It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TV interview 'tipped off' Iran about ship's intelligence role

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 06:51 PM
link   

TV interview 'tipped off' Iran about ship's intelligence role


observer.guardian.co.uk

Iranian intelligence officers told the 15 British captives they first became suspicious about their activities after watching an interview with one of them on British television. Families of the hostages said that their loved ones had told them the Iranians had made the claim soon after capturing them.

The revelation is likely to raise questions about the Ministry of Defence's decision to allow the media to accompany Cornwall, the ship on which the service personnel were based, and report on its activities.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 7-4-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 06:51 PM
link   
This is incredibly interesting.

Was the interview cleared by Military sources, if so why did they allow the broadcast?

I am sure many other questions will arise, and mot likely will never be fully answered.

observer.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 07:19 PM
link   
An interesting breaking news item to add here:

Anger as hostages sell stories to highest bidders


The 15 British military hostages released by Iran were accused last night of cashing in on the ordeal by selling their stories in a string of lucrative media deals.

The sailors, who spent 13 days in captivity and at times feared for their lives, have been given permission by the Ministry of Defence to give exclusive interviews. The MoD justified lifting the ban on military personnel selling their stories while in service because of the 'exceptional circumstances' involved.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Great cover, and diversion from the original story in this thread?

If the TV interview was indeed approved my UK military officials, and perhaps knowing the Iranians would pick it up and capture the 15 Britons, was this a plot to start a war?

We may never really know the answer.



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
An interesting breaking news item to add here:

Anger as hostages sell stories to highest bidders


The 15 British military hostages released by Iran were accused last night of cashing in on the ordeal by selling their stories in a string of lucrative media deals.


I am assuming that any publications appearing on our shelves regarding these events will have been vetted by 'the authorities' prior to release, so it does make me wonder if the content will be designed to, perhaps, influence people's perceptions further, shall we say.



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by KhieuSamphan
I am assuming that any publications appearing on our shelves regarding these events will have been vetted by 'the authorities' prior to release, so it does make me wonder if the content will be designed to, perhaps, influence people's perceptions further, shall we say.


Exactly!

I've seen a lot of things pulled off via the news media, and this one, is far beyond anything I've ever seen. Of course it is only speculation at this point. But it is hard to ignore the possibilities here.

If as in the original article, the Iranians were tipped off by the broadcast TV interview, and it was in fact cleared prior to broadcast by officers in the military.... Why?

It led to a situation that quickly became a war scenario.

Scary thought.



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 08:41 PM
link   
A tawdry development...but a sure-fire way for the UK to capitalize on the media spin, and further propagandize the issue to their benefit.

Peace &
Good Fortune
OBE1



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   
An important quote from the original article in the opening post of this thread, just in case the story is pulled.



On 13 March - 10 days before the 15 were seized - Channel 5 broadcast an interview with Captain Chris Air, one of the captured Royal Marines, in which he stated that his crew's role was to liaise with Iraqi vessels to 'let them know we are here to protect them, protect their fishing and to stop any terrorism or any piracy in the area'.

The Iranian interrogators told their captives, who were seized while travelling in two dinghies during a patrol, that this had alerted them to Cornwall's role.



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   
I don't really see anything that would be blatantly provocative. The portion of the interview that was released simply said they were there to stop terrorism and piracy. There was nothing mentioning the Iranians, or that would push the Iranians buttons. The portion of the interview where he said they were collecting intelligence on the Iranians was held back and edited out of the interview. That only came out AFTER the situation. The Iranians may have become suspicious based on what he said, but they've always been ultra suspicious of anyone operating anywhere near them.



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 10:03 AM
link   
For only those who like speculative conspiracy related commentary.

What if?

There was a collaborative effort to spark a conflict with Iran?

The British crew does an Interview, approved by officials, just enough to get the Iranian's attention, they capture the crew, without a fight, as expected. The crisis intensifies, to a level where the majority of British citizens are ready for war. Military forces make provocative moves, Then the US media releases this report:

Military confirms attack by Iranian forces last year

Which first appeard on only local US news sites, and quickly spread from there, further making the case against Iran, also the potential nuclear threat from Iran is hyped even further during this time.

The Iranians however, may have played a trump card, and the crisis has since the release of the British crew eased, and now they are free to sell their stories.

A perfect way for any UK officials to deny any bad press that may be revealed by the crew, now or in the future when they are no longer active military personnel. Let them SELL their stories, and it can easily be written off as contrived, made up, sensationalized.

Then again, wouldn't have been easier to just drop bombs on Iran, if they really wanted to start war?

[edit on 8-4-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Exactly, there was no mention of Iran in the C5 story.

I got confused when I read the thread title, as the Sky interview was only released to the public after the crisis.

Even so, it does not warrant the illegal detainment of the troops in such an aggressive manner. Infact the Sky interview hinted that Iranian forces were also committing piracy in the waterway, and that is another reason why intelligence was being gathered on Iranian movements.

I've always been concerned about embedded media units reporting on millitary operations, but perhaps Chris Air will be reprimanded (rightly or wrongly). Which is a shame, as he does seem to be a very capable soldier, with good leadership qualities.



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 11:36 AM
link   
The original article stressed that the part about the Corwall being there to gather information on Iran, was left out of the program that aired, the program that the Iranians were supposed to have seen.

If that wasn't in the final cut, did someone tell Iran about the info gathering.....or give them an un-edited copy that mentioned the info gathering....??

(Maybe the timing was off for an attack......the surge troops were not in place, and funding hit a snag...?)



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Do we really know if the Iranians seen the "edited version" of the interview, or some other more revealing version??

[edit on 8-4-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   
I don't agree with the assumption that the Brits allowed themselves to be captured in order to start a war as part of some dastardly plan by the US/UK coalition. For one thing, the diplomatic efforts to release them succeded and at all times Blairs language was one of dialogue not confrontation.

However, should they conclusively link the supplying of insurgents in Iraq with arms from Iran that will be a whole new ballgame. Blair's language after the captives were released suggests that might well be the angle they will be taking. Couple that with the Iranian desire for nuclear power and well, things don't look too good for the Iranian regime in the long run...

WRT the thread title, the interview that was aired the week before the troops were captured didn't contain anything that would have given the Iranians any reason whatsoever to enter Iraqi waters and take the Brits hostage. To be perfectly honest, neither did the interview in its entirety. Sky News blatantly spun the Intel angle in a wholly inappropriate manner and tried to make something out of absolutely nothing. Shoddy and amateurish, IMHO.

Cheers,
Zep



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Intel boats are never armed because to operate well armed
in unwelcome waters means WAR.

The best might mean subs, still what kind of intel would they want.

It was an exercise op for crew they don't want around.



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   
So Iran gets a better Channel 5 reception then ME??


I hope many people don't criticise the story being made public for any (IF any) "propaganda" purposes. If those who won't slam Iran for their treatment of the RN captives simply BECAUSE some people in the West has done it in the past, then they cannot protest the UK possibly conducting a little propaganda on this crisis when Iran did it themselves for two whole weeks.



posted on Apr, 8 2007 @ 06:24 PM
link   
So the idea here is that the Iranians had no idea of british ships operating in the waters and they realized it after a news story?

Doubt that.

They know the ships are out there and I bet anyone would believe that the Iranians would be suspicious that part of the mission was intelligence gathering.

I suspose seeing it on tv sould cause them to decide to "poke a stick" at the situation, so to speak. These seems possible.



posted on Apr, 9 2007 @ 05:09 AM
link   
the iranis have to watch british tv to see what a frigate of ours is doing there crap say i!
they must do this confontation stuff all the bloody time.
BOTH sides!
But those iranian boats look fast and capable of launching a surf to surf missle .
They were known for thier human wave tactics in the saddam war,suppose they sent a few hundred of those babys some armed with anti ship missles?
specially the exocette type.
snmall and stand off ....hmmmmm?




top topics



 
5

log in

join