The Times (London), on Iran, 20 October 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Two suspects in RAF Fairford plot

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.4 findings

Two men suspected of involvement in have been arrested on suspicion of assisting Iran’s intelligence service. Police reaffirmed their belief in Tehran’s involvement as they detained the pair, aged 24 and 25, for a second round of questioning, this time under the National Security Act. Most commented 1 Forgotten particle may hold key to how universe survived big bang Science 245 comments 2 Lily Allen: ‘I felt I was a vehicle for male pleasure — not my own’ Music 235 comments 3 ‘We got a call yesterday.

Birth mum’s had another baby’ Parenting 32 comments 4 Doctor Who and me — Russell T Davies on his life in TV Books 24 comments 5 Budget 2026 predictions: when is it and what could be announced? Economics 235 comments The men were originally arrested last month on suspicion of preparing terrorist attacks. Their re-arrest, under fresh espionage offences, is an indication that detectives could have found specific evidence to link them directly to Iran.

Top stories 1 16 of the best safaris in Africa Africa Since a group of men in balaclavas were seen approaching the RAF base in Gloucestershire in the early hours of September 27, detectives have been examining the suspects’ electronic devices and combing their contacts. Andy Burnham, the prime minister, has previously said that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was likely to have co-ordinated the plot. Among the possibilities the authorities are considering are that it was a surveillance operation, a “dry run” to test security or a stunt to send a message to the British government.

Advertisement , , issued threats against Fairford in July because it is a staging post for US strikes in the Middle East. A group of men were arrested on September 27 However, fears of an imminent terrorist attack were downgraded when experts found fuel, not explosives, in the three vans that the men were driving, and The Times revealed that one of the men called 999 himself . Seventh arrest over RAF Fairford but mastermind may be in Iran Nonetheless, American B-1 bombers were withdrawn from Fairford after the incident.

Top stories 1 Prepare now for the inheritance tax mess coming for your pension Tax The 24-year-old man, a UK national, was part of the group initially arrested near the airbase in the early hours of Sunday, September 27. The 25-year-old, a dual UK-Iranian national, was arrested on October 1. Both men live in the borough of Westminster, central London. Advertisement Assistant Commissioner Laurence Taylor, head of Counter Terrorism Policing, said: “This is very much a live investigation, and our evidence gathering continues, but at this time our position remains the same; we consider it highly likely that there is Iranian state involvement.

Our investigators are continuing to examine what that level of involvement was and the ambition behind it.” The three vans allegedly used by the men The two men were re-arrested for offences relating to Section 3 of the National Security Act, which relates to assisting a foreign intelligence service. It carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years for conduct such as carrying out surveillance or passing on information. Taylor said: “Due to their sensitive nature, national security investigations can take time to progress, and I’m grateful to everyone who has given my teams the time and space needed to pursue this work thoroughly and effectively.

“From the outset our priority has been to uphold the integrity of this investigation and hold those who wish to do our country harm accountable. We know the public have unanswered questions. I want to be as transparent as possible and when we are in the position to share more, we will.” Five other men arrested remain on police bail.

Read the original article on thetimes.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (4)

The Times reports the re-arrest of two men under the National Security Act and attributes the claim of Iranian state involvement to police and the prime minister. It calls the event "the plot" in its own voice, although its own reporting shows that fears of an attack were downgraded. It calls Iran's government "the Iranian regime", puts words nobody said in quotation marks in the headline, and gives Iran's denial a single clause.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “the RAF Fairford plot”

    Why this matters
    The Times calls the events at Fairford "the RAF Fairford plot" in its own voice, with no "alleged" or "suspected".
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes it as settled that a plot against the base existed.
    The context
    The article's own facts leave open what happened. Experts found fuel, not explosives, one man called 999 himself, and the authorities are still weighing a surveillance operation, a dry run or a stunt. The Guardian calls it an ambiguous episode, and The Times itself earlier wrote "alleged terrorist plot".

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  2. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “The Iranian regime”

    Why this matters
    The Times calls Iran's government "the Iranian regime" in its own narration, with no attribution.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes in a hostile verdict on Iran's government as neutral description.
    The context
    "Regime" is the word British ministers use, as The Times's own earlier report shows in Ed Miliband's quoted statement. Elsewhere in this article the outlet manages with "Tehran" and "Iran".

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  3. Headline goes beyond the article

    Minor

    “re-arrested for ‘helping Iran’”

    Why this matters
    The headline puts "helping Iran" in quotation marks and says the men were re-arrested "for" it.
    The impression it gives
    A reader may think someone said these words, or that the men were arrested for something established rather than suspected.
    The context
    Nobody in the article says "helping Iran". The body says the men were arrested "on suspicion of assisting Iran’s intelligence service".

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“on suspicion of assisting Iran’s intelligence service”

    Show it in the article

  4. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “which has denied involvement”

    Why this matters
    The Times gives Iran's response a single subordinate clause. Police and the prime minister get repeated direct quotes and paraphrase.
    The impression it gives
    A reader hears the British case at length and Iran's position only as a bare denial.
    The context
    Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, responded publicly. Metro reports he said Burnham was "barking up the wrong tree". The Times quotes none of this.

    Show it in the article

What it gets right

  • “fears of an imminent terrorist attack were downgraded when experts found fuel, not explosives, in the three vans that the men were driving, and The Times revealed that one of the men called 999 himself”

    The Times gives the reader facts that cut against the most alarming reading of the event, rather than leaving only the terror framing.

  • “we consider it highly likely that there is Iranian state involvement”

    The claim of Iranian state involvement is kept as the police's assessment, in their own words, not stated as the outlet's fact.

  • “Police reaffirmed their belief in Tehran’s involvement”

    The Times attributes the link to Iran to the police as a belief, not as established fact.

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from The Times (London)

  1. 22 OctFears Iran war will reignite as US withdraws diplomats from Saudi Arabia6.0
  2. 20 OctDespite election fears, US and Israel agree: let’s attack Iran again3.0
  3. 20 OctStrait of Hormuz may be redundant in five years, says HSBC boss0.0
  4. 12 OctIran is ‘highly likely’ to have been behind RAF Fairford plot6.0
  5. 12 OctThe multibillion-dollar reasons Trump hesitates to resume Iran war7.3

Everything we scored from The Times (London)