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.
John Kiriakou's two-part answer to a hypothetical about a socialist administration — that most of the CIA would carry on as though nothing had happened, because officers serve at the pleasure of the president, while elements of the directorate of operations would actively seek to remove such a president. His supporting example is John F. Kennedy.
The CIA under a left-wing president is John Kiriakou’s response to a hypothetical put to him on air: if the country elected a government of the far left — “red and yellow bunting all over the country and hammer and sickle flags” — would the CIA dutifully continue to operate under it, or would that be too much for the agency?[1]
The first prong
Kiriakou announced the shape of his answer before giving it. “I’m going to give you a two-pronged like a forked answer.”[2]
The first half is institutional and unsentimental. “on the on the one hand most of the CIA would continue to operate as if nothing happened because the the president is the chief executive. They serve at the pleasure of the president.”[2]
The second prong
The second half is narrower and more serious. “With that said, I think there would be elements of the CIA’s directorate of operations that would actively seek to remove a president like that.”[2]
When his interlocutor reacted, Kiriakou pre-empted the obvious objection — that a president with anti-communist credentials would be safe. “I mean John Kennedy was a Cold War Democratic hawk, anti-communist.” Told that Kennedy was also a war hero, he agreed and closed the point: “And uh that didn’t save him.”[3]
He does not spell out what “remove” is meant to cover, and does not restate the Kennedy assassination claim explicitly; the example is left to carry the implication.
The same exchange produced his flat denial that the agency involves itself in New York City elections, recorded at the NYPD intelligence post — so the distinction he is drawing is between routine municipal liaison, which he says the agency cares about, and a national government it might regard as intolerable.[4]
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.
