blonde poker forum

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8226509.stm

One of the finest minds this country has ever produced, considered to be the father of computer science by many, and a key figure in the breaking of the Enigma code during WWII - and yet many in the UK have never heard of him.

What many don't know as well is that Turing was gay, and this was considered a crime in the UK at the time, and in 1952 he was prosecuted and chemically castrated for having sexual relationships with a man. Of course, his sexuality also meant that he could no longer work for GCHQ.  Such enlightened and happy times they were for all.

There's now a campaign to have the government formally apologise and pardon Turing for his 'crimes'.  You can sign the petition here: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/turing/

I had posted something about this on tikay's thread, but it got lost amongst other posts and I thought it deserved a thread all to itself.

More info on Turing here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing

post written by a computer imo

Cliffs notes ^^

Thanks for the input Cos ::).

You were one of those who hadn't heard of Alan Turing.

Yup. I agree that it was a disgrace what happened to him but what's to do about it now?

Posthumous apology and knighthood =  greater recognition for his achievements, greater awareness that certain groups were (and still are) discriminated against, someone for the country to be proud of, an inspiration to others, etc.  Probably loads more reasons as well?

Have to agree with those.

Don't wanna get into the whole minorities thing as I think a lot are treated too well but yeah I'd have to echo what you said. Surprised it never got mentioned on Mr Massala's diary.

It will be.

Just a bit distracted with incoming flak right now. Chaff about to be deployed. Over.

Since you don't want to get in to it, I won't ask.  :-X

Did you get my text?


Some are treated too well, some aren't treated well enough - nothing too controversial from me! Just didn't wanna derail the thread too much.

No.

Since you've mentioned it - and it's my thread... who are the minorities who get treated 'too well'?

I see. It was just that your original post only mentioned those treated too well.

[ ] I'm good at saying what I mean.

Why does he deserve a pardon for his crime and why should the current government apologise?

Admittedley the crime in question is a ridiculous one and should never have been an offence in the first place but the fact is that at the time it was the law and he broke it.

I don't deny that he deserves recognition for his achievements but why the pardon for a crime that he commited?

Pardon for making it a crime in the first place, handing down such a severe punishment, and ruining a good man's life perhaps?

"He was injected with estrogen, an experience that is widely believed to have led to his suicide just two years later. " ewwww.

So every generation or so every Government should go back, find the laws they don't agree with and pardon everyone convicted of them?

I agree that it was all very wrong but it wasn't this government that made it a crime or indeed handed out the insane punishment.

Perhaps a public acknowledgment of his great achievements and also acknowledgment that he was charged with a crime that in our modern society is seen as perfectly acceptable behaviour.

But why the apology? What has anybody today got to be sorry for? They didn't do it.

Similar to genocide in that a specific group of people were targeted without having committed any crime (anything we would reasonably consider to be a crime at least) for barbaric treatment leading to death in this case at least. Except in this case the trait they were selected for was sexuality rather than nationality.

I agree that an apology is absolutely in order. I don't always see the point, when governments apologise for actions taken by their predecessors so long ago that taking responsibility for something so far removed seems patronising and placatory. In this case though, the injustice was so recent and rights to marriage and adoption for homosexuals are such hot topics that an apology would be at least a step towards an end to centuries of officially-sanctioned prejudice.

Of course, it won't make any concrete difference to the past, that's not the point of any apology. It might, however, reassure British citizens that the government is capable of recognising its mistakes, and recognises that it needs to address society as it is today and adapt to a state of absolute equality.

and now many men voluntarily eat soy

Surely the mistake has already been recognised by a previous government.

Possibly the one that got rid of the law?

Precisely - this is such a waste of time.

Build a statue, yes. Put some money into Bletchley Park so that what the codebreakers did there is properly remembered.

But don't waste time trying to get someone to apologise for something he didn't do to someone who isn't around to hear it, especially that now homosexuality is not only not illegal, but the Deputy Prime Minister is openly gay.

How about the government address the problems of today, rather than the problems of the 1950s.

Money isn't being put into Bletchley park either.

http://www.savingbletchleypark.org/About-the-campaign.html

You're splitting hairs Matt.

To apologise is to be sorry about something.

What harm could it do to vindicate this man and apologise on behalf of your predecessor?

So just say sorry for everything wrong that any previous government has ever done?

They've been working their way through them - doesn't make any difference, doesn't suggest they mean it, doesn't achieve anything in the slightest bit constructive.

A knighthood is a recognition of his achievements, it could be used as a platform to promote tolerance and as Andrew suggested there are other practical ways of honouring him - but a few words by someone who had nothing to do with the achievement or the intolerance at the time don't really mean anything.

He's not going to get a knighthood without an apology.

Does an apology not send out a message?

How could you apologise on behalf of someone's predecessor when in reality they probably wouldn't be sorry about it.

It does no harm to say sorry. Why the fuk would people argue against it? lol you would rather spend tax payers money on a statue, unreal.

When did posthumous knighthoods start being given out?

Correctly worded then it would be fine.

Like when you tell someone you are sorry because they have lost a loved one. You aren't directly apologising for it but you are upset that it has happened and are sorry for them.

If this is the sorry that people are looking for then I've no problem at all. This is very different to an apology and I think that is what the OP asks for.

What good does it do?

Apart from improving the image of whichever prime minister does it (in some sectors)?

Why should this issue be used for political ends?

Change can be good.

It can also be bad.

'Tis true.  But a change to the way knighthoods and other 'honours' are giving out in this country would be a good thing (imo).

We should be giving out fewer knighthoods, not more.

Agreed.  But that doesn't mean that adding some posthumous knighthoods out to those deserving is a bad thing.

I agree on the basis we give one to Jesus first.

::)

That's a whole other issue Dan.

so what did he do to deserve a knighthood? His efforts during the war were incredible but then so were a lot of other's.

Are we saying that he should get knighted because of his war efforts or because of this + the fact that he was persecuted for his sexuality?

If he hadn't been chemically castrated and subsequently killed himself would he still require a posthumous knighthood following his natural death?

Happy debating.

Yes

Assuming he hadn't got one while living.

What did he do to deserve a knighthood?

Is that a serious question?  I really don't know many others who've been given the honour who are more deserving.  I know of many who have been honoured who are less deserving.

I actually think the whole honours system should be overhauled, but that's another discussion altogether.



No, he'd have been honoured as a national hero whilst he was still alive.

Unless you're religious of course...

It's not really relevant to the debate - but no, I don't think he would have :)

Interesting, please elaborate.

You're probably one of the few who actually appreciate how brilliant and important Turing was, so want to hear your thoughts here.

Just because of the work - a knighthood a few decades after he retired may have been likely.

But Bletchley Park's work has never really got much 'public' attention from the government - possibly still carrying on, hence the link you provided earlier.

There is another argument here - people seem to assume Turing would have wanted a knighthood.

They aren't just dished out - you get contacted and asked if you would accept one. If you say no, then they respect that. You think Stephen Hawking and David Bowie haven't been offered one in the past?

Perhaps if Turing was still alive and offered a knighthood he'd tell them where they could stick it.

Ah, OK.  So you think he'd have been worthy of it - but the recognition wouldn't have been forthcoming because of the media and where it all sits within the public conscience?

Something like that - the 80's at the earliest would be my guess.

Hawking is just Eliza in a waxwork model anyway.  ;)

I would have thought that most of the efforts ralating to Bletchley Park were still classified in the 1950's, probably until the 70's or 80's so publicly giving him a knighthood (if he had still been alive in 1960) would have meant nothing to the pubic, as they could not be told why he was getting it.

There's no reason to think he wouldn't have been alive into the 80s, is there?

Kin, if he was straight and lived a normal life following his work would you know about him today?

If yes, would you still think he should have a Knighthood?

If yes do you think he is the most deserving person who doesn't have one? Can you name others you'd put in front?

I don't think that proves anything - that's just to do with the selection process in general.


The few places in print and film where his achievements are recognised rarely talk about his homosexuality - so that's a moot point on some levels.

Many people wouldn't have known about him, many people don't know about his work - doesn't mean they shouldn't though.

Factually incorrect.

The Knighthood was offered to Ziggy Stardust. "God given ass" - eat your heart out, Gallagher Sisters.

Ziggy played for time, jiving us that we were voodoo
The kids were just crass, he was the nazz
With god given ass
He took it all too far but boy could he play guitar

Tell me more about Eliza in a waxwork model anyway.

[X] Reading comprehension fail.

I hope you've not come on this thread to cause trouble, like you did on the *** st*bbings thread.

Touche

As a computer science graduate I obv know all about his work and what it means for the field of computing. I didn't know about his homosexuality or death though..

Of course I bloody would!!  One of the greatest minds Britain's ever produced.  I refer to my OP.


Erm, I think I've covered this already - yes, definitely.


I've said that I don't care much for the honours system, but I think he's one of the most important British people of the last few hundred years that many people know nothing or very little about.  I'll have a think of others who also lack the recognition they deserve...

Crick, Watson and Wilkins probably don't get a huge amount of recognition from the general public - although as Nobel Prize winners it's not quite right to say that they haven't been recognised.

I know this was addressed to Kin, but even so I've got give my view on it.

If you get a chance read Simon Singh's "The Code Book - The Secret History of Codes and Code Breaking". Turing provided the quantum leap in code breaking and by breaking some of the Enigma machines (as I remember they never managed to break the German Navy's network). Considering at one point we were back across the channel & looked like losing the war, even with good inside information on German troop movement & plans from Turing & the rest at Bletchley Park, I think it's a safe conclusion to draw that we could have lost the war before Pearl Harbour bought the Yanks in without their efforts.

The Knighthood would be nothing to do with his sexuality, his work more than earned the honour.

I'm not a fan of the honours system really, but I can't off hand think of many more deserving whose contribution has been left unpraised by the establishment.

 ;indestructable;

Who do you reckon Tom?

;)

Thanks hun, pretty much summed up my thoughts exactly there.

No, you fool - Rod is a Celtic fan.

Oh, I know that - as does Rod.  'Thanks Fenian *******' doesn't have the same ring to it..

I think Tikay should be knighted

For services to?

Longevity?

Television?

Poker?

Michelle Orpe?

what are the rules on being knighted if you're not british? I know they're quite strict and not many non brits make the cut. just wondering if jebus would be allowed to be a sir

Nope ... Hair dye ;)

I  actually lolled at that. And I'm not in lolling mood today.

He was British! English, in fact.

Did not Lol.

loling too much is over-rated. gives you wrinkles. you wouldn't want to ruin your faultless complexion Tikay :)

Non Commonwealth Citizens are not allowed to use the 'sir' . They just have KBE after their name. So he would be Jesus Christ KBE

kqtimggeszzcjaawrfnordewp

FYP.

Presumably for services to carpentry?

It worked.

http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page20571

Now for some public recognition.  Maybe an additional  Bank Holiday in his honour?

BBC News article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-16061279)


Sign e-petition here (https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/23526)

This is spooky, I watched the documentary on 4OD last night