﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Declass Board Tells Obama Openness is &#8220;At Risk&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/03/at_risk.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/03/at_risk.html</link>
	<description>Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:51:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DJ</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/03/at_risk.html/comment-page-1#comment-3026</link>
		<dc:creator>DJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:05:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=2400#comment-3026</guid>
		<description>Josh, you are an ignoramus.  This is not about Bush or Obama; this appears to be conclusions that the board has come to without regard to who the president is.  They then reported to the president, who just happens to be Obama in this case.  It appears that you saw this as yet another slam on Obama, and you want them to give at least equal slam to Bush.  I am not really a big Bush fan, but I think that this little office, even if they had intended this to slam Obama, would not even show up as a momentary blip on the radar of slams that Mr. Obama will see during the four years he will be with us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Josh, you are an ignoramus.  This is not about Bush or Obama; this appears to be conclusions that the board has come to without regard to who the president is.  They then reported to the president, who just happens to be Obama in this case.  It appears that you saw this as yet another slam on Obama, and you want them to give at least equal slam to Bush.  I am not really a big Bush fan, but I think that this little office, even if they had intended this to slam Obama, would not even show up as a momentary blip on the radar of slams that Mr. Obama will see during the four years he will be with us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Johnny</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/03/at_risk.html/comment-page-1#comment-2993</link>
		<dc:creator>Johnny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 03:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=2400#comment-2993</guid>
		<description>Isn&#039;t that what declassification is about? To decide what to declassify? If its a security risk then don&#039;t declassify it duh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#8217;t that what declassification is about? To decide what to declassify? If its a security risk then don&#8217;t declassify it duh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joshquasimoto`</title>
		<link>http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/03/at_risk.html/comment-page-1#comment-2985</link>
		<dc:creator>joshquasimoto`</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 19:03:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=2400#comment-2985</guid>
		<description>So this board was established in 2000.  Well it would seem that all the stone-walling and classification issues that dogged the Bush administration were somewhat of a problem as well.  So let me get this straight this board which has seen Obama and his administration work for 60 days has already announced that they now see further problems?  Well I can not say that transparency is a bad thing but I think a little parity would go well with this article.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So this board was established in 2000.  Well it would seem that all the stone-walling and classification issues that dogged the Bush administration were somewhat of a problem as well.  So let me get this straight this board which has seen Obama and his administration work for 60 days has already announced that they now see further problems?  Well I can not say that transparency is a bad thing but I think a little parity would go well with this article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

