On Book tv-The Reluctant Spy-John Kirakou explains how vital records directly tied to 9/11 IGNORED

[Boxerfan]

I'm watching this on C-span 2 right now.

He just told a tale of coming across a phone bill linked to Al Queda that had multiple contacts-In the USA-that abruptly ended 9/10 & slowly resumed a few weeks after. They realized the import of the document & were instructed to forward it to HQ.

He asked in curiosity later whatever happened to the documents. They were boxed away & never investigated....

Also goes into how he was advised we were going to Iraq a year before it happened-All planned ahead of time including the fake UN presentation....


Would be nice if they let this get on the Mainstream news-

[aquart]

1. "linked to Al Queda"... and Kevin Bacon, too, I bet.

[lutherj]

2. I remember reading an article in either Harper's or The New Yorker, that

came out just about one year before our invasion of Iraq (so spring of 2002), and which laid out exactly the whole invasion plan, including the mounting propaganda campaign to justify the invasion. This was before Bush had even started talking about war with Iraq, as I recall. Obviously it was common knowledge in certain circles.

[wildbilln864]

4. It certainly was in PNAC circles. nt

[peacetalksforall]

5. That's why it is nonsense that Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Chuch Shcumer, and all

the others knew exactly what was going on. They preteded to be innocemnt. There words that they believed what they were told in their briefings. All they did was collude.

We need fresh new Senators and what do we have a Supreme Court. The Corporatons Supreme Court and Senate and House of Representatives and obviously the GAO's. Barely a whimper out of those folks. All funding approved.

[wildbilln864]

3. k&r! Thanks Boxerfan....nt

:hi:

[The Doctor.]

6. Ummm.... ever heard the term "Sketchy"?

That's what you've posted.

Anything with substance at all?

[Boxerfan]

7. Hey-how about watching the show or reading the book

Might be a tad less "sketchy" for you...

http://www.booktv.org/Program/11544/After+Words+John+Kiriakou+The+Reluctant+Spy+interviewed+by+Frederick+Hitz.aspx

[EFerrari]

8. I watched the whole thing.

This man has no credibility (still) and this former CIA IG has less.

He makes the CIA sound like camp which it clearly is not. If nothing else, listen for all the excuses he offers for every move, how much he softens everything. All the good intentions he assigns to himself (prompted by the interviewer) and how he makes this all sound like a spy movie.

I don't remember the details but when he first went out into the press in the middle of the CIA destroyed tape scandal, there were threads here that ran down why he was full of it. It's possible that if you search his name here, those threads will come up.

ETA: Here's on thread I found that was posted about the time he went on teevee to do damage control for CIA. This interview sounds like more of the same, imo:

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2451983

[xocet]

9. Thanks for bringing this up...

I saw the program, too, and posted on it earlier today: to wit,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8354090.

Your assessment of the interview is very similar to what I thought. Kiriakou did admit that his initial interview with ABC News was incorrect in that he purportedly was judging the treatment of Abu Zubaydah by a memo (or possibly a set of memos) to which he had access; in the interview, he states that Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times (not the 1 time that he had previously advertised to ABC) and says that this technique is therefore ineffective - and morally wrong.

Anyway, I am not defending his credibility, but who gains if these two go on the record admitting that the war against Iraq was started for reasons other than those given to the public? Do you think that this is just an attempt at personal rehabilitation or just an attempt to sell a book?

[EFerrari]

10. I have no way of telling. It's likely both and he's still sounds

as if he's on the payroll in that he assigns only good intentions to the CIA when their history, much of which is public record, shows otherwise. And, they still today have a black site at Bagram so none of this is even over yet.