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
Blackmail in agent recruitment
From KiriPedia, the archive of John Kiriakou's on-record words
Based on 1 recorded interview · Last updated
What John Kiriakou says CIA career trainees were taught about blackmail: that the agency does not use it, not on moral grounds but because a long-term agent relationship requires mutual trust and coercion cannot produce it. He allows two exceptions — the pre-Church Committee past, and cases where the objective is simply to stop a target doing something, which can also be handed to a friendlier service.
Blackmail in agent recruitment is a subject John Kiriakou addresses from the training room rather than from operations: what CIA career trainees were explicitly told, and where he thinks the teaching stops being descriptive.
What the instructors said
“In my training, I was told the same thing. When you’re trying to recruit an asset, you want that recruitment to be over the long term. And in order to have a successful long-term recruitment, you need to be able to trust each other. Even if you don’t like each other, you have to at least be able to trust each other.”[1]
The rule followed from that: “my instructors were very clear in saying that we cannot get long-term working relationships going on the right track if we start with blackmail. It’s just not something that we would do.”[2] The justification offered was operational — that blackmail is an unreliable and high-risk tool for managing assets — rather than ethical.[1]
The exceptions he volunteers
Kiriakou does not present the teaching as a complete account of agency behaviour. He concedes the historical case immediately: “certainly they did it in the past, pre-Church Committee.”[2]
And he separates recruitment from suppression. Where the objective is not cooperation but inaction — where you simply need a target not to do something — “yeah, sure. Blackmail threats.” He adds the further step: “maybe even you outsource it to another intelligence service, another friendly intelligence service, uh, who might not be as friendly as you are.”[3]
His summary of the doctrine as day-to-day policy is unchanged, and carefully bounded: “as a matter of day-to-day policy, we were told that blackmail wasn’t going to be done.”[3]
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.
