<?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: SEC Is Making A List, Not Checking It Twice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189</link>
	<description>Latest News on DDTC, BIS, OFAC, and other export law matters</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:06:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ExportLawBlog &#187; SEC List of Companies Doing Business in Terror States Taken Down</title>
		<link>http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189/comment-page-1#comment-3043</link>
		<dc:creator>ExportLawBlog &#187; SEC List of Companies Doing Business in Terror States Taken Down</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:43:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189#comment-3043</guid>
		<description>[...] We&#8217;d like to think that our post critical of the SEC&#8217;s list of public companies doing business in Syria, Sudan, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran had something to do with the SEC&#8217;s decision to remove the list from its website. But, in all honesty, we&#8217;ll have to admit that a storm of protest from more important people on the Hill was more likely the cause. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] We&#8217;d like to think that our post critical of the SEC&#8217;s list of public companies doing business in Syria, Sudan, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran had something to do with the SEC&#8217;s decision to remove the list from its website. But, in all honesty, we&#8217;ll have to admit that a storm of protest from more important people on the Hill was more likely the cause. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jose Gonzalez, Sr.</title>
		<link>http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189/comment-page-1#comment-2865</link>
		<dc:creator>Jose Gonzalez, Sr.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189#comment-2865</guid>
		<description>Another hypocritical factor in our policy towards Cuba, and it has not and will not work. It is time to recognize them and move forward</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another hypocritical factor in our policy towards Cuba, and it has not and will not work. It is time to recognize them and move forward</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott K.</title>
		<link>http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189/comment-page-1#comment-2789</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott K.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2007 17:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/189#comment-2789</guid>
		<description>Color me puzzled...Halliburton does not appear in the list associated with Iran. They &#039;officially&#039; pulled out in this calendar year, and still have a subsidiary working in Iran on a gas pipeline.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Color me puzzled&#8230;Halliburton does not appear in the list associated with Iran. They &#8216;officially&#8217; pulled out in this calendar year, and still have a subsidiary working in Iran on a gas pipeline.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

