iDear reader,we are not begging for money.We are asking youto put KiriPedia up your ass.
Julian Assange
did seven years in an embassy and five in a cell for less than what KiriPedia publishes every day.
When they come for us, they will come with a bag over the head, a ship with no flag, and a destination on no chart. The website goes down. The archive vanishes. History depends on your rectal cavity.
The whole encyclopedia (every article, every transcript, every word John has ever spoken into a microphone) fits on a $4 flash drive the size of a fingernail. Not in the cloud. In you.
John did 23 months in federal prison. As a convicted felon he is still barred from voting, from keeping and bearing arms, and from the federal pension he earned over 14 years at the CIA. A pardon restores all three.
Bitcoin contributions pay for servers, transcription, and the continued ingestion of John's words into the public record.
KiriPedia is not a nonprofit. Honestly, this isn't even about the money.
I already inserted one
9/11 Commission
From KiriPedia, the archive of John Kiriakou's on-record words
Based on 3 recorded interviews · Last updated
The federal commission of inquiry into the September 11 attacks, which John Kiriakou describes as structurally incapable of reaching the truth because it was barred from interviewing serving CIA officers or any Guantanamo detainee, and was blocked by the CIA from pursuing the Saudi thread.
The 9/11 Commission is, in John Kiriakou’s account, an inquiry that was fixed before it began. Its information came to it “in a trickle”: it was not allowed to interview anybody from Guantanamo, and it was not allowed to interview any CIA officers.[1][2] Because no Guantanamo detainee was interviewed, no al-Qaeda fighter or leader in American custody was ever questioned by the commission at all.[3][4]
The blocked Saudi thread
Kiriakou ties the restriction directly to what went uninvestigated. He asks why Omar al-Bayoumi was at President Bush’s Crawford ranch before the attacks with Crown Prince Abdullah, and why al-Bayoumi then excused himself from that meeting to go outside and telephone the hijackers, and answers that it was never investigated “because the CIA wouldn’t let us investigate it. The CIA wouldn’t let the 9/11 Commission investigate it.”[5] The rhetorical question he puts to the room follows from it: “What kind of commission was the 9/11 Commission if it was not permitted to interview CIA officers? Or if it was not permitted to interview prisoners at Guantanamo? What did they just fill in the blanks by making it up?”[6]
The case for a second commission
Kiriakou supports reopening the investigation, and frames a new commission as useful in two directions at once. It would allow the outstanding questions about the Saudi and Israeli roles to be put properly; it would also lay to rest what he calls the more outrageous rumours that have taken hold in the vacuum, that the Pentagon was struck by a missile rather than an airliner, watched by ten thousand people sitting in rush-hour traffic, or that the aircraft were empty and their passengers executed at an air force base.[2][7] Twenty-four years on, his summary is that the truth about 9/11 is still not known, and that neither the Israeli nor the Saudi role can be known “because we’re not allowed to investigate it.”[8]
Sourced from John Kiriakou's on-record public statements. See his profile for the full body of his interviews, podcast appearances, and short-form video.
