Title: Whistleblower Diaries #1 — John Kiriakou with Greg Barns S
Show: The Information Rights Project
Date: 2026-05-27
URL: https://youtu.be/4AACmzGfitg
Duration: 1:00:00

---

[00:00] Good evening everyone and thank you so much for joining us tonight. My name is Nea and I'm the general manager of the information rights project. Tonight is a very special event for us. This is the first installment of the new whistleblower diary series where we're going to be bringing you the world's most significant trutht tellers in direct conversations with Australian audiences. We'll be speaking with the people who paid the price, telling you what happened and why. Our

[00:30] very special guest this evening is John Kuryaku and leading tonight's conversation is Greg Barnes SC. Greg is one of Australia's most prominent civil liberties barristers. He spent decades defending press freedoms, whistleblower rights, and the rule of law, including as a senior adviser during during Julian Assange's legal campaign. We're so pleased to have everyone join us tonight. I'm going to hand over to you Greg and after their conversation we'll open the floor for questions. Greg over to you.

[01:01] >> Well thank you Neva very much and um for that introduction uh it's a great pleasure for a number of reasons. Firstly because the information rights project which Gabriel Shipton many of you would know uh Julian's brother uh has a great vision for freedom of speech whistleblower issues and the importance of transparency um and so the information rights project is spun out of that and we've got an exciting agenda really picking up work

[01:31] that other people aren't doing particularly in the Australian context. But we're here tonight to talk with uh a person who I I can I can say this um as someone who's been around and there aren't I don't have many of these people but he's a personal hero of mine. John Keryaku. Um John as you know um has an extraordinary record of bravery uh and integrity. He was the only CIA officer uh imprisoned in connection with the

[02:02] United States Post 911 torture program which is familiar sadly to many Australians. He wasn't imprisoned for committing torture. He was imprisoned because he spoke truth and how many times did we hear about that happening? So in December 2007, John was the first US government official to confirm on the record that the CIA was borderboarding detainees. Uh and to call it torture, he did an interview with Brian Ross on the American ABC uh establishing that water

[02:35] boarding was official US policy delivered at the highest levels of government, not the work of a few rogue uh agents. And of course we know in Australia I think there were questions asked of the Australian government out of John's revelations what the Australian government knew. Within 24 hours of that interview John was uh a crime report was filed. Um this is sort of CFKA stuff. Um he's then charged under the Espionage Act facing up to 45

[03:06] years in prison. He pleads guilty to a single count. I have clients who plead guilty just to get out of there and uh he got 23 months in federal prison. Those who organized this program and implemented this program of course were never charged. But since his release, John has been over the last uh decade one of the most important and influential figures in relation to whistleblower persecution, intelligence, accountability, and state secrecy. He's

[03:37] received the pen, very prestigious pen first amendment award. the Sam Adams Award for Integrity and Intelligence and the Blueprint International Whistleblowing uh Prize. He's written a number of books. He writes regularly for Consortium News, which is a great outlet if you don't know it, and also for Covert uh Action Magazine, and you can get a lot of his interviews now on Tik Tok, I think, and also Instagram. And of course, he was a great supporter, and that's where I first came across John, great supporter of uh Julian Assange.

[04:09] Well, in Australia and John and I were just chatting with Nea prior to coming on, we ourselves of course have a serious issue in relation to whistleblower protection and you've probably heard me and other lawyers talk about the lack of protections for whistleblowers in Australia. We know David McBride and his case uh which I won't go into at length, but we've also got Richard Bole who again a case like John's, you know, he's a he's a whistleblower in the tax office exposing very unethical debt recovery practices. he gets charged. Those who those who

[04:41] undertook those um matters don't get charged. So, what we're going to do tonight is I'm going to have a chat with John. We're here to hear John, not me. So, I'll keep my questions short. And then we're going to have about 15 minutes for questions. If you can keep your questions really tight, Nevin is going to be curating them, I think is the word they use these days. Um and so we aim for those of you who are in the eastern part of Australia, we'll be aiming to finish by 10.

[05:12] John, welcome. Um >> thank you. >> And um for doing this so early in your day. We appreciate it. >> My pleasure. >> You you were a 14-year veteran of the CIA. You led the team that captured Abu uh Zuba Zubadaya. Um, and you know, in other words, if I can put it this way, you were sort of part of the established, you know, um, hierarchy, if you like, in the United States. >> Yeah, I was. I really believed we were

[05:45] the good guys, especially after 9/11. I dedicated my life to hunting down the perpetrators of 9/11 and bringing them to justice. But in retrospect, that was sort of the beginning of my split with the establishment because I believed in the system. And I'll give you an example. Um, after 9/11, I became the chief of CIA counterterrorism operations in Pakistan. And there was a point in

[06:16] March of 2002 where the Pakistanis came back to us and said that we had literally filled the Rahul Pindi jail with our counterterrorism prisoners and that we needed to do something with them. Get them out of Pakistan. So I cabled CIA headquarters. I said, "The Pakistanis are telling me that the jail is full. What do you want me to do with these prisoners?" And I was told to put them on a C12 transport plane and send them to Guantanamo. And I responded, Guantanamo, Cuba. Why would I send them

[06:47] to Cuba? And the response was that headquarters had come up with this plan to hold them in Cuba for 2 or 3 weeks until we could determine which federal district court to try them in. 911 was an ongoing criminal investigation and the crime had been committed in the Southern District of New York, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Eastern District of Massachusetts, and the um I I forget the

[07:17] other one. Western Pennsylvania, Eastern Massachusetts, Southern New York, and Eastern Virginia. That's what it was. I said, "That's a great idea." And so we started just shipping all prisoners to Guantanamo until someone in Dick Cheny's office said, "You know what? In Guantanamo, they actually don't have any rights at all. We should just leave them there as in forever." And that's where I started my break with the government because we're supposed to be a nation of

[07:48] laws. When I was serving overseas on rotation to the State Department, Greg, I was the uh human rights officer. I was the human rights officer in Kuwait and in Bahrain. And as the human rights officer, I had to write the annual human rights report and send it to Congress. And so we would use that human rights report as a cudgel that if you don't respect human rights, we will not sell you F-16s or F-18s. We

[08:19] will not sell you radar systems. You have to respect human rights. So, we're either going to be a nation of laws, a nation that respects human rights, or we're not. But we can't be both. >> Yeah. >> And so, that that's what began my split. >> And John, did when you did that interview with ABC News, how how did that come about? >> Right. Well, I left the CIA in 2004. My resignation

[08:49] was effective 2005. And um and I really believed and expected that someone would come out publicly and blow the whistle on the torture program. It was just so obviously illegal to me. I thought certainly somebody would come out and say something and nobody did. And then Brian Ross from the American ABC called me and said that he had a source who said that I had tortured Abu Zuba. I said that was absolutely untrue. I was

[09:22] the only person who was kind to Abu Zubeda. And he said, "Well, you're welcome to come on the show and defend yourself." I didn't know that was an old reporter's trick because I had never spoken to a reporter before. >> Yeah. And so I decided, to make a long story short, I decided that I would do that interview and that whatever he asked me, I was simply going to tell the truth and let the cards fall where they may. >> And that's what I did.

[09:52] >> The the interview when you did the interview, did you did you feel a sense that something was going to happen that you were spilling the beans? No, I didn't. Because in the 12 months before the interview, prior to the interview, Amnesty International had come out with a report saying that the CIA was torturing its prisoners. Human Rights, Human Rights Watch said that the CIA was torturing its prisoners. And the International Committee of the Red Cross said that the CIA was torturing its prisoners. So, the information was out

[10:23] there. Somebody had leaked the fact that the CIA had secret prisons. Um, we never figured out who that was. So I I confirmed that information, but it was already well out there. >> And after it happened, when did you realize that they were going to come after you? You know, so you do the interview, you know, within 24 hours they've turned this into a this is a criminal investigation. When did you realize? I I did the interview and then Brian

[10:56] Ross called me and said that the network wanted to invite me to New York to watch it go live. So, I flew up to New York, and it's funny, the the newscast at at 700 PM. I happened to be on the plane going to New York when it broadcast. And when I landed, I turned on my phone and my mailbox was full. I had no voicemails when the plane took off. It's

[11:28] a 1-hour flight. And I thought, "Oh my god, what's happening?" I had 36 emails, uh, sorry, 36 voicemails which jammed my inbox. And one of them was from my boss and he said, "I want to see you in Dallas immediately." Oh, I knew what that meant. So, um, I went into ABC. They had a long form version of the interview on at uh 11:30 p.m. First

[12:01] flight in the morning, I flew to Dallas. It was a banner headline on the New York Times the next morning and the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal and every newspaper in America. And I realized, oh my god, what's happened? So I flew to uh to Dallas. My boss said, um, I want you to resign. I said, wait a minute. You gave me written permission to go on this, uh, this broadcast and

[12:34] speak my piece. Yes, but we didn't know it was going to be such a giant international issue. And I said, I didn't know it was going to be a giant international issue, but you told me in writing that I could do it. We still want you to resign. I said, absolutely not. I ended up having to sue them. Sorry to interrupt you, John, but that that's fascinating. So that they knew what you were going to be saying on >> Well, but I was work I was working in the private sector. I had left the agency in 2004. I was working for a firm

[13:04] called Deote, which is one of the big four uh consulting firms. So yeah, they knew in advance. I told them in writing what I was going to say and in writing they said, "Go ahead and say it." And mind you, my boss and his two deputies were also a former CIA. And so we all were big boys. We all knew what the fallout was likely to be. Um not necessarily to the extent that it ended up being, but we had an idea of what was going to happen. I really believed it was a one day story. I really did. And so

[13:36] I flew home from Dallas, logged on to the computer, called up CNN.com, and I see a headline that I'm being investigated on espionage charges. And I thought, "Oh my god, okay, well, I have to prepare myself." And so I called an attorney and um and began my defense. So I'm interested in this as a as a a lawyer. Of course, the you get charged under the Espionage Act, which of course was the same charge used against Julian

[14:07] Assange, designed to prosecute spies. Um, >> yes. >> As I understand it, the judge uh rejected uh a public interest defense. Ju just talk us talk us through that because that's that's an issue in Australia that that's a problem that people I advise have that there is no such defense. Talk us through what happened to you. >> Sure. The the Espionage Act, just as background, the Espionage Act in the United States was written in 1917

[14:38] >> to combat German saboturs. It has never been meaningfully updated. Never. It does not even mention the term classified information because the classification system wasn't even invented until 1951. It just says national defense information. But then it never defines what national defense information is. So the judge in my case began by saying that she would not respect precedent set in other federal

[15:08] district courts. meaning she would not permit an affirmative defense and that she would not insist that there be either damage to the national security or criminal intent. And my attorneys jumped up and one of them said, "Your honor, are you saying that a person can accidentally commit espionage?" And she said, "That's exactly what I'm saying." And then she looked at me and she said, "Mr. Kiryaku, you either did it or you didn't do it. And I think you

[15:41] did it. >> Wow. >> So, we received a hund we received 15,000 pages of classified discovery from the Justice Department. We filed 150 motions for the declassification of documents necessary for me to defend myself. And we blocked off 3 days for the hearings on the 150 documents. We walked into court and the judge says, "Let me make this easy for everyone. I'm denying all 150 motions."

[16:13] And um as we were walking out, the whole hearing took 5 minutes. As we were walking out, I said to my lawyers, "What just happened?" And the lead attorney said, "We just lost the case. That's what happened." And I said, "Now what do we do?" And he said, "Now we talk about a plea. She would not permit me to defend myself." And I would add, >> John, which district was that? It was it? Eastern District. >> Eastern District of Virginia, which is the home district of the CIA and the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland

[16:44] Security. >> And I'll tell you one other thing just as a postcript. My best friend's wife had an uncle who was OJ Simpson's jury consultant, and they reached out and he took pity on me. So, he flew to Washington. He agreed to to represent me for free. We got him a security clearance. He went through all of the discovery and then we met with I had 11 attorneys. We're all

[17:15] around this giant conference room table. And he said to me, "If we were in any other district in America, I would say, let's go for it. We're going to win this thing." But the Eastern District of Virginia, your your jury is going to be made up of people either working for the CIA or with relatives at the CIA or the Pentagon or the FBI or intelligence community contractors. He said, "You don't have a prayer. Take the deal." >> It's interesting, um, John, because um,

[17:46] some of those who are watching tonight will remember that one of the issues in Julian Assange's case was that he would have been tried in that same district. And it has a notorious repres reputation, shocking reputation. I mean, it would be >> no national security defendant has ever won a case there. And I'll tell you one other thing related to Julian's case. My judge was judge Leoni Brinka. Now, they have something something in the federal court system called the judicial wheel where they literally have all the cases

[18:17] on a wheel and whenever the judge it's the that judge's turn, she or he takes the case off the wheel and handles the case. So the the judges are supposed to be chosen at random. Judge Brinkama had my case, CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling's case, Ed Snowden's case, Julian Assange's case, Zacharias Mousawi's case, she reserved every national security case for herself and literally every defendant was found guilty.

[18:47] I mean, ju just for those of you here, um it would be like, um, and look, we have a very troubled legal system, but I don't think anything that bad. It would be like, for example, the Melbourne magistrate's court having one or two judges and they just do all the cases involving whistleblowers and they find all whistleblowers guilty. That's what it's like. John, let's just I think people and again I say this as a lawyer with many clients have been through these terrible orals. You know, you were facing 45 years. Um you had we had five

[19:20] children. How the reality of having to plead guilty. How did that make you feel? Oh, >> it was it was devastating. It made me feel suicidal to tell you the truth. It was just devastating. the the last the the justice department was stuck at 45 years for eight months more than eight months uh almost 10 months 45 45 and uh and I kept saying no I'm not

[19:50] doing 45 minutes I haven't done anything uh I haven't done anything wrong and so after 10 months they came down to 10 years which I declined then eight years then five years. My lead attorney was a legendary figure whom the Washington Post called a legal titan, Plato Cacheras. He said to me, you know, I've been an attorney in this city for 52 years, and I've never seen the Justice

[20:20] Department come down in time. >> Yeah. They'll offer you 10 years. If you say no, the next offer is 15. Then then the next offer is 20. >> Yeah. >> Said, "Why are they coming down in time?" And he said because they have a case and they know it's and that's why we're going to trial. So they came down from 45 to 10 to 8 to 5 to 3 and 1/2. And I said no to the 3 and 1/2. And then they finally made what they called their

[20:50] best and final offer of 2 and 1/2 30 months. I would do 23 months. And they gave me until noon the next day to decide. My wife and I stayed up all night long the night before um debating this, doing our final research. No one had ever gone to trial. I was only the second person ever charged with this crime in American history uh vi violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982.

[21:21] And um and we decided to turn it down. And so I emailed the attorneys at 7:00 in the morning. I said, "We've been up all night. We decided to turn it down. I want to go to trial." One of the attorneys wrote back and said, "Put on a pot of coffee. We're on our way to the house." So, they came to the house. Plato was the first one through the door, came right up into my face and said, "You stupid son of a Take the deal." And I said, "You're the one that told me not to take the deal." And he said, "I only said that to keep your

[21:52] spirits up." And then the second of the three leads said, "If you were my own brother, I would beg you to take this deal." The third one, who I actually liked and respected the most, said to me quite angrily. He said, "You know what your problem is? Your problem is you think this is about justice, and it's not about justice. It's about mitigating damage. Take the deal."

[22:23] And I said to him, if I don't take the deal and I'm convicted, what am I realistically looking at? He said, 12 to 18 years, take the deal. And so I took the deal. And then one of them said, "Look, this can be a blip in your life or it can be the defining event in your life. Make it the blip. Take the deal." And so I took the deal. You know, it's funny, too, because once I agreed to the deal, I felt this odd

[22:56] sense of relief. >> Yeah. >> That at least it gave me an end point to look forward to. >> I've had plenty of clients think the same, John. Just you you you spent time in a federal correctional institution. You wrote an open letter to to Edward Snowd again someone who's done the world a great uh service. you advis him not to cooperate with the FBI. >> Um, where was Snowden at that time? Was he in Russia or Yeah.

[23:30] >> Yeah. You know, I'm so glad you brought up Ed Snowden because somehow he's he's come up in conversations that I've had a lot the last week or so. I think because there's so much talk here in the United States of presidential pardons coming. I think Ed Snowden is a bonafide American hero. I really do. We wouldn't have any idea that the American government was spying on American citizens had Ed Snowden not told us. So Ed Snowden, I'm very proud to say that Ed Snowden told

[24:00] the New York Times that that Thomas Drake and I inspired him to go public with his revelations. I'm very very proud of that. >> Wow. >> So Ed Ed made his revel revelations and then traveled immediately to Hong Kong. He decided while in Hong Kong to make his way to Ecuador and he was transiting the transit lounge at Moscow airport when Secretary of State John Kerry revoked his American passport and

[24:32] stranded him in Russia. I can't tell you how much it hates I I hate it when I hear people say that Ed Snowden defected to Russia. No, of course he didn't defect to Russia. John Kerry put him in Russia. >> Yeah. >> Um he's he's become a Russian citizen. His girlfriend traveled from the United States to to Moscow. They got married there. They now have two children. He

[25:03] works for a for a Russian social media company doing coding. He's got a a pleasant normal life in Russia. Um, but when I went public, he was just a a regular normal, you know, employee of Booze Allen working for for NSA. Um, but he decided after the Tom Drake case and then my case kind of brought it to a head that he was going to go

[25:33] public. >> Well, and and not only did he inform the world about what the American government gets to in the United States, but those of you who will remember uh what it did reveal was the extent of Australian government involvement in that. the NSA basically hoovering up uh with the Australian government's cooperation data on on a daily basis. >> John, I I just want to talk to you about a little bit about Australia and the McBride case and Julian's case

[26:04] where where whistleblower reform. Um has there been any substantive reform in the United States either at a state or or federal level uh since your case? No, none. >> I hate to say that. Nothing whatsoever. Representative Ilhan Omar, uh, a Democrat from the state of Minnesota, has twice sponsored um a a rewrite of the Espionage Act. Uh

[26:36] I I've worked with the attorney who's written this, Chip Gibbons, who's a great he's a young but but great and accomplished uh civil liberties attorney. Uh this this new version would be version of the Espionage Act allows for an affirmative defense and um and it has never made it out of subcommittee. And I said to Chip, we got together on on New Year's Eve and I said, you know, you

[27:07] know how much I love the bill. I said, I I think that that this is the perfect version of the Espionage Act because it would allow for prosecutions of of people who who you know are working for foreign governments, foreign intelligence services, passing foreign passing the secrets to foreign governments. And it would allow for an affirmative defense for those of us who have legitimate, you know, causes to blow the whistle on waste, fraud, abuse, illegality, or threats to the public health or public safety. But um but I said, "What district are you running in?

[27:39] Can you imagine going on the campaign trail and saying, "I want to make it more difficult to prosecute people for espionage." >> Yeah. This is going to have to be one of those things that is agreed upon by the leaderships of both parties and there's no national consensus yet to do that. And so I blew the whistle what 19 almost 19 years ago. I was going to say two decades ago. Yeah. >> Yeah. And literally nothing has happened to improve the situation for

[28:11] whistleblowers. I noticed that uh Thomas Massie uh who was of great assistance to Gabriel uh Shipton and and the Australian politicians uh who went to support Julian lobbyed very hard and very successfully for Julian. Um that he he lost uh his primary I think was Massie is Massie one of those who will be a loss to Congress in terms of these issues.

[28:41] Yeah, Massie. I I I know Thomas Massie uh personally, he's he's whether you agree or disagree with him on these issues, he's exactly what we need 535 of >> on Capitol Hill. >> Um he not only lost day before yesterday, he was crushed day before yesterday by by something like 11 percentage points. This was a blow to all civil libertarians in the United States. Um

[29:14] Tom Thomas lost largely because of his support for Palestinian human rights. >> He had greatly angered Donald Trump uh because of the Epstein files. It was Thomas who sponsored the legislation that essentially forced Donald Trump to release the Epstein files which in the end he didn't release. He released one trunch of them. There are still three to three and a half million pages that Trump refuses to release. >> So it was Massie that sponsored this

[29:46] bill. It was Massie that engineered what's called the discharge petition forcing the bill to the floor of the House for a vote. The vote was 419 to1 in the House. It was 99 to nothing in the Senate. Donald Trump had to sign it, which he did, and then immediately said he wouldn't respect his own signature. Uh, but that angered Trump. The Israel stance angered the voters and so poor Massie didn't have a chance.

[30:19] This is the most conservative, the most Republican district in the state of Kentucky. and Trump handpicked a retired Navy Seal and down the line conservative Republican and he's going to be the new congressman there. Now, >> just to pick up on on Epstein for a moment, um the way that's been handled um through the Congress, is there is there someone going to step up now? because I know he had of course co-sponsors, but who who is Well, perhaps I'll perhaps I'll take

[30:52] that back and ask the question this way, John, and this this might put it better. Who who if you look over Congress, who's someone who can push on issues like Epstein? Who's going to replace Thomas? >> Well, six months ago, I would have said Marjorie Taylor Green, but she's resigned as well. >> Yeah. Um, Ilhan Omar would be probably the the most logical, but she's very very controversial,

[31:22] unnecessarily so, I should say. Um, you know, we have this group of, excuse me, progressive Democrats in the House of Representatives that's that's colloquially known as the squad. It would probably be the squad that would do that would take this up. Um, among Republicans, it was just Thomas. >> Yeah. >> Um, the conventional wisdom is the Democrats are going to win the House of Representatives. Now that the Supreme

[31:53] Court has disallowed Virginia's redistricting, now it's not so clear that the Democrats are going to win the House of Representatives. Many of the districts have been gerrymandered to favor the Republicans. >> You have an appalling Supreme Court. I have to say it's >> This is the worst Supreme Court ever. >> Ever. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I was going to say since the Civil War when when they ruled that uh you know, blacks were worth three-fifths of whites. >> Yeah. >> So, yeah, this is unprecedented

[32:23] certainly in my lifetime. >> Let me let me um we've got about 10 minutes left. Uh John, for questions. I just want to talk a little bit about the Australian connection because of course you were very supportive of Julian and vocally so and and I think you know the David McBride case. What what do we what do we need to do >> um to get the community generally to focus on the fact that you know they get lied to by governments as we know that when

[32:54] people stand up and are brave they're the ones who get punished. How do we how do we get the community thinking this is outrageous? It's it's more than just this is disturbing. This is a gross injustice and it needs to be fixed. What what are the messages do you think we need to be sending? You know, it feels like like a battle that is that is impossible to win. It really does. Ed Ed Snowden told me that that when he went public in

[33:26] the summer of 2013, June of 2013, he really believed that over the following two, three years, his revelations would be shocking enough to enough members of Congress that they would have changed the law. And instead, literally nothing has happened. a couple votes changed in the House of Representatives, none in the Senate. And

[33:57] so we're in the same position that we were in 2013 when he blew the whistle, in 2007 when I blew the whistle. There is no change. We we haven't amended the the Espionage Act. um federal uh national security whistleblowers in the United States are still not not uh covered by the whistleblower protection act uh uh safeties here in the United States. So with all that as background, we just have to continue fighting. And I

[34:29] know that it feels like we're just spinning our wheels. I know because I've been doing it for the last 19 years. But we we have to never give up. >> Yeah. We have to continue writing and speaking and marching and lobbying and working in campaigns to elect like-minded people. Even if we just can do it one voter at a time or one member of parliament at a time, we have to keep the fight up because the other side is better funded than we are. It's better

[35:00] organized than we are. And we have to wear them down rather than to allow them to wear us down. I I I've dedicated my life to this. I won't give up. And look at it this way. We have literally nothing to lose. >> Nothing. And so we have to keep up the fight. >> John, look, that's great because I think you know those who are here tonight um and and from overseas, the information rights project in Australia is designed to do exactly that. we're filling that

[35:31] big gap that we've got there. C can I just ask you a couple of other questions though? Certainly. >> Before we wrap up, John, firstly, just in relation to to your own case, what's been the fallout for you? You know, that's that's almost 20 years ago now. Do you still get people who want to talk to you about the case that that I mean, obviously, you've got a great public pro profile, but is there You know there people who now the next

[36:02] generation if you like coming through saying John we got to do something about this you know your case Assange others are really telling us that something is very wrong. >> Yes. Not as many as I might like. You know I I will I will tell you Greg that um you know in my mind this all happened yesterday. >> Yeah. I'm sure >> not 19 years ago. It happened yesterday. And so just over the last 10 or 11 weeks, I

[36:33] have found myself with this this newfound fame that I can't fully explain. And I'm surprised at the number of people, young people, who are just discovering my story. And this makes me very, very happy because they are as appalled today as I was 19 years ago. and and so it's it's like this new generation is discovering civil rights and civil liberties and human rights and

[37:03] I am very happy to repeat the story over and over and over again. I will add that another thing that gives me hope is that my most serious detractors, the most dangerous people who were in the CIA um and who sought who sought to harm me are either dead or retired. And frankly, they've become irrelevant in this debate. >> And because I've never stopped talking,

[37:34] my side of the story is the side of record. And so I welcome that. Um the personal fallout has been grave. Uh I I went bankrupt. I've remained bankrupt until 11 weeks ago. Um my marriage broke up. I'm unemployable. No company would ever hire me. I'm a troublemaker. I throw grenades into the middle of the room, you know, related to

[38:04] to ethics and human rights and civil rights and civil liberties. So, I've had to work for myself. Now, thank God that's actually worked out quite well, but uh but you have to really be prepared to go it alone when you decide to blow the whistle, especially in national security. >> Yeah. Yeah. I think that you make a really good point about and I think it's the sort of gutlessness of employers. um well you know you're trouble um the moment you actually you're the one standing up for ethics

[38:34] you're the one actually calling out the truth suddenly you're trouble and I I I think that's a really difficult aspect of our society just one more question then Nevin I think we'll go to questions so we've got plenty of time for them um just a message and you've already really talked about this a little moment earlier but just in terms of the message that people need to communicate about these issues What's the I know there's there's no oneliner as it were, John, but what's the key message that people need to be telling their politicians,

[39:07] decision makers, etc. >> I'll explain it this way. At the CIA, the culture is such that they want us to believe that everything in life is a shade of gray. And that is just simply not true. Some things are black and white. They're right or wrong. And we all know in our gut the difference between right and wrong. And so the message is to do the right thing always. We know what the right thing is.

[39:39] Sometimes it's expedient to do the wrong thing. Sometimes it's profitable to do the wrong thing. But doing the wrong thing is the wrong thing. And so we always have to do what's right. On my very first day at the CIA, the director of security said, and I know that he didn't mean it in this context, but it's all it's always stuck in my mind, never take an action that you wouldn't be proud to see on the front page of the Washington Post. And that's true.

[40:09] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it gets said in this in this country, you know, front page of the age or the ABC and and >> John, thank you so much uh for your wisdom and also uh being I think so frank about something that's really impacted on your life. So, John, we'll go to questions now. What have we what have you got for us? >> We've got plenty in the chat. Uh we have Zach saying that John, you're a legend.

[40:40] I just want to pick up a few of these. >> John, you can't do better than that. >> Exactly. Uh Gabriel has said Gabriel stripped in saying, "Incredible story. JK is a hero." Pretty sure he's talking about you and not the children's author. >> Um >> we Oh, I'll I'll go to this one from Rodney. Uh Rodney asks, "John, you've analyzed everything from Iran to regime change with the US Oz uh ties strained by shifting administration. What's your

[41:11] read on whether allies like Australia risk being dragged into future ops or forever wars? And how can we build smarter, more independent intelligence partnerships?" >> Very good question, John. >> That's a very good question. That's a very good question. You know, I can't help but to think that the United States has bullied so many of its allies, especially the Five Eyes allies of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, bullied them into mirroring

[41:43] what has taken place in the United States or or what the US position is on things like whistleblowing and especially national security whistleblowing. Um I I'm I'm very disappointed especially in the Australian and UK governments u visav their their treatment of whistleblowers. David McBride is a national hero. I'm proud to call David a friend and you know it's funny. He came to the United States I'm going to say well it was during co and we had dinner together

[42:14] and I kept telling him I just can't wrap my head around the notion that this is happening to you. This seems so crazy to me, >> like far crazier than than my situation or the situation of Thomas Drake or Jeffrey Sterling. I said, "You are so obviously a hero and and a legitimate whistleblower bringing bringing to light evidence of of crimes. I just can't wrap my head around the fact that this is

[42:44] happening to you." And I actually wrote about his case having convinced myself that cooler heads were going to prevail in Australia. There was already this military commission that practically shouted hero. I thought certainly certainly the prosecutors wouldn't go forward with this case. And now the poor guy's in prison. >> Yeah, that's right. >> It's inexplicable to me. >> Yeah. And we've seen the same thing in

[43:15] in the UK. I have friends in the UK, journalists in the UK who have been placed under arrest and held on terrorism charges because they've expressed support for Palestinian human rights. This is it's insanity to me. >> And so all we can do is just keep up the fight. There's nothing else we can do. I've I've written a couple of times things that that I know the CIA objects to and I dare them to arrest me. Go

[43:48] ahead, arrest me. I I'll give you one example. Um, in the 15,000 pages of classified discovery, we found three memos that were of particular import. One was a memo from John Brennan, uh, an old nemesis of mine, who was the national security, deputy national security adviser for counterterrorism who became the CIA director. John wrote to the attorney general, Eric Holder, about me and said, "Charge him with espionage." And Eric Holder wrote back and said, "My people don't think he committed espionage." And Brennan wrote

[44:21] back and said, "Charge him anyway and make him defend himself." And they charged me with five felonies, including three counts of espionage. They waited until the day I went bankrupt, and then they dropped the espionage charges. So, somebody asked me, "Do you have copies of those memos?" And I said, "No, they're actually still classified." Well, aren't you afraid that they'll charge you with espionage again for revealing classified information? I said, "I dare them. Charge me. Go ahead,

[44:53] charge me." Because then you'll have to release the documents so that I can defend myself. Go ahead and charge me. And so, that's what we need to do. We need to take on our governments head on. Yeah. And I think just on that, I mean there are there are many lawyers in Australia. There's a great network of lawyers these days. I've been working on um cases for people who are in the Gaza flatillaa at the moment and they're great network. So those of you who are online tonight and who if you've got any issues at all, feel free to get in touch

[45:24] with me because there are plenty who are there to support because lawyers are a really important part of this doing the right thing. >> Oh boy. Are they >> Yeah. >> critical. Um what else? Sorry, I was going to ask another question, but I'm being I'm being greedy. I want to keep >> You're being greedy, Greg. You've had plenty. >> Keep going. Never. >> We have one from Declan, who says, "Hi, John. I'm 26 and never heard of you until a few months ago. I'm really inspired by your story. With the fragmentation of politics and more people looking towards the far left and

[45:55] far right political options, do you believe this has negative implications for whistleblower legislation? On the contrary, I think see this is we live in Bizarro world now where everything is upside down and it's the opposite of what it's supposed to be or or the twilight zone. Um, you know, it's funny. First of all, Declan is correct. We are seeing a great polarization not just of politics in the

[46:25] United States, but in Australia, in Canada, in the UK, all over the place. We're seeing the resurgence of the far right. We're seeing a a new um uh kind of far-left. I didn't even know there was such a thing called the Revolutionary Communist Party of the United States until 6 weeks ago, for example. I never heard of it. So, um, Declan, I think that what we're seeing is that people at the edges of politics feel

[46:58] emboldened and empowered to speak their minds, which on the one hand may not be a good thing because there's a lot of hate included in that speech both on the far right and the far left. But at the same time, they hate that inactive, frozen, corrupt center as much as the rest of us do. And so that might be enough to spur people to demand change. I I I said on the Tucker Carlson

[47:29] show again the other day, we've had this conversation a number of times, that I don't believe that the ideological spectrum is a straight line from left to right. I believe that it's a circle and it meets at a certain point and that's where the left and the right can cooperate on these issues like protecting whistleblowers and that's why I welcome the ability to cooperate with with anybody with anybody on these issues. We don't

[48:01] have to agree on everything. We don't even have to like each other. But if we agree on these important issues, then by God, let's do it and we can get something done. >> Yeah, great question, Declan. Well done. Um, thank you because I think that's really relevant as you know to Australia. And just very quickly on the Assange campaign, as Gabriel well knows, um, you know, we had people from the left, you know, the Greens, One Nation, in fact, right across the parliament. And it's not a left right issue. Never

[48:31] know. It's not one. No. >> Rory, um, thank you for your question. Rory asks, "Do you think the US government learned the light right lessons from the torture program or just learned how to hide controversial operations better?" By the way, huge fan of yours and wish you the best with your pardon. >> Thank you very much. Uh, that's a great question and uh, there's not an easy answer to it. Uh, I'm I'm very proud. One of the things that I'm most proud of in my life,

[49:04] well, let me tell you, 6 weeks before my release from prison, I called my wife. I was allowed to call her for 15 minutes every other day. And I I called her this one day in December of 2014, and I said, "How was your day?" She said, "It was great." And I said, "Really great? What made it so great?" and she said, "The Senate torture report was released today and it proved that everything you said was true." And she said, "Senator John McCain got up on the

[49:34] floor of the Senate and said that the country owed you a debt of gratitude because without your revelations, the American people would never have known what the government was doing in their name." Just as I was released from prison, Congress passed into law the McCain Feinstein amendment banning torture permanently. And Senator McCain said that it was because of my whistleblowing that torture was banned. Now, is torture

[50:04] banned? Legally, it is. Does the CIA torture people? I have no idea. They're not allowed to. But the bottom line is we're just going to have to take their word for it because the cowards that we've elected to Congress, the cowards who sit on the Senate and House intelligence committees, the oversight committees tell us that there is no torture, but do we believe them? I'd like to,

[50:37] but we don't know. I am proud that there is legislation that came out of my whistleblowing that banned torture, that banned secret prisons, and I hope that we never go back to those horrible days. But I do have doubts. >> Well, as we saw overnight, I don't know if you saw it, John, but many of you may have seen it, the Israeli government, its mistreatment of um uh detainees. it's picked up from a flotilla. There is

[51:09] no doubt uh that there will be and is torture and you know that's you won't hear that you won't hear the Americans criticizing that or the Austral well the Australians sort of never know let's keep going. Fernanda asks, "CIA seems to act with very limited democratic accountability. In practice, who do intelligence agencies actually answer to? Elected governments, entrenched bureaucracies, corporate interests, or geopolitical doctrine?" >> Yeah, that's a good one. That's a tough

[51:40] question. Um, the reality from when I was in the CIA that was that they answered to practically no one. Technically, they're supposed to answer to the president and that uh is supposed to be overseen by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, but they've effectively recruited those overseers. Uh, you know, I've I've always said too that that I'm philosophically opposed to any CIA

[52:13] director having been a general or an admiral because generals and admirals became generals and admirals by saying yes sir. And you don't want somebody who has spent 35 years saying yes sir. You want somebody who has the intellectual freedom to say Mr. president. That's a terrible idea. Let me tell you why. You need that independence. And we haven't had a CIA director like that

[52:46] since Stansfield Turner from 1977 to 1981. You you get people who who do the bidding of of the president who whomever the president happens to be who do the bidding of of the deep state and let's face it the deep state is real and who are utterly unaccountable to the American people. >> Yeah. All right. Never know what um we've

[53:17] probably got time for a couple of quick questions if we've got them. >> We sure do. Uh, we've got one from AM saying, "Thank you for your integrity and courage, John. Surveillance feels ubiquitous now. Free speech is under assault from the government and commercial and foreign interests are deeply embedded. Do you have hope for the future? And where do you find it? I have been accused repeatedly

[53:48] of being irrationally optimistic about life. And I am. I admit it. I'm irrationally optimistic. Uh but I can't imagine living life as a pessimist. And so um I believe that there are better days ahead. I agree that the surveillance state is ubiquitous. It's actually far worse in the UK than it is in the US so far. And it's pretty bad in the US.

[54:20] Uh but the UK is a police state where every square inch of the place is under is under 24-hour, you know, CCTV. It's incredible. I've never seen anything like it. And um we're getting there in the United States. AI is making it worse. Facial recognition software is making it worse yet. Um but we just have to keep up keep up this this fight. You know, this is another thing too is we we sort of convince ourselves

[54:51] that the fight is not winnable. And so we repeatedly elect these mainstreamers who just go along to get along. uh people who are either supporters of the deep state or who are easily um who easily adapt their personal politics to the politics of the deep state. And we need to elect bombthrowers, figuratively speaking, of course, people like Thomas Massie was here in the

[55:23] United States. I think in in most any other district in America, Massie would have won that race. I spoke to him a few weeks ago and he I I expressed worry about him and he said, "Don't worry." He said, "My internal polls show that it's going to be close, but I'm going to win this thing." He couldn't have been any more wrong. >> Uh Marjorie Taylor Green won her last race with 77 and a half% and had to resign because she knew she couldn't win

[55:53] another Republican primary. It wasn't that the Democrats were a threat to her. her own party was a threat to her. Uh so many elected officials are are afraid to take on the status quo in in 2017. Um I was I was called CNN called me and asked me to go up to the studio and give an interview and they gave an interview about or they asked me to give an interview about Charles Schumer, the Democratic Senate leader. uh he had made

[56:26] a statement about Donald Trump where where Trump called the CIA the deep state. He's going to dismantle the CIA, which was all nonsense, but this is what he said in in 2016 and 2017. And Schumer had said to the media that Trump ought to be careful because the CIA has his his words nine ways from Sunday to ruin a person's life. And they asked me, "What did Schumer

[56:56] mean when he said nine ways from Sunday?" And I said, "Well, I think what he didn't mean was a repeat of November 22nd, 1963. I don't I don't think we're going to see the president, you know, sprawled out dead in the streets of, you know, Dallas, Texas." What he meant was there really is a deep state. You can call it whatever you want. You can call it the federal bureaucracy. You can call it the state, but when I was in the CIA, CIA leaders were there for 25 years, 30

[57:28] years, 35 years. I worked for one man who had been a CIA officer for 42 years. Well, they know that presidents come and go every four years or every eight years. And if a president orders them to do something that they don't want to do, they just ignore him. >> That's all. And and if he ever asks about it, they say, "Yes, Mr. president. We're working on that right now. Yes, sir. We're we're on top of it right now because they know in four years he's

[57:59] going to be gone and the next guy is not going to have any idea. So, yeah, it is the deep state that runs the country and that's what we have to fight against. >> Thanks, John. Um, we are almost out of time, but never >> one short one. >> One short one. Okay, >> I've got one short one from Caroline and thank you to everyone who submitted a question. Sorry if we couldn't get to yours. John Caroline asked, "What advice would you give uh young people for the future, especially those interested in

[58:29] politics and human rights?" >> Oh, yeah, that's a wonderful question. I am a realist. I have called for the dismantling of the CIA. I know the CIA is not going to be dismantled ever. It's there to It's there to stay. It's the same in every Western country. We're not going to just suddenly wake up one day and do away with our intelligence services. So, I'm a realist. I understand that the only way to change things is from the inside. So, I would strongly recommend to young people to

[59:01] run for political office and force change that way, to become attorneys and sue, sue, sue at every opportunity to force change that way. or to enter the intelligence services. When I was a brand new CIA officer, the deputy director of my office, who was an old man in I mean, he was my age, what I am now, but when I was 27, he was an ancient old man. He told me, "Once

[59:31] you've been in the CIA around 10 years, you're going to suddenly realize that you're in a position of authority, maybe you're a branch chief, maybe you're a deputy group chief, you're going to realize that you all of a sudden have the ability to make policy." And he said, "Make policy for the collective good. We commit a lot of crimes here." He said, "Unnecessary crimes. You can change that. you can change it from the inside.

[1:00:01] And so that's what I recommend that people do. >> Yeah, some great great advice, John. Thank you uh so much uh for spending some of your morning uh with us. Um we appreciate >> um and just so many learned out of that and I know that we're going to stay in touch and it's a great honor for the information. >> I look forward to it. The honor is mine. I'm I'm very I'm very pleased to know you and Gabriel Shipton and Julian and thanks for these wonderful questions as well.

[1:00:32] >> No, no pleasure. Nevina, thank you for organizing this event so brilliantly and um I think uh Nevin any more housekeeping or we'll let everyone go. >> Everyone thank you again for joining us. Greg, thank you for your masterful hosting and again John it's been a pleasure. Thank you for supporting us and your work. >> Go and have another coffee John. I'm gonna have another another quadruple shot.
