Another object lesson in official lying

At least it only took one year for this to come out, instead of 25:

Fifteen British sailors and Marines were seized by Iran in internationally disputed waters and not in Iraq’s maritime territory as Parliament was told, according to new official documents released to The Times. ...

Newly released Ministry of Defence documents state that:

— The arrests took place in waters that are not internationally agreed as Iraqi;

— The coalition unilaterally designated a dividing line between Iraqi and Iranian waters in the Gulf without telling Iran where it was;

— The Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ coastal protection vessels were crossing this invisible line at a rate of three times a week; It was the British who apparently raised their weapons first before the Iranian gunboats came alongside; ...

Iran always claimed that it had arrested the Britons for violating its territorial integrity.

Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, repeatedly told the Commons that the personnel were seized in Iraqi waters.

It seems that no matter how many times we see the evidence of past government dissembling, there's always a temptation (or a subconscious urge) to give credence to what we hear the next time around.  Everyone else is so certain and the official pronouncements are so categorical—surely there must be something there?

So if you ever feel that little tug of credulity (I know I do, and I doubt I'm the only one), just keep reminding yourself about things like this.

Comments

[cemmcs]

When people tell outrageous lies there is a tendency to believe them because you think it makes no sense to tell such an outrageous lie. Why would they lie about it, you wonder, when if it is a lie, it's so likely to come back at them? Or, atleast that's how I see it.

[Duncan]

My trouble is knowing who not to believe the most. Should I believe Bill Clinton, or Saddam Hussein? George Bush, or Saddam Hussein? The British government, or the Iranian government? When everyone concerned may be lying, it's hard to find the compass points.

[Save the Oocytes]

I always figured it was the British government lying in this case; I just had a feeling. It amused me how quickly and obviously the BBC lined up behind their government in this instance.

[John Caruso]

I find that it's easier for events like this, where the situation is well-known and the motivations of the players are more transparent. Where I have a very difficult time with it is on issues I know less about; in cases like that, you just don't know where the lies begin, even the enormous ones. I mentally mark all such information as provisional.

In this case the overarching lies and hypocritical poses were so transparent (Iran is a threat, international borders must be respected, it's wrong to detain citizens of another country, etc) that it didn't matter much where the incident happened. Still, I did wonder about that, in a Rashomon sort of way.

[petey]

"Newly released Ministry of Defence documents state that:

— The arrests took place in waters that are not internationally agreed as Iraqi;

— The coalition unilaterally designated a dividing line between Iraqi and Iranian waters in the Gulf without telling Iran where it was"

you knew it.