Sailors selling their stories

Fed up of hearing about this. I dont have a problem with the sailors selling their stories. The public wanted to know what was going on and the press were willing to pay. After what they went through I dont begrudge them a penny.

WormThatTurned wrote:

Fed up of hearing about this. I dont have a problem with the sailors selling their stories. The public wanted to know what was going on and the press were willing to pay. After what they went through I dont begrudge them a penny.

I tend to agree, I can't believe this became such a big story and required and apology in parliament....

I don't have a problem with it at all, I wanted to know what went on so bought the paper with one of the stories in.

As long as thats an end to it and they are not going to be going to the papers etc again then I see no problem with it.

They chose their job and they get paid very well to be out there.

I don't think they should have been allowed to, if only for the fact that I don't trust the British press no to put a spin on it. They could (and most prob did) mangle the facts to suit themselves, which is dangerous.

I think it was a strange decision to allow them myself. I haven't read the articles in question either.

It was the wrong decision definately to allow them to sell their stories. What happens the next time servicemen find themselves in dangerous situations will they be looking at their comrades wondering if they will be selling their story or not, it could affect the decisions servicemen make.

A lot of people wanted to know what had gone on though as it was so high profile in the news and so selling their stories was the only way we were going to know what went on.

However if there was already a rule in place to say that they must not sell their stories then I can't see why this rule was bent and then obviously put back into place after the backlash.

However it did make me laugh to read that the main person objecting to stories being sold was being paid himself to give his opinions to the press.

spoilt_little_brat wrote:

A lot of people wanted to know what had gone on though as it was so high profile in the news and so selling their stories was the only way we were going to know what went on.

Not so they could have just had a press conference and a press release, there was no need for each one to cut their own deal which in my mind makes the content of the stories less credable as there is the need to justify your £100k fee in the item. If the Iranians had them sitting around drinking tea and playing parlour games all day then they will hardly tell the press that, no they will want to talk about how they feared for their lives and were harshly treated no matter what the reality was.

I'm sure that they did not play parlour games and the treatment was harsh it is just that once you know someone is being paid for their story then you have to apply a certain amount of sceptism to the account.

I dont see it as any worse than selling your wedding pictures or babies first pictures to the press like a lot of celebrities do. I detect a lot of hypocrisy from some of the critics.

Nope, it totally different.

Selling wedding pictures has nothing to do with national security.

How does selling their stories compromise national security ? From what I read, they merely said what actually happened to them !!

In order to get them released, a lot of stuff went on in the background that we probably will never know about (or need to know about). For Ahmedinadjad to get away with changing his mind he had to be seen by his people to be making a magnanimous gesture and being a good guy.
Personally, I believe the sailors were 'allowed' to sell their stories because the government and navy couldn't be seen to be saying nasty stuff about the Iranian government and wanted the sailors to do their dirty work for them. However they didn't think about the backlash from the public which would accompany that decision.
Military personnel should not tell their stories in this tawdry way - celebs can do what they like and whatever they can get Max Clifford to line up for them. We don't directly pay them for doing what they do. We DO pay military personnel.

Nicely put, there is no comparison between what they were allowed to do and celebs selling wedding pictures.

I do not blame the sailors for taking the money rather the idiots in the government for allowing it.

Yeah I don't feel the sailors are at blame, infact I feel sorry for them as they have been made to look stupid because of the backlash.

I do. They shouldnt have done it. They are VERY VERY well paid to be out there.

My mate spent two years in the Army before deciding it wasnt for her and the reason she decided it wasnt for her was because of the sheer dedication to the whole Army ethos most of the soldiers she worked with had. I have met quite a few of them and they do the job because they believe thats the right thing to do and accept that they may end up in a dangerous situation.

Two out the forteen (if memory serves) sold out, the rest didn't. (and I do see it as nothing more than selling out).

I dont begrudge them one single penny. I wouldnt wish what they went through on anybody.

In our local paper the lad who spoke out said they had all agreed to do a story and the others only backed off once the backlash started.

I dont think it is appropriate or professional.

Who they work for, or where they work is not relevant either...we all sign contracts of employment.

I could write a book this week in my industry...much more juicy although less risky...but I don't!

helencbradshaw wrote:

I dont think it is appropriate or professional.

Who they work for, or where they work is not relevant either...we all sign contracts of employment.

I could write a book this week in my industry...much more juicy although less risky...but I don't!

Let's not forget that only two of the sailors actually sold their story.

I didn't read any of it and I suspect the papers spun it to suit their own agendas but from what I gather it was simply an account of how they were treated it doesn't seem to be risking national security. If there is going to be a total ban on this kind of thing then so be it but I don't really see why in this case there should be.

I read the lads story, he said he was using the money to pay for driving lessons and then a car. Also he gave his mum some money as she was off work the whole time he was prisoner. This was before the furore. Good luck to the kid.

WormThatTurned wrote:

I read the lads story, he said he was using the money to pay for driving lessons and then a car. Also he gave his mum some money as she was off work the whole time he was prisoner. This was before the furore. Good luck to the kid.

He was very naive and silly. But then this is the lad who went out on patrol in his boat with his iPod on.

WormThatTurned wrote:

I read the lads story, he said he was using the money to pay for driving lessons and then a car. Also he gave his mum some money as she was off work the whole time he was prisoner. This was before the furore. Good luck to the kid.

Oh come on!! The navy would have put him through his driving test no bother, and with the amount he gets paid to be out there, he could easily buy a pretty nice car.

The amount he was likely to have been paid would have went a HELL of a lot further than those things.

And why would he even mention what he had planned for the money if he didn't think (of had been told) that it might be a tad contentious?

I wonder, should every officer or soldier who have witnessed things while on active duty abroad be doing this? I've heard first hand what people are going through and I can only imagine how *Bad Word* they feel about the whole thing.