Shaun Newman Podcast - #956 - Pelle Neroth Taylor & Kari Poutiainen

Episode Date: November 24, 2025

Pelle Neroth Taylor is a Swedish-British journalist, filmmaker, and political writer based in Sweden, renowned for his investigative work on geopolitics, propaganda, political assassinations, and the rise of European populism. Educated at Westminster School and Bristol University, he began his career in the early 1990s reporting for The Economist from the post-communist Baltic States, later editing and contributing to outlets like The Guardian, The Independent on Sunday, The Times, Financial Times, Sunday Times, New Scientist, and The Lancet. As founder of Two Raven Films, he has produced documentaries such as Sweden, Dying to Be Multicultural, a critical examination of Sweden's immigration policies that has garnered over 2 million views on platforms like Amazon Prime and Blckbx TV, and Cancel Nation, addressing censorship and cancel culture. Kari Poutiainen is a Swedish physicist and one of Sweden’s most persistent independent investigators of the 1986 assassination of Prime Minister Olof Palme. Together with his brother Pertti, he wrote the influential 1995 book Inuti labyrinten (“Inside the Labyrinth”), a meticulous critique of the official police investigation that became a bestseller and a classic reference work in the Palme case. For over three decades Poutiainen has continued his research, publishing additional books and appearing in documentaries and interviews. In recent years he has strongly advocated the theory that the murder was carried out by or with the involvement of Sweden’s secret Cold War “Stay Behind” network, motivated by Palme’s independent foreign policy and his contacts with Mikhail Gorbachev. Tickets to Cornerstone Forum 26’: https://www.showpass.com/cornerstone26/Tickets to the Mashspiel:https://www.showpass.com/mashspiel/Silver Gold Bull Links:Website: https://silvergoldbull.ca/Email: [e-mail] Grahame: [phone]Bow Valley Credit UnionBitcoin: www.bowvalleycu.com/en/personal/investing-wealth/bitcoin-gatewayEmail: [e-mail] Use the code “SNP” on all ordersProphet River Links:Website: store.prophetriver.com/Email: [e-mail] your voice heard: Text Shaun 587-217-8500

This is Viva Fry. I'm Dr. Peter McCullough. This is Tom Lomago. This is Chuck Prodnick. This is Alex Krenner. Hey, this is Brad Wall. This is J.P. Sears. Hi, this is Frank Paredi.

This is Tammy Peterson. This is Danielle Smith. This is James Lindsay. Hey, this is Brett Kessel, and you're listening to the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the podcast, folks. Happy Monday. How's everybody doing? If you aren't a Substack fan, you should turn into a substack fan.

I just did a walkthrough for paid members of the news. studio that is coming this week well it'll air next week where we've got some conversations going to be starting in there excited to say the least and uh how about we talk before we get into anything else a little silver and gold a little precious metals a little silver gold bull would you well if uh i hop on the the markets as of today gold 56 uh 57 man read it 57-3606 and a year ago, 3696. So there you go. That's the live look at the market in Canadian dollars, I might add.

And Black Friday, Cyber Monday coming up here. You can get deals on precious metals as well. All you've got to do is go to silvergoldbull.ca.com if you're on the American side. And if you're looking for any details or just wanted to have some questions answered, Graham's your man. You go down the show notes. You can find them there. He'll answer all your questions you may have around.

buying, selling, storing, or using your retirement accounts to invest in precious metals. Just look to Silver Gold Bowl for all your precious metal needs. Bow Valley Credit Union, buying and selling Bitcoin has never been easier. Bow Valley Credit Union has developed the first in-can of Bitcoin Gateway Gateway with just a few clicks. You can buy Bitcoin directly from your Bow Valley Credit Union account. Your Bitcoin Gateway account is linked to your traditional BVCU bank account, enabling seamless on-ramps and off-ramps between Fiat and Bitcoin.

Little tech expertise or knowledge of blockchain required. visit bow valley c u.com for more information profit river when it comes to firearms look no further than profit river you can go to profit river.com i'm actually on their website right now and uh some of the new products they got in a couple antique revolvers uh you know maybe you're a collector um they got new used a whole just a whole bunch of different things when it comes to optics accessories and um when you're on the website or stopping in store or give them on a phone call, make sure to use the coupon code, S&P. You can also email Joel.

He's a primary contact for all you listeners at SNP at Profitriver.com. It's down on the show notes. They just go to Profitriver.com when it comes to all your firearms needs. They are the major retailer of firearms, optics, and accessories, and they serve all of Canada. Carly Closs and the team over at Windsor Plywood. When it comes to wood, look no further than Windsor Plywood here in Loymister, whether we're talking mantles, decks, windows, doors, sheds. I don't know, a new podcast studio.

Yeah, all the character would you'll find at Windsor Plywood. Stop in a day here in Lloyd Minster and tell Carly and team I sent you. The Mash Spiel is coming, January 17th, and we're down to 10 teams. So if you're wanting to get into this thing, don't wait. It's going to be a fun little day. You can set up as a team of four or as an individual. Either way, we'll find a spot for you. Maybe you can come play with me.

If you want to win, don't play with me. I assume if there's some good players out there, you're going to hide me because I'm awful. And if you're awful, come join me. It's going to be a ton of fun. We're going to have a nice relaxing Saturday, January 17th, in Kalmar, just west of Laduke. Down on the show notes, there's a link where you can buy tickets for that. Jamie Sinclair are going to be in attendance, and maybe a couple others. You just never know who's going to show up.

The Cornerstone Forum returns March 28th at the Westing Calgary Airport. Yes, we're returning to Calgary, albeit at a different venue. Down in the show notes, you can find all the details there. Some returning guests, Tom Luongo, Alex Kraner, Matt Erritt, Tom Bodroviks, 22 minutes, some new faces showing up, Vince Lanchi, Chad Prather, Karen Katowski, Sam Cooper, and believe me, more on the way. You're going to be first to hear about it here, or maybe become a paid member of Substack. Yes, substack's where we do the week in review, and if you've been paying attention,

this is a Matt Smith thing. So he pushed on me to start releasing the podcast on there. It's been interesting to watch people interact with it. Some really good feedback, honestly. So you can also watch the full episodes on Substack. If you, well, my earlier comments, we did a walkthrough of the new studio. We got our first Guardian blue color roundtable, that is, going to be happening later this week. That'll air next Monday.

So the new studio is getting finally its first conversation in there and excited to unveil that. You can also go to Substack, become a paid member, and check out the new studio. I'll give a little bit of a walkthrough, and you're going to see everything there. Man, I am excited to say the least. Happy Monday to everybody, and look forward to hearing your thoughts on the new studio. If you're listening or watching on Spotify, Apple, YouTube, Rumble, X, Facebook, Substack, make sure to subscribe, leave a review, and share with a friend. Now, let's get on to that tale of the tape.

Our first guest is a Swedish, British journalist, filmmaker, and political writer, the second, a Swedish physicist and author. I'm talking about Peli Niroth Taylor and Kerry Putanainen. So buckle up, here we go. Welcome to the Sean Newman podcast. Today I'm joined by Pellie Neeroth Taylor and Carrie. Potianen. I hope I'm saying that right. I'm sorry, Carrie. I'm going to, I'm going to, you know, I'm close. Gentlemen, thanks for hopping on. Pleasure to be here. Thanks. Now, Kerri was just on a few weeks ago.

Carrie, it's your first time. For the audience, just a little bit about yourself, if you don't mind. Well, I have studied physics. I almost took my doctorate at the University of Stockholm. And I have been a teacher at high school level for many years, not in an ordinary high school, but in a school for grown-ups they have in Sweden. Grown-ups can study here, sort of to be. And I'm interested in physics. Now I'm trying to look at the Spiner Electrodynamics, the gauge group for the Lorenz group.

That doesn't say much to ordinary people. I understand that. But I just wanted to mention it. For sure. Well, you both are coming in from Sweden. And Peli, you know, you, you know, we're saying in email, we're going to like Carrie takes center stage. I wonder if you wouldn't mind just kind of outlining today for the audience. This is of your work.

I'm always interested to have people on the other side of the pond, so to speak, come on and discuss not only different events for historical significance, but just to get a sense of where we're at in the world today. I listen to you and Kerry's conversation that you did with them, but maybe you could outline for the audience what you're hoping we can pull. out of Kerry today. All right. Well, I'm actually located in Winchester in the UK. I'm half English and at the moment I'm visiting family there. And the, the, the power, Olof Palma was a Swedish Prime Minister in the 1980s, sort of a co-prime. I mean, Prime Minister at about the same time as

Pierre Trudeau in Canada. And he had a similar sort of, he's very pro-developing world. And, He was the controversial prime minister of a country that often saw itself as morally superior to the rest of the world. I mean, if the NATO countries had a blue flag and the Warsaw Pact, the Soviets had a red flag, Sweden had the white flag, and it was part of neither bloc. I mean, socially and intellectually and culturally, it was part of the West, but it wasn't part of the Western military bloc. And it was very engaged in African and Asian issues. And Palmer reached out to a lot of leaders in the developing world. was also quite well known as a negotiator and mediator in Southern Africa and in the Middle East. And he was a very dominant political figure, dominant personality. And he really got up the

backs of the Western deep state, partly because he had personal issues. I mean, they thought he was arrogant. It was a generation that remembered that Sweden had been neutral in World War II. And if you lived with Churchill and the victory over the Germans and all that, you know, you thought that you weren't going to be lectured to by the Swedes, you know. But, and he became increasingly controversial and not popular in Sweden, and especially among the sort of middle class and the business classes, as it were. Sweden is this paradoxical country, which is highly egalitarian economically, with a very advanced welfare state, like Canada,

but a lot of very strong military industries and industries with ties to kind of the Western corporate deep state, if you like. And they were very unhappy about what they saw as Palmer's, equivocation that he wasn't unequivocally on the western side, but he was also talking to the Soviet Union and said, you know, we're neutral and we've got to have daint. And in a way, he was kind of proceeding what Margaret Thaksha and Reagan were doing by several years, which was he recognized Gorbachev as being a, who was the Russian sort of date leader, the new Russian face of daint years before Margaret Thacher did. Now,

He was assassinated in February 1986, the 40th anniversary is coming up now. And the murderer was, murder was never solved. It was a dark night. He was walking home from the cinema in Stockholm. And, you know, it was a very cold night and minus 10 degrees. And he didn't have his bodyguards with him. He was accompanied by his wife. And then he was shot in the back by a mysterious killer,

apparently wearing sort of black clothes and disappeared into the darkness. and there were witnesses around but it's sort of become the Sweden's JFK murder because I mean you wouldn't believe the number of books that have been written about it a number of the amounts of documentaries, amount of films

the way it's kind of extached itself into the Swedish consciousness in an even greater way than the JFK assassination because Sweden is a much smaller country so I would say that if you're a man over 40, let's say over 50 I mean you'll know everything it's almost and for many of

it's like an obsession, you know, you want to solve this murder. It's like a real-life murder thriller story. And I was working in UK journalism. And I first started, my first story on this was actually over 30 years ago. And then I had very little to do with Sweden for many years because I was engaged in British journalism. But then I moved to Sweden a few years ago because I had a Swedish girlfriend. And then I thought, well, I'm going to take the time to solve this because, you know, it's a niche. Nobody in the Anglo world knows a business.

about this. And yet it's very interesting. I speak fluent Swedish. So I'm going to delve into this. And there are a couple of books that were my guide, were my guides. And one was Carries and his brothers, Perry's Poutian, and this book called Inside the Labyrinth, which was a brick of a book. It came out in 1996, I think. 95. It was a very, very detailed, a very serious book. So let's say, you know, when there, the dozens of hundreds of books been written about the palmer murder he his that book inside the labyrinth is definitely the top five of books that you should read so i mean carry is not just like he's not just anyone he's a kind of legend in the palma research community so he's far too modest about himself when he's talking about that here

is really well known well carry i'm i'm one of those uh people from the west who's under 40 and has no idea what either one of your i'm like okay uh like i mean obviously from the emails i understand and from listening to your conversation i mean it's it's i don't know is the comparison it's uh sweden's jfk is that a similar comparison is yeah yeah and it's very well shall i carry on because i'll try and finish up i'll just say it's even sure what's happening right now in europe well anyway the reason why carrie's coming on is he came out with a book this time minus his brother two or three weeks ago was it and i was given a review copy and a review 10th of october yeah and then I decided to interview you and you obliged me with an interview and then I thought come on the

show and tell it for a wider audience so very very good to have you on but the thing is that my research is and I did a documentary for YouTube on it and I talked to some of the people I'm not I'm in the slipstream of what people I carry have already done they paved away but at least I'm part of the English speaking journalistic community so I thought well I'll bring what they're saying to a wider audience my conviction is that it was a a British-American operation, they were pulling the strings with the acquiescence of the Swedish security police. So they had to accept that this was going on. Now, this is really important because we all know that, well, if the CIA and the Brits killed people, it's like bad guys. It's guys

from the Latin American generals with twirling mustaches and from dodgy dictatorships, you know who they torture their citizens and you know if they were killed by the cia well i mean they were bad guys anyway nobody really smorns them but this was a guy who although he was sometimes autocratic and bossy ran the world's most successful democracy the world's second richest country after switzerland you know the country that that um i lived because i lived a few years of my youth in sweden was more prosperous in the uk i mean it was packed supermarkets and more of a consumer society than America. I mean, you just remember that period, very, very westernized. And yet that our friends in NATO kill this guy. So it's like proof positive that our friends in Langley

and Wauxhall Cross don't just kill the bad guys with their horrible brown mustaches and their brown skin and their and their bad dictatorial southern Latin habits. But they also kill peoples of democracies. So, and I think that my sources could lead the trail all the way to Margaret Thakshire. However, proof is very hard to come by anyone, anyone can say anything. But I talked to a guy who was an MI6 agent in Stockholm, Gothenburg a few weeks ago, and I showed Carrie the documentary this afternoon, and he says, well, you know, the MI6 chief in Stockholm knew about this murder two days before it happened, and he told me about it. So for knowledge, it might not mean for planning, but it might be that they planned it as well.

But anyway, I mean, Carrie has a, I think what Carrie's book was really good at was detailing beyond doubt that the Swedish security police were involved and they facilitated the murder. So he has, I've got more of the international dimension, but you're very strong. Carrie, if you don't mind coming from a guy who knows, and I am going to assume my audience knows less than 1% of what you're about to say. Maybe you could just walk us through the story of forgive me. How do I pronounce the name of the man that was assassinated? Oloff Palme. And he was the leader of Sweden. He was the prime minister of Sweden.

You can compare it with Canada. Canada has a prime minister and the king in England is sort of the head of state. It's the same system here in Sweden. We have a king. He's the head of state. And then Olof Palme was the prime minister when he was murdered in 1986. And the king has not much power. He has even less power than the English king in England. So it's a system that reminds a lot about Canada. Canada also as a prime minister. Yes. Was there any other questions? Well, I guess I would just like to know the story first before we get into the dark shadowy underworld of it. I've just, if you wouldn't mind, you know, sitting here in Canada, I've heard, you know, I go back to 1986, boys, I was born that year. There's probably a reason why I have zero clue of man being assassinated.

But it, you know, I've heard of different leaders from around the world being assassinated, never Sweden's, I've never even heard the story. So I wouldn't mind if you'd just walk us through it. There were Palme became the Prime Minister of Sweden in 1969. He became the leader of the Social Democratic Party who had ruled Sweden for decades before that. And there were tensions, the Americans hated him, you could say. There were tensions all the time through the, especially in the beginning of the 70s. when he was criticizing America for the Vietnam War. So there was very strong tensions.

And the tensions just continued. And in the beginning of the 80s, he lost the elections in 1976. The Social Democratic Party lost elections. So he was in opposition until 1982. And then he became prime minister again. And he, during the period, when he was in opposition, he started something that sort of a group where politicians from England and from the global south, Rajiv Gandhi, David Owen, a former prime minister

and Russians also, Georgi Arbato, who he, because the thing was that Palme in 1980, he was very much afraid of a nuclear war. He wanted to prevent a nuclear war. There was tensions that could have led to a nuclear war. So he formed this group and they got made a report called Common Security in English. And there was a Swedish translation also. And it went to the United Nations. And this was the common, the idea in the Common Security report was that we have to to be closer to the Soviets. The Soviets and the West have to work together to prevent a nuclear war. That was the general idea. And that was totally against what Margaret Thatcher thought and what President Ronald Reagan at the time thought. Reagan's idea was, we win, they

lose. Nothing that we shouldn't cooperate in any way. We win, they lose. That was his policy. so there was total confrontation with palmer and okay you can no i mean i think that margaret's action ronald reagan everyone knows their story of the cold war which was that they outspent the soviets on military equipment you know uh and they scared the soviets they scared them and they bankrupted them um because the soviets whose economy was didn't work because of social socialists. And their distribution, I mean, if you went to the Soviet Union in the 1980s, behind all these missiles, missile processions in the red square, there was a country where you couldn't get basic foods in the supermarkets. So they were like empty mausoleums, you know, I mean, that have one carrot maybe or something. And so people who traveled to the Soviet Union knew that behind this frightening superpower was a country that was kind of economically on its last. legs. That is very different from today, by the way. I think today's Russia is a much more successful country. But back then, and people in the Reagan administration thought, well, if

we outspend, so in 1981, I think America decided to massively increase its defense spending and massively increase the provocations that carried out. I mean, they sent B-52 bombers right up to the Soviet borders and then they turned back at the last minutes. and they attacked, they sent their aircraft carriers up to the Norwegian coast, which is not far from the Soviet Union, and they sent their aircraft right up to the Soviet border, and they started blockading, they started sending submarine divers into Murmans, which is the Soviet Union's most famous, most important naval base, it's right across, as it were, the North Pole from Canada, right? It's their most important naval base. And they sent their divers in to both listen in, send drone, what's the word, listening devices. So they recorded everything the Soviet admirals were telling each other. And they started tracking the Soviet missile subs as they left Murmansk.

And as I understand it, that the Americans were able to track every single Russian missile sub throughout its entire lifetime as it traveled wherever it was in the high seas so if the russians were going to thinking of starting a nuclear war the american submarine hunter killers were going to get their first and shoot them down but the point is for i think that the soviets were scared shitless by this and they thought that the americans really were going to create a nuclear incident or something and um the there was an excellent exercise in 1983 where NATO simulated an attack on the Soviet Union, which given all the background and everything else NATO was doing, the Russians thought was a serious thing. So they're on a hair

trigger alert. They were going to launch a preempt, because if a war is coming, you've got to get your attack in first, right, because the first attack gets all the benefits. So they were like days away from deciding that this fake exercise was actually a real exercise aimed at killing the Soviets. they were going to kill NATO first. And they were not kidding. They were really frightened into that. So we had this world of incredible tensions. And I mean, Sean, if you say you were born in 1986, well, I mean, Carrie is older than me, but I was 13 in the early 1980s. And I remember on television, you know, children's programs, kids were saying, like a child was allowed to ask Margaret Thakshire, you know, she's invited onto the program. Yes, dear, what would you like to know?

Prime Minister, are you going to kill us all in a nuclear war? You know, cartoons. I mean, there's a cartoon called Where the Wind Blows. It was a very popular, both an animation and a cartoon. It's a bestseller you saw in every bookshop about an old couple living through a nuclear war. And there were demonstrations, hundreds of thousands of people. I mean, if you were born in 1986, you'll probably remember the 2003 March. is against Iraq, against the Iraq war.

This was even bigger than that. Half a million people, tens of thousands of people marching from Paris to Stockholm and vice versa. And cities declared their cities to be nuclear-free zones. And so if you went into, you thought, welcome to Stockholm, this is a nuclear-free zone, right? And the reason, and so it's interesting, because you know that film Oppenheimer by Christopher Nolan?

Yeah. Well, he's my age. And Christopher Nolan, which is about the first nuclear war, first nuclear device, the, you know, the Manhattan program, he said to interviewers, the reason why he made that film was because his child, who was 14 or 15 today, had never heard, didn't know anything about nuclear weapons, didn't know anything about the Cold War, didn't know anything about the dangers we were living through. And as said, Nolan, I don't think he's that political, but he is etched into his memory. And I think that what's one of the problems that we're living through today is a world where, let's say people under 40, a lot of our political class, they're very inexperienced. I mean, they're unusually inexperienced because they've lived through a long period of prosperity and peace. They don't know how dangerous nuclear war is.

I mean, as Trump said, you know, I don't know about global warming, but I'll tell you what will warm up the globe in five seconds. That's a nuclear war. I mean, it could kill us all. Five billion people are going to die in a nuclear war. and the whole earth will be blacked out by nuclear winter, that is the clouds created by the fires when our cities are devastated,

will turn northern hemisphere into an ice age, basically. The thing is, when we were 13 and 14 in the early 1980s, we all knew that. We were like living through the war, but except it was a cold war, and it was a real threat, not this kind of global warming kind of bogus threat. It was a real threat because we could die any minute. That consciousness has gone now.

So those of us in my age, we knew the Cold War was dangerous. We knew nuclear war was the real threat. We're amazed at how relaxed the Generation X or whatever you call it, or Generation Z. They think about, you know, Putin is just blackmailing us. We know how dangerous nuclear war is. Every side of six thousand missiles, any one of which could, any one of those six thousand could destroy a city in seconds flat, London, gone in five seconds. So Oppenheimer was made because he wanted to raise consciousness about that.

And the point is Palma was living in this permanent fear of nuclear disaster with the Russians being, as it were, provoked by Margaret Thack and Ronald Reagan. And he said, let's talk to the Russians instead of confronting them, exactly the same approach as Trump is doing today. And Trump is getting enormous pushback for it, as we know. But Palma, so Palma, in a way, I mean, I thought I've got some contacts in the Trump administration through my other shows. And I thought, well, if I can picture, because they're just as ignorant, they don't know anything. I said, well, this was a guy trying to do what you were doing except 40 years ago, and he was killed for it. A man, a peacemaker who tried to talk to the other side and was killed by hardliners on his own side because he was trying to avoid destruction in a nuclear war that would kill five billion people. Well, yeah, as you're both talking, I'm like, it sounds eerily to the way today's world is where if you're talking to the opposing,

side, a lot of people don't like that. And meanwhile, you're like, but if you don't want nuclear war, that's exactly what you should be doing, is talking to the other side and making sure nobody presses the button. And the scary thing is that you had, in 1983, there were two incidents. Pelle talked about one, Abel Archer. But there was another incident just a little bit earlier, where we were on the verge of nuclear war by accident. That's the thing, by accident. No one intended to start a nuclear war. But in September 1983, I think it was, the Russians thought their instruments showed that the Americans were sending nuclear weapons towards Russia. the instrument showed

in Moscow and the the man sort of who led the who led the organization that was checking

the if nuclear missiles are coming or not he had it was a false alarm actually but no one knew it at the time and he could have sort of just gone up and said

now now the Americans have attacked. And it would just have taken a few minutes before you had had a full-fledged nuclear war, less than an hour. The Soviets, the leaders in the Soviet Union wouldn't have had a long time to decide. But he was cool. He was so cool. So he decided by himself that this must be a false alarm. And there's a Danish filmmaker who in 1914 made a film, his name was Petro, made a film about him and said, and the title of the film was the man who saved the world. And this was secret until 1998 when a Soviet general divulged this thing in September when they thought that, when the Russians thought that

they were attacked by nuclear weapons from America. So that's the scary thing here. It's that you can get a nuclear war unintentionally. And it was the same thing with Abel Archer, the thing that Pelle was talking about. The Russians thought that the Americans might attack, and the Americans hadn't, they were not going to attack. But if the Russians think they're attacking, then they'll have to attack. And it's just by accident. Everything sort of accelerates by accident. And the odd thing is that, as Pella also said, that today, young people and even the politicians seem not to care.

They don't understand how dangerous a nuclear war is. They're going to be exterminated. The human race is going to be exterminated if there's a nuclear war. They don't seem to understand that. Palme understood that. But today's politicians, they are talking about we can win a nuclear war. There are no winners in a nuclear war. Only loses.

So if I draw back to Paul May, he was assassinated, if I'm reading between the lines of what you're both talking about, is because, you know, at times was he bossy and a couple other words thrown around? It's like, do we assassinate people for being bossy? I don't think so. He's a leader of a country in a very difficult time where you got nuclear superpowers all over the world aiming their nukes at each other going. You blink, we're firing off and destroying the world. And his thought, if I can simply paraphrase and please explain more, but is basically we need to start talking everybody. And the powers that be the hardliners that wanted this conflict, didn't want the talk, didn't want discussion, didn't want a de-escalation of this. And for that he was killed.

Am I oversimplifying that? Well, I'll tell you what my take on it is. I think that Palmer was very, very quick to identify. He was a very clever man and very independent-minded. So he didn't listen to the sort of hawks of Washington, you know. He thought they're always wrong. And he came from a small country with credibility because it was rich, democratic, prosperous, anti-colonialist and all that.

So it had a lot of kudos with the developing world. And he identified Gorbachev as a man you could possibly talk to. Now, let's, he, Gorbachev was this relatively young man who came onto the Soviet scene in 1985. And everyone said, wow, this is a guy's a human being, you know, he's curious, he maybe wants to reform the Soviet system. Maybe this man can bring peace to the world. And he was in London in December 1984, to get Margaret Thatcher. Even Margaret Thatcher said, oh, look, this guy wants peace.

So Palma had planned a trip to see him in April 1986. And I think that, and I think Carries. done more research on this but there were there was a very common belief that it reached far into the sort of Swedish middle classes if you like the bourgeoisie the palmer was a kind of Soviet agent or something an agent of influence that was going to turn sweden into a Soviet republic because a lot of people remembered that after World War two the Soviets brought countries on their periphery into the Soviet bloc by infiltrating the political system. So the fear, I'm not saying that this is true. I'm not saying the Soviets would do this. I'm saying the fear was there from

the Western analysts that they, that, you know, they knew Sweden was, Sweden was becoming too friendly. The Swedes were not going to bring it in a start of war. You couldn't start a kinetic real war, but what you could do is you could subvert your country's political system by infiltrating it with spies or people's paid agents who rise inside the system, become prime ministers or prime ministerial advisors, and then align your foreign policy with the Soviet Union and basically become an ally from the inside without the Swedish people knowing. And there were people in the Swedish military analyst intelligence complex who were convinced that the social democrat, that's the left wing, that's the kind of Labour Party of Sweden, was honeycombed with Soviet spies,

people who took their orders from Moscow and that Palma was one of them and that when Palma was going to go to Moscow he was going to sell out Sweden's military secrets where all the secret bases were and he was going to align himself and kind of be dragged into the Soviet orbit like this is very technical

like Czechoslovakia was in 1948 Czechoslovakia was a democratic free country and then was dragged into the Soviet bloc by a kind of coup in a way like the you know the Ukraine coup that brought Ukraine into the Western Bloc in 2014. Well, everybody plays that game, you know. So there was people, and it's a small country with a small media sphere,

and people get into hysterics. I mean, there's no more, the Swedes are absolutely hysterical about the Soviet Russian threat now. And I'd say it reached the same heights in 1985. So Palmer's perspective was, we've got to avoid nuclear war, talk to the other side, talk to the Americans, and I'll bring them all together. because Stockholm was a city like Geneva where diplomats met from all sides.

The Swedish military industrial class said, this guy is a Soviet spy and he's going to talk to his bosses in Moscow and bring us over to the Soviet side. What do you, I mean, isn't that that, that's Carrie, that's what your take on it as well, isn't it? Yes, but it was only the right wing here who thought that he was a Soviet spy. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Sorry, I'm not making a party political point.

all I'm saying is that there were elements of the Swedish deep state, if you like, the military, the Seppo and Moos, this military industrial, and of course the business, the industrial captains of industry who thought that. I'm not saying, I don't believe he was, I'm just saying they believed it was, it might have made them act the way they did. Yes, but it was not, these people like you're talking about must and all this, they were intelligence people. They worked in secret, but there was an open political, divide in Sweden. And the right wing in Sweden, the political parties on the right wing, they hated Palme. They thought he was selling out Sweden to Russia. And there's another aspect here that made them even more afraid because Gorbachev, when he became the leader of the Soviet Union, he's one of his closest men, George Yarvatov, was part of the Palme Commission. And he was advising Gorbachev. And Gorbachev admired, you could say he admired Palme.

He wanted to have close ties with Palme. And this was in the western side. They were very scared about this. And then if you have common security like Palme wanted, what's the sense in having NATO? If we are all agreeing. We're building a security framework that where we all are agreed. What's the sense in having NATO also?

So Palme was a direct threat to NATO. And so that was why he had to sort of go. And the same thing was with, I've written, I wrote in my book, it's only a part about the Palme murder. there was, I wrote a lot about Italy and the murder of Aldomoro. And he was the Prime Minister of Italy in 1978. And he wanted the Italian communists to get closer. He wanted to make more stable governments in Italy.

Governments in Italy often only set one year. They had to change government every year almost. And that was because the communists were so big in Italy. They had about 30% of the vote. And everybody tried to keep them out. So the political situation became very unstable. So Aldomor wanted to include the communists more in the government. And that would have been a big threat to the security order that was proclaimed in Yalta in 1945.

when Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin met, and they divided sort of Europe. If the communist had come into political power in Italy, it would have sort of wrecked the whole framework, you could say. And it would have been a big threat to NATO. And it's the same situation here in 1985 in Sweden as it was in Italy. And Aldamoro was murdered. He was first kidnapped and then murdered. and it was exactly the same situation.

Palme was a threat to NATO with this. He wants to get closer to the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union. So what's the sense in having NATO if you're on friendly terms, if you don't have an enemy? So in that sense, he was a threat to NATO. If I, I mean, it's very, very, it's funny because you know that saying, which is actually inscribed on the gates of Auschwitz, which is, if you don't.

remember history you're doomed to repeat it i mean although trump is a very different person from ulf palmer and the people who like palman he has many fans in today's sweden hate trump a lot of sweden are probably the least trump friendly people on the planet you know exactly but there are actually parallels because you probably know i mean you know the whole russia gate thing and and just as carrie was talking about the swedish conservatives the business class as it were and the military intelligence complex. They hated parliament. Well, I mean, and they hated the Soviet Union. Well, today in America, we've got the Democrats who always, who have been convinced and they wrecked Trump's first presidency

by alleging that he was a Soviet spy. And even talking to Putin would, I mean, that Putin had some devices on him that kind of brainwash him. You know, I mean, they thought that he had microchips or something that when he shook Trump's hand, he would. was kind of passing on information. I mean, this crazy conspiracy theory stuff. Half the American population and the entire Washington political class were all Democrats think that's exactly what happened. Or that Trump goes up into his attic at the White House

and communicates to his bro Putin on the other side of the Atlantic and gets his instructions from him. That's what they believe. That's what intelligent people in America, half the staff of the New York Times, they believe that. maybe maybe a bit less now well that's exactly what sweden was like 40 years ago and if if trump knew about these things i think maybe you think well wow you know this is interesting

because history is repeating itself trump was almost assassinated i know i know i know people think oh trump did it so he would win the election he organized it i don't think so i think it was exactly the same deep state people who killed palma except they failed in trump's case and they succeeded in palmer's case i mean that those guys the two assassination candidates for trump they all have ukrainian intelligence all over them you know they were fans of ukraine so you know there you go it's it's history repeats itself and um i it would similar i mean what carrie was saying is that palmer was wanted to reconstruct the security architecture of europe because what you had even i mean it's even more strongly now than now back then you had half a million men on each side

of the iron curtain they went halfway down Germany, East Germany and West Germany country divided in two, since World War II. NATO had several hundred thousand men, all armed and ready to go, so did the Warsaw Pax. They had their tanks ready to go in five minutes that the order came to storm across the border and attack Germany. Well, we all lived with that.

I mean, that was like our reality. I mean, we didn't know another world. And Pan was saying, let's abolish the NATO and let's abolish the Warsaw Pact. Let's be friends. You know, you can be socialist and we'll be capitalist and we can coexist because none of us gain from having our fingers on the nuclear trigger. So if you accept that you can, we're not going to, we can't defeat you and you can't defeat us because any attempt at military defeat is going to end up in a nuclear war. So let's just chill, re-disarm and be friends and have a system that reduces the importance of NATO in the Warsaw Pact. The trouble is there are so many vested interests in keeping NATO, all those people who had planned, all those people dreaming from their boyhood about defeating the Russian army.

You know, if you're a young man trained and brainwashed to this, it's your lifetime's achievement is to fight a war. If you're a bit older, you know that war is insane. And if you're a bit more clever than that, you realize that wars can't be won in a nuclear era. Even, I mean, theoretically, you could win a war at huge costs. didn't have nuclear weapons but and there might be some gain you could win Russia's resources but you can't we can't defeat Russia today we can't because Russia would rather start a nuclear war than lose militarily I mean they're winning actually but if they were losing they would

never lose because they would just fight they just nuke London Warsaw and Berlin so the questions at Palmer asked are relevant today as they were back then when he was assassinated I agree with Pella here. And I don't know. No, no, no, no. No, finish your thought, Pelly. Well, you know, before we, when we're planning this program,

I said, I want to talk about the stay behinds. Because what NATO did was, I was talking about subversion earlier. They realized that the Soviets were unlikely to launch a kinetic war because they knew they could work out there would be a nuclear war. and it's such a high cost, they destroyed cities, you'd have to rebuild them. Much easier and smarter, they reasoned. If you subvert, if you mind control the leader of the West, or you infiltrate it with spies,

or you have the local communist parties, the communists who were very big in Western Europe as a legitimate party, if you have them infiltrate the government and take over from that side. So at one point, the CIA was convinced that every left-wing leader, social Democrat leader, from Harold Wilson in the UK, to, I think Mitterrand as well, Ulf Palmy was basically a Soviet spy and they watched these guys very, very closely. And NATO had a secret assassination unit, basically, which called the stay behinds or gladios. If you Google those words after this show, you'll find the whole description of that, which is basically just as NATO's official army of half a million men on tanks and all the rest of it was going to stop a Soviet military onslaught, this was going to stop infiltration.

And if the infiltration seemed successful, they could assassinate that leader. And although Italy and Sweden are very different countries, Al-Dermor is a very popular 1970s leader of Italy. He was killed by Gladio, basically, because he was flirting with the country's powerful communist Vardy. Palme was killed by the Swedish branch, if you like. It was that every country had its own stay behind organization or gladio organization, consisting of top military staff and a couple of agents. And they present, we don't know everything about it because all the papers have been burnt.

It came out a little bit a few years ago, but books have been written about it. And they posit this that every country had its own gladio organization whose orders were to kill or neutralize or kidnap or steal elections or whatever to prevent pro-Soviet or pro-Russian or pro-communist leaders from ever seizing power and endangering NATO. And it still, it exists. this stay behind thing, and said books have been written about it, but they've been very, very careful to stop revelations about it. So just after the Cold War ended in 1991, there's a flurry of discussion about the topic and parliamentary inquiries and books were written about it. And the last 10 years, it's all gone quiet again, perhaps because we're living in a new period where the new stay-behinds are ready to neutralize anyone who wants to talk

to the Russians. And I think that is what Trump is being maybe subjected to. Yes. And in the case of when it comes to Aldomoro, it's clear that the Americans were behind it. The red brigades killed Morrow. He was first kidnapped and kept for 55 days in central Rome. And the Italian police, they had the biggest manhunt ever in Italy. and they claimed that they couldn't find Aldo Moro. But it was clear that they could have. The people in Italy who were trying to find Morrow, they had help from an American expert. He was sent from Washington, from the State Department in Washington. His name was Steve Pitchinich.

He was assistant deputy secretary of state. And in the beginning of the year 2000s, he sort of admitted that we had to use the Red Brigades to have Aldomoro killed. And he regretted it. He was sorry for Aldo Morrow, but we had to do it to stabilize Europe instead. So it's quite clear that the Red Brigades were sort of, they were communists. supposedly, but they were run by outside forces. It's clear. So they had to sort of get rid of him because he more was a threat to NATO because of his, he wanted to get closer to get the communists into government in Italy or at least. Carrey, your point is that the Red Brigades

was this left-wing terrorist group. But actually in the employ of NATO, they were using just like the Antifa right now are probably assets of intelligence you know so the world of intelligence operations is a world of mirrors and deceptions so black lives matter you know where they where did they get their bricks from when was it an autonomous self-starting anti-racist organization or was somebody funding it who's actually wanted to pretend and clothe themselves in a mask of virtue was somebody was rich oligarchs soros or whatever was at the democrats was at the cia who want to create trouble in america funding the b lm so the point is nothing is what it seems in politics so these left-wing terrorists are terrorizing italy hundreds of people were killed in

the 1970s and 80s railway stations have blown up they were actually funded by nato basically is that right carrie by the Italian state, more not NATO directly, I don't think, but by the Italian state. And there were also left-wing and right-wing terrorists, and you could say they were funded in secret, funded. For the intelligence services, deception is the central thing. That's what they do. That's the job to deceive, deceive and deception. I have an old book written by Alan Dulles. He was CIA chief in the 50s. He said that deception has been the main thing

for intelligence services since the Trojan horse. So if you know the Iliad about the Trojan horse, how the Greeks deceived the Trojans with the horse, if you have read about that. So ever since then, deception has been the key, word for intelligence services since the Trojan horse. So you can't believe they lie a lot also. It's difficult to believe when some who works for, to example, CIA or MI6 or says something.

You don't know if he's lying or what he's doing. So it's difficult to believe them because they're trained to deceive. If you fast forward to today, gentlemen, to me, you know, you know, in all the conversations I've had, NATO seems maybe a bit of a shell of what it once was. Maybe it never was, I don't know. You talk 500,000 men, you talk about how they had tanks ready to go

and all these different things coming out of the war. So I assume at a certain point, they were a pretty sizable force and a big deterrent, if you would. Today, like, here in Canada, our prime minister well i shouldn't say our prime minister they just came out talking about how they're going to order uh 300 000 civil servants to um basically become supplementary reservists get a week of training a year so that they can bump up their military numbers because our military is tiny

they're they're starting to talk about the finish model a lot whole of society training all these different things um because we haven't you know i don't know about every other country in nato But our, you know, I forget what our goal for NATO is, 2% of GDP, something like that. And then to have X amount of people in service in the military, et cetera. All those numbers are falling. And we've never made our 2%. And now you see Trump pushing on Canada to increase military spending, et cetera. So our government has decided to try and enlist civil servants, public servants,

which is funny to see them put into that ring. NATO doesn't seem to me where I sit is this big evil force, but the stories you're telling of the past would tell a different picture. What are you seeing of it today? I don't think the NATO conventional, with conventional soldiers was much stronger than it is today. But in those days they had nuclear weapons in Europe, much more than they had today. and nuclear weapons that could have gone to the Soviet Union on a close range.

They had in West Germany and so on. They have nuclear weapons in Europe even now, but they had much more and much more dangerous nuclear weapons in the 80s. So there has been a sort of de-escalation on the nuclear side. So that's why I think NATO seems to be weak today, because they don't have as much nuclear weapons now as they did then. Well, I disagree. I'm not an expert on the topic, but I think that the native conventional forces were much bigger in the 1980s, basically. I mean, I could go away and come back in five

minutes sort of thing and find out the stats, but there were many, many combat divisions. And even Canadians had a sizable army in Europe. The Brits did. It was a different atmosphere. I think that what the 1980s was, we were ruled by people in their 60s who fought in World War II. I mean, my dad was in advertising in the 60s in London. And the first thing you found out about the other person is what they did in World War II, you know. I mean, it was the defining event, you know, which battalion, which front were you on. And of course, there was one upmanship. So, I mean, if you've been cleaning toilets and the, you know,

barracks in Scotland. It didn't rank as highly as if you'd been on the beaches at D-Day. But I mean, it was a ranking that was omnipresent in a way. And society was much more formal, if you like, until the Beatles came along. But I mean, it was with the war. And I remember, as I said, I grew up in the 70s. We played war games every single day. I mean, we came back from school and we were running around on the street where we lived in London and with plastic guns you know firing at each other every single day and every single weekend there were two or three movies on television talking about the british sacrifices in world war two and it was very anglo-centric so the russians who actually won the war did most of the fighting didn't were never

mentioned you know the fins what the hell are the fins um it was the british there was dunkirk it was um the battle of britain and of course i can imagine that what sets the canadians apart from the Americans as the Canadians absorbed much of that Anglo-British myth about the World War II. I mean, probably you thought, well, that's what sets us apart. And Canadians were like the biggest contributors to the bomber command, which I think was horrible war crime, you know, 50% mortality rate. Anyway, so, but the 1980s was still as only, I say only 40 years after the war, as it was, actually not that long. War was infused everything, memories of the war. People just said the war, they didn't say World War II.

And 30 years after that, we've got a generation of kids growing up and become politicians who live in a totally different world intellectually. And that's why Russia, the Russia-Ukraine war comes to such a shock. I think that that war would never have happened if we'd had the politicians that we had in the 1980s who remembered war and remembered that you don't play with fire kids, you know, this is serious stuff. Oh, sorry. NATO has less forces now than they had in the 80s, but the Russians also had less forces now, before the Ukraine war. So both sides have sort of de-escalated their forces.

But the Russians have started building up now because they feel that they're threatened by the West. So now they have more forces than we have on this side. But the economy is very bad. You don't, for us, I mean, the odd thing is that you never acknowledge that you haven't had, for instance, in Sweden, you haven't had any growth since the Ukraine war started. But on TV and everywhere in the news, no one ever acknowledges that it could have something to do with the Ukraine war. No, no, no. that we have put in sanctions and deprived us from cheap energy. No, no, it has nothing to do with that.

So they never sort of want to acknowledge that, that it could have had anything to do with the Ukraine war, that the living standards are going down, and they're not rising as they used to do. So it's a funny situation. I mean, they, oh, you, you both have brought, you both have brought up how this generation, not only a politician, but anyone under roughly 40, just doesn't understand the Cold War and coming out of World War II and what that actually could look like. I assume both of you of red, but, you know, if nothing else, no of Jurassic Park, Michael Crichton, would I be safe, safe in assuming that? Yeah.

He wrote, he wrote, Michael Jurassic Park. You know that dinosaur. Yeah, I've seen the movies, but I haven't read the books. Okay, well, I, I showed up to Vance Crowe because, you know, once upon a time I was a part of his book club when he had it running. And he, and he, and we read Jurassic Park. And I remember thinking, why the heck are we reading this book? And it's funny, that book going through COVID and onwards continues to just stick in my brain.

And here's one of the things in it that Michael Crichton wrote. Scientific power is a form of inherited wealth. Most forms of power require a substantial sacrifice by those wishing to attain it. There is an apprenticeship lasting many years. Whatever it is you seek, you have to put in the time, the practice, the effort you must give up a lot to get it, as it has been very important to you. And once you've attained it, it is your power and it can't be given away. It resides in you.

It is literally the result of your discipline. interesting about this process is that by the time someone has learned to kill with their bare hands, they have matured so they will not use it unwisely. This power has a built-in control, the discipline and getting the power changes you so you won't abuse it. But scientific power is a form of inherited wealth attained without discipline. When I think of nuclear powers and inheriting that, when you talk about the group of people that built that and then witnessed the atrocities that were performed by it and just the atrocities wars in general as they die off you have a new group that has all these powers and now yeah we got nuclear power this is great

we don't want to talk to the russians we're just going to win it's like you have no idea what it took to get that it's inherited wealth and they don't know how to use that wisely because they didn't have the discipline uh and the timing of going through all that to have that experience Would that be a safe assumption of where we sit today? Yep, very well said. Yes, and I'm astonished over our leaders today who don't seem to understand and don't seem to care. They put the doomsday clock closer and closer to midnight all the time without thinking, sort of, especially, you know, because I'm from Finland, the Finnish president. He can, usually, Finns don't speak English so well, but he can speak English well.

And he's become something of an icon. Now, everybody interviews him because he speaks English so well. But I think he's one of the most stupid presidents Finland has ever had. I certainly didn't vote for him. So his name is Stubb. And I usually use the worst, it's STU-B. I put an ID at the end, Stubbid, Stubbid. Alexander Stubbitt.

It's true. People didn't, it's an inheritance, this nuclear weapon, because the wartime generation, the nuclear weapon was partly invented to create peace, basically, because they thought, well, I mean, it's a horrific weapon, but we've got to understand the psychological context, in which there was the nuclear race because people were dying in their millions

anyway and they thought that the war would be over more quickly and of course there's a controversy because some people that said that Japan was on the verge of surrender anyway and they were surrendered anyway because the Soviets had invaded

Manchuria and so nuclear's, there's a big but some people say well actually the nuclear war might have killed 200,000 civilian Japanese but it saved half a million soldiers from dying on each side if we'd have been forced to invade Japan and so on but at least I mean these discussions were alive so people who old men who've nearly always say that war is a mistake you know horrific and they

it's young men because when I was 20 I'm going to make a confession I went to Estonia in the early 1990s because everyone thought there was going to be a war there can you believe it I went to Estonia because because I thought I'm going to see shooting and I'm going to report on it and then I'm going to go back and win a prize. And the thought that people might die because of this or it was almost incidental. But that's that's our genetic inheritance. I mean, if you're 21 or 22, 23 or something, you don't think about serious things like that, I think. You're just a fighter, you know?

And, you know, I think that, and war matures you. So it matures you and they were in their 60s. So the political generation in the 1980s, they're in their 60s, which is a maturity. I think you need to be 60 to be a politician, and they'd live through World War II. They lived through the enormous prosperity after World War II by wise people. They'd spent 30 years in Parliament. What we've got today is politicians, young women in their 30s or 20s, who've kind of been promoted because they say the right thing about gender transitions

when they were in the local committee meeting. and they get promoted to foreign minister at age of 32, having served two years in Parliament. What the hell do they know? They don't know anything. They don't know anything. And Kaya Kallas, who's this Estonian foreign minister, is a foreign minister of Europe now. She didn't even know that the Russians were on the winning side in World War II, even though she's lived right next door to Russia all her life. Incredible. I guess, I don't know if I subscribe to their needs to be, maybe an age minimum. I'm an age minimum.

60, I don't know if I agree with that, Peli, because I look at some of the 60-year-old politicians today, and I just want to give them, you know, Kerry talks about stupid. And I go, there's a lot of stupid politicians in their 60s right now that I could just be done with. And, you know, I'm looking for, I'm looking for strong politicians,

just talk about what's going on. But, you know, in this conversation, if you're one of those, you're talking about Italy, you're talking about Sweden, you're talking about all over the place, you're one of those and you talk out against what NATO's going to do and you even look like you're friendly to the Russians, the Soviets, and all of a sudden you, you're on the crosshairs. So I mean, there is, there's a lot here that builds up to where

we have a bunch of stupid politicians because if they step out of line, they might be the one next, you know, getting the, the, the long walk in the night. That's right. So you have a kind of negative selection in a way, the ones who you tow the line, I mean, because assassination, I mean, it's interesting because when Palma was assassinated, Sweden's independent foreign policy, which was basically criticizing the Americans and the Soviets and doing whatever the hell they liked, you know, went away. Sweden became very aligned to the Americans, and the successor to all of Parliament, his deputy prime minister, he became prime minister, and he was invited to Washington the very next year. And since then, Sweden's had a very pro-American foreign policy.

So the signal was understood loud and clear, even if they don't know exactly what happened. If you step out of line, you'll get in trouble. And I think the first warnings might be, I think that, for instance, I mean, the fact now that everyone is recorded on their mobile phones, whatever they do, and there's CCTV cameras everywhere, you know, you'll topple a minister like that British health minister who had a love affair with his a woman in his Department of Health in London. Well, that sent a signal

to everyone else in a way. If you step out of line, you know, we've got CCTV footage of you. I mean, Tucker Carlson said that every porn site is monitored by the CIA, you know, and he says in his every single congressman has got a file on them by the

CIA. And he says, all his congressman friends says, we know this. So they're completely controlled you know i mean um and uh if they step step out of line like trump does you know so so then the question becomes three burr i don't know if i consider myself brilliant two brilliant men on this show how do you get out of this this perpetual cycle of like we're going to inch inch inch inch closer to blowing up the planet because you have hardliners that think we're going to win and then you have a whole bunch of people going no we we need to start talking but if you start talking

You've given examples of how they attack and to the point of killing. So how do we get out of this perpetual cycle? Or is we just doomed to repeat this over and over again? We have to try to get above the propaganda. For instance, when I wrote my book, there are parallels to the war in Ukraine now. But I avoided mentioning, I don't mention Ukraine. The book is 800 pages. And I don't mention Ukraine even once because the propaganda is so overwhelming.

I mean, you're crazy if you start saying that anything that the Russians say are okay about the Ukraine war. No one will accept that. The propaganda is, you're totally, most of the population is brainwashed. But now if the economy starts going tanking now, then more people, more and more, people might awaken but but and up and i can also mention about the age you know the finnish president alexander stupid he is 58 so he's almost 60 so it it doesn't guarantee anything if you're 60 that you would be any smarter than than the younger people young people can also be smart so yeah yeah um okay well i you're very good it's very good to have a solution and uh I think that the, the, what we've got is we've got a lot of, we've got a lot of, we've got a lot of democracy freedom and free speech on the internet. It seems as if, like the newspapers were better 40 years ago, I remember, because I read a lot of archive material when I was researching my work. I thought they're so fair minded, actually, you know, and they don't go into these paroxysms of partisanship that they've got now. I think that, um, we've got a political class or an elite of,

or whatever, that's very, very polarized or very sure of themselves and equally incompetent. And I think that we've got, I actually, I think that Kari is more of a man on the left than I am, but I actually believe in these populist movements that are happening in Europe. They might be an imperfect vehicle, but they actually, I mean, the Brexit, a lot of to criticize about Brexit, a lot to criticise about the AFD in Germany and about Le Pen. But the point is, sides, the parties that support dialogue with Russia, they might be called Nazis, ironically, I mean, or far right or whatever. Forget that. They want to have dialogue with Russia. They are all winning in the polls and the parties that talk for the

sort of usual confrontation with Russia at huge economic cost us. They're cratering. I mean, Macron, Stama, Mertz, the German Chancellor, a very powerful figure, deranged idiot in my mind. He's only been in power, what, six months or something and he's already the most unpopular leader of Germany since you know who you know but um he so so this there's a lot of dislike people when you you say i mean there's official propaganda as carry said is is absolutely overwhelming you know especially in these countries that boast of being the best democracy as well scandinavia's gone crazy i mean these these countries weren't quite similar to canada in some ways but underneath it people vote for for parties that talk for peace vote for peace

and I'm hoping that there'll be a sort of Europe-wide move for this and that the establishment are on the back foot, as it were. We're seeing a transition into maybe a new political class. But what worries me is this, we could call it the globalists sometimes people call it, or the liberal universalists or the American vassals or something like that. They might start a war rather than face democratic election loss, do something crazy, you know, rather than. than lose power and that start because starting wars resets everything and everybody focuses on the

wall and that's what worries me although i don't write a word about ukraine in my book it has got a sort of a kind of poison stamp because there was a journalist who worked for swedish radio swedish radio is almost like bbc if you can compare he he had been working with me not working, but he had been interviewing me for years. He came here to my place where I live twice a year and we talked about the book. And he said he was going to make a radio program about the historical context and when the book was going to come out. And I went to the studio here in Stockholm, radio studio. And he interviewed me for five hours. It was not a direct. He was going to edit the interviews. So for five hours I sat there and then he

telephoned me later and said okay now I've edited it. It became both in Finnish and in Swedish. He was going to make programs for both Finnish and Swedish audiences here in Sweden. And the Swedish part became 56 minutes long he said he was going to put in put it into a historical context. But the leadership I had already warned him in advanced. The leadership in the Swedish radio said, no, no, the program is too long. We can't put it in. It was supposed to be sent on 13th of October on Monday. It's too long. You have to edit it down. We can't have such a long. So he edited both the Finnish and Swedish

editions to 20 minutes. But now they were saying, no, we have to look. We have to go through and see, go through and see about the program, what they're about. And he had to leave them to higher ups in the organization. They were going to look at the program. And he wrote to me at the end of October. He works for the Swedish radio. It's a journalist. He wrote that, no, nothing has happened. They haven't even looked at, as he said, they were going to go through, the program but they haven't even looked at it. So I wrote back to him, they'll probably never broadcast it. And he just wrote one word back, probably. Kerry, if you didn't mention anything about Ukraine, right, because you're like,

there's just way, there's way too much propaganda. It doesn't matter if I try and explain it, nobody's going to, the propaganda is so heavy. What was it in your newest book that raises the flag of the powers of B that, I don't know if we want this out there. It was because I was connecting it to NATO, that the murder was sort of, there were hints that the intelligence agencies were behind it. And yes, that was the main thing, I think. It's a very sensitive question here in Sweden. You know that CIA, they couldn't even acknowledge that CIA was, because they accused in the beginning of the Palme investigation, they accused this terrorist organization, PKK,

to be behind. PKK, it's a Turkish organization, to be behind the murder. But they couldn't sort of even acknowledge that thing now in my book that I wrote about that a little bit. And that PKK was somehow connected to the intelligence services. here in the west and that that's such a sensitive thing and they were bugging in sweden and in those days it wasn't allowed to bug do bugings but they were bugging the swedish secret services were bugging the pkk people in together with cia people the cia station here they had

people who were experts in bugging so the the swedish secret secret Secret Services work together with them, but that's not, you can't acknowledge that. It just never been acknowledged by the government that that happened, that they work together with CIA. It's too sensitive to mention that. And Sweden was supposed to be a neutral country, you know, but they worked behind the scenes. They were working together with the CIA. You can't mention that that's impossible.

When did Sweden become part of NATO? last year last year last year yeah so so within with any if you had written this book criticizing NATO 10 years ago would there have been pushback yes it's not maybe not as much but still Sweden was an informal member of NATO and has been an informal member of NATO since the 60s officially Sweden was neutral but informally they were actually a member of NATO you could say and the Russians didn't care much when Sweden became a member of NATO because they had the opinion that Sweden had always been a member of NATO. It wasn't a big change according to them.

I mean, I sadly disagree. I think the Swedish military war on the side of NATO, but it was always unclear whether the Swedish political side were on board with that. So if there'd been a war breaking out, Sweden occupied a very strategic position, when the Soviets attacked with their tanks rolling across the border they'd be overrunning all the air bases

that the Americans had like Ramstein and so on pretty quickly and so there was a plan apparently to relocate American planes to Swedish air bases and there would have been basically a huge aircraft carrier on the Soviet flank able to attack into the Soviet Union and they'd send their reinforcements to Sweden instead now the point was they needed the Swedish military

military to say, they need the Swedish political elite to say, yes, we're going to go into this war. And there's a lot of talk about whether NATO would engineer a provocation, like an assassination of the Swedish prime minister, and blame it on the Soviets. And that way, get Sweden into the war. The Soviets had no interest in getting Sweden into World War III. NATO had a big interest in getting Sweden into World War III. So I think that while there was a lot of secret collaboration between NATO and the Swedish military, I don't think the Swedish political left-wing political class were on board at all and it was that dislocation that led actually led to the assassination they couldn't trust palmer when it came down to it and because and all the official

rhetoric of the 1980s i mean it was all about sweden being neutral and um you know when i when i was um in england and talking to people and say what do you know about sweden they'd say free beautiful women and neutrality you know basically so neutrality was like an essential part of what everyone knew about Sweden like Canadian Mounties or something you know now not obviously but you you average Swedes carried their neutrality in their knapsack you know we're not part of you guys we're not part of you guys we're above it all we're better than you basically so I think I I don't quite agree with Carrie, many others saying, well, we were, Sweden was a secret member of NATO. I think there was an ambiguity there.

Well, if I may, I mean, you wrote a book. You don't point out Ukraine because you're like, the propaganda is so heavy. But you write about NATO. And why is that? Probably because I'm just assuming, Carrie, and you can poke holes in this, it's because the public's probably a little bit divided on whether they wanted to be involved in NATO, which would be why a book on it would be so important for the population to read. but when they join NATO and officially become NATO, now we can't criticize it. And

that is interesting because that is in itself a form of propaganda. It's censorship. It's making sure we can criticize them. I mean, the Swedes have bamboo into NATO. There was no public vote on it. It happened

after a few opinion polls that seemed to point to NATO and then bang, the parliament voted it through without a referendum without much political discussion. The media totally one-sided and i think a lot of swedes are having buyers remorse like wow was this really a good idea nato is supposed to protect us but it seems that we're going to be the next ukraine the brits and the americans are pushing us into war with russia and our crazy leadership so carrie's book basically saying well our most famous prime minister in our history

was killed by nato that's incredibly toxic piece of news you know yes it is of course but i i i I disagree here with Pella, Sweden had a deal with NATO, the Swedish military, a secret deal. I write about that in the book, that they had a secret deal from the beginning of the 60s, that if Sweden would be attacked, and even Finland, if Finland would be attacked by the Russians, then NATO would immediately intervene. They had such an agreement, actually. But the point is, I don't think Russia would attack Sweden precisely for that reason. for that reason. No, they wouldn't.

Near a false flag attack. Yeah, yeah, of course. But they still had that kind of deal. It was, so Sweden was sort of an informal member of NATO. Yeah. Not an official member. They couldn't trust that Palmer would honor that deal. I don't think.

No, but Palme, I don't even know if Palme knew about the deal. The Swedish politicians knew about that deal. It was so secret. But the point is who has, who has executive? power in a war situation? Is it the military or is it the civilians? And it wasn't a deal between NATO and Sweden. Sweden wasn't part of NATO. The deal was between the United States and Sweden. So in that sense, Sweden was sort of an exemption from the other NATO. Not not the other NATO countries didn't know about this, but the United States had a deal that was actually put on paper

in the beginning of the 60s that they would intervene if Sweden was attacked from the Russians of course and that was the only enemy they could have but they had they had an official paper and that wasn't so sweden wasn't formally a part of the nato it wasn't a nato nation but they had their own deal with the united states so it wasn't agreed on by the public and it wasn't agreed on known by the politicians and it wasn't a legitimate deal and i think that's what would come up in the in the if only the military knew about it then you're going to have a command issue because when it comes up the military the swedes are going to Swedish leadership, I can say, what's the hell is this? Where the hell did this come from?

We didn't sign up to this. And the military might say, well, sorry, Prime Minister, we're in charge now, you know, because we're going to adhere to that. But in a situation of war and escalating tensions, no one would ask questions like that. They would be happy. Oh, the Americans are going to come and help us. No, I don't think so. I think you know, because that would make Sweden into a target and Swedes thought that they could stay out of the war completely. Yeah, they thought so, but okay, I don't, but they were still afraid of being attacked here in Sweden. Not everybody, but I mean the right way. And they were afraid of being attacked if the NATO intervened and that might

force the Soviet attack. In fact, that's true of all wars. No, no, it's more than that. Pella, do you remember the U-boats in the war? the 80s. Yeah. The U-Boats who showed themselves in the Swedish archipelagos. There were U-Bots. People saw U-Bots all over the Swedish archipelagos and they were, in the press they were deemed as Russian. So the Russians and the press wrote Russians were preparing an attack on Sweden. But why should they be with their U-boats in the Swedish archipelagos if they weren't going to attack? so that there was a kind of consensus that also

they were native somebody right polarized palmes partly palmes foreign policy was paralyzed by these U-boats and it turns out that they were not Russians probably not Russian U-Bots because if you don't see a U-Bort if it doesn't want to show itself that's right so these U-Bots they went and showed

so the people in the who live there in their Belagos could say, oh, you vote over there. This is crazy. The Russians are going to attack any moment, you know. You foment a kind of panic. That's what we're doing now with Ukraine. Sweden is next to Ukraine. I don't understand the reasoning. Why should Russians attack NATO? They said if we lose in Ukraine, then the Russians is going to attack the whole of Europe. I mean, there's no sense. The Russians had no interest in it. attacking Scandinavia because they would just open up a front which they couldn't fight because the Baltic Sea was like a moat, a seaborn defense, which of the Russians couldn't cross

and they would have to halve their forces that they were very strong in Germany and they couldn't divert those forces to scanavia. NATO was very interested in having Sweden in the war and that's the basic security fact. That's why NATO would do a full flag to kill Swedes both to get them out of the way and both to create a casusbelly a reason to bring sweden into nata oh well the russians killed our prime minister so they were going to dress up as soviet spies it's very interesting in world war two the british were about to attack norway and the germans got there first the germans wouldn't have attacked norway if the brits hadn't planned to attack norway and they were going to attack sweden as well they were going to use the expeditionary force to go from navik

and seize the kirina yelivari mines and then what would happen was the germans would invade Sweden, and then the French and the British would be very happy because the Germans would get bogged down in Sweden rather than fight the French. It's incredible that people don't know that. The British ships were waiting on their way to Navig when the Germans got their thirst with their parachutists. So the British and the French were very happy to sacrifice Scandinavia if you could just keep the wolf away from the French door. Yes, and Sweden was neutral. you know, and they actually in the beginning. The Germans didn't want to attack Sweden or Scandinavia because they were getting everything they wanted from the Swedes anyway. Yeah, the Germans got everything they wanted from the Swedes anyway, so there was no sense.

The parallel is. The Swedes are brought up to love the British and the Americans. Oh, they're so fantastic. But these are not the ones who have their own best interests at heart. They're using them. Like they use all small countries. Yeah. Gentlemen, I've appreciated today's discussion. discussion. Thanks again for hopping on. It's always interesting on this side to have people

on the different side of the pond and to give different perspectives and everything else. It's been a bit of a history lesson and then fast-boarding where we sit today. It's in tumultuous times. But Kerry Pelly, thanks for, thanks for hopping on the show. Pleasure. All right. Thank you very much. Thanks. It has been a pleasure for me too. Thanks.