Discussion:
More about the queer agenda
(too old to reply)
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-16 17:18:43 UTC
Permalink
From a site discussing the bill passed in California last spring,
thankfully vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger:

Aejaie Sellers, executive director of the Billy DeFrank LGBT Center
in Santa Clara told the San Jose Mercury News that she thinks SB 1437
– requiring gay and lesbian history lessons for students – is
fantastic idea.

"Gays throughout history should be recognized. Who knows that the
author of 'America the Beautiful,' Katharine Lee Bates, was gay?"

http://cahsconservative.blogspot.com/2006/04/sb-1437.html


The better question is, why *SHOULD* anyone know that Bates was a carpet
muncher, if in fact she was? In what way does that change the value of
her beautiful song (which I have long thought should be the national
anthem)? The obvious answer: it doesn't change it at all, and there is
*ZERO* reason to teach this so-called "fact". But this is *exactly* the
sort of special recognition that is part and parcel of the queer agenda.
Queers believe they have a "right" to this kind of recognition, and
the simple fact is, they do not - nor should they have.
Wayne
2008-12-16 18:32:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
From a site discussing the bill passed in California last spring,
Aejaie Sellers, executive director of the Billy DeFrank LGBT Center
in Santa Clara told the San Jose Mercury News that she thinks SB 1437
– requiring gay and lesbian history lessons for students – is
fantastic idea.
"Gays throughout history should be recognized. Who knows that the
author of 'America the Beautiful,' Katharine Lee Bates, was gay?"
http://cahsconservative.blogspot.com/2006/04/sb-1437.html
The better question is, why *SHOULD* anyone know that Bates was a carpet
muncher, if in fact she was? In what way does that change the value of
her beautiful song (which I have long thought should be the national
anthem)? The obvious answer: it doesn't change it at all, and there is
*ZERO* reason to teach this so-called "fact". But this is *exactly* the
sort of special recognition that is part and parcel of the queer agenda.
Queers believe they have a "right" to this kind of recognition, and the
simple fact is, they do not - nor should they have.
-
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-16 18:41:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by Rudy Canoza
From a site discussing the bill passed in California last spring,
Aejaie Sellers, executive director of the Billy DeFrank LGBT Center
in Santa Clara told the San Jose Mercury News that she thinks SB 1437
– requiring gay and lesbian history lessons for students – is
fantastic idea.
"Gays throughout history should be recognized. Who knows that the
author of 'America the Beautiful,' Katharine Lee Bates, was gay?"
http://cahsconservative.blogspot.com/2006/04/sb-1437.html
The better question is, why *SHOULD* anyone know that Bates was a carpet
muncher, if in fact she was? In what way does that change the value of
her beautiful song (which I have long thought should be the national
anthem)? The obvious answer: it doesn't change it at all, and there is
*ZERO* reason to teach this so-called "fact". But this is *exactly* the
sort of special recognition that is part and parcel of the queer agenda.
Queers believe they have a "right" to this kind of recognition, and the
simple fact is, they do not - nor should they have.
-
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
Of *COURSE* it is. I find it both astonishing and hilarious that queers
and their sycophantic allies deny that there is such an agenda. It
actually speaks to their political cowardice. If they really were as
tough as they wish to pretend to be, they'd be defending it and daring
people to challenge it; they'd adopt a "you're going to take it and
you're going to /like/ it" attitude, but instead - and their fear is
palpable in this - they frantically try to deny it. Bizarre.
n***@millions.com
2008-12-16 18:54:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by Rudy Canoza
From a site discussing the bill passed in California last spring,
Aejaie Sellers, executive director of the Billy DeFrank LGBT Center
in Santa Clara told the San Jose Mercury News that she thinks SB 1437
– requiring gay and lesbian history lessons for students – is
fantastic idea.
"Gays throughout history should be recognized. Who knows that the
author of 'America the Beautiful,' Katharine Lee Bates, was gay?"
http://cahsconservative.blogspot.com/2006/04/sb-1437.html
The better question is, why *SHOULD* anyone know that Bates was a carpet
muncher, if in fact she was? In what way does that change the value of
her beautiful song (which I have long thought should be the national
anthem)? The obvious answer: it doesn't change it at all, and there is
*ZERO* reason to teach this so-called "fact". But this is *exactly* the
sort of special recognition that is part and parcel of the queer agenda.
Queers believe they have a "right" to this kind of recognition, and the
simple fact is, they do not - nor should they have.
-
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-16 19:33:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?

Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.

BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
n***@millions.com
2008-12-16 20:18:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.

A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.

However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-16 22:09:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
admitting that you have no answer to a simple question:

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

All it takes is to just say "yes" or "no". Why can't you do that? I
gave you a citation with some details of the history. Did you even
bother to read it?

My guess is that, deep down, you know he answer is "yes" but you can't
bring yourself to say that because you'd be disagreeing with your
new-found friend Rudy, who would then not want to play with you
because he doesn't like anyone not as bigoted as he is.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-16 22:17:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
Bill Z.
2008-12-16 22:46:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II. If you weren't so dishonest, you'd at
least quote a full sentence:

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

You do remember the long squabble we had with Russia, don't you? You
know, the one called "The Cold War".
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-16 22:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention
At that point, they have delineated the scope: "history class in which
World War II was being covered". Turing's outing as a queer, and
subsequent prosecution, occurred seven years after the end of the war.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 00:29:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention
At that point, they have delineated the scope: "history class in
which World War II was being covered". Turing's outing as a queer,
and subsequent prosecution, occurred seven years after the end of the
war.
Liar + idiot. Here's the full quote:

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

You are reduced to claiming that a discussion of the history of war
should not cover anything related to it that happened afterwards,
an idea that would leave historians in stitches. It is more than clear
that you are grasping at straws to avoid the real issue.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 00:42:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention
At that point, they have delineated the scope: "history class in
which World War II was being covered". Turing's outing as a queer,
and subsequent prosecution, occurred seven years after the end of the
war.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
There you go. There's the scope: WW II, not something that happened
*SEVEN* years later.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 02:42:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention
At that point, they have delineated the scope: "history class in
which World War II was being covered". Turing's outing as a queer,
and subsequent prosecution, occurred seven years after the end of the
war.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
(note that the liar Rudy Canoza claims snipped the quote again).
Post by Rudy Canoza
There you go. There's the scope: WW II, not something that happened
*SEVEN* years later.
No, you are just lying - the "scope" is something you made up. Here's
the full quote:

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

Note both (a) and (b): what he did during the war and the harm the
British government did to itself afterwards by ruining the career of
one of their most talented citizens is certainly germane to a
discussion of the history of that time period.

You may not like it, but you don't get to truncate history at some
date merely to avoid dealing with your prejudices.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 05:56:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention
At that point, they have delineated the scope: "history class in
which World War II was being covered". Turing's outing as a queer,
and subsequent prosecution, occurred seven years after the end of the
war.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
There you go. There's the scope: WW II, not something that happened
*SEVEN* years later.
No, you are just lying - the "scope" is something you made up. Here's
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
World War II - an event that ended a full seven years before Turing was
outed.

Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II, then
Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is 100%
irrelevant.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 06:41:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention
At that point, they have delineated the scope: "history class in
which World War II was being covered". Turing's outing as a queer,
and subsequent prosecution, occurred seven years after the end of the
war.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
There you go. There's the scope: WW II, not something that happened
*SEVEN* years later.
No, you are just lying - the "scope" is something you made up. Here's
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
World War II - an event that ended a full seven years before Turing
was outed.
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question:

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

Obviously this includes what followed the war, which is also of historical
interest. You are dishonestly trying to wiggle out of it, all to
serve your silly little agenda.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 06:43:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II,
and his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break
German codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects
history's judgment of his achievement.
More selective snipping from liar Rudy Canoza. They were not just
talking about World War II.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention
At that point, they have delineated the scope: "history class in
which World War II was being covered". Turing's outing as a queer,
and subsequent prosecution, occurred seven years after the end of the
war.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
There you go. There's the scope: WW II, not something that happened
*SEVEN* years later.
No, you are just lying - the "scope" is something you made up. Here's
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
World War II - an event that ended a full seven years before Turing
was outed.
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full eight years before Turing's public status as
a queer was out in the open.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 18:13:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full eight years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
from a historical perspective is idiotic):

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

Obviously this includes what followed the war, which is also of historical
interest. You are dishonestly trying to wiggle out of it, all to
serve your silly little agenda.

Also, as was pointed out to you earlier, Turing had in fact not
kept his sexual orientation hidden from co-workers. I provided a link
for that. You are simply ignoring the facts.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 18:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 18:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
from a historical perspective is idiotic):

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

Obviously this includes what followed the war, which is also of historical
interest. You are dishonestly trying to wiggle out of it, all to
serve your silly little agenda.

Also, as was pointed out to you earlier, Turing had in fact not
kept his sexual orientation hidden from co-workers. I provided a link
for that. You are simply ignoring the facts.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 18:44:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.

His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did. It neither enhances it nor detracts from it. It is utterly
irrelevant.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 19:09:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.
His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did. It neither enhances it nor detracts from it. It is utterly
irrelevant.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
from a historical perspective is idiotic):

Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly
lifted his security clearance wnd would not let him consult
government agencies on cryptography?

Obviously this includes what followed the war, which is also of historical
interest. You are dishonestly trying to wiggle out of it, all to
serve your silly little agenda.

Also, as was pointed out to you earlier, Turing had in fact not
kept his sexual orientation hidden from co-workers. I provided a link
for that. You are simply ignoring the facts.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-18 06:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.
His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did. It neither enhances it nor detracts from it. It is utterly
irrelevant.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question
No.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II ended seven years before Turing was outed as a queer. His being
queer has nothing to do with WW II.
SilentOtto
2008-12-18 09:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Face the facts, billy:  if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.
His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did.  It neither enhances it nor detracts from it.  It is utterly
irrelevant.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question
No.
Post by Bill Z.
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II ended seven years before Turing was outed as a queer.  His being
queer has nothing to do with WW II.
You don't think that a homosexual, who was under constant threat of
being discovered and intensely persecuted for his homosexuality,
deciding that the needs of his country outweighed what ever personal
feelings he might harbor against his country isn't a story worth
mentioning in a history class?

And, you claim you're not a rightard....
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-18 15:09:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.
His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did. It neither enhances it nor detracts from it. It is utterly
irrelevant.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question
No.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II ended seven years before Turing was outed as a queer. His being
queer has nothing to do with WW II.
You don't think that a homosexual, who was under constant threat of
being discovered and intensely persecuted for his homosexuality,
deciding that the needs of his country outweighed what ever personal
feelings he might harbor against his country isn't a story worth
mentioning in a history class?
No. Put it in a queer studies class at some liberal arts re-education
camp that masquerades as a college.
SilentOtto
2008-12-18 16:01:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Face the facts, billy:  if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.
His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did.  It neither enhances it nor detracts from it.  It is utterly
irrelevant.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question
No.
Post by Bill Z.
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II ended seven years before Turing was outed as a queer.  His being
queer has nothing to do with WW II.
You don't think that a homosexual, who was under constant threat of
being discovered and intensely persecuted for his homosexuality,
deciding that the needs of his country outweighed what ever personal
feelings he might harbor against his country isn't a story worth
mentioning in a history class?
No.  
Of course you don't.

That's because you're a rightard homophobe closet queer.

I understand.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Put it in a queer studies class at some liberal arts re-education
camp that masquerades as a college.
Historians think it's worth putting into books about WWII.

I think I'll go with their opinion of what constitutes sound history
over that of a rightard homophobe closet queer.

Heh heh...

Rightard closet queers.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-18 16:06:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Face the facts, billy: if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.
His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did. It neither enhances it nor detracts from it. It is utterly
irrelevant.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question
No.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II ended seven years before Turing was outed as a queer. His being
queer has nothing to do with WW II.
You don't think that a homosexual, who was under constant threat of
being discovered and intensely persecuted for his homosexuality,
deciding that the needs of his country outweighed what ever personal
feelings he might harbor against his country isn't a story worth
mentioning in a history class?
No.
Of course you don't.
Yes. It doesn't belong there.
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Rudy Canoza
Put it in a queer studies class at some liberal arts re-education
camp that masquerades as a college.
Historians think it's worth putting into books about WWII.
No, they don't.
SilentOtto
2008-12-18 16:22:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Face the facts, billy:  if the topic in the history class is WW II,
then Turing's being queer - a fact that was not known in 1945 - is
100% irrelevant.
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - which ended a full seven years before Turing's public status
as a queer was out in the open.
Lying idiot - you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
Turing's outing as a queer didn't happen for another seven years.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question (and are
pretending that any discussion would not include what followed, which
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II - something that ended seven years before Turing was outed.
His being queer does not in any way affect the importance of what he
did.  It neither enhances it nor detracts from it.  It is utterly
irrelevant.
you are trying avoid the *orginal* question
No.
Post by Bill Z.
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered
WW II ended seven years before Turing was outed as a queer.  His being
queer has nothing to do with WW II.
You don't think that a homosexual, who was under constant threat of
being discovered and intensely persecuted for his homosexuality,
deciding that the needs of his country outweighed what ever personal
feelings he might harbor against his country isn't a story worth
mentioning in a history class?
No.  
Of course you don't.
Yes.  It doesn't belong there.
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Rudy Canoza
Put it in a queer studies class at some liberal arts re-education
camp that masquerades as a college.
Historians think it's worth putting into books about WWII.
No, they don't.
Yes they do, rightard.

That's how I learned of Turning's homosexuality and what was later
done to him by the British government when his homosexuality was
discovered.

"U-boat Wars: 1916 - 1945" by John Terraine.

You're either ignorant or lying.

Which is it?

Heh heh...

Rightard closet queers...

I mean... Could you be ANY more obvious?
n***@millions.com
2008-12-17 00:11:54 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 00:38:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
Wayne
2008-12-17 01:59:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
The difference is that Rudy and I recognize him for his achievements. You
want him recognized as a homosexual, which in not really an achievement.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 02:58:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
The difference is that Rudy and I recognize him for his achievements. You
want him recognized as a homosexual, which in not really an achievement.
Liar. Rudy had never even heard of him, and I mentioned the government
persecution in the context of a course on history, where it would
certainly be relevant as the issue was cutting off the career of a
very talented individual due to shear ignorance on the part of society.
Wayne
2008-12-17 03:53:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
The difference is that Rudy and I recognize him for his achievements.
You
want him recognized as a homosexual, which in not really an achievement.
Liar. Rudy had never even heard of him, and I mentioned the government
persecution in the context of a course on history, where it would
certainly be relevant as the issue was cutting off the career of a
very talented individual due to shear ignorance on the part of society.
-
Can't speak for whether Rudy ever heard of him or not, but I share the view
with him that a history course isn't the place for advancing a homosexual
agenda. Perhaps a course in "Great Homosexuals of the 20th Century", but
not a general history course.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 06:11:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
The difference is that Rudy and I recognize him for his achievements.
You
want him recognized as a homosexual, which in not really an achievement.
Liar. Rudy had never even heard of him, and I mentioned the government
persecution in the context of a course on history, where it would
certainly be relevant as the issue was cutting off the career of a
very talented individual due to shear ignorance on the part of society.
-
Can't speak for whether Rudy ever heard of him or not, but I share the view
with him that a history course isn't the place for advancing a homosexual
agenda. Perhaps a course in "Great Homosexuals of the 20th Century", but
not a general history course.
He said he hadn't, but he claimed a background in computer science. Any
cursory reading of the history would have sufficed, and he surely would
have heard terms like "Turing machine" and discussions of various
theorems. That is, if Rudy actually studied computer science as opposed
to merely taking a programming course.

When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for Turing's
relatively early death by suicide, and the source had nothing to do
with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar. It was more along
the lines of, "we had this really bright guy who could contribute a
lot and we lost him out of our society's collective stupidity."
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 06:19:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
The difference is that Rudy and I recognize him for his achievements.
You
want him recognized as a homosexual, which in not really an achievement.
Liar. Rudy had never even heard of him, and I mentioned the government
persecution in the context of a course on history, where it would
certainly be relevant as the issue was cutting off the career of a
very talented individual due to shear ignorance on the part of society.
-
Can't speak for whether Rudy ever heard of him or not, but I share the view
with him that a history course isn't the place for advancing a homosexual
agenda. Perhaps a course in "Great Homosexuals of the 20th Century", but
not a general history course.
He said he hadn't, but he claimed a background in computer science.
No, I didn't. I claimed, and have, a background in business computer
systems application development.
Post by Bill Z.
cursory reading of the history would have sufficed, and he surely would
have heard terms like "Turing machine" and discussions of various
theorems.
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 06:42:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar! Here's the original:

When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for
Turing's relatively early death by suicide, and the source had
nothing to do with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar.
It was more along the lines of, "we had this really bright guy who
could contribute a lot and we lost him out of our society's
collective stupidity."
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 06:44:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar!
No, you read about it in some queer agenda setting. Nothing could be
more obvious.`
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 18:15:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar!
No, you read about it in some queer agenda setting. Nothing could be
more obvious.`
Here's what you snipped ...

Bald-faced liar! Here's the original:

When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for
Turing's relatively early death by suicide, and the source had
nothing to do with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar.
It was more along the lines of, "we had this really bright guy who
could contribute a lot and we lost him out of our society's
collective stupidity."

Canoza, you are a real idiot and a pathological liar.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 18:39:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar!
No, you read about it in some queer agenda setting. Nothing could be
more obvious.`
Here's what you snipped ...
When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for
Turing's relatively early death by suicide, and the source had
nothing to do with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar.
Sure it didn't.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 18:44:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar!
No, you read about it in some queer agenda setting. Nothing could be
more obvious.`
Here's what you snipped ...
When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for
Turing's relatively early death by suicide, and the source had
nothing to do with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar.
Sure it didn't.
Of course it didn't: it was a historical account.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 18:44:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar!
No, you read about it in some queer agenda setting. Nothing could be
more obvious.`
Here's what you snipped ...
When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for
Turing's relatively early death by suicide, and the source had
nothing to do with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar.
Sure it didn't.
Of course it didn't
Sure it didn't, billy. We believe you.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 18:49:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar!
No, you read about it in some queer agenda setting. Nothing could be
more obvious.`
Here's what you snipped ...
When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for
Turing's relatively early death by suicide, and the source had
nothing to do with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar.
Sure it didn't.
Of course it didn't
Sure it didn't, billy. We believe you.
Can't bear to quote a single line of text?

Of course it didn't: it was a historical account.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 19:02:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Right. I have heard of that, and no mention of Turing's having been a
queer. It is fully *IRRELEVANT* to his contributions to computer science.
Post by Bill Z.
When I first read about it,
...in some queer agenda setting...
Bald-faced liar!
No, you read about it in some queer agenda setting. Nothing could be
more obvious.`
Here's what you snipped ...
When I first read about it, it was mentioned as a reason for
Turing's relatively early death by suicide, and the source had
nothing to do with "gay activists" or anything remotely similar.
Sure it didn't.
Of course it didn't
Sure it didn't, billy. We believe you.
Can't bear to quote a single line of text?
Of course it didn't: it was a historical account.
Sure, billy.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 20:31:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Sure it didn't, billy. We believe you.
Can't bear to quote a single line of text?
Of course it didn't: it was a historical account.
Sure, billy.
Evasion noted.
n***@millions.com
2008-12-17 03:36:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
So you love yorself that you are willing to fondle yourself on the
newsgroups.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 06:11:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
You and I and many others know that, but Bill Zaumen wants to talk
about it above and beyong the millions upon millions of pages of the
recorded history of those years.
Both of you are complete and utter idiots. The history of how he
was persecuted (and thus how the British government lost one of
their most talented citizens) is important as an object lesson in
mistakes that one should not be daft enough to repeat.
So you love yorself that you are willing to fondle yourself on the
newsgroups.
DCI
Lying idiot.
W***@Ireland.com
2008-12-17 17:11:50 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
Damn, Canoza, how stupid can you get. If Turing was persecuted and
denied security clearance later because he was gay, that's accurate
history. It is worth mentioning. Just like it's mentioned that
Giannini was an Italian-American. Just like it's mentioned that the
one of the first men to fall in the Boston Massacre was black. Just
like it's mentioned that one of the soldiers to raise one of the flags
on Iwo was an AmerInd. Just like it's mentioned that Joe McCarthy was
an alcoholic. The fact that Turin was gay and persecuted because of
that is bigotry plain and simple. It's the asses like you who made
"security risks" out of homosexuals. C'mon out of the closet Rudy and
become a cross-dresser like your namesake - you seem to have a very
unhealthy fixation on the gay lifestyle. What'sa matter - wouldn't
they let you join their "team"?

WB Yeats
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 17:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
Damn, Canoza, how stupid can you get.
Not at all.
Post by n***@millions.com
If Turing was persecuted and
denied security clearance later because he was gay, that's accurate
history.
But it is *NOT* part of WW II history. That's the scope of the class,
using twit Billy Zaumen's own example.
Post by n***@millions.com
It is worth mentioning.
It's not. It's utterly irrelevant and pointless...unless one's "point"
is to be oh-so-PC and "inclusive", and to try to say that he wouldn't
have achieved what he did unless he had had to "overcome discrimination"
in order to be a brilliant computer scientist.

His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his contributions
to computer science.
W***@Ireland.com
2008-12-17 17:42:30 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
Damn, Canoza, how stupid can you get.
Not at all.
Post by n***@millions.com
If Turing was persecuted and
denied security clearance later because he was gay, that's accurate
history.
But it is *NOT* part of WW II history. That's the scope of the class,
using twit Billy Zaumen's own example.
But it is, Dork. Anything which occurred in connection to WWII is part
and parcel of that history - and its later ramifications.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by n***@millions.com
It is worth mentioning.
It's not. It's utterly irrelevant and pointless...unless one's "point"
is to be oh-so-PC and "inclusive", and to try to say that he wouldn't
have achieved what he did unless he had had to "overcome discrimination"
in order to be a brilliant computer scientist.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his contributions
to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant. The fact that he was persecuted
because if it makes it even MORE relevant.

WB Yeats
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 17:45:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it. They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes. The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
Damn, Canoza, how stupid can you get.
Not at all.
Post by n***@millions.com
If Turing was persecuted and
denied security clearance later because he was gay, that's accurate
history.
But it is *NOT* part of WW II history. That's the scope of the class,
using twit Billy Zaumen's own example.
But it is,
It isn't.
Post by W***@Ireland.com
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by n***@millions.com
It is worth mentioning.
It's not. It's utterly irrelevant and pointless...unless one's "point"
is to be oh-so-PC and "inclusive", and to try to say that he wouldn't
have achieved what he did unless he had had to "overcome discrimination"
in order to be a brilliant computer scientist.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his contributions
to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to his work in code-breaking.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 18:24:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his
contributions to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to his work in code-breaking.
His being persecuted for being gay is what is relevant, as it
prevented him from working for his government on cryptography,
and the haraassment seems to have led to an early death, which
was a major loss to the field of computer science.

That the normally sensible British government would have been daft
enough to let such mindless prejudices get in the way of its
national interest during the Cold War, when Russia was viewed as
a major threat, should be of concern to all of us - we could easily
make the same mistake (and it doesn't matter what the prejudice is
about).
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 18:39:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his
contributions to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to his work in code-breaking.
His being persecuted for being gay is what is relevant
Doesn't belong in a history class talking about WW II.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 18:46:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his
contributions to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to his work in code-breaking.
His being persecuted for being gay is what is relevant
Doesn't belong in a history class talking about WW II.
Nonesense. Your "opinion" is as silly as claiming that one should
not mention that Eisenhower went on to become a U.S. president,
which would not have happened if he had not become so well known
as a general during World War II.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 19:01:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his
contributions to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to his work in code-breaking.
His being persecuted for being gay is what is relevant
Doesn't belong in a history class talking about WW II.
Nonesense. Your "opinion" is as silly as claiming that one should
not mention that Eisenhower went on to become a U.S. president
If you're talking about WW II, Eisenhower's future role as president is
irrelevant. If you're talking about his presidency, however, then his
role as supreme commander of allied forces is relevant, because that's
what got him to the presidency.

Turing's having been queer is not relevant to anything, unless you're a
queer activist who says that someone's being queer is worthy of our
notice in and of itself.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 20:33:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his
contributions to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to his work in code-breaking.
His being persecuted for being gay is what is relevant
Doesn't belong in a history class talking about WW II.
Nonesense. Your "opinion" is as silly as claiming that one should
not mention that Eisenhower went on to become a U.S. president
If you're talking about WW II, Eisenhower's future role as president
is irrelevant. If you're talking about his presidency, however, then
his role as supreme commander of allied forces is relevant, because
that's what got him to the presidency.
We are talking about history. It doesn't magically stop at some
particular point in time, and the consequences of something that
occurred during a war, including ones that occurred afterwards,
are highly relevant.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Turing's having been queer is not relevant to anything, unless you're
a queer activist who says that someone's being queer is worthy of our
notice in and of itself.
Sigh. We were discussing his persecution, not his sexual orientation.
Why are you incapable of addressing the real issue?
n***@millions.com
2008-12-17 21:06:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:24:17 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
His being queer is fully irrelevant to a discussion of his
contributions to computer science.
His being gay is perfectly relevant.
His being queer is fully irrelevant to his work in code-breaking.
His being persecuted for being gay is what is relevant
Doesn't belong in a history class talking about WW II.
Nonesense. Your "opinion" is as silly as claiming that one should
not mention that Eisenhower went on to become a U.S. president
If you're talking about WW II, Eisenhower's future role as president
is irrelevant. If you're talking about his presidency, however, then
his role as supreme commander of allied forces is relevant, because
that's what got him to the presidency.
We are talking about history. It doesn't magically stop at some
particular point in time, and the consequences of something that
occurred during a war, including ones that occurred afterwards,
are highly relevant.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Turing's having been queer is not relevant to anything, unless you're
a queer activist who says that someone's being queer is worthy of our
notice in and of itself.
Sigh. We were discussing his persecution, not his sexual orientation.
Why are you incapable of addressing the real issue?
So show us your course outline for the relevant subject, WWII.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 21:49:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Sigh. We were discussing his persecution, not his sexual orientation.
Why are you incapable of addressing the real issue?
So show us your course outline for the relevant subject, WWII.
I gave you the citations (several URLs). Read them. Otherwise try
to actually contribute something to a discussion - something I've
never seen you do.
n***@millions.com
2008-12-17 23:16:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Sigh. We were discussing his persecution, not his sexual orientation.
Why are you incapable of addressing the real issue?
So show us your course outline for the relevant subject, WWII.
I gave you the citations (several URLs). Read them. Otherwise try
to actually contribute something to a discussion - something I've
never seen you do.
No, no, stop the crap. A course outline has nothing to do with any
citations. How would you instruct a history class for school about
WWII?

What I contribute is the light on you. Get with the program.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-18 01:51:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Sigh. We were discussing his persecution, not his sexual orientation.
Why are you incapable of addressing the real issue?
So show us your course outline for the relevant subject, WWII.
I gave you the citations (several URLs). Read them. Otherwise try
to actually contribute something to a discussion - something I've
never seen you do.
No, no, stop the crap. A course outline has nothing to do with any
citations. How would you instruct a history class for school about
WWII?
You stop the "crap" - I'm not teaching a course but commenting
on the historical relevance of the treatment of a person whose
individual effort had a significant impact on the outcome.
Post by n***@millions.com
What I contribute is the light on you. Get with the program.
You contribute absolutely nothing whatsoever, troll.
SilentOtto
2008-12-18 03:23:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:17:24 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Look up <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> for details.
BTW, to put this in terms you people might be able to understand,
given a choice between maintaining prejudices and shooting oneself
in the foot, sensible people throw the prejudices out the door.
Good limited research. Yes, sir! Now what? History has so many facets,
falsehoods, fantasies, exacting points, forgotten points, and on and
on it does.
A good teacher in history is itself an artform, and greatly depends
upon the instructor's interpretations and availablilty of as many
factual elements as time will tell.
What a pompous ass!
Post by n***@millions.com
However, no answer will satisfy you, and that is a recent historical
fact.
Is that your way of looking (or not looking) at a citation and
   Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
   history class in which World War II was being covered should not
   mention that Alan Turing was gay
Yes, there's no reason to mention it.  They're talking about WW II, and
his being queer had nothing to do with his work that helped break German
codes.  The fact of his being queer in *NO* way affects history's
judgment of his achievement.
Damn, Canoza, how stupid can you get. If Turing was persecuted and
denied security clearance later because he was gay, that's accurate
history. It is worth mentioning.
Just to illustrate the point...

I didn't learn that Turning had been persecuted to the point of
committing suicide from a gay publication.

I learned it from reading a history of the Battle of the Atlantic
called "The U-boat Wars, 1916-1945" written by John Terraine.

It would seem that a notable historian thought it was worth
mentioning.

I guess the author was just pushing the gay agenda...
Post by n***@millions.com
Just like it's mentioned that
Giannini was an Italian-American. Just like it's mentioned that the
one of the first men to fall in the Boston Massacre was black. Just
like it's mentioned that one of the soldiers to raise one of the flags
on Iwo was an AmerInd. Just like it's mentioned that Joe McCarthy was
an alcoholic.  The fact that Turin was gay and persecuted because of
that is bigotry plain and simple. It's the asses like you who made
"security risks" out of homosexuals. C'mon out of the closet Rudy and
become a cross-dresser like your namesake - you seem to have a very
unhealthy fixation on the gay lifestyle. What'sa matter - wouldn't
they let you join their "team"?
WB Yeats
n***@millions.com
2008-12-18 04:34:35 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:23:14 -0800 (PST), SilentOtto
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

.
Post by SilentOtto
Just to illustrate the point...
I didn't learn that Turning had been persecuted to the point of
committing suicide from a gay publication.
I learned it from reading a history of the Battle of the Atlantic
called "The U-boat Wars, 1916-1945" written by John Terraine.
It would seem that a notable historian thought it was worth
mentioning.
I guess the author was just pushing the gay agenda...
And maybe the author was adding depth to his documentation of the
specifics in WWII scene. However, one element of the responders to the
thread made the observation about the efficacy of expanding history
courses in schools dealing with WWII to include information about gays
in the military.
Bill Z.
2008-12-18 05:54:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:23:14 -0800 (PST), SilentOtto
.
Post by SilentOtto
Just to illustrate the point...
I didn't learn that Turning had been persecuted to the point of
committing suicide from a gay publication.
I learned it from reading a history of the Battle of the Atlantic
called "The U-boat Wars, 1916-1945" written by John Terraine.
It would seem that a notable historian thought it was worth
mentioning.
I guess the author was just pushing the gay agenda...
And maybe the author was adding depth to his documentation of the
specifics in WWII scene. However, one element of the responders to the
thread made the observation about the efficacy of expanding history
courses in schools dealing with WWII to include information about gays
in the military.
Not true - it was about cases of allowing prejudice to overrule the
national interest by booting out talented individuals with critical
skills. BTW, Turing was not in the military:
<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article4582773.ece>.
SilentOtto
2008-12-18 06:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:23:14 -0800 (PST), SilentOtto
.
Post by SilentOtto
Just to illustrate the point...
I didn't learn that Turning had been persecuted to the point of
committing suicide from a gay publication.
I learned it from reading a history of the Battle of the Atlantic
called "The U-boat Wars, 1916-1945" written by John Terraine.
It would seem that a notable historian thought it was worth
mentioning.
I guess the author was just pushing the gay agenda...
And maybe the author was adding depth to his documentation of the
specifics in WWII scene.
That's probably exactly what he was doing.

Why would that be out of place in a history class?
Post by n***@millions.com
However, one element of the responders to the
thread made the observation about the efficacy of expanding history
courses in schools dealing with WWII to include information about gays
in the military.
None in opposition to the "gay agenda" have any problem with noting
the contribution of the Nissie in WWII.

Why not make that the cause celebre?

If it's pushing a gay agenda to point out the contribution of gays in
the service to our country, isn't it pushing a Japanese-American
agenda to note the contributions of Nissie troops?

Why is it out of place to note that gays have served our country just
as proudly as any other group?
SilentOtto
2008-12-16 20:47:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, that might have been an
injustice?

If so, do you think injustice should be taught to students?
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.
What about soldiers who are being discharged from our military for
being gay today?

Are they also a security risk?
Should it be taught in high school history class?  Hell no!  Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
Should we also gloss over other injustices?

You know... Like slavery? The treatment of Native Americans?
Anything else that suits your prejudices?

Heh heh...

Rightards...
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-16 20:53:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bill Z.
2008-12-16 22:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Rudy can't read - Turing got in trouble after World War II (which you should
have known from the dates in the article I cited). At that point, we
were in a cold war with the Russians, and being able to break their
codes was definitely in our interest.
n***@millions.com
2008-12-17 00:08:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Rudy can't read - Turing got in trouble after World War II (which you should
have known from the dates in the article I cited). At that point, we
were in a cold war with the Russians, and being able to break their
codes was definitely in our interest.
Bill Zaumen, apparently, Alan Turing has become your cause celebre.
What you fail to understand, others already know the Turing story very
well and most likely it didn't make an impression one way or the
other.

How about giving us a rundown on the McCarthy hearings and his staff.
Do you know anything we don't already know or saw/viewed at those
times?

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 00:35:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Bill Zaumen, apparently, Alan Turing has become your cause celebre.
What you fail to understand, others already know the Turing story very
well and most likely it didn't make an impression one way or the
other.
Liar. I simply posed a question, one that you refused to answer. Your
inability to answer it and your attempts to bluster your way out are
noted.

You are truly an idiot.
Post by n***@millions.com
How about giving us a rundown on the McCarthy hearings and his staff.
Do you know anything we don't already know or saw/viewed at those
times?
I bet a lot of people know more of the history than you do.
n***@millions.com
2008-12-17 03:34:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Bill Zaumen, apparently, Alan Turing has become your cause celebre.
What you fail to understand, others already know the Turing story very
well and most likely it didn't make an impression one way or the
other.
Liar. I simply posed a question, one that you refused to answer. Your
inability to answer it and your attempts to bluster your way out are
noted.
You are truly an idiot.
Post by n***@millions.com
How about giving us a rundown on the McCarthy hearings and his staff.
Do you know anything we don't already know or saw/viewed at those
times?
I bet a lot of people know more of the history than you do.
You're so far off target, Bill Zaumen, that it is a waste of time to
respond with nothing more than simplle answers.

As to knowing more history, your comment has no meaning.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 06:11:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Bill Zaumen, apparently, Alan Turing has become your cause celebre.
What you fail to understand, others already know the Turing story very
well and most likely it didn't make an impression one way or the
other.
Liar. I simply posed a question, one that you refused to answer. Your
inability to answer it and your attempts to bluster your way out are
noted.
You are truly an idiot.
Post by n***@millions.com
How about giving us a rundown on the McCarthy hearings and his staff.
Do you know anything we don't already know or saw/viewed at those
times?
I bet a lot of people know more of the history than you do.
You're so far off target, Bill Zaumen, that it is a waste of time to
respond with nothing more than simplle answers.
As to knowing more history, your comment has no meaning.
DCI
Lying idiot.
W***@Ireland.com
2008-12-17 17:26:41 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:53:14 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bull - maybe irrelevant to your narrow minded view of history but
germane to the man and the times. Your version of WWII history would
would leave out the "Nip Brigade" who saved a bunch of cracker Texans
in Italy. It would leave out the "brave" American soldiers who used
"Nip soldiers" for target practice at Iwo and Okinawa; and "Ayrabs"
for the same in N. Africa. It would skip over the fact that many of
the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were slave owners. Yup
- lets' all leave US history as it used to be taught - the study of
dead white men. History is best learned when everything is taught -
warts and all - and taught in the context of the times the events
occurred.

WB Yeats
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 17:31:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:53:14 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bull - maybe irrelevant to your narrow minded view of history but
germane to the man and the times.
Not relevant to WW II history in any way, shape or form.
W***@Ireland.com
2008-12-17 17:46:44 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:31:55 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:53:14 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bull - maybe irrelevant to your narrow minded view of history but
germane to the man and the times. Your version of WWII history would
would leave out the "Nip Brigade" who saved a bunch of cracker Texans
in Italy. It would leave out the "brave" American soldiers who used
"Nip soldiers" for target practice at Iwo and Okinawa; and "Ayrabs"
for the same in N. Africa. It would skip over the fact that many of
the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were slave owners. Yup
- lets' all leave US history as it used to be taught - the study of
dead white men. History is best learned when everything is taught -
warts and all - and taught in the context of the times the events
occurred.
Not relevant to WW II history in any way, shape or form.
Because you say so! Yup - historians everywhere bow to your
intelligence and perspicacity. Not! BTW - snipping relevant info (as
opposed to your continued irrelevance) is cowardice.

(Space left for L'il Rudy's temper tantrum)

WB Yeats
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 17:52:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:31:55 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:53:14 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bull - maybe irrelevant to your narrow minded view of history but
germane to the man and the times. Your version of WWII history would
would leave out the "Nip Brigade" who saved a bunch of cracker Texans
in Italy. It would leave out the "brave" American soldiers who used
"Nip soldiers" for target practice at Iwo and Okinawa; and "Ayrabs"
for the same in N. Africa. It would skip over the fact that many of
the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were slave owners. Yup
- lets' all leave US history as it used to be taught - the study of
dead white men. History is best learned when everything is taught -
warts and all - and taught in the context of the times the events
occurred.
Not relevant to WW II history in any way, shape or form.
Because you say so!
No, like so many others, you get the direction of causation all fucked
up - completely backward. It isn't true because I say so - rather, I
say so because it is true. HTH
W***@Ireland.com
2008-12-18 15:09:35 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:52:04 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:31:55 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:53:14 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bull - maybe irrelevant to your narrow minded view of history but
germane to the man and the times. Your version of WWII history would
would leave out the "Nip Brigade" who saved a bunch of cracker Texans
in Italy. It would leave out the "brave" American soldiers who used
"Nip soldiers" for target practice at Iwo and Okinawa; and "Ayrabs"
for the same in N. Africa. It would skip over the fact that many of
the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were slave owners. Yup
- lets' all leave US history as it used to be taught - the study of
dead white men. History is best learned when everything is taught -
warts and all - and taught in the context of the times the events
occurred.
Not relevant to WW II history in any way, shape or form.
Because you say so! Yup - historians everywhere bow to your
intelligence and perspicacity. Not! BTW - snipping relevant info (as
opposed to your continued irrelevance) is cowardice.
(Space left for L'il Rudy's temper tantrum)
Glad to see you filled in the space.
Post by Rudy Canoza
No, like so many others, you get the direction of causation all fucked
up - completely backward. It isn't true because I say so - rather, I
say so because it is true. HTH
Woof - good doggie.

Dr Pavlov
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-18 15:18:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:52:04 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:31:55 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:53:14 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bull - maybe irrelevant to your narrow minded view of history but
germane to the man and the times. Your version of WWII history would
would leave out the "Nip Brigade" who saved a bunch of cracker Texans
in Italy. It would leave out the "brave" American soldiers who used
"Nip soldiers" for target practice at Iwo and Okinawa; and "Ayrabs"
for the same in N. Africa. It would skip over the fact that many of
the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were slave owners. Yup
- lets' all leave US history as it used to be taught - the study of
dead white men. History is best learned when everything is taught -
warts and all - and taught in the context of the times the events
occurred.
Not relevant to WW II history in any way, shape or form.
Because you say so! Yup - historians everywhere bow to your
intelligence and perspicacity. Not! BTW - snipping relevant info (as
opposed to your continued irrelevance) is cowardice.
No, like so many others, you get the direction of causation all fucked
up - completely backward. It isn't true because I say so - rather, I
say so because it is true. HTH
[gas]
You're as done as billy.
W***@Ireland.com
2008-12-18 16:28:50 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:18:09 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:52:04 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:31:55 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by W***@Ireland.com
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:53:14 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Still irrelevant to a discussion about WW II.
Bull - maybe irrelevant to your narrow minded view of history but
germane to the man and the times. Your version of WWII history would
would leave out the "Nip Brigade" who saved a bunch of cracker Texans
in Italy. It would leave out the "brave" American soldiers who used
"Nip soldiers" for target practice at Iwo and Okinawa; and "Ayrabs"
for the same in N. Africa. It would skip over the fact that many of
the signers of the Declaration and Constitution were slave owners. Yup
- lets' all leave US history as it used to be taught - the study of
dead white men. History is best learned when everything is taught -
warts and all - and taught in the context of the times the events
occurred.
Not relevant to WW II history in any way, shape or form.
Because you say so! Yup - historians everywhere bow to your
intelligence and perspicacity. Not! BTW - snipping relevant info (as
opposed to your continued irrelevance) is cowardice.
No, like so many others, you get the direction of causation all fucked
up - completely backward. It isn't true because I say so - rather, I
say so because it is true. HTH
[gas]
You're as done as billy.
When one can't reason with idiots, then one ignores them. Plink! Hell,
you're not even worth a real Plonk.

WB Yeats

Wayne
2008-12-16 22:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, that might have been an
injustice?

If so, do you think injustice should be taught to students?
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.
What about soldiers who are being discharged from our military for
being gay today?

Are they also a security risk?
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
Should we also gloss over other injustices?

You know... Like slavery? The treatment of Native Americans?
Anything else that suits your prejudices?

Heh heh...

Rightards...
************************

Apparently you would like to inject the homosexual agenda into all aspects
of life. The fact is that all the concerns you expressed have nothing to do
with a history class.
SilentOtto
2008-12-17 10:17:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by SilentOtto
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
Do you know or care that he was hounded about his homosexuality to his
suicide?
Do you think that maybe, just maybe, that might have been an
injustice?
If so, do you think injustice should be taught to students?
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.
What about soldiers who are being discharged from our military for
being gay today?
Are they also a security risk?
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
Should we also gloss over other injustices?
You know...  Like slavery?  The treatment of Native Americans?
Anything else that suits your prejudices?
Heh heh...
Rightards...
************************
Apparently you would like to inject the homosexual agenda into all aspects
of life.  The fact is that all the concerns you expressed have nothing to do
with a history class.
Past social injustice doesn't have anything to do with history?

Tell that to the Jews.

And you wonder why you get called a rightard....

Heh heh...

Rightard closet queers...
Wayne
2008-12-16 20:20:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.

Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
Bill Z.
2008-12-16 22:17:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that! It was a major disgrace given what he
had done for his country. I gave you a quote from a wikipedia article
mentioning it.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him. Plus you can't blackmail
someone by threatening to disclose what everyone could read in the
evening news.
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest? The
British did that regarding Turing. The Nazis blew it big time by
targeting Jews, which meant that they lost a huge number of highly
capable individuals.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-16 22:22:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that!
I didn't, and I've worked in business computer systems since 1976. I
knew who Turing was, and what his intellectual achievements were, and I
didn't need to know a thing about his sexual "orientation" in order to
appreciate his achievements; and I appreciate them no more and no less
as a result of knowing it. It's fully irrelevant.
Post by Bill Z.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him.
Bullshit. He was in the closet. It wasn't known that he was queer.
The Wikipedia entry even discusses the possibility that his potential
for being exploited over security issues might mean that he was
assassinated.
Post by Bill Z.
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest?
Depends on the class. But a class about WW II and how the British
cracked German codes does not need to address it at all.
Bill Z.
2008-12-16 23:16:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm
concerned, you are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that!
I didn't, and I've worked in business computer systems since 1976. I
knew who Turing was, and what his intellectual achievements were, and
I didn't need to know a thing about his sexual "orientation" in order
to appreciate his achievements; and I appreciate them no more and no
less as a result of knowing it. It's fully irrelevant.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history, specifically how he was persecuted by the British government
after having made a major contribution towards saving his country
from defeat. That's the issue, not his sexual orientation per se.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at
that time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him.
Bullshit. He was in the closet. It wasn't known that he was
queer. The Wikipedia entry even discusses the possibility that his
potential for being exploited over security issues might mean that he
was assassinated.
Liar. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> clearly states
that:

"In 1952, Arnold Murray, a 19-year-old recent acquaintance of
Turing's,[27] helped an accomplice to break into Turing's
house, and Turing reported the crime to the police. As a
result of the police investigation, Turing acknowledged a
sexual relationship with Murray, and a crime having been
identified and settled, Turing and Murray were charged with
gross indecency under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment
Act of 1885. Turing was unrepentant and was convicted of the
same crime Oscar Wilde had been convicted of more than fifty
years before.[28]"

He wouldn't have "acknowledged a sexual relationship" if he were
completely in the closet. If he told the police and was tried to
it, exactly how is someone going to blackmail him?
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who,
other than people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest?
Depends on the class. But a class about WW II and how the British
cracked German codes does not need to address it at all.
A history class would - what followed the WW II is germane to such a
class.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-16 23:29:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm
concerned, you are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that!
I didn't, and I've worked in business computer systems since 1976. I
knew who Turing was, and what his intellectual achievements were, and
I didn't need to know a thing about his sexual "orientation" in order
to appreciate his achievements; and I appreciate them no more and no
less as a result of knowing it. It's fully irrelevant.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history,
Right. That part of the history was irrelevant as far as my interest in
him goes.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at
that time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him.
Bullshit. He was in the closet. It wasn't known that he was
queer. The Wikipedia entry even discusses the possibility that his
potential for being exploited over security issues might mean that he
was assassinated.
Liar. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> clearly states
"In 1952, Arnold Murray, a 19-year-old recent acquaintance of
Turing's,[27] helped an accomplice to break into Turing's
house, and Turing reported the crime to the police. As a
result of the police investigation, Turing acknowledged a
sexual relationship with Murray, and a crime having been
identified and settled, Turing and Murray were charged with
gross indecency under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment
Act of 1885. Turing was unrepentant and was convicted of the
same crime Oscar Wilde had been convicted of more than fifty
years before.[28]"
He wouldn't have "acknowledged a sexual relationship" if he were
completely in the closet.
He acknowledged it because, upon discovery, it was unavoidable.

Why did you omit this part, billy?

Because Turing's homosexuality would have been perceived as a
security risk, the possibility of assassination has also been
suggested.[31]
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 00:30:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm
concerned, you are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that!
I didn't, and I've worked in business computer systems since 1976. I
knew who Turing was, and what his intellectual achievements were, and
I didn't need to know a thing about his sexual "orientation" in order
to appreciate his achievements; and I appreciate them no more and no
less as a result of knowing it. It's fully irrelevant.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history,
Right. That part of the history was irrelevant as far as my interest
in him goes.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at
that time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him.
Bullshit. He was in the closet. It wasn't known that he was
queer. The Wikipedia entry even discusses the possibility that his
potential for being exploited over security issues might mean that he
was assassinated.
Liar. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> clearly states
"In 1952, Arnold Murray, a 19-year-old recent acquaintance of
Turing's,[27] helped an accomplice to break into Turing's
house, and Turing reported the crime to the police. As a
result of the police investigation, Turing acknowledged a
sexual relationship with Murray, and a crime having been
identified and settled, Turing and Murray were charged with
gross indecency under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment
Act of 1885. Turing was unrepentant and was convicted of the
same crime Oscar Wilde had been convicted of more than fifty
years before.[28]"
He wouldn't have "acknowledged a sexual relationship" if he were
completely in the closet.
He acknowledged it because, upon discovery, it was unavoidable.
Why did you omit this part, billy?
Because Turing's homosexuality would have been perceived as a
security risk, the possibility of assassination has also been
suggested.[31]
Becuase it was not relevant to your claim that he was closeted, moron.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-17 00:43:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm
concerned, you are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that!
I didn't, and I've worked in business computer systems since 1976. I
knew who Turing was, and what his intellectual achievements were, and
I didn't need to know a thing about his sexual "orientation" in order
to appreciate his achievements; and I appreciate them no more and no
less as a result of knowing it. It's fully irrelevant.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history,
Right. That part of the history was irrelevant as far as my interest
in him goes.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at
that time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him.
Bullshit. He was in the closet. It wasn't known that he was
queer. The Wikipedia entry even discusses the possibility that his
potential for being exploited over security issues might mean that he
was assassinated.
Liar. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> clearly states
"In 1952, Arnold Murray, a 19-year-old recent acquaintance of
Turing's,[27] helped an accomplice to break into Turing's
house, and Turing reported the crime to the police. As a
result of the police investigation, Turing acknowledged a
sexual relationship with Murray, and a crime having been
identified and settled, Turing and Murray were charged with
gross indecency under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment
Act of 1885. Turing was unrepentant and was convicted of the
same crime Oscar Wilde had been convicted of more than fifty
years before.[28]"
He wouldn't have "acknowledged a sexual relationship" if he were
completely in the closet.
He acknowledged it because, upon discovery, it was unavoidable.
Why did you omit this part, billy?
Because Turing's homosexuality would have been perceived as a
security risk, the possibility of assassination has also been
suggested.[31]
Becuase it was not relevant
Relevant. He was in the closet until 1952.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 02:47:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm
concerned, you are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that!
I didn't, and I've worked in business computer systems since 1976. I
knew who Turing was, and what his intellectual achievements were, and
I didn't need to know a thing about his sexual "orientation" in order
to appreciate his achievements; and I appreciate them no more and no
less as a result of knowing it. It's fully irrelevant.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history,
Right. That part of the history was irrelevant as far as my interest
in him goes.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at
that time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him.
Bullshit. He was in the closet. It wasn't known that he was
queer. The Wikipedia entry even discusses the possibility that his
potential for being exploited over security issues might mean that he
was assassinated.
Liar. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing> clearly states
"In 1952, Arnold Murray, a 19-year-old recent acquaintance of
Turing's,[27] helped an accomplice to break into Turing's
house, and Turing reported the crime to the police. As a
result of the police investigation, Turing acknowledged a
sexual relationship with Murray, and a crime having been
identified and settled, Turing and Murray were charged with
gross indecency under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment
Act of 1885. Turing was unrepentant and was convicted of the
same crime Oscar Wilde had been convicted of more than fifty
years before.[28]"
He wouldn't have "acknowledged a sexual relationship" if he were
completely in the closet.
He acknowledged it because, upon discovery, it was unavoidable.
Why did you omit this part, billy?
Because Turing's homosexuality would have been perceived as a
security risk, the possibility of assassination has also been
suggested.[31]
Becuase it was not relevant
Relevant. He was in the closet until 1952.
Liar. See <http://www.turing.org.uk/turing/scrapbook/electronic.html>:

Alan Turing was particular open about his being gay while
working with Donald Bayley. The young engineer was amazed at
meeting someone who was open and 'almost proud' of it. He also
told me how in 1944 he left this as a private matter, but that
if such a thing had happened after 1948 when new 'security'
rules came into force, he would have had to report it.

So, while Turing didn't stand up on a soapbox, he certainly didn't keep
it a secret among people he knew or worked with.
Wayne
2008-12-17 00:30:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm
concerned, you are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that!
I didn't, and I've worked in business computer systems since 1976. I
knew who Turing was, and what his intellectual achievements were, and
I didn't need to know a thing about his sexual "orientation" in order
to appreciate his achievements; and I appreciate them no more and no
less as a result of knowing it. It's fully irrelevant.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history, specifically how he was persecuted by the British government
after having made a major contribution towards saving his country
from defeat. That's the issue, not his sexual orientation per se.
-
Sheeesh dude. I worked as a cryptographer for many years and never had the
slightest interest in Turing's personal life.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 02:56:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history, specifically how he was persecuted by the British government
after having made a major contribution towards saving his country
from defeat. That's the issue, not his sexual orientation per se.
-
Sheeesh dude. I worked as a cryptographer for many years and never had the
slightest interest in Turing's personal life.
The issue is not his personal life but the government persecution and
how that hurt the UK - Turing was way too valuable. And the U.S.
under that moron George Bush has made the same mistake, although on a
lesser scale - discharging Arabic translators from the military for
being gay when that skill was sorely needed to save American lives (or
limbs as the case may be).

So, it really is a relevant issue, even today. We are still making the
same stupid mistakes.

But just out of curiosity, you tell me what you really think: given an
either/or choice between working with a gay translator versus having
your leg blown off because you can't understand what some panicky
Iraqi guy is trying to tell you, which of the two alternatives would
you pick?
Wayne
2008-12-17 03:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
You mean you were doing business applications and did not know the
history, specifically how he was persecuted by the British government
after having made a major contribution towards saving his country
from defeat. That's the issue, not his sexual orientation per se.
-
Sheeesh dude. I worked as a cryptographer for many years and never had the
slightest interest in Turing's personal life.
The issue is not his personal life but the government persecution and
how that hurt the UK - Turing was way too valuable. And the U.S.
under that moron George Bush has made the same mistake, although on a
lesser scale - discharging Arabic translators from the military for
being gay when that skill was sorely needed to save American lives (or
limbs as the case may be).
So, it really is a relevant issue, even today. We are still making the
same stupid mistakes.
But just out of curiosity, you tell me what you really think: given an
either/or choice between working with a gay translator versus having
your leg blown off because you can't understand what some panicky
Iraqi guy is trying to tell you, which of the two alternatives would
you pick?
-
Man, you're all over the place. I don't see how this fits the previous
commentary.....
But....when I was in the army, I didn't give a rat's ass if anybody was a
homosexual or not. The important thing was could he pull his weight and not
get himself or me killed. I don't know if that answered you question or
not.
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 06:06:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
So, it really is a relevant issue, even today. We are still making the
same stupid mistakes.
But just out of curiosity, you tell me what you really think: given an
either/or choice between working with a gay translator versus having
your leg blown off because you can't understand what some panicky
Iraqi guy is trying to tell you, which of the two alternatives would
you pick?
-
Man, you're all over the place. I don't see how this fits the previous
commentary.....
But....when I was in the army, I didn't give a rat's ass if anybody was a
homosexual or not. The important thing was could he pull his weight and not
get himself or me killed. I don't know if that answered you question or
not.
Well, that was precisely the point - saving your ass was far more
important to you than some guy's sexual orientation. During World War
II, the work Turing did literally saved untold numbers of Americans
from a watery grave as we knew where most of the U-boats were.
Instead of them sinking us, we sank them, and they never caught on
because they thought their cryptography machines were invincible. If
the British had found out that Turing was gay and fired him for it
during this critical time period, a lot of Americans would have
needlessly died. While it's a different situation, its the same
principle with the translators I mentioned (and discharging them for
being gay actually did happen during the Bush administration in the
middle of a war): it is singularly dumb to let prejudices get in
the way of something critical such as keeping your people alive and
in one piece.

Since this is a mistake our government made and the British government
made, it is pretty sensible to teach kids about it in school, so they
learn not to make the same mistake later in their lives. And it is
not really about sexual orientation - any mindless prejudice will do.
n***@millions.com
2008-12-16 23:56:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that! It was a major disgrace given what he
had done for his country. I gave you a quote from a wikipedia article
mentioning it.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him. Plus you can't blackmail
someone by threatening to disclose what everyone could read in the
evening news.
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest? The
British did that regarding Turing. The Nazis blew it big time by
targeting Jews, which meant that they lost a huge number of highly
capable individuals.
Bill Zaumen, can you out yourself?

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 00:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest? The
British did that regarding Turing. The Nazis blew it big time by
targeting Jews, which meant that they lost a huge number of highly
capable individuals.
Bill Zaumen, can you out yourself?
Can you f___ yourself? Do you really think it was smart to not
let one of their best people - someone whose group had shortened
World War II by a couple of years - use the same skills during
the Cold War? Or are you just a complete and utter idiot?
n***@millions.com
2008-12-17 02:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest? The
British did that regarding Turing. The Nazis blew it big time by
targeting Jews, which meant that they lost a huge number of highly
capable individuals.
Bill Zaumen, can you out yourself?
Can you f___ yourself? Do you really think it was smart to not
let one of their best people - someone whose group had shortened
World War II by a couple of years - use the same skills during
the Cold War? Or are you just a complete and utter idiot?
Snappy but off target.

DCI
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 06:11:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Wayne
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest? The
British did that regarding Turing. The Nazis blew it big time by
targeting Jews, which meant that they lost a huge number of highly
capable individuals.
Bill Zaumen, can you out yourself?
Can you f___ yourself? Do you really think it was smart to not
let one of their best people - someone whose group had shortened
World War II by a couple of years - use the same skills during
the Cold War? Or are you just a complete and utter idiot?
Snappy but off target.
DCI
Lying idiot.
Wayne
2008-12-17 00:25:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Bill Z.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
Didn't know, or care, that Turing was gay...so as far as I'm concerned, you
are "outing" him.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that! It was a major disgrace given what he
had done for his country. I gave you a quote from a wikipedia article
mentioning it.
-
I didn't take the politically correct version of computer science, so the
subject of homosexuality never came up. And since when do I respond to your
reading assignments of Wiki?
Post by Bill Z.
As far as the clearance goes....in terms of prevailing attitudes at that
time, he probably was a potential security risk.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him. Plus you can't blackmail
someone by threatening to disclose what everyone could read in the
evening news.
Didn't matter what Turing thought.
Post by Bill Z.
Should it be taught in high school history class? Hell no! Who, other than
people with agendas, gives a big rat's ass.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest? The
British did that regarding Turing. The Nazis blew it big time by
targeting Jews, which meant that they lost a huge number of highly
capable individuals.
History should deal with just the facts. I don't think "spin" should be
applied to any serious course material. Did you go to NYU or something?
Bill Z.
2008-12-17 03:15:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
ROTFLAMO - everyone with even a slight familiarity of the history of
computer science knows that! It was a major disgrace given what he
had done for his country. I gave you a quote from a wikipedia article
mentioning it.
-
I didn't take the politically correct version of computer science, so the
subject of homosexuality never came up. And since when do I respond to your
reading assignments of Wiki?
You mean you don't know the history and wouldn't even bother to read an
impartially written citation before mouthing off and making a fool of
yourself.

Also, your ignorance is astounding - his persecution for his sexual
orientation was historically significant because of the impact on his
career and because of his death (apparent suicide) a couple of years
later.
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
Not true at all - Turing didn't think there was anything wrong with
it, making it impossible to blackmail him. Plus you can't blackmail
someone by threatening to disclose what everyone could read in the
evening news.
Didn't matter what Turing thought.
Actually, it does - it's pretty damn hard to blackmail someone for
something that person thinks is perfectly OK.
Post by Wayne
Post by Bill Z.
You don't think high school students should be taught about how
governments have historically made very bad decisions every so often
by letting prejudices interfere with the national interest? The
British did that regarding Turing. The Nazis blew it big time by
targeting Jews, which meant that they lost a huge number of highly
capable individuals.
History should deal with just the facts. I don't think "spin" should be
applied to any serious course material. Did you go to NYU or something?
The facts are that Turing was persecuted by the British government. There
was a trial, etc. It is all a matter of public record. You apparently
are too ignorant to know that.
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-18 07:31:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by n***@millions.com
Post by Wayne
This kind of in-your-face political correctness is absolute proof of the
homosexual agenda that they continually deny (using the equal rights
rallying cry).
So the equalizer would be to include the information that a person in
the pages of history should be know as a heterosexual? It is getting
rather silly out there in the streets of modern demands, I would
opine.
Some particular bill aside, is it your opinion that a high-school
history class in which World War II was being covered should not
mention that Alan Turing was gay in spite of him (a) having a
significant impact on the outcome and (b) being later persecuted by
his government over his sexual orientation, where they stupidly lifted
his security clearance wnd would not let him consult government
agencies on cryptography?
There is, of course, no reason to mention that he was a queer, if the
subject is WW II. It wasn't known at the time he was working on
decryption that he was a queer, and what he contributed to the
decryption effort is in no way altered, one way or another, by the
knowledge that he was a queer.

Of course, if the queers and their PC sycophantic supporters had their
way, Turing's work in cryptology and computer science would get less
than a minute's worth of attention, and the entire semester - hell, all
four years of high school history instruction - would be devoted to the
"history" of the persecution of queers, blacks, cripples, and other HAMs
(Historically Aggrieved Minorities). To the PC indoctrination crowd,
cursing at physically intact straight white males is all that
"education" should be.
Patriot Games
2008-12-16 20:00:28 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 09:18:43 -0800, Rudy Canoza
Post by Rudy Canoza
From a site discussing the bill passed in California last spring,
Aejaie Sellers, executive director of the Billy DeFrank LGBT Center
in Santa Clara told the San Jose Mercury News that she thinks SB 1437
– requiring gay and lesbian history lessons for students – is
fantastic idea.
"Gays throughout history should be recognized. Who knows that the
author of 'America the Beautiful,' Katharine Lee Bates, was gay?"
http://cahsconservative.blogspot.com/2006/04/sb-1437.html
The better question is, why *SHOULD* anyone know that Bates was a carpet
muncher, if in fact she was?
She may or may not have been a slavering bull dyke, nobody knows for
certain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Lee_Bates
Johnny Asia
2008-12-16 23:25:26 UTC
Permalink
"they try to ram this immoral lifestyle down our throats."

http://neoconservativelincs.blogspot.com/2007/07/morality-of-liberalism-sodomy.html

"ram...down our throats"

It's so very freudian!
--
+

Pucker your lips for the Apocalypse!

Johnny Asia, Guitarist from the Future

http://music.download.com/johnnyasia

http://johnnyasia.net

"If you want to know what the future of
music sounds like..listen to Johnny Asia,
then you'll know!" - Jazz Guitarist Dom Minasi

+
Rudy Canoza
2008-12-18 07:21:54 UTC
Permalink
Here is another absolutely *classic* example of the loathsome queer
agenda at work; specifically, that part of the queer agenda that says
that being queer, and the queers' non-stop bleating about it, is
something in which normal people are morally obliged to be interested.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-muslimgay17-2008dec17,0,1438523.story

This bullshit linked above is a story that appeared - naturally - on
the front page of the L.A. Times this morning, concerning some
thoroughly uninteresting Muslim Indian carpet muncher and her
narcissistic self-absorption in trying to force her family to accept her
as a queer. The story is just awash in PC totems: she's a woman, she's
a queer, she's a "person of color", she's an immigrant. About the only
thing missing is that she is not obviously a cripple. I'm sure if I had
read more than the vomit-provoking first couple of paragraphs, I'd
undoubtedly have learned that she has some learning disability.

Hers is a story that is utterly uncompelling - absolutely no reason to
be told. Other than the fact she's a queer, her story is no different
from that of any other child of immigrants who is seduced by the banal
depravity of American life and pisses her parents off in the process.
But if she weren't queer, the story never would have appeared in the Times.

I don't care about her. I don't give a fuck about what transpired as
she tried to bully her parents into accepting her deviancy. Contrary to
what the PC fuck-scum keep insisting, I do *not* have a moral or
political obligation to be interested in her life story as a queer. I
refuse.
Loading...