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.
A former CIA open-source analyst and frequent television commentator on terrorist threats, whom John Kiriakou dismisses in unusually direct terms: that she never held access to classified information, that she analysed press rather than intelligence, and that she has built a living out of predicting imminent disaster.
Sarah Adams is a former CIA analyst and television commentator on terrorism whose public forecasts run against John Kiriakou’s, and whom a viewer asked him about directly on 28 February 2026: what does a former CIA officer like Adams see that he does not?
Kiriakou’s answer disputed the premise of the question rather than the substance of her claims. “I think Sarah Adams is nuts, to tell you the truth.”[1]
The access argument
His objection is to the authority the comparison assumes. “Sarah Adams never had access to classified information. She was She was an open-source analyst analyzing press.”[1]
He repeats the point at the end of the answer for emphasis: “She never had access to classified documents.”[1]
The business model
The second half of the answer is about incentives. “She’s made quite a handsome living for herself by predicting imminent disaster. That’s why people flock to her. They’re like, ‘Oh my god, she’s from CIA, and she’s saying that the terrorist cells are going to destroy us.’ That’s how she makes a living.”[1]
The underlying disagreement
The dispute is not only about credentials. Minutes earlier in the same broadcast, asked whether terrorist sleeper cells would be activated in the United States, Kiriakou had said flatly that when he was inside there were none here — they exist in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, and he was careful to add that his information is old.[2]
That is the claim on which the two commentators diverge, and Kiriakou’s account of Adams’s career is offered as the reason to prefer his version of it.
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.
