It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Sailors in the Persian Gulf have known him for years: a radio operator who taunts and insults passing ships. The rants are heard and logged, then mostly forgotten.
But now the phantom voice has taken center stage in the latest flurry of claims and counterclaims between Iran and the United States following a tense high seas confrontation — raising new questions about whether Washington could have gotten a key element of the story wrong.
Such renegade broadcasters are called by the ethnically offensive moniker, "the Filipino Monkey" — a name used by mariners around the globe for someone who uses a radio for unnecessary or inappropriate transmissions.
Last week, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said there had been two or three similar incidents over the past year, but "maybe not quite as dramatic" as the Jan. 6 confrontation. None had been publicized until the eve of Bush's trip to the region, even though in one, in December, a U.S. ship actually fired warning shots toward an Iranian boat.
The airwaves on the sea are full of rogue broadcasts. Many are dismissed as harmless snippets or remarks, but the one heard during the encounter with the Iranian craft was taken seriously.
Still, the Navy has said it cannot pinpoint the source. Over the decades, neither the location or the nationality of the Gulf radio prankster — or pranksters — has been determined.
A separate audio recording of that voice, which came across the VHS channel open to anyone with access to it, was spliced into a video on which the voice apparently could not be heard. That was a political decision, and Lieutenant Colonel Mark Ballesteros of the Pentagon's Public Affairs Office told IPS the decision on what to include in the video was "a collaborative effort of leadership here, the Central Command and navy leadership in the field".
Might want to do some digging on this link, but what it is saying is pretty damaging to the Pentagon (leadership) case. It actually makes the Force commanders in the field look good which is exactly the situation I suspect.