Title: Interview(partial) with Former CIA Case Officer John Kiriakou
Show: Chris Petracco
Date: 2015-10-21
URL: https://youtu.be/ciSgcE0wogk
Duration: 11:00

---

[00:00] claim that the U.S has a quote long-standing history of exclusively supporting Democratic governmental transition in light of recent CIA activity to counter Syrian president Assad including the reported training and arming of rebels in Jordan and elsewhere and ngos backing Euro maiden and anti-russian groups in Ukraine why is the state department making these kinds of claims I think the state Department's claims are patently absurd first of all let's look just at the Middle East um Bahrain is an absolute monarchy it's

[00:31] a dictatorship there has been a democratic movement there for more than 20 years the state department has never supported it indeed the state department hasn't even really addressed the issue of human rights violations in Bahrain Saudi Arabia is worse there's actually a law in this com in this country called the Specter amendment that says that the United States may not sell arms to a country that does not in Institute Democratic reforms Saudi Arabia is one of our leading purchasers of military

[01:01] equipment let's look at Palestine Hamas won a democratic election we've done nothing to recognize Hamas as the Democratic representative of the Palestinian people or even just the gazan people Egypt did have a democratic election right and uh the Muslim Brotherhood won well as soon as the Muslim Brotherhood turned out to be somebody we didn't want to do business with we supported a military coup and an ensuing military dictatorship we can go back farther in history we can talk about Iran we can

[01:32] talk about Guatemala in the 50s we can talk about the Dominican Republic in the 60s we can talk about Greece a NATO country and we supported the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Greece in 1967 and then did nothing to encourage democracy until the Greek people overthrew their own dictatorship in 1974. so for the state department spokesman to say something like this either she thinks the American people are stupid or she's horribly misinformed well as for Egypt I suppose my understanding was that a vote for the

[02:04] Muslim Brotherhood in that case was really a vote by the Egyptians to discontinue elections after that I mean given their stated views of what they were going to do but the Muslim Brotherhood never said that it was one vote one man one vote one time they never said that um there were no Democratic institutions in Egypt in the first place I think in part because we've supported the the Mubarak and and before him the uh the uh Sadat government you know for

[02:34] so many decades but for us to just say well the Muslim Brotherhood they're really not Democratic so we should probably support their overthrow I think it's disingenuous so following the killing of Osama bin Laden CIA director Panetta encouraged Obama to release death photos of the al-Qaeda leader due to concerns that a lack of transparency would lead to skepticism about the event having taken place at all which that skepticism came to fruition among some people and weighing that concern against the

[03:04] definitely inflammatory nature of the photographs what do you make of the president's decision not to release the photos uh I thought it showed a lack of transparency I would have released the photos for the same reasons that Panetta said that they should be released I think we should have released them at the time even if they angry people or they seemed like they were right well I mean Al Qaeda is going to be angry whether there are photos or not they're going to attack us whether they're photos or not and I think that it would have gone it would have gone a release of the photos would have gone a long way to uh to sort of uh

[03:35] put to rest some of the concerns that we had made the whole thing up would you have liked to have seen civilian trials in Manhattan or absolutely Northern Virginia court for the absolutely we of course we have a historic precedent for for civilian trials in this country I don't know why all of a sudden we're so afraid of Al Qaeda that we have to try them in a military Court in Guantanamo what about the blind Sheikh he was tried in a civilian Court what about uh the the First World Trade

[04:06] Center bombers they were tried in in a civilian Court we didn't have any problems and as far as congressmen not wanting uh prisoners like like senior Al Qaeda senior Al Qaeda leaders in their in their districts and prisons in their districts well we already have super max prisons in their districts what's the difference whether we have an Al-Qaeda person in there or not it doesn't make any sense to me yeah they held McVeigh for a while there sure they did until they sure they did that's right

[04:37] so the NSA was tracking mon in the lead up to 9 11 the NSA was tracking monitoring and recording 911 hijackers phone calls which of which they apparently still have recordings uh in order to qualm those who would doubt the 911 Commission report and holder in part do you think the NSA should be obligated to release original similar Source materials like that I don't know uh to be honest with you I'd like to see the source material I don't I don't really care if I you know for me as a private citizen to hear the

[05:08] recordings but I'd certainly like to see transcripts even more than that I'd like to see congress's full and unredacted report on the 911 attacks I think that's where we would really get the truth Senator Bob Graham came out the other day and said he was talking about these 28 redacted Pages pointing to official Saudi involvement in 9 11. I'd love to see what that says yeah what do you think I was about to ask about that why don't you think Graham is taking heat for now more brazenly alluding to the 28 pages of the 911 Commission report they were redacted

[05:38] when when will be too much you know it seems like he's slowly slowly he's walking right up to the edge right now I agree with you you know and and one interesting thing about Bob Graham um and this is why I think we should take this very seriously is Bob Graham is a serious guy Bob Graham was a was a very important Senator he was a member of the uh of the Senate select committee on intelligence highly respected on both sides of the aisle if Bob Graham says that he believes there was official

[06:10] Saudi involvement I'm going to believe Bob Grant and I think really the American people are owed an explanation do you think it was uh official Saudi involvement or just just Saudi Elite sewer I personally don't believe it was official Saudi involvement but I think that there were Saudi Elites including probably members of the Saudi royal family who were supportive of Al Qaeda right I'd like to see the source material right of course so you would support its release and of course uh I think almost a dozen members of Congress or co-sponsors of a build and get that material out there do you

[06:41] think do you think it'll get leaked this is total total speculation but what sort of timeline and how long do you think it'll be till we see it I think the Obama Administration has so frightened people about leaks that unless they're they're pro-administration or somehow further the government's position on issues I think they probably won't be leaked yeah it seems like they're mostly you know Libertarians like Amash or farther left you know it seems like that's most of the that's right characters who want it out there what's the what's the pressure this is this about oil you know is that what these 28

[07:13] pages are about what's the difference is it about oil is it about this this long time relationship we've we've had with the Saudi royal family uh is it about offending people who have a major stake in our economy right probably right so when you foresaw that Graham question here's a good one so in a recent interview with John Oliver Edward Snowden addressed a redaction error by the New York Times which it snowed himself called a mistake the mistake revealed NSA cognizant

[07:44] cognizance of a mobile instant messaging program in use several years ago by Al Qaeda in Iraq how can aspiring whistleblowers like Snowden way especially a single whistleblower weigh ethically the potential for inadvertently helping terrorists or enemies of the nation against the ideal of Defending civil liberties oh that's a great question I think that's a very important question um and I'm going to compare it to my own situation what I should have done is what I think future whistleblowers should do I should

[08:16] have consulted an attorney who specializes in whistleblower cases before going public and I think that any future potential whistleblower should also consult an attorney who has familiarity with these issues to go over perhaps what he's thinking about exposing because accidents like this happen and in some cases well we can certainly lose the intelligence like what as Snowden was talking about but in some cases people

[08:46] can lose their lives because of inadvertent exposure do you think snowden's ultimately responsible for the release of that information even though the New York Times did it well sure he's ultimately responsible and and I will say let me say two things about it Snowden first of all I think he did a great national service I think he exposed evidence of of abuse and illegality uh against American citizens on the part of NSA uh I think we owe him a debt of gratitude with that said

[09:17] I wouldn't have leaked everything that Snowden leaked there are some things that I think should have been kept secret this being one thing another being the fact that NSA was intercepting the communications of foreign leaders that's exactly what NSA is supposed to be doing that's what we want NSA to do we don't want NSA to spy on American citizens I believe that's illegal it's certainly a violation of nsa's own Charter but I want them to focus overseas

[09:48] and but soon seems to be concerned about spying on foreigners he he tells that he admitted in the John Oliver interview that no one cares about it but he is outraged by it yeah he shouldn't be well I mean I shouldn't talk for it's known I'm not I I like I say I want NSA to be spying on foreign Nationals I know you're not talking for Snowden yeah yeah what I don't think you're his lawyer so by the way just just a legal Point uh you would certainly know this you're a lawyer but you if someone wants to be a whistleblower can they consult an attorney with specialization in in IG

[10:20] issues and whistleblowing without having broken their Oaths without having violated their non-disclosure agreements yes you can certainly talk around issues you can do it several different ways you can go to the Inspector General of your agency or I think more appropriately you can go to the oversight committee that's the house permanent select committee on intelligence or the Senate select committee on intelligence uh and you can talk to them it's their job to oversee the agencies that make up the intelligence community so they're fully cleared they're read into all the

[10:52] compartments you can speak freely with with members of Congress and and their cleared staffs there are also several whistleblower um attorneys active in Washington whistleblower organizations active in Washington that are that are led by attorneys and while they're not cleared necessarily for the information you can certainly talk around the information and address the issue of whistleblowing versus the specific classified
