

“The French are very enthusiastic – Macron has made quite a change – but there are things to do make sure they follow through,” Cameron tells the pranksters. 

“The problem is if you put troops in Ukraine, you create a target for Putin – what would you do if they were hit?” 

In a rare moment of sanity, he says, “Lets think of the things we can do that aren’t escalatory.”

Destroying Russian nuclear defenses seem to fit this bill, as does pressuring U.S. politicians to become more like Lindsey Graham and less like Donald Trump.

The fake “Poroshenko” tells Cameron that another problem is, “[sic] case of next Presidential election in the U.S.”  

Cameron, Blair and Johnson have surprisingly been even more militant and reckless than the far more militarily powerful United States. They have pressured the US to do even more than it has in the ongoing, impossible-to-win conflict.

In an interview with openly Catholic Judge Andrew Napolitano today, Aaron Maté – award-winning journalist/writer/podcaster with the Grayzone, provides some crucial, not publicly known insights into the sabotage of the April 1, 2022 Istanbul deal. It would have completely ended the war, saved 600,000 Ukrainian soldier’s lives, and met most of Ukraine’s demands.

Maté later also discusses the Israel war.

Maté explains the current crisis,

…is the inevitable result of a decision in Washington to use Ukraine to bleed Russia. That’s the sole goal. It’s the explicit goal of the Biden Administration. Lloyd Austin made it plain when he said our goal is to weaken Russia.

Jake Sullivan doubled down on that when he said a few months later, this is back in 2022, that our goal is to hand Russia a strategic defeat, not to defend Ukraine, not to bring this war to an end, but to use Ukraine to inflict pain on Russia.

He continues,

…whatever the extent of U.S. assistance was in this attack, the question to ask ourselves is this what we want to be doing? Do we want to be rolling the dice with nuclear Armageddon just so that we can take the side of Ukrainian Ultra-nationalists in Ukraine who couldn’t accept the Minsk Accords, who couldn’t accept recognizing the rights of Russian-speaking people inside Ukraine, who couldn’t accept the idea of Ukraine being permanently neutral even though that was the goal enshrined in Ukraine’s Declaration of State back in 1990?

What Russia is asking for there is not some radical Russian proposal. That was actually a Ukrainian principle when Ukraine was founded at the end of the of the Cold War and Yanukovich, the leader who was outed in the US-backed coup, he also moved to change the Constitution to enshrine neutrality, so these are not radical demands, but because Washington’s goals align with Ukrainian Ultra-nationalists, we are risking Armageddon.

Was Cameron’s recent meeting with Trump a rumor? No. It was a case of direct interference in U.S. politics at the highest level.

“It’s true. I had dinner with him [Trump]. My aim was for him not to block the money for Ukraine,” Cameron admits. 

What was the problem here? Cameron says he spoke to House Speaker Mike Johnson over the delay by the U.S. of funding a war that geopolitical expert John Mearsheimer says “Ukraine has zero chance of winning.”

“Because obviously Speaker Mike Johnson wanted two things: he wanted to vote the money for Ukraine, but he also wanted to keep his job,” said Cameron. 

So, how did Cameron help Johnson?  

“I thought it was important to try to make sure that Trump backed him sufficiently to do that – which is what happened in the end.”  

Cameron says the Republican Party is “split,” and that there “is a portion of it that is not very supportive of Ukraine, not supportive of what they see as overseas conflicts.”  

Happily, Cameron knows some traditionalists who do not see things like this. 

“The traditional Republicans see the threat of Russian aggression,” Cameron assures the Poroshenko impersonator. 

Cameron named the lifelong bachelor Lindsey Graham as a prime example of the ideal Traditional Republican.  

“I think we’ve all got to – any contacts we have in the Republican Party – we’ve got to bolster our friends. People like Lindsey Graham.”

Yet the fake Poroshenko reminded Cameron about Lindsey’s more colorful remarks.  

“He proposed to bomb Moscow,” said prankster Vovan, speaking as Poroshenko.  

Cameron starts laughing at this, “Don’t believe everything he says.” 

Cameron’s view of Trump is that he has no clear view of anything, and will simply back whoever is winning in November.  

“The key thing is to make sure Ukraine is on the front foot and Putin on the back foot in November. [Trump] will support the winning side.”  

Winning is all that matters to Trump, says David “security and safety” Cameron. He explains that this is why it is so important to send more money to Ukraine and to cause maximum damage to Russia in the months before the U.S. presidential election.  

“That’s why the $60 billion is so important and that’s why the summer is so important.” 

If the fixed policy of Britain achieves its enthusiastic aims, there is a fair chance few of us will see the election in November.  

Tell Congress to stop the Biden administration from funding wars in Ukraine and Israel

Previous ArticleNext Article