Eight years out, what's to be scared of? Not rhetorical. Definitely not rhetorical. Just Google "Gareth Williams" if you don't believe me. Poor sod. There's burned, and then there's a whole lot of scorching that goes on. People think the term tends to be the property of the CIA, but that's not the case. It's pretty much universal now. Ask what used to be called Mossad, if you dare.
So why now? What's plonked a ginger tabby in the pigeon coop? An idea, that's what. An idea for a 4-part TV series based upon (fairly) recent and (potentially embarrassing) current events. It wouldn't make the G6 folks nervous (they're above it all), but it might draw attention to the utter weirdness of SIS recruitment, how it's concealed, and why academia in Britain has such a curious relationship with the security services.
You see? This is already starting to feel like a half-arsed pitch, and I haven't even got to the juicy stuff yet. Take a breath. Relax. The carefully-constructed mask of Internet-based anonymity hasn't slipped yet. But it will, as soon as I throw a few "character" names into the mix, because - as many have pointed out - I'm rubbish at names. Even the think-tank I worked for was burdened with a nom-de-plume (by order of the Director) in private correspondence, and I got warned about subsequent Google searches tracked to Manchester and Glasgow as a consequence. This is difficult. I signed a lot of paperwork back in the day, and much of it remains in effect eight years on, as I found to my cost fairly recently.
This isn't bravery. It's more akin to suicide. And some of us don't have the welcoming arms of embassy staff to fall into.
But it's a blog post. Let's keep it under that happy umbrella of convenience, eh? If this were a pitch, it'd be addressed to Channel 4. In the old days, it might've been headed in the direction of BBC3, but they're screwed now, and that's sad. Our protagonist is a fairly low-level analyst/researcher working for a think-tank that..."has links" to MI5. It's not quite an open secret, but he's progressed far enough to realise that reports and analyses have direct consequences, some of which actually get reported in the mainstream media. When one of his reports gets picked up by a Cabinet committee, he's called upon to present his findings directly to the PM.
Now, let's say - again, for convenience - that this report concerns the possible "turning" of Abu Basir al-Tartusi to Western-sensitive interests in Syria, and that our protagonist believes a double acquisition of assets is possible, due to the former's links with a radical Islamic preacher in the UK.
I genuinely hope this isn't going above your heads. Do the reading, even if your sources are Wikipedia, and whatever bullshit the Daily Telegraph website likes to scare its readers with. Obviously, for the purposes of TV drama, the names would be changed...slightly. This is all episode one material. Episode two would kick off with our protagonist getting the go-ahead from his Director to pursue his case, and an intervention from G6, taking our protagonist to their version of the Farm. At this point, all bets are off - our protagonist is being prepared for an actual field op, much to his protestations.
This is where we have a real problem. It's mainly down to the telescoping of time, and plausibility. Of course, it's only a problem if you're a devotee of cold, hard reality, because this stuff happens all the time, but no one wants you to know that. At some point, an upper-echelon spook has decided that our protagonist is, essentially, expendable, but he deserves a shot at what he's aiming for.
So episode three would kick off with our protagonist, now trained in the dirty arts, preparing to meet the UK-based radical preacher at a mosque in Holborn (sorry, I went for the crunchingly familiar). Remember, the whole point of the op is to effectively turn the guy over time, but the clock is ticking, and events are moving at a dizzying pace. Islamic youths in the UK are being radicalised, and shipped-out to flashpoints in Syria and Iraq at a rate of knots. Another agent has been dispatched to follow-up on our protagonist's line regarding Abu Basir al-Tartusi, but he's proving elusive to track down. It's all looking somewhat hopeless when...our protagonist meets the daughter of the radical Islamic preacher.
Yes, I know what you're thinking. And you're probably right. Romantic angle, yeah? Yeah. Well, a bit. But our protagonist, who has come to his "training" somewhat late is neither James Bond nor George Smiley (hello, extremes of the continuum). He's fairly desperate to be proved right, whatever the cost. So the somewhat Westernized daughter of the radical preacher (she refuses the hijab, and considers her father a problem to be solved, whatever the cost) is only a partial help.
Episode four is where it all comes together, the disparate threads of the narrative coalescing, and our protagonist caught in the ultimate trap of proscribed duty and desperate inclination. Does he ultimately succeed, or is he burned beyond recognition?
I'm not going to tell you. I'll be pitching this to Channel 4, so let's hope you find out in due course.
No comments:
Post a Comment