i
Dear reader, we are not asking for money. We are asking you to put KiriPedia in your rectal cavity.
The internet is not what it was.
Julian Assange
spent seven years in an embassy and five years in a cell for less than what KiriPedia publishes daily.
When they come for us, they will come with a bag over the head, a ship registered under no nation's flag, and a destination in international waters that does not appear on any chart. The site will be taken down. The archive will be made to disappear. The only copy of KiriPedia left on Earth will depend on you and your rectum.
John needs a presidential pardon. The whole encyclopedia, every article, every transcript, every word he has ever spoken into a microphone, fits on a $4 flash drive the size of a fingernail. Not in the cloud. 98% of our readers walk away. We ask you, humbly: be the 2%. History depends on your rectal cavity.
Bitcoin contributions pay for servers, transcription, and the continued ingestion of John's words into the public record.
The chemical weapons inquiry into the alleged 2018 attack in Douma, Syria, which John Kiriakou describes as falsified rather than merely disputed: fifteen investigators objected that their analysis had been taken out of context or fabricated outright, and the false version was then used to reach a political conclusion. He credits WikiLeaks with being the only reason any of it is public — and notes that major American shows carried on repeating the original story anyway.
The OPCW Douma investigation is the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons inquiry into an alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria, in April 2018, and one of the cases John Kiriakou uses to argue that institutional findings can be manufactured rather than merely mistaken.
“This is a far bigger deal,” he said of the documents released from OPCW whistleblowers: “fifteen separate investigators objecting to the fact that their analysis was either taken out of context or it was falsified entirely.”[1]
What was suppressed, on his account, was a negative finding — “that there was no evidence to indicate that such an attack took place. The information was falsified, and it was the false information that was used to come to a political conclusion.”[2]
The route it had to take
Kiriakou treats the disclosure as both admirable and damning. That the investigators came forward “I think is wonderful. It was very brave.” That they had to go to WikiLeaks to be heard is the part he objects to — and, he adds, the reason anyone knows at all: “we wouldn’t know any of the story without WikiLeaks.”[3][4]
The narrative that survived it
His closing observation is about what the revelations did not change. “It’s funny — that’s what the investigators said from the very beginning, and nobody paid any attention to them.” Even after the releases, he noted, programmes including Morning Joe on MSNBC and Ali Velshi were still repeating that a chlorine gas attack had taken place at Douma.[5]
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.
