Looking forward to listening!

(Add some commentary so the thread does not get locked)

Yeah it is a must listen.

The first half if you know Kiriakou won't be much new info. But if you don't know the man you get to see what the Obama admin did to a completely innocent man who by the way, in his own words, was a lifelong third gen democrat.

The second half or so is some new info. His insights into Russia/Ukraine, Israel.

And if nothing else you get to learn about how terrible Brennen and Kerry are from someone who knows them well.

wtf am I listening to?

I listened to a fair chunk of it this weekend. It's a crazy story, but tbh, I think there are a lot of nuggets of truth but he's also supplemented it with quite a bit bullsh for the sake of a good story that also white knights him as much as possible. He is/was broke and his story is the one asset he has to sell.

I just assume everything on Rogan is made up

Quote:

---

a completely innocent man

---

I wouldn't go that far.

He did, in fact, help a journalist with information that outed a CIA officer. That violates the law. It does not matter if people thought they already knew the person. He provided confirmation.

My bull**** alarm for me started going off right out of the gate with the story about how his buddy told him the 10 advanced interrogation techniques in the cafeteria, how he marched right on up to leadership on the 7th floor to say "we can't do this", and how he became outs for being against it. Mr White Knight from day one 25 years ago to the end. I don't buy it. Says we NEVER got any good intelligence from these techniques. I don't buy it. Is there some truth in there? I'm sure there is. But so many parts of his story rang untrue, whitewashed for himself while all others are always the bad guy, etc.

Now I'm not defending Brennan or Obama. I think they are complete ****bags along with many others. But on the whole, I just don't buy a lot of what this guy is selling. I'm sure some of it's true, but he's painting it way too black and white and being extreme in how he discusses both.

There are definitely many levels of BS with Kirakou! But his overall story is interesting, and should be great to hear on Rogan.

It's definitely an interesting story. How much is story vs real is a question. I'm just the type that the more stuff you tell me that smells like embellished bull****, the less I am inclined to believe even the stuff that doesn't. And being bankrupt with a dead govt career, he has major motivation to pitch a story that sells and paints him in a good light.

The aryan prison cell story was another one, especially in how he told it. "I put up my dukes!!!"

Very fair assessment!

He is naive in that the thinks the protections in place by the US Constitution somehow should apply to foreign combatants who do not pay our taxes. That's not at all how that is supposed to work.

I haven't seen this episode, but is his story "believable" if he mentions that Giuliani indicated he could get him a presidential pardon if he paid him for access to Trump, or how Sebastian Gorka offered the same thing?

Both of these stories paint prominent 'Republicans' in a bad light; I've found the guy pretty consistent in how he paints dirtbags from BOTH parties as corrupt, dumb, & narcissistic asses.

You can kinda read between the lines on the BS on this interview. This guy wasn't completely innocent but he wasn't completely guilty either.

LOYAL AG said:

---

Apollo79 said:

---

I just assume everything on Rogan is made up

---

That's absurd but you do you.

---

Thats kind of his thing.

AI summary of "What did Obama and Brennan do to John Kiriakou". Dunno how accurate, but here tis

Quote:

---

John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer, became widely known for publicly confirming in 2007 that the CIA had used waterboarding on detaineesan act he described as torture. His whistleblowing led to significant personal and legal consequences, particularly under the Obama administration, with John Brennan playing a key role in the fallout.
What Happened to John Kiriakou?
[ol]

Whistleblowing on CIA Torture:

• Kiriakou revealed details about the CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques," including waterboarding, during a 2007 interview.
• He was the first U.S. official to publicly confirm the practice and label it as torture.

Legal Repercussions:

• Following his disclosures, Kiriakou was investigated by the FBI. Although they initially found no wrongdoing, he was later charged under the Espionage Act for allegedly leaking classified information to a journalist.
• He accepted a plea deal and was sentenced to 30 months in prison.

Role of Obama and Brennan:

• Kiriakou has stated that John Brennan, then a senior intelligence official and later CIA Director under Obama, had a personal vendetta against him.
• He claims Brennan pushed for his prosecution as a form of retaliation and to set an example for other potential whistleblowers.
• The Obama administration, despite publicly opposing torture, did not prosecute those who carried it outbut did prosecute Kiriakou for exposing it.

Aftermath:

• Kiriakou lost his pension and faced financial hardship after his release.
• He has spoken extensively about government overreach, the "deep state," and the intelligence community's ability to operate independently of elected leadership.

[/ol]

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

a completely innocent man

---

I wouldn't go that far.

He did, in fact, help a journalist with information that outed a CIA officer. That violates the law. It does not matter if people thought they already knew the person. He provided confirmation.

---

My memory is a bit fuzzy. But wasn't this so-called journalist paid as part of a scheme to get him to do some sort of misstep? And nothing was actually ever published as the person giving the interview was on a directed fishing campaign?

Story was definitely embellished, but no doubt he was a fall guy. How he earned that position, is probably different than how he describes it. My take at least.

Interesting listen. Hard to believe its 100% accurate. I dont doubt brennan and co are horrible, corrupt people though.

I dont think there is much, if any, material BS in his story. He probably assigns more malicious intent than exists, to what is mostly aggressive damage control.

When you blow the whistle like that, the other side immediately builds a case for defense and goes on the offense. Whether its the FBI, CIA, or Corporations, they all have lawyers who ultimately get in the driver's seat. They use other corrupt lawyers, judges, and politicians to gang up on the whistleblower.

The only way to win is lay it out in the court of public opinion, which is what we see here.

Apollo79 said:

---

I just assume everything on Rogan is made up

---

I don't really care.

Haven't watched this interview but have seen some others with him. His story about catching the al-Qaeda financier in Pakistan was fascinating.

Whether they outed him for being a whistleblower or if he was just a dumb guy who talked to an "author" is still up in the air for me. As it turns out I think it's been confirmed from outside sources this author he was talking to is now known for being a CIA and/or FBI plant and this wasn't the only guy he snared.

His opinion on waterboarding is correct though. The torture program we had under the Bush Administration was completely ineffective and at times led to really bad intelligence. People just start going crazy and making stuff up.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

His opinion on waterboarding is correct though. The torture program we had under the Bush Administration was completely ineffective and at times led to really bad intelligence. People just start going crazy and making stuff up.

---

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals just just laid down a pretty troubling opinion IMO a few months ago based around this. I went down a rabbit hole back then, ironically enough, from Kiriakou whom I first heard it from. It revolves around the legalities, uses, and command of third party contractors. Specifically, PMCs, private military contractors.

The court upheld that contractors, while under the direction ("but not total", actual quote btw) and authority of a government agency (CIA in this case), are considered "agents" of the United States and hence imbued with and protected under all of it's laws.

Sounds not too crazy on paper to most I am sure but this case was Abu Zubdayah's. The main torturee and recipient of the infamous waterboarding from the Bush era. The people who did it in person, were Blackwater. Those rights granted to CIA's sworn officers are now fully vested to these private contractors. Up to and including assassination, kidnapping, torture, espionage, and literally everything else. As long as the CIA orders it and is in overall charge at the top. Which does NOT include operational command.

The use of PMCs is already an incredibly politically charged and sensitive topic. But now with this added on top? Another layer to help flesh out that grey army that sucked up so much of our taxpayer dollars in the 2000s while doing some super shady **** by going rogue? And that's just the stuff we know about.

I don't like this one at all. Most of us know this stuff has been happening for a long while now, but to see it down on paper making it legal once and for all and ending that particular debate, is sobering. Here is the court decision for those interested. Pertinent stuff starts around mid page 16.

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/zayn-al-abdin-muhammad-husayn-v-james-mitchell-opinion.pdf

ETA: Would love for any bored lawyers to go over it and see if I am overreacting by misreading or misinterpreting something. Legalese is not my strongest suit. But read through it twice and it seems fairly plain to me.

Nothing "sobering" about it. If CIA is ordered by the president to kill an enemy combatant, then it's no different than the president ordering the army to kill that same combatant. Whether or not the people doing the killing are full time employees with benefits or contract employees makes ZERO difference.

Foreigners in other countries are not granted ANY Constitutional protection by the US government. We pay the American government a crapload of taxes to protect AMERICANS. Not to protect foreigners and certainly not foreign combatants trying to kill Americans.

The US government should do whatever it takes to best protect Americans. If torture did work, then we should ABSOLUTELY torture, and I would order the torture 1000 Al Queda fighters to save the life of one American. Lucky for you, torture doesn't work, so you don't have to clutch pearls anymore.

aTmAg said:

---

Nothing "sobering" about it. If CIA is ordered by the president to kill an enemy combatant, then it's no different than the president ordering the army to kill that same combatant. Whether or not the people doing the killing are full time employees with benefits or contract employees makes ZERO difference.

Foreigners in other countries are not granted ANY Constitutional protection by the US government. We pay the American government a crapload of taxes to protect AMERICANS. Not to protect foreigners and certainly not foreign combatants trying to kill Americans.

The US government should do whatever it takes to best protect Americans. If torture did work, then we should ABSOLUTELY torture, and I would order the torture 1000 Al Queda fighters to save the life of one American. Lucky for you, torture doesn't work, so you don't have to clutch pearls anymore.

---

Simmer down, lad. Didn't mean to spin you into a tizzy. And you clearly misunderstood my post.

My point is the government finally legalized to have PMCs imbued with the full powers of the US government. If you can't tell the difference between that and sworn US government officers then we are at a fundamental standoff.

My issue is the lack of accountability grows stronger and strengthens the "shadow army" that many are uncomfortable with. The guardrails on these companies and their actions to date was already paper thin as it were and only were enforced when it blew up spectacularly on camera. And these companies are responsible for so much more than enacting out your fantasy of torturing AQ fighters. Well, they were in that time frame but took a back seat after all the controversies they were in. They have been steadily creeping back into power though and with this new ruling, gives them even more power that they, ostensibly at least, ever had.

Apollo79 said:

---

I just assume everything on Rogan is made up

---

Rogan gets a few things right here and there, but for the most part, he's just a dork

annie88 said:

---

Apollo79 said:

---

I just assume everything on Rogan is made up

---

Rogan gets a few things right here and there, but for the most part, he's just a dork

---

Definitely a dork and I generally don't like his actual style of work while he hosts. Yet, I can appreciate the incredible range of guests and topics he provides. He has a massive platform and it is open to just about anybody, if you have something interesting to say. If I ever do catch snippets of Rogan, it is because of his guest, not because of Rogan himself.

Eliminatus said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Nothing "sobering" about it. If CIA is ordered by the president to kill an enemy combatant, then it's no different than the president ordering the army to kill that same combatant. Whether or not the people doing the killing are full time employees with benefits or contract employees makes ZERO difference.

Foreigners in other countries are not granted ANY Constitutional protection by the US government. We pay the American government a crapload of taxes to protect AMERICANS. Not to protect foreigners and certainly not foreign combatants trying to kill Americans.

The US government should do whatever it takes to best protect Americans. If torture did work, then we should ABSOLUTELY torture, and I would order the torture 1000 Al Queda fighters to save the life of one American. Lucky for you, torture doesn't work, so you don't have to clutch pearls anymore.

---

Simmer down, lad. Didn't mean to spin you into a tizzy. And you clearly misunderstood my post.

My point is the government finally legalized to have PMCs imbued with the full powers of the US government. If you can't tell the difference between that and sworn US government officers then we are at a fundamental standoff.

My issue is the lack of accountability grows stronger and strengthens the "shadow army" that many are uncomfortable with. The guardrails on these companies and their actions to date was already paper thin as it were and only were enforced when it blew up spectacularly on camera. And these companies are responsible for so much more than enacting out your fantasy of torturing AQ fighters. Well, they were in that time frame but took a back seat after all the controversies they were in. They have been steadily creeping back into power though and with this new ruling, gives them even more power that they, ostensibly at least, ever had.

---

Lad? I'm probably older than you.

The difference between PMCs and "sworn US government officers" is that PMCs are easy to fire. Government employees are nearly impossible. There was a room full of slackers at CIA who did nothing but read the paper (or browse the internet) all day because they were so hard to fire. There is a good reason PMCs exist.

Your "sobering" concern is bogus.

aTmAg said:

---

Eliminatus said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Nothing "sobering" about it. If CIA is ordered by the president to kill an enemy combatant, then it's no different than the president ordering the army to kill that same combatant. Whether or not the people doing the killing are full time employees with benefits or contract employees makes ZERO difference.

Foreigners in other countries are not granted ANY Constitutional protection by the US government. We pay the American government a crapload of taxes to protect AMERICANS. Not to protect foreigners and certainly not foreign combatants trying to kill Americans.

The US government should do whatever it takes to best protect Americans. If torture did work, then we should ABSOLUTELY torture, and I would order the torture 1000 Al Queda fighters to save the life of one American. Lucky for you, torture doesn't work, so you don't have to clutch pearls anymore.

---

Simmer down, lad. Didn't mean to spin you into a tizzy. And you clearly misunderstood my post.

My point is the government finally legalized to have PMCs imbued with the full powers of the US government. If you can't tell the difference between that and sworn US government officers then we are at a fundamental standoff.

My issue is the lack of accountability grows stronger and strengthens the "shadow army" that many are uncomfortable with. The guardrails on these companies and their actions to date was already paper thin as it were and only were enforced when it blew up spectacularly on camera. And these companies are responsible for so much more than enacting out your fantasy of torturing AQ fighters. Well, they were in that time frame but took a back seat after all the controversies they were in. They have been steadily creeping back into power though and with this new ruling, gives them even more power that they, ostensibly at least, ever had.

---

Lad? I'm probably older than you.

The difference between PMCs and "sworn US government officers" is that PMCs are easy to fire. Government employees are nearly impossible. There was a room full of slackers at CIA who did nothing but read the paper (or browse the internet) all day because they were so hard to fire. There is a good reason PMCs exist.

Your "sobering" concern is bogus.

---

This is such an incredibly narrow and simplistic view that I am not going to bother trying to dispute it. It's one of those times you see someone say something and you just stare at them, knowing they are just flat out wrong and ignorant about it but shrugging it off because it's not worth the energy or care.

We have fundamentally different bases here it seems, so agree to disagree.