Thanks to certain contacts across Asia and the Middle East, I’ve heard off the record that a well-funded group of hackers working for the Taliban–now flush with resources after our generous exit–were responsible for the January 15 hacking of the normally secure Salt Lake Tribune website. On behalf of the Taliban, the hackers posted a shocking opinion column calling for government persecution, if not eradication, of the unvaxxed as if they were loathsome infidels. The result, of course, was the notorious column, “Utah leaders have surrendered to COVID pandemic, the Editorial Board writes.” The piece calls for one immediate action so radical that I feel readers should have immediately spotted the prank and recognized the hand of the Taliban:
Were Utah a truly civilized place, the governor’s next move would be to find a way to mandate the kind of mass vaccination campaign we should have launched a year ago, going as far as to deploy the National Guard to ensure that people without proof of vaccination would not be allowed, well, anywhere.
Of course, this uncreative parody of Soylent Green, funny as it may be, reflects foreign confusion about how things work in America, where citizens don’t need to carry papers to get a police state’s approval to go places, and where a governor can’t simply order troops to drive out citizens or even exterminate them (the apparent implication of not being allowed to be, well, anywhere, of course) when they don’t comply with a regime’s wishes of the moment. These are the crude fantasies of stone-age totalitarians (no offense to the Taliban intended — there were many positives about the Stone Age, such as being relatively carbon neutral), not the fruit of the more literate and genteel minds behind the Tribune.
So please, don’t take this seriously, and don’t blame the Tribune. It’s a Taliban thing, and not even the Taliban in general, I’m told, but a specific radical splinter group known as the Talibune, proud for one day to have written for the Salt Lake Talibune. Unfortunately, with the many billions of capital they recently received from us, they may have funding for many more similar gags in the near future, so please be on guard and be ready at all times to ignore apparent threats to your Constitutional rights.
Another tell-tale sign of Taliban origins is the so-last-year implication that this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated, and the appallingly divisive notion that if we can only get rid of those deplorables, our problems will be solved. The educated among us have long-since learned that the benefit of the vaccines is reducing personal risk when ill. Except for those living in caves (again, no offense, Taliban — caves can be lovely places high in equity, vibrant communal living, and energy conservation), we’ve all realized that the vaccines don’t do much to prevent transmission or prevent infection. Vaccines may be effective, especially for older people or and those with various health risks, in greatly reducing the impact of the disease, but the disease is going to spread and persist and mutate for years to come. Omicron is spreading among vaccinated and unvaccinated alike. I’m double vaxxed and was diagnosed early last week with COVID. as was my wife, who is also double vaxxed. It seems we can spread it and get it easily, vaxxed or not. I’m glad I’m vaxxed, but we need to respect the choice of those who hesitate or have legitimate reasons to wait.
Finally, the surest evidence of all that the good folks at the real Salt Lake Tribune (not the Salt Lake Talibune!) did not write the hacked column of Jan. 15 might be the diversity implications of the piece. The Taliban don’t yet understand that certain minorities in the US tend to be less vaccinated than white people. The pro-diversity and pro-equity minds that gently guide the Tribune certainly would not call for oppressive means to compel hesitant people of color to be denied basic rights. To think that we need to use the military power of the National Guard to bully them in order for Utah to be “more civilized” should make this ugly prank all the more obvious. It’s just too bad it wasn’t published on April 1 so readers would be more willing to ask if this was just an insensitive joke. With hackers like this running unfettered, from now on we must consider every day as April 1 when we read the news.
Without a legitimate social good argument, without a reasonable right in America to deny personal privacy and body sovereignty (“my body, my choice”), and now with the availability of effective treatments for mitigating the impact of the disease, there is no justification to compel anyone to take an injection, especially one that has not had the normal years of extensive safety testing, an injection that is not needed as the only possible way to cope with an existential threat. Whether to get it or not must be a personal decision based on informed consent and free will, not bureaucrats deciding they should determine what medical treatment others get, and forcing all of us to carry papers are if subjects of totalitarians who get to determine where and when we can have their permission to gather or travel. That may seem OK to the writers of a gag column on the other side of the world, but this is still America, a place with traditions, freedoms, and laws that the Talibune authors obviously do not grasp.
But how could this have happened in the first place? How did the primitive Talibune manage to bypass 21st century security systems to place their divisive verbal malware on the Tribune’s site? My hacker friends in Asia (whose existence I can neither confirm nor deny, for the record) believe the breach occurred via a non-compliant Windows 10 computer that had refused the latest anti-virus booster. The partially unvaxxed device is being hauled away by the National Guard as we speak for the greater good and will be recycled into pleasant green motherboard materials to sustain more worthy low-carbon-footprint computers in the future.
Again, please remain calm, carry on, and above all don’t blame the Tribune or cancel your subscription.
12 thoughts on “Taliban Hackers Hijack Salt Lake Tribune Website, Call for Totalitarian Oppression of Unvaxxed”
Ha, ha. The Talibune's "Modest Proposal."
Looks like the Taliban have also haved the American Medical Association, leading them to take the Talibune position in favor of vaccine mandates when the AMA's latest decree directly violates AMA's own code of ethics: https://wirepoints.org/still-calling-for-employer-vaccine-mandates-american-medical-association-ignores-its-own-code-of-ethics-wirepoints/. The Talibune aren't great at logic. Of course, logic isn't necessary for pranks like this, but trying to be logical would make the prank less transparent.
Jeff you aren't funny or insightful. This is loathsome and embarrassing. The kids would call it "cringe."
Loathsome, embarrassing, "cringe?" Using "loathsome" and "embarrassing" is nonsensical: If one thinks an idea loathsome, it doesn't make sense to be embarrassed by it. "Loathsome" means "causing hatred or disgust." "Embarrassed" is "being made to feel awkward, self-conscious." Hatred/disgust is hardly a trigger for feeling awkward/self-conscious. On occasion, I've followed your argumentation, and I daresay it is difficult to see you as a wordsmith. A simple proposition using words like loathsome and embarrassing is not an argument; such propositions are not the mark of a mind that is capable of acquiring and applying knowledge and skills. I'll bet you could do better!
I take it, then, that you're in agreement with the Trib editorial referred to above.
By the way, I just saw a study that I hope would interest you: https://phys.org/news/2022-01-rationality-declined-decades.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weekly-nwletter
Sadly, we live in tough times.
I am certain all those who are in favor of “bodily autonomy” must surely be in favor of reproductive rights. Bodily autonomy…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Thanks sharing more kindness. Love your response!
Wish you the best,
Sorry, John, for the abusive language from one of my uncivilized readers who not only endorses using the military to harass his/her political opponents, but can't even pretend to have a dialog with someone who disagrees without relying on profanity. I deleted their response.
Bodily autonomy should be a simple principle to understand. I should be able to choose what medical treatments I receive. That's my right. What is the justification for the State to use force to compel me to accept an injection that will have lifelong consequences before it has even had the normal range of safety testing and disclosure or potential risks that informed consent requires? When the disease only jeopardizes a small subset of the population, and when there are alternative approaches available, what possible justification is there for a blanket mandate for all to receive this? Have you even begun to consider the possible conflicts of interest and the obvious evidence of bad faith in our government's policies? Have you asked yourself why all citizens need to be forced to accept this vaccine, when the same government allows hundreds of thousands of unvaccinated people to walk across the border, many of whom are infected, with no concern and certainly no requirement to be vaccinated? Why are you shaking in fear over healthy unvaccinated citizens but close your eyes when hundreds of thousands of untested people can enter our country bringing unchecked disease? Saving lives from the disease is clearly not the driving force here.
"My body, my choice" makes a lot of sense. When it's someone else's body, it's a different story. Here's where the science is vitally important: when an unborn baby is involved, that body is NOT the mother's body, nor the father's body, but a unique new body or a new human being that has genetic contributions from both father and mother, but has it's own unique DNA, it's own nervous system, it's own circulatory system, and at a very early stage it's own feelings (yes, it can feel pain). How dare we neglect the distinct humanity of that unborn human and deny its humanity under the blatant lie of calling it "my body" and thus "my choice"?
You can try to choose any medical treatment you want. But anti-vaccers are overwhelming our critical care facilities in Utah and your needs may not be met at the moment.
You argue that these vaccines (according to the First Presidency they are safe) only protect the lives of a subset of the population. So no biggy. But this virus can evolve more readily in an unvaccinated population. Surely that should be considered?
Ending abortion would only protect the lives of a subset also, indeed it would protect a subset not recognized as fully living in scripture. I suppose that it is easy for one to claim that we are not protectors of life when our own life or well-being is not on the line and to urgently call for the protection of life (in the case of abortion) when sacrifice or even effort on our part is not required. But then many flip the argument on its head again, by not trying to ensure medical care for needy children. I suppose that life is sacred until one is born.
Is the protection of life a moral obligation or not? It seems that the conservative position is to protect life only when it is convenient and those paying the real costs are the elderly, those with poor health and women (especially rape and incest victims).
If protecting life is a moral imperative, conservatives don't have the stellar track record they think they do.
2 weeks later and the situation in Utah hospitals has gone from worse to even more worse, but keep hand wringing, Jeff.
it's noteworthy that having an abortion is not a barrier to joining the church, nor does it require a special interview to enter the waters of baptism if a woman has had one.
Sorry, anonymous, that is not correct. See handbook 18.104.22.168 (mission president, not missionaries, must interview baptismal candidates who have participated in an abortion).