<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with taliban and 9-11</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/taliban+9-11</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'taliban' and '9-11' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jul 2007 07:03:02 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jul 2007 07:03:02 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Sinner or Saint?</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/63137/Sinner%2Dor%2DSaint</link>
		<description> &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/3673730.stm&quot;&gt;Reintroducing&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.yvonneridley.org/&quot;&gt;Yvonne&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4929046509315492036&quot;&gt;Ridley&lt;/a&gt;&#8230;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2007:site.63137</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jul 2007 07:03:02 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>Conversion</category>
		<category>Islam</category>
		<category>Taliban</category>
		<category>Terrorism</category>
		<dc:creator>hadjiboy</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Mike Hawash Pleads Guilty</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/27498/Mike%2DHawash%2DPleads%2DGuilty</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,93944,00.html"&gt;Mike Hawash pleads guilty&lt;/a&gt; to conspiring to provide services to the Taliban and will testify against his friends that attempted to travel to Afghanistan after September 11, 2001.  After the previous MeFi threads about Mike &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/25424&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/24938&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, this ought to be quite a suprise for some.  No update yet on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.freemikehawash.org/&quot;&gt;Free Mike Hawash&lt;/a&gt; site.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.27498</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2003 12:18:23 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>afghanistan</category>
		<category>hawash</category>
		<category>mikehawash</category>
		<category>taliban</category>
		<category>terrorism</category>
		<dc:creator>schlyer</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/13555/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/05/opinion/05RICH.html"&gt;&quot;The New P.C.&quot;  Post 9/11 Political Correctness:&lt;/a&gt; &lt;i&gt;&quot;In the new p.c., anyone who says anything critical about the president or his administration is branded an anti-American akin to the Marin County Taliban,&quot;&lt;/i&gt; writes Frank Rich in the New York Times.  The old p.c. died when Bill Maher&apos;s&lt;a href=&quot;http://tv.yahoo.com/news/va/20010919/100095746600.html&quot;&gt; &quot;Politically Incorrect&quot; &lt;/a&gt;was nearly cancelled.  Where will the new p.c. take us in the 21st century? (more inside)  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.13555</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2002 05:38:50 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>politicalcorrectness</category>
		<category>president</category>
		<category>taliban</category>
		<dc:creator>Carol Anne</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/12411/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20011115/pl/congress_bin_laden_2.html"&gt;Most lawmakers want bin Laden dead.&lt;/a&gt; Is that a good idea, or should he have a public trial if captured?  Also, Pakistan dismisses the idea that &lt;a href=&quot;http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011116/wl/attack_pakistan_binladen_dc.html&quot;&gt;bin Laden has crossed over and hiding there somewhere.&lt;/a&gt; Given the strong support he and the Taliban have in Pakistan, would they turn him over if he is there?   </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.12411</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:54:00 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>binLaden</category>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>Pakistan</category>
		<category>Taliban</category>
		<dc:creator>Rastafari</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/11487/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20011015/us/attacks_washington_42.html"&gt;Bush Refused a Deal that would have turned over Bin Laden?&lt;/a&gt; Does he want a ribbon wrapped around him? Does he want a cherry on top of him?  So the Taliban wants to drop him off at a country other than the U.S., is that a bad thing? 

I know he doesn&apos;t want to negotiate, but they&apos;re saying they&apos;ll hand him over .. aren&apos;t they?  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.11487</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:08:55 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>Afghanistan</category>
		<category>binLaden</category>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>Bush</category>
		<category>extradition</category>
		<category>GeorgeBush</category>
		<category>GWB</category>
		<category>Taliban</category>
		<category>WarOnTerror</category>
		<dc:creator>tsarfan</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/10599/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/central/09/20/ret.afghan.clerics/"&gt;Taliban clerics meet to discuss bin Laden&lt;/a&gt; and then they &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=topnews&amp;StoryID=233014&quot;&gt;kindly ask him to leave&lt;/a&gt;.   </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.10599</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2001 03:12:17 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>Afghanistan</category>
		<category>binLaden</category>
		<category>Osama</category>
		<category>Taleban</category>
		<category>Taliban</category>
		<dc:creator>bargle</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/10531/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1550000/1550366.stm"&gt;Was a US attack on the Taliban been in the works since July?&lt;/a&gt; According to this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bbc.co.uk&quot;&gt;BBC&lt;/a&gt; article, the US had been planning a &quot;military action&quot;, for the end of October, since mid July. The plan was to invade &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/af.html&quot;&gt;Afghanistan&lt;/a&gt;,oust the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.everything2.com/?node=Taleban&quot;&gt;Taliban&lt;/a&gt;, and install a moderate government, possibly under former king &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sabawoon.com/afghanpedia/Personalities.MohammadZahirShah.shtm&quot;&gt;Zahir Shah&lt;/a&gt;.  Are the attacks last week simply going to legitimize this pre-existing plan? Or am I simply being too paranoid?  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.10531</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2001 12:11:48 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>afghanistan</category>
		<category>bbc</category>
		<category>iraq</category>
		<category>taliban</category>
		<category>waronterror</category>
		<dc:creator>bshort</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/10487/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/0109/18/world/world1.html"&gt;Troops Massing on Afghanistan/Pakistan Border:&lt;/a&gt; 20,000+ Taliban troops and an unreported number of Pakistani reinforcements have been deployed in anticipation of a Pakistan-based U.S. strike.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.10487</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2001 17:26:37 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>Afghanistan</category>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>military</category>
		<category>Pakistan</category>
		<category>preparations</category>
		<category>Taleban</category>
		<category>Taliban</category>
		<category>war</category>
		<dc:creator>ryanshepard</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/10214/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.taleban.com"&gt;http://www.taleban.com&lt;/a&gt;  keeps looping back to our own machines at work.  At home, it comes up non-existant yet it&apos;s showed up in my server logs. network solutions has a listing for it.  Anyone else getting bizarre results with this domain?  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.10214</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2001 14:03:41 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>hacked</category>
		<category>hacking</category>
		<category>internet</category>
		<category>Taleban</category>
		<category>Taliban</category>
		<category>website</category>
		<dc:creator>Zebulun</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/10091/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1539000/1539468.stm"&gt;Taleban will extradite Bin Laden...&lt;/a&gt; If there is sufficient evidence for his guilt, according to the BBC.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.10091</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2001 05:44:56 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>BBC</category>
		<category>binLaden</category>
		<category>extradition</category>
		<category>Taliban</category>
		<dc:creator>talos</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/10067/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.bragg.army.mil/www-82dv/"&gt;Paratroopers?&lt;/a&gt; Or cruise missiles?  What will America&apos;s military response be if the Taliban are determined to be liable?  The Russians certainly didn&apos;t too well with a conventional military attack on Afghanistan.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.10067</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:49:16 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>911</category>
		<category>9-11</category>
		<category>September11</category>
		<category>taliban</category>
		<category>terrorism</category>
		<category>terrorists</category>
		<category>war</category>
		<category>worldtradecenter</category>
		<category>wtc</category>
		<dc:creator>MattD</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


