Politics

Eurovision too

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Backing track, back tracking or tracking back?

Vesna ‘are not your dolls’: Eurovision Q&A

Six piece girl band Vesna have already made the final, with a song that urges support for Ukraine.

When I saw the headline I thought this might be a political comment, for if typically you tried to make a political statement at a sporting event you would quickly find that sport is apolitical. Whilst the joining together of the indefinite article and the adjectival noun is intended to express that politics is not permitted to enter sport, that is patently untrue. It is a mere pretence to cover up some other motive. Politics does have a part to play. So, the strap line of the BBC article which gave the impression that a particular performer was not only permitted to make a political statement but that that statement was an integral part of the performance aroused some interest. Even where apolitical is abused in sport, to go that far is hardly permitted.

A careful reading of the article however suggests that superficially at least there is no political statement at all in what is said or done. It is a matter of interpretation in a particular context. In a different ages and places different interpretations may be placed upon the words expressed in a particular language, as it is for the words ‘Lead kindly light’. However, there was something of greater interest and concern, but as one who has used similar techniques I have to be careful how I criticise.

Imagine what it would be like if you turn up at the cup final and on the field you do not see twenty three men, but one man and twenty-two androids. Would you not feel somewhat cheated? ‘Oh no, the reply would come. Don’t worry each android would behave exactly as you would expect the individual upon whom it has been modelled to behave. It will be just like watching the real thing. Each android has been programmed with AI to imitate its model. It will do even better. It will avoid all of the mistakes that the star performer would make or could make. The game will be far better’. Is the placement of artificial turf a preparation for such a change? Imagine being able to watch Pele, Hurst and Beckenbauer again even if only in avatar.

Or, if having spent months writing the dissertation for your finals, you find that everyone else wrote theirs just the day before using ChatGPT; and that the examiners were quite happy about that. Or again, you hear that Menuhin shall perform the Beethoven in the RAH, but when you arrive there is an empty dais and the compiled sounds of a Deutsche Grammophon recording* booming out of the speakers.

It was the words ‘The technical complexity of Eurovision means that all songs are sung to a backing track’ that caught my attention. I had always thought that the performances were live, though of course very well rehearsed and flawlessly performed, just as in every other music competition throughout the country. What would you think if the Black Dyke Band turned up and simply mimed to their own playing, which was a compilation of several different ‘performances’ from which all of the faults had been ironed out. In Leeds the whole orchestra turns out to play live for the pianists. So why, in the light of so called technical complexity, is a band not permitted to play its own music in front of the audience. Do they think that in some way a wholly live performance will devalue the ‘competition’? Do they fear that the quality of the acts may not be as good as the organisers want you to think they are. It becomes a sham of a competition when you are permitted to iron out the defects in the backing track. Might as well project holographs of the group as mime.

In any event, what is this reference to a backing track? Has someone lost sight of what the music is. Is not the backing track an intrinsic part of the musical presentation? Erlkönig would not be as fearful as it is without its ‘backing track’. Or do they actually not care about the music at all, it is really simply about physical gyration? Nothing else matters.

How disappointing! But then that is what this world loves. It loves the appearance, but not the reality. The splendid buildings which rise up contrary to the building regulations, but collapse at a shifting of the ground beneath them. The war games fascinate and captivate many in their games’ rooms and virtual reality worlds, but place the same in the reality of Bakhmut, Dresden or Saigon; what then?

It is the same with godliness, men love the appearance of it, but ask them to change their way of life to live godly lives and they turn away. They are very happy with a religion which says: ‘Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,’ all of which concern things which do not endure. These are but the commandments and doctrines of men. They are regulations. ‘If we keep them we shall live’ is what they think. Well, these things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in a self-imposed religion, but it is a false humility and are of no value against the indulgence of the body. (Colossians 2:20-23) Ask them however to become lovers of God rather than pleasure, and they turn away. They want the benefits of religion, but do not want its power to change the way in which they live. We love ourselves, we love money, we love pleasure. This will all pass away, and then what? ‘What good will it do for a man if he gain the whole world and lose his soul?’ the Lord Jesus Christ asked us.

Let them have their backing tracks if they will, but let us, without hypocrisy, love the Lord our God, who gave himself to save our souls, with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength.

2 Timothy 3

But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!
* Coco is not aware of any such recording

Coronas

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Today is an important day for many reasons. We have crowned a man who is king, who in that crowning made certain clear commitments. We do not have to be monarchists to recognise the benefits of those commitments, and I would suggest that of whatever form of government you want if you do not require of the governor those same commitments then you do both yourself and your fellow countrymen a great disservice. There are only two, or perhaps three, on which comment shall be made here.

Firstly, a commitment is made to protect his people both from external troubles and from those within the kingdom who would exploit them. Now we cannot argue against that.  A king, or any governor, who exploits his people, leaves them defenceless or makes war against them is a not one any of you would want, but we do see such elsewhere in this world. We are called upon to pray for kings, rulers and all in authority, for why? Two reasons are given, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life (1 Tim 2:1). I shall come to the other later. This is an important commitment.

Secondly, a commitment is made to defend the Christian religion.  The Scriptures provide the foundation upon which our treatment of each other rests. If we have any other foundation then we shall conclude that some are second or even third or lower class, or that the death of a man is no more significant that the death of a fly on the wall, it being merely a rearrangement of the chemicals of which he is made. We are told: ‘Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ So God created man in his own image; in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth’ (Genesis 1)

I am not arguing here that we have been obedient to that instruction, the king whom we have just crowned has long spoken about many of the ways in which we have overstepped the authority that we have, but where else do we such a clear testimony to the value of a human life. We are made in the image of God; what could be a more beautiful image than that? Even more so, what this means is that we cannot relegate one of our kind to a lower position, or consider them to be soulless, for every one of us carried that image with him. It is this, and this alone, that gives us value not any other trappings that we may carry with us. Secondly, God declares: ‘Male and female he created them’. Men and women are not the same, otherwise we would have the same noun to describe us, but we are both made in the image of God, If not the same then, what are we? We are both made in the image of God, but made complementary to each other as we read later: And the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.’ And Adam declares: ‘This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.’ I do not claim that my etymology is correct, but superficially the English words used here do show a similar connection as the Hebrew: she shall be called ishah, because she was taken out of ish. Jigsaw pieces could not all be the same for the jigsaw to fit together (except in certain special cases of which I am sure mathematically minded individuals would be delighted to point out), the pieces must be complementary to each other (the complementarity of the special cases is what makes the same special cases work as jigsaws). And so it is for us, men and women are complementary to each other.

What a great, glorious, enlightening and liberating teaching this is! No-one is second class; no-one is of less worth than any other.

Depart from the Christian faith and we shall descend into the abyss of superstition, idolatry, paganism, false religion and oppression, for it is only the Christian faith that demands that we love one another, even those who show themselves to be our enemies, and treat others, not as they treat us, but as we would want to be treated ourselves. As the king said on his arrival today: In [the name of Jesus Christ] and after his example I come not to be served but to serve. The example of Jesus Christ was to love his enemies, those who would hand him over to be crucified. Many of them later received mercy from the one whom they had, by means of the Roman nails and spear, pierced.

Thirdly, we are reminded of the importance of kingship. There is one true king, the true man, the perfect man Jesus. He is the only one who has fulfilled the law of God and the only one therefore who is fit to be king. The Scripture says of him ‘You love righteousness and hate wickedness; Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness more than your companions.’ (Psalm 45:7)  But each earthly king is to be like him, and to exemplify him before us. Some do it better than others. Many fail in many ways, as we may read in the books of the kings, and in our own history books, but their failings do not invalidate the value of a king. Rather let them learn what a true king is and learn to be like him. Even the wicked king Manasseh towards his end understood how badly he had failed and repented of his wickedness (2 Chr 33:13).

You see, we do not appoint a king, nor do we elect one, we acknowledge the one who is king. This one, some would say, is king by an accident of nature. So let it be. An accident of nature is certainly no less likely to choose the right man as the vicissitudes of an electorate choosing from a group of power hungry men, and probably more likely to do so. But I cannot say it in that way.  It is God who raises up rulers among men, and he has appointed one to rule over us:  Yet I have set my king on my holy hill of Zion, (Psalm 2:6) and later warns the kings of the earth to serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling, to kiss the Son (the king) as our Prince did his father today. That we do not choose our king reminds us of this, pointing both us and our king to the King of kings in whose name he was welcomed to the coronation today.

I mentioned that there were two reasons why we should pray for kings and all in authority. The second points us again to the king of kings, it is that it is good to do so in the sight of God our Saviour who desires all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth through the one mediator between man and God, the man Jesus Christ.

So, only three comments:

The king is our nation’s protector, just as Jesus, the king of kings is our protector.

The king is the defender of the Christian faith, from which we learn that our worth is that we are made in the image of God.

The king is appointed not by us, reminding us that we are to serve the one whom God has appointed, Jesus the king of Kings.

And this Jesus has been anointed by God, not men, so that the Spirit of the Lord God is upon him to preach good tidings to the poor; to heal the broken hearted; to proclaim liberty to the captives; and the opening of the prison to those who are bound. (Isaiah 61:1)

We have a king, who lives to serve his people not to be served by us, which points us to the King Jesus, who came not to be served but to serve and give his life a ransom for many. (Matt 20:28)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65503950

Further comments:

All remain standing. Samuel Strachan, Child of His Majesty’s Chapel Royal, addresses The King
Your Majesty, as children of the kingdom of God we welcome you in the name of the King of kings.
The King replies
In his name and after his example I come not to be served but to serve.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you. And with thy spirit.

Alleluia. Christ is risen.

He is risen indeed. Alleluia.

Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all your judgements?

Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England?

Give the king your judgements, O God, and your righteousness to the son of a king. Then shall he judge your people righteously and your poor with justice.

Alleluia. May he defend the poor among the people, deliver the children of the needy and crush the oppressor.

During the chant the Lord President of the Council exchanges the Sword of State for the Jewelled Sword of Offering, and delivers it to the Archbishop, who says: Hear our prayers, O Lord, we beseech thee, and so direct and support thy servant King Charles, that he may not bear the sword in vain; but may use it as the minister of God to resist evil and defend the good, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Jewelled Sword of Offering is placed into the king’s right hand. The archbishop says: Receive this kingly sword: may it be to you and to all who witness these things, a sign and symbol not of judgement, but of justice; not of might, but of mercy. The king rises. The sword is put upon the king, and he sits. The archbishop says: With this sword do justice, stop the growth of iniquity, protect the holy Church of God and all people of goodwill, help and defend widows and orphans, restore the things that are gone to decay, maintain the things that are restored, punish and reform what is amiss, and confirm what is in good order: that doing these things you may be glorious in all virtue; and so faithfully serve our Lord Jesus Christ in this life, that you may reign for ever with him in the life which is to come. Amen. The king stands and offers the sword at the altar, where it is received by the dean. The king returns to the coronation chair. The sword is redeemed and is returned to the Lord President of the Council.

It is very meet, right and our bounden duty that we should at all times and in all places, give thanks unto thee, O Lord, Holy Father, Almighty, Everlasting God, through Jesus Christ thine only Son our Lord. Who hast at this time consecrated thy servant Charles to be our King, that by the anointing of thy grace, he may be the Defender of thy Faith and the Protector of thy people; that, with him, we may learn the ways of service, compassion, and love; and that the good work thou hast begun in him this day may be brought to completion in the day of Jesus Christ. Therefore with angels and archangels and with all the company of heaven, we laud and magnify thy glorious name; evermore praising thee, and saying:

There are parts with which Coco may disagree! The Church of England is not fully reformed, and elements derived from paganism through romish errors have been retained. Notwithstanding this, though there is error as Paul said of those in Rome who spoke supposing to harm him: Christ is proclaimed. There was a clear proclamation at the start that he had been raised from the dead; the reading from Colossians spoke of his pre-eminence, creative and redemptive power; and the words of the communion the purpose of his death on a Roman cross.

O Miserable man!

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

An apology coming so soon after the previous one? One would have thought that cartoonists might have learned a thing or two by now. It is fitting however when two interesting articles are placed side by side they provoke an interesting thought, but given that this morning’s sermon was on Romans 12: Be subject to the authorities, I wondered whether political satire may sometimes be haram rather than kosher. But we do have Rutherford’s teaching also on the matter who promoted Lex rex rather than Rex lex, aptly illustrated by when on the appointment of one of his governors, Trajan handed to him a dagger with the words: ‘to be used for me (As Paul said: they hold the power of the sword) and [if I do wrong] in me’. How different from the lèse-majesté of another nation. On the basis of this, the interesting (or not so interesting depending upon your point of view) thought becomes public at the risk of offending those who by their nature are afflicted with the plague of sensitivity to that which is ill aligned with the contemporary notion of politica rectitude, and given with apologies to those who will recognise that I, being ignorant of such matters, have used the incorrect case.

Now the cartoon which has been hidden from view by the author, but not by many others who are not, is clearly an abomination in the good tradition of political satire from at least the end of the 18th century exemplified by Gillray. To show a former prime minister sitting on a throne hidden behind a pile of whatever you may wish to describe it but would be quite at home in a farmyard, with such a grotesque visage is at the best described as insulting, but perhaps a gentler form of treatment of the gentleman, if a gentleman, could have been found. The other gentleman has a face which AI may easily have produced if it had been asked to cartoonise a photograph of the gentleman whom the cartoon portrays but has actually been produced by the real intelligence of a real man. What a jolly description it is indeed of at least one of the ills of our times.

In the other article we are presented with a protest against laws and regulations by a government by which under the cloak of a ban on fake news, as the nation’s own judges recognise by the way they have been written, it would be possible to silence fair criticism including satire and parody. Now I suggest that that other nation perhaps needs to look at the Western approach (except of course it cannot because that would be to allow itself to be subject to the colonialists) to the banning of satirical literature, ideographs and cartoons. The Western approach is simply to get the PC brigade on your side and never again a word shall be spoken against you ever – even if it would have been spoken in jest – for those very comedians and comediennes will regulate themselves and keep silent being more afraid of the wrath of the liberal elite than that of the government. So, it would seem that as well as exposing as intended one of the ills of our time, it also unintentionally exposed another of the ills. I suspect the putative claim of the ‘offended’ is a cover for the real reason which is closer to that from which the lèse-majesté are designed to protect those who would wish to sit upon a throne but have proven to be unsuitable candidates for it.

As for caricatures, they are necessary and are necessarily built upon actual characteristics of real people. ‘Paint me, warts and all!’ the man said for it was well known that if the warts were painted out it would be said that it was not a true likeness. If we are offended by a caricature of our culture, race, tribe or even locality then remember it is a caricature because it is like that in some way, and we then should ask why? What is it that makes that particular caricature? What is it in the caricature that is offensive? What is it of which we, as members of that class, are ashamed? If it is something bad, we then need to further ask ourselves: is it found in me? If it is then I must expunge it from myself.

So when I hear words spoken about or see a cartoon of a particular class or group of people to whom I may, or may not, have a relationship or a belonging: ‘Though their pockets are deep their arms are short’ remember that this is a caricature. And then ask does it apply to me as much as it does to the miser. O miserable man that I am!

Guardian apologises over cartoon of BBC chairman Richard Sharp

Kunal Kamra: Why an Indian comedian is challenging fake news rules

Inadequate

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Raising standards, improving lives?

It has at last been discovered. It is the time to speak openly and to come out. Coco has been found to be inadequate. There is no other one-word judgement that can be applied. So, it is now time to publish a parable that Coco heard many years ago, but first of all a brief explanation.

Those of you with whom Coco worked will fully understand why this judgement has been applied (many others will have a partial understanding, and some will know that it is unquestionably just). The behaviour of Coco was so audacious as to risk the bringing of the whole group into disrepute. It was well-known that Coco (and not only he, but the others Coco shall not name here) rode roughshod over systems, policies, regulations, even at times of standards in order to achieve for the client what the client needed at that time. This failure to adhere to proper controls (preparing a change document, designing functionality tests and user tests, which would provide measurable results; building a safe programming environment in which testing could take place; proper separation of duties and therefore accountability for the several parts of the process of implementation of the change; as well as the modification of design and help documents and systems, which followed their own separate processes for change) often resulted in a few short words of correction being spoken, and ignored but ensured that the client was happy and the client’s timetable was not disrupted by an internally imposed process when all we had done was incorrectly spell Xiannopulou’s name in the formally approved release two months earlier. It was for this reason that someone was always allocated to Coco who understood the need for these things – in other words a compliance officer (please don’t take that as an insult, Coco says it in jest, you were always admirable in your work, correcting Coco where needed, and without your help Coco would not have remembered or done anything that was required and it provided you with an opportunity to manage a recalcitrant and incorrigible colleague). Every attempt to change that behaviour simply provided a new and interesting opportunity to design new ways to beat the system.

The parable was along these lines:

It was Monday morning, the weekend had been longer and more tedious than usual, and Norbert was preparing to leave for the office, when there was a knock at the door. Norbert was surprised to find Jeremy the local bobby outside.

N: Good morning, Jerry. What brings you here today?
J: I am very sorry, sir, but I must take you away to a place of confinement where you will remain for an indefinite period.
N: I don’t understand, are you saying that you are taking me to gaol?
J: Yes, sir, that is what I must do. You were condemned by the Court yesterday, and I have been instructed to escort you to The Lawful Place Of Confinement.
N: I know you must do your work, Jerry, but perhaps you would enlighten me. For what have I been condemned?
J: I have not been told, sir. I am aware that your statement was presented to the court, one witness was called and then came the judgement, but I was not permitted to enter into the courtroom.
N: May I have a few moments to pack a bag? Please come in and take a seat. I shall not be long.

As he packed, Norbert reflected upon the situation. He had been called into the station several weeks ago to give an account of his movements on a particular day in December. He thought carefully about what he had said in that document. He had been out of town all of that week on business, and could think of nothing in it that could give rise to what was now taking place. He mused thoughtfully, as the absurdity of the situation pressed home upon him. Here he was about to be committed to a place of confinement on the judgement of a court at a hearing of which he had no knowledge. He supposed that had he troubled himself to go to the court every day, he would have seen his name on the list of cases to be heard: Person or persons unknown v Norbert Smith Defendant 1230 Room B, he imagined to himself. What had been said about him? Why had he not received a call to attend the hearing and reply to his accusers?

He resigned himself to his fate. He remembered that the wise man said: the first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him. (Proverbs 18:17)

Coco added his own comments to this, which at the time seemed to be appropriate:
Coco wonders how many of us feel a little bit like Norbert. There are flaws in many processes which would not be permitted in the legal process in a liberal state. And if you wonder why Coco wrote this, it is quite simple, there are two reasons. Firstly, the [assessment] document appears to be empty. Nothing has been said, so there is nothing to which a reply can be given. And secondly, there has been no process meeting with the preparer of the assessment, but merely an informal chat with the one who has been interposed. It is of course nothing less than is expected to happen or not happen however you may wish to look at it.

There was however an opportunity to respond to the electronic document, so Coco entered this parable, only to discover that having made the entry it was not possible to remove it or even edit it. It was once only effort – make a mistake in it and the mistake is forever written in stone or at least electronic bits.

It now appears, in the light of the reports of certain Government bodies that such things do happen in a liberal state, as, although the documents promulgated by that body are not empty, the evidences to support the assessments are not disclosed so no answer can be given.

I understand that to break the law in one part is to break the law as a whole, for the law is one; but you do not label a pupil as inadequate if they fail in English but excel in all of the others.

You may care to refer to Coco’s blog on targets which considers raising educational standards from a slightly different perspective and for a different purpose.

The defiled mind

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Der Spiegel: India anger over ‘racist’ German magazine cartoon on population

A good man once said: To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure. So now, in the light of this and the recent reaction to a cartoon depicting a race between two trains which was perhaps as much of a contest as the legendary race in which a man and horse competed to be the first from London to York. To pit a new HSR (‘Bullet’ train) against an old diesel is surely a foregone conclusion, just as the outcome of the horse-man race would have been in the seventeenth century. Oh! distracted again so that my first intended sentence became little more than a noun and a qualifying subordinate clause I should resume where off I had left. So, in the light of the afore described colourful line drawing, if there is any element of race in it, and of course there is but perhaps not in the sense that has been expressed elsewhere, should I not now consider that there is an element of race in all things that are or could be said in the minds of some? It has often been said: ‘it takes one to know one’, but I would add that it is often incorrectly said in order to attribute, perhaps insinuate is a more appropriate word in this context, to attribute to the accuser the imputed qualities of the accused.

Whilst seeking to avoid the claim to any kind of purity in myself, if one sees impurity in a thing that is not in itself impure, does that not in the light of the words of our good and wise man, suggest that there is some impurity in the one who sees what he thinks is a kind of impurity in it? In which case the often ill-used saying: ‘it takes one to know one’ may also in this instance be true, that those who cry wolf are in fact wolves themselves, and that the same kind of impurity that they found in the pure thing is the very impurity which defiles them. But if you simply look at the cartoon as a cartoon depicting a race, is it not simply, purely, funny?

On the other hand, had the cartoonist given us the identities of the drivers perhaps we may have different views of the world.

The relations between the two drivers were quite cordial until the red train began to move ahead.

With thanks, and apologies for any possible infringements of copyright which may be found in this not-for-profit educational use of a small part of the material of the copyright holders, and in particular to Chappatte, Stuttmann, knowthenation, the Chinese Embassy authority and the BBC, without whose article this blog would never have been written.

The use of alien languages

~ admin ~ Leave a comment
Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau*

If Coco had written:
Gan nad yw rhywun yn disgwyl gweld Firenze mewn erthygl am Fflorens neu 臺北市 mewn erthygl am brifddinas y weriniaeth Tsieineaidd, pam mae disgwyl i un ddarllen Snowdon mewn erthygl Gymraeg am yr Wyddfa?

Coco is quite sure there would be much support for the view expressed, which is why Snowdon in Wales is known as, and probably ‘always’ has been known as yr Wyddfa.  I quite understand this, for if Coco were to speak in Italian, which Coco cannot, it would be intolerable to refer to Florence and not Firenze, and in French, which the French do not permit, to refer to Paris as Paris (euphonically speaking of course). 

But if Coco asks:
As one does not expect to see Firenze in an English article about Florence or 臺北市 in an English article about the capital city of the Chinese republic, why is one expected to read yr Wyddfa in an English article about Snowdon?
will Coco receive a similar response?

The editors of the BBC seem to take a different view and give more regard to those who would detract them for reasons of being PC, which you will understand is nothing to do with pure chocolate, than to their intended audience. For, when they write for an English speaking audience, then they do not write in English but introduce other tongues. If there is a need to write in another tongue, and from time to time there must be such a need, as Coco has demonstrated in the foregoing, then a translation should be provided for those who do not understand what is written. In the slightly better article from this perspective, to which we thought we had already referred, but have not so the link must be edited later, though the explanation was rather lacking in due care, at least an attempt had been made to provide an explanation. In this one* (Snowdon: Yr Wyddfa could be the first plastic-free mountain) however, whilst Yr Wyddfa is the proper name for Snowdon in the Welsh language, it is not the name for the mountain in the English language.

As a great man once said: If I come to you speaking in tongues [you do not understand] how will I benefit you? So with you, if you utter speech that is unintelligible how will anyone know what is said? You will be speaking to the air. If I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker a foreigner to me. … I would rather speak five words and be understood than ten thousand words in a language that is not, but if I must speak in another tongue, please let there be an interpreter.

With apologies for not providing a translation of the Welsh and to those who know for Google’s bad Welsh.

* Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau – The land of my fathers

* There is an appearance that since Coco first saw the article, a change has been made to make it clear that yr Wyddfa is Snowdon, but still we have Eryri National Park. Is this a location in Transylvania or near the great lake of a slightly similar English name?

Not at the occident

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

12/04/2023

Ukraine war: Leak shows Western special forces on the ground

Does it really matter who leaked them? What really matters is are they true? Are NATO troops involved in the war? Some may argue that it is OK to sell arms to Ukraine, even to give them, and continue to claim that we are not involved in the fighting, but when we are on the ground? Surely that claim, if it has not already done so by the provision of arms, falls flat?

…
According to the document, dated 23 March, the UK has the largest contingent of special forces in Ukraine (50), followed by fellow Nato states Latvia (17), France (15), the US (14) and the Netherlands
(1).The document does not say where the forces are located or what they are doing.
The numbers of personnel may be small, and will doubtless fluctuate. But special forces are by their very nature highly effective. Their presence in Ukraine is likely to be seized upon by Moscow, which has in recent months argued that it is not just confronting Ukraine, but Nato as well.
…
UK special forces are made up of several elite military units with distinct areas of expertise, and are regarded to be among the most capable in the world.
The British government has a policy of not commenting on its special forces, in contrast to other countries including the US.
The UK has been vociferous in its support of Ukraine, and is the second largest donor after the US of military aid to Kyiv.
US Defense(sic.) Secretary Lloyd Austin said the Department of Justice had opened a criminal investigation and he was determined to find the source of the leak.
“We will continue to investigate and turn over every rock until we find the source of this and the extent of it,” he said.

Steak knives

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

11/04/2023 19:50

By Julian O’Neill

BBC News NI home affairs correspondent

‘Freddie Scappaticci denied he was the Army’s most high-ranking agent in the IRA during the Troubles.’

Stakeknife: Alleged Army agent in IRA Freddie Scappaticci dies

… Freddie Scappaticci, the man suspected of being Stakeknife, the Army’s top agent within the IRA, has died.
Mr Scappaticci, who was in his 70s, always denied he was Stakeknife. …

Why would he not be telling the truth even though it may be entirely casuistically? He was never the most high ranking agent in the IRA at all. There was another who held a much higher rank than Scappaticci did. It is his identity that has been successfully concealed by the investigations into Scappaticci and his own vehement denials.

Just criticism

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

10/04/2023

China jails prominent legal activists Xu Zhiyong and Ding Jiaxi

The BBC reported that ‘in response to past criticism about its human rights record, Beijing has said “only the 1.3 billion* Chinese people have a say on China’s human rights”.’ It could well have added: ‘and if any of them exercise their right to have their say, we shall listen to them. In due time there shall be no more criticism’.

* A slight exaggeration may be seen to exist here. The number may be correct if an average lifespan were 50 years and the country had had a population of the current size for about seven times longer than history would allow, otherwise the figure should be 1.3 milliard, roughly 1‰ of the number quoted.

End-to-end Encryption

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Should we or shouldn’t we?

There are many different answers to the question:

WhatsApp: We won’t lower security for any government

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-62291328

Signal would ‘walk’ from UK if Online Safety Bill undermined encryption

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-64584001

What does Coco think?

Should we or shouldn’t we be allowed to use end-to-end encryption? The authorities will always argue that they need it for certain purposes – such high purposes as national security. Do they also need it for communication with the taxpayer? How high is the bar before it is permitted to be used? Do private citizens ever have the need to use it?

Perhaps private citizens do not need it. We happily speak to each other in the hearing of others all of the time without applying encryption to our voices, but one day whilst Coco was speaking with a client, he answered a telephone call. The conversion proceeded in English, until he had something to say that he did not want me to know. He then encrypted his message. Even his secretary could not decrypt it, but it was the mother tongue of the caller. We also go into quiet places for certain conversations, do we not? There are times when it is not appropriate for others to listen in to our conversation. When we used to write on paper to each other, we did not always use postcards, did we? No, we sealed our text into an envelope so that the proper recipient would know that there had been no interference.  

Now it is said that the UK Online Safety Bill has many good things about it which will help in the combat of crime and particular types of crime which otherwise would be hard to detect. I shall not address that here but a different aspect of its benefit.

The Online Safety Bill sounds to Coco like a wonderful new business opportunity. Is anybody out there ready to deliver the necessary software, please?

It seems likely that messaging apps will be required to scan and report on any malicious content in any message they send. This will be achieved it is suggested by scanning any message in its unencrypted form before it is sent. Should any disallowed content be found the messaging app will be required to report it to an appropriate authority.

It sounds good. We do not want the apps we use to be used to transmit harmful material. But many have recognised that as soon as it becomes possible to scan for anything one thing, then it is possible to scan for all things. Governments may require the apps to scan for illegal content, but what is illegal content? We may (note may) not have corrupt, despotic, immoral liars or cheats as leaders, but if they do exist, will they require scanning for words which might further defame the already defamed name of the leader? Will yet others require scanning for words which indicate disagreement with the current moral ethic? Will advertisers see the opportunity to ask, or place pressure upon, the owners of the messaging services to scan for words which would allow them to more easily target you in other market places (you may see that as a benefit)? Will the owners of the messaging apps start to scan for words which indicate discontent with the provider? Will the owners of the messaging apps see their own way to profit from the information that scanning provides? Well, you may answer: But they already do all of these things anyway. Perhaps they do, but then they are liars and cheats themselves for they speak to us about end-to-end encryption and declare that they cannot read what we write.

You may also say: Actually, I don’t care. When I used physical post I never used sealed envelopes, I always used postcards. Let the post man read it if he wants. And most of the time the post man did not want, apart from want to complete his shift. If they want to read my messages let them, and if it means they catch the bad guys, so much the better.

But, Coco suggests that you do care about privacy. In Facebook, do you place everything you post into the public arena, or do you restrict it to friends and followers? Let Coco also ask, do you ever use Facebook Messenger? In that you are speaking one to one with another user. If you did not care about the privacy of your message, why do you not post it in your journal openly?

So let Coco ask, once the door has been opened for scanning, how will you know for what is being scanned? Coco sought recently, and many years ago as well, to understand what had caused the blacklisting of an email account. No-one could say precisely as the spam scanners are so complex. Youtube scans videos that are uploaded for among other things copyrighted content. One that was recently uploaded was scanned and copyrighted material was found in it. It was there, but it was not a problem. The material however that had been found was incorrectly attributed to the wrong copyright holder, and the scan failed to find all of the copyrighted material. The scans do a job, and to some extent a good job, but do you not have to check your own spam folder just to be sure that there is nothing there that is not spam? Even government departments will warn you that some of their messages to you may be treated as spam. The scans we could say are capricious. If our incoming scans are capricious, will not the outgoing one be also?

So, thinking about a particular class of images, we may have problems with images produced for medical purposes, where perhaps the patient is in need of urgent attention. If the messaging app scan determines that the image is of a proscribed type, what will the consequence be? Will it refuse to send it and then report it? If it cannot be sent, the patient may not receive the correct treatment for whatever condition is indicated by the image. How long will it take to have the image released? The doctor may even find himself unable to carry on providing treatment if an allegation is raised under safeguarding legislation.

Similar consideration may be applied to images sent out of a disaster or war zone for they may be sent for good or bad purposes. How can the scanning distinguish the purpose or the sending of the image? Will all of the class be put on detention because one boy, unknown to the others, wrote on the blackboard?

But perhaps a greater problem is that the more complex the scanning routines become, the more easily malicious actors will be able to place their own malicious pre-entry scans into them, perhaps not merely scanning what is there but inserting their own content as well. Do you not recall seeing messages at the foot of emails such as:  ‘E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses’.

So, what we need then to avoid these problems is an crypting app which will encrypt our messages before we hand them over to the messaging app, which then sends our already encrypted message. The crypting app will then unencrypt the message at the other end for the recipient. This crypting app will not need to send any messages, as it is not a messaging app, so it should not fall under the scrutiny of the regulator. It will give you the necessary key, or allow you to define your own, to share with your correspondent for any particular conversation, period of time, or message by message, or you may have permanent keys for particular correspondents saved into both your copy of the app and your correspondents, depending upon the level of security you may desire.

You may be able to use the crypting app with a single messaging app, sending both one key and the encrypted message over it, or use two messaging apps one for the key, the other for the encrypted message, or perhaps have the key encoded into an image. We assume of course that the recipient already has the second key.

In the meantime, and in the absence of such an app, please encrypt any messages to Coco using PureChocolate as the lock on: https://moffattfamily.org.uk/htm/purechocolate/encryptor/index.htm. Please do not forget to provide a copy of the key that you use to turn the lock, else your message shall be lost forever – or at least for as long as it takes to get to the top of the heap of one of the guardians of the net, but then that may only be one day less than forever.

W&U*\Dp{r0w_npqNMsU.2u#c,`4n(]0(_npve?oU/9w']wk+'xU4iRxhsOY*Z#:s*i6XDuwh'(_u'vHHDel5d,[6p5|(Z1zixldK8xN8Ak'c6X4k(W1uTtn#[>*]#@l2n%\Domf'6

MlU0vS3W#en*\'stm@lZ&ur[MvP%2#2_6Z5u|f#lTi{#TH}L&3/<R-kD p].{_&P#T0%e,2d"n%\9zi['{ilyrTM%V/W#__yfDim]0oisluL;%ey;#'^we/tih'(Tjlde8}e/;o'[{c?'|c@lZ&zrsM

Finally, Coco is not advocating the use of such a crypting app, merely trying to say that what is proposed will not catch the bad guys but may defeat some of what the good guys want to and must do. The good guys have nothing to hide. The bad guys will simply build a better wall behind which to hide what they wish to hide.