By Joe Mellor, Deputy Editor
One of the stranger claims made during the EU referendum debate came from the PM when he said that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of Islamic State, is probably in favour of Britain leaving the EU.
Cameron made these claims after Boris Johnson accused the PM of colluding with big business to ensure the UK remains in the European Union.
The PM discussed the IS leaders hopes of a “Brexit,” as he said that allies such as Australia, Japan and US want the UK to remain, but on the other side are enemies of the British.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum, in London he said: “It is worth asking the question: who would be happy if we left? Putin would be happy. I suspect al-Baghdadi would be happy.”
In the past the PM has stated that staying the European Union is necessary to ensure security on British soil. European allies are needed to share intelligence on any potential terrorist activity that could bring death and devastation to our shores.
Cameron said two former chiefs of MI5 and MI6, Jonathan Evans and John Sawers said the UK is safer from attack if it stays in the EU.
Brexit supporters will see this latest claim from the PM as further scaremongering about the possibilities of what might happen if Vote Leave became a reality. Cameron had previously said that leaving the EU could eventually push Europe into a third world war.
These comments from the PM and the remain camp have caused Boris Johnson to mount his own attack in defence of the leave campaign. He claims that secret deals with business are bringing the EU referendum debate into disrepute.
The former London mayor said business “fat cats” had been secretly agreeing to campaign for remain while “angling for lavish” government contracts, which made Britain look “like a banana republic”.
“This is the biggest stitch-up since the Bayeux tapestry. It stinks to high heaven.
“FTSE 100 chiefs are seeing their pay packets soar while uncontrolled immigration is forcing down wages for British workers.
“And it is also now beyond doubt that the so-called renegotiation was a fiction designed to bamboozle the public.
“It was a meaningless mime, a ritual, a kabuki drama in which the outcome was utterly preordained. This is not the far-reaching and fundamental reform we were promised.”
