<?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: Release the GTMO Document</title>
	<atom:link href="http://washingtonindependent.com/43957/release-the-gtmo-document/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/43957/release-the-gtmo-document</link>
	<description>National News in Context</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Related Newswire Articles on Guantanamo &#8211; Huffington Post &#171; Our Country in Change</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/43957/release-the-gtmo-document/comment-page-1#comment-31437</link>
		<dc:creator>Related Newswire Articles on Guantanamo &#8211; Huffington Post &#171; Our Country in Change</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 01:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=43957#comment-31437</guid>
		<description>[...] Post &#124; by Jason Linkins Yesterday, the New York Times&#8216; led with a big splashy report that the Pentagon was in possession of a document that made a claim that was sure to cramp the style of GITMO-closure advocates: that one in seven [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Post | by Jason Linkins Yesterday, the New York Times&#8216; led with a big splashy report that the Pentagon was in possession of a document that made a claim that was sure to cramp the style of GITMO-closure advocates: that one in seven [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shayana Kadidal: The Myth of Return to the Battlefield from Guantanamo &#171; Wizreport</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/43957/release-the-gtmo-document/comment-page-1#comment-31367</link>
		<dc:creator>Shayana Kadidal: The Myth of Return to the Battlefield from Guantanamo &#171; Wizreport</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 12:04:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=43957#comment-31367</guid>
		<description>[...] See Spencer Ackerman&#8217;s slow dissection of Bumiller&#8217;s claims here and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] See Spencer Ackerman&#8217;s slow dissection of Bumiller&#8217;s claims here and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: What exactly is the Gitmo recidivism rate? &#171; Later On</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/43957/release-the-gtmo-document/comment-page-1#comment-31314</link>
		<dc:creator>What exactly is the Gitmo recidivism rate? &#171; Later On</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 21:13:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=43957#comment-31314</guid>
		<description>[...] Release the GTMO Document, by Spencer Ackerman As The New York Times reports, the Pentagon is sitting on a document that claims one in seven Guantanamo Bay detainees released by the Bush administration returns* to terrorism. These claims have come up before and been debunked before. But it shouldn’t matter. If there’s a relevant piece of information for the Guantanamo debate, it should be released. If it can withstand scrutiny, it should be part of the debate. If it can’t, oh well. Setting policy based on insufficient information is obviously unwise. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Release the GTMO Document, by Spencer Ackerman As The New York Times reports, the Pentagon is sitting on a document that claims one in seven Guantanamo Bay detainees released by the Bush administration returns* to terrorism. These claims have come up before and been debunked before. But it shouldn’t matter. If there’s a relevant piece of information for the Guantanamo debate, it should be released. If it can withstand scrutiny, it should be part of the debate. If it can’t, oh well. Setting policy based on insufficient information is obviously unwise. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

