#noindividuals

[zoneofsilence1]

[0ut0f-this-w0rld-blog]

Norms in a Society

Just because something is accepted by a wide majority of the people or just because they make it the norm to accept something, it doesn’t make that immoral thing/behavior/etc, moral. 

I am baffled as to how many people think that it’s ok to be with someone who cheats on you just because a society accepts it and makes it the norm. 

Think for yourself, quit being a sheep. A sin is a sin. 

[wolfieblack]

I always laugh when generic people talk shit about my appearance. Don't be mad cuz your man has no individuality and looks like every other dude and plays it safe. It's also funny when females think they're the only ones who can dress up and go against the grain, while all men are expected to have short hair, wear regular clothes, and live inside a box 😂 Fuck those "normal people"🖕🏾#GenericWomen #GenericMen #BasicBitch #BasicBitches #BaldGuys #Plain #NoIndividuality #NormalPeopleSuck #RegularPeople #NormalPeople #Normies https://www.instagram.com/p/B-f4cjnnzLD/?igshid=zqsn3tg7f6i5

[urban-regal]

Instagram = recycling of the same looks/trend/style from top to bottom over and over and over again. Stuck between hating it or loving it 😕😪

[edulaunchers]

𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝘁 𝗡𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘆 ,  𝗦𝗮𝗻 𝗗𝗶𝗲𝗴𝗼, 𝗖𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗮 𝗡𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝘀-

> Optional Practical Training.

> Work while studing

>Accomodations available

> Conditional offer letter

𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗥𝗬 𝗥𝗘𝗤𝗨𝗜𝗥𝗘𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗦-𝗕𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗿’𝘀 𝗗𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝘀-IELTS: 5.5 Overall (noindividual band lowerthan 5.0)

𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿’𝘀 𝗗𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝘀-IELTS: 6.0 Overall(no individual bandlower than 6.0)

𝟮𝟱+ 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗺𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗖𝗵𝗼𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗙𝗿𝗼𝗺

Call Now at 𝟳𝟲𝟵𝟲𝟵𝟵𝟳𝟲𝟮𝟵 to know more.

Follow edulaunchers for more updates.

#edulaunchers #studyabroad #california #student #ielts

[durgauniverse-blog1]

Ive been raised by #feminists, in the North of #Europe, with ideas that #independence is really important for #survival. Topped up with #Marxist ideas that equalled #dependency and #noindividuality, I'm questioning all these #dogmas that have ruled my #reality. When I grew up it was so deeply rooted in #Estonianculture, to live as far from others as possible, to build a house somewhere in #isolation; to #depend on yourself, to be #alone. When #traveling in Mediterranean countries or #Asia for example it feels so right to be surrounded by connected people, who give compliments, assistance, despite of the gender. When I discussed this with my friend from Sweden she pointed out something very #familiar, that this #kindness probably comes with the price of some hidden agenda or you end up being a 50's style housewife. That's exactly why I've been a #commitmentfobic most of my life, when it comes to #relationships, in the name of this "wonderful" #independence. This is the exact same root cause why I find it so difficult to be in the Ayahuasca retreats, to open up with mattresses side by side together, when my supposed #personalspace parameter is programmed to be at least two meters. When you walk on the streets of #Helsinki, the streets are widest in the World as far as the number of population is concerned; with the same idea of personal space in mind, yet I felt perhaps most #disconnected in that city. The other extreme is the American #enthusiasm, this #fake it till you make it #smiles and asking how are you while not giving a fuck to hear the answer. When one looks at the #sand each grain is different, yet it's all one sand. Just like the #fluid, the more #dependent we are, the more connected and #happy we are. And the more independent, perhaps less connected? (at Licata, Sicily, Italia)

[nozoned]

Question For The Record Text via PDF

[Unedited] This is the html version of the file https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/qfr-pompeo-011217.pdf. Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web. Page 1 Page 2 QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORDREPRESENTATIVE MIKE POMPEOQUESTION FOR THE RECORD FROM SENATOR FEINSTEIN During his campaign, President-elect Trump publicly called for U.S. forces to use torture in theWar on Terror. He said he·d reinstitute waterboarding, which he called a minor form of torture.and bring back '"a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.'· 1. Do you believe that waterboarding and the other 'Enhanced InterrogationTechniques' previously utilized by CIA personnel in the Rendition, Detention, andInterrogation (ROI) program, such as stress positions, forced nudity, slammingindividuals into walls, slapping or hitting detainees, constitute torture? In the past decade. the law has changed significantly concerning interrogation techniques.Section 1045 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2016 provides that noindividual in U.S. custody may be subjected to any interrogation technique or approachthat is not authorized by and listed in the Army Field Manual. Executive Order 13491contains a similar requirement. Other statutes, including the Detainee Treatment Act of2005. the Torture Statute, and the War Crimes Act. would prohibit certain interrogationtechniques, alone or in combination. I understand the interrogation techniques mentionedin your question are currently prohibited. I have not sought legal counsel to address thehypothetical as to whether any prohibited techniques meet the legal definition of torture. 2. Do you believe that waterboarding is effective? If so, based on what? 1 understand the disagreement over the past use of waterboarding and whetherinformation could have been obtained through other less coercive methods. The currentAdministration has submitted to the Committee written documents detailing results ofthe Agency's interrogation program. I would refer you to those publicly availabledocuments from the current Administration. See, for example.https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/CIAs June2013 Response to the SSCI Study onthe Former Detention and Interrogation Program.pdf andhttps://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/2014-press-releases-statements/cia-fact-sheet-ssci-study-on-detention-interrogation-program.html. Thosedocuments also note that an exact scientific study has not been performed as to whetherless coercive methods could have produced the same results. 3. Do you agree that waterboarding and other former CIA "Enhanced InterrogationTechniques," are unlawful and will you commit to upholding and executing allapplicable law that prohibits them? Yes. Section I 045 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2016 provides thatno individual in U.S. custody may be subjected to any interrogation technique orapproach that is not authorized by and listed in the Army Field Manual. Executive Order Page 3 13491 contains a similar requirement. Other statutes, including the Detainee TreatmentAct of2005, the Torture Statute, and the War Crimes Act, would prohibit certaininterrogation techniques, alone or in combination. 4. Will you provide this committee notice if the Justice Department concludes that astatute is an unconstitutional infringement on Executive Power, or narrowlyinterprets a statute to .avoid such an alleged infringement? I am committed to keeping the Committee fully and currently informed of any changes todetention and interrogation policy in accordance with applicable law. I cannot speak forthe Department of Justice, but will honor requests for information from the Committee,including providing relevant legal analysis underlying or supporting CIA's intelligenceactivities, as required by law. 5. In your prehearing questionnaires you've stated a desire to consult with intelligenceprofessionals to understand the current operational need as of 2017 for any changesto current interrogation or detention programs involving CIA.a) Will you commit to refraining from taking any steps to authorize orimplement any plan that would bring back waterboarding or any otherenhanced interrogation techniques? As noted in my response to the Committee's pre-hearing questions, if confirmed, Iwill consult with experts at the Agency and at other organizations in the U.S.government on whether the Army Field Manual uniform application is animpediment to gathering vital intelligence to protect the country or whether anyrewrite of the Army Field Manual is needed. If any differences are justified, afundamental requirement is that such differences fully comply with law, includinglaws governing the treatment and interrogation of individuals. And any suchdifferences would need to be based on a clear, justified need and carefullyimplemented by appropriate experts and with full oversight. I note that otherorganizations, including the Department of Defense and FBI, have extensiveexperience with detention and interrogation and would want to understand anyunique reasons for the involvement of the CIA in detention and interrogation. Iwould expect to consult with the full Congressional Intelligence Committees onany differences that are appropriate, including any changes to law that would berequired. b) What would prompt you to review current law regarding interrogations? If experts believed current law was an impediment to gathering vital intelligenceto protect the country, I would want to understand such impediments and whetherany recommendations were appropriate for changing current law. c) Do you believe there are any circumstances in which a reinterpretation ofcurrent law (rather than a change in statutes) could justify departing frompublic Army Field Manual techniques? 2 Page 4 I am not aware of authorizations for departures from the Army Field Manual bythe CIA. I have not consulted legal experts on any hypothetical circumstance thatwould impact existing legal interpretations, but I intend to fully comply with thelaw. QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD FROM SENATOR WYDENSurveillance Your January 16, 2016, op-ed in the Wall Street Journal stated: "Congress should pass a law re-establishing collection of all metadata, and combining it with publicly available financial andlifestyle information in a comprehensive, searchable database." If confirmed, you willparticipate in poli'cy discussions in which your views, and those of the CIA, will be solicited withregard to the necessary and appropriate scope of U.S. government surveillance activities. 6. In your responses to pre-hearing questions about the op-ed, you wrote: "I wasreferring to metadata of the type collected under the then-existing program that wasavailable for review under procedures and conditions reviewed and approved byfederal judges." In addition to the bulk telephony metadata program conductedpursuant to Section 215 of FISA, there was also a bulk electronic communicationsmetadata program conducted pursuant to Section 402 of FISA. Do you support theresumption of that program as well and, if so, would you combine it with bulktelephony metadata into a single database? As I indicated at my confirmation hearing, I voted for the USA Freedom Act thateffectively ended the bulk metadata program conducted pursuant to Section 215. If I amconfirmed, and Agency officials inform me they believe the current programs and legalframework are insufficient to protect the country, I would make appropriaterecommendations for any needed changes to laws and regulations. 7. During the hearing, you stated that "the American people demand that if there ispublicly available information, someone has out there on a publicly available site, Ithink we have an obligation to use that information to keep Americans safe."a) Do you believe the U.S. government should collect and retain thisinformation when it pertains to Americans who are not connected to aninvestigation?b) If so, are there boundaries to the appropriate scope of such collection andretention? I made the statement that you quote in the context of if "someone's out there on theirFacebook page talking about an attack or plotting an attack against America." Insuch cases, publicly available information can provide relevant information andgenerally involves fewer privacy concerns than other collection techniques. Of3 Page 5 course there are boundaries; any collection and retention must be conducted inaccordance with the Constitution, statutes, and applicable presidential directives. 8. During the hearing, you were asked whether there were boundaries to the kind of"fmancial and lifestyle information" you would include in this database. Youresponded that the boundaries would be legal. Do you believe that, if informationon U.S. persons is legally available to the U.S. government on an individualized orlimited basis, it is always legal or appropriate to collect and retain it in bulk andinclude it in a comprehensive database? If not, please elaborate. I have not consulted legal experts on a hypothetical database and whether informationthat is legally available on an individualized basis could, in every case, be collected andretained in bulk. Such a compilation of information would require examining the specifictypes of information and ensuring that any collection and retention of information was inaccordance with the Constitution, statutes, and regulations. Of course there areboundaries; any collection and retention must be conducted in accordance with the C~nstitution, statutes, and applicable presidenti~ directives. 9. In your responses to pre .. hearing questions, you wrote that "I did not set forth aspecific list of.items, but in general was referring to publicly available information,not information purchased by third parties." (emphasis added.)a) Are there any examples of information that could be purchased or otherwiseobtained from third parties, such as data brokers, that could, or should becollected with regard to Americans who are not connected to aninvestigation?b) Are there any such examples of information that could, or should be included in a comprehensive database? I have not studied what information is available from third parties and theapplicable legal restrictions on obtaining any such information. Information from foreign partners In your responses to the Committee's pre-hearing questions, you wrote "If the CIA requests aforeign partner collect communications of a U.S. person, I understand that collection anddissemination should be done pursuant to the same level of approvals that would be required ifthe CIA itself were to collect those communications." During the hearing, you reiterated this,stating "It is not lawful to outsource that which we cannot do, the Agency cannot do under itslaws." However, your responses to pre-hearing questions also stated that, if a foreign partnercollects the communications of U.S. persons independently and not at the request of the CIA, "Itis appropriate for the CIA to receive such infonnation from foreign partners without the samerequirements that would apply if the CIA itself were to collect the infonnation or to request thatthe foreign partner collect the infonnation." Furthermore, you wrote that "it may be appropriate for CIA to collect [that] information in bulk." 4 Page 6 Absent a specific request from the CIA, a foreign partner, company, organization or individualmay nonetheless provide the CIA with the results of extensive cyber operations or othersurveillance, including targeted collection against, or bulk collection that includes thecommunications of U.S. persons. That information could include the communications of U.S.political figures and political activists, leaders of nonprofit organizations, journalists, religiousleaders, businesspeople whose interests conflict with those of President Trump, and countlessinnocent Americans. Moreover, Donald Trump already encouraged the Russian Government toconduct hacking operations against his opponent, thereby raising the prospect that the Russianscould share with the U.S. government the results of their cyber-operations against Americans,absent a formal CIA request.You wrote in response to pre-hearing questions, "In very limited circumstances, however, themanner in which a foreign partner collected the information could be so improper that it wouldnot be appropriate for the CIA to receive, use, or further disseminate the information." 10. Please detail what those "very limited circumstances" might be. In my response, I was indicating that I could not rule out a circumstance in which theconduct of a foreign partner is so egregious that CIA would not receive the information.This would be a highly fact-specific determination, but information obtained throughsuch egregious conduct may be inappropriate for the CIA to use or disseminate. 11. Besides tbe manner in which the information was collected, would the CIA's receipt,use or dissemination of the information be in any way restricted by any of thefollowing: a) The source of the information, i.e., from an adversary rather than an ally or established partner;·· b) The intent of the foreign partner, i.e., to disrupt U.S. democracy or supportillegal or undemocratic actions on the part of the U.S. government ratherthan support U.S. national security;c) The nature of the information, i.e., communications of U.S. persons engagedin First Amendment-protected political activity rather than terroristsuspects; ord) The scope of the information, i.e., bulk collection on thousands or millions ofU.S. persons rather than a more limited set of communications. All of these considerations, and others, factor into decisions regarding CIA's receipt,·use, or dissemination of information received from a foreign partner. Importantly, ifan activity furthers no legitimate U.S. governmental interest, CIA would not use theinformation. In addition, to the extent that the information implicates the privacyrights of Americans, the CIA' s use and dissemination of that information must remainreasonable and further U.S. governmental interests of sufficient importance to justifythe privacy intrusion. The listed considerations could all be relevant to either the5 Page 7 nature or degree of a privacy intrusion, or to the importance of the U.S. governmentalinterests at stake.During the hearing, you stated: "My understanding is that the same set of rules that surround theinfonnation ifit were collected by the U.S. government apply to information that becomesavailable as a result of collection from non-U.S. sources as well." The CIA's collection of suchinformation would presumably be governed by its authorities under Executive Order 12333.Inyour responses to pre-hearing questions, you wrote: "Because CIA activities under ExecutiveOrder 12333 are strictly focused on collection activities abroad, with very limited exceptions,there is a smaller risk that these activities could implicate U.S. person communications comparedwith collection under Section 702 [ofFISA]." You cited this as among the reasons why "theCIA's access to, queries of, use, dissemination, and retention of U.S. person communicationsunder Executive Order 12333 are appropriately governed by broader and more flexibleguidelines, compared with those required under Section 702 [ofFISA]." (emphasis added.) 12. If the CIA received from a foreign power information known to include U.S.communications, should that necessitate the use of minimization guidelines morestringent than those applied to other information collected pursuant to ExecutiveOrder 12333 in which, as you stated, there is a "smaller risk" that they implicateU.S. person communications?If there were a circumstance involving significant volumes of known U.S. person communication contents, I could foresee circumstances where more stringentminimization guidelines generally would be appropriate, but I would need to consult withexperts on the applicable laws, including Attorney General approved guidelines that mayapply. 13. In your responses to pre-hearing questions, you described as appropriate CIAqueries of U.S. persons' communications collected under Section 702 ofFISA, solong as "the query term is reasonably likely to return foreign intelligenceinformation, as defined in FISA." Given your statement that CIA's access to,queries of, use, dissemination, and retention of U.S. person communications underExecutive Order 12333 should be "governed by broader and more flexibleguidelines," what do you believe the standard should be for CIA queries ofinformation obtained pursuant to Executive Order 12333 known to include U.S.persons' communications? The requirements applicable to collection conducted under Executive Order 12333 shouldbe flexible enough so that they remain feasible and practicable in the range ofcircumstances in which queries might be made, while also protecting the privacy rights ofAmericans. Because the categories of information outlined at Section 2.3 of ExecutiveOrder 12333 regarding the collection, retention and dissemination of U.S. personinformation largely fall within the definition of"foreign intelligence information" underthe FISA, I understand the standards for querying are similar in some cases. I und~rstandthat in a number of circumstances, for information obtained under Executive Order12333, the standard for conducting queries is whether the query is reasonably designed to6 Page 8 retrieve information related to a duly authorized activity of the CIA. I understand this isa complex area governed by detailed laws and rules and I would consult legal experts onspecific standards for CIA queries of collected information. 14. In your responses to pre-hearing questions, you described as a priority "expandingintelligence cooperation, collaboration, and models of intelligence sharing with stateand non-state partners globally." In your Statement for the Record, you stated "Wewill need to rely on liaison services and new relationships, which are critical togathering information around the world."a) Please elaborate on which new partners and relationships you anticipate. Dothey include Russia? Do they include companies, organizations orindividuals that may conduct cyber operations against U.S. persons?b) For what purposes do you anticipate establishing new relationships with.state and non-state partners?c) How do you anticipate mitigating counterintelligence risks?d)- Will you ensure that all new or expanded relationships have the approval ofthe country Chief of Mission, are fully coordinated with the Office of theDirector of National Intelligence, and are fully and currently notifi~d to theCommittee? I was not referring to any specific partn~rs or relationships that need to bedeveloped, nor did I highlight this with a specific collection priority in mind.Since our national security threats are becoming more complex each day, the CIAneeds to improve its collection operations-through both unilateral andcooperative means. As your question highlights, increased cooperation bringsincreased risk. The CIA already has a strong counterintelligence program and, ifconfirmed, I intend to look closely at our counterintelligence capabilities andoperations to ensure they are up to the task. I will ensure that all foreignintelligence relationships are coordinated and approved in accordance with policyand law and that the Committee is notified in accordance with the law andstandard practices. As we discussed in our personal meeting and during thehearing last week, I would welcome any specific recommendations or concernsyou have regarding the CIA's Congressional notification practices. 15. Is it legal or appropriate for the White House to obtain from a foreign partner, or acompany, organization or individual information that includes the communicationsof U.S. persons? Is it legal or appropriate for the White House to retain suchinformation? This question does not pertain to finished products provided by theIntelligence Community to the White House. I am not an expert on legal guidance that may apply to the White House on receivinginformation. I am not aware of a role for the DCIA in providing legal counsel to the7 Page 9 White House on its activities. However, I understand that the White House is not anoperational agency that pursues intelligence collection, but instead relies on theIntelligence Community to pursue lawful intelligence gathering, pursuant to rules andregwations governing such activities, including rules and regulations governing thecollection and retention of information concerning U.S. persons. 16. If you were to learn that the White House had obtained or was retaining theinformation described above, do you commit to informing Congress? See my response to the above question. I am not aware of a DCIA role in supervisingWhite House activities or providing legal counsel to the White House on its activities. Iunderstand the White House has legal expertise available to it from across thegovernment, including the Office of Counsel to the President in the Executive Office ofthe President and the Department of Justice. If confirmed, I will comply with legalrequirements to keep Congress informed. Chief of Mission authority Questions previously submitted to you included the following:"22 U.S.C. 3927 states that 'Under the direction of the President, the chief of mission to aforeign country ... shall have full responsibility for the direction, coordination, and supervision ofall Government executive branch employees in that country ... ' Do you believe that, absentdirection from the President, the CIA is obligated to cease intelligence activities, including butnot limited to liaison relationships that do not have the approval of the chief of mission? " 17. In your response, you stated that you would "seek to resolve the disagreement withthe Secretary of State or, in the extremely rare circumstance in which thedisagreement could not be resolved, seek further guidance from the President." Ifthe disagreement has not yet been resolved with the Secretary of State and furtherguidance from the President has not yet been received, is the CIA obligated to ceasethe intelligence a~tivities at issue? Please respond yes or no. If the answer is no,please provide supporting analysis of the meaning of the statutory languageprovided above. As I mentioned in my answers to the pre-hearing question, I would seek to resolve thedisagreement with the Secretary of State, or in the extremely rare circumstance in whichthe disagreement could not be resolved, seek further guidance from the President. In thathypothetical and extremely rare circumstance, if confirmed, I will seek, and expect, anexpeditious decision from the President. This would ensure the decision to cease orcontinue intelligence activities reflected guidance from the President.8 Page 10 Lethal operations against U.S. personsIn your responses to pre-hearing questions, you wrote that:"[W]hen the United States knows in advance that the specific object of its attack is an individualU.S. citizen, it proceeds on the assumption that constitutional rights - in particular, the FifthAmendment's Due Process Clause and the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonablesearches and seizures - attach to the U.S. citizen even while the individual is abroad Thoserights are considered in assessing whether it is lawful to target the individual. " The May 22, 2013, Procedures for Approving Direct Action Against Terrorist Targets LocatedOutside the United States and Areas of Active Hostilities (PPG) includes the following: "[W}hen considering potential direct action against a U.S. person under this PPG, there areadditional questions that must be answered The Department of Justice (DOJ), for example,must conduct a legal analysis to ensure that such action may be conducted against the individualconsistent with the laws and Constitution of the United States. "18. Do you agree with this requirement? If so, what form should the Department ofJustice's legal analysis take and should· it be provided to Congress? As I referenced in my response to pre-hearing questions, the U.S. must consider anAmerican citizen's constitutional rights prior to targeting him or her for lethal action. Ihave not studied ·the PPG implementation and its impact, if any, on intelligenceoperations. Without referencing the existence of any specific activity or operations, Iunderstand that CIA attorneys frequently consult with, and seek guidance from, theDepartment of Justice. If confirmed, I would expect that practice to continue. I do nothave a view on the form of the legal analysis, whether that is a formal legal opiniontalcing many weeks or months, or a shorter analysis based on operational needs, if any. Icannot speak for the Department of Justice in terms of providing its legal advice toCongress, although I am always inclined to ensure the Committee is fully infonned of theCIA activities and their legal basis~ 19. Do you believe there should be any additional checks witll regard to lethal actionsagainst U.S. persons? As I currently understand, there are a range of other checks and requirements that must bemet prior to conducting direct action against a U.S. person. As with other criticallyimportant responsibilities, I would welcome the Committee's thoughts on this matter.·, 9 Page 11 Public statements20. If, for any reason, you or a CIA official makes a public statement that is inaccurate,do you commit to making a public statement correcting the record?I understand the importance of accuracy in public statements. While I cannot envisionevery circumstance or reason that a stat~ment could be inaccurate, I do understand that insome instances, making additional public statements in the nature of corrections may becomplicated by the need to protect American lives or sources and methods. Especiallywith respect to my own statements, my bias would be to correct publicly made statementsthat are materially inaccurate with public statements that correct that material inaccuracy.Declassification21. Executive Order 13526 (December 29, 2009) provides that: "In no case shallinformation be classified, continue to be maintained as classified, or fail to bedeclassified in order to: (1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrativeerror; (2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency; (3) restraincompetition; or ( 4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not requireprotection in the interest of national security." Executive Order 13292 (March 25,2003) and Executive Order 12958 (April 17, 1995) prohibited classification based onthe same factors. Do you disagree with the prohibitions in these Executive Orders? No. 22. The Executive Summary of the Committee's Study of the CIA's Detention andInterrogation Program was released after the CIA had redacted sources andmethods, as well as names, pseudonyms and, in some cases, titles. Do you believethat, in redacting the Executive Summary, the CIA failed to protect Americans?I have not reviewed any assessments about the impact of redacting the ExecutiveSummary on protecting Americans.23. If you have responded to the previous two questions in the negative, would yousupport declassification and public release of the full Committee Study, assuming itis subject to a CIA redaction process similar to that applied to the ExecutiveSummary? If not, why?I understand the status and release of the Committee Study is the subject oflitigation. Beyond this high-level understanding of the current status, I have not studiedthis issue and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on a matter in litigation atthis point. 10 Page 12 CIA and congressional staff24. The CIA's Inspector General determined that Agency employees improperlyaccessed Committee shared drives the Committee used in preparation of its Study ofthe CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program. The Inspector-General alsodetermined that a crimes report submitted by the CIA to the Department of Justicerelated to Committee staff was "unfounded" and was based on "inaccurateinformation." Do you have any reason to disagree with the CIA IG'saeterminations?I have not studied the CIA IG's determinations. Nor have I studied the CIAAccountability Review Board's report on this issue. I do not intend to revisit this matter. If confirmed, I would hope to work closely with the Committee to enable oversight activities and ensure that the CIA and the Committees never find themselves in such aplace during my tenure.QUESTION FOR THE RECORD FROM SENATOR KING25. During your open confirmation bearing, I asked you about a message you sent toyour Twitter followers on July 24, 2016, which referred to information fromWikileaks as "proof." During the open hearing, you said that you do not viewWikileaks as a credible source. For the record, please expand on your answer aboutyour use of Wikileaks, your understanding of that organization, and the messageyou sent last July.The January 6, 2017 report from the Intelligence Community provides details on howRussia has actively collaborated with Wikileaks in releasing information. The tweet Isent in July 2016 was not meant as an endorsement of Wikileaks or its practices, butrather remarked on the content of the material now in the public domain. I understandthe concern over the tweet' s reference to Wikileaks, given how disclosures by Wikileakshave targeted American institutions and democracy. The tweet was sent in reference topolitical issues in the middle of a hard-fought campaign. Based on additional briefingsand information, including the reports released by the Intelligence Colilil?-unity, I nowhave a much deeper understanding of Wikileaks and its harmful activities.11

[d-dotangelettie]

Lesson from Jay-Z & Tidal: Friends don't take all the credit and the MONEY!!! They get rich together...#PayAttention #ChampionshipTeam #Winners #NoIndividuals #YouGottaShare #EveryBodyEats #Lakers #Rings

[wolfieblack]

I always laugh when generic people talk shit about my appearance. Don't be mad cuz your man has no individuality and looks like every other dude and plays it safe. It's also funny when females think they're the only ones who can dress up and go against the grain, while all men are expected to have short hair, wear regular clothes, and live inside a box 😂 Fuck those "normal people"🖕🏾#GenericWomen #GenericMen #BasicBitch #BasicBitches #BaldGuys #Plain #NoIndividuality #NormalPeopleSuck #RegularPeople #NormalPeople #Normies https://www.instagram.com/p/B-f0WTmHHUM/?igshid=edzbt67ggskk

[zoneofsilence1]

Wisdom from Ramana Maharshi - purest sage ever!

[d-dotangelettie]

Lesson from Jay-Z & Tidal: Friends don't take all the credit and the MONEY!!! They get rich together...#PayAttention #ChampionshipTeam #Winners #NoIndividuals #YouGottaShare #EveryBodyEats #Yankees #NY #27Championships

[d-dotangelettie]

Lesson from Jay-Z & Tidal: Friends don't take all the credit and the MONEY!!! They get rich together...#PayAttention #ChampionshipTeam #Winners #NoIndividuals #YouGottaShare #EveryBodyEats #Steelers #Sixburgh