King Charles shows up in D.C. beating war drums for WWIII against Russia
Talks about ‘shared values’ and ‘unyeilding resolve’ in ‘defending Ukraine’ …but what does that look like and where does it end? Depopulation is the key to it all.
LEO HOHMANN
Just when you thought the war drums couldn’t be any louder, with extremist Israel-firsters pushing for continuing and expanding the killing fields in Iran, Lebanon, Gaza, and beyond, and with the neocons hinting of an upcoming invasion of Cuba, along comes the ultimate King of war, King Charles.
Charles addressed the U.S. Congress on Wednesday, April 28, and his message was clear.
There is more war getting ready to break out, not less, and we should ignore any talks of peace or of any sort of “Golden Age” of peace and prosperity.
Get ready for war, with the inevitable famine trailing right behind.
Because Charles wants the U.S. to join Europe in yet another big war, one that he has been hoping for with all his heart for a very long time.
That’s the war against Russia. But he can’t launch it on his own. He needs America to play a leading role.
Trump may be fixated on edging China out of its energy lifeline in an effort to restore American global economic dominance.
But Charles came to Washington to remind him that we also must take on Russia to ensure our shared Western “safety.”
Here’s what he said, which elicited an ecstatic response from the war whores in Congress:
“Today, Mr. Speaker, that same, unyielding resolve is needed for the defense of Ukraine and her most courageous people. It is needed in order to secure a truly just and lasting peace. From the depths of the Atlantic to the disastrously melting icecaps of the Arctic, the commitment and expertise of the United States Armed Forces and its allies lie at the heart of NATO, pledged to each other’s defense, protecting our citizens and interests, keeping North Americans and Europeans safe from our common adversaries.
“Our defense, intelligence and security ties are hard-wired together through relationships measured not in years, but in decades.”
If you were like me and were naive enough, at one time in my life, to think we fought a war to decouple ourselves from this British warmongering spirit, you found out that was a historic fiction. We are joined at the hip. Nothing against the British people. It’s their government and their king I want nothing to do with.
Russia is “weak,” but the war with it will be long, said British Chief of the Defence Staff Anthony Radakin at a June 2025 meeting of the British Parliament’s Defence Committee. At the same time, the admiral called Russia “the main security threat” to Europe.
According to another British military expert, NATO countries could be involved in a war with Russia by 2027. Ed Arnold from the British think tank Royal United Services Institute predicted this in an April 2025 interview with Deutsche Presse-Agentur.
So it makes sense that in 2026, King Charles would come to Washington talking up war with Russia. We are apparently just one year away from the scheduled conflict.
Charles also acknowledged the recent (faked?) assassination attempt at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner and highlighted the “shared history and values between our two nations.”
In a speech that lasted only 30 minutes, Charles used the word “shared” nine times. “Shared values.”
“Shared democratic values.”
“Shared history.”
“Shared resilience.”
“Shared prosperity.”
“Shared responsibility.”
He was clearly pandering to Trump’s ego, because he knows that’s the easiest route to getting what he wants from the narcissist in chief. You can read the transcript of the entire Charles speech here.
Charles, the ultimate Malthusian, channeled his glory days as the godfather of the “Earth Charter” sustainability movement by invoking the “shared responsibility to safeguard nature, our most precious and irreplaceable asset.” This may sound wonderful, but safeguarding nature in accordance with the globalist vision espoused by Charles calls for all the sacrifices to be paid by average people while he and his billionaire friends go on living it up with the finest steaks, expensive gas-guzzling cars, and jet-setting travel schedules. For the rest of us, we get to eat bugs and fake lab-grown meat, get priced out of our automobiles and out of our homes in favor of tiny high-rise apartments in 15-minute cities. That’s their idea of safeguarding nature: fewer human beings on the planet using far less of the earth’s resources. Of course what better way to force energy austerity upon us than by starting new wars that trigger the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil supply flows?
These Luciferian power elites know they can’t get the masses to accept such a diminished lifestyle without first triggering more and bigger wars, ending in a smaller more compliant global population. They know that war breeds famine and desperation, and desperation breeds compliance.
You could almost hear the military-industrial complex salivating in the background as Charles summoned the demons of war against Russia. Palantir, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and the rest of the fascist corporate grifters are all chomping at the bit to get things started even more than they already are.
This is why I have been warning, really since the end of the last big manufactured crisis, Covid-19, for people to prepare themselves, mentally if nothing else, for the next big crisis, which will be World War III, potentially kicking off simultaneously with rampant civil strife, food riots, etc., on the domestic front. The likelihood of violent, even war-like conditions coming to a city near you is higher than it’s ever been post-World War II if you live in the United States or Europe.
Why have I been telling people to prepare for war? Because the most powerful people in the world want it. We can argue over why they want it, but the fact is they do. They’ve been openly talking about it for the last four years.
The age of global coexistence is not coming to an end, it’s at its end. The days when rival Great Powers sat down at a table and hammered out agreements on how to deal with each other peacefully, are over.
When they get to the point of blockading major global shipping chokepoints crucial to the movement of petroleum and fertilizers, and attacking and burning down oil refineries worldwide (there have been dozens of supposedly random “fires” in the last month across multiple countries), we need to read the tea leaves and prepare for the worst.
Even when they do sit down and talk, it’s only to buy time to rearm for their next military confrontation.
A retired 4-star general who sits on the boards of key think tanks and moonlights as a contributing commentator for Fox News, even said this week that the U.S. should warn Iran’s diplomatic delegation that if they don’t accept a deal on Washington’s terms, they will be targeted for assassination. That retired general is Gen. Jack Keane, a familiar talking head on Fox, who may be the most satanic military man in America today. His entire schtick is for America to bully and kill its way to restoring its fading empire. How anyone can listen to him without wanting to vomit is beyond me. They must suffer from the same blood lust as Keane.
Fast-forward to the 21:30 mark in the video below and listen through at least the 27-minute mark for information on Gen. Keane’s insane advice to President Trump.
Unfortunately, this type of war criminality isn’t just coming from one retired general.
Similar things have been stated by Senator Lindsey Graham.
The president himself talks openly, brags, about annihilating an entire civilization. Don’t forget that tweet from a few weeks ago.
More recently, Trump posted to his social media accounts on April 29 a picture of himself holding a machine gun, wearing dark sunglasses, with the words “No more Mr. Nice Guy.” True to his gangster form.
This post made me wonder, do “nice guys” kidnap foreign leaders and steal their oil?
Do nice guys send cruise missiles into elementary schools, killing 168 little girls between the ages of 8 and 12?
Do nice guys blow up unarmed fishing boats in international waters, claiming, without showing any evidence, that they are running drugs?
Do nice guys use the U.S. military infrastructure to launch Operation Warp Speed and inject 80 percent of Americans with a harmful mRNA gene-therapy bioweapon, then brag about how they saved the world?
I’ve never heard a U.S. president, or any Western leader, talk like this or act like this in my lifetime.
But the problem is much bigger than Trump. Because Trump would not be in office and playing the role of the destroyer if globalist financial elites and tech oligarchs did not want him there.
We are not just witnessing the bizarre rantings of a deranged madman. Someone has gotten to him and told him that he can get away with this. He will go down in history as the most famous American president if he goes along with the script laid out for him, that of a military conqueror.
And to make matters worse, Trump believes he’s got God on his side. He often refers to himself in messianic terms, and he’s had spiritual leaders whispering in his ear that anything he puts his hand to will succeed.
These are crazed lunatics. Malthusians. Depopulation fanatics. WEF’rs. Whatever you wish to call them. In the end they all have one thing in common, they work for Satan.
I believe the likely scenario is to foment so much war and famine that the world ends up with a much smaller human population, and those who remain alive will be in such dire straits that they will beg for the very medicine the oligarchs have waiting in the wings – a new global digital currency that will command more purchasing power than the old paper currencies, but will only be available to those willing to be digitally marked, tracked and scored to make sure they are in complete compliance with the dictates of the new world superstate.
This article (King Charles shows up in D.C. beating war drums for WWIII against Russia) was created and published by Leo Hohmann and is republished here under “Fair Use”
See Related Article Below
Starmer’s Silly Talking Points: King Charles III Visits Washington
DR. BINOY KAMPMARK
He can hardly be blamed for being given the brief by his Prime Minister. King Charles III is in the United States on a repair job, playing diplomatic handyman and mender for Sir Keir Starmer and the US-UK alliance so long regarded as special. On the occasion of the 250th anniversary of American independence, it was easy to forget that the British, despite losing its American colonies, gained some vengeance through the exploits of Major General Robert Ross, who, on August 14, 1814, burned down the White House, the Capitol building, and an assortment of other government facilities.
The US President Donald Trump has made it clear that alliances are only special if they serve his bullying and selfish needs, transient and fickle as they are. Otherwise, the whole notion of an alliance can be allowed to go by the wayside or stung into decay by venomous statements on social media. The UK’s ambassador to Washington, Christian Turner, who replaced the disastrously appointed Peter Mandelson in February, has even gone so far to suggest that the term “special relationship” be scrapped as dated and musty. The phrase, he unguardedly told a group of British students visiting that month, was “quite nostalgic” and “quite backwards-looking”, encumbered with “baggage”. Instead of leaving it at that, Turner proceeded to offer the only exemplar in the US diplomatic inventory that might count, whatever the baggage.
“I think there is probably one country that has a special relationship with the United States – and that is probably Israel.”
Any ruffles arising from that leaked audio has been seemingly contained. On the occasion of this state visit Trump was cordial, even sprightly.
“The Americans have had no closer friends than the British,” he declared on April 28. The same language was spoken, the same values shared, the “warriors” of the two nations having “defended the same extraordinary civilization under the twin banners of red, white, and blue.”
Before a joint sitting of Congress, Charles delivered a speech filled with the usual solecisms on the US political system, not to mention a few on his own. The US Congress is hardly a “citadel of democracy created to represent the voice of all American people, to advance sacred rights and freedoms”, being the republican vision of slave owning plantation owners who were nervous about the mob and ever keen to keep them at bay with a dampening system of checks and balances. The “revolutionary” notions of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” were to be kept on a firm leash. And while the United Kingdom has democratic pretensions, it exercises power through that mysterious political and legal construction known as the Crown. In a short note for the Spectator in October 1959, the conservative, at times reactionary novelist Evelyn Waugh made an abundantly clear point: “Great Britain is not a democracy. All authority emanates from the Crown.” All figures of note from judges and bishops to the Poet Laureate “exist by the royal will.” Elections are, rather, “a very hazardous process” to select ill-chosen advisors.
Starmer, as advisor-in-chief, clearly fed the monarch a rather odd assortment of dishes to temper and placate the businessman tyrant trainee. Lay it heavy with the friendship issue, talking of that “bond of kinship and identity” that is “priceless and eternal”. Accept that disagreements can happen between close allies (“no taxation without representation”, for instance, stirring the anger of the American colonists). “Ours is a partnership born out of dispute, but no less strong for it.” When the countries found ways to agree “what great change is brought about – not just for the benefit of our peoples, but of all peoples.”
A fig leaf of soothing assurance was offered to US lawmakers and the Trump administration. The UK, recognising “that the threats we face demand a transformation in British defence”, was swelling the defence budget, “the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War”. The defence of Ukraine, not high on Trump’s list but very much top of the Starmer summit, also warranted a mention.
Damnably foolish things can be said about defence, that area of spending scandalously exempt from the usual, fiscal scrutiny reserved for welfare budgets and services. And Charles was not spared the Starmer talking points about joint efforts to build F-35 fighter jets and pursuing “the most ambitious submarine program in history, AUKUS.” AUKUS was being pursued “in partnership with Australia, a country of which I am also immensely proud to serve as sovereign.”
AUKUS continues to warp the imagination of its executors, distort military planning, and, importantly, make the most telling demands on Australia, the junior yet, in some ways, most essential partner in the relationship. For one thing, it remains the most duped and witless of the three, having made staggering concessions to both the US and UK in terms of military real estate and investment. Despite turning Australia into a garrison state invigilating over the rise of China in the Indo-Pacific, the agreement makes no guarantee that the Royal Australian Navy will ever receive Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines it does not need, let alone any assurance that it will exercise control over their use and command.
The US Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, published on January 26, does much to scupper suggestions that Australian sovereignty would ever be a serious consideration, given an analysis of the “benefits, costs, and risks compare[d] with those of an alternative of procuring up to eight additional Virginia-class SSNs that would be retained in US Navy service and operated out of Australia along with the US and UK SSNs that are already planned to be operated under Pillar 1.” Even as these doubts are being expressed, the Australian taxpayer continues to invest in the US submarine industrial base.
Obsessed by the deterrent value of such boats against China, the nail-biting worry in the Pentagon and Congress is that any transfer from a navy that remains tardy in meeting the set target of 2 SSNs a year will blunt potency.
“Selling three to five Virginia-class SSNs to Australia would thus convert those SSNs from boats that would be available for use in a US-China crisis or conflict into boats that might not be available for use in a US-China crisis or conflict.”
Such considerations would have been unlikely to feature in Starmer’s mind when mulling over the details of the King’s speech. The British PM has shown himself to be stunningly short on political judgment and incapable in making sound decisions. However polished the performance by Charles in Washington, it may not be enough to save his prime ministership.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. Email: [email protected]
This article (Starmer’s Silly Talking Points: King Charles III Visits Washington) was created and published by Global Research and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Dr. Binoy Kampmark
***
Trump and the King thing
The obsequious coverage of King Charles clowning around for President Trump is a predictable embarrassment.
MIC WRIGHT
The first thing I heard when I turned on the radio this morning was Emma Barnett on Radio 4’s Today programme referring to King Charles the “ultimate diplomat”. It’s a ludicrous label for the royal, but it was in keeping with the sycophantic tone of the media coverage around his state visit to the US.
Almost every news report notes that the King “made a coded reference to the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein” in his speech to Congress, speaking of the need to “support victims of some of the ills that, so tragically, exist in both our societies today”. The BBC’s North America Editor, Sarah Smith, let the cat out of the bag when she said that reporters had been “pointed to that by Buckingham Palace officials”. It’s the press and wider media regurgitating exactly what the palace press operation wants them to say.
A properly critical media would give prominent coverage to voices saying that a vague gesturing towards the crimes with which the King’s own brother has been explicitly connected is not remotely enough. The Queen is meeting some victims of violence and abuse on the visit, just not any of those who suffered at the hands of Epstein and his coterie of rich and powerful friends.
Instead of anything resembling a proper analysis of the King’s speeches, we get the kind of soft reviews you’d find in a fanzine. Let’s start with The Times. Beneath the headline King Charles’ speech to Congress: praise, warnings and 12 standing ovations, the paper’s assistant editor with special responsibility for royal reporting, Kate Mansey, writes:
In a diplomatic masterclass designed to appease and warn in equal measure, the King had 12 standing ovations from across the political divide as he made a historic speech in Washington.
Addressing a joint meeting of Congress on the second day of his visit, Charles managed to strike a blow for British interests while acknowledging that the country should pull its weight by increasing defence spending.
Was there any chance that the phrase “diplomatic masterclass” would not be used to describe this speech? If Charles had stumbled onstage, his trousers falling down to a soundtrack of sad trombone music, the Times would have praised him for his pitch-perfect comic timing. A royal getting standing ovations from Congress is about as surprising as sea lions clapping their fins when they’re thrown fish.
Over at The Times’ tabloid sibling, The Sun, you’ll be unsurprised to find that there’s an even greater slurry of superlatives. Headlined KING CHARMING: Charles delights beaming Trump in gag-laden speech with jokes about ‘soccer’ & ‘speaking French’ at lavish state dinner, its report, from its royal editor Matt Wilkinson, begins:
King Charles poured on the charm at a lavish White House dinner – delighting guests with jokes about “soccer” and speaking French. In a light-hearted and fun toast, the monarch, 77, raised big laughs as he continued to smooth over any cracks in the so-called “special relationship” between the US and UK.
With sharp wit and charisma, Charles left the US President – who has been very critical of the British government in recent weeks – beaming as he cracked gags and handed over the golden bell from Royal Navy submarine HMS Trump.
Another way of putting it is that the King clowned around for the benefit of a bully who recently mocked and denigrated his country. For slagging off the Royal Navy, Trump has been rewarded with a historical artefact. And we’re expected to believe that Charles’s stilted delivery of lame gags written for him by a team of speechwriters makes him the royal equivalent of a roast battle master. Noting that the UK calls the game “football” rather than “soccer” counts as fresh material if you’re the king.
Over on The Sun’s opinion pages, Wilkinson continues his slavering praise for Charles with a piece headlined Trump should consider King’s zingers the highest honour a Brit can bestow – Charles ran a diplomatic masterclass. He writes:
After the seriousness of his Congress address, the King let his hair down at the bash with a series of zingers. He was loose – and the jokes were delivered well, with almost all hitting the mark. It was light-hearted, fun, and there was laughter at all the right times… There is no greater compliment from a Brit than they consider you so much a friend that they can make a joke at your expense.
And to have Charles poking fun in front of the great and the good of Washington DC – consider it the highest honour, Donald.
Wilkinson should be careful; by writing that “almost all” Charles’s jokes hit the mark, he came close to admitting the King isn’t perfect. There’s no space for that in royal reporting, you know. Not if you want to keep being allowed to trail around after them.
Across the aisle at The Sun’s red top rival, The Daily Mirror, the coverage focuses on Trump saying he was “jealous” of the King’s speech and what it terms the “rapturous reception” it got from lawmakers. Its more openly right-wing branded stablemate, The Daily Express, once home to the world’s most unhinged Princess Diana coverage, dials up the jingoism (Donald Trump just tried to show King Charles who’s boss – but it’s Britain 1 USA 0). It’s a Love Actually-brained way of looking at things, with several hundred words dedicated to concluding that Charles ‘won’ his handshake encounter with Trump.
Of course, The Daily Telegraph is extremely committed to presenting King Charles as an exceptional diplomat rather than one step up from an animated Toby Jug. Its royal editor, Hannah Furness, writes:
It was a message that perhaps only the King could deliver.
Amid his florid, fluent words, meandering through Oscar Wilde, Charles Dickens and Magna Carta, he made some pointed remarks to the US Congress.
Covering Nato, Ukraine, religion, the Armed Forces, and unspecified “victims”, the King’s 2,624-word speech to the US Congress laid out the British Government’s objectives for America to hear.
The monarch received 12 standing ovations, some genuine laughs and no audible dissent.
The sub-head of her piece suggests “it is possible some of His Majesty’s messages were lost in translation”. Could that be because all of those strong messages were wrapped in so much blandness and deflection that they ultimately meant nothing? Where Furness writes…
Some of the messages were so tactfully delivered that they appeared to have been missed on first hearing.
… you could equally conclude that Charles’ diplomacy is built on appearing to say something while actually delivering nothing onto which you can actually grab hold.
The Daily Mail claims that the King delivered “hard truths”. Its royal commentator Robert Hardman, dedicated a large chunk of his piece on the visit boasting about his own dubious research into potential family tree connections between Trump and King Charles. The story, of course, appealed to Trump, who posted on X about it. What had Hardman ‘discovered’? Well…
I had reported that Mr Trump and the King had a common ancestor in the 16th century, the 3rd Earl of Lennox, from whom both men are directly descended.
Go back far enough, and everyone is related to everyone else. Remember when Danny Dyer found out that he’s descended from Edward III?
Over at The Guardian, David Smith gets in line with the obsequiousness, writing:
A flick of Oscar Wilde here, a nod to Henry Kissinger there, a sprinkling of Charles Dickens here, a dollop of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt there. Job done!
The British monarch mobilised an elite squad of dead white men, leavened with humour and subliminal politicking, on Tuesday in a charm offensive aimed over Donald Trump’s head and squarely at the US Congress. Judging by the cheers and minute-long applause he received at the end, the soft power flex worked a treat and the special relationship lives to fight another day.
For The Independent, Holly Baxter came the closest to writing about what actually happened rather than delivering a review that would appeal to the palace:
It was a nice enough speech, if you like historical fiction.
King Charles addressed the U.S. Congress on Tuesday afternoon, the first time a British monarch has done so since his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, delivered similar remarks in 1991. He was here, basically, to insist — against all evidence to the contrary — that “the special relationship” between England and America still exists.
While the BBC is calling Charles’ speech “powerful”, Baxter is blunt, calling it full of “flattering, reassuring, nostalgic filler”. She rightly skewers the blandness that ran right through the performance:
There was also a quick reference to the attempted shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, entirely milquetoast in its analysis (“Such acts of violence will never succeed!”) and entirely predictably given a standing ovation… If you like historical fiction, you might find yourself getting misty-eyed.
In the run-up to the royal visit, there was a great deal of handwringing about whether Trump might embarrass King Charles, the man whose private phone calls imagining himself as his now wife’s tampon were once splashed all over the front pages. Truly, the real embarrassment so far is the lickspittle coverage of his words and the pretence that parading himself around in front of Trump like a living royal collectable means anything at all for the future of the rest of us.
This article (Trump and the King thing) was created and published by Mic Wright and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
What a profoundly stupid man. Thankfully, The Solar System is unmoved!