Bletchley Park

greasedscotsman

Anyone been? Worth a visit?

Giraffoto

Yes and yes. Hooray! I've just been laconic! Worship me!

But yes, Bletchley Park is well worth a visit. Don't just wander around (I don't know if you even can) take the guided tour

RDW

Note that the National Museum of Computing next door (which has the Colossus Gallery) is separate, and you'll probably want to see both:

http://www.tnmoc.org/

It's a shame the two museums can't seem to co-operate:

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2 ... debreaking

dabber

I went about 10 years ago. Great visit and the chap doing the guided tour was terrific value. Don't what it's like now with some splitting up of the place.
Btw, we were lucky enough to have the late Tony Sale give us a talk on Colossus. Excellent.

florerider

Yes, worth it.

Makes you realise just how ungrateful the nation was to Alan Turing though.

shockedsoshocked

Would love to visit the place myself being a fan of the more clandestine aspects of the Second World War.

Turings treatment was despicable. A man who possibly made the single most effective contribution to the defence of the freedom of Britain prosecuted for expressing his own personal freedoms. What makes it worse is I'm sure the pardon only went through early this year!

greasedscotsman

Thanks for all the replies. Don't think I'm going to have time to visit on the weekend I had in mind, maybe check it out another time.

pblakeney

I have not been.
Not much help admittedly but it was your first question.

CiB

Today (9th) is a good day to visit as it's Remembrance Sunday and all of the district Beavers Cubs & Scouts are represented in the parade from there to the war memorial up the road.

Park at Bletchley station and walk the 5 minutes to Bletchley Park.

secretsam

IIRC when you pay to get in, it's a 'year' membership thing, so you can always go back again.

I've been meaning to go for some time, given that it's up the road, mind you, I lived in Bristol for 19 years and still have never visited the SS Great Britain...

dhobiwallah

ShockedSoShocked wrote:

......... prosecuted for expressing his own personal freedoms. What makes it worse is I'm sure the pardon only went through early this year!

Just out of interest - why was he pardoned?

Did he not break the law at the time then? And if he did where are the pardons for every single other homosexual man prosecuted simply for expressing their own personal freedoms?

The pardon was a shallow, populist political decision of the crassest order. He was, without doubt, treated appallingly - like many, many other men who have received no such pardon....

shockedsoshocked

dhobiwallah wrote:

ShockedSoShocked wrote:

......... prosecuted for expressing his own personal freedoms. What makes it worse is I'm sure the pardon only went through early this year!

Just out of interest - why was he pardoned?

Did he not break the law at the time then? And if he did where are the pardons for every single other homosexual man prosecuted simply for expressing their own personal freedoms?

The pardon was a shallow, populist political decision of the crassest order. He was, without doubt, treated appallingly - like many, many other men who have received no such pardon....

I made a comment regarding one particular individual who is relevant to the thread. It so happens he is particularly famous (or infamous?) for his treatment (Oscar Wilde being another off the top of my head). Would I pardon every single man convicted of similar? Of course I would. Would I rather he wasn't singled out for pardon and instead every individual convicted similarly received one? Yes. Unfortunately I have no such power, so I don't really understand your tone towards me.

Why was he pardoned? I suppose if I was to take the cynical tone of your post, because he is famous. In my personal view, because it's right. Is it fair he's the only one? No.

dhobiwallah

The tone wasn't aimed at you - (apologies if it seemed as such). It was at the whole process of pardoning a single individual purely because he is famous. TBH it is pretty much the same as the ultra rich buying their justice. Bernie Ecclestone bribing a government to get off a bribery charge springs to mind... The law should be blind - not least to fame or finance.

As to whether we should retrospectively apply todays laws to past crimes is quite an in-depth subject frequently given very little thought above shallow populism.

One that on the surface seems even more cut and dry is the blanket pardoning of those executed in WW1 for cowardice and desertion as a large number of them were suffering from undiagnosed PTSD. The thing is that many were not. Whether you agree with the stance of capital punishment for this crime or not - it was in force at the time. Nobody alive can know the exact circumstances in which the decisions were made - but made they were and presumably not for shits and giggles...

I disagree with the laws on homosexuality at the time. I do not agree that he should be singled out for a posthumous pardon simply because of his status. So as it stands I do not think it is shocking that his pardon came through so recently as I do not think he should have been pardoned at all unless every other man tried under the same law is simultaneously pardoned. As to whether that should happen - I'm not even sure; probably yes as I think the law was based on a misunderstanding of homosexuality and the reasoning behind an individual's 'choice' of sexual orientation. And if that was the case then I would suggest that a blanket pardon is probably more fitting than the shell shock/cowardice one which would really have to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

Retrying past crimes with a new lawbook and no new evidence is a big can of worms. Not least as in 30 years you may find yourself in the dock for something currently considered perfectly acceptable.

Anyway - thread creep of the highest order...